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

26846

Vol. 60, No. 97

Friday, May 19, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–ANE–08]

Airworthiness Directives; AlliedSignal

Engines (Formerly Textron Lycoming)

Models LTS101–650B1, –750B1, –650C,

and –750C Turboshaft Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to

AlliedSignal Engines (formerly Textron

Lycoming) Models LTS101–650B1,

–750B1, –650C, and –750C turboshaft

engines. This proposal would require

installation of an improved power

turbine (PT) rotor and electronic PT

rotor overspeed controller as a

terminating action to the currently

required inspections of AD 88–14–01.

This proposal is prompted by reports of

additional bearing failures since

publication of AD 88–14–01, including

one additional uncontained PT disk

failure. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to prevent PT

overspeed and uncontained engine

failure.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 18, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–ANE–08, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

AlliedSignal Inc., 550 Main Street,

Stratford, CT 06497. This information

may be examined at the FAA, New

England Region, Office of the Assistant

Chief Counsel, 12 New England

Executive Park, Burlington, MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eugene Triozzi, Aerospace Engineer,

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299; telephone (617) 238–7148,

fax (617) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–ANE–08.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, New England Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–ANE–08, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299.

Discussion

On May 26, 1988, the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) issued

airworthiness directive (AD) 88–14–01,

Amendment 39–5952 (53 FR 25317, July

6, 1988), to require initial and repetitive

inspections of the engine lubrication

and bearing systems on AlliedSignal

Engines (formerly Textron Lycoming)

LTS101 series turboshaft engines. That

action was prompted by reports of four

uncontained power turbine (PT) disk

failures. Subsequent investigation

revealed that the PT disk failures were

caused by bearing failures resulting in

PT shaft disengagement from the gear

train drive, unloading the PT and

causing rotor overspeed. Two other PT

disk failures involved No. 4 bearing

failure, followed by power pinion gear

teeth failure, thereby unloading the PT

and causing PT rotor overspeed. This

condition, if not corrected, could result

in PT overspeed and uncontained

engine failure.

Since the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has received reports of additional

bearing failures with resultant loss of PT

rotor location, including one additional

uncontained PT disk failure. In order to

minimize the possibility of an

uncontained engine failure, the

manufacturer has developed an

improved PT rotor with retention

capability and an improved electronic

PT rotor overspeed controller. These

improvements are only available for

AlliedSignal Engines Models LTS101–

650B1, –750B1, –650C, and –750C

turboshaft engines, installed on Bell

Helicopter Textron 222 series and

Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm (MBB)

BK117 series helicopters. Installation of

these improved components constitutes

terminating action to the inspections

required by AD 88–14–01 only to these

certain engine models installed on these

certain helicopters.

On October 28, 1994, AlliedSignal

Inc. purchased the turbine engine

product line of Textron Lycoming.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

the technical contents of the following

Textron Lycoming Service Bulletins

(SB), that describe installing an

improved PT rotor with retention

capability and an electronic PT rotor

overspeed controller:
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 97 / Friday, May 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 26847

Engine model PT rotor Electronic overspeed

LTS101–650B ....................... LTS101B–72–50–0122, Revision 4, dated June 17,

1991.

LTS101B–73–10–0127, Revision 2, dated August 14,

1992.

LTS101–750B1 ..................... LTS101B–72–50–0116, Revision 6, dated August 14,

1992.

LTS101B–73–10–0127, Revision 2 dated August 14,

1992.

LTS101–650C and –750 Series.LTS101C–72–50–0119, Revision 2, dated June 17,

1991.

LTS101C–73–10–0129, Revision 3, dated August 14,

1992.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

require installation of an improved PT

rotor with retention capability and an

electronic PT rotor overspeed controller

at the next shop visit when the PT rotor

is removed after the effective date of this

AD, but prior to December 31, 1997, as

a terminating action to the currently

required inspections of AD 88–14–01.

The FAA has determined, based on the

availability of parts, that by that date

affected engines would have at least one

scheduled shop visit to install the

improved components. In addition, by

that date operators would have at least

one scheduled opportunity to install

components of the electronic overspeed

controller in affected aircraft. The

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletins described previously.

There are approximately 950 engines

of the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 95 engines

installed on aircraft of U.S. registry

would be affected by the requirement to

install the PT rotor with improved

retention, that it would take

approximately 10 work hours per engine

to accomplish the proposed action, and

that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Required parts cost for the

PT rotor installation would be $44,400

per engine. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of installing the PT rotor

with improved retention is estimated to

be $4,275,000.

In addition, the FAA estimates that

576 engines installed on aircraft of U.S.

registry would be affected by the

requirement to install the electronic PT

rotor overspeed controller, that it would

take approximately 3 work hours per

engine to accomplish the proposed

action, and that the average labor rate is

$60 per work hour. Required parts cost

for the electronic PT rotor overspeed

controller installation would be $5,825.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of installing the electronic PT rotor

overspeed controller would be

$3,458,880. Therefore, the total cost

impact of all the actions of the proposed

AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$7,733,880.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ under Executive

Order 12291; (2) is not a ‘‘significant

rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies

and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February

26, 1979); and (3) if promulgated, 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.

A copy of the draft regulatory evaluation

prepared for this action is contained in

the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be

obtained by contacting the Rules Docket

at the location provided under the

caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

AlliedSignal Engines: Docket No. 95–ANE–

08.

Applicability: AlliedSignal Engines

(formerly Textron Lycoming) Model LTS101–

650B1, –750B1, –650C, and –750C turboshaft

engines installed on Bell Helicopter Textron

222 series and Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm

(MBB) BK117 series helicopters.

