Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules 801 

these replacement times, the following 

items must be considered: 

(A) Damage identified in the threat 

assessment required by paragraph 

(d)(1)(iv) of this section; 

(B) Maximum acceptable 

manufacturing defects and in-service 

damage (i.e., those that do not lower the 

residual strength below ultimate design 

loads and those that can be repaired to 

restore ultimate strength); and 

(C) Ultimate load strength capability 

after applying repeated loads. 

(ii) Inspection intervals for PSEs must 

be established to reveal any damage 

identified in the threat assessment 

required by paragraph (d)(1)(iv) of this 

section that may occur from fatigue or 

other in-service causes before such 

damage has grown to the extent that the 

component cannot sustain the required 

residual strength capability. In 

establishing these inspection intervals, 

the following items must be considered: 

(A) The growth rate, including nogrowth, of the damage under the 

repeated loads expected in-service 

determined by tests or analysis 

supported by tests; 

(B) The required residual strength for 

the assumed damage established after 

considering the damage type, inspection 

interval, detectability of damage, and 

the techniques adopted for damage 

detection. The minimum required 

residual strength is limit load; and 

(C) Whether the inspection will detect 

the damage growth before the minimum 

residual strength is reached and restored 

to ultimate load capability, or whether 

the component will require 

replacement. 

(3) Each applicant must consider the 

effects of damage on stiffness, dynamic 

behavior, loads, and functional 

performance on all PSEs in establishing 

the allowable damage size and 

inspection interval. 

(e) Fatigue Evaluation: If an applicant 

establishes that the damage tolerance 

evaluation described in paragraph (d) of 

this section is impractical within the 

limits of geometry, inspectability, or 

good design practice, the applicant must 

do a fatigue evaluation of the particular 

composite rotorcraft structure and: 

(1) Identify all PSEs considered in the 

fatigue evaluation; 

(2) Identify the types of damage for all 

PSEs considered in the fatigue 

evaluation; 

(3) Establish supplemental procedures 

to minimize the risk of catastrophic 

failure associated with the damages 

identified in paragraph (e) of this 

section; and 

(4) Include these supplemental 

procedures in the Airworthiness 

Limitations section of the Instructions 

for Continued Airworthiness required 

by § 29.1529. 

Appendix A to Part 29 [Amended] 

6. Amend the second sentence of section 

A.29.4 of Appendix A to Part 29 by removing 

the phrase ‘‘approved under § 29.571’’ and 

adding the phrase ‘‘required for type 

certification’’ in its place. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

18, 2009. 

K.C. Yanamura, 

Acting Director, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–31381 Filed 1–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0674; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NE–25–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

plc RB211–Trent 500, 700, and 800 

Series Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for Rolls-Royce plc 

RB211–Trent 800 series turbofan 

engines. That AD currently requires 

replacing the fuel-to-oil heat exchanger 

(FOHE). This proposed AD would 

require replacing the FOHE on the 

RB211–Trent 500 and RB211–Trent 700 

series turbofan engines in addition to 

the RB211–Trent 800 series turbofan 

engines. This proposed 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, and results from 

the risk of engine FOHE blockage. The 

MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: 

In January 2008, a Boeing 777 powered by 

RB211–Trent 800 engines crashed short of 

the runway as a result of dual loss of engine 

response during the final stages of approach. 

The investigation of the incident has 

established that, under certain ambient 

conditions, ice can accumulate on the walls 

of the fuel pipes within the aircraft fuel 

system, which can then be released 

downstream when fuel flow demand is 

increased. This released ice can then collect 

on the FOHE front face and limit fuel flow 

through the FOHE. This type of icing event 

was previously unknown and creates ice 

concentrations into the fuel system beyond 

those specified in the certification 

requirements. 

In May 2009, an Engine Indicating and 

Crew Alerting System (EICAS) surge message 

was set following a successful go-around 

maneuver on a single RB211–Trent 700 

engine of an A330 aircraft. Subsequent 

analysis concluded the likely cause to be 

temporary ice accumulation causing fuel 

flow restriction in the FOHE. The incident 

has indicated the potential susceptibility to 

ice blockage for Airbus aircraft in 

combination with Rolls-Royce engines that 

feature similar fuel systems to the RB211– 

Trent 800. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

ice from blocking the FOHE, which 

could result in an unacceptable engine 

power loss and loss of control of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by February 5, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

Contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31, 

DERBY, DE24 8BJ, UK; telephone 44 (0) 

1332 242424; fax 44 (0) 1332 249936, for 

the service information identified in this 

proposed AD. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

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 proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is the 

same as the Mail address provided in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Lawrence, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: james.lawrence@faa.gov; 

telephone (781) 238–7176; fax (781) 

238–7199. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

802 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0674; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NE–25–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.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 Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including, if provided, 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). 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued AD 2009–0142, 

dated July 13, 2009 to correct an unsafe 

condition on RB211–Trent 800 series 

turbofan engines. We issued AD 2009– 

24–05 (74 FR 62222, November 27, 

2009) to correspond with that EASA 

AD. Since we issued that AD, EASA 

issued AD 2009–0257, dated December 

3, 2009, to correct the same unsafe 

condition on RB211–Trent 500 and 

RB211–Trent 700 series turbofan 

engines. That EASA AD states: 

In January 2008, a Boeing 777 powered by 

RB211–Trent 800 engines crashed short of 

the runway as a result of dual loss of engine 

response during the final stages of approach. 

