Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52001 

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(2) For Models SR20, serial numbers 1005 through 1455, 

and SR22, serial numbers 0002 through 1044, do the following actions: 

(i) Identify whether the recline lock is secured with two 

bolts or three bolts.

(ii) If the recline locks are secured with two bolts, remove the existing recline locks and replace with the 

new recline locks kit, kit number 70084–001.

(iii) If the recline locks are secured with three bolts, remove existing recline locks and replace with the new 

recline locks kit, kit number 70084–002.

(iv) Check break-over pin alignment and adjust as necessary.

(v) Check that the locks engage with the break-over 

bolts with the seat in the full recline position. If full 

seat recline is not possible or difficult to engage, 

grinding of the lower aft seat frame is necessary.

(vi) Repeat the above actions for the opposite crew seat 

Within 50 hours TIS or within 180 days, 

whichever occurs first after October 

13, 2005 (the effect9ve date of this 

AD).

Follow Cirrus Design Corporation Service Bulletin SB 2X–25–06 R4, revised 

May 5, 2005. 

May I Request an Alternative Method of 

Compliance? 

(f) You may request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD by following the procedures in 14 

CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise, 

send your request to your principal 

inspector. The principal inspector may add 

comments and will send your request to the 

Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification 

Office, FAA. For information on any already 

approved alternative methods of compliance, 

please contact one of the following: 

(1) Wess Rouse, Small Airplane Project 

Manager, ACE–117C; Chicago Aircraft 

Certification Office, 2300 East Devon 

Avenue, Roon 107, Des Plaines, Illinois 

60018; telephone: (847) 294–8113; facsimile: 

(847) 294–7834; e-mail: 

Wess.Rouse@Faa.gov; or 

(2) Angie Kostopoulos, Aerospace 

Engineer, ACE–116C, Chicago Aircraft 

Certification Office, 2300 East Devon 

Avenue, Room 107, Des Plaines, Illinois 

60018; telephone: (847) 294–7426; facsimile: 

(847) 294–7834; e-mail: 

Evangelia.Kostopoulos@Faa.gov. 

Does This AD Incorporate Any Material by 

Reference? 

(g) You must do the actions required by 

this AD following the instructions in Cirrus 

Design Corporation Alert Service Bulletin SB 

A2X–25–08, dated June 22, 2004; and Service 

Bulletin SB 2X–25–06 R4, revised May 5, 

2005. The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

these service bulletins in accordance with 5 

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To get a 

copy of this service information, contact 

Cirrus Design Corporation, 4515 Taylor 

Circle, Duluth, Minnesota 55811; telephone: 

(218) 727–2737; Internet address: http:// 

www.cirrusdesign.com. To review copies of 

this service information, go to the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). For information on the availability 

of this material at NARA, go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html or call (202) 741–6030. To 

view the AD docket, go to the Docket 

Management Facility; U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 

Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, 

DC 20590–001 or on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov. The docket number is FAA–

2004–19694; Directorate Identifier 2004–CE–

41–AD. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 

19, 2005. 

Terry L. Chasteen, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–16980 Filed 8–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 98–ANE–61–AD; Amendment 

39–14243; AD 2005–18–03] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & 

Whitney PW2000 Series Turbofan 

Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Pratt & Whitney (PW) PW2000 series 

turbofan engines. That AD currently 

requires revisions to the engine 

manufacturer’s time limits section (TLS) 

to include enhanced inspection of 

selected critical life-limited parts at 

each piece-part opportunity. This AD 

requires modifying the airworthiness 

limitations section of the manufacturer’s 

manual and an air carrier’s approved 

continuous airworthiness maintenance 

program to incorporate additional 

inspection requirements. This AD 

results from an FAA study of in-service 

events involving uncontained failures of 

critical rotating engine parts that 

indicates the need for mandatory 

inspections. The mandatory inspections 

are needed to identify those critical 

rotating parts with conditions, which if 

allowed to continue in service, could 

result in uncontained failures. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent critical lifelimited rotating engine part failure, 

which could result in an uncontained 

engine failure and damage to the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

February 28, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket at the FAA, New England 

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Riley, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–

5299; telephone (781) 238–7758, fax 

(781) 238–7199. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with 

a proposed airworthiness directive (AD). 

