13414 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

AS355F1, AS355F2, and AS355N

helicopters, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For helicopters 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 (e) 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: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To eliminate confusion and unnecessary

costs and to prevent a cracked fuselage frame

(frame), tailboom failure, and subsequent loss

of control of the helicopter, accomplish the

following:

(a) Inspect the fuselage-to-tailboom

attachment bolts in accordance with

paragraph (d) for this AD within 30 hours

time-in-service (TIS).

(b) Inspect the fuselage-to-tailboom

attachment bolts in accordance with

paragraph (d) for this AD within 30 hours TIS

of replacing or reinstalling a tailboom.

(c) Repeat the inspection in accordance

with paragraph (d) of this AD at intervals not

to exceed 2500 hours or 6 years TIS,

whichever occurs first.

(d) Inspect the fuselage-to-tailboom

attachment bolts for proper torque range and

the frame, part number 350A21–1247–00, for

a crack at the fuselage-to-tailboom interface.

(1) Procedure for inspecting proper torque

range:

(i) Using a fine-point felt tip pen, mark the

position of the nut relative to the assembly.

(ii) One at a time, slightly loosen each nut.

Do not allow the corresponding bolt to rotate

relative to the assembly.

(iii) Tighten the nut with a properly

calibrated torque wrench until the mark on

the nut lines up with the mark on the

assembly.

(iv) Record the torque value required to

line up the two marks.

(2) Interpretation of the recorded torque

values for each nut:

(i) If the torque value is less than 0.3 mdaN

(26 in-lbs) on any nut:

(A) Remove the tailboom.

(B) Perform a dye-penetrant inspection for

a crack in the bending radius of the frame.

(C) If a crack is found, repair or replace the

frame with an airworthy frame before further

flight.

(ii) If the torque value is between 0.3 mdaN

and 1 mdaN (26 to 88 in-lbs), re-torque to

0.75 mdaN to 0.9 mdaN (67 to 79 in-lbs).

(iii) If the torque value is equal to or greater

than 1 mdaN (88 in-lbs), remove the nut and

bolt and replace them with a new nut and

bolt. Torque the nut to 0.75 mdaN to 0.9

mdaN (67–79 in-lbs).

Note 2: Aerospatiale Service Bulletins AS

355 No. 05.14 and AS 350 No. 05.16 pertain

to the subject of this AD.

(e) 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, Regulations

Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,

who may concur or comment and then send

it to the Manager, Regulations Group.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Regulations Group.

(f) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199

to operate the helicopter to a location where

the requirements of this AD can be

accomplished.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

April 10, 2001.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February

20, 2001.

Eric Bries,

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–5167 Filed 3–5–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–NM–26–AD; Amendment

39–12135; AD 2001–04–15]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–8–31, DC–8–32,

DC–8–33, DC–8–41, DC–8–42, DC–8–

43, DC–8–51, DC–8–52, DC–8–53, DC–

8–55, DC–8–61, DC–8–61F, DC–8–62,

DC–8–62F, DC–8–63, DC–8–63F, DC–

8F–54, and DC–8F–55 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–8–31, DC–8–32, DC–

8–33, DC–8–41, DC–8–42, DC–8–43,

DC–8–51, DC–8–52, DC–8–53, DC–8–55,

DC–8–61, DC–8–61F, DC–8–62, DC–8–

62F, DC–8–63, DC–8–63F, DC–8F–54,

and DC–8F–55 series airplanes. This

action requires modification of the flow

control system by rerouting the bleed air

ducts to warm the pitot tube lines. This

action is necessary to prevent the pitot

lines from freezing, which could result

in erroneous or total loss of airspeed

indications to the flight crew, and

consequent loss of control of the

airplane. This action is intended to

address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective March 21, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of March 21,

2001.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

May 7, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

26–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmiarcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–26–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from National

Aircraft Service, Inc., 9133 TecumsehClinton Road, Tecumseh, Michigan

49286. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Chicago Aircraft Certification

Office, 2330 East Devon Avenue, Room

323, Des Plaines, Illinois; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy

Boffo, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and

Flight Test Branch, ACE–117C, FAA,

Chicago Aircraft Certification Office,

2350 East Devon Avenue, Room 323,

Des Plaines, Illinois 60018; telephone

(847) 294–7564; fax (847) 294–7834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

has received reports of erroneous

airspeed readings, including those from

the airspeed indicator and Machmeter,

after a McDonnell Douglas Model DC–

8 series airplane had flown through

visible moisture. The original airplane

design included a turbo compressor

system. The turbo compressors

generated enough heat to prevent

freezing of any trapped moisture in the

lines running from the pitot tubes. The

turbo compressors were removed during

installation of Supplemental Type

Certificate (STC) ST466CH, which

incorporated a flow control system that

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 13415

uses bleed air from the engines.

However, the flow control system did

not generate enough heat in the area of

the pitot tube lines to prevent freezing.

Frozen pitot lines could generate

erroneous or total loss of airspeed

indications to the flight crew, which

could result in loss of control of the

airplane

A modification to positively address

this unsafe condition was subsequently

developed, and applicable parts and

procedures were provided to operators

of the affected airplanes. However, a

recent fleetwide inspection revealed

that not all of those airplanes had been

modified.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

National Aircraft Service, Inc., issued

Service Bulletin SB–98–01R1, dated

January 26, 1999, which the FAA

reviewed and approved. The service

bulletin describes procedures to modify

the flow control system by rerouting the

bleed air ducts to warm the pitot tube

lines. Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of the Requirements of the

Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design, this AD is being issued to

prevent the pitot lines from freezing,

which could result in erroneous or total

loss of airspeed indications to the flight

crew, and consequent loss of control of

the airplane. This AD requires

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service bulletin described

previously, except as discussed below.