The investigation of the incident has 

established that, under certain ambient 

conditions, ice can accumulate on the walls 

of the fuel pipes within the aircraft fuel 

system, which can then be released 

downstream when fuel flow demand is 

increased. This released ice can then collect 

on the FOHE front face and limit fuel flow 

through the FOHE. This type of icing event 

was previously unknown and creates ice 

concentrations into the fuel system beyond 

those specified in the certification 

requirements. 

In May 2009, an EICAS surge message was 

set following a successful go-around 

maneuver on a single Trent 700 engine of an 

A330 aircraft. Subsequent analysis concluded 

the likely cause to be temporary ice 

accumulation causing fuel flow restriction in 

the FOHE. The incident has indicated the 

potential susceptibility to ice blockage for 

Airbus aircraft in combination with RollsRoyce engines that feature similar fuel 

systems to the RB211–Trent 800. 

To mitigate the risk of engine FOHE 

blockage, this proposed AD would 

require, for RB211–Trent 500, 700, and 

800 series turbofan engines, replacing 

the existing FOHE with a FOHE 

incorporating the modifications 

specified in the applicable Rolls-Royce 

plc Alert Service Bulletin. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Rolls-Royce plc has issued Alert 

Service Bulletin (ASB) No. RB.211–79– 

AG346, dated October 23, 2009 for 

RB211–Trent 500 series turbofan 

engines, ASB No. RB.211–79–AG338, 

Revision 1, dated December 2, 2009 for 

RB211–Trent 700 series turbofan 

engines, and ASB No. RB.211–79– 

AG257, Revision 1, dated September 14, 

2009 for RB211–Trent 800 series 

turbofan engines. The actions described 

in this service information are intended 

to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

These products have been approved 

by the aviation authority of the United 

Kingdom, and are approved for 

operation in the United States. Pursuant 

to our bilateral agreement with the 

United Kingdom, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information provided by EASA, and 

determined the unsafe condition exists 

and is likely to exist or develop on other 

products of the same type design. This 

proposed AD would require replacing 

the existing FOHE on RB211–Trent 500 

and RB211–Trent 700 series turbofan 

engines within 6,000 flight hours after 

the effective date of this AD, or before 

January 1, 2011, whichever occurs first, 

and on RB211–Trent 800 series turbofan 

engines, replacing the existing FOHE 

within 6,000 flight hours after January 4, 

2010 (the effective date of FAA AD 

2009–24–05), or before January 1, 2011, 

whichever occurs first. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

The EASA AD 2009–0142, dated July 

13, 2009, and EASA AD 2009–0257, 

dated December 3, 2009, require 

replacing the FOHE within 6,000 flight 

hours from July 10, 2009 or before 

January 1, 2011, whichever occurs first. 

This proposed AD would require 

replacing the FOHE on RB211–Trent 

500 and RB211–Trent 700 series 

turbofan engines within 6,000 flight 

hours after the effective date of this AD, 

or before January 1, 2011, whichever 

occurs first, and on RB211–Trent 800 

series turbofan engines, replacing the 

FOHE within 6,000 flight hours after 

January 4, 2010 (the effective date of AD 

2009–24–05), or before January 1, 2011, 

whichever occurs first. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD will 

affect about 138 RB211–Trent 800 series 

engines, and about 10 RB211–Trent 700 

series engines, installed on airplanes of 

U.S. registry. There are currently no 

RB211–Trent 500 series engines 

installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take about 

8.5 work-hours per product to comply 

with this AD. The average labor rate is 

$80 per work-hour. Required parts will 

cost about $58,005 per product. Based 

on these figures, we estimate the cost of 

the AD on U.S. operators to be 

$8,685,380. 

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 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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules 803 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this 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. 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 proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA 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 39–16092 (74 FR 

62222, November 27, 2009) and by 

adding the following new AD: 

Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2009– 

0674; Directorate Identifier 2009–NE– 

25–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by February 

5, 2010. 

Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs) 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2009–24–05, 

Amendment 39–16092. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to: 

(1) Rolls-Royce plc models RB211–Trent 

553–61, 556–61, 556B–61, 560–61, 553A2– 

61, 556A2–61, 556B2–61, and 560A2–61 

turbofan engines with fuel-to-oil heat 

exchangers (FOHEs) part number (P/N) 

55027001–1 or 55027001–11 installed; and 

(2) Rolls-Royce plc models RB211–Trent 

768–60, 772–60, 772B–60, and RB211–Trent 

875–17, 877–17, 884–17, 884B–17, 892–17, 

892B–17, and 895–17 turbofan engines with 

FOHEs P/N 55003001–1 or 55003001–11 

installed. 

(3) The RB211–Trent 500 series engines are 

installed on, but not limited to, Airbus A340– 

500 and –600 series airplanes. The RB211– 

Trent 700 series engines are installed on, but 

not limited to, Airbus A330–200 and –300 

series airplanes. The RB211–Trent 800 series 

engines are installed on, but not limited to, 

Boeing 777 series airplanes. 

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, and results 

from the risk of engine FOHE blockage. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent ice from 

blocking the FOHE, which could result in an 

unacceptable engine power loss and loss of 

control of the airplane. 

Actions and Compliance 

(e) For RB211–Trent 500 series turbofan 

engines and RB211–Trent 700 series turbofan 

engines, unless already done, within 6,000 

flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 

or before January 1, 2011, whichever occurs 

first, do the following: 

(1) For RB211–Trent 500 series turbofan 

engines, replace the FOHE P/N 55027001–1 

or 55027001–11, with an FOHE that 

incorporates the modifications specified in 

Rolls-Royce plc Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 

No. RB.211–79–AG346, dated October 23, 

2009. 

(2) For RB211–Trent 700 series turbofan 

engines, replace the FOHE, P/N 55003001–1 

or 55003001–11, with an FOHE that 

incorporates the modifications specified in 

Rolls-Royce plc ASB No. RB.211–79–AG338, 

Revision 1, dated December 2, 2009. 

(f) For RB211–Trent 800 series turbofan 

engines, unless already done, replace the 

FOHE, P/N 55003001–1 or 55003001–11, 

with an FOHE that incorporates the 

modifications specified in Rolls-Royce plc 

ASB No. RB.211–79–AG257, Revision 1, 

dated September 14, 2009 within 6,000 flight 

hours from January 4, 2010 (the effective date 

of FAA AD 2009–24–05), or before January 1, 

2011, whichever comes first. 

FAA AD Differences 

(g) This AD differs from the Mandatory 

Continuing Airworthiness Information 

(MCAI) by requiring replacing the FOHE 

within 6,000 flight hours after the effective 

date of this AD for RB211–Trent 500 and 

RB211–Trent 700 series turbofan engines or 

January 4, 2010 for RB211–Trent 800 series 

turbofan engines, rather than within 6,000 

flight hours from July 10, 2009. 

Previous Credit 

(h) For RB211–Trent 700 series engines, 

replacement of the FOHE with an FOHE that 

incorporates the modifications specified in 

Rolls-Royce plc ASB No. RB.211–79–AG338, 

dated September 29, 2009, complies with the 

replacement requirement specified in 

paragraph (e)(2) of this AD. 

(i) For RB211–Trent 800 series engines, 

replacement of the FOHE with an FOHE that 

incorporates the modifications specified in 

Rolls Royce plc ASB No. RB.211–79–AG257, 

dated June 24, 2009, complies with the 

replacement requirement specified in 

paragraph (f) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(j) 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 

(k) Refer to MCAI AD 2009–0142, dated 

July 13, 2009, MCAI AD 2009–0257, dated 

December 3, 2009, for related information. 

Contact Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31, 

DERBY, DE24 8BJ, UK; telephone 44 (0) 1332 

242424; fax 44 (0) 1332 249936, for a copy 

of the service information referenced in this 

AD. 

(l) Contact James Lawrence, Aerospace 

Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: james.lawrence@faa.gov; 

telephone (781) 238–7176; fax (781) 238– 

7199, for more information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

December 31, 2009. 

Peter A. White, 

Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–31394 Filed 1–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 147 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0955] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; FRONTIER DISCOVERER, 

Outer Continental Shelf Drillship, 

Chukchi and Beaufort Sea, Alaska 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a 

temporary safety zone around the 

DRILLSHIP FRONTIER DISCOVERER, 

while anchored on location in order to 

drill exploratory wells at various 

prospects located in the Chukchi and 

Beaufort Sea Outer Continental Shelf, 

Alaska, from 12:01 a.m. on July 1, 2010 

through 11:59 p.m. on October 31, 2010. 

The purpose of the temporary safety 

zone is to protect the DRILLSHIP from 

vessels operating outside normal 

shipping channels and fairways. Placing 

a temporary safety zone around the 

DRILLSHIP will significantly reduce the 

threat of allisions, oil spills, and 

releases of natural gas, and thereby 

protect the safety of life, property, and 

the environment. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before February 5, 2010. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS