Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 32533

Incorporation by Reference

(d) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–

25A0265, dated May 27, 1999. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing

Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707,

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. Copies may

be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

Effective Date

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

July 20, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 6,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14723 Filed 6–14–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NE–22–AD; Amendment

39–12261; AD 2001–12–06]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General

Electric Company (GE) CF34–1A, –3A,

–3A1, –3A2, –3B, and –3B1 Turbofan

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD), that is

applicable to GE CF34–1A, –3A, –3A1,

–3A2, –3B, and –3B1 turbofan engines

with No. 5 bearing rotating air seal part

number (P/N) 4019T60G01 installed.

This amendment requires initial and

repetitive checks of the magnetic chip

detector indicators, which are located in

the lubrication system for the engine

bearings, and installation of an

improved No. 5 bearing rotating air seal

as a terminating action. This

amendment is prompted by a report of

the failure of a No. 5 bearing rotating air

seal that led to a fire in the cavity of the

low pressure turbine (LPT),

overtemperature of the LPT turbine

disk, and excessive turbine disk growth.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent No.5 bearing

rotating air seal failures and possible

uncontained engine failures.

DATES: Effective date July 20, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Information regarding this

action may be examined at the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), New

England Region, Office of the Regional

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: (781) 238–7148,

fax: (781) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an AD that is applicable to GE

CF34–1A, –3A, –3A1, –3A2, –3B, and

–3B1 engines was published in the

Federal Register on February 27, 2001

(66 FR 12443). That action proposed to

require initial and repetitive checks of

magnetic chip detector indicators,

which are located in the lubrication

system for the engine bearings, in order

to detect No. 5 bearing roller distress

before air seal failure, and installation of

a new modified design No. 5 bearing

rotating air seal, P/N 4019T60G03, as

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of this AD.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Requests To Eliminate Repetitive

Inspection Requirements

Three commenters request that the

repetitive inspection requirements be

eliminated from the AD. The

commenters state that they are already

performing the inspections based upon

recommendations from the

manufacturer. The FAA does not agree.

Although these individual commenters

may already be complying with the

proposed requirements, the FAA has

determined that an unsafe condition

exists that warrants requiring all

operators to conduct mandatory

repetitive inspections, until the

terminating actions are accomplished.

Therefore, the FAA must issue an AD to

require repetitive inspections, regardless

of the manufacturer’s recommendations.

Requests To Change Compliance Time

for Initial Inspections

Two commenters request that the time

to comply with the initial inspection

requirements be increased from 30

hours after the effective date of the

proposed AD to 100 hours after the

effective date, for CF34–1A, –3A, and

–3A2 engines. The commenters feel that

a 100-hour initial inspection provides

an acceptable level of safety based on

risk analysis conducted by the type

certificate holder, and will reduce the

economic burden on operators. The

FAA agrees. Further review of risk

analysis data supports that an

acceptable level of safety would result

with a 100-hour initial inspection

threshold rather than a 30-hour initial

inspection threshold. Therefore, the

FAA has changed the initial inspection

compliance time for CF34–1A, –3A, and

–3A2 engines to ‘‘100 flight hours from

the effective date of this AD.’’

Requests To Change Compliance Time

for CF34–3B Repetitive Inspections

One commenter requests that the time

to comply with the repetitive inspection

requirements be increased from an

interval of 30 hours to an interval of 100

hours for CF34–3B engines. The

commenter states that the extended time

will reduce the economic impact on the

commenter due to additional

maintenance requirements, and make

the CF34–3B inspection requirements

the same as the CF34–3A inspection

requirements. The FAA does not agree.

Risk analysis data used by the FAA to

establish the AD requirements shows

that an unacceptable level of safety

would result from increasing the

inspection interval from 30 flight hours

to 100 flight hours for the CF34–3B

engine fleet.

Requests To Clarify Who May Perform

Maintenance Actions

One commenter requests that the

wording of the AD be revised to reflect

that the pilot may do the check, but a

maintenance technician must do any

required maintenance actions.

Additionally, the same commenter and

another commenter, request that the AD

be revised to clarify that on CF34–1A,

–3A, and –3A2 turbofan engines, chip

detector checks are maintenance actions

and are not to be performed by flight

crew. CF34–1A, –3A, and –3A2 turbofan

engine models have individual chip

detectors. Those chip detectors are

checked with an ohmmeter, unlike the

CF34–3A1, –3B, and –3B1 engine

models, which have a single master chip

detector with a white triangle or

illuminated indicator. The FAA agrees.

