Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc RB211-Trent 800 Series Turbofan Engines, 24796-24798 [2011-10520]
Download as PDF
24796
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(h) See European Aviation Safety Agency
Airworthiness Directive 2009–0073R1, dated
April 8, 2009, for related information.
(i) Contact Alan Strom, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA,
Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; e-mail: alan.strom@faa.gov; telephone
(781) 238–7143; fax (781) 238–7199, for more
information about this AD.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use Rolls-Royce Alert Service
Bulletin RB.211–72–AF964, Revision 1,
dated June 6, 2008, to do the actions required
by this AD, unless the AD specifies
otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
this service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box
31, Derby, DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom;
phone: 011 44 1332 242424, fax: 011 44 1332
249936; e-mail: tech.help@rolls-royce.com.
(3) You may review copies at the FAA,
New England Region, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202) 741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
April 12, 2011.
Peter A. White,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–10517 Filed 5–2–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2008–1165; Directorate
Identifier 2008–NE–38–AD; Amendment 39–
16685; AD 2011–10–04]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce
plc RB211–Trent 800 Series Turbofan
Engines
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results
from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by an aviation authority of
SUMMARY:
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP)
compressor stage 1 discs, a small number of
parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection.
Analysis of the possibility of less severe
examples having been undetected and passed
into service has concluded that action is
required to reduce the risk of failure. It was
therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is part
of the HP compressor stage 1–4 shaft,
part number (P/N) FK32580. We are
issuing this AD to prevent failure of the
HP compressor stage 1 disc,
uncontained engine failure, and damage
to the airplane.
DATES: This AD becomes effective June
7, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations
office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803;
e-mail: alan.strom@faa.gov; telephone
(781) 238–7143; fax (781) 238–7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) and a supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an
AD that would apply to the specified
products. That NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on February 18,
2009 (74 FR 7563) and that SNPRM was
published in the Federal Register on
October 4, 2010 (75 FR 61114). That
SNPRM proposed to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products.
The MCAI states that:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP)
compressor stage 1 discs, a small number of
parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection.
Analysis of the possibility of less severe
examples having been undetected and passed
into service has concluded that action is
required to reduce the risk of failure. It was
therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is
part of the HP compressor stage 1–4
shaft, P/N FK32580. Since we issued the
original NPRM on February 10, 2009
(74 FR 7563, February 18, 2009), EASA
issued AD 2010–0087, dated May 5,
2010 (corrected May 6, 2010), which
retains certain requirements of
superseded EASA AD 2008–0099, and
imposes more restrictive life limits in
the Heavy Flight Profile Parts. You may
obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the AD docket.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. We
considered the comments received.
Request To Revise the Compliance
Times
Four commenters, American Airlines,
Delta Airlines, Rolls-Royce plc, and The
Boeing Company, request that we revise
the compliance times to be consistent
with the service bulletin and the
airworthiness limitations section (ALS)
of the engine manual. Doing this would
account for the later AD release date and
for the entire Trent 800 series fleet
instead of just certain US operators’
expected cyclic usage. The commenters
state that the proposed requirements
would have a severe adverse economic
impact to operators relative to the
service bulletin requirements. The
simplified compliance requirements in
the SNPRM relative to the service
bulletin requirements, may not
accurately reflect the risk of an
uncontained event, and are confusing.
We do not agree. The requirements in
the SNPRM were developed to
minimize the risk of uncontained disc
failure, based on the age of the parts in
the field at the time the SNPRM was
issued. The service bulletin
requirements were developed at a time
when the age of the parts in service was
lower than when the SNPRM was
issued. Because the risk of failure
increases as the age of the parts in the
field increase, any revision to the
requirements of the SNPRM would
again have to take the increased age of
the parts in service into account. As
such, an analysis would result in
removal requirements more stringent
than the requirements in the SNPRM,
and a follow-on NPRM would be
required. Therefore, we determined that
it is in the public interest to keep the
removal requirements the same as
published in the SNPRM. We did not
change the AD.
