Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly Allison Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison) 250-B and 250-C Series Turboprop and Turboshaft Engines, 261-265 [05-14]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 2 / Tuesday, January 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations submitted to the Office of the Deputy Administrator, CMP, within 30 days following the date of the original determination. The Recipient may request a hearing. (b) If the Recipient submits its appeal and requests a hearing, the Deputy Administrator, or the Deputy Administrator’s designee, will set a date and time, generally within 60 days. The hearing will be an informal proceeding. A transcript will not ordinarily be prepared unless the Recipient bears the cost of the transcript; however, the Deputy Administrator or designee may have a transcript prepared at FAS’s expense. (c) The Deputy Administrator or the Deputy Administrator’s designee will base the determination on appeal upon information contained in the administrative record and will endeavor to make a determination within 60 days after submission of the appeal, hearing, or receipt of any transcript, whichever is later. The determination of the Deputy Administrator will be the final determination of FAS. The Recipient must exhaust all administrative remedies contained in this section before pursuing judicial review of a determination by the Deputy Administrator. § 1486.506 reviewed? When will a project be Any project or activity funded under the program is subject to review or audit at any time during the course of implementation or after the completion of the project. § 1486.507 What is the effect of failing to make required contributions? A Recipient’s contribution requirement is specified in the project agreement. If a Recipient fails to contribute the total specified in the agreement, the difference between the amount contributed and the total must be repaid to the CCC in U.S. dollars. If a Recipient is reimbursed by CCC for less than the amount of funds approved in the agreement, then the final cost share shall equal, on a percentage basis, the original ratio of private contributions to the authorized EMP funding level. § 1486.508 How long must Recipients maintain original project records? Each Recipient shall maintain all original records and documents relating to the project for 3 calendar years following the end of the project’s completion. All documents and records related to the project, including records pertaining to contractors, shall be made available upon request. VerDate jul<14>2003 15:29 Jan 03, 2005 Jkt 205001 § 1486.509 Are Recipients allowed to charge fees for specific activities in approved projects? Reasonable activity fees or registration fees, if identified as such in a project budget, may be charged for projects approved for program funding. Income or refunds generated from an activity, however, for which the expenditures have been wholly or partially reimbursed, shall be repaid by submitting a check payable to CCC or offsetting the Recipient’s reimbursement claim. Any activity fees charged must be used to offset activity expenses. Such fees may not be used as profit or counted as cost-share. The intent to charge a fee must be part of the original proposal, along with an explanation of how such fees are to be used. § 1486.510 What is the policy regarding disclosure of program information? (a) Documents submitted to CCC by Recipients are subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552, 7 CFR Part 1, Subpart A—Official Records, and specifically 7 CFR 1.11, Handling Information from a Private Business. (b) Progress reports, final performance reports, and the results of any research or other activity conducted by a Recipient under an agreement, shall be the property of the U.S. Government. § 1486.511 What is the general policy regarding ethical conduct? (a) The Recipient shall maintain written standards of conduct governing the performance of its employees engaged in the award and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, or agent shall participate in the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by Federal funds if a real or apparent conflict of interest would be involved. Such a conflict would arise when the employee, officer, or agent and any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an entity which employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for an award. The officers, employees, and agents of the Recipient shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, or parties to sub-agreements. However, Recipients may set standards for situations in which the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal value. The standards of conduct shall provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of such standards by officers, employees, or agents of the Recipient. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 261 (b) A Recipient shall conduct its business in accordance with the laws and regulations of the country in which an activity is carried out. § 1486.512 Has the Office of Management and Budget reviewed the paperwork and record keeping requirements contained in this part? The paperwork and record keeping requirements imposed by this part have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). OMB has assigned control number 0551–0043 for this information collection. Dated: December 1, 2004. A. Ellen Terpstra, Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service and Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation. [FR Doc. 05–39 Filed 1–3–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–10–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2004–18515; Directorate Identifier 2004–NE–12–AD; Amendment 39– 13921; AD 2004–26–09] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly Allison Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison) 250–B and 250–C Series Turboprop and Turboshaft Engines Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for RollsRoyce Corporation (RRC) 250–B and 250–C series turboprop and turboshaft engines with certain part numbers (P/ Ns) of compressor adaptor couplings manufactured by Alcor Engine Company (Alcor), EXTEX Ltd. (EXTEX), RRC, and Superior Air Parts (SAP) installed. This AD requires operators to remove from service affected compressor adaptor couplings. This AD results from nine reports of engine shutdown caused by coupling failure. We are issuing this AD to reduce the risk of failure of the compressor adaptor coupling and subsequent loss of all engine power. DATES: This AD becomes effective February 8, 2005. E:\FR\FM\04JAR1.SGM 04JAR1 262 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 2 / Tuesday, January 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https:// dms.dot.gov or in Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Baitoo, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; telephone: (562) 627–5245, fax: (562) 627–5210, for questions about Alcor, EXTEX, or SAP compressor adaptor couplings; and John Tallarovic, Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018– 4696; telephone (847) 294–8180; fax (847) 294–7834, for questions about RRC compressor adaptor couplings. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with a proposed airworthiness directive (AD). The proposed AD applies to RRC 250– B and 250–C series turboprop and turboshaft engines with certain P/Ns of compressor adaptor couplings manufactured by Alcor, EXTEX, RRC, and SAP installed. We published the proposed AD in the Federal Register on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 39877). That action proposed to require operators to remove from service affected couplings. That proposal results from nine reports of engine shutdown caused by compressor adaptor coupling failure. ADDRESSES: Examining the AD Docket You may examine the docket that contains the AD, any comments received, and any final disposition in person at the DMS Docket Offices between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647– 5227) is located on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation Nassif Building at the street address stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them. Comments We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the development of this AD. We have considered the comments received. Request To Change the Impeller-toCoupling Target Fit Tolerance One commenter, RRC, requests that we change the fit between the compressor impeller and the coupling from 0.0000 to ¥0.0018 inch, to 0.0000 to ¥0.0013 inch in the final rule. Based upon rig tests, RRC has changed their recommended fit between the impeller and coupling. We agree. We have changed paragraph (i)(4) and Table 3 of VerDate jul<14>2003 15:29 Jan 03, 2005 Jkt 205001 the final rule to reflect these new fit values. Request To Clarify the Compliance Section The same commenter, RRC, requests the following wording changes to the AD to clarify the compliance section: Change Table 3 in the AD by deleting the column titled Impeller ID. There is no need to specify the impeller ID in Table 3. The key dimension is the fit between the impeller and the coupling and the column listing the impeller ID is unnecessary and only adds confusion. Change paragraph (h) from ‘‘Remove RRC compressor adaptor couplings, P/ Ns 23039791–1, –2, and –3 from service at next access but not later than March 1, 2012’’ to ‘‘Remove RRC compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns 23039791–1, –2, and –3 from service next time the compressor rotor is disassembled for any reason but not later than March 1, 2012.’’ This change more precisely defines the circumstances when the coupling must be replaced. Change paragraph (i)(1) from ‘‘Machine the inside diameter (ID) to accept the next larger size outside diameter (OD) compressor adapter coupling’’ to ‘‘Select and measure pilot OD of a new larger dash size coupling.’’ Change paragraph (i)(4) from ‘‘A fit of 0.0000 to ¥0.0018 inch must be achieved. No fretting is allowed on the impeller after machining’’ to ‘‘Machine inside diameter (ID) of impeller to achieve a fit of 0.000 to ¥0.0013 inch. No fretting is allowed on the impeller after machining.’’ Add a paragraph under (i) that states ‘‘A new coupling must never be installed into a worn impeller.’’ These changes to paragraph (i) would clarify what should be done when the impeller and coupling are serviced. We agree with the intent of these requested changes and have incorporated them in the final rule. We have added paragraph (i)(10) that states the mating surfaces of the impeller and coupling must not have any fretting, and states, do not install a –1 coupling into a used impeller, to address the commenter’s concerns to add a paragraph (i). Request To Correct the Costs of Compliance One commenter requests that the economic evaluation be revised to better reflect the actual costs of the action. The commenter states that the FAA’s economic impact estimate didn’t consider engine and compressor removal, and shipping and out-ofservice time if compliance doesn’t PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 coincide with a scheduled maintenance event. We do not agree. The costs are for replacing the coupling. We do not include any other costs. Availability of Improved Couplings One commenter states that the improved couplings may not be available in sufficient quantities to support the proposed compliance schedule for the parts manufacturer approval (PMA) parts. We partially agree. The improved couplings may be unavailable in sufficient quantities to support the compliance schedule for the engines with EXTEX, SAP, and ALCOR PMA couplings. However, the compliance schedules are based primarily on our evaluation of field management plans developed by those PMA manufacturers. Clarification of Field Management Responsibility EXTEX states that although it has agreed to include SAP couplings in the EXTEX service documents, for clarification, EXTEX requests we note that it is not responsible for the field management of the SAP produced couplings, nor is EXTEX responsible for any costs and liabilities associated with parts produced by SAP. We agree to note EXTEX’s comment. Request To Return Removed Couplings for Analysis One commenter requests that all removed, failed, cracked or fretted couplings of any part number should be returned to the manufacturer for analysis and reported to the FAA of any significant findings. This would help to gain more knowledge of the failure mode of couplings. We do not agree. We have a good understanding of the failure mode of the coupling and the marginal benefit of additional data does not justify the cost burden on the operators to return these couplings. Request for Explanation of Compliance Time One commenter requests an explanation of the year 2012 compliance time for the RRC couplings. The commenter states there may be less attention given to this problem if there is a 7.5 year compliance period. We do not agree. As stated in the proposal, each manufacturer is responsible for their independent component design, design substantiation, component manufacture, and development of a field management plan for its fleet. An important element of the field management plans is the risk E:\FR\FM\04JAR1.SGM 04JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 2 / Tuesday, January 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations assessment. The varying outcomes of those independent risk assessments lead to differing compliance intervals. The compliance time for Rolls-Royce couplings is not intended to convey the message that there is little risk. Operators are expected to use the compliance time to schedule the maintenance actions required by this AD. Also, the commenter requests to allow installation of a ‘‘1 coupling into a used impeller, if the fit is correct. We do not agree. A –1 coupling cannot be installed in a used impeller even if the fit is correct. The surface of a used impeller that mates to the coupling must be cleaned by machining. After machining, a larger coupling is required. Request To Add a Comment To Explain the Dimension Change for Press Fit and Add Requirement for Surface Finish Conclusion We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. One commenter requests we add a comment on how the press fit for the compressor adaptor coupling has changed, and requests we add a requirement for the correct surface finish for the impeller surface. The commenter states that the fit between the compressor adaptor coupling and the impeller is critical. We partially agree. We specified the change to the press fit for the compressor adaptor coupling in the compliance section of the final rule. Since the surface finish is specified in the Overhaul Manual, we will not include the surface finish of 40 microinches for the machined impeller in the final rule. Costs of Compliance Could Be Mitigated One commenter states the costs of