This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

63104

Vol. 69, No. 209

Friday, October 29, 2004

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–18024; Directorate 

Identifier 2003–NE–39–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

(1971) Limited, Bristol Engine Division 

Model Viper Mk.601–22 Turbojet 

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for Rolls-Royce (1971) 

Limited, Bristol Engine Division (RR) 

model Viper Mk.601–22 turbojet 

engines. That AD currently requires 

reducing the life of certain 1st stage 

turbine rotor blades from 7,000 hours 

time-in-service (TIS) to 4,600 hours TIS, 

and provides a drawdown schedule for 

blades that have already exceeded the 

new reduced life limit. This proposed 

AD would require the same actions but 

changes certain compliance times to be 

in agreement with RR Alert Service 

Bulletin (ASB) No. 72–A184, dated 

January 2001. This proposed AD results 

from comments received on AD 2004–

13–03, that the AD is unnecessarily 

more restrictive than the requirements 

in the associated RR ASB No. 72–A184. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

multiple failures of 1st stage turbine 

rotor blades that could result in a dualengine shutdown.

DATES: We must receive any comments 

on this proposed AD by December 28, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments 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 1http://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. 

• 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 

Rolls-Royce Limited, Bristol Engines 

Division, Technical Publications 

Department CLS–4, P.O. Box 3, Filton, 

Bristol, BS34 7QE England; telephone 

117–979–1234, fax 117–979–7575. 

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: Ian 

Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–

5299; telephone (781) 238–7178; fax 

(781) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Docket Management System (DMS) 

We have implemented new 

procedures for maintaining AD dockets 

electronically. As of May 17, 2004, we 

posted new AD actions on the DMS and 

assigned a DMS docket number. We 

track each action and assign a 

corresponding Directorate identifier. 

The DMS docket No. is in the form 

‘‘Docket No. FAA–200X–XXXXX.’’ Each 

DMS docket also lists the Directorate 

identifier (‘‘Old Docket Number’’) as a 

cross-reference for searching purposes. 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposal. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2004–18024; Directorate Identifier 2003-

NE–39-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 DMS 

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 DMS Docket Offices 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–

5227) is located on the plaza level of the 

Department of Transportation Nassif 

Building at the street address stated in 

ADDRESSES. Comments will be available 

in the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

Discussion 

On June 16, 2004, the FAA issued AD 

2004–13–03, Amendment 39–13684 (69 

FR 34563, June 22, 2004). That AD 

requires reducing the life of certain 1st 

stage turbine rotor blades from 7,000 

hours TIS to 4,600 hours TIS, and 

provides a drawdown schedule for 

blades that have already exceeded the 

new reduced life limit. That AD was the 

result of the manufacturer’s 

investigations into failures of 1st stage 

turbine rotor blades. That condition, if 

not corrected, could result in multiple 

failures of 1st stage turbine rotor blades 

that could result in a dual-engine 

shutdown. 

Comments Received Since AD 2004–13–

03 Was Issued 

Since we issued final rule; request for 

comments AD 2004–13–03, we have 

considered the comments received. 

Paragraph (g)(4) in Table 1 Is More 

Restrictive Than the SB 

One commenter requests that we 

revise paragraph (g)(4) in Table 1 so that

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Proposed Rules 63105

the limits are only applicable to engines 

with 5,800 hours TIS or more. As 

currently written, that paragraph is 

more restrictive than RR ASB No. 72-

A184, dated January 2001, and not 

consistent with it. 

We agree. Based on paragraph (g)(4) of 

AD 2004–13–03, it is possible that an 

engine with fewer than 5,800 hours TIS, 

but exceeding either the 200-hour or 6-

month limit from the effective date of 

the AD, would have to be removed from 

service. The intent was that after 6 

months from the effective date of the AD 

and up to 3 years from the effective date 

of the AD, engines be allowed to operate 

up to a maximum of 5,800 hours TIS. 

We have rewritten the second column 

for paragraph (g)(4) in Table 1 of this 

proposal as follows: 

‘‘Replace the engine that has the 

higher blade life at 5,800 hours TIS or 

6 months after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs later.’’

