AD 2014-28478

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 234 (Friday, December 5, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72132-72135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28478]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0159; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-010-AD; 
Amendment 39-18032; AD 2014-23-16]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Robinson Helicopter Company Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-12-10 for 
Robinson Helicopter Company (Robinson) Model R22, R22 Alpha, R22 Beta, 
R22 Mariner, R44, and R44 II helicopters with certain main rotor blades 
(blade) installed. AD 2011-12-10 required inspecting each blade at the 
skin-to-spar line for debonding, corrosion, a separation, a gap, or a 
dent and replacing any damaged blade with an airworthy blade. This new 
AD also requires a terminating action for those inspection 
requirements. These actions are intended to detect debonding of the 
blade skin, which could result in blade failure and subsequent loss of 
control of the helicopter, and to correct the unsafe condition by 
replacing the main rotor blades with new blades that do not require the 
AD inspection.

DATES: This AD is effective January 9, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of January 9, 
2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of July 5, 
2011 (76 FR 35330, June 17, 2011); corrected March 5, 2012 (77 FR 
12991).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Robinson Helicopter Company, 2901 Airport Drive, Torrance, CA 90505; 
telephone (310) 539-0508; fax (310) 539-5198; or at <a href="http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm">http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm</a>. You may review a copy of the 
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional 
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth 
Texas, 76137.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a> or in person at the Docket Operations Office 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, any incorporated-by-reference 
service information, the economic evaluation, any comments received, 
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations 
Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is U.S. Department of Transportation, 
Docket Operations Office, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineer, 
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712; telephone 
(562) 627-5232; email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aec8dccbca80c9dbcbdcc7c0eec8cfcf80c9c1d8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bbddc9dedf95dccedec9d2d5fbdddada95dcd4cd">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On February 25, 2013, at 78 FR 12648, the Federal Register 
published our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to 
amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2011-12-10, Amendment 39-16717 (76 
FR 35330, June 17, 2011), corrected March 5, 2012 (77 FR 12991), that 
applied to Robinson Model R22, R22 Alpha, R22 Beta, and R22 Mariner 
helicopters with blade, part number (P/N) A016-4; and Model R44 and R44 
II helicopters with blade, P/N C016-2 or C-016-5, installed. AD 2011-
12-10 required a pilot check of the blade skin-to-spar joint area for 
any bare metal before the first flight of each day. AD 2011-12-10 also 
required repetitively inspecting each blade for corrosion, separation, 
a gap, or a dent, refinishing any bare metal before further flight, and 
replacing any damaged blade with an airworthy blade. AD 2011-12-10 was 
prompted by a fatal accident due to blade delamination.
    At the time we issued AD 2011-12-10, Robinson had developed 
replacement blades on the R22 and R44 model helicopters. AD 2011-12-10 
was issued as a Final rule; request for comment; however, the amount of 
time permitted to replace the blades required allowing the public an 
opportunity to comment. Thus, the NPRM proposed to retain the pilot 
check, recurring inspection, and blade refinishing requirements of AD 
2011-12-10. An owner/operator (pilot) may perform the visual check 
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD and must enter compliance with 
that paragraph into the helicopter maintenance records in accordance 
with 14 CFR 43.9(a)(1) through (4) and 91.417(a)(2)(v). A pilot may 
perform this check because it involves only looking at a visible area 
of the blades and can be performed equally well by a pilot or a 
mechanic. This check is an exception to our standard maintenance 
regulations. The NPRM also proposed to add a part-numbered blade to its 
applicability for R22 model helicopters. Lastly, the NPRM proposed to 
require, within five years of the effective date, replacing both main 
rotor blades with the new part-numbered aluminum blades, which would 
constitute terminating action of the recurring inspection requirements. 
These actions are intended to detect and prevent debonding of the blade 
skin, which could result in blade failure and subsequent loss of 
control of the helicopter.

Comments

    After our NPRM (78 FR 12648, February 25, 2013) was published, we 
received comments from 15 commenters and have given due consideration 
to each one. We have identified five unique issues and addressed those 
issues as follows.

Requests

    Ten operators requested that we withdraw the NPRM and allow 
continued repetitive inspections of the blades for all affected models, 
as there is insufficient data justifying the termination of the 
requirement for repetitive inspections and for replacing the main rotor 
blades with new blades that do not require the AD inspection. One 
commenter noted that there have been no blade failures since the 
procedures of AD 2011-12-10 have

[[Page 72133]]

been implemented, and therefore the NPRM increases the financial burden 
to an operator without increasing safety. Another commenter requested 
that more data be obtained regarding the effect of the operating 
environment and the inspection accordingly modified. Two commenters 
stated that a salt air environment caused the debonding due to 
corrosion. Some commenters state that inspections and routine 
maintenance, if done correctly, will ensure continued operational 
safety.
    We do not agree. Blade debonding continues to occur in service. The 
cause of the debonding was determined to be erosion on unpainted blade 
tip bond lines which allows the bond to weaken and the skin to pull up. 
The erosion is mechanical and occurs in any environment regardless of 
salt or moisture in the air. This unsafe condition is sufficient to 
mandate inspections due to the catastrophic consequences if the blade 
becomes delaminated. However, airworthiness cannot be assured long-term 
by reliance on continued repetitive inspections. Although there have 
been no fatalities since we issued AD 2011-12-10, Robinson continues to 
report instances of blade delamination found during maintenance checks. 
Because blades continue to have debond issues, and as using a safety-
by-inspection approach for a critical component has been shown to have 
an inherent amount of risk, it is in the interest of safety to reduce 
the retirement of the blades from 12 years from the blade manufacturing 
date to an earlier date.
    Five operators requested that we remove the requirement for 
replacing the blades for the R44 Astro models, because these models are 
not equipped with hydraulic assisted controls and the new blades cannot 
be installed on these models unless the helicopter is converted to 
hydraulic assisted controls, a costly conversion which is not necessary 
for safe flight. These commenters further stated that the conversion is 
not only an additional expense but also can only be performed at the 
Robinson factory. One commenter believed the new blades are compatible 
with the non-hydraulic airframe and requested we require that Robinson 
test the new blades on the non-hydraulic R44 Astro airframe, so that 
the new blades can be installed on the R44 Astro without also having to 
convert the helicopter. The commenters also stated that Robinson then 
reserves the right to upgrade any component on the helicopter to their 
latest revision even though there is no AD or SB stating the Robinson 
required change, and this Robinson requirement results in additional 
cost increase. One commenter requested that we justify this requirement 
for the R44 Astro helicopters by identifying the number of reports of 
blade delamination on R44 Astros and explain the safety improvement 
resulting from converting a helicopter to hydraulic assisted controls. 
Finally, the commenters also stated that requiring replacement of the 
blades (and thus, conversion) for R44 Astro helicopters significantly 
reduces the resale value of these helicopters.
    We do not agree. The R44 Astro is subject to the same unsafe 
condition as the other R22 and R44 helicopter models. The purpose of 
this AD is not to require converting a helicopter to hydraulic assisted 
controls; the purpose is to correct this unsafe condition on the 
blades. Robinson's decision whether to test the new blades with the 
non-hydraulic R44 Astro helicopter is a business decision, and the FAA 
does not have the authority to mandate a different decision. Similarly, 
Robinson's decision to discontinue blades designed for the non-
hydraulic equipped helicopters is a business decision that the FAA does 
not have the authority to change. Because the blades for the non-
hydraulic equipped R44 Astro helicopters are calendar life limited to 
12 years and will no longer be produced, and as the manufacturer has 
not pursued FAA approval for installation of the new blades on the non-
hydraulic R44 Astro, the owners of the Astro helicopter will need to 
install hydraulic assisted flight controls after 12 years regardless of 
the AD requirements. The FAA acknowledges that the expense and downtime 
to accomplish the blade replacement is greater for the R44 helicopters 
that are not equipped with hydraulic assisted controls. However, this 
greater cost due to an absence of hydraulic controls, while 
unfortunate, does not change the blade safety issue or the need to 
require replacement of the blades prior to their retirement life.
    Four operators stated that the FAA has not considered the cost of 
this AD on operators and requested that Robinson be responsible for the 
cost of the new blades. One commenter also requested that Robinson be 
responsible for the cost of converting the R44 Astro to hydraulic 
assisted flight controls, as this will be required for that model when 
the new blades are installed.
    We do not agree. While we acknowledge that the costs associated 
with the actions of this AD are not minimal, we have determined that 
these costs are reasonable given the unsafe condition. As far as 
request for Robinson to bear these costs, the FAA does not have the 
authority to require a manufacturer to bear the cost of a repair.
    One commenter requested that we require blade replacement at the 
2,200 hour overhaul or 12 years instead of the 5-year compliance time. 
The commenter stated that as Robinson started the production of new 
blades about 3 years ago, the 5-year replacement period would require 
some owners to replace the blades long before reaching the 12-year 
inspection, and this financial cost was not taken into account with the 
proposed rule.
    We do not agree. We determined a replacement period of five years 
from the date of the AD by using a quantitative and qualitative risk 
assessment methodology. The risk of blade skin debonding results in a 
loss of control of the helicopter and is beyond acceptable risk 
guidelines when allowing the blades to continue in service 
indefinitely. Although the risk assessment indicates that immediate 
action is required to correct the unsafe condition, this risk is 
partially mitigated by the improved inspection techniques, making it 
acceptable to allow a five year period of time for blades to be 
replaced. The added cost to retire the blades has been anticipated in 
the financial burden justification of this AD. The FAA acknowledges 
that in some situations the cost to the operator may be in excess of 
the cost of the replacement blades, but we have determined that the 
costs associated with the actions of this AD are reasonable given the 
safety issue.
    Lastly, one commenter did not make a request but stated that bare 
metal can be seen on areas of the helicopter and that the helicopter 
manufacturer provides poor corrosion protection on the helicopter. The 
commenter explained that metal-to-metal contact causes the corrosion 
that occurs on the blades.
    We disagree. Metal-to-metal contact may be a mechanism that is 
causing the corrosion in the rotor blade tip cap to skin interface, but 
it has not been shown to be a mechanism for skin debonding in the area 
of the blade that has been found in the fleet. Skin debonding is the 
unsafe condition the actions in this AD are correcting.

