Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical Support, mailstop S581A, 6900 Main Street, Stratford, CT, telephone (203) 383-4866, email address
We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.
On October 23, 2009, we issued a proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to Sikorsky Model S-92 helicopters. That NPRM was published in the
That NPRM was prompted by a mistake in the RFM, which allowed “Class D” rotorcraft load combinations for HEC operations for this model helicopter. The Model S-92A RFM did not include the required one-engine inoperative (OEI) hover performance and procedures.
Also, the NPRM proposed replacing the words “RESCUE HOIST” in the RFM with “HOIST.”
Since issuing the previous NPRM, a recent design approval for HEC operations has been issued for this helicopter. Therefore, we no longer need to prohibit rotorcraft load combinations for HEC operations for this model helicopter, but rather we need to correct the RFM to apply the appropriate limitations.
Because this change expands the scope of the originally proposed rule, the FAA will reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment.
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require, within 90 days, revising the Operating Limitations section of the RFM S92A-RFM-003, Part 1, Section 1, by inserting a copy of this AD into the RFM or by making pen and ink changes to several sections of the RFM Operating Limitations. The changes required by this AD are complied with if RFM S92A-RFM-003, Revision 12, has been incorporated into the RFM.
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 65 helicopters in the U.S. registry. The costs for inserting a correction to the RFM are expected to be minimal.
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.
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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, I certify this proposed regulation:
1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a “significant rule” under the 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
This AD applies to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model S-92A helicopters, certificated in any category.
This AD defines the unsafe condition as an inaccurate Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) provision, which was approved without appropriate limitations for this model helicopter for carrying Class D external rotorcraft-load combinations, including Human External Cargo (HEC), when this model helicopter was not certificated to Category A one-engine inoperative (OEI) performance standards, including fly away capabilities after an engine failure, which is required for carrying HEC.
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.
Within 90 days, revise the Operating Limitations section of Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) S92A-RFM-003, Part 1, Section 1, by inserting a copy of this AD into the RFM or by making pen and ink changes, as follows:
The changes required by this AD are complied with if RFM S92A-RFM-003, Revision 12, has been incorporated into the RFM.
(1) In the Types of Operation section, beneath Hoist, add the following:
“The hoist equipment certification installation approval does not constitute approval to conduct hoist operations. Operational approval for hoist operations must be granted by the Federal Aviation Administration. No cabin seats may be installed in front of station 317 when conducting Human External Cargo hoist operations, which requires Category A performance capabilities.”
(2) In the Flight Limits section, add the following:
“HOIST When conducting Human External Cargo operations, which require category `A' performance capabilities, the minimum hover height is 20 feet AGL and the maximum hover height is 80 feet AGL.
HOIST The collective axis must remain uncoupled when conducting Human External Cargo, which requires category `A' performance capabilities, for the period of time that the person is off the ground or water and not in the aircraft. This can be
(3) In the Weight Limits section:
(i) Remove this note: “
(ii) Add this paragraph and figure: “HOIST Maximum gross weight for Human External Cargo, which requires category `A' performance capabilities, is limited to the gross weight determined in accordance with the following Figure 1-2A to Paragraph (d) of this AD for your altitude and temperature with the air-conditioner, anti-ice, and bleed air turned off.”
(1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: John Coffey, Flight Test Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone (781) 238-7173, fax (781) 238-7170; email
(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.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Attn: Manager, Commercial Technical Support, mailstop S581A, 6900 Main Street, Stratford, CT, telephone (203) 383-4866, email address
Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2510: Flight Compartment Equipment.