We have also added a new paragraph 

(h) to this proposal as follows: 

‘‘(h) No engine may operate with a 

blade life exceeding 5,800 hours TIS, 

applicable beginning 6 months after the 

effective date of this AD.’’

Paragraph (h) Is More Restrictive Than 

the SB 

One commenter requests that we 

revise paragraph (h) of AD 2004–13–03, 

so that it is not more restrictive than RR 

ASB No. 72-A184, dated January 2001, 

and is consistent with it. 

We agree. The intent of paragraph (h) 

of AD 2004–13–03 was to remove all 

engines with blades exceeding 4,600 

hours TIS, applicable within 3 years 

after the effective date of the AD. This 

wording is not clear and could apply to 

an engine, for example, with 1,000 

hours TIS. This would force the engine 

off wing after 3 years while the engine 

may have only accumulated an 

additional 1,000 hours TIS, which is far 

short of the intended life limit. It is 

important to delineate between the near 

term ‘‘drawdown’’ schedule which 

limits blade life to 5,800 hours TIS per 

Table 1, beginning at 6 months and 

continuing up to 3 years from the 

effective date of the AD, and the 

‘‘objective’’ life limit of 4,600 hours TIS 

which begins at 3 years from the 

effective date of this AD. We have 

removed the existing paragraph (h) from 

this proposal and recodified the 

paragraphs. We have added a new 

paragraph (i) to this proposal as follows: 

‘‘(i) No engine may operate with a 

blade life exceeding 4,600 hours TIS, 

applicable beginning 3 years after the 

effective date of this AD.’’

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed and approved the 

technical contents of RR Alert Service 

Bulletin (ASB) 72-A184, dated January 

2001, that describes procedures for 

managing engine configurations to 

reduce the risk of dual-engine 

shutdowns. The CAA classified this 

service bulletin as mandatory and 

issued AD 004–01–2001 in order to 

ensure the airworthiness of these RR 

engines in the UK. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

RR ASB 72-A184, dated January 2001, 

specifies the date of receipt of the ASB 

as the baseline for the compliance time. 

This proposed AD specifies the effective 

date of the AD as the baseline for the 

compliance time. 

Bilateral Agreement Information 

This engine model is manufactured in 

the UK and is type certificated for 

operation in the United States under the 

provisions of section 21.29 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.29) and the applicable bilateral 

airworthiness agreement. Under this 

bilateral airworthiness agreement, the 

CAA has kept the FAA informed of the 

situation described above. We have 

examined the findings of the CAA, 

reviewed all available information, and 

determined that AD action is necessary 

for products of this type design that are 

certificated for operation in the United 

States.

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

We have evaluated all pertinent 

information and identified an unsafe 

condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of this same 

type design. 

The unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

on other RR Viper Mk.601–22 turbojet 

engines of the same type design. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent multiple 

failures of 1st stage turbine rotor blades 

that could result in a dual-engine 

shutdown. We are proposing this AD 

which would: 

• Reduce the recommended class B 

life of certain 1st stage turbine blades, 

P/Ns V926000, V926293 and V926319, 

from 7,000 hours TIS to a mandatory life 

limit of 4,600 hours TIS, and 

• Provide a drawdown schedule for 

engines with blades that have already 

exceeded the new reduced life limit. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that 84 RR model Viper 

Mk.601–22 turbojet engines installed on 

airplanes of U.S. registry would be 

affected by this proposed AD. We 

estimate that no additional labor cost 

will be incurred to replace 1st stage 

turbine rotor blades when done at time 

of engine overhaul. A replacement set 

1st stage turbine rotor blades costs about 

$166,987. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the total cost of the proposed 

AD to U.S. operators to be $14,026,950. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Would not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a summary of the costs 

to comply with this proposal and placed 

it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy 

of this summary at the address listed 

under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–13684 (69 FR 

34563, June 22, 2004) and by adding a 

new airworthiness directive, to read as 

follows:

Rolls-Royce (1971) Limited, Bristol Engine 

Division: Docket No. FAA–2004–18024; 

Directorate Identifier 2003-NE–39-AD. 

