Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 Series Turboprop, and TSE331-3U Model Turboshaft Engines, 9281-9285 [E6-2574]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 36 / Thursday, February 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS 17. Should part 715 require credit unions that obtain a financial statement audit and/or an ‘‘attestation on internal controls’’ (whether as required or voluntarily) to forward a copy of the auditor’s report to NCUA? If so, how soon after the audit period-end? If not, why not? 18. Should part 715 require credit unions to provide NCUA with a copy of any management letter, qualification, or other report issued by its external auditor in connection with services provided to the credit union? If so, how soon after the credit union receives it? If not, why not? 19. If credit unions were required to forward external auditors’ reports to NCUA, should part 715 require the auditor to review those reports with the Supervisory Committee before forwarding them to NCUA? 20. Existing part 715 requires a credit union’s engagement letter to prescribe a target date of 120 days after the audit period-end for delivery of the audit report. Should this period be extended or shortened? What sanctions should be imposed against a credit union that fails to include the target delivery date within its engagement letter? 21. Should part 715 require credit unions to notify NCUA in writing when they enter into an engagement with an auditor, and/or when an engagement ceases by reason of the auditor’s dismissal or resignation? If so in cases of dismissal or resignation, should the credit union be required to include reasons for the dismissal or resignation? 22. NCUA recently joined in the final Interagency Advisory on the Unsafe and Unsound Use of Limitation of Liability Provisions in External Audit Engagement Letters, 71 FR 6847 (Feb. 9, 2006). Should credit union Supervisory Committees be prohibited by regulation from executing engagement letters that contain language limiting various forms of auditor liability to the credit union? Should Supervisory Committees be prohibited from waiving the auditor’s punitive damages liability? By the National Credit Union Administration Board on February 16, 2006. Mary F. Rupp, Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E6–2531 Filed 2–22–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7535–01–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:33 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–23704; Directorate Identifier 2006–NE–02–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 Series Turboprop, and TSE331–3U Model Turboshaft Engines Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 series turboprop, and TSE331– 3U model turboshaft engines. This proposed AD would require implementing a new flight cycle counting method for first, second, and third-stage turbine rotors used in aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings without an engine shutdown, and removing turbine rotors from service that have reached or exceeded their cycle life limits. This new flight cycle counting method would require determining total equivalent cycles accrued. This proposed AD results from several reports of uncontained turbine rotor separation on engines used in special-use operations. We are proposing this AD to prevent uncontained failure of the turbine rotor due to low-cycle-fatigue (LCF), and damage to the aircraft. DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by April 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– 0001. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 9281 You can get the service information identified in this proposed AD from Honeywell Engines, Systems & Services, Technical Data Distribution, M/S 2101– 201, P.O. Box 52170, Phoenix, AZ 85072–2170; telephone: (602) 365–2493 (General Aviation); (602) 365–5535 (Commercial); fax: (602) 365–5577 (General Aviation and Commercial). You may examine the comments on this proposed AD in the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5246; fax (562) 627–5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2006–23704; Directorate Identifier 2006–NE–02–AD’’ in the subject line of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of the DOT Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit http:// dms.dot.gov. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments received and, any final disposition in person at the DOT Docket Office 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 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 9282 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 36 / Thursday, February 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management Facility receives them. Discussion We received several reports of turbine rotor separations on Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 turboprop series engines, resulting in metal fragments either penetrating the engine case or exiting the tail pipe. These engines were in special-use operations that typically include minor cycles (aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings without an engine shutdown). We found that as minor cycles on these engines accumulate, so does LCF damage to the turbine rotors, just like LCF damage does from a major cycle (engine start, takeoff, landing, shutdown). Further, the manufacturer’s major life cycle calculations do not address special-use operations (aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings without an engine shutdown). Special-use operations typically include agricultural, skydiving, and certain cargo flight operations, where the number of minor cycles generally ranges between five and twenty takeoffs-andlandings (to ground idle) per major cycle. This proposed AD is related to the recent FAA safety evaluation on Mitsubishi MU–2B series airplanes. This condition, if not corrected, could result in LCF damage to the turbine rotors, resulting in uncontained turbine rotor failure and damage to the aircraft. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed the technical contents of Honeywell International Inc. Alert Service Bulletins (ASBs) No. TPE331–A72–2111, dated November 12, 2002; No. TPE331–A72–2123, dated February 8, 2006; No. TPE331–A72– 2130, dated September 27, 2005; and TPE331–A–72–2131, dated September 27, 2005, that describe procedures for determining total equivalent cycles (major cycles plus minor cycles) for first, second, and third-stage turbine rotors used in special-use operations and procedures for removing over-limit turbine rotors from service. We have also reviewed and approved the technical contents of Honeywell International Inc. Service Bulletins (SBs) No. TPE331–72–0019, Revision 22, dated May 16, 2001; SB No. TPE331–72–0180, Revision 31, dated November 7, 2003; and SB No. TP331– 72–0476, Revision 27, dated September 17, 2003, and AlliedSignal Inc. SB No. TP331–72–0117, Revision 11, dated November 13, 1997, that describe procedures for recording total equivalent cycles. currently installed in engines that were or are in special-use operations; and • Removing from service, turbine rotors that were or are in special-use operations that have reached or exceeded their cycle life limits; and • Using the new flight cycle counting method that counts major and minor cycles as accrued for all new turbine rotors. The proposed AD would require you to use the service information described previously to perform these actions. Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Manufacturer’s Service Information The proposed AD would allow special-use operators to remove overlimit turbine rotors either according to Table 1 of the removal schedule in the applicable ASBs, or within nine months after the effective date of the proposed AD, whichever occurs later. This would allow high-utilization agricultural operators more time to comply with the proposed AD within their spraying season. Also, the compliance time stated in compliance paragraph 1.D. of the applicable Honeywell ASBs is different from the proposed AD. Also, although the Honeywell and AlliedSignal ASBs and SBs address only the TPE331 series, and TSE331–3U model engines in service, the applicability of the proposed AD includes all certified TPE331–1 through –12 series engines and TSE331–3U model engines. Also, the proposed AD provides actions for used rotors installed on or after the effective date of this AD. We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 200 TPE331 series turboprop, and TSE331–3U model turboshaft engines installed on airplanes and helicopters of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about two work hours per engine to perform the proposed total equivalent cycles determination and recording. We also estimate that to perform a proposed turbine engine removal it would take 40 work hours per engine when done at an unscheduled turbine section inspection, and one work hour per engine when done at a scheduled engine turbine section inspection. We estimate the average labor rate to be $65 per work hour. Required parts would cost about $20,000 per engine. The costs associated with this proposed AD are dependent on the engine mission cycle. Operators accruing many minor and major cycles might replace first and second stage turbine rotors every two years. For the purpose of this proposed AD, we estimate the costs for an eight-year period with moderate usage to be 10 minor cycles each flight and 200 flights each year, and the effective use of the first and second turbine rotors to be equivalent to 2,600 cycles. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost to U.S. operators to be $9,350,630. This is one of several actions that FAA is evaluating for unsafe conditions on the MU–2B airplanes. We estimate that 10 percent of the affected engines are used on MU–2B airplanes. To date, we have proposed the following actions: 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. We are proposing this AD, which would require: • Determining and recording the total equivalent cycles for turbine rotors Date NPRM published Unsafe condition FAA–2006–23578 cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS Docket Wing attach barrel nuts, bolts, and retainers for cracks, corrosion, and fractures. January 25, 2006 (71 FR 4072). FAA–2006–23644 An asymmetric thrust situation in certain flight conditions, which could result in airplane controllability problems. February 9, 2006 (71 FR 6685). VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:33 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Costs of Compliance Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Cost impact $65 per airplane for the inspection and $1,195 per airplane if all 8 barrel nuts needed replacement. Total airplane cost is $1,260 per airplane. If all 397 airplanes needed all 8 barrel nuts replaced, the total cost on U.S. operators for this proposed action would be $500,220. $390 per airplane to change the blade angle. The total cost to U.S. operators for this proposed action would be $57,720. E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 36 / Thursday, February 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules Total proposed cost impact to date (including this NPRM) for the affected airplanes is $47,113 per airplane. This does not account for the following: • The cost of any repairs or replacements based upon the results of inspections by the proposed actions; and • The loss of revenue due to the airplane being down for work associated with any proposed AD action. The total cost to date on all U.S. operators (including this NPRM) would be $18,703,940. This is based on the presumption that 10 airplanes would need the actions performed as specified by Docket No. FAA–2006–23704. 