The proposed AD applies to PW 

PW2000 series turbofan engines. We 

published the proposed AD in the 

Federal Register on August 18, 2004 (69 

FR 51198). That action proposed to 

require modifying the TLS of the 

manufacturer’s manual and an air 

carrier’s approved continuous 

airworthiness maintenance program to 

incorporate the additional inspection 

requirements. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD Docket 

(including any comments and service 

information), by appointment, between 

8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

52002 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Friday, except Federal holidays. See 

ADDRESSES for the location. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments received. 

Request To Increase the Costs of 

Compliance 

Several commenters express concern 

about the capital investment required to 

eddy-current inspect the bolt holes of 

the HPT stage 2 hub. They suggest the 

NPRM fails to recognize the substantial 

up-front investment to get the 

equipment needed for the eddy current 

inspection. In addition, one commenter 

states we should increase the Costs of 

Compliance because the complex 

inspections will require several fulltime, specially trained operators. We 

don’t agree. The AD doesn’t require air 

carriers to invest in tooling and 

equipment or hire more personnel to 

comply with the proposed AD. The AD 

requires adding the new eddy current 

inspection to the TLS of the engine 

manufacturer’s manual, and to the air 

carriers’ approved maintenance 

manuals. Operators can choose to buy 

equipment to perform the inspection, or 

they may send the disk to an approved 

service provider. 

Request for an Annual Cost for the 

Recurring Inspections 

One commenter states that the NPRM 

implies a onetime cost for the 

inspection, but that it is actually a 

recurring cost. We don’t agree. The 

Costs of Compliance section of the 

NPRM states the estimated cost for each 

inspection on each engine. We used the 

current shop visit rate for the PW2000 

engine to calculate the recurring cost for 

each engine on a yearly basis. The air 

carriers can use their own specific costs 

for their individual PW2000 fleet to 

calculate their inspection cost. 

Question About the Actual Cost for the 

Inspection 

One commenter states that the actual 

costs for the inspections are 

significantly different from the costs we 

specified in the NPRM. We don’t agree. 

We based our cost estimate on actual 

inspection times provided by the engine 

manufacturer. We understand that cost 

estimates can vary depending on the 

service provider. However, we consider 

basing our estimate on inspection times 

provided by the engine manufacturer to 

be the most accurate approach to 

estimating the cost to comply with the 

AD. 

Concern About Increased Inventory 

Levels for Parts Not Reflected in the 

Cost Estimate 

One commenter suggests that quoted 

turnaround time for the inspection will 

make air carriers increase inventory 

levels for the affected parts. The 

commenter also feels the cost estimate 

doesn’t reflect the cost of the increased 

inventory. We don’t agree. The 

proposed AD requires adding the new 

eddy current inspection for the bolt 

holes in the HPT stage 2 hub to the TLS 

of the engine manufacturer’s manual, 

and to the air carrier’s approved 

maintenance manuals. The AD doesn’t 

require air carriers to increase spare 

parts inventory levels or specify the 

logistics of performing the inspections. 

Requests To Allow Operators To Use 

Equivalent Equipment To Perform the 

Inspections 

Two commenters ask that we allow 

them to use equipment that is 

equivalent to the inspection equipment 

specified by the engine manufacturer. 

