heedm,
Almost all certification/qualification decisions are based on economics, one way or another. If a part falls short of expectations, it will be redesigned and retested to meet the original business plan, and if a limit penalizes the operator it will similarly be retested. The operator's needs are a big part of the decision process, so most likely your desire is almost automatically met. Exceptions might be for those who operate in a corner of the envelope (maybe a pure hover lift operation in a non-crane type helo, for example) where the appeal of a re-do might not be very universal.
Your basic premise is right on, Matt. The economics of component life costs and maintenance made the S-92 team decide to design and qualify all components with 30,000 hour minimum lives, and at least 6,000 hour TBO's on the gearboxes.
The cost to recertify most components is eye-watering. It is not too hard to spend 1 million dollars on aeronautical engineering tasks, and I doubt that any individual operator wants to foot that kind of bill. Mostly, customers vote with their purchasing dollars!