Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 884B, 892, 892B, and 895 Series Turbofan Engines, 8303-8305 [05-3191]
Download as PDF
8303
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 70, No. 33
Friday, February 18, 2005
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001–NE–12–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce
plc RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 884B,
892, 892B, and 895 Series Turbofan
Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to
supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) for Rolls-Royce plc (RR)
RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 892, 892B,
and 895 series turbofan engines. That
AD currently requires repetitive
application of dry film lubricant (DFL)
to low pressure compressor (LPC) fan
blade roots. This proposed AD would
require the same actions but at more
frequent intervals than the existing AD,
add the Trent 884B engine to the list of
engine models affected, add a fan blade
part number (P/N) to the affected list of
fan blades, and would relax the initial
DFL repetitive application compliance
time for certain fan blades that have
never been removed from the disk. This
proposed AD results from discovering
DFL in worse condition than anticipated
on fan blades fitted to disks previously
run for a significant period. This
proposed AD also results from the need
to update the list of engine models
affected, and to update the list of fan
blade part numbers affected. We are
proposing this AD to prevent LPC fan
blade loss, which could result in an
uncontained engine failure and possible
aircraft damage.
DATES: We must receive any comments
on this proposed AD by April 19, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
proposed AD:
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:39 Feb 17, 2005
Jkt 205001
• By mail: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England
Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NE–
12–AD, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803–5299.
• By fax: (781) 238–7055.
• By e-mail: 9-aneadcomment@faa.gov.
You may examine the AD docket, by
appointment, at the FAA, New England
Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,
12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Spinney, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office,
FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate,
12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA 01803–5299; telephone:
(781) 238–7175, fax: (781) 238–7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
LPC fan blade roots. That AD resulted
from an aborted take-off resulting from
LPC fan blade loss, and reports of four
cracked LPC fan blade roots.
Comments Invited
Paragraph (d) of the current AD, AD
2002–10–15, contains a paragraph
pertaining to special flight permits.
Even though this final rule does not
contain a similar paragraph, we have
made no changes with regard to the use
of special flight permits to operate the
airplane to a repair facility to do the
work required by this AD. In July 2002,
we published a new Part 39 that
contains a general authority regarding
special flight permits and airworthiness
directives; see Docket No. FAA–2004–
8460, Amendment 39–9474 (69 FR
47998, July 22, 2002). Thus, when we
now supersede ADs we will not include
a specific paragraph on special flight
permits unless we want to limit the use
of that general authority granted in
section 39.23.
We invite you to submit any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposal. Send your
comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No.
2001–NE–12—AD’’ in the subject line of
your comments. If you want us to
acknowledge receipt of your mailed
comments, send us a self-addressed,
stamped postcard with the docket
number written on it; we will datestamp your postcard and mail it back to
you. We specifically invite comments
on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed AD. If a person contacts us
verbally, and that contact relates to a
substantive part of this proposed AD,
we will summarize the contact and
place the summary in the docket. We
will consider all comments received by
the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those
comments.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD Docket
(including any comments and service
information), by appointment, between
8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. See
ADDRESSES for the location.
Discussion
On May 16, 2002, the FAA issued AD
2002–10–15, Amendment 39–12761 (67
FR 36803, May 28, 2002). That AD
requires repetitive application of DFL to
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Actions Since AD 2002–10–15 was
Issued
Since that AD was issued, we have
determined from a sampling of DFL
coatings on fan blades, that the DFL
coating condition has some variation.
The condition appears worse than
anticipated on fan blades fitted to disks
previously run for a significant period.
Also, since that AD was issued, we
discovered that the Trent 884B engine
needs to be added to the applicability
list, and fan blade, P/N FW23552, needs
to be added to the list of affected blades.
Special Flight Permits Paragraph
Removed
Replacement of References to Manual
Tasks, Repair Schemes, and Coatings
In this proposed AD, we have
replaced references in AD 2002–10–15
to Aircraft Maintenance Manual task
72–31–11–300–801–R00 (Repair
Scheme FRS A031 by air spray method
only), Engine Manual task 72–31–11–
R001 (Repair Scheme FRS A028), and
lubricants, Dow Corning 321R (RollsRoyce (RR) Omat item 4/51), Rocol Dry
Moly Spray (RR Omat item 4/52),
Molydag 709 (RR Omat item 444), or
PL.237/R1 (RR Omat item 4/43), with a
reference to RR Alert Service Bulletin
No. RB.211–72–AD347, Revision 6,
dated April 22, 2004, which contains
that information.