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 regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: 9283 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive: Honeywell International Inc. (formerly AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett Engine Division; Garrett Turbine Engine Company; and AiResearch Manufacturing Company of Arizona): Docket No. FAA–2006–23704; Directorate Identifier 2006–NE–02–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by April 24, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Honeywell International Inc. TPE331–1, –1U, –1UA, –2, –2UA, –3U, –3UW, –3W, –5, –5A, –5AB, –5B, –5U, –6, –6A, –6U, –8, –8A, –9, –9U, –10, –10A, –10AV, –10B, –10G, –10GP, –10GR, –10GT, –10J, –10N, –10P, –10R, –10T, –10U, –10UA, –10UF, –10UG, –10UGR, –10UJ, –10UK, –10UR, –11U, –11UA, –12, –12B, –12JR, –12UA, –12UAR, –12UER, and –12UHR series turboprop and TSE331–3U model turboshaft engines. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, the following aircraft: Manufacturer Airplane model AERO PLANES, LLC (formerly McKinnon Enterprises) .......................... ALLIED AG CAT PRODUCTIONS (formerly Schweizer) ........................ AYRES ...................................................................................................... BRITISH AEROSPACE LTD (formerly Jetstream) .................................. CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY ............................................................ CONSTRUCCIONES AERONAUTICAS, S.A. (CASA) ............................ DEHAVILLAND ......................................................................................... DORNIER ................................................................................................. FAIRCHILD ............................................................................................... G–21G. G–164 SERIES. S–2R SERIES. 3201 SERIES, AND HP.137 JETSTREAM MK.1. 441 CONQUEST. C–212 SERIES. DH104 SERIES 7AXC (DOVE). 228 SERIES. SA226 AND SA227 SERIES (SWEARINGEN MERLIN AND METRO SERIES). G–164 SERIES. MU–2B SERIES (MU–2 SERIES). PC–6 SERIES (FAIRCHILD PORTER AND PEACEMAKER). PZL M18, PZL M18A, PZL M18B. cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS GRUMMAN AMERICAN ........................................................................... MITSUBISHI ............................................................................................. PILATUS ................................................................................................... POLSKIE ZAKLADY LOTNICZE SPOLKA (formerly Wytwornia Sprzetu Komunikacyjnego). PROP-JETS, INC. .................................................................................... RAYTHEON AIRCRAFT (formerly Beech) ............................................... SHORTS BROTHERS AND HARLAND, LTD ......................................... THRUSH (ROCKWELL COMMANDER) .................................................. TWIN COMMANDER (JETPROP COMMANDER) .................................. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:33 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 400. C45G, TC–45G, C–45H, TC–45H, Tc–45J, G18S,.E18S–9700, D18S, D18C, H18, RC–45J, JRB–6, UC–45J, 3N, 3NM, 3TM, B100, C90 AND E90. SC7 (SKYVAN) SERIES. S–2R. 680 AND 690 SERIES. Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 9284 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 36 / Thursday, February 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules Manufacturer Helicopter model SIKORSKY ............................................................................................... Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from several reports of uncontained turbine rotor separation on engines used in specialuse operations. We are issuing this AD to prevent uncontained failure of the turbine rotor due to low-cycle-fatigue (LCF), and damage to the aircraft. Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed S–55 SERIES (HELITEC CORP. S55T). within the compliance times specified unless the actions have already been done. Used Turbine Rotors Installed Before the Effective Date of This AD (f) For used turbine rotors installed before the effective date of this AD, and currently or previously used in specialuse operations: (1) Within 100 major cycles-in-service after the effective date of this AD, or upon removal of the turbine rotor(s) from the engine, whichever occurs first, do the following: (i) Determine the total equivalent cycles accrued for turbine rotors. Use paragraph 2.A. of the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) for your model engines listed in the following Table A., to make the determination. TABLE A.—HONEYWELL ASBS FOR DETERMINING TOTAL EQUIVALENT CYCLES For engines Turbine rotor removal schedule Use ASB No. (A) TPE331–1 through –6 series and TSE331–3U model .... (B) TPE331–8 through –9 series ........................................... (C) TPE331–10 through –11 series ....................................... (D) TPE331–12 series ........................................................... (ii) If you are unable to determine equivalent cycles for prior special-use operations, you must use a takeoff-toengine shutdown ratio of six to estimate TPE331–A72–2111, TPE331–A72–2123, TPE331–A72–2130, TPE331–A72–2131, dated dated dated dated November 12, 2002 ................... February 8, 2006 ....................... September 27, 2005 .................. September 27, 2005 .................. prior special-use equivalent cycles for turbine rotors. (iii) For each turbine rotor affected on the Life Limited Part Log Card, record the total equivalent cycles accrued, as Use Use Use Use ASB ASB ASB ASB Table Table Table Table 1. 1. 1. 1. determined in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, by complying with the recording requirements for your model engine listed in the following Table B.: TABLE B.