The commenters ask us to allow them 

to use equipment they already use for 

other mandated inspections. The 

commenters suggest that using the 

single-source equipment specified by 

the manufacturer will cause an undue 

burden. We don’t agree. We don’t intend 

that this proposed AD specify only one 

method, or limit the inspection to one 

method of inspection. This AD requires 

the operators to revise the ALS to 

include a mandatory opportunistic 

inspection. The engine manufacturer 

developed a validated inspection 

procedure using specific tooling and 

equipment that provides an acceptable 

inspection technique. However, 

operators may still seek approval from 

the manufacturer to use alternative tools 

or methods of inspections other than 

those specified in the engine manual. 

Providing flexibility for the engine 

manufacturers to revise their engine 

manuals as they fine-tuned their 

inspection methods and developed 

alternatives is part of the outcome of 

working with the Air Transportation 

Association, operators, and 

manufacturers. 

Request To Extend the Compliance 

Time of the Final Rule 

Two commenters ask that we extend 

the compliance of the AD to allow an 

additional six to eight months to 

procure the eddy current inspection 

equipment and train personnel. We 

agree. We changed the effective date 

from 30 days after publication in the 

Federal Register to 180 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Request To Provide Special Eddy 

Current Inspection Instructions 

Two commenters ask that we provide 

clear instructions regarding special 

handling of the parts and the 

complexity and sensitivity of the eddy 

current inspection equipment. We 

partially agree. We agree that eddy 

current inspections of aircraft engine 

parts require special inspection 

procedures to perform the inspections. 

However, this AD only requires the 

operators add eddy current inspection 

of the bolt holes of HPT stage 2 hub bolt 

holes to the ALS of the manufacturer’s 

engine manual as a mandatory 

inspection. The engine manufacturer 

and the suppliers of the eddy current 

inspection equipment will provide the 

special procedures and requirements for 

the actual inspections. 

Removed PW2240 Series and PW2337 

Series Engine Models From the 

Applicability 

On January 6, 2005, we removed PW 

engine models PW2240 and PW2337 

from the type certificate data sheet for 

the PW2000 series engine type 

certificate. We removed reference to 

them from paragraph (c) of this AD. 

Corrected a Typographical Error 

One commenter found a 

typographical error in paragraph 

(f)(1)(b). We specified inspection 72–52–

00. The inspection should be 72–52–16. 

We corrected paragraph (f)(1)(b) in the 

final rule. 

Conclusion 

We have carefully reviewed the 

available data, including the comments 

received, and determined that air safety 

and the public interest require adopting 

the AD with the changes described 

previously. We have determined that 

these changes will neither increase the 

economic burden on any operator nor 

increase the scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 938 Pratt & Whitney 

PW2000 series turbofan engines of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

We estimate that this AD will affect 777 

engines installed on airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it will 

take about 4 work hours per engine to 

perform the inspections, and that the 

average labor rate is $65 per work hour. 

Since this is an added inspection 

requirement, included as part of the 

normal maintenance cycle, no 

additional part costs are involved. Based 

on these figures, we estimate the total 

additional cost per engine per shop visit 

to be $260. Based on the current 

PW2000 engine shop visit rate, we 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52003 

estimate the total additional cost for the 

PW2000 fleet to be $80,860 per year. 

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); 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 summary of the costs 

to comply with this AD and placed it in 

the AD Docket. You may get a copy of 

this summary by sending a request to us 

at the address listed under ADDRESSES. 

Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 98–ANE–61–

AD’’ in your request. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 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 39–12778, (67 FR 

40143, June 4, 2002) and by adding a 

new airworthiness directive, 

Amendment 39–14243, to read as 

follows: 

2005–18–03 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 

39–14243. Docket No. 98–ANE–61–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective February 28, 

2006. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2002–12–06. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney 

(PW) PW2037, PW2040, PW2043, PW2143, 

PW2643, PW2037D, PW2037M, and 

PW2040D series turbofan engines. These 

engines are installed on, but not limited to 

Boeing 757 series and Ilyushin IL–96T series 

airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from the need to 

require enhanced inspection of selected 

critical life-limited parts of PW PW2000 

series turbofan engines. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent critical life-limited rotating 

engine part failure, which could result in an 

uncontained engine failure and damage to 

the airplane. 

