Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan Engines, 26979-26982 [2017-12078]

Download as PDF 26979 Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 82, No. 112 Tuesday, June 13, 2017 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2013–0740; Directorate Identifier 2013–NE–24–AD; Amendment 39– 18905; AD 2017–11–06] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan Engines Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014–05– 32 for all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117–PW–100 turbofan engines. AD 2014–05–32 required one-time eddy current inspection (ECI) of affected engines with certain diffuser and highpressure turbine (HPT) cases installed. AD 2014–05–32 also required a fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) of the diffuser case rear flange and the HPT case front flange. This AD requires additional repetitive, on-wing ECI inspections. This AD was prompted by the manufacturer determining through analysis that the inspections required by AD 2014–05–32 are not adequate to maintain safety for certain diffuser cases. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: This AD is effective July 18, 2017. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 18, 2017. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860–565–0140; fax: 860–565–5442; email: HELP24@ pw.utc.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jun 12, 2017 Jkt 241001 Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2013– 0740. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.govby searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2013– 0740; or in person at the Docket Management Facility 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 address for the Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238–7772; fax: 781–238–7199; email: brian.kierstead@faa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2014–05–32, Amendment 39–17804 (79 FR 17856, March 31, 2014), (‘‘AD 2014–05–32’’). AD 2014–05–32 applied to all PW PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117–PW–100 turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 22, 2016 (81 FR 93855) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM was prompted by the manufacturer determining through analysis that the inspections required by AD 2014–05–32 were not adequate to maintain safety for diffuser cases that incorporate a wrought M-flange. Also, repaired wrought flanges cannot be distinguished from other wrought flanges or from non-repaired flanges on diffuser cases installed on the affected engines. The NPRM, therefore, proposed to add additional repetitive, on-wing PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ECIs. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the diffuser-to-HPT case flange, which could lead to uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA’s response to each comment. Request for New AD Instead of Supersedure AD PW, Delta Airlines (Delta), FedEx Express (FedEx), and United Airlines (United) requested that the NPRM to supersede AD 2014–05–32 be withdrawn and the requirements of the NPRM be included in a new AD that does not supersede AD 2014–05–32. Delta indicated that the NPRM applies only to a sub-population of diffuser cases. Delta recommended that further field data be captured to validate PW’s analysis prior to issuance of the final rule AD. PW, Delta, and United added that the repetitive ECIs introduced by this AD are different from those mandated by AD 2014–05–32. We disagree. AD 2014–05–32 and this AD address the same safety issue, which is cracking and rupture of the diffuser case M-flange. Therefore, AD 2014–05– 32 and this AD have the same applicability. Differences in compliance time reflect different levels of risk associated with different subpopulations of diffuser cases. We therefore find it appropriate that this AD replaces AD 2014–05–32. We are, however, revising the Previous Credit section of this AD to allow credit for ECIs of the diffuser case M-flange performed using either PW Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW2000 72–763, Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013; and PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016. Request To Exclude F117 Engines From Applicability PW requested that the F117–PW–100 turbofan engine be excluded from the applicability of this AD. PW indicated that the F117 engine meets all safety requirements and does not warrant a service bulletin or an AD. PW asked that if this AD does not remove the F117 engine from applicability, then this AD should clarify that the repetitive ECIs in E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1 26980 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD do not apply to the F117 engine. Further, this AD should reference PW SB F117 72–410, Revision 1, dated December 17, 2013. We partially agree. We agree that the original build F117–PW–100 engines used only cast material M-flanges and, therefore, are not susceptible to the safety issue responsible for this AD. We note, however, that an F117 diffuser case flange can be repaired using the wrought material making these flanges susceptible to the unsafe condition represented by this AD. We, therefore, find it necessary to include the F117– PW–100 engine in the applicability of this AD. We disagree with removing the F117 engine from the recurring ECIs in paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD since these inspections apply to all applicable engines. We disagree with referencing PW SB F117 72–410, Revision 1, dated December 17, 2013, as this is not an equivalent instruction for the repetitive inspections of this AD. We did not change this AD. Request To Revise Criteria for Recurrent ECI Inspection PW, Delta, FedEx, and UPS requested that the re-inspection required by paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD be changed to occur ‘‘within 2,500 cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever occurs last’’ instead of ‘‘within 2,500 cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever occurs first’’ as proposed. The commenters indicated that using the criteria ‘‘whichever occurs first’’ would not allow the repetitive inspection interval to be reset following an ECI inspection. PW also commented that the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD should reference PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. We partially agree. We agree that changing the criteria in paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD to ‘‘whichever occurs last’’ maintains an acceptable level of safety and changed this paragraph accordingly. Paragraph (f)(4) of this AD references direct compliance in accordance with PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. There is no need to repeat that instruction in paragraph (f)(4)(ii). Request To Revise Initial Inspection Threshold Delta and United requested that the initial inspection intervals be increased. Delta also requested that the initial inspection threshold of 5,500 cycles VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jun 12, 2017 Jkt 241001 since new or since M-flange replacement, as specified in paragraph (f)(4)(i)(A) of this AD, be extended to 6,500 cycles since new. United asked that the initial inspection threshold in this paragraph (f)(4)(i)(C) be aligned with the service information, which provides an inspection interval of 1,500 cycles for engines with more than 2,500 cycles since last engine shop visit. We partially agree. We agree that closer alignment of the initial inspection threshold with PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, maintains an acceptable level of safety. We therefore increased the initial inspection threshold in paragraph (f)(4)(i)(C) of this AD from 500 cycles to 1,000 cycles from the effective date of this AD. We do not, however, have data to support increasing the interval from 5,500 to 6,500 cycles since new. Therefore, we did not change paragraph (f)(4)(i)(A) of this AD. Request To Clarify References to Diffuser Cases PW and Delta requested that we revise sections in the preamble of the NPRM, particularly the ‘‘Summary’’ and the ‘‘Actions Since AD 2014–05–32 Was Issued’’ sections, to clarify that the ‘‘subpopulation identified by the manufacturer’’ refers to diffuser cases manufactured or repaired using wrought flanges. Also, PW and Delta want to clarify that repaired flanges cannot be distinguished from non-repaired since they share the same part number. We partially agree. The summary of an AD is not intended to provide the level of detail requested by the commenters, but we added a reference to clarify that we are referring to a certain population of diffuser cases. The ‘‘Actions Since AD 2014–05–32 Was Issued’’ section does not exist in a final rule AD, but we clarified in the Discussion sections of this AD that we are referring to diffuser cases that incorporate a wrought M-flange. We also added a statement in the Discussion to note that repaired flanges cannot be distinguished from non-repaired flanges. Request To Update Service Information References PW, Delta, United, and FedEx requested that we revise references in the compliance section of this AD from PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. PW and Delta also requested that we allow compliance to later revisions of this ASB. PW and Delta indicated that they expect an additional revision to PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 this ASB prior to issuance of this final rule. Delta further asked that publication of this final rule AD be delayed until the latest version of this ASB is published. We partially agree. We agree to update the references to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765 to Revision 2, dated August 12, 2016, in the compliance section of this AD. We do not agree to delay publication of this final rule AD or to revise the references to service information to allow compliance to revisions that have not been published. We cannot require compliance to service information that does not exist. Request To Clarify References to Diffuser Cases M-flange PW, Delta, FedEx, and United requested that we clarify that the inspections required by paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD are for cracks from the diffuser case M-flange bolthole towards the case body. The commenters note that flange bolthole cracks away from the case body do not contribute to the unsafe condition. We agree. We changed this AD by revising paragraphs (f)(4)(iii) and (iv) to refer to ‘‘bolthole ID crack’’ as defined by ASB No. PW2000 A72–765. Request To Revise SUMMARY PW requested that we clarify in the SUMMARY that FPI is performed at ‘‘piece part opportunity.’’ We disagree. The compliance section of this AD specifies that the FPI is performed at piece-part opportunity. The SUMMARY is not intended to provide that level of detail. We did not change this AD. Request To Revise Definition Delta requested that the Definition of ‘‘piece-part opportunity’’ in paragraph (g) of this AD be revised to exclude diffuser cases that will not be returned to service. Delta noted that diffuser cases that will be scrapped should not be required to be inspected. We disagree. This AD is only applicable to parts that are installed. Parts that will be scrapped do not need to be inspected. We did not change this AD. Request To Revise Previous Credit Section PW and Delta requested that the reference to the HPT case M-flange be removed from the Credit for Previous Actions section of this AD. PW commented that only the diffuser case M-flange should be referenced. PW also requested that in the Credit for Previous Actions section we refer to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016, instead of Revision No. 1 of this SB. PW and Delta asked that we correct the date of PW SB No. PW2000 72–763, Revision No. 1, from August 13, 2013, to August 30, 2013. We partially agree. We disagree with removing the reference to the HPT case M-flange. In order to have complied with this AD, the operator must have performed an ECI of the diffuser and HPT case M-flange as specified in this AD. As noted in our previous comment response, we agreed to update the reference to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72– 765 to Revision No. 2 in the compliance section of this AD. We do not need to refer to Revision No. 2 in the Credit for Previous Actions section. The purpose of the Credit for Previous Actions section is to allow credit for actions that use earlier versions of service information required by this AD. We agree to correct the