The intent of the AD is to allow chip

detector indicator checks to be done by

the pilot for engine models with the

master chip detector installation.

Although the proposed AD would not

have authorized the pilot to do any task

beyond a visual check of the indicator,

the FAA agrees that additional clarity is

needed. Therefore, the FAA has revised

32534 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

paragraph (b) to clarify the

requirements.

Requests To Allow Pilot to ‘‘Sign-off’’

30 Flight Hour Magnetic Chip Detector

Check

Two commenters request that the

pilot be allowed to sign-off the 30-flight

hour magnetic chip detector check. The

commenters feel that the check is a very

simple task on the CF34–3A1, –3B, and

–3B1 engine installations. The chip

detector panel location is accessed by

aircrews on a daily basis in the normal

course of their duties of determining

and monitoring engine oil levels. The

chip detector check that is required by

paragraph (b) of the proposed AD is a

simple go/no-go check and could be

performed by an aircrew. The FAA

agrees, but no revisions to the AD are

needed as this is explicitly provided for

in paragraph (b) of the proposed AD.

Requests To Increase the Compliance

Time for Mandatory Terminating

Action

One commenter requests that the

compliance time for the mandatory

terminating action for the CF34–3A1,

–3B, and –3B1 be increased from 15,000

cycles-in-service (CIS) after the effective

date of the proposed AD, to 18,000 CIS

after the effective date of the proposed

AD. The commenter requests the change

in anticipation of future rotating part

life limit increases, and to coincide with

scheduled shop visits in the future if life

limits are increased. The FAA does not

agree. The level of safety provided by

the requirements of the proposed AD

were established based upon

compliance within 15,000 CIS after the

effective date to the AD, and no

additional data was provided by the

commenter to show that an acceptable

level of safety would be provided if the

terminating action deadline were

extended. In addition, further review

with the type certificate holder

indicated that future life limit increases

are not anticipated for all affected

engine models.

Request for Clarification of the

Mandatory Terminating Action

Compliance Time

The same commenter requests that the

compliance time for the mandatory

terminating action be revised to indicate

terminating actions are not required

upon reaching 15,000 cycles-since-new

(CSN), but instead that terminating

actions are required after accumulating

15,000 additional CIS after the effective

date of this AD. The commenter states

that one operator has misinterpreted the

existing wording as a hard limit of

15,000 CSN. The FAA agrees. The intent

of the proposed AD was to require

terminating action within 15,000 CIS

accumulated after the effective date of

the AD, and was not intended to impose

a 15,000 CSN limit. The FAA has

changed the wording in Table 2

accordingly.

Request To Incorporate Chip Detector

Check as Part of the Flight Checklist

One commenter requests that the chip

detector check be done as part of the

aircrew normal acceptance of

terminating flight checklist. The

commenter feels that precedence for

aircrews performing simple go/no-go

checks as part of an approved checklist

can be found in AD 92–16–51 for the

EMB120. The FAA partially agrees. The

FAA agrees that the engine chip

detector check can be performed by the

aircrew, which is provided for in

paragraph (b) of the AD. However, as

further stated in paragraph (b),

91.417(a)(2)(v) of the Federal Aviation

Regulations [14 CFR 91.417(a)(2)(v)]

requires that for AD actions involving

recurring inspections, records must be

maintained, including the time and date

when the next action is required.

Accordingly, although the chip detector

checks may be included in the aircrew

daily checklist, this would not obviate

the need for the operator to record each

AD accomplishment, and no changes to

the proposed rule are required.

Request for a New Paragraph To

Require a Maintenance Operational

Check of the Engine Master Chip

Detector

One commenter requests that a new

paragraph be added to the proposed AD

to require a maintenance operational

check (BITE) of the engine master chip

detector. The check would be required

to be done at the air carriers’ first

scheduled maintenance opportunity,

but not to exceed seven calendar days.

The commenter feels that this check

would provide an equivalent of better

level of safety than that proposed in the

AD. The FAA does not agree. The FAA

has no data that mandating operational

checks of the engine master chip

detector system would improve the

level of safety provided by the proposed

rule as currently written.

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

described previously. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Economic Impact

There are about 1,650 engines of the

affected design in the worldwide fleet.