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. 

(f) Within 30 days after the effective date 

of this AD, revise the manufacturer’s Time 

Limits section (TLS) of the manufacturer’s 

engine manual, as appropriate for PW 

PW2037, PW2040, PW2043, PW2143, 

PW2643, PW2037D, PW2037M, and 

PW2040D series turbofan engines, and for air 

carriers revise the approved continuous 

airworthiness maintenance program, by 

adding the following: 

‘‘MANDATORY INSPECTIONS 

(1) Perform inspections of the following 

parts at each piece-part opportunity in 

accordance with the instructions provided in 

PW2000 Engine Manuals 1A6231 and 

1B2412: 

Nomenclature Part No. EM Manual 

section Inspection/check Subtask 

Hub, LPC Assembly ........................ ALL ...... 72–31–04 –06.

Disk, HPT 1st Stage ....................... ALL ....... 72–52–02 FPI entire disk per 72–52–00, Inspection/Check–02 .. 72–52–02–230–007 

Hub, HPT 2nd Stage ....................... ALL ...... 72–52–16 (a) FPI entire hub per 72–52–00, Inspection/Check–

02.

72–52–16–230–007 

(b) Eddy-current inspect hub bolt holes per 72–52–

16, Inspection/Check–05. 

72–52–16–200–005 

Hub, HPC Front .............................. ALL ....... 72–35–02 –05.

Disk, HPC Drum Rotor Assembly 

(7–15).

ALL ....... 72–35–03 –04.

Disk, HPC Drum Rotor Assembly 

(16–17).

ALL ...... 72–35–10 –05.

Disk, HPC 16th Stage ..................... ALL ...... 72–35–06 –04.

Disk, HPC 17th Stage ..................... ALL ...... 72–35–07 –04.

HPC Turbine Drive Shaft Assembly ALL ....... 72–35–08 –05.

LPC Drive Turbine Shaft ................. ALL ...... 72–32–01 –06.

Hub, Turbine Rear .......................... ALL ....... 72–53–81 –06.

Disk, LPT 3rd Stage ........................ ALL ....... 72–53–31 –01.

Disk, LPT 4th Stage ........................ ALL ....... 72–53–41 –01.

Disk, LPT 5th Stage ........................ ALL ....... 72–53–51 –01.

Disk, LPT 6th Stage ........................ ALL ....... 72–53–61 –01.

Disk, LPT 7th Stage ........................ ALL ....... 72–53–71 –01.

52004 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

(2) For the purposes of these mandatory 

inspections, piece-part opportunity means: 

(i) The part is considered completely 

disassembled when done in accordance with 

the disassembly instructions in the 

manufacturer’s engine manual to either part 

number level listed in the table above, and 

(ii) The part has accumulated more than 

100 cycles in service since the last piece-part 

opportunity inspection, provided that the 

part was not damaged or related to the cause 

for its removal from the engine.’’

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(g) You must perform these mandatory 

inspections using the TLS and the applicable 

Engine Manual unless you receive approval 

to use an alternative method of compliance 

under paragraph (h) of this AD. Section 43.16 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

43.16) may not be used to approve alternative 

methods of compliance or adjustments to the 

times in which these inspections must be 

performed. 

(h) 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. 

Maintaining Records of the Mandatory 

Inspections 

(i) You have met the requirements of this 

AD by using a TLS of the manufacturer’s 

engine manual changed as specified in 

paragraph (f) of this AD, and, for air carriers 

operating under part 121 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 121), by 

modifying your continuous airworthiness 

maintenance plan to reflect those changes. 