—SBS FOR RECORDING TOTAL EQUIVALENT CYCLES For engines Record using (A) TPE331–1 through –6 series and TSE331–3U model ...................... Honeywell SB No. TPE331–72–0019, Revision 22, dated May 16, 2001. AlliedSignal SB No. TPE331–72–0117, Revision 11, dated November 13, 1997. Honeywell SB No. TPE331–72–0180, Revision 31, dated November 7, 2003. Honeywell SB No. TPE331–72–0476, Revision 27, dated September 17, 2003. (B) TPE331–8 through –9 series ............................................................. (C) TPE331–10 through –11 series ......................................................... (D) TPE331–12 series .............................................................................. AD using the applicable Turbine Rotor Removal Schedule in Table A of this AD. Used Turbine Rotors Installed On or After the Effective Date of This AD cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS (2) Remove from service turbine rotors affected by paragraph (f) of this AD using the applicable Turbine Rotor Removal Schedule in Table A of this AD, or, within nine months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. (h) For all new (zero cycles) turbine rotors installed on or after the effective date of this AD: (1) Use the new counting method by counting and recording minor and major cycles when accrued, and determine equivalent cycles by the method described in paragraph (f) of this AD. (2) The use of the ratio of six takeoffs to one engine shutdown per major cycle for unknown cycle history is not permitted. (g) For used turbine rotors installed on or after the effective date of this AD, and currently or previously used in special-use operations: (1) Before further flight, determine and record total equivalent cycles using paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(iii) of this AD. (2) Remove from service, turbine rotors affected by paragraph (g) of this VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:33 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 New (Zero Cycles) Turbine Rotors Installed On or After the Effective Date of This AD PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Definitions (i) Engines used in special-use operations are engines installed in aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings without engine shutdown. (j) Total equivalent cycles is the combination of major and minor cycles as specified in the Honeywell ASBs listed in Table A of this AD. (k) Total equivalent cycle life limits listed in the ASBs are the same as the cycle life limits specified in the SBs listed in Table B of this AD. (l) The recording of total equivalent cycles on the Life Limited Part Log Card is the same procedure specified for ‘‘accumulated cycles’’ or ‘‘total cycles’’ in the SBs listed in Table B of this AD. E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 36 / Thursday, February 23, 2006 / Proposed Rules (m) Turbine rotors includes first, second, and third stage seal plates, air seals, rotor disks, wheels, and assemblies that have part numbers specified in the ASBs listed in Table A of this AD. (n) A major cycle is an engine start, takeoff, landing, and shutdown. (o) A minor cycle is multiple takeoffs and landings without an engine shutdown. (p) A used turbine rotor is a turbine rotor whose cycles-since-new are more than zero. Alternative Methods of Compliance (q) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 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. Related Information (r) None. Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 15, 2006. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–2574 Filed 2–22–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary 14 CFR Part 382 RIN 2105–AD41 [OST Docket No. 2006–23999] Accommodations for Individuals Who Are Deaf, Hard of Hearing, or DeafBlind Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to amend a previously published proposed rule that implements the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), to provide for additional accommodations for air travelers who are deaf, hard of hearing or deaf-blind. This proposed rule applies to U.S. air carriers, to foreign air carriers for their flights into and out of the United States, to airport facilities located in the U.S. that are owned, controlled or leased by carriers, and to aircraft that serve a U.S. airport. It proposes to require U.S. and certain foreign air carriers to provide prompt access for individuals who identify themselves as requiring hearing VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:33 Feb 22, 2006 Jkt 208001 or visual assistance to the same information provided to other passengers in the terminal and on the aircraft; caption safety and informational videos, DVDs and other audio-visual displays shown on new and existing aircraft; caption entertainment videos, DVDs and other audio-visual displays on new aircraft; ensure that individuals calling a carrier’s TTY line for information or reservations receive equal response time and level of service (including queuing or other automated response service) as that provided to individuals calling a non-TTY information or reservation line; enable captioning on televisions and audio-visual equipment located in those portions of U.S. airports that are owned, leased or controlled by carriers and open to public access to the extent that such equipment has captioning capability on the effective date of this rule; replace non-caption capable televisions and audio-visual displays with captioning capable technology in the normal course of operations or when relevant airport facilities undergo substantial renovation or expansion; and train carrier personnel to proficiency on recognizing requests for communication accommodations and communicating with individuals who have visual or hearing impairments. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments must be received on or before April 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must refer to the docket and notice numbers cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to the Docket Management Facility of the Office of the Secretary (OST), located on the Plaza Level of the Nassif Building at the U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001. The DOT Docket Facility is open to the public from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Commenters may also submit comments electronically. Instructions appear on the Dockets Management System (DMS) pages of the Department’s Web site (http://dms.dot.gov). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Omar Guerrero or Blane A. Workie, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW., Room 4116, Washington, DC 20590, 202–366–9342 (voice), (202) 366–0511 (TTY), 202–366–7152 (fax), omar.guerrero@dot.gov or blane.workie@dot.gov (e-mail). Arrangements to receive this notice in an alternative format may be made by contacting the above named individuals. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 9285 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background This NPRM concerns the issue of accommodations for deaf, hard of hearing and deaf-blind individuals. The Department of Transportation (hereinafter ‘‘Department’’ or ‘‘DOT’’) first considered such an NPRM in 1996. At that time, DOT issued an NPRM on seating accommodations and stowage of collapsible wheelchairs in which it also requested comments on suggestions the Department had received regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing persons. See 61 FR 56484 (Nov. 1, 1996). Specifically, the 1996 NPRM sought comments on the need for, technical feasibility of, and cost of the following accommodations: (1) The captioning of video material shown on aircraft (e.g., movies and other entertainment features); (2) the availability of telecommunications devices for the deaf where air phone service is provided to other passengers; (3) the provision of assistive listening technology for public address announcements in the aircraft; and (4) the provision of electronic messaging or assistive listening technology in gate areas. In the preamble of the final rule that resulted from the November 1996 proposed rulemaking, however, the Department deferred a decision on whether to require additional accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing passengers. See 63 FR 10528 (March 4, 1998). In January 2000, DOT reopened consideration of this issue by convening a public meeting to discuss whether the Department should commence a rulemaking to require certain additional accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing passengers under the ACAA. See 62 FR 63279 (Nov. 19, 1999); 64 FR 66590 (Nov. 29, 1999). Later that year, the Department determined to institute a rulemaking on additional accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing individuals through the use of a regulatory negotiation. However, resource issues delayed the formation and progress of a regulatory negotiation on this issue. Representatives from the deaf and hard of hearing community, during the May 2001 DOT forum regarding air travel for people with disabilities, asked that DOT follow-up on these early efforts to address deaf and hard of hearing accommodations with a rulemaking. In response to this request, DOT indicated that collaboration among air carriers, airports and the disability community would accelerate the initiation of rulemaking addressing these issues. E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9281-9285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-2574]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-23704; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-02-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 
Series Turboprop, and TSE331-3U Model Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for certain Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 series turboprop, and 
TSE331-3U model turboshaft engines. This proposed AD would require 
implementing a new flight cycle counting method for first, second, and 
third-stage turbine rotors used in aircraft that make multiple takeoffs 
and landings without an engine shutdown, and removing turbine rotors 
from service that have reached or exceeded their cycle life limits. 
This new flight cycle counting method would require determining total 
equivalent cycles accrued. This proposed AD results from several 
reports of uncontained turbine rotor separation on engines used in 
special-use operations. We are proposing this AD to prevent uncontained 
failure of the turbine rotor due to low-cycle-fatigue (LCF), and damage 
to the aircraft.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by April 24, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this 
proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You can get the service information identified in this proposed AD 
from Honeywell Engines, Systems & Services, Technical Data 
Distribution, M/S 2101-201, P.O. Box 52170, Phoenix, AZ 85072-2170; 
telephone: (602) 365-2493 (General Aviation); (602) 365-5535 
(Commercial); fax: (602) 365-5577 (General Aviation and Commercial).
    You may examine the comments on this proposed AD in the AD docket 
on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; telephone 
(562) 627-5246; fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send us any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address 
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2006-23704; 
Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-02-AD'' in the subject line of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of the 
DOT Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you 
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments 
received and, any final disposition in person at the DOT Docket Office 
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