Note: This AD applies to each engine

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

engines that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (d) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition, or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any engine from

the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent power turbine (PT) overspeed

and uncontained engine failure, accomplish

the following:

(a) Install the improved PT rotor with

retention capability at the next shop visit

when the PT rotor is removed after the

effective date of this AD, but prior to

December 31, 1997, in accordance with the

following Textron Lycoming Service

Bulletins (SB):

Engine model SB No. Rev. Date

LTS101–650B1 ................................................................................................................. LTS101B–72–50–0122 4 June 17, 1991.

LTS101–750B1 ................................................................................................................. LTS101B–72–50–0116 6 August 14, 1992.

LTS101–650C and –750C Series .................................................................................... LTS101C–72–50–0119 2 June 17, 1991.

(b) Install the improved electronic PT rotor overspeed controller concurrently with the PT rotor installation required by paragraph

(a) of this AD in accordance with the following Textron Lycoming SB:
26848 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 97 / Friday, May 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

1Associated data include arbitraries, footnotes,

routing numbers and fare class explanations. See 14

CFR 221.4 and 221.283.

Engine model SB No. Rev. Date

LTS101–650B1 ................................................................................................................. LTS101–73–10–0127 2 August 14, 1992.

LTS101–750B1 ................................................................................................................. LTS101–73–10–0127 2 August 14, 1992.

LTS101–650C and –750C Series .................................................................................... LTS101–73–10–0129 3 August 14, 1992.

(c) Installation of the improved PT rotor

with retention capability and the improved

electronic PT rotor overspeed controller in

accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this

AD constitutes terminating action to the

inspection requirements of AD 88–14–01.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Engine

Certification Office. The request should be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Engine Certification Office.

Note: Information concerning the existence

of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this airworthiness directive,

if any, may be obtained from the Engine

Certification Office.

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

May 15, 1995.

James C. Jones,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12330 Filed 5–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Part 221

[Docket No. 50355; Notice No. 95–5]

RIN 2105–AC23

Electronic Filing of International Airline

Passenger Rules Tariffs

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Transportation proposes to amend its

regulations governing the filing of

airline tariffs. Under the proposed rule,

carriers would be authorized to

electronically file the rules governing

passenger fares and their conditions of

service, subject to certain format

requirements necessary to enable the

Department to work with differing filing

systems. The Department’s regulations

have permitted the electronic filing of

passenger fares since 1989. The

Department is proposing this action at

the request of tariff publishing agents in

order to extend the efficiencies of

electronic data transmission and

processing to the filing of rules tariffs.

Filers could, however, continue to file

fare rules on paper if they preferred.

DATES: Comments should be received no

later than June 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Five (5) copies of any

comments should be sent to the

Documentary Services Division, C–55,

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400

7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590–

0002, and should refer to this docket. To

receive acknowledgment of comments,

include a stamped, self-addressed

postcard which the Docket Clerk will

return stamped with time and date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

John H. Kiser, Pricing and Multilateral

Affairs Division, Department of

Transportation, at the address above.

Telephone: (202) 366–2435.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 19, 1989, the Department

published a final rule that allows

international passenger fares tariffs

(fares and associated data) to be filed

electronically, as an alternative to the

filing of paper tariffs.1 54 FR 2087,

January 19, 1989. The rule, contained in

subpart W of part 221, established a

number of criteria that have to be met

for carriers or their agents to make such

filings, including a signed agreement or

agreements providing for the

maintenance and security of the on-line

tariff database. Approval by the

Department of an application containing

various hardware and software service

commitments, as well as the filer’s

proposed format, is also required.

The 1989 rule was issued in response

to an emergency petition for rulemaking

by the Airline Tariff Publishing

Company (ATPCO), requesting an

expedited amendment to part 221 to

permit the electronic filing of

international passenger fares on an

experimental basis. The Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking was issued on

July 8, 1988, at 53 FR 25615. Although

ATPCO and other commenters then

urged that the rule be broadened to

include all international tariffs, the

Department determined to address the

filing of passenger fare rules and cargo

tariffs in subsequent proceedings, citing

the need for expedition as well as the

need for a period of operational

experience to determine whether the

filing criteria and procedures set forth in

Subpart W adequately meet regulatory

needs.

ATPCO, a publishing agent owned by

and representing a number of U.S. and

foreign airlines, was initially the only

entity that applied for authority to make

electronic fare filings under the rule. It

began test filings in July 1989, and in

December 1989 it received final

approval from the Department to

commence official electronic filings. On

November 28, 1990, ATPCO filed a

petition for rulemaking in Docket 47288,

requesting the amendment of part 221 to

permit the alternative electronic filing of

all international tariffs. The petition

included suggested regulatory changes

to accommodate the filing of passenger

and cargo rules, and cargo rates.

In February 1992, the Department

permitted ATPCO to begin filing

electronic passenger rules on an

unofficial test basis. The official rules,

however, continue to be filed on paper.

By a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

issued October 15, 1992, in Docket

48385, 57 FR 47303, the Department

proposed extensive revisions to part 221

to permit the electronic filing of all

international tariffs. Following a

comment period and a public meeting,

the proposal was withdrawn for further

study of various technical issues, and

the proceeding was terminated. 58 FR

12350, March 4, 1993.

Requests for Further Action

Since the termination of the 1992

rulemaking, ATPCO has informally

urged the Department to take whatever

actions may be necessary to develop the

capability for the acceptance and

processing of all tariffs electronically.

In addition, another entity has

demonstrated interest in filing

international tariffs electronically with

the Department. The Societe ́

Internationale de Telecommunications

Ae ́ronautiques (SITA), a tariff

publishing service which developed an

electronic tariff filing system for use in

Europe and elsewhere, has

demonstrated its ProFile system to the

Department’s staff and is making

modifications to accommodate U.S.

requirements and procedures. On June