compliance could be mitigated by stating the costs occur over 7 years. The commenter gave no specific justification. We do not agree. The estimated costs of compliance for this AD already takes into account the 6,000 engines affected, without basing estimates over 7 years. Request for Explanations One commenter requests that we explain the physical difference between the RRC P/N 23076559–1 and RRC P/N 23039791. The physical difference is that RRC P/N 23076559 has a coating that is more resistant to fretting compared to P/N 23039791. The commenter also asks why the -1 version of the P/N 23036559 compressor adapter coupling is installed only when a new impeller is installed. The –1 coupling is the smallest size and will only fit correctly into a new impeller. As stated in the proposal, a used impeller must be machined before a new compressor adaptor coupling can be installed. This action is required to clean all fretting damage from the surface of the impeller that mates with the coupling. Once an impeller has been machined, a larger (–2 or –3) coupling is required. VerDate jul<14>2003 15:29 Jan 03, 2005 Jkt 205001 Costs of Compliance There are about 9,000 RRC 250–B and 250–C series turboprop and turboshaft engines of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. We estimate that 6,000 engines installed on helicopters and airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD. We also estimate that it would take about 3 work hours per engine to perform the actions when done at time of rotor disassembly, and that the average labor rate is $65 per work hour. Required parts will cost about $1,601 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the AD to U.S. operators to be $10,776,000. 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 We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 263 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); and (3) 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 a summary of the costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the address listed under ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows: I PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive: I 2004–26–09 Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly Allison Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison): Amendment 39– 13921. Docket No. FAA–2004–18515; Directorate Identifier 2004–NE–12–AD. Effective Date (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective February 8, 2005. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly Allison Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison) 250–B17, –B17B, –B17C, –B17D, –B17E, 250–C20, –C20B, –C20F, –C20J, –C20S, and –C20W series turboprop and turboshaft engines with the compressor adaptor couplings installed listed in the following Table 1: E:\FR\FM\04JAR1.SGM 04JAR1 264 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 2 / Tuesday, January 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 1.—AFFECTED COMPRESSOR ADAPTOR COUPLINGS Manufacturer Affected part numbers Alcor Engine Company (Alcor) ........................................................................................................................................... EXTEX Ltd. (EXTEX) .......................................................................................................................................................... Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC) .......................................................................................................................................... Superior Air Parts (SAP) ..................................................................................................................................................... These engines are installed on, but not limited to, the aircraft in the following Table 2: TABLE 2.—APPLICABLE AIRCRAFT Helicopters Agusta Models. A109, A109A, A109A II. Bell Models. 206A, 207B, 206L. Enstrom Models. TH–28, 480, 480B. Eurocopter France Models. AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2. Eurocopter Deutschland Models. BO–105C, BO–105S. MDHI Models. 369D, 369E, 369H, 369HM, 369HS, 369HE. Schweizer Model 269D. Airplanes B–N Group Ltd. Model. BN–2T. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from nine reports of engine shutdown caused by compressor adaptor coupling failure. Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the actions have already been done. Alcor Compressor Adaptor Couplings (f) Remove Alcor compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns 23039791AL, 23039791AL– 1, –2, and –3 from service as follows: (1) For couplings with 600 or more operating hours-since-new as of the effective date of this AD, or the operating hours are unknown and cannot be determined, remove couplings from service at next access but not to exceed 50 additional operating hours. (2) For couplings with fewer than 600 operating hours-since-new on the effective date of this AD, remove couplings from service at next access but not to exceed 649 operating hours-since-new. EXTEX and SAP Compressor Adaptor Couplings (g) Remove EXTEX and SAP compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns A23039791, E23039791, E23039791–1, –2, and –3, EH23039791, and EH23039791–1, –2, and –3, from service as follows: (1) For couplings with operating hours that are unknown and cannot be determined, remove couplings from service at next access but not to exceed 50 additional operating hours. (2) For couplings with 600 or more operating hours-since-new as of the effective date of this AD, remove couplings from service at next access but not to exceed 100 additional operating hours. (3) For couplings with fewer than 600 operating hours-since-new on the effective date of this AD, remove couplings from service at next access but not to exceed 150 additional operating hours. P/Ns 23039791AL. 23039791AL–1/–2/–3. A23039791. E23039791. E23039791–1/–2/–3. EH23039791. EH23039791–1/–2/–3. 23039791–1/–2/–3. A23039791. RRC Compressor Adaptor Couplings (h) Remove RRC compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns 23039791–1, –2, and –3 from service next time the compressor rotor is disassembled for any reason, but not later than March 1, 2012. Installation Requirements for Compressor Adaptor Couplings (i) Machine the compressor impeller as follows: (1) Select and measure the pilot outside diameter (OD) of a new larger dash size coupling. (2) For example, if a –1 coupling was removed, a –2 coupling must be installed. (3) If a –3 coupling is removed, a new impeller is required. (4) Machine the inside diameter (ID) of the compressor impeller to achieve a fit of 0.0000 to –0.0013 inch. No fretting is allowed on the impeller after machining. (5) Due to previous fretting, an impeller with a –1 coupling removed might have to be machined for a –3 coupling. Plating of the impeller ID is not allowed. (6) Fluorescent penetrant inspect the impeller. (7) Install a new compressor adaptor coupling, P/N 23076559–2 or –3; or (8) If a new impeller is installed, then install compressor adaptor coupling, P/N 23076559–1. (9) Heating of the impeller per the engine overhaul manual is required to install the coupling to achieve the target fit specified in the following Table 3: TABLE 3.—IMPELLER-TO-COUPLING TARGET FIT New adaptor Adaptor OD Fit (interference) (i) 23076559–1 ..................................... (ii) 23076559–2 .................................... (iii) 23076559–3 ................................... 