E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM
18FEP1
8304
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 33 / Friday, February 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Bilateral Agreement Information
These engine models are
manufactured in the U.K. and are type
certificated for operation in the United
States under the provisions of Section
21.29 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the
applicable bilateral airworthiness
agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral
airworthiness agreement, the CAA has
kept the FAA informed of the situation
described above. The FAA has
examined the findings of the CAA,
reviewed all available information, and
determined that AD action is necessary
for products of this type design that are
certificated for operation in the United
States.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent
information and identified an unsafe
condition that is likely to exist or
develop on other products of this same
type design. Therefore, we are
proposing this AD, which would:
• Require repetitive application of
DFL to LPC fan blade roots at more
frequent intervals than the existing AD;
• Add the Trent 884B engine to the
applicability;
• Add a fan blade P/N to the affected
list of fan blades; and
• Relax the initial DFL repetitive
application compliance time for certain
fan blades that have never been
removed from the disk.
Costs of Compliance
There are approximately 388 RR
RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 884B, 892,
892B, and 895 series turbofan engines of
the affected design in the worldwide
fleet. We estimate that 106 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry
would be affected by this proposed AD.
We also estimate that it would take
approximately six work hours per
engine to perform the DFL application,
and that the average labor rate is $65 per
work hour. Based on these figures, we
estimate the total cost of the proposed
AD to U.S. operators to perform one
repetitive application of DFL to the
affected engines to be $41,340.
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,
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:39 Feb 17, 2005
Jkt 205001
‘‘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
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 above, I
certify that the 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); and
3. Would 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 proposal and placed
it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy
of this summary by sending a request to
us at the address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No.
2001–NE–12–AD’’ in your request.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Amendment 39–12761 (67 FR
36803, May 28, 2002) and by adding a
new airworthiness directive, to read as
follows:
Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. 2001–NE–12–
AD.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) must receive comments on this
airworthiness directive (AD) action by April
19, 2005.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2002–10–15,
Amendment 39–12761.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR)
RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 884B, 892, 892B,
and 895 series turbofan engines with low
pressure compressor (LPC) fan blade part
numbers (P/Ns): FK 30838, FK30840,
FK30842, FW12960, FW12961, FW12962,
FW13175, FW18548, or FW23552. These
engines are installed on, but not limited to,
Boeing 777 series airplanes.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from the discovery of
dry film lubricant (DFL) condition appearing
worse than anticipated on fan blades fitted to
disks previously run for a significant period.
This AD also results from the need to update
the list of engine models affected, and to
update the list of fan blade part numbers
affected. The actions specified in this AD are
intended to prevent LPC fan blade loss,
which could result in an uncontained engine
failure and possible aircraft damage.
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.
(f) Apply an approved DFL to LPC fan
blade roots as follows:
(1) For LPC fan blades P/Ns FW13175,
FW12960, FW12961, FW12962, FW18548,
and FW23552 that have never been removed
from the disk, apply DFL at the first removal
from the disk or before 1,200 cycles-inservice (CIS), whichever occurs first.
(2) For LPC fan blades P/Ns FW13175,
FW12960, FW12961, FW12962, FW18548,
and FW23552 that have been removed from
the disk since entering service, apply DFL
before accumulating 600 cycles-since-new
(CSN) or before accumulating 600 cyclessince-last DFL application, or within 200 CIS
from the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
(3) For LPC fan blades P/Ns FK30842,
FK30840, and FK300838, apply DFL before
accumulating 600 CSN or before
accumulating 600 cycles-since-last DFL
application, or within 100 CIS after July 2,
2002 (effective date of superseded AD 2002–
10–15), whichever occurs first.
(4) Thereafter, reapply DFL to LPC fan
blade roots within 600 cycles-since-last DFL
application.
(5) Information on applying DFL to fan
blade roots can be found in RR Alert Service
Bulletin No. RB.211–72–AD347, Revision 6,
dated April 22, 2004.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(g) The Manager, Engine Certification
Office, has the authority to approve
alternative methods of compliance for this
AD if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19.
E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM
18FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 33 / Friday, February 18, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Related Information
(h) Civil Aviation Authority Airworthiness
Directive G–2004–0008, dated April 29, 2004,
also addresses the subject of this AD.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
February 10, 2005.