date for PW SB No. PW2000 72–763, Revision No. 1, to August 30, 2013. Request Update to Contact Information PW requested that we update the manufacturer’s contact information in this AD to Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860–565–0140 ; fax: 860–565–5442; email: HELP24@pw.utc.com. We agree. We updated the manufacturer’s contact information in the ADDRESSES and Material Incorporated by Reference sections of this AD. Request To Revise Costs of Compliance Estimate PW commented that that this AD affects 638 engines installed on U.S. airplanes. FedEx commented that the cost of the repetitive ECI proposed in this AD is $618,800. We disagree. When AD 2014–05–32 was issued, there were only 638 affected engines in the U.S. Registry. However, a more recent inquiry for this AD located 910 engines listed in the U.S. Registry. We disagree with FedEx that the cost for a repetitive ECI is $618,800 because FedEx assumes all engines will be subject to the repetitive ECI. We estimate that the additional inspections affect only 339 of the 910 engines. We did not change this AD. Conclusion We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes: 26981 • Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and • Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM. We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD. Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51 We reviewed PW SB No. PW2000 72– 763, Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013; and PW ASB No. PW2000 A72– 765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. This service information describes procedures for a one-time ECI inspection of the engine diffuser case and the HPT case, and repetitive onwing ECIs of the engine diffuser case assembly, respectively. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD affects 910 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD: ESTIMATED COSTS Action Labor cost On-wing/module ECI Inspection nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES FPI Inspection ............................. 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680. 3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255. 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jun 12, 2017 Parts cost Jkt 241001 Cost per product $0 $680 ....................................... 20 $275 per inspection cycle ..... products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866, (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Cost on U.S. operators $230,520 per inspection cycle. $250,250 per inspection cycle. (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and (4) 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. 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: E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1 26982 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 13, 2017 / Rules and Regulations PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014–05–32, Amendment 39–17804 (79 FR 17856, March 31, 2014), and adding the following new AD: ■ 2017–11–06 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 39–18905; Docket No. FAA–2013–0740; Directorate Identifier 2013–NE–24–AD. (a) Effective Date This AD is effective July 18, 2017. (b) Affected ADs This AD replaces AD 2014–05–32, Amendment 39–17804 (79 FR 17856, March 31, 2014). (c) Applicability This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117–PW–100 turbofan engines. (d) Subject Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 72, Turbine/Turboprop Engine. nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES (e) Unsafe Condition This AD was prompted by a rupture of the diffuser-to-high-pressure turbine (HPT) case flange. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the diffuser-to-HPT case flange, which could lead to uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane. (f) Compliance Unless already done, comply with this AD within the compliance times specified. (1) For diffuser case, part number (P/N) 1B7461, serial numbers (S/Ns) DGGUAK1306 and DGGUAK1308, and HPT case, P/N 1B2440, S/N DKLBCS1032: (i) Within 100 flight cycles or 30 days after May 5, 2014, whichever is later, eddy current inspect the diffuser case and the HPT case Mflange. Use PW Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW2000 72–763, Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013, to do the inspection. (ii) Reserved. (2) For all diffuser and HPT cases, at the next piece-part opportunity and every piecepart opportunity thereafter, perform a high sensitivity fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) of the entire diffuser case rear flange (M-flange) and boltholes, and the entire HPT case forward flange (M-flange) and boltholes. (3) For diffuser cases that have not incorporated PW SB PW2000–72–364 or have incorporated either PW SB PW2000–72–700 or PW2000 Series Engine Manual, Repair-28, Task 72–41–01–300–028 (M-flange replacement), perform initial and repetitive eddy current inspections (ECIs) of the Mflange of the diffuser case in accordance with paragraph (f)(4) of this AD. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:51 Jun 12, 2017 Jkt 241001 (4) Use, as applicable, either the Accomplishment Instructions, ‘‘For Engines Installed on the Aircraft,’’ paragraphs 3.(I) through 3.(J), or the Accomplishment Instructions, ‘‘For Engines Removed from the Aircraft,’’ paragraphs 3.(D) through 3.(E), of PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016 to do the ECI as follows: (i) Perform an initial inspection within the following period, whichever occurs later: (A) Within 5,500 cycles since new or since M-flange replacement, or (B) Within 2,500 cycles since last piecepart FPI inspection, or (C) Within 1,000 cycles from the effective date of this AD. (ii) If no crack indications are found, reinspect within 2,500 cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever occurs later. (iii) If bolthole ID crack indications are found, measure the length and determine the re-inspect interval in accordance with: (A) Paragraphs 5.(C) through 5.(D) of PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016 ‘‘For Engines Installed on the Aircraft’’; or (B) Paragraphs 4.(C) through 4.(D) of PW ASB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016, ‘‘For Engines Removed from the Aircraft.’’ (iv) Remove from service diffuser cases with bolthole ID cracks exceeding 0.170 inches. 7772; fax: 781–238–7199; email: brian.kierstead@faa.gov. (g) Definition For the purpose of this AD, piece-part opportunity is defined as when the part is completely disassembled. Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on May 17, 2017. Robert J. Ganley, Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. (h) Credit for Previous Actions (1) You may take credit for the diffuser case and HPT case inspections required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) of this AD if you performed: (i) An ECI of the diffuser case and the HPT case M-flange using the Accomplishment Instructions of PW SB No. PW2000 72–763, Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013, or an earlier version; or (ii) a high sensitivity FPI of the diffuser case and the HPT case at a piece-part opportunity after January 1, 2010. (2) You may take credit for only the diffuser case inspections required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) of this AD if you performed an ECI of the M-flange using the Accomplishment Instructions of PW SB No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, or an earlier version. (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request. You may email your request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@faa.gov. (j) Related Information For more information about this AD, contact Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781–238– PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 (k) Material Incorporated by Reference (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. (i) Pratt & Whitney (PW) Service Bulletin No. PW2000 72–763, Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013. (ii) PW Alert Service Bulletin No. PW2000 A72–765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. (3) For PW service information identified in this AD, contact Pratt & Whitney,400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860– 565–0140; fax: 860–565–5442; email: HELP24@pw.utc.com. (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. (5) You may view this service information 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: http:// www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. [FR Doc. 2017–12078 Filed 6–12–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2016–9512; Directorate Identifier 2016–NE–27–AD; Amendment 39– 18909; AD 2017–11–10] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Lycoming Engines Reciprocating Engines Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. AGENCY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Lycoming TIO–540–AJ1A reciprocating engines. This AD requires initial and repetitive inspections of engine exhaust system weld joints and torque checking the exhaust pipe flange mounting nuts. This AD was prompted by several reports of engine exhaust leaks. We are SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26979-26982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12078]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 13, 2017 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 26979]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0740; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-24-AD; 
Amendment 39-18905; AD 2017-11-06]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-05-32 for 
all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, 
PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117-PW-100 turbofan engines. AD 2014-05-32 
required one-time eddy current inspection (ECI) of affected engines 
with certain diffuser and high-pressure turbine (HPT) cases installed. 
AD 2014-05-32 also required a fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) of 
the diffuser case rear flange and the HPT case front flange. This AD 
requires additional repetitive, on-wing ECI inspections. This AD was 
prompted by the manufacturer determining through analysis that the 
inspections required by AD 2014-05-32 are not adequate to maintain 
safety for certain diffuser cases. We are issuing this AD to correct 
the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:  This AD is effective July 18, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of July 18, 
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, 
contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 
860-565-0140; fax: 860-565-5442; email: HELP24@pw.utc.com. You may view 
this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the 
availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125. It is also 
available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching 
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-0740.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.govby searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2013-
0740; or in person at the Docket Management Facility 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 address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, 
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7772; fax: 781-
238-7199; email: brian.kierstead@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to supersede AD 2014-05-32, Amendment 39-17804 (79 FR 17856, 
March 31, 2014), (``AD 2014-05-32''). AD 2014-05-32 applied to all PW 
PW2037, PW2037D, PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and 
F117-PW-100 turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal 
Register on December 22, 2016 (81 FR 93855) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM 
was prompted by the manufacturer determining through analysis that the 
inspections required by AD 2014-05-32 were not adequate to maintain 
safety for diffuser cases that incorporate a wrought M-flange. Also, 
repaired wrought flanges cannot be distinguished from other wrought 
flanges or from non-repaired flanges on diffuser cases installed on the 
affected engines. The NPRM, therefore, proposed to add additional 
repetitive, on-wing ECIs. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of 
the diffuser-to-HPT case flange, which could lead to uncontained engine 
failure and damage to the airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and 
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request for New AD Instead of Supersedure AD

