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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52005 

our cost estimate on inspection times 

provided by the engine manufacturer. 

We understand that cost estimates can 

vary depending on the service provider. 

However, we consider basing our cost 

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 

The same commenter suggests that 

quoted turnaround time for the 

inspection will make air carriers 

increase inventory levels for the affected 

parts. The commenter also suggests the 

cost estimate doesn’t reflect the cost of 

the increased inventory. We don’t agree. 

The AD requires adding the new eddy 

current inspection 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 

Three commenters ask that we allow 

them to use equipment that equals 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 TLS 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. 

Question About the Completeness of 

Paragraph (i) of the Proposed AD 

One commenter states the last 

sentence in paragraph (i), under 

‘‘Maintaining Records of the Mandatory 

Inspections’’ does not seem complete. 

The commenter states the current 

sentence reads: ‘‘For air carriers 

operating under part 121, you may use 

either the system established to comply 

with the compliance times unless 

specified unless the actions have 

already been done.’’ We don’t agree the 

sentence is incomplete. The sentence 

reads ‘‘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’’. 

Request To Extend the Compliance 

Time of the Final Rule 

Two commenters ask that we extend 

the effective date of the AD to allow an 

additional six to eight months. The 

commenters suggest the extension is 

necessary to procure the eddy current 

inspection equipment, train personnel, 

and to allow PW to revise their engine 

manuals to define clearly the approval 

procedure for alternate equipment. 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. 

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 2,345 Pratt & Whitney 

JT8D–209, –217, –217A, –217C, and 

–219 turbofan engines of the affected 

design in the worldwide fleet. We 

estimate that this AD will affect 1,143 

engines installed on airplanes of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it will 

take about 8 work hours per engine to 

perform the proposed 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 cost of the AD to U.S. operators to 

be $594,360. 

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 

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 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. 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 by sending a request to 

us at the address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 98–

ANE–43–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. 

52006 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 169 / Thursday, September 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–12797 (67 FR 

44527, July 3, 2002) and by adding a 

new airworthiness directive, 

Amendment 39–14242, to read as 

follows: 

2005–18–02 Pratt & Whitney: Amendment 

39–14242. Docket No. 98–ANE–43–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective February 28, 2006. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2002–13–09. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Pratt & Whitney 

(PW) JT8D–209, –217, –217A, –217C, and 

–219 turbofan engines. These engines are 

installed on, but not limited to Boeing 727 

and McDonnell Douglas MD–80 series 

airplanes. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from the need to 

require enhanced inspection of selected 

critical life-limited parts of JT8D–209, –217, 

–217A, –217C, and ‘‘219 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 the next 30 days after the 

effective date of this AD, (1) revise the Time 

Limits section (TLS) of the manufacturer’s 

Engine Manual, Part Number 773128, as 

appropriate for PW JT8D–209, –217, –217A, 

–217C, and –219 turbofan engines, and (2) for 

air carriers, revise the approved mandatory 

inspections section of the continuous 

airworthiness maintenance program, by 

adding the following: 

‘‘Critical Life Limited Part Inspection 

A. Inspection Requirements: 

(1) This section contains the definitions for 

individual engine piece-parts and the 

inspection procedures, which are necessary, 

when these parts are removed from the 

engine. 

(2) It is necessary to do the inspection 

procedures of the piece-parts in Paragraph B 

when: 

(a) The part is removed from the engine 

and disassembled to the level specified in 

paragraph B and 

(b) The part has accumulated more than 

100 cycles since the last piece part 

inspection, provided that the part is not 

damaged or related to the cause of its 

removal from the engine. 

(3) The inspections specified in this 

section do not replace or make unnecessary 

other recommended inspections for these 

parts or other parts. 

B. Parts Requiring Inspection. 

Note: Piece part is defined as any of the 

listed parts with all the blades removed. 

Description Section Inspection No. 

Hub (Disk), 1st Stage Compressor: 

Hub Detail—All P/Ns ........................................................................................................................................ 72–33–31 –02, –03, –04 

Hub Assembly—All P/Ns .................................................................................................................................. 72–33–31 –02, –03, –04 

Disk, 13th Stage Compressor—All P/Ns ................................................................................................................. 72–36–47 –02 

HP Turbine, First Stage: 

Rotor Assembly—All P/Ns ................................................................................................................................ 72–52–02 –04 

Disk—All P/Ns .................................................................................................................................................. 72–52–02 –03 

Disk, 2nd Stage Turbine—All P/Ns ......................................................................................................................... 72–53–16 –02 

Disk, 3rd Stage Turbine—All P/Ns .......................................................................................................................... 72–53–17 –02 

Disk, 4th Stage Turbine—All P/Ns .......................................................................................................................... 72–53–18 –02 

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. 05–17319 Filed 8–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–21599; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–036–AD; Amendment 

39–14246; AD–2005–18–06] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier 

Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet 

Series 100 & 440) Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD), 

which applies to all Bombardier Model 

CL–600–2B19 series airplanes. That AD 

currently requires revising the airplane 

flight manual (AFM) to provide the 

flightcrew with operating limitations 

and procedures to enable them to 

maintain controllability of the airplane 

in the event that aileron control stiffness 

is encountered during flight. This new 

AD requires revising the Airworthiness