Francis A. Favara,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–3191 Filed 2–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 51
[Public Notice 4993]
RIN 1400–AB93
Electronic Passport
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This proposed rule would
amend the passport regulations to
incorporate changes required by the
electronic passport. The rule would
define ‘‘electronic passport,’’ would
include a damaged electronic chip as an
additional basis for possible
invalidation of a passport, would
abolish the U.S. passport amendment
process except for the convenience of
the U.S. Government, and would
enlarge the reasons for issuing a
replacement passport at no fee. The rule
would also add unpaid fees as a ground
for invalidating a passport.
DATES: The Department will accept
comments from the public up to 45 days
from February 18, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
questions regarding the proposed rule
should be addressed to: Chief, Legal
Division, Office of Passport Policy,
Planning and Advisory Services, 2100
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 3rd Floor,
Washington, DC 20037. You may also
send comments by e-mail to:
PassportRules@state.gov.
Persons with access to the internet
may also view this notice and provide
comments by going to the
regulations.gov Web site at: https://
www.regulations.gov/index.cfm. You
must include the Regulatory
Identification Number (RIN) in the
subject line of your message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sharon Palmer-Royston, Office of
Passport Policy, Planning and Advisory
Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs,
who may be reached at (202) 663–2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
1101(a)(30) of Title 8, United States
Code (U.S.C.), defines a passport as any
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:23 Feb 17, 2005
Jkt 205001
travel document issued by a competent
authority showing the bearer’s origin,
identity and nationality, which is valid
for the admission of the bearer into a
foreign country. Acquisition of United
States nationality is provided for by
Title III of the Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952, as amended (8
U.S.C. 1401, et seq.), including the
acquisition of U.S. nationality but not
citizenship under 8 U.S.C. 1408 by
individuals born in an outlying
possession of the United States. Section
1185(b) of Title 8, U.S.C., requires U.S.
citizens to bear a valid U.S. passport to
enter or depart the United States unless
excepted—exceptions are provided in
22 CFR 53.2. The Secretary of State has
sole authority to grant and issue
passports, pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 211a.
Before a passport is issued to any person
by or under authority of the United
States, such person must subscribe to
and submit a written application, as
required by 22 U.S.C. 213. During its
period of validity, a passport (when
issued to a U.S. citizen for the
maximum period authorized by law) is
a document establishing proof of United
States citizenship, pursuant to 22 U.S.C.
2705. 22 CFR 51.2(b) provides that
unless authorized by the Department no
person shall bear more than one valid or
potentially valid U.S. passport at any
one time.
The Department plans to introduce an
enhanced version of the traditional
passport, using an embedded electronic
chip to digitally carry the information
printed on the data page, a biometric
version of the bearer’s photo, and
coding to prevent any digital data from
being altered or removed. The contents
of the data page of the traditional
passport have been established for a
very long time by international usage
and by the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO). The current
Machine Readable Passport format has
been the international standard, used by
the United States, since 1982 (ICAO
Publication 9303, Machine Readable
Travel Documents, Part I, Machine
Readable Passports, Fifth Edition 2003).
The first passport using the enhanced,
electronic passport format is expected to
be issued in mid-2005. After that, the
issuance technology would be
sequentially placed into all passport
agencies, so that, within a year, all new
passports would be issued in this
format. All valid old-style passports
would continue to be valid until they
normally expire unless they were
individually invalidated.
The technology selected for the
electronic passport is the 64 kilobyte
contactless integrated circuit chip with
an antenna. The electronic chip itself
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8305
has a very short read distance,
approximately four inches. This choice
is compatible with standards and
recommendations of ICAO. The
standards and recommendations are
found in ICAO Publication 9303,
Machine Readable Travel Documents,
Part 1, Machine Readable Passports,
Fifth Edition 2003; and in the
recommendations found in Technical
Reports and an Annex supplementing
that publication relating to the
technology supporting the use of
electronic chips in travel documents.
Specifically, the three Technical Reports
are ‘‘Development of a Logical Data
Structure—LDS for Optimal Capacity
Expansion Technologies,’’ Revision 1.7,
May 18, 2004; ‘‘Development and
Specification of Globally Interoperable
Biometric Standards for Machine
Assisted Identity Confirmation Using
Machine Readable Travel Documents,’’
Version 2.0, May 21, 2004; ‘‘PKI for
Machine Readable Travel Documents
Offering ICC Read-only Access,’’
Version 1.1, October 1, 2004. The Annex
is ‘‘Use of Contactless Integrated
Circuits in Machine Readable Travel
Documents,’’ Version 4.0, May 5, 2004.