Request for Clarity and Interpretation
Delta Airlines states that it would be
helpful if we could provide some clarity
in the AD as to how an operator should
interpret the differing information
between the AD, the ALS of the RollsRoyce Time Limits Manual, and the
service bulletin. The commenter is
concerned that there will be three
locations where the life limit of the
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
shaft, P/N FK32580, is specified, and all
three have different data.
We do not agree. The AD and the ALS
take precedence over the service
bulletin. Operators must comply with
the AD and the ALS. We did not change
the AD.
Question on Reworked Part
Delta Airlines asks for clarification as
to whether a part reworked from P/N
FK32580 to FW61622, is still required to
be removed in accordance with
paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of the AD.
The commenter is unsure if a reworked
part can be returned to service under the
life limit of the new part number.
The AD applies only to P/N FK32580.
If the part is reworked to a different
P/N, the requirements of the new P/N
would apply. We did not change the
AD.
Request To Use the Service Bulletin
Method
American Airlines requests that we
revise the AD to use the service bulletin
method of determining the number of
cycles before removal is required;
specifically, based on a date before the
effective date of the AD. The commenter
states that the simplified compliance in
the SNPRM would result in early engine
removal and a cumulative loss of about
eleven engine-years of useful service to
American Airlines.
We do not agree. The compliance
thresholds in the AD are a function of
usage, which is not directly related to
calendar dates. We did not change the
AD.
Request To Update Contact Information
Rolls-Royce plc requests that we
update their contact information in the
AD to: Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate
Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby,
England, DE248BJ, telephone: 011–44–
1332–242424; fax: 011–44–1332–
245418, or e-mail: https://www.rollsroyce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp.
We agree and changed the AD.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD
with the change described previously.
Differences Between This AD and the
MCAI
We have reviewed the MCAI and, in
general, agree with its substance. But we
have found it necessary to not
incorporate the June 4, 2008 compliance
date which is in EASA AD 2010–0087,
dated May 5, 2010 (corrected May 6,
2010). We updated the compliance
times in the AD based on a more recent
assessment of the unsafe condition.
Costs of Compliance
Based on the service information, we
estimate that this AD will affect about
78 products of U.S. registry. Required
parts will cost about $15,095 per
product. We estimate that no additional
labor costs would be incurred to
perform the actions, as we anticipate
that the removal from service of the HP
compressor stage 1–4 shafts will occur
while the engine is inducted into the
shop for routine maintenance. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the
AD on U.S. operators to be $1,177,410.
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 determined that this AD will not
have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this AD:
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. Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this AD and placed it in the AD docket.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
24797
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Operations office between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (phone
(800) 647–5527) is provided in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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 adding
the following new AD:
■
2011–10–04 Rolls-Royce plc: Amendment
39–16685; Docket No. FAA–2008–1165;
Directorate Identifier 2008–NE–38–AD.
Effective Date
(a) This airworthiness directive (AD)
becomes effective June 7, 2011.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc
models RB211–Trent 875–17, –Trent 877–17,
–Trent 884–17, –Trent 884B–17, –Trent 892–
17, –Trent 892B–17, and –Trent 895–17
turbofan engines, with high-pressure (HP)
compressor stage 1–4 shafts, part number (P/
N) FK32580, installed.
Reason
(d) This AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2010–
0087, dated May 5, 2010 (corrected May 6,
2010) states the unsafe condition is as
follows:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP)
compressor stage 1 discs, a small number of
parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection.
Analysis of the possibility of less severe
examples having been undetected and passed
into service has concluded that action is
required to reduce the risk of failure. It was
therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
24798
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 85 / Tuesday, May 3, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is part of the
HP compressor stage 1–4 shaft, P/N FK32580.
We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the HP compressor stage 1 disc, uncontained
engine failure, and damage to the airplane.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following
actions.
Multiple Flight Profile Monitoring Parts
(1) For RB211–Trent 800 series engines
being monitored by ‘‘Multiple Flight Profile
Monitoring,’’ remove the HP compressor stage
1–4 shaft, P/N FK32580, before accumulating
5,580 standard duty cycles (SDC) since-new
or within 960 SDC from the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later.