[[Page 9282]]

ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after 
the Docket Management Facility receives them.

Discussion

    We received several reports of turbine rotor separations on 
Honeywell International Inc. TPE331 turboprop series engines, resulting 
in metal fragments either penetrating the engine case or exiting the 
tail pipe. These engines were in special-use operations that typically 
include minor cycles (aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings 
without an engine shutdown).
    We found that as minor cycles on these engines accumulate, so does 
LCF damage to the turbine rotors, just like LCF damage does from a 
major cycle (engine start, takeoff, landing, shutdown). Further, the 
manufacturer's major life cycle calculations do not address special-use 
operations (aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings without 
an engine shutdown). Special-use operations typically include 
agricultural, skydiving, and certain cargo flight operations, where the 
number of minor cycles generally ranges between five and twenty 
takeoffs-and-landings (to ground idle) per major cycle.
    This proposed AD is related to the recent FAA safety evaluation on 
Mitsubishi MU-2B series airplanes. This condition, if not corrected, 
could result in LCF damage to the turbine rotors, resulting in 
uncontained turbine rotor failure and damage to the aircraft.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed the technical contents of Honeywell International 
Inc. Alert Service Bulletins (ASBs) No. TPE331-A72-2111, dated November 
12, 2002; No. TPE331-A72-2123, dated February 8, 2006; No. TPE331-A72-
2130, dated September 27, 2005; and TPE331-A-72-2131, dated September 
27, 2005, that describe procedures for determining total equivalent 
cycles (major cycles plus minor cycles) for first, second, and third-
stage turbine rotors used in special-use operations and procedures for 
removing over-limit turbine rotors from service.
    We have also reviewed and approved the technical contents of 
Honeywell International Inc. Service Bulletins (SBs) No. TPE331-72-
0019, Revision 22, dated May 16, 2001; SB No. TPE331-72-0180, Revision 
31, dated November 7, 2003; and SB No. TP331-72-0476, Revision 27, 
dated September 17, 2003, and AlliedSignal Inc. SB No. TP331-72-0117, 
Revision 11, dated November 13, 1997, that describe procedures for 
recording total equivalent cycles.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Manufacturer's Service 
Information

    The proposed AD would allow special-use operators to remove over-
limit turbine rotors either according to Table 1 of the removal 
schedule in the applicable ASBs, or within nine months after the 
effective date of the proposed AD, whichever occurs later. This would 
allow high-utilization agricultural operators more time to comply with 
the proposed AD within their spraying season.
    Also, the compliance time stated in compliance paragraph 1.D. of 
the applicable Honeywell ASBs is different from the proposed AD. Also, 
although the Honeywell and AlliedSignal ASBs and SBs address only the 
TPE331 series, and TSE331-3U model engines in service, the 
applicability of the proposed AD includes all certified TPE331-1 
through -12 series engines and TSE331-3U model engines. Also, the 
proposed AD provides actions for used rotors installed on or after the 
effective date of this AD.

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. We are proposing this AD, which would 
require:
     Determining and recording the total equivalent cycles for 
turbine rotors currently installed in engines that were or are in 
special-use operations; and
     Removing from service, turbine rotors that were or are in 
special-use operations that have reached or exceeded their cycle life 
limits; and
     Using the new flight cycle counting method that counts 
major and minor cycles as accrued for all new turbine rotors.
    The proposed AD would require you to use the service information 
described previously to perform these actions.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 200 TPE331 series 
turboprop, and TSE331-3U model turboshaft engines installed on 
airplanes and helicopters of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it 
would take about two work hours per engine to perform the proposed 
total equivalent cycles determination and recording. We also estimate 
that to perform a proposed turbine engine removal it would take 40 work 
hours per engine when done at an unscheduled turbine section 
inspection, and one work hour per engine when done at a scheduled 
engine turbine section inspection. We estimate the average labor rate 
to be $65 per work hour. Required parts would cost about $20,000 per 
engine. The costs associated with this proposed AD are dependent on the 
engine mission cycle. Operators accruing many minor and major cycles 
might replace first and second stage turbine rotors every two years. 
For the purpose of this proposed AD, we estimate the costs for an 
eight-year period with moderate usage to be 10 minor cycles each flight 
and 200 flights each year, and the effective use of the first and 
second turbine rotors to be equivalent to 2,600 cycles. Based on these 
figures, we estimate the total cost to U.S. operators to be $9,350,630.
    This is one of several actions that FAA is evaluating for unsafe 
conditions on the MU-2B airplanes. We estimate that 10 percent of the 
affected engines are used on MU-2B airplanes. To date, we have proposed 
the following actions:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Docket                Unsafe condition           Date NPRM published               Cost impact
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAA-2006-23578............  Wing attach barrel nuts,  January 25, 2006 (71 FR       $65 per airplane for the
                             bolts, and retainers      4072).                        inspection and $1,195 per
                             for cracks, corrosion,                                  airplane if all 8 barrel
                             and fractures.                                          nuts needed replacement.
                                                                                     Total airplane cost is
                                                                                     $1,260 per airplane. If all
                                                                                     397 airplanes needed all 8
                                                                                     barrel nuts replaced, the
                                                                                     total cost on U.S.
                                                                                     operators for this proposed
                                                                                     action would be $500,220.
FAA-2006-23644............  An asymmetric thrust      February 9, 2006 (71 FR       $390 per airplane to change
                             situation in certain      6685).                        the blade angle. The total
                             flight conditions,                                      cost to U.S. operators for
                             which could result in                                   this proposed action would
                             airplane                                                be $57,720.
                             controllability
                             problems.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 9283]]