Supersedes AD 2004–13–03, 

Amendment 39–13684.

63106 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) action by 

December 28, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2004–13–03, 

Amendment 39–13684. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce (1971) 

Limited, Bristol Engine Division (RR) Model 

Viper Mk.601–22 turbojet engines. These 

engines are installed on, but not limited to, 

Raytheon HS.125 Series 600 and BH.125 

Series 600 airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from comments 

received on AD 2004–13–03, that the AD is 

unnecessarily more restrictive than the 

requirements in the associated RR Alert 

Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 72-A184. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent multiple 

failures of 1st stage turbine rotor blades that 

could result in a dual-engine shutdown. The 

actions specified in this AD are intended to 

prevent multiple failures of 1st stage turbine 

rotor blades that could result in a dual-engine 

shutdown.

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. 

New Reduced Life Limit 

(f) Change the RR Time Limits Manual life 

limit for the 1st stage turbine rotor blades, P/

Ns V926000, V926293, and V926319, from 

7,000 hours time-in-service (TIS) to 4,600 

hours TIS. 

(g) Limit the number of installed engines 

with 1st stage turbine rotor blades that 

exceed 4,600 hours TIS on the effective date 

of this AD as specified in the following Table 

1:

TABLE 1.—INSTALLED ENGINES

On the effective date of this AD, if Then: 

(1) Both engines installed on the airplane have 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed 5,800 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage turbine rotor blades in the engine that has the 

higher blade life within 50 hours TIS or 6 weeks after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(2) One engine installed on the airplane has 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed turbine 5,800 hours TIS, and the other engine 

has 1st stage turbine rotor blades that exceed 4,600 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage turbine rotor blades in the engine that has the 

higher blade life within 100 hours TIS or 4 months after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(3) One engine installed on the airplane has 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed 5,800 hours TIS, and the other engine has 1st 

stage turbine rotor blades with fewer than 4,600 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage turbine rotor blades in the engine that has the 

higher blade life within 200 hours TIS or 6 months after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs first. 

(4) One engine installed on the airplane has 1st stage turbine rotor 

blades that exceed 4,600 hours TIS, but have fewer than 5,800 

hours TIS, and the other engine has 1st turbine stage turbine rotor 

blades with fewer than 4,600 hours TIS.

Replace the 1st stage rotor blades in the engine that has the higher 

blade life at 5,800 hours TIS or 6 months after the effective date of 

this AD, whichever occurs later. 

(h) No engine may operate with a blade life 

exceeding 5,800 hours TIS, applicable 

beginning 6 months from the effective date of 

this AD. 

(i) No engine may operate with a blade life 

exceeding 4,600 hours TIS, applicable 

beginning 3 years from the effective date of 

this AD. 

Installation of Engines After the Effective 

Date of This AD 

(j) After the effective date of this AD, do 

not install any engine that has 1st stage 

turbine rotor blades, P/Ns V926000, 

V926293, and V926319, that exceed 4,600 

hours TIS, except as allowed in Table 1 of 

this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(k) The Manager, Engine Certification 

Office, has the authority to approve 

alternative methods of compliance for this 

AD if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(l) None. 

Related Information 

(m) Civil Aviation Authority airworthiness 

directive AD 004–01–2001, dated January 

2001, also addresses the subject of this AD.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

October 25, 2004. 

Francis A. Favara, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–24230 Filed 10–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19470; Directorate 

Identifier 2003–NM–268–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 747–100B SUD, –300, –400, and 

–400D Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 

–300, –400, and –400D series airplanes. 

This proposed AD would require a onetime inspection for discrepancies of the 

fuselage frame to tension tie joints at 

body stations (BS) 1120 through 1220 

and to determine if steel splice plates 

are installed on the fuselage frames, and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions. This proposed AD is prompted 

by reports indicating that severed 

tension ties were found at the fuselage 

frame joints at BS 1120 and 1140. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue 

cracking of the fuselage frame to tension 

tie joints, which could result in severing 

of the tension ties and consequent rapid 

decompression of the airplane fuselage.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 13, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments 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. 

• By fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,