Heavy Flight Profile Parts
(2) For RB211–Trent 800 series engines
being monitored by ‘‘Heavy Flight Profile,’’
remove the HP compressor stage 1–4 shaft,
P/N FK32580, before accumulating 5,280
flight cycles since new or within 860 flight
cycles from the effective data of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
FAA Differences
(f) We have found it necessary to not
incorporate the June 4, 2008 compliance date
which is in EASA AD 2010–0087, dated May
5, 2010 (corrected May 6, 2010). We also
updated the compliance times in the AD
based on a more recent assessment of the
unsafe condition.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(g) The Manager, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(h) Refer to EASA Airworthiness Directive
2010–0087, dated May 5, 2010 (corrected
May 6, 2010), and Rolls-Royce plc Alert
Service Bulletin No. RB.211–72–AF825,
Revision 3, dated August 25, 2009 for related
information. Contact Rolls-Royce plc,
Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31,
Derby, England, DE248BJ, telephone: 011–
44–1332–242424; fax: 011–44–1332–245418;
or e-mail via: https://www.rolls-royce.com/
contact/civil_team.jsp, for a copy of this
service information.
(i) Contact Alan Strom, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; e-mail: alan.strom@faa.gov; telephone
(781) 238–7143; fax (781) 238–7199, for more
information about this AD.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
April 25, 2011.
Peter A. White,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–10520 Filed 5–2–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2010–0821; Directorate
Identifier 2010–NE–30–AD; Amendment 39–
16657; AD 2011–08–07]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce
plc (RR) RB211–Trent 875–17, RB211–
Trent 877–17, RB211–Trent 884–17,
RB211–Trent 884B–17, RB211–Trent
892–17, RB211–Trent 892B–17, and
RB211–Trent 895–17 Turbofan Engines
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results
from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:
SUMMARY:
In January 2009 a Trent 895 powered
Boeing 777–200 aircraft experienced release
of a low pressure (LP) compressor blade
which failed due to fatigue cracking in the
root section of the blade. The released blade
(undercut root standard) had received a part
life processing to apply a compression layer
to the blade root (Service Bulletin SB 72–
D672—Introduction of Laser Shock Peening
(LSP)) and also a part life upgrade to the
retention feature lubrication system.
Investigation has revealed that the
effectiveness of this upgraded blade root
lubrication coating system may be reduced
dependant on the extent of previous running
with the earlier standard, leading to
increased blade root stress levels. In the
specific case of the released blade, a review
of its in-service modification history has
shown that it operated for a relatively high
number of flight cycles prior to the
compression layer processing and the new
retention feature lubrication system. A
review of the Engine Health Monitoring data
has also identified it operated at high N1
speeds compared to the Trent 800 fleet
average N1 speeds. The combination of these
factors has resulted in increased fatigue life
usage which is considered to have led to
crack initiation and propagation prior to
reaching the blades declared life limit. A
review of all in-service undercut/LSP
standard Trent 800 LP compressor blades has
identified specific blades that carry a similar
increased susceptibility to cracking.
This AD is issued to mitigate the risk of
possible multiple fan blades failure affecting
those blades identified as described above
which could lead to high energy non
contained debris from the engine.
We are issuing this AD to prevent LP
compressor blades from failing due to
blade root cracks, which could lead to
uncontained engine failure and damage
to the airplane.
DATES: This AD becomes effective June
7, 2011. The Director of the Federal
Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed
in this AD as of June 7, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations
office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803;
e-mail: alan.strom@faa.gov; telephone
(781) 238–7143; fax (781) 238–7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to the specified products. That
NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on January 14, 2011 (76 FR
2605). That NPRM proposed to correct
an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states that:
In January 2009 a Trent 895 powered
Boeing 777–200 aircraft experienced release
of a low pressure (LP) compressor blade
which failed due to fatigue cracking in the
root section of the blade. The released blade
(undercut root standard) had received a part
life processing to apply a compression layer
to the blade root (Service Bulletin SB 72–
D672—Introduction of Laser Shock Peening
(LSP)) and also a part life upgrade to the
retention feature lubrication system.
Investigation has revealed that the
effectiveness of this upgraded blade root
lubrication coating system may be reduced
dependant on the extent of previous running
with the earlier standard, leading to
increased blade root stress levels. In the
specific case of the released blade, a review
of its in-service modification history has
shown that it operated for a relatively high
number of flight cycles prior to the
compression layer processing and the new
retention feature lubrication system. A
review of the Engine Health Monitoring data
has also identified it operated at high N1
speeds compared to the Trent 800 fleet
average N1 speeds. The combination of these
factors has resulted in increased fatigue life
usage which is considered to have led to
crack initiation and propagation prior to
reaching the blades declared life limit. A
review of all in-service undercut/LSP
standard Trent 800 LP compressor blades has
identified specific blades that carry a similar
increased susceptibility to cracking.
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 3, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24796-24798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10520]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2008-1165; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-38-AD;
Amendment 39-16685; AD 2011-10-04]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce plc RB211-Trent 800 Series
Turbofan Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP) compressor stage 1
discs, a small number of parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection. Analysis of the possibility
of less severe examples having been undetected and passed into
service has concluded that action is required to reduce the risk of
failure. It was therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is part of the HP compressor stage 1-4
shaft, part number (P/N) FK32580. We are issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the HP compressor stage 1 disc, uncontained engine failure,
and damage to the airplane.
DATES: This AD becomes effective June 7, 2011.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
alan.strom@faa.gov; telephone (781) 238-7143; fax (781) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and a supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to
include an AD that would apply to the specified products. That NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on February 18, 2009 (74 FR 7563) and
that SNPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 4, 2010 (75
FR 61114). That SNPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states that:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP) compressor stage 1
discs, a small number of parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection. Analysis of the possibility
of less severe examples having been undetected and passed into
service has concluded that action is required to reduce the risk of
failure. It was therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is part of the HP compressor stage
1-4 shaft, P/N FK32580. Since we issued the original NPRM on February
10, 2009 (74 FR 7563, February 18, 2009), EASA issued AD 2010-0087,
dated May 5, 2010 (corrected May 6, 2010), which retains certain
requirements of superseded EASA AD 2008-0099, and imposes more
restrictive life limits in the Heavy Flight Profile Parts. You may
obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.
Request To Revise the Compliance Times
Four commenters, American Airlines, Delta Airlines, Rolls-Royce
plc, and The Boeing Company, request that we revise the compliance
times to be consistent with the service bulletin and the airworthiness
limitations section (ALS) of the engine manual. Doing this would
account for the later AD release date and for the entire Trent 800
series fleet instead of just certain US operators' expected cyclic
usage. The commenters state that the proposed requirements would have a
severe adverse economic impact to operators relative to the service
bulletin requirements. The simplified compliance requirements in the
SNPRM relative to the service bulletin requirements, may not accurately
reflect the risk of an uncontained event, and are confusing.
We do not agree. The requirements in the SNPRM were developed to
minimize the risk of uncontained disc failure, based on the age of the
parts in the field at the time the SNPRM was issued. The service
bulletin requirements were developed at a time when the age of the
parts in service was lower than when the SNPRM was issued. Because the
risk of failure increases as the age of the parts in the field
increase, any revision to the requirements of the SNPRM would again
have to take the increased age of the parts in service into account. As
such, an analysis would result in removal requirements more stringent
than the requirements in the SNPRM, and a follow-on NPRM would be
required. Therefore, we determined that it is in the public interest to
keep the removal requirements the same as published in the SNPRM. We
did not change the AD.
Request for Clarity and Interpretation
Delta Airlines states that it would be helpful if we could provide
some clarity in the AD as to how an operator should interpret the
differing information between the AD, the ALS of the Rolls-Royce Time
Limits Manual, and the service bulletin. The commenter is concerned
that there will be three locations where the life limit of the
[[Page 24797]]
shaft, P/N FK32580, is specified, and all three have different data.
We do not agree. The AD and the ALS take precedence over the
service bulletin. Operators must comply with the AD and the ALS. We did
not change the AD.
Question on Reworked Part
Delta Airlines asks for clarification as to whether a part reworked
from P/N FK32580 to FW61622, is still required to be removed in
accordance with paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of the AD. The commenter
is unsure if a reworked part can be returned to service under the life
limit of the new part number.
The AD applies only to P/N FK32580. If the part is reworked to a
different P/N, the requirements of the new P/N would apply. We did not
change the AD.