    Total proposed cost impact to date (including this NPRM) for the 
affected airplanes is $47,113 per airplane. This does not account for 
the following:
     The cost of any repairs or replacements based upon the 
results of inspections by the proposed actions; and
     The loss of revenue due to the airplane being down for 
work associated with any proposed AD action.
    The total cost to date on all U.S. operators (including this NPRM) 
would be $18,703,940. This is based on the presumption that 10 
airplanes would need the actions performed as specified by Docket No. 
FAA-2006-23704.

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 regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location 
to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    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 adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

Honeywell International Inc. (formerly AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett 
Engine Division; Garrett Turbine Engine Company; and AiResearch 
Manufacturing Company of Arizona): Docket No. FAA-2006-23704; 
Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-02-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive comments 
on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by April 24, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Honeywell International Inc. TPE331-1, -1U, 
-1UA, -2, -2UA, -3U, -3UW, -3W, -5, -5A, -5AB, -5B, -5U, -6, -6A, -6U, 
-8, -8A, -9, -9U, -10, -10A, -10AV, -10B, -10G, -10GP, -10GR, -10GT, -
10J, -10N, -10P, -10R, -10T, -10U, -10UA, -10UF, -10UG, -10UGR, -10UJ, 
-10UK, -10UR, -11U, -11UA, -12, -12B, -12JR, -12UA, -12UAR, -12UER, and 
-12UHR series turboprop and TSE331-3U model turboshaft engines. These 
engines are installed on, but not limited to, the following aircraft:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Manufacturer                        Airplane model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AERO PLANES, LLC (formerly McKinnon      G-21G.
 Enterprises).
ALLIED AG CAT PRODUCTIONS (formerly      G-164 SERIES.
 Schweizer).
AYRES..................................  S-2R SERIES.
BRITISH AEROSPACE LTD (formerly          3201 SERIES, AND HP.137
 Jetstream).                              JETSTREAM MK.1.
CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY................  441 CONQUEST.
CONSTRUCCIONES AERONAUTICAS, S.A.        C-212 SERIES.
 (CASA).
DEHAVILLAND............................  DH104 SERIES 7AXC (DOVE).
DORNIER................................  228 SERIES.
FAIRCHILD..............................  SA226 AND SA227 SERIES
                                          (SWEARINGEN MERLIN AND METRO
                                          SERIES).
GRUMMAN AMERICAN.......................  G-164 SERIES.
MITSUBISHI.............................  MU-2B SERIES (MU-2 SERIES).
PILATUS................................  PC-6 SERIES (FAIRCHILD PORTER
                                          AND PEACEMAKER).
POLSKIE ZAKLADY LOTNICZE SPOLKA          PZL M18, PZL M18A, PZL M18B.
 (formerly Wytwornia Sprzetu
 Komunikacyjnego).
PROP-JETS, INC.........................  400.
RAYTHEON AIRCRAFT (formerly Beech).....  C45G, TC-45G, C-45H, TC-45H, Tc-
                                          45J, G18S,.E18S-9700, D18S,
                                          D18C, H18, RC-45J, JRB-6, UC-
                                          45J, 3N, 3NM, 3TM, B100, C90
                                          AND E90.
SHORTS BROTHERS AND HARLAND, LTD.......  SC7 (SKYVAN) SERIES.
THRUSH (ROCKWELL COMMANDER)............  S-2R.
TWIN COMMANDER (JETPROP COMMANDER).....  680 AND 690 SERIES.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 9284]]


------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Manufacturer                       Helicopter model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIKORSKY...............................  S-55 SERIES (HELITEC CORP.
                                          S55T).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from several reports of uncontained turbine 
rotor separation on engines used in special-use operations. We are 
issuing this AD to prevent uncontained failure of the turbine rotor due 
to low-cycle-fatigue (LCF), and damage to the aircraft.

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.

Used Turbine Rotors Installed Before the Effective Date of This AD

    (f) For used turbine rotors installed before the effective date of 
this AD, and currently or previously used in special-use operations:
    (1) Within 100 major cycles-in-service after the effective date of 
this AD, or upon removal of the turbine rotor(s) from the engine, 
whichever occurs first, do the following:
    (i) Determine the total equivalent cycles accrued for turbine 
rotors. Use paragraph 2.A. of the Accomplishment Instructions of the 
applicable Honeywell Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) for your model 
engines listed in the following Table A., to make the determination.

                        Table A.--Honeywell ASBs for Determining Total Equivalent Cycles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               For engines                           Use ASB No.              Turbine rotor  removal  schedule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) TPE331-1 through -6 series and        TPE331-A72-2111, dated November   Use ASB Table 1.
 TSE331-3U model.                          12, 2002.
(B) TPE331-8 through -9 series..........  TPE331-A72-2123, dated February   Use ASB Table 1.
                                           8, 2006.
(C) TPE331-10 through -11 series........  TPE331-A72-2130, dated September  Use ASB Table 1.
                                           27, 2005.
(D) TPE331-12 series....................  TPE331-A72-2131, dated September  Use ASB Table 1.
                                           27, 2005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) If you are unable to determine equivalent cycles for prior 
special-use operations, you must use a takeoff-to-engine shutdown ratio 
of six to estimate prior special-use equivalent cycles for turbine 
rotors.
    (iii) For each turbine rotor affected on the Life Limited Part Log 
Card, record the total equivalent cycles accrued, as determined in 
paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, by complying with the 
recording requirements for your model engine listed in the following 
Table B.:

           Table B.--SBs for Recording Total Equivalent Cycles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              For engines                          Record using
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) TPE331-1 through -6 series and       Honeywell SB No. TPE331-72-
 TSE331-3U model.                         0019, Revision 22, dated May
                                          16, 2001.
(B) TPE331-8 through -9 series.........  AlliedSignal SB No. TPE331-72-
                                          0117, Revision 11, dated
                                          November 13, 1997.
(C) TPE331-10 through -11 series.......  Honeywell SB No. TPE331-72-
                                          0180, Revision 31, dated
                                          November 7, 2003.
(D) TPE331-12 series...................  Honeywell SB No. TPE331-72-
                                          0476, Revision 27, dated
                                          September 17, 2003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Remove from service turbine rotors affected by paragraph (f) of 
this AD using the applicable Turbine Rotor Removal Schedule in Table A 
of this AD, or, within nine months after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later.

Used Turbine Rotors Installed On or After the Effective Date of This AD

    (g) For used turbine rotors installed on or after the effective 
date of this AD, and currently or previously used in special-use 
operations:
    (1) Before further flight, determine and record total equivalent 
cycles using paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(iii) of this AD.
    (2) Remove from service, turbine rotors affected by paragraph (g) 
of this AD using the applicable Turbine Rotor Removal Schedule in Table 
A of this AD.

New (Zero Cycles) Turbine Rotors Installed On or After the Effective 
Date of This AD

    (h) For all new (zero cycles) turbine rotors installed on or after 
the effective date of this AD:
    (1) Use the new counting method by counting and recording minor and 
major cycles when accrued, and determine equivalent cycles by the 
method described in paragraph (f) of this AD.
    (2) The use of the ratio of six takeoffs to one engine shutdown per 
major cycle for unknown cycle history is not permitted.

Definitions

    (i) Engines used in special-use operations are engines installed in 
aircraft that make multiple takeoffs and landings without engine 
shutdown.
    (j) Total equivalent cycles is the combination of major and minor 
cycles as specified in the Honeywell ASBs listed in Table A of this AD.
    (k) Total equivalent cycle life limits listed in the ASBs are the 
same as the cycle life limits specified in the SBs listed in Table B of 
this AD.
    (l) The recording of total equivalent cycles on the Life Limited 
Part Log Card is the same procedure specified for ``accumulated 
cycles'' or ``total cycles'' in the SBs listed in Table B of this AD.

[[Page 9285]]

    (m) Turbine rotors includes first, second, and third stage seal 
plates, air seals, rotor disks, wheels, and assemblies that have part 
numbers specified in the ASBs listed in Table A of this AD.
    (n) A major cycle is an engine start, takeoff, landing, and 
shutdown.
    (o) A minor cycle is multiple takeoffs and landings without an 
engine shutdown.
    (p) A used turbine rotor is a turbine rotor whose cycles-since-new 
are more than zero.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (q) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 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.

Related Information

    (r) None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on February 15, 2006.
Ann C. Mollica,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft 
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6-2574 Filed 2-22-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P