0.9000 to 0.9008 inch ....................................................................................... 0.9020 to 0.9028 inch ....................................................................................... 0.9040 to 0.9048 inch ....................................................................................... 0.0000 to –0.0013 inch. 0.0000 to –0.0013 inch. 0.0000 to –0.0013 inch. (10) The mating surfaces of the impeller and coupling must not have any fretting. Do not install a –1 coupling into a used impeller. Definition (j) For the purposes of this AD, next access is defined as when the compressor module is separated from the engine and disassembled for any reason. VerDate jul<14>2003 15:29 Jan 03, 2005 Jkt 205001 Alternative Methods of Compliance (k) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, has the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for Alcor, EXTEX, and SAP adaptor couplings addressed in this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, has the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for RRC PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 adaptor couplings addressed in this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information (l) Alcor SLB No. 814–3–1, Revision C, dated April 28, 2004, EXTEX Alert Service Bulletin T–081, Revision B, dated May 4, 2004, and RRC CEB-A–1392 and CEB-A– E:\FR\FM\04JAR1.SGM 04JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 2 / Tuesday, January 4, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 1334, dated September 9, 2003, pertain to the subject of this AD. Examining the Docket DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 23, 2004. Jay J. Pardee, Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 05–14 Filed 1–3–05; 8:45 am] You can examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 265 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2004–19050; Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–139–AD; Amendment 39–13900; AD 2004–25–12] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Model EMB–135 and –145 Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. AGENCY: ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a typographical error in an existing airworthiness directive (AD) that was published in the Federal Register on December 9, 2004 (69 FR 71339). The docket number of the final rule was incorrectly cited as FAA–2004–19767. This AD applies to all EMBRAER Model EMB–135 and –145 series airplanes. This AD requires a one-time inspection of each passenger service unit (PSU) to determine the serial number of the printed circuit board (PCB) installed in each PSU, replacement of the PCB if necessary, related investigative actions, and other specified actions. DATES: Effective January 13, 2005. You can examine the contents of this AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. This docket number is FAA–2004– 19050; the directorate identifier for this docket is 2004–NM–139–AD. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. VerDate jul<14>2003 15:29 Jan 03, 2005 On November 30, 2004, the FAA issued AD 2004–25–12, amendment 39–13900 (69 FR 71339, December 9, 2004), for all EMBRAER Model EMB–135 and –145 series airplanes. The AD requires a onetime inspection of each passenger service unit (PSU) to determine the serial number of the printed circuit board (PCB) installed in each PSU, replacement of the PCB if necessary, related investigative actions, and other specified actions. As published, the docket number of the final rule is incorrectly cited in the product identification section of the preamble and the regulatory information of the final rule. In the regulatory text, that AD reads ‘‘* * * Docket No. FAA– 2004–19767. * * *’’ However, that AD should have read ‘‘* * * Docket No. FAA–2004–19050. * * *’’ No other part of the regulatory information has been changed; therefore, the final rule is not republished in the Federal Register. The effective date of this AD remains January 13, 2005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Jkt 205001 PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES § 39.13 [Corrected] On page 71340, in the first column, the product identification line of AD 2004–25–12 is corrected to read as follows: * * * * * 2004–25–12 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): Amendment 39–13900. Docket No. FAA–2004–19050; Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–139–AD. * * * * * Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 27, 2004. Kevin M. Mullin, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 05–19 Filed 1–3–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 18 CFR Part 35 [Docket No. RM02–1–005; Order No. 2003– B] Standardization of Generator Interconnection Agreements and Procedures December 20, 2004. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Order on rehearing and directing compliance. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) affirms, with certain clarifications, the fundamental determinations in Order No. 2003–A. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 19, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Rooney (Technical Information), Office of Markets, Tariffs and Rates, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–6205; Roland Wentworth (Technical Information), Office of Markets, Tariffs and Rates, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8262; P. Kumar Agarwal (Technical Information), Office of Markets, Tariffs and Rates, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8923; Michael G. Henry (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8532. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction and Summary II. Background III. Discussion A. Jurisdiction B. Pricing and Cost Recovery Provisions 1. Transmission Credits 2. Credits Under Change in Ownership 3. Protecting Native Load and Other Existing Transmission Customers 4. Interconnection Products and Services 5. Generator Balancing Service Arrangements C. Independent Transmission Provider Obligations D. Issues Related to the Large Generator Interconnection Agreement 1. Stand Alone Network Upgrades 2. Permits and Licensing Requirements 3. Tax Issues a. Security Requirements b. Elimination of the Interconnection Customer’s Right to Contest or Appeal Taxes E:\FR\FM\04JAR1.SGM 04JAR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 2 (Tuesday, January 4, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 261-265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-14]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2004-18515; Directorate Identifier 2004-NE-12-AD; 
Amendment 39-13921; AD 2004-26-09]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly 
Allison Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit 
Diesel Allison) 250-B and 250-C Series Turboprop and Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for 
Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC) 250-B and 250-C series turboprop and 
turboshaft engines with certain part numbers (P/Ns) of compressor 
adaptor couplings manufactured by Alcor Engine Company (Alcor), EXTEX 
Ltd. (EXTEX), RRC, and Superior Air Parts (SAP) installed. This AD 
requires operators to remove from service affected compressor adaptor 
couplings. This AD results from nine reports of engine shutdown caused 
by coupling failure. We are issuing this AD to reduce the risk of 
failure of the compressor adaptor coupling and subsequent loss of all 
engine power.