Request To Use the Service Bulletin Method
American Airlines requests that we revise the AD to use the service
bulletin method of determining the number of cycles before removal is
required; specifically, based on a date before the effective date of
the AD. The commenter states that the simplified compliance in the
SNPRM would result in early engine removal and a cumulative loss of
about eleven engine-years of useful service to American Airlines.
We do not agree. The compliance thresholds in the AD are a function
of usage, which is not directly related to calendar dates. We did not
change the AD.
Request To Update Contact Information
Rolls-Royce plc requests that we update their contact information
in the AD to: Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate Communications, P.O. Box 31,
Derby, England, DE248BJ, telephone: 011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-
1332-245418, or e-mail: https://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp.
We agree and changed the AD.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described
previously.
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI
We have reviewed the MCAI and, in general, agree with its
substance. But we have found it necessary to not incorporate the June
4, 2008 compliance date which is in EASA AD 2010-0087, dated May 5,
2010 (corrected May 6, 2010). We updated the compliance times in the AD
based on a more recent assessment of the unsafe condition.
Costs of Compliance
Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 78 products of U.S. registry. Required parts will cost
about $15,095 per product. We estimate that no additional labor costs
would be incurred to perform the actions, as we anticipate that the
removal from service of the HP compressor stage 1-4 shafts will occur
while the engine is inducted into the shop for routine maintenance.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD on U.S.
operators to be $1,177,410.
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 determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
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. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (phone (800) 647-5527) is provided in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
2011-10-04 Rolls-Royce plc: Amendment 39-16685; Docket No. FAA-2008-
1165; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-38-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 7,
2011.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc models RB211-Trent 875-
17, -Trent 877-17, -Trent 884-17, -Trent 884B-17, -Trent 892-17, -
Trent 892B-17, and -Trent 895-17 turbofan engines, with high-
pressure (HP) compressor stage 1-4 shafts, part number (P/N)
FK32580, installed.
Reason
(d) This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2010-0087, dated
May 5, 2010 (corrected May 6, 2010) states the unsafe condition is
as follows:
During manufacture of high-pressure (HP) compressor stage 1
discs, a small number of parts have been rejected due to a machining
defect that was found during inspection. Analysis of the possibility
of less severe examples having been undetected and passed into
service has concluded that action is required to reduce the risk of
failure. It was therefore necessary to reduce the life limit.
[[Page 24798]]
The HP compressor stage 1 disc is part of the HP compressor stage 1-
4 shaft, P/N FK32580. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the HP compressor stage 1 disc, uncontained engine failure, and
damage to the airplane.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following actions.
Multiple Flight Profile Monitoring Parts
(1) For RB211-Trent 800 series engines being monitored by
``Multiple Flight Profile Monitoring,'' remove the HP compressor
stage 1-4 shaft, P/N FK32580, before accumulating 5,580 standard
duty cycles (SDC) since-new or within 960 SDC from the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
Heavy Flight Profile Parts
(2) For RB211-Trent 800 series engines being monitored by
``Heavy Flight Profile,'' remove the HP compressor stage 1-4 shaft,
P/N FK32580, before accumulating 5,280 flight cycles since new or
within 860 flight cycles from the effective data of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
FAA Differences
(f) We have found it necessary to not incorporate the June 4,
2008 compliance date which is in EASA AD 2010-0087, dated May 5,
2010 (corrected May 6, 2010). We also updated the compliance times
in the AD based on a more recent assessment of the unsafe condition.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(g) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(h) Refer to EASA Airworthiness Directive 2010-0087, dated May
5, 2010 (corrected May 6, 2010), and Rolls-Royce plc Alert Service
Bulletin No. RB.211-72-AF825, Revision 3, dated August 25, 2009 for
related information. Contact Rolls-Royce plc, Corporate
Communications, P.O. Box 31, Derby, England, DE248BJ, telephone:
011-44-1332-242424; fax: 011-44-1332-245418; or e-mail via: https://www.rolls-royce.com/contact/civil_team.jsp, for a copy of this
service information.
(i) Contact Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: alan.strom@faa.gov;
telephone (781) 238-7143; fax (781) 238-7199, for more information
about this AD.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 25, 2011.
Peter A. White,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-10520 Filed 5-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P