    PW, Delta Airlines (Delta), FedEx Express (FedEx), and United 
Airlines (United) requested that the NPRM to supersede AD 2014-05-32 be 
withdrawn and the requirements of the NPRM be included in a new AD that 
does not supersede AD 2014-05-32. Delta indicated that the NPRM applies 
only to a sub-population of diffuser cases. Delta recommended that 
further field data be captured to validate PW's analysis prior to 
issuance of the final rule AD. PW, Delta, and United added that the 
repetitive ECIs introduced by this AD are different from those mandated 
by AD 2014-05-32.
    We disagree. AD 2014-05-32 and this AD address the same safety 
issue, which is cracking and rupture of the diffuser case M-flange. 
Therefore, AD 2014-05-32 and this AD have the same applicability. 
Differences in compliance time reflect different levels of risk 
associated with different sub-populations of diffuser cases. We 
therefore find it appropriate that this AD replaces AD 2014-05-32. We 
are, however, revising the Previous Credit section of this AD to allow 
credit for ECIs of the diffuser case M-flange performed using either PW 
Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW2000 72-763, Revision No. 1, dated August 
30, 2013; and PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW2000 A72-765, 
Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016.

Request To Exclude F117 Engines From Applicability

    PW requested that the F117-PW-100 turbofan engine be excluded from 
the applicability of this AD. PW indicated that the F117 engine meets 
all safety requirements and does not warrant a service bulletin or an 
AD. PW asked that if this AD does not remove the F117 engine from 
applicability, then this AD should clarify that the repetitive ECIs in

[[Page 26980]]

paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD do not apply to the F117 engine. 
Further, this AD should reference PW SB F117 72-410, Revision 1, dated 
December 17, 2013.
    We partially agree. We agree that the original build F117-PW-100 
engines used only cast material M-flanges and, therefore, are not 
susceptible to the safety issue responsible for this AD. We note, 
however, that an F117 diffuser case flange can be repaired using the 
wrought material making these flanges susceptible to the unsafe 
condition represented by this AD. We, therefore, find it necessary to 
include the F117-PW-100 engine in the applicability of this AD.
    We disagree with removing the F117 engine from the recurring ECIs 
in paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD since these inspections apply 
to all applicable engines.
    We disagree with referencing PW SB F117 72-410, Revision 1, dated 
December 17, 2013, as this is not an equivalent instruction for the 
repetitive inspections of this AD. We did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Criteria for Recurrent ECI Inspection