DATES: This AD becomes effective February 8, 2005.

[[Page 262]]


ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif 
Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Baitoo, Aerospace Engineer, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; telephone: 
(562) 627-5245, fax: (562) 627-5210, for questions about Alcor, EXTEX, 
or SAP compressor adaptor couplings; and John Tallarovic, Aerospace 
Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2300 East Devon 
Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696; telephone (847) 294-8180; fax (847) 
294-7834, for questions about RRC compressor adaptor couplings.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 
with a proposed airworthiness directive (AD). The proposed AD applies 
to RRC 250-B and 250-C series turboprop and turboshaft engines with 
certain P/Ns of compressor adaptor couplings manufactured by Alcor, 
EXTEX, RRC, and SAP installed. We published the proposed AD in the 
Federal Register on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 39877). That action proposed to 
require operators to remove from service affected couplings. That 
proposal results from nine reports of engine shutdown caused by 
compressor adaptor coupling failure.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the docket that contains the AD, any comments 
received, and any final disposition in person at the DMS Docket Offices 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on 
the plaza level of the Department of Transportation Nassif Building at 
the street address stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in 
the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the 
development of this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Request To Change the Impeller-to-Coupling Target Fit Tolerance

    One commenter, RRC, requests that we change the fit between the 
compressor impeller and the coupling from 0.0000 to -0.0018 inch, to 
0.0000 to -0.0013 inch in the final rule. Based upon rig tests, RRC has 
changed their recommended fit between the impeller and coupling. We 
agree. We have changed paragraph (i)(4) and Table 3 of the final rule 
to reflect these new fit values.