Difference Between AD and Service

Bulletin

The service bulletin recommends the

modification within 500 flight hours

after March 1, 1999; this AD requires the

modification within 30 days after the

effective date of this AD. In light of the

urgency of the unsafe condition and the

fact that the revised service bulletin has

been available to affected operators for

nearly two years, the FAA finds that the

required compliance time represents an

appropriate interval of time allowable

for affected airplanes to continue to

operate without compromising safety.

Determination of Rule’s Effective Date

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this rule by

submitting such written data, views, or

arguments as they may desire.

Communications shall identify the

Rules Docket number and be submitted

in triplicate to the address specified

under the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in

evaluating the effectiveness of the AD

action and determining whether

additional rulemaking action would be

needed.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.

For example, discuss a request to

change the compliance time and a

request to change the service bulletin

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the AD is being requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the rule that might suggest a need to

modify the 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 that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this AD

will be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this rule must

submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket 2001–NM–26–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it is

determined that this final rule does not

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 13132.

The FAA has determined that this

regulation is an emergency regulation

that must be issued immediately to

correct an unsafe condition in aircraft,

and that it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866. It has been determined

further that this action involves an

emergency regulation under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is

determined that this emergency

regulation otherwise would be

significant under DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures, a final

regulatory evaluation will be prepared

and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it, if filed, may be obtained from the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

2001–04–15 McDonnell Douglas:

Amendment 39–12135. Docket 2001–

NM–26–AD.

Applicability: The following Model DC–8

series airplanes that have been modified in

accordance with Supplemental Type

Certificate (STC) ST466CH, certificated in

any category:

13416 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

DC–8–31

DC–8–32

DC–8–33

DC–8–41

DC–8–42

DC–8–43

DC–8–51

DC–8–52

DC–8–53

DC–8–55

DC–8–61

DC–8–61F

DC–8–62

DC–8–62F

DC–8–63

DC–8–63F

DC–8F–54

DC–8F–55

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes 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 (b) 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: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent the pitot lines from freezing,

which could result in erroneous or total loss

of airspeed indications to the flight crew, and

consequent loss of control of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

Modification

(a) Within 30 days after the effective date

of this AD, modify the flow control system

to reroute the bleed air ducts, in accordance

with National Aircraft Service, Inc., Service

Bulletin SB–98–01R1, dated January 26,

1999.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(b) 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, Chicago

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Chicago ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Chicago ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(c) 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 airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(d) The actions shall be done in accordance

with National Aircraft Service, Inc., Service

Bulletin SB–98–01R1, dated January 26,

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 National Aircraft Service, Inc., 9133

Tecumseh-Clinton Road, Tecumseh,

Michigan 49286. Copies may be inspected at

the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the FAA, Chicago Aircraft

Certification Office, 2330 East Devon

Avenue, Room 323, Des Plaines, Illinois; 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

March 21, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

22, 2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–4933 Filed 3–5–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NE–56–AD; Amendment 39–

12130; AD 2001–04–11]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pratt &

Whitney JT9D Series Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain Pratt & Whitney

(PW) JT9D series turbofan engines. This

amendment requires initial and

repetitive detailed eddy current

inspections for cracks in 1st stage high

pressure turbine (HPT) disks, and, if

necessary, replacement with serviceable

parts. This amendment is prompted by

the discovery of a crack in the web of

one cooling air hole on a 1st stage HPT

disk. The actions specified by this AD

are intended to prevent 1st stage HPT

disk cracking, which could result in an

uncontained engine failure and damage

to the aircraft.

DATES: Effective May 7, 2001. The

incorporation by reference of certain

publications listed in the regulations is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register as of May 7, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East

Hartford, CT 06108; telephone 860–565–

8770, fax 860–565–4503. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, New England Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, 12 New England

Executive Park, Burlington, MA, or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wego Wang, Aerospace Engineer,

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA

01803–5299; telephone: 781–238–7134,

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

certain PW JT9D series turbofan engines

was published in the Federal Register

on March 7, 2000 (65 FR 11940). That

action proposed to require initial and

repetitive detailed eddy current

inspections for cracks in 1st stage HPT

disks, and, if necessary, replacement

with serviceable parts.

Comments Received

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for the Rule as Proposed

Two commenters state their support

of the notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM) as written.

Economic Analysis Question

One commenter states that the cost

incurred due to premature engine

removal is not captured in the NPRM

economic analysis. This cost would

adversely impact operators when an

engine must be removed prematurely in

order to perform disk inspections. The

cost would specifically impact this

operator when an engine that is not

under its maintenance program is

acquired and is inducted into its system.

The FAA does not agree. The NPRM

cost analysis is based on the costs of

parts and labor to U.S. operators needed

to perform the required initial

inspections, and is not specific to any

particular maintenance system.

However, the economic analysis is

corrected to clarify that the cost totals

are for initial inspection only.

Two Types of Compliance Times

Two commenters state that the

NPRM’s proposed compliance times are