    PW, Delta, FedEx, and UPS requested that the re-inspection required 
by paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD be changed to occur ``within 2,500 
cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever 
occurs last'' instead of ``within 2,500 cycles since last ECI or last 
piece-part FPI inspection, whichever occurs first'' as proposed. The 
commenters indicated that using the criteria ``whichever occurs first'' 
would not allow the repetitive inspection interval to be reset 
following an ECI inspection. PW also commented that the repetitive 
inspections required by paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD should 
reference PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 
2016.
    We partially agree. We agree that changing the criteria in 
paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of this AD to ``whichever occurs last'' maintains 
an acceptable level of safety and changed this paragraph accordingly. 
Paragraph (f)(4) of this AD references direct compliance in accordance 
with PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. 
There is no need to repeat that instruction in paragraph (f)(4)(ii).

Request To Revise Initial Inspection Threshold

    Delta and United requested that the initial inspection intervals be 
increased. Delta also requested that the initial inspection threshold 
of 5,500 cycles since new or since M-flange replacement, as specified 
in paragraph (f)(4)(i)(A) of this AD, be extended to 6,500 cycles since 
new. United asked that the initial inspection threshold in this 
paragraph (f)(4)(i)(C) be aligned with the service information, which 
provides an inspection interval of 1,500 cycles for engines with more 
than 2,500 cycles since last engine shop visit.
    We partially agree. We agree that closer alignment of the initial 
inspection threshold with PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 1, 
dated July 13, 2016, maintains an acceptable level of safety. We 
therefore increased the initial inspection threshold in paragraph 
(f)(4)(i)(C) of this AD from 500 cycles to 1,000 cycles from the 
effective date of this AD. We do not, however, have data to support 
increasing the interval from 5,500 to 6,500 cycles since new. 
Therefore, we did not change paragraph (f)(4)(i)(A) of this AD.

Request To Clarify References to Diffuser Cases

    PW and Delta requested that we revise sections in the preamble of 
the NPRM, particularly the ``Summary'' and the ``Actions Since AD 2014-
05-32 Was Issued'' sections, to clarify that the ``subpopulation 
identified by the manufacturer'' refers to diffuser cases manufactured 
or repaired using wrought flanges. Also, PW and Delta want to clarify 
that repaired flanges cannot be distinguished from non-repaired since 
they share the same part number.
    We partially agree. The summary of an AD is not intended to provide 
the level of detail requested by the commenters, but we added a 
reference to clarify that we are referring to a certain population of 
diffuser cases. The ``Actions Since AD 2014-05-32 Was Issued'' section 
does not exist in a final rule AD, but we clarified in the Discussion 
sections of this AD that we are referring to diffuser cases that 
incorporate a wrought M-flange. We also added a statement in the 
Discussion to note that repaired flanges cannot be distinguished from 
non-repaired flanges.

Request To Update Service Information References

    PW, Delta, United, and FedEx requested that we revise references in 
the compliance section of this AD from PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, 
Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, 
Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016. PW and Delta also requested that 
we allow compliance to later revisions of this ASB. PW and Delta 
indicated that they expect an additional revision to this ASB prior to 
issuance of this final rule. Delta further asked that publication of 
this final rule AD be delayed until the latest version of this ASB is 
published.
    We partially agree. We agree to update the references to PW ASB No. 
PW2000 A72-765 to Revision 2, dated August 12, 2016, in the compliance 
section of this AD. We do not agree to delay publication of this final 
rule AD or to revise the references to service information to allow 
compliance to revisions that have not been published. We cannot require 
compliance to service information that does not exist.

Request To Clarify References to Diffuser Cases M-flange

    PW, Delta, FedEx, and United requested that we clarify that the 
inspections required by paragraphs (f)(3) and (4) of this AD are for 
cracks from the diffuser case M-flange bolthole towards the case body. 
The commenters note that flange bolthole cracks away from the case body 
do not contribute to the unsafe condition.
    We agree. We changed this AD by revising paragraphs (f)(4)(iii) and 
(iv) to refer to ``bolthole ID crack'' as defined by ASB No. PW2000 
A72-765.