FAA's Determination

    We have reviewed the relevant information, considered the comments 
received, and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely 
to exist or develop on other products of these same type designs and 
that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD 
requirements as proposed, except we are allowing compliance with the 
revised service information as an optional

[[Page 72134]]

action. We have also made clarifications in the economic analysis to 
reflect the correct cost of required parts and labor for R-44 
helicopters without hydraulically boosted flight controls installed. 
The total estimated cost for these model helicopters has not changed. 
These changes are consistent with the intent of the proposals in the 
NPRM (78 FR 12648, February 25, 2013) and will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Related Service Information

    We have reviewed the following Robinson service information:
    <bullet> Letter titled ``Additional Information Regarding Main 
Rotor Blade Skin Debonding,'' dated May 25, 2007, discussing blade skin 
debonding;
    <bullet> Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) changes to the Normal 
Procedures Section 4 and Systems Description Section 7, revised April 
20, 2007, for each applicable model helicopter containing a ``caution'' 
about skin-to-spar bond line erosion;
    <bullet> One Service Letter with two different Nos.: R22 SL-56B and 
R44 SL-32B, both revised April 30, 2010, specifying proper inspection 
and protection (refinishing) of bonded areas; and
    <bullet> Service Bulletins SB-103 for the Model R22 and SB-72 for 
the Model R44, both dated April 30, 2010, and SB-103A and SB-72A, both 
dated July 19, 2012, specifying proper inspection and protection 
(refinishing) of bonded areas for certain affected blades.
    <bullet> R44 Service Letter SL-37, dated June 18, 2010, specifying 
the required modifications for a carbureted R-44 to install P/N C016-7 
blades.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 1,290 Model R22 helicopters and 
1,353 Model R44 helicopters, for a total of 2,643 helicopters of U.S. 
Registry. At an average labor rate of $85 per hour, we estimate that 
operators will incur the following costs in order to comply with this 
AD:
    <bullet> Time to perform the before flight check each day is 
negligible.
    <bullet> Inspecting both blades will require about three work 
hours, for a total cost per helicopter of $255 and a total cost to the 
U.S. operator fleet of $673,965.
    <bullet> Replacing both blades on a Model R22 helicopter will 
require about 20 work hours, and required parts will cost $29,808, for 
a total cost per helicopter of $31,508 and a total cost to the U.S. R22 
operator fleet of $40,645,320 over a 5-year period.
    <bullet> Replacing both blades on a Model R44 helicopter with 
hydraulically boosted flight controls installed (approximately 1,053 
helicopters) will require about 20 work hours, and required parts will 
cost $43,783, for a total cost per helicopter of $45,483 and a total 
cost to the U.S. R44 operator fleet of $47,893,599 over a 5-year 
period.
    <bullet> Replacing both blades on a Model R44 helicopter without 
hydraulically boosted flight controls installed (approximately 300 
helicopters) will require modifying the aircraft with hydraulic flight 
controls, and adding the P/N C016-7 blades and the required airframe 
provisions at a cost of 100 work-hours for a total labor cost of 
$8,500. Parts will cost $103,747 for a total cost per helicopters of 
$112,247, and a cost to U.S. operators of $33,674,100 over 5 years.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, 
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent 
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply 
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2011-12-10, Amendment 39-16717 (76 FR 35330, June 17, 2011); corrected 
March 5, 2012 (77 FR 12991), and adding the following new AD:

2014-23-16 Robinson Helicopter Company: Amendment 39-18032; Docket 
No. FAA-2013-0159; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-010-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model R22, R22 Alpha, R22 Beta, and R22 
Mariner helicopters with main rotor blade (blade), part number (P/N) 
A016-2 or A016-4; and Model R44 and R44 II helicopters with blade, 
P/N C016-2 or C-016-5, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as blade skin debonding, 
which could result in blade failure and subsequent loss of control 
of the helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2011-12-10, Amendment 39-16717 (76 FR 
35330, June 17, 2011); corrected March 5, 2012 (77 FR 12991).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective January 9, 2015.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this 
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been 
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Before the first flight of each day, visually check for any 
exposed (bare metal) skin-to-spar joint area on the lower surface of 
each blade. The actions required by this

[[Page 72135]]