Request To Clarify the Compliance Section

    The same commenter, RRC, requests the following wording changes to 
the AD to clarify the compliance section:
    Change Table 3 in the AD by deleting the column titled Impeller ID. 
There is no need to specify the impeller ID in Table 3. The key 
dimension is the fit between the impeller and the coupling and the 
column listing the impeller ID is unnecessary and only adds confusion.
    Change paragraph (h) from ``Remove RRC compressor adaptor 
couplings, P/Ns 23039791-1, -2, and -3 from service at next access but 
not later than March 1, 2012'' to ``Remove RRC compressor adaptor 
couplings, P/Ns 23039791-1, -2, and -3 from service next time the 
compressor rotor is disassembled for any reason but not later than 
March 1, 2012.'' This change more precisely defines the circumstances 
when the coupling must be replaced.
    Change paragraph (i)(1) from ``Machine the inside diameter (ID) to 
accept the next larger size outside diameter (OD) compressor adapter 
coupling'' to ``Select and measure pilot OD of a new larger dash size 
coupling.''
    Change paragraph (i)(4) from ``A fit of 0.0000 to -0.0018 inch must 
be achieved. No fretting is allowed on the impeller after machining'' 
to ``Machine inside diameter (ID) of impeller to achieve a fit of 0.000 
to -0.0013 inch. No fretting is allowed on the impeller after 
machining.''
    Add a paragraph under (i) that states ``A new coupling must never 
be installed into a worn impeller.'' These changes to paragraph (i) 
would clarify what should be done when the impeller and coupling are 
serviced.
    We agree with the intent of these requested changes and have 
incorporated them in the final rule. We have added paragraph (i)(10) 
that states the mating surfaces of the impeller and coupling must not 
have any fretting, and states, do not install a -1 coupling into a used 
impeller, to address the commenter's concerns to add a paragraph (i).

Request To Correct the Costs of Compliance

    One commenter requests that the economic evaluation be revised to 
better reflect the actual costs of the action. The commenter states 
that the FAA's economic impact estimate didn't consider engine and 
compressor removal, and shipping and out-of-service time if compliance 
doesn't coincide with a scheduled maintenance event.
    We do not agree. The costs are for replacing the coupling. We do 
not include any other costs.

Availability of Improved Couplings

    One commenter states that the improved couplings may not be 
available in sufficient quantities to support the proposed compliance 
schedule for the parts manufacturer approval (PMA) parts.
    We partially agree. The improved couplings may be unavailable in 
sufficient quantities to support the compliance schedule for the 
engines with EXTEX, SAP, and ALCOR PMA couplings. However, the 
compliance schedules are based primarily on our evaluation of field 
management plans developed by those PMA manufacturers.

Clarification of Field Management Responsibility

    EXTEX states that although it has agreed to include SAP couplings 
in the EXTEX service documents, for clarification, EXTEX requests we 
note that it is not responsible for the field management of the SAP 
produced couplings, nor is EXTEX responsible for any costs and 
liabilities associated with parts produced by SAP.
    We agree to note EXTEX's comment.

Request To Return Removed Couplings for Analysis

    One commenter requests that all removed, failed, cracked or fretted 
couplings of any part number should be returned to the manufacturer for 
analysis and reported to the FAA of any significant findings. This 
would help to gain more knowledge of the failure mode of couplings.
    We do not agree. We have a good understanding of the failure mode 
of the coupling and the marginal benefit of additional data does not 
justify the cost burden on the operators to return these couplings.