Request To Revise SUMMARY

    PW requested that we clarify in the SUMMARY that FPI is performed 
at ``piece part opportunity.''
    We disagree. The compliance section of this AD specifies that the 
FPI is performed at piece-part opportunity. The SUMMARY is not intended 
to provide that level of detail. We did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Definition

    Delta requested that the Definition of ``piece-part opportunity'' 
in paragraph (g) of this AD be revised to exclude diffuser cases that 
will not be returned to service. Delta noted that diffuser cases that 
will be scrapped should not be required to be inspected.
    We disagree. This AD is only applicable to parts that are 
installed. Parts that will be scrapped do not need to be inspected. We 
did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Previous Credit Section

    PW and Delta requested that the reference to the HPT case M-flange 
be removed from the Credit for Previous Actions section of this AD. PW 
commented that only the diffuser case M-flange should be referenced.
    PW also requested that in the Credit for Previous Actions section 
we refer to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765,

[[Page 26981]]

Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016, instead of Revision No. 1 of 
this SB. PW and Delta asked that we correct the date of PW SB No. 
PW2000 72-763, Revision No. 1, from August 13, 2013, to August 30, 
2013.
    We partially agree. We disagree with removing the reference to the 
HPT case M-flange. In order to have complied with this AD, the operator 
must have performed an ECI of the diffuser and HPT case M-flange as 
specified in this AD. As noted in our previous comment response, we 
agreed to update the reference to PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765 to Revision 
No. 2 in the compliance section of this AD. We do not need to refer to 
Revision No. 2 in the Credit for Previous Actions section. The purpose 
of the Credit for Previous Actions section is to allow credit for 
actions that use earlier versions of service information required by 
this AD. We agree to correct the date for PW SB No. PW2000 72-763, 
Revision No. 1, to August 30, 2013.

Request Update to Contact Information

    PW requested that we update the manufacturer's contact information 
in this AD to Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; 
phone: 860-565-0140 ; fax: 860-565-5442; email: HELP24@pw.utc.com.
    We agree. We updated the manufacturer's contact information in the 
ADDRESSES and Material Incorporated by Reference sections of this AD.

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance Estimate

    PW commented that that this AD affects 638 engines installed on 
U.S. airplanes. FedEx commented that the cost of the repetitive ECI 
proposed in this AD is $618,800.
    We disagree. When AD 2014-05-32 was issued, there were only 638 
affected engines in the U.S. Registry. However, a more recent inquiry 
for this AD located 910 engines listed in the U.S. Registry. We 
disagree with FedEx that the cost for a repetitive ECI is $618,800 
because FedEx assumes all engines will be subject to the repetitive 
ECI. We estimate that the additional inspections affect only 339 of the 
910 engines. We did not change this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed PW SB No. PW2000 72-763, Revision No. 1, dated August 
30, 2013; and PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated August 
12, 2016. This service information describes procedures for a one-time 
ECI inspection of the engine diffuser case and the HPT case, and 
repetitive on-wing ECIs of the engine diffuser case assembly, 
respectively. This service information is reasonably available because 
the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of 
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 910 engines installed on airplanes 
of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Parts                              Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost          cost      Cost per product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-wing/module ECI Inspection.....  8 work-hours x $85            $0  $680................  $230,520 per
                                     per hour = $680.                                        inspection cycle.
FPI Inspection....................  3 work-hours x $85            20  $275 per inspection   $250,250 per
                                     per hour = $255.                  cycle.                inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a 
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent 
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
    (4) 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.

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:

[[Page 26982]]

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2014-05-32, Amendment 39-17804 (79 FR 17856, March 31, 2014), and 
adding the following new AD:

