[Federal Register: May 28, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 102)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 31642-31644]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28my03-21]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 98-ANE-68-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG
Models Tay 650-15 and 651-54 Turbofan Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes to
supersede an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to
Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG (RRD) (formerly Rolls-Royce plc)
models Tay 650-15 and 651-54 turbofan engines with certain part numbers
of fan blades and fan discs. That AD currently requires initial and
repetitive visual and ultrasonic inspections of fan blades for cracks,
and, if necessary, replacement with serviceable parts. In addition,
that AD requires recording instances when engines are operated in a
stabilized manner in newly prohibited ranges. This proposal would also
require recording instances when engines are operated inadvertently in
reverse thrust in prohibited ranges, and would require before further
flight initial and repetitive ultrasonic inspections of fan blades for
cracks and if necessary, dispositioning of fan blades and fan discs, if
certain reverse thrust events occurred. This proposal is prompted by
updated prohibited ranges of engine operation and the introduction of
an N1 Alert System in Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100 airplanes with Tay
650-15 engines installed. The actions specified by the proposed AD are
intended to prevent fan blade failures, which can result in an
uncontained engine failure, engine fire, and damage to the airplane.
DATES: Comments must be received by July 28, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), New England Region, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 98-ANE-68-AD, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299. Comments may be inspected at
this location, by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. Comments may also be sent via
the Internet using the following address: 9-ane-adcomment@faa.gov.
Comments sent via the Internet must contain the docket number in the
subject line.
The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be
obtained from Rolls-Royce plc, Technical Publications Department, PO
Box 31, Derby, England DE248BJ; telephone 44 1332 242424, fax 44 1332
249936. This information may be examined, by appointment, at the FAA,
New England Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Lawrence, Aerospace Engineer,
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate,
12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA, 01803-5299; telephone
(781) 238-7176, fax (781) 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 action 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 action must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 98-ANE-68-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRM's
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, New England Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 98-ANE-68-AD, 12 New England Executive
Park, Burlington, MA 01803-5299.
Discussion
On October 31, 2001, the FAA issued airworthiness directive (AD)
2001-22-18, Amendment 39-12497 (66 FR 56755, November 13, 2001), to
require initial and repetitive visual and ultrasonic inspections of fan
blades for cracks, and, if necessary, replacement with serviceable
parts. In addition, that AD requires recording instances when Tay 650-
15 engines are operated in a stabilized manner at any intermediate
position between idle reverse and emergency maximum reverse thrust
except during powerback operations. That AD also requires recording
instances when Tay 651-54 engines are operated in a stabilized manner
at any intermediate position between idle and maximum reverse thrust.
The Luftfahrt-
[[Page 31643]]
Bundesamt (LBA), which is the airworthiness authority for Germany,
notified the FAA that an unsafe condition may exist on RRD models Tay
650-15 and 651-54 turbofan engines. The LBA advises that they have
received reports of two separate Tay 650-15 low pressure (LP)
compressor fan blade failures since 1997. The most recent failure
occurred on September 15, 2001 and resulted in the release of the LP
compressor assembly, penetration of the fuselage, and a fatality.
Investigations indicate that fatigue cracks initiated in the fan blade
root section due to fan flutter is caused by the engine operating in a
stabilized manner between idle reverse thrust and emergency maximum
reverse thrust for Tay 650-15 engines or between idle reverse thrust
and maximum reverse thrust for Tay 651-54 engines. The airplane flight
manuals have already been revised to prohibit operating in a stabilized
manner within these ranges. However, inadvertent stabilized operations
in the prohibited ranges could result in fan blade failure. This
condition, if not corrected, could result in fan blade failure, which
can result in an uncontained engine failure, engine fire, and damage to
the airplane.
Since AD 2001-22-18 was issued, RRD has updated the prohibited
ranges of engine operation regarding this condition for the models Tay
650-15 and 651-54 turbofan engines, by defining the conditions as to
when inspections and dispositioning of fan blades and fan discs are
required, based on whether or not an airplane-installed N1 alert system
is used.
Manufacturer's Service Information
RRD has issued Service Bulletin (SB) Tay-72-1447, Revision 4, dated
May 8, 2002, that describes procedures for recording engine operation
within updated prohibited engine operating ranges, and specifies
conditions for performing initial and repetitive ultrasonic inspections
of fan blades. That SB also recognizes the introduction of Fokker SB
F100-31-060, which installs an N1 Alert System in Fokker Model F.28
Mark 0100 airplanes. This N1 Alert System is designed to set a
maintenance message that instructs inspection action if the engine is
operated in prohibited operating ranges. The LBA classified this
service bulletin as mandatory and issued AD No. 2002-090, dated May 8,
2002, in order to assure the airworthiness of these RRD Tay 650-15 and
651-54 turbofan engines in Germany.
Bilateral Agreement Information
These engine models are manufactured in the U.K. and are type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
Section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. However, the primary
type certificates have been transferred from Rolls-Royce plc in the
U.K. to Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG in Germany. Pursuant to
this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the LBA has kept the FAA
informed of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the
findings of the LBA, reviewed all available information, and determined
that AD action is necessary for products of this type design that are
certificated for operation in the United States.
Proposed Requirements of This AD
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other RRD Tay 650-15 and 651-54 turbofan engines of
the same type design that are used on airplanes registered in the
United States, the proposed AD would require recording instances when
engines are operated inadvertently in reverse thrust in prohibited
ranges. The proposed AD would also require ultrasonic inspections of
roots of Tay 650-15 fan blades, part numbers (P/Ns) JR31911, JR31912,
JR33865, JR33866, JR35120, or JR35121, installed in fan discs P/N
JR31198A, and of Tay 651-54 fan blades P/Ns JR31911, JR31912, JR33865,
or JR33866, installed in fan discs P/N JR34563A, and if necessary,
dispositioning of fan blades and fan discs, before further flight if
certain reverse thrust events occur. The actions would be required to
be done in accordance with the service bulletin described previously.
Economic Analysis
There are approximately 713 RRD Tay 650-15 and 651-54 engines of
the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 451
engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by
this proposed AD. Based on the current utilization and shop visit rates
for the affected engine models, the FAA estimates that the number of
shop visits and inspections for the U.S. fleet would be approximately
140 per year. It would take approximately 5 work hours per engine to do
the actions at a labor rate of $60 per work hour. Assuming that five
percent of these inspections result in a rejected fan blade set at a
cost of approximately $100,000 per set, the annual cost of this
proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $742,000. The current
inspection failure rate is below one percent and this cost estimate is
believed to be conservatively high.
Regulatory Analysis
This proposed rule does not have federalism implications, as
defined in Executive Order 13132, because it would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Accordingly, the FAA has not consulted with state authorities prior to
publication of this proposed rule.
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 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Amendment 39-12497, (66 FR
56755), and by adding a new airworthiness directive:
Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. 98-ANE-68-AD. Supersedes AD 2001-22-18,
Amendment 39-12497.
Applicability: This airworthiness directive (AD) is applicable
to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) models Tay 650-15 turbofan engines with fan
blades, part numbers (P/Ns) JR31911,
[[Page 31644]]
JR31912, JR33865, JR33866, JR35120, or JR35121, installed in fan
discs P/N JR31198A, and Tay 651-54 turbofan engines with fan blades
P/Ns JR31911, JR31912, JR33865, or JR33866, installed in fan discs
P/N JR34563A. These engines are installed on, but not limited to
Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100 and Boeing 727-100 series airplanes
modified in accordance with Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
SA8472SW (727-QF).
Note 1: 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 request
approval for an alternative method of compliance in accordance with
paragraph (c) of this AD. The request should include an assessment
of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the
unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition
has not been eliminated, the request should include specific
proposed actions to address it.
Compliance: Compliance with this AD is required as indicated,
unless already done.
To prevent fan blade failures, which can result in an
uncontained engine failure, engine fire, and damage to the airplane,
do the following:
Record Operation in Prohibited Operating Ranges
(a) If an engine is operated inadvertently in reverse thrust
within the prohibited ranges described in RRD Service Bulletin (SB)
No. Tay 72-1447, Revision 4, dated May 8, 2002, paragraph 1.C., as
applicable by engine model, then before further flight make an entry
in the engine records that reflects that operation. If known,
include the stabilized N1 speed in the engine records.
Inspections
(b) Perform initial and repetitive ultrasonic inspections (UI)
of fan blades each time an engine is operated inadvertently in
reverse thrust within the prohibited ranges described in RRD SB No.
Tay 72-1447, Revision 4, dated May 8, 2002, paragraph 1.C., as
specified in the following Table 1:
Table 1.--Initial and Repetitive Inspection Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N1 Alert system
status (installed Was this a If inadvertent Then before next
Airplane and engine model per Fokker SB powerback event? reverse thrust flight:
F100-31-060) event was:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Fokker 0100; Tay 650-15.... (i) Installed and (A) No........... Between 57% and Perform UI and if
operative. 75% N1 speed for necessary,
7.5 seconds or disposition parts in
more. accordance with
paragraphs 3. and
3.A. of RR SB No. Tay
72-1447, Revision 4,
dated May 8, 2002.
(B) Yes.......... Between 57% and Perform UI and if
75% N1 speed for necessary,
7.5 seconds or disposition parts in
more. accordance with
paragraphs 3. and
3.B. of RR SB No. Tay
72-1447, Revision 4,
dated May 8, 2002.
(ii) Not (A) No........... N1 above idle for Perform UI and if
installed, or any reason. necessary,
installed but disposition parts in
not operative. accordance with
paragraphs 3. and
3.A. of RR SB No. Tay
72-1447, Revision 4,
dated May 8, 2002,
unless it can be
proven by flight data
recorder information
that engine operation
between 57% and 75%
N1 speed lasted less
than 7.5 seconds.
(B) Yes.......... Between 57% and Perform UI and if
75% N1 speed. necessary,
disposition parts in
accordance with
paragraphs 3. and
3.B. of RR SB No. Tay
72-1447, Revision 4,
dated May 8, 2002,
unless it can be
proven by flight data
recorder information
that engine operation
between 57% and 75%
N1 speed lasted less
than 7.5 seconds.
--------------------------------
(2) Boeing 727-QF; Tay 651-54.. Not applicable... Not applicable... Between 57% and Perform UI and if
75% N1 speed for necessary,
7.5 seconds or disposition parts in
more, or if the accordance with
parameters paragraphs 3. and
cannot be 3.A. of RR SB No. Tay
confirmed. 72-1447, Revision 4,
dated May 8, 2002.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(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 (ECO).
Operators must submit their request through an appropriate FAA
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send
it to the Manager, ECO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive,
if any, may be obtained from the ECO.
Special Flight Permits
(d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
Sec. Sec. 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 done.
Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in Luftfahrt-
Bundesamt airworthiness directive No. 2002-090, dated May 8, 2002.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on May 20, 2003.
Francis A. Favara,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 03-13221 Filed 5-27-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P