Request for Explanation of Compliance Time

    One commenter requests an explanation of the year 2012 compliance 
time for the RRC couplings. The commenter states there may be less 
attention given to this problem if there is a 7.5 year compliance 
period.
    We do not agree. As stated in the proposal, each manufacturer is 
responsible for their independent component design, design 
substantiation, component manufacture, and development of a field 
management plan for its fleet. An important element of the field 
management plans is the risk

[[Page 263]]

assessment. The varying outcomes of those independent risk assessments 
lead to differing compliance intervals. The compliance time for Rolls-
Royce couplings is not intended to convey the message that there is 
little risk. Operators are expected to use the compliance time to 
schedule the maintenance actions required by this AD.

Request To Add a Comment To Explain the Dimension Change for Press Fit 
and Add Requirement for Surface Finish

    One commenter requests we add a comment on how the press fit for 
the compressor adaptor coupling has changed, and requests we add a 
requirement for the correct surface finish for the impeller surface. 
The commenter states that the fit between the compressor adaptor 
coupling and the impeller is critical.
    We partially agree. We specified the change to the press fit for 
the compressor adaptor coupling in the compliance section of the final 
rule. Since the surface finish is specified in the Overhaul Manual, we 
will not include the surface finish of 40 microinches for the machined 
impeller in the final rule.

Costs of Compliance Could Be Mitigated

    One commenter states the costs of compliance could be mitigated by 
stating the costs occur over 7 years. The commenter gave no specific 
justification.
    We do not agree. The estimated costs of compliance for this AD 
already takes into account the 6,000 engines affected, without basing 
estimates over 7 years.

Request for Explanations

    One commenter requests that we explain the physical difference 
between the RRC P/N 23076559-1 and RRC P/N 23039791. The physical 
difference is that RRC P/N 23076559 has a coating that is more 
resistant to fretting compared to P/N 23039791.
    The commenter also asks why the -1 version of the P/N 23036559 
compressor adapter coupling is installed only when a new impeller is 
installed.
    The -1 coupling is the smallest size and will only fit correctly 
into a new impeller. As stated in the proposal, a used impeller must be 
machined before a new compressor adaptor coupling can be installed. 
This action is required to clean all fretting damage from the surface 
of the impeller that mates with the coupling. Once an impeller has been 
machined, a larger (-2 or -3) coupling is required.
    Also, the commenter requests to allow installation of a ``1 
coupling into a used impeller, if the fit is correct.
    We do not agree. A -1 coupling cannot be installed in a used 
impeller even if the fit is correct. The surface of a used impeller 
that mates to the coupling must be cleaned by machining. After 
machining, a larger coupling is required.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the 
comments received, and determined that air safety and the public 
interest require adopting the AD with the changes described previously. 
We have determined that these changes will neither increase the 
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 9,000 RRC 250-B and 250-C series turboprop and 
turboshaft engines of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. We 
estimate that 6,000 engines installed on helicopters and airplanes of 
U.S. registry will be affected by this AD. We also estimate that it 
would take about 3 work hours per engine to perform the actions when 
done at time of rotor disassembly, and that the average labor rate is 
$65 per work hour. Required parts will cost about $1,601 per engine. 
Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the AD to U.S. 
operators to be $10,776,000.

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

    We have determined that 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); and
    (3) 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 a summary of the costs to comply with this AD and 
placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the 
address listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, 
the Federal Aviation Administration 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 adding the following new airworthiness 
directive:

2004-26-09 Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly Allison Engine Company, 
Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit Diesel Allison): Amendment 
39-13921. Docket No. FAA-2004-18515; Directorate Identifier 2004-NE-
12-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective February 
8, 2005.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Corporation (formerly Allison 
Engine Company, Allison Gas Turbine Division, and Detroit Diesel 
Allison) 250-B17, -B17B, -B17C, -B17D, -B17E, 250-C20, -C20B, -C20F, 
-C20J, -C20S, and -C20W series turboprop and turboshaft engines with 
the compressor adaptor couplings installed listed in the following 
Table 1:

[[Page 264]]



             Table 1.--Affected Compressor Adaptor Couplings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Manufacturer                     Affected part numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alcor Engine Company (Alcor)......  P/Ns 23039791AL.
                                    23039791AL-1/-2/-3.
EXTEX Ltd. (EXTEX)................  A23039791.
                                    E23039791.
                                    E23039791-1/-2/-3.
                                    EH23039791.
                                    EH23039791-1/-2/-3.
Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC).....  23039791-1/-2/-3.
Superior Air Parts (SAP)..........  A23039791.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These engines are installed on, but not limited to, the aircraft 
in the following Table 2:

                      Table 2.--Applicable Aircraft
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Helicopters
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agusta Models.
A109, A109A, A109A II.
Bell Models.
206A, 207B, 206L.
Enstrom Models.
TH-28, 480, 480B.
Eurocopter France Models.
AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2.
Eurocopter Deutschland Models.
BO-105C, BO-105S.
MDHI Models.
369D, 369E, 369H, 369HM, 369HS, 369HE.
Schweizer Model 269D.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B-N Group Ltd. Model.
BN-2T.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from nine reports of engine shutdown caused 
by compressor adaptor coupling failure.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the 
actions have already been done.

