28114 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / Proposed Rules

(a) For CFM56–5/–5B/–5C engines that

have a stationary number 3 bearing aft air/oil

seal, Part Number (P/N) 1364M71G02,

installed, inspect the stage 1 disk of the

HPCR stage 1–2 spool in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of CFM56–5

Service Bulletin (SB) No. 72–440, CFM56–5B

SB No. 72–064, or CFM56–5C SB No. 72–229,

all Revision 2, dated June 23, 1995, as

applicable, as follows:

(1) If the disk has been previously

inspected prior to the effective date of this

AD, inspect prior to accumulating 2,200

cycles since new (CSN).

(2) If the disk has been previously

inspected prior to the effective date of this

AD, and the disk was found not to be rubbed

or scratched, reinspect prior to accumulating

2,200 cycles since last inspection (CSLI).

(b) Thereafter, for disks that have been

inspected in accordance with paragraph

(a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, inspect in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of CFM56–5 SB No. 72–440,

CFM56–5B SB No. 72–064, or CFM56–5C SB

No. 72–229, all Revision 2, dated June 23,

1995, as applicable, at intervals not to exceed

2,200 CSLI.

(c) Remove from service HPCR stage 1–2

spools with rubbed or scratched stage 1 disks

and replace with a serviceable part, as

follows:

(1) For spools with less than 2,200 CSN on

the effective date of this AD, at the next

engine shop visit after the effective date of

this AD, or prior to accumulating 2,200 CSN,

whichever occurs first.

(2) For spools with 2,200 CSN or more on

the effective date of this AD, at the next

engine shop visit after the effective date of

this AD, or prior to accumulating 2,200 CSLI,

whichever occurs first.

(d) Remove from service stationary number

3 aft air/oil seals, P/N 1364M71G02, at the

next engine shop visit after the effective date

of this AD, and replace with a serviceable

part. Compliance with this paragraph

constitutes terminating action to the

inspection requirements of paragraphs (a)(1),

(a)(2), and (b) of this AD.

(e) For the purpose of this AD, a

serviceable HPCR stage 1–2 spool is defined

as a spool without a rub or scratch indication

on the stage 1 disk, a P/N 1834M55G01

spool, or a spool that has accomplished the

stage 1 disk rework in accordance with any

revision level of CFM56–5 SB No. 72–442,

CFM56–5B SB No. 72–066, or CFM56–5C SB

No. 72–230, as applicable.

(f) For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable

stationary number 3 bearing aft air/oil seal is

defined as any seal other than a P/N

1364M71G02 seal.

(g) For the purpose of this AD, an engine

shop visit is defined as the induction of an

engine into the shop for any reason.

(h) 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

Principal 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.

(i) 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 22, 1996.

Robert E. Guyotte,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–13890 Filed 6–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 93–ANE–79]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt &

Whitney JT8D Series Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking; reopening of

comment period.

SUMMARY: This notice revises an earlier

proposed airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to Pratt & Whitney (PW) JT8D

series turbofan engines, that would have

superseded a current AD by reducing

the rear flange inspection interval for

combustion chamber outer cases

(CCOC’s) when only the aft face of the

rear flange has been inspected, and

introducing an improved ultrasonic

probe assembly. That proposal was

prompted by reports of crack origins in

the forward face of the rear flange that

could not be detected by the inspection

methods for installed CCOC’s that were

mandated in the current AD. This action

retains the elements of the original

proposal, but simplifies the compliance

instructions, and incorporates a new PW

Alert Service Bulletin (ASB). This

action also revises the proposed rule by

introducing new non-destructive

inspection procedures (NDIP’s), and

introducing a rotating eddy current

probe for shop inspections in which the

case is removed from the engine. In

addition, this action eliminates

fluorescent penetrant inspection (FPI),

fluorescent magnetic particle inspection

(FMPI), and visual inspections from hot

section disassembly level inspection

procedures. This action also revises the

proposed rule by consolidating the

inspection requirements of an

additional current AD, 95–08–15, into

this proposed AD. The actions specified

by this proposed AD are intended to

prevent CCOC flange cracks that could

result in uncontained engine failure,

inflight engine shutdown, engine cowl

release, and airframe damage.

DATES: Comments must be received by

August 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

93–ANE–79, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

Comments may also be submitted to the

Rules Docket by using the following

Internet address: ‘‘epdadcomments@mail.hq.faa.gov’’.

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

Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main Street, East

Hartford, CT 06108. 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:

Mark A. Rumizen, Aerospace Engineer,

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299; telephone (617) 238–7137,

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
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / Proposed Rules 28115

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 93–ANE–79.’’ 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. 93–ANE–79, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299.