You must maintain records of the mandatory 

inspections that result from those changes to 

the TLS according to the regulations 

governing your operation. You do not need 

to record each piece-part inspection as 

compliance to this AD. For air carriers 

operating under part 121, you may use either 

the system established to comply with 

section 121.369 or use an alternative system 

that your principal maintenance inspector 

has accepted if that alternative system: 

(1) Includes a method for preserving and 

retrieving the records of the inspections 

resulting from this AD; and 

(2) Meets the requirements of section 

121.369(c); and 

(3) Maintains the records either 

indefinitely or until the work is repeated. 

(j) These record keeping requirements 

apply only to the records used to document 

the mandatory inspections required as a 

result of revising the TLS as specified in 

paragraph (f) of this AD, and do not alter or 

amend the record keeping requirements for 

any other AD or regulatory requirement. 

Related Information 

(k) None. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

August 24, 2005. 

Jay J. Pardee, 

Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–17318 Filed 8–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 98–ANE–43–AD; Amendment 

39–14242; AD 2005–18–02] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & 

Whitney JT8D–209, –217, –217A, 

–217C, and –219 Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D–209, –217, 

–217A, –217C, and –219 turbofan 

engines. That AD currently requires 

revisions to the engine manufacturer’s 

time limits section (TLS) to include 

enhanced inspection of selected critical 

life-limited parts at each piece-part 

opportunity. This AD requires 

modifying the airworthiness limitations 

section of the manufacturer’s manual 

and an air carrier’s approved continuous 

airworthiness maintenance program to 

incorporate additional inspection 

requirements. An FAA study of inservice events involving uncontained 

failures of critical rotating engine parts 

has indicated the need for mandatory 

inspections. The mandatory inspections 

are needed to identify those critical 

rotating parts with conditions, which if 

allowed to continue in service, could 

result in uncontained failures. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent critical lifelimited rotating engine part failure, 

which could result in an uncontained 

engine failure and damage to the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

February 28, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket at the FAA, New England 

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keith Lardie, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803–5299; telephone (781) 238–7189, 

fax (781) 238–7199. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with 

a proposed AD. The proposed AD 

applies to PW JT8D–209, –217, –217A, 

–217C, and –219 turbofan engines. We 

published the proposed AD in the 

Federal Register on August 18, 2004 (69 

FR 51196). That action proposed to 

require modifying the time limitations 

section of the manufacturer’s manual 

and an air carrier’s approved continuous 

airworthiness maintenance program to 

incorporate additional inspection 

requirements. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD Docket 

(including any comments and service 

information), by appointment, between 

8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. See 

ADDRESSES for the location. 

Comments 

We provided the public the 

opportunity to participate in the 

development of this AD. We have 

considered the comments received. 

Request To Increase the Costs of 

Compliance 

Two commenters ask us to reconsider 

the necessary equipment and cost to do 

the automated eddy current inspections 

and to revise the Costs of Compliance to 

include the necessary tooling. The 

commenters suggest the notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) fails to 

recognize the large investment to get the 

equipment needed for the eddy current 

inspection. We don’t agree. The AD 

doesn’t require air carriers to invest in 

tooling and equipment or hire more 

personnel to comply with the proposed 

AD. The AD requires adding the new 

eddy current inspection to the TLS of 

the engine manufacturer’s manual, and 

to the air carriers’ approved 

maintenance manuals. Operators can 

choose to buy equipment to perform the 

inspection, or they may send the disk to 

an approved service provider. 

Request for an Annual Cost for the 

Recurring Inspections 

One commenter states the NPRM 

implies a onetime cost for the 

inspection, but that it is a recurring cost. 

We don’t agree. The Costs of 

Compliance section of the NPRM states 

the estimated cost for each inspection 

on each engine. We used the current 

shop visit rate for the JT8D engine to 

calculate the yearly recurring cost for 

each engine. The air carriers can use 

their own specific costs for their 

individual JT8D fleet to calculate their 

inspection cost. 

Question About the Cost for the 

Inspection 

One commenter states the costs for 

the inspections are significantly 

different from the costs we specified in 

the NPRM. We don’t agree. We based