Alcor Compressor Adaptor Couplings

    (f) Remove Alcor compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns 23039791AL, 
23039791AL-1, -2, and -3 from service as follows:
    (1) For couplings with 600 or more operating hours-since-new as 
of the effective date of this AD, or the operating hours are unknown 
and cannot be determined, remove couplings from service at next 
access but not to exceed 50 additional operating hours.
    (2) For couplings with fewer than 600 operating hours-since-new 
on the effective date of this AD, remove couplings from service at 
next access but not to exceed 649 operating hours-since-new.

EXTEX and SAP Compressor Adaptor Couplings

    (g) Remove EXTEX and SAP compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns 
A23039791, E23039791, E23039791-1, -2, and -3, EH23039791, and 
EH23039791-1, -2, and -3, from service as follows:
    (1) For couplings with operating hours that are unknown and 
cannot be determined, remove couplings from service at next access 
but not to exceed 50 additional operating hours.
    (2) For couplings with 600 or more operating hours-since-new as 
of the effective date of this AD, remove couplings from service at 
next access but not to exceed 100 additional operating hours.
    (3) For couplings with fewer than 600 operating hours-since-new 
on the effective date of this AD, remove couplings from service at 
next access but not to exceed 150 additional operating hours.

RRC Compressor Adaptor Couplings

    (h) Remove RRC compressor adaptor couplings, P/Ns 23039791-1, -
2, and -3 from service next time the compressor rotor is 
disassembled for any reason, but not later than March 1, 2012.

Installation Requirements for Compressor Adaptor Couplings

    (i) Machine the compressor impeller as follows:
    (1) Select and measure the pilot outside diameter (OD) of a new 
larger dash size coupling.
    (2) For example, if a -1 coupling was removed, a -2 coupling 
must be installed.
    (3) If a -3 coupling is removed, a new impeller is required.
    (4) Machine the inside diameter (ID) of the compressor impeller 
to achieve a fit of 0.0000 to -0.0013 inch. No fretting is allowed 
on the impeller after machining.
    (5) Due to previous fretting, an impeller with a -1 coupling 
removed might have to be machined for a -3 coupling. Plating of the 
impeller ID is not allowed.
    (6) Fluorescent penetrant inspect the impeller.
    (7) Install a new compressor adaptor coupling, P/N 23076559-2 or 
-3; or
    (8) If a new impeller is installed, then install compressor 
adaptor coupling, P/N 23076559-1.
    (9) Heating of the impeller per the engine overhaul manual is 
required to install the coupling to achieve the target fit specified 
in the following Table 3:

                                    Table 3.--Impeller-to-Coupling Target Fit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              New adaptor                         Adaptor OD                       Fit  (interference)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 23076559-1........................  0.9000 to 0.9008 inch.........  0.0000 to -0.0013 inch.
(ii) 23076559-2.......................  0.9020 to 0.9028 inch.........  0.0000 to -0.0013 inch.
(iii) 23076559-3......................  0.9040 to 0.9048 inch.........  0.0000 to -0.0013 inch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (10) The mating surfaces of the impeller and coupling must not 
have any fretting. Do not install a -1 coupling into a used 
impeller.

Definition

    (j) For the purposes of this AD, next access is defined as when 
the compressor module is separated from the engine and disassembled 
for any reason.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (k) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, has 
the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for 
Alcor, EXTEX, and SAP adaptor couplings addressed in this AD if 
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. The Manager, 
Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, has the authority to approve 
alternative methods of compliance for RRC adaptor couplings 
addressed in this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 
CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (l) Alcor SLB No. 814-3-1, Revision C, dated April 28, 2004, 
EXTEX Alert Service Bulletin T-081, Revision B, dated May 4, 2004, 
and RRC CEB-A-1392 and CEB-A-

[[Page 265]]

1334, dated September 9, 2003, pertain to the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 23, 2004.
Jay J. Pardee,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-14 Filed 1-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.