2017-11-06 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 39-18905; Docket No. FAA-2013-
0740; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-24-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective July 18, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2014-05-32, Amendment 39-17804 (79 FR 17856, 
March 31, 2014).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2037, PW2037D, 
PW2037M, PW2040, PW2040D, PW2043, PW2143, PW2643, and F117-PW-100 
turbofan engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 72, Turbine/
Turboprop Engine.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a rupture of the diffuser-to-high-
pressure turbine (HPT) case flange. We are issuing this AD to 
prevent failure of the diffuser-to-HPT case flange, which could lead 
to uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Unless already done, comply with this AD within the compliance 
times specified.
    (1) For diffuser case, part number (P/N) 1B7461, serial numbers 
(S/Ns) DGGUAK1306 and DGGUAK1308, and HPT case, P/N 1B2440, S/N 
DKLBCS1032:
    (i) Within 100 flight cycles or 30 days after May 5, 2014, 
whichever is later, eddy current inspect the diffuser case and the 
HPT case M-flange. Use PW Service Bulletin (SB) No. PW2000 72-763, 
Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013, to do the inspection.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (2) For all diffuser and HPT cases, at the next piece-part 
opportunity and every piece-part opportunity thereafter, perform a 
high sensitivity fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) of the 
entire diffuser case rear flange (M-flange) and boltholes, and the 
entire HPT case forward flange (M-flange) and boltholes.
    (3) For diffuser cases that have not incorporated PW SB PW2000-
72-364 or have incorporated either PW SB PW2000-72-700 or PW2000 
Series Engine Manual, Repair-28, Task 72-41-01-300-028 (M-flange 
replacement), perform initial and repetitive eddy current 
inspections (ECIs) of the M-flange of the diffuser case in 
accordance with paragraph (f)(4) of this AD.
    (4) Use, as applicable, either the Accomplishment Instructions, 
``For Engines Installed on the Aircraft,'' paragraphs 3.(I) through 
3.(J), or the Accomplishment Instructions, ``For Engines Removed 
from the Aircraft,'' paragraphs 3.(D) through 3.(E), of PW Alert 
Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 2, dated 
August 12, 2016 to do the ECI as follows:
    (i) Perform an initial inspection within the following period, 
whichever occurs later:
    (A) Within 5,500 cycles since new or since M-flange replacement, 
or
    (B) Within 2,500 cycles since last piece-part FPI inspection, or
    (C) Within 1,000 cycles from the effective date of this AD.
    (ii) If no crack indications are found, re-inspect within 2,500 
cycles since last ECI or last piece-part FPI inspection, whichever 
occurs later.
    (iii) If bolthole ID crack indications are found, measure the 
length and determine the re-inspect interval in accordance with:
    (A) Paragraphs 5.(C) through 5.(D) of PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, 
Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016 ``For Engines Installed on the 
Aircraft''; or
    (B) Paragraphs 4.(C) through 4.(D) of PW ASB No. PW2000 A72-765, 
Revision No. 2, dated August 12, 2016, ``For Engines Removed from 
the Aircraft.''
    (iv) Remove from service diffuser cases with bolthole ID cracks 
exceeding 0.170 inches.

(g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, piece-part opportunity is defined as 
when the part is completely disassembled.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) You may take credit for the diffuser case and HPT case 
inspections required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) of this AD if you 
performed:
    (i) An ECI of the diffuser case and the HPT case M-flange using 
the Accomplishment Instructions of PW SB No. PW2000 72-763, Revision 
No. 1, dated August 30, 2013, or an earlier version; or
    (ii) a high sensitivity FPI of the diffuser case and the HPT 
case at a piece-part opportunity after January 1, 2010.
    (2) You may take credit for only the diffuser case inspections 
required by paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) of this AD if you performed an 
ECI of the M-flange using the Accomplishment Instructions of PW SB 
No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 1, dated July 13, 2016, or an 
earlier version.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs 
for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your 
request. You may email your request to: ANE-AD-AMOC@faa.gov.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Brian Kierstead, 
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; 
phone: 781-238-7772; fax: 781-238-7199; email: 
brian.kierstead@faa.gov.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Pratt & Whitney (PW) Service Bulletin No. PW2000 72-763, 
Revision No. 1, dated August 30, 2013.
    (ii) PW Alert Service Bulletin No. PW2000 A72-765, Revision No. 
2, dated August 12, 2016.
    (3) For PW service information identified in this AD, contact 
Pratt & Whitney,400 Main St., East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 860-
565-0140; fax: 860-565-5442; email: HELP24@pw.utc.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & 
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
781-238-7125.
    (5) You may view this service information 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: 
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on May 17, 2017.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-12078 Filed 6-12-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P