Discussion

On October 3, 1989, the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) issued

airworthiness directive (AD) 87–11–07

R1, Amendment 39–6360 (54 FR 46045,

November 1, 1989), applicable to Pratt

& Whitney (PW) JT8D series turbofan

engines, to require repetitive eddy

current, fluorescent penetrant,

fluorescent magnetic penetrant, or

visual inspections for cracks in the rear

flange, and ultrasonic, fluorescent

penetrant, or fluorescent magnetic

penetrant inspections for cracks in the

PS4 boss, and drain bosses of the

combustion chamber outer case (CCOC).

That action was prompted by reports of

uncontained rupture of the CCOC. That

condition, if not corrected, could result

in CCOC flange cracks that if undetected

could result in uncontained engine

failure, inflight engine shutdown,

engine cowl release, and airframe

damage.

Since the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has received reports of crack

origins in the forward face of the rear

flange that cannot be detected by the

inspection methods for installed CCOC’s

that were mandated in that AD. While

no failures have been attributed to these

undetected cracks, analysis indicates

that a reduced inspection interval is

necessary to prevent crack propagation

to critical lengths as the CCOC’s age.

The FAA has determined that to reduce

the fleet-wide risk to an acceptable

level, the inspection interval should be

reduced if only the aft face of the rear

flange is inspected.

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to add an AD, applicable to PW

JT8D series turbofan engines, was

published as a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal

Register on March 15, 1994 (59 FR

11942). That NPRM would have

reduced the inspection interval for

CCOC’s that have had only the aft face

of the rear flange inspected and

introduced an improved ultrasonic

probe assembly. That NPRM was

prompted by reports of rupture of

CCOC’s that had only the aft face of the

rear flange inspected in accordance with

the current AD.

Since the issuance of that NPRM, the

manufacturer has introduced improved

non-destructive inspection procedures

(NDIP’s) that are applicable to the

existing CCOC inspection requirements

of AD 87–11–07 R1. The FAA has

determined that the improved NDIP’s

should be incorporated into the CCOC

inspection requirements, that the FPI,

FMPI, and visual inspections should be

eliminated from the hot section

inspection level of disassembly

inspection requirements, that a new

rotating eddy current probe should be

introduced for shop level inspections in

which the case is removed from the

engine, and that the compliance section

should be simplified.

In addition, since issuance of the

NPRM the FAA has issued AD 95–08–

15, Amendment 39–9204 (60 FR 20019,

April 24, 1995), which requires an

additional inspection of the CCOC rear

flange for intergranular cracking. In

addition, PW has issued Revision 1 to

the Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)

incorporated in that AD, No. A6202,

dated January 4, 1996, which removes

the in-shop ultrasonic inspection

requirement and clarifies the borescope

inspection requirements. The FAA has

determined that AD 95–08–15 should be

superseded and the compliance

requirements of that AD and that PW

ASB No. A6202, Revision 1, dated

January 4, 1996, should be consolidated

into the existing CCOC inspection

requirements of AD 87–11–07 R1.

In addition, PW has issued ASB No.

A6228, dated November 7, 1995, which

introduces the improved NDIP’s,

eliminates the FPI and FMPI from the

hot section disassembly level inspection

requirements, and consolidates

inspection procedures for the CCOC.

This ASB is incorporated in this

proposed rule. Pratt & Whitney ASB No.

A6228, dated November 7, 1995, also

includes an inspection of PS4 and drain

bosses for a thin walled condition in

Paragraph 2.C, Part III of that ASB. The

FAA has determined, however, that this

condition does not pose a significant

risk to continued safe flight and

therefore is not included in this

proposed AD.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this proposal. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Two commenters state that the new,

reduced, rear flange inspection interval

should only apply to future inspections,

and not be retroactive, such that some

engines would require inspection

immediately upon AD effectivity. The

FAA agrees. This proposed AD allows

the inspection interval previously

established under AD 87–11–07 R1 to be

completed prior to imposing the new,

reduced intervals.

One commenter states that inspection

records may not specifically state

whether or not both faces of the rear

flange were inspected, or if only the aft

face was inspected, thus precluding

determination of the appropriate

reinspection interval in accordance with

PW ASB No. A6228, dated November 7,

1995. The FAA agrees. As stated above,

the previously established inspection

interval, determined in accordance with

AD 87–11–07 R1, may be used for the

initial inspection without the need for a

more comprehensive records search.

One commenter states that an

inspection should not be required at

shop visits that occur within a short

time period of a previous shop visit in

which the CCOC was inspected. The

FAA agrees. Shop visits that occur

within 1,000 cycles of a previous shop

visit that included a CCOC inspection

do not need to be reinspected.