The FAA estimates that 1,075 engines

installed on aircraft of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD,

that it would take about 0.5 work hours

per engine to do the proposed checks,

and that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

total proposed AD cost impact on U.S.

operators, for the initial check is

estimated to be $32,250. In addition, the

replacement air seal cost is

approximately $2,400 per unit, so the

total proposed material cost impact on

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$2,580,000. No additional labor is

required for air seal replacement, as this

will occur during normal exposure at

shop visit. Based on these figures, the

total proposed AD cost impact on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $2,612,250.

Regulatory Impact

This proposal does not have

federalism implications, as defined in

Executive Order 13132, because it

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.

Accordingly, the FAA has not consulted

with state authorities prior to

publication of this proposal.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that 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) 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:

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 116 / Friday, June 15, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 32535

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. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive to

read as follows:

2001–12–06 General Electric Company:

Amendment 39–12261. Docket No.

2000–NE–22–AD.

Applicability

This airworthiness directive (AD) is

applicable to CF34–1A, –3A, –3A1, –3A2,

–3B, and –3B1 turbofan engines with No. 5

bearing rotating air seal, part number (P/N)

4019T60G01 installed. These engines are

installed on but not limited to Bombardier

Inc. (Canadair) Model CL–600–2A12, Model

CL–600–2B16, and Model CL–600–2B19,

airplanes.

Note 1: 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 request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (f) of this AD. The

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the modification, alteration, or repair

on the unsafe condition addressed by this

AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been

eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance

Compliance with this AD is required as

indicated, unless already done.

To prevent No.5 bearing rotating air seal

failures and possible uncontained engine

failures, do the following:

Magnetic Chip Detector Indicator Check

(a) Check magnetic chip detector indicators

in accordance with the following Table 1:

TABLE 1.—INITIAL AND REPETITIVE CHECKS

Engine model Initial check within: Then within every:

(1) CF34–3A1, –3B1, and –3B ......... 30 flight hours or 3 calendar days, whichever is

greater, from effective date of this AD.

30 flight hours time-since-last-inspected (TSLI) or 3

calendar days TSLI, whichever is greater.

(2) CF34–1A, –3A, and –3A2 ........... 100 flight hours, from the effective date of this AD .. 100 flight hours TSLI.

Chip Detector Indicator Check,

Authorization

(b) For CF34–3A1, –3B, and –3B1 turbofan

engine models, notwithstanding section 43.3

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

43.3), the checks required by paragraph (a) of

this AD, may be performed by an aircrew

member holding at least a private pilot

certificate. The operator of the airplane must

record completion of the checks in the

airplane records to show compliance with

this AD, in accordance with sections 43.9

and 91.417(a)(2)(v) of the Federal Aviation

Regulations 14 CFR part 43.9 and 14 CFR

part 91.417(a)(2)(v). The records must be

maintained as required by the applicable

Federal Aviation Regulation.

Detection of Chips

(c) If a chip detection is indicated, remove

the chip detector and disposition the chip,

and the engine, using the engine

maintenance manual procedures.

Replacement of Air Seal

(d) Remove No.5 bearing rotating air seal

P/N 4019T60G01, and replace with air seal

P/N 4019T60G03, in accordance with the

following Table 2:

TABLE 2.—COMPLIANCE TIMES FOR REPLACEMENT OF AIR SEAL

Engine model Replace at

(1) CF34–3A1, –3B1, and –3B ......................... Next shop visit when HPT is exposed, but do not exceed 15,000 cycles-in-service from the effective date of this AD.

(2) CF34–1A, –3A, and –3A2 ........................... Next 3000-hour hot section inspection or at next 6,000-hour overhaul, whichever occurs first,

but not to exceed 3,000 hours time-in-service from the effective date of this AD.

Mandatory Terminating Action

(e) Replacement of air seal P/N

4019T60G01 with air seal P/N 4019T60G03

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements specified

in paragraph (a) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(f) 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 (ECO). Operators shall

submit their request through an appropriate

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, ECO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this airworthiness directive,

if any, may be obtained from the ECO.

Special Flight Permits

(g) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance §§ 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.

Effective Date of This AD

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

July 20, 2001.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

June 5, 2001.

Francis A. Favara,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14824 Filed 6–14–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NE–07–AD; Amendment

39–12262; AD 2001–12–07]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General

Electric Company CT58 Series and

Former Military T58 Series Turboshaft

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is