The electronic chip will carry the
information on the data page of the
passport plus a biometric identifier to
enhance the ability to identify the
bearer. The biometric chosen for the
initial version of the U.S. electronic
passport is the facial image, one of three
biometrics currently identified by the
International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) as suitable for
inclusion in international travel
documents, although the facial image
was mandatory. Under the proposed
rule, border inspectors would compare
the passport bearer with the digital
facial image stored on the electronic
chip. ICAO also recognizes fingerprints
and iris scans as acceptable biometrics.
As biometric technology is rapidly
advancing, the inclusion of facial image
data in U.S. passports is considered a
first step in ensuring that an effective
biometric system is incorporated into
the U.S. passport system.
Using an embedded electronic chip in
the passport to store the information
from the passport data page will
enhance the security of the document
and is expected to benefit travelers by
improving the ability of border officials
to verify personal identities. The
Department plans to use this format
because of the enhanced security
features and improved port of entry
performance provided by the electronic
chip technology.
The Department considers the
inclusion of biometric identifiers in
international travel documents, made
E:\FR\FM\18FEP1.SGM
18FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 33 (Friday, February 18, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8303-8305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-3191]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 33 / Friday, February 18, 2005 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 8303]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001-NE-12-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc RB211 Trent 875, 877,
884, 884B, 892, 892B, and 895 Series Turbofan Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) for Rolls-Royce plc (RR) RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 892,
892B, and 895 series turbofan engines. That AD currently requires
repetitive application of dry film lubricant (DFL) to low pressure
compressor (LPC) fan blade roots. This proposed AD would require the
same actions but at more frequent intervals than the existing AD, add
the Trent 884B engine to the list of engine models affected, add a fan
blade part number (P/N) to the affected list of fan blades, and would
relax the initial DFL repetitive application compliance time for
certain fan blades that have never been removed from the disk. This
proposed AD results from discovering DFL in worse condition than
anticipated on fan blades fitted to disks previously run for a
significant period. This proposed AD also results from the need to
update the list of engine models affected, and to update the list of
fan blade part numbers affected. We are proposing this AD to prevent
LPC fan blade loss, which could result in an uncontained engine failure
and possible aircraft damage.
DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by April 19,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD:
By mail: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), New
England Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket
No. 2001-NE-12-AD, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-
5299.
By fax: (781) 238-7055.
By e-mail: 9-ane-adcomment@faa.gov.
You may examine the AD docket, by appointment, at the FAA, New
England Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Spinney, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299;
telephone: (781) 238-7175, fax: (781) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``AD Docket No. 2001-NE-12--AD'' in the
subject line of your comments. If you want us to acknowledge receipt of
your mailed comments, send us a self-addressed, stamped postcard with
the docket number written on it; we will date-stamp your postcard and
mail it back to you. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed
AD. If a person contacts us verbally, and that contact relates to a
substantive part of this proposed AD, we will summarize the contact and
place the summary in the docket. We will consider all comments received
by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those
comments.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD Docket (including any comments and service
information), by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. See ADDRESSES for the
location.
Discussion
On May 16, 2002, the FAA issued AD 2002-10-15, Amendment 39-12761
(67 FR 36803, May 28, 2002). That AD requires repetitive application of
DFL to LPC fan blade roots. That AD resulted from an aborted take-off
resulting from LPC fan blade loss, and reports of four cracked LPC fan
blade roots.
Actions Since AD 2002-10-15 was Issued
Since that AD was issued, we have determined from a sampling of DFL
coatings on fan blades, that the DFL coating condition has some
variation. The condition appears worse than anticipated on fan blades
fitted to disks previously run for a significant period. Also, since
that AD was issued, we discovered that the Trent 884B engine needs to
be added to the applicability list, and fan blade, P/N FW23552, needs
to be added to the list of affected blades.
Special Flight Permits Paragraph Removed
Paragraph (d) of the current AD, AD 2002-10-15, contains a
paragraph pertaining to special flight permits. Even though this final
rule does not contain a similar paragraph, we have made no changes with
regard to the use of special flight permits to operate the airplane to
a repair facility to do the work required by this AD. In July 2002, we
published a new Part 39 that contains a general authority regarding
special flight permits and airworthiness directives; see Docket No.
FAA-2004-8460, Amendment 39-9474 (69 FR 47998, July 22, 2002). Thus,
when we now supersede ADs we will not include a specific paragraph on
special flight permits unless we want to limit the use of that general
authority granted in section 39.23.
Replacement of References to Manual Tasks, Repair Schemes, and Coatings
In this proposed AD, we have replaced references in AD 2002-10-15
to Aircraft Maintenance Manual task 72-31-11-300-801-R00 (Repair Scheme
FRS A031 by air spray method only), Engine Manual task 72-31-11-R001
(Repair Scheme FRS A028), and lubricants, Dow Corning 321R (Rolls-Royce
(RR) Omat item 4/51), Rocol Dry Moly Spray (RR Omat item 4/52), Molydag
709 (RR Omat item 444), or PL.237/R1 (RR Omat item 4/43), with a
reference to RR Alert Service Bulletin No. RB.211-72-AD347, Revision 6,
dated April 22, 2004, which contains that information.
[[Page 8304]]
Bilateral Agreement Information
These engine models are manufactured in the U.K. and are type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
Section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this
bilateral airworthiness agreement, the CAA has kept the FAA informed of
the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of the
CAA, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD action
is necessary for products of this type design that are certificated for
operation in the United States.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products
of this same type design. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which
would:
Require repetitive application of DFL to LPC fan blade
roots at more frequent intervals than the existing AD;
Add the Trent 884B engine to the applicability;
Add a fan blade P/N to the affected list of fan blades;
and
Relax the initial DFL repetitive application compliance
time for certain fan blades that have never been removed from the disk.
Costs of Compliance
There are approximately 388 RR RB211 Trent 875, 877, 884, 884B,
892, 892B, and 895 series turbofan engines of the affected design in
the worldwide fleet. We estimate that 106 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD. We
also estimate that it would take approximately six work hours per
engine to perform the DFL application, and that the average labor rate
is $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the total
cost of the proposed AD to U.S. operators to perform one repetitive
application of DFL to the affected engines to be $41,340.
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 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 above, I certify that the 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); and
3. Would 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 proposal and
placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary by
sending a request to us at the address listed under ADDRESSES. Include
``AD Docket No. 2001-NE-12-AD'' in your request.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14
CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
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]
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by removing Amendment 39-12761 (67 FR
36803, May 28, 2002) and by adding a new airworthiness directive, to
read as follows:
Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. 2001-NE-12-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by April 19,
2005.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2002-10-15, Amendment 39-12761.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) RB211 Trent 875,
877, 884, 884B, 892, 892B, and 895 series turbofan engines with low
pressure compressor (LPC) fan blade part numbers (P/Ns): FK 30838,
FK30840, FK30842, FW12960, FW12961, FW12962, FW13175, FW18548, or
FW23552. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Boeing
777 series airplanes.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from the discovery of dry film lubricant
(DFL) condition appearing worse than anticipated on fan blades
fitted to disks previously run for a significant period. This AD
also results from the need to update the list of engine models
affected, and to update the list of fan blade part numbers affected.
The actions specified in this AD are intended to prevent LPC fan
blade loss, which could result in an uncontained engine failure and
possible aircraft damage.
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.
(f) Apply an approved DFL to LPC fan blade roots as follows:
(1) For LPC fan blades P/Ns FW13175, FW12960, FW12961, FW12962,
FW18548, and FW23552 that have never been removed from the disk,
apply DFL at the first removal from the disk or before 1,200 cycles-
in-service (CIS), whichever occurs first.
(2) For LPC fan blades P/Ns FW13175, FW12960, FW12961, FW12962,
FW18548, and FW23552 that have been removed from the disk since
entering service, apply DFL before accumulating 600 cycles-since-new
(CSN) or before accumulating 600 cycles-since-last DFL application,
or within 200 CIS from the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
(3) For LPC fan blades P/Ns FK30842, FK30840, and FK300838,
apply DFL before accumulating 600 CSN or before accumulating 600
cycles-since-last DFL application, or within 100 CIS after July 2,
2002 (effective date of superseded AD 2002-10-15), whichever occurs
first.
(4) Thereafter, reapply DFL to LPC fan blade roots within 600
cycles-since-last DFL application.
(5) Information on applying DFL to fan blade roots can be found
in RR Alert Service Bulletin No. RB.211-72-AD347, Revision 6, dated
April 22, 2004.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(g) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
[[Page 8305]]
Related Information
(h) Civil Aviation Authority Airworthiness Directive G-2004-
0008, dated April 29, 2004, also addresses the subject of this AD.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 10, 2005.
Francis A. Favara,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05-3191 Filed 2-17-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P