[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 28, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31642-31644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-13221]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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: [email protected]. 
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