Three commenters state that the shop

visit definition conflicted with the

definition contained in the PW ASB,

and in some instances CCOC

inspections and associated extensive

engine disassembly could be required

during limited scope maintenance

activities. The FAA agrees. This

proposed AD requires use of the shop

visit definition in the ASB, and this

definition has been refined in response

to operators’ concerns.

One commenter states that an

incorrect Table reference was specified

in paragraph (d) of the NPRM. The FAA

agrees. This proposed AD contains a

simplified compliance section that

limits references to only the applicable

major paragraphs of the ASB

compliance section.

Three commenters state that the AD

applicability section should specify the

applicable CCOC part numbers as well

as the applicable engine models. The

FAA agrees. The applicability section in

this proposed AD includes these part

number references.

One commenter states that the ASB is

complex and could lead to noncompliance with the AD. The FAA

agrees. Both the ASB and the proposed

AD have been simplified.

One commenter states that the

equipment and procedures used for the

inspection of the PS4 and drain bosses

produce unreliable results. The FAA

agrees in part. The FAA acknowledges

that the inspections are complex and

require skilled and trained inspectors,
28116 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / Proposed Rules

and refinements have been made to

these inspection procedures and tools

based on past in-service experience and

reports from operators of the PW JT8D

series engines.

One commenter concurs with the

proposed AD as written.

Since these changes expand the scope

of the originally proposed rule, the FAA

has determined that it is necessary to

reopen the comment period to provide

additional opportunity for public

comment.

The FAA estimates that 6,815 engines

installed on aircraft of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD

and that it would take approximately

4.5 work hours per engine to

accomplish the proposed actions. Since

publication of the NPRM, the FAA has

revised its average labor rate estimate

from $55 per work hour to $60 per work

hour to better reflect current costs.

Based on these figures, the total cost

impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $1,840,050.

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 ‘‘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:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–6360 (54 FR

46045, November 1, 1989) and

amendment 39–9204 (60 FR 20019,

April 24, 1995) and by adding a new

airworthiness directive to read as

follows:

Pratt & Whitney: Docket No. 93–ANE–79.

Supersedes AD 87–11–07 R1,

Amendment 39–6360, AD 87–11–07,

Amendment 39–5619, and AD 95–08–15,

Amendment 39–9204.

Applicability: Pratt & Whitney (PW)

Models JT8D–1, –1A, –1B, –7, –7A, –9, –9A,

–11, –15, –15A, –17, –17A, –17R, and –17AR

turbofan engines, with combustion chamber

outer case (CCOC) part numbers (P/Ns)

490547, 542155, 616315, 728829, 728829–

001, 730413, 730413–001, 730414, 730414–

001, 767197, 767279, 767279–001 installed.

These engines are installed on but not

limited to Boeing 737 and 727 series, and

McDonnell Douglas DC–9 series aircraft.

Note: This airworthiness directive (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 (c)

to request approval from the Federal Aviation

Administration (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 CCOC flange cracks that could

result in uncontained engine failure, inflight

engine shutdown, engine cowl release, and

airframe damage, accomplish the following:

(a) Inspect, disposition, and report CCOC

distress, in accordance with the intervals and

procedures described in Paragraphs 2.A and

2.C of PW Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No.

A6202, Revision 1, dated January 4, 1996.

Reporting requirements have been approved

by the Office of Management and Budget and

assigned OMB control number 2120–0056.

(1) For the purposes of this AD, the

accomplishment effective date to be used for

determination of inspection intervals, as

required by Section 2.A of PW ASB A6202,

Revision 1, dated January 4, 1996, is defined

as the effective date of this AD.

(b) Inspect, disposition, and report CCOC

distress in accordance with the intervals and

procedures described in Paragraphs 2.A. (Part

I), 2.B. (Part II), and 2.D of PW ASB No.

A6228, dated November 7, 1995. Reporting

requirements have been approved by the

Office of Management and Budget and

assigned OMB control number 2120–0056.

(c) 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

Principal 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.

(d) 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 22, 1996.

Robert E. Guyotte,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–13889 Filed 6–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 12, 20, 56,

and 58

[Docket No. 96N–0163]

RIN 0910–AA69

Reinvention of Administrative

Procedures Regulations

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is considering

ways to further streamline its

administrative procedures regulations as

a result of a page-by-page review of the

agency’s regulations. This regulatory

review is part of the administration’s

‘‘Reinventing Government’’ initiative

that seeks to streamline Government

and to ease the burden on regulated

industry and consumers. FDA is seeking

public comment on ways to streamline

its administrative procedures

regulations.

DATES: Written comments by September

3, 1996.