paragraph may be performed by the owner/operator (pilot) holding at 
least a private pilot certificate and must be entered into the 
aircraft records showing compliance with this AD in accordance with 
14 CFR 43.9(a)(1) through (4) and 14 CFR 91.417(a)(2)(v). The record 
must be maintained as required by 14 CFR 91.417, 121.380, or 
135.439.
    (2) If there is any bare metal in the area of the skin-to-spar 
bond line, before further flight, inspect the blade by following the 
requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this AD.
    (3) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), and at intervals not 
to exceed 100 hours TIS or at each annual inspection, whichever 
occurs first, inspect each blade for corrosion, separation, a gap, 
or a dent by following the Compliance Procedure, paragraphs 1 
through 6 and 8, of Robinson R22 Service Bulletin SB-103, dated 
April 30, 2010 (SB103), or Robinson Service Bulletin SB-72, dated 
April 30, 2010 (SB72), as appropriate for your model helicopter. 
Although the Robinson service information limits the magnification 
to 10X, a higher magnification is acceptable for this inspection. 
Also, an appropriate tap test tool which provides similar 
performance, weight, and consistency of tone may be substituted for 
the ``1965 or later United States Quarter-dollar coin,'' which is 
specified in the Compliance Procedure, paragraph 2, of SB72 and 
SB103.
    (4) Before further flight, refinish any exposed area of a blade 
by following the Compliance Procedure, paragraphs 2 through 6, of 
Robinson R22 Service Letter SL-56B or R44 Service Letter SL-32B, 
both dated April 30, 2010, as appropriate for your model helicopter.
    (5) Before further flight, replace any unairworthy blade with an 
airworthy blade.
    (6) Within 5 years of the effective date of this AD:
    (i) For Model R22 series helicopters, replace blade P/N A016-2 
or A016-4 with a blade, P/N A016-6.
    (ii) For Model R44 series helicopters fitted with hydraulically 
boosted main rotor flight controls, replace blade P/N C016-2 or 
C016-5 with a blade, P/N C016-7.
    (iii) For Model R44 series helicopters without hydraulically 
boosted main rotor flight controls, replace blade P/N C016-2 or 
C016-5 with a blade, P/N C016-7. Prior to installing a blade P/N 
C016-7, verify the helicopter has been modified as required by 
Robinson R44 Service Letter SL-37, dated June 18, 2010, Compliance 
Procedures, paragraphs 1. through 10.
    (iv) Installing blades, P/N A016-6 or P/N C016-7, is terminating 
action for the inspection requirements of paragraphs (f)(1) through 
(f)(4) of this AD.
    (7) As an option for complying with paragraph (f)(3) of this AD, 
you may perform a blade inspection by following the corresponding 
provisions of SB-103A or SB-72A, both dated July 19, 2012, as 
appropriate for your model helicopter.

(g) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits will not be issued.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 
may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Fred Guerin, 
Aviation Safety Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, 
CA 90712; telephone (562) 627-5232; email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#15736770713b726070677c7b557374743b727a63"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="375145525319504252455e597751565619505841">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.
    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating 
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you 
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, 
the manager of the local flight standards district office or 
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft 
complying with this AD through an AMOC.
    (3) AMOCs approved for AD 2011-12-10 (76 FR 35330, June 17, 
2011); corrected March 5, 2012 (77 FR 12991), are approved as AMOCs 
for the corresponding requirements in paragraph (f) of this AD.

(i) Additional Information

    The Robinson letter titled ``Additional Information Regarding 
Main Rotor Blade Skin Debonding,'' dated May 25, 2007, which is not 
incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the 
subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD, 
contact Robinson Helicopter Company, 2901 Airport Drive, Torrance, 
CA 90505; telephone (310) 539-0508; fax (310) 539-5198; or at <a href="http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm">http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm</a>. You may review a copy of this 
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest 
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.

(j) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6210: Main Rotor 
Blades.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on 
January 9, 2015.
    (i) Robinson R44 Service Letter SL-37, dated June 18, 2010.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (4) The following service information was previously approved 
for IBR on July 5, 2011 (76 FR 35330, June 17, 2011); corrected 
March 5, 2012 (77 FR 12991).
    (i) Robinson R22 Service Bulletin SB-103, dated April 30, 2010.
    (ii) Robinson R44 Service Bulletin SB-72, dated April 30, 2010.
    (iii) Robinson R22 Service Letter SL-56B, dated April 30, 2010.
    (iv) Robinson R44 Service Letter SL-32B, dated April 30, 2010.
    (5) For Robinson service information identified in this AD, 
contact Robinson Helicopter Company, 2901 Airport Drive, Torrance, 
CA 90505; telephone (310) 539-0508; fax (310) 539-5198; or at <a href="http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm">http://www.robinsonheli.com/servelib.htm</a>.
    (6) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the 
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, 
Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For information on the availability of this 
material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at 
NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to: <a href="http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html">http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html</a>.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 4, 2014.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft 
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-28478 Filed 12-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P