[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45842-45845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17296]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2012-1114; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-21-AD;
Amendment 39-17511; AD 2013-14-06]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; CFM International, S. A. Turbofan
Engines
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
CFM International, S. A. (CFM) model CFM56-5 and CFM56-5B series
turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by corrosion of the delta-P
valve in the hydro-mechanical unit (HMU) fuel control caused by
exposure to type TS-1 fuel. This AD requires cleaning, inspection, and
repair of affected HMUs. We are issuing this AD to prevent seizure of
the HMU, leading to failure of one or more engines and damage to the
airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective September 3, 2013.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of September 3,
2013.
ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.
For service information identified in this AD, contact CFM
International Inc., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room
285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; International phone: 513-552-3272; USA
phone: 877-432-3272; International fax: 513-552-3329; USA fax: 877-432-
3329; email: [email protected]; or CFM International SA, Customer Support
Center, International phone: 33 1 64 14 88 66; fax: 33 1 64 79 85 55;
email: [email protected]. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call 781-238-7125.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is provided in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martin Adler, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7157;
fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2013 (78
FR
[[Page 45843]]
2644). The NPRM proposed to require cleaning, inspection, and repair of
the affected HMUs.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and the FAA's response to each comment.
Agreement With the Proposed AD
American Airlines supports the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013)
and does not foresee being impacted by this AD now or in the future.
Request To Include Minimum Threshold for TS-1 Fuel Usage
Seven commenters requested that the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14,
2013) be modified to include a minimum threshold for TS-1 fuel usage
similar to the service bulletins (SBs). The reason for this request is
that the NPRM differs from the service information. The data does not
support the more restrictive applicability called for by the NPRM. The
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2012-0123, dated July 9,
2012, is less restrictive as well. There have been no events since
implementation of the EASA AD and since the latest versions of the CFM
SBs. Several carriers questioned whether the data supports having no
threshold and if in-flight shutdown events truly apply to the worldwide
fleet.
We partially agree with including a minimum usage threshold. We
have no technical objections to the usage threshold utilized in the CFM
SBs. However, since there are no U.S. operators using TS-1 fuel, there
is no benefit to increasing the complexity of the AD. We did not change
the AD.
Request To Reduce Applicability To Match EASA AD
Five commenters requested that the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14,
2013) be modified to reduce the applicability to match the EASA AD. The
reason for this request is that the data does not support the more
restrictive applicability called for by the NPRM. The EASA AD
applicability is less restrictive. There have been no events since
implementation of the EASA AD and the latest versions of the CFM SBs.
We do not agree. No U.S. operators use TS-1 fuel. Therefore, there
is no benefit to increasing the complexity of the AD. We did not change
the AD.
Request To Eliminate TS-1 Fuel Usage Recording
Five air carriers requested that the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14,
2013) be modified to eliminate TS-1 fuel usage recording. The reason
for this request is that the additional record keeping will add cost
and complexity. This will be a burden to the operators.
We do not agree. TS-1 fuel usage records are required for
enforcement of the AD. In addition, many operators already track fuel
usage for business purposes. The creation and retention of TS-1 fuel
records required by this AD is not considered an undue burden. We did
not change the AD.
Request To Delay Issuance of AD
CFM and Airbus requested that we delay issuing the AD until mid-
2013. The reason for this request is that CFM is conducting additional
testing and analysis to further validate the usage threshold called out
in the SBs.
We do not agree. We have no technical objections to the usage
threshold utilized in the CFM SBs. However, since there are no U.S.
operators using TS-1 fuel, there is no benefit to increasing the
complexity of the AD. We did not change the AD.
Request Clarification of Differences Between NPRM and EASA AD
Lufthansa Technik noted that there are significant differences
between the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) and the EASA AD.
Lufthansa Technik questioned whether the agencies have differing
opinions of the technical issue.
We do not agree. The technical understanding of the issue is
consistent, but differences in procedure and policy result in the
differences between the NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) and the
EASA AD.
Request To Define Parameters for Recording TS-1 Fuel Usage
Lufthansa Technik pointed out that the specific parameters to
record TS-1 fuel usage are not well defined and asked if it is the
intention to track fuel volume or the number of fuel uploads. The
reason for this request is to clarify units to be measured for TS-1
fuel usage.
We do not agree. The actions are required regardless of the amount
of TS-1 exposure. The intent is to track if an HMU has been exposed to
TS-1 fuel. We did not change the AD.
Request To Allow Earlier Versions of the SB To Be Used
Lufthansa Technik and Virgin America Airlines requested that use of
earlier revisions of the SBs be allowed. Earlier revisions of the SB
allow cleaning or replacement of the delta-P valve. The latest
revisions only allow replacement of the delta-P valve. Cleaning has
proven effective at eliminating the issue, so replacement in all cases
is not required. Also, the general inspection procedure has not changed
from the initial release of the SBs to the one called out by the AD.
We agree. Cleaining of the HMU delta-P valve is effective at
mitigating the risk of this issue and should be allowed. We changed
this AD to reference the following service information to do the
inspection: paragraph 3.A(2) of CFM SB CFM56-5 S/B 73-0182, Revision 6,
dated March 8, 2012; or CFM SB CFM56-5B S/B 73-0122, Revision 8, dated
March 8, 2012.
Request To Clarify Reporting Requirements
TAP Portugal asks if the AD includes a usage threshold calculation,
would time spent in storage be discounted from the calculation? The
reason for this request is to seek clarification on threshold
calculation.
We do not agree. The AD does not include a usage threshold. We did
not change the AD.
Request Change to Applicability
TAP Portugal requested that the AD also apply to the CFM56-5C
engine. The reason for this request is that there are many
interchangable parts between CFM56-5C and the affected engines.
We do not agree. The data received for HMU corrosion and subsequent
engine shutdown have all come from CFM56-5A and CFM56-5B engines, which
are used on a different family of airplanes than CFM56-5C. At this
time, there is insufficient data to support adding the CFM56-5C to the
Applicability paragraph. We did not change the AD.
Request Clarification for the Definition of Overhaul
Air France requested that we clarify the definition of overhaul.
HMU overhaul is defined in the Component Maintenance Manual as specific
maintenance which may or may not align with the maintenance required by
this AD. This could cause conflicts and confusion when attempting to
comply with the AD.
We agree. The intent of the AD when referring to overhaul is
anytime the HMU delta-P valve is inspected, cleaned, or replaced. We
added the following defintion to the AD: ``For the purposes of this AD,
overhaul is defined as HMU maintenance, which includes inspection,
cleaning, or replacement of the HMU delta-P valve.''
Request Increase in Compliance Time
Rossiya Airlines requested an increase in initial compliance time
for an HMU
[[Page 45844]]
with more than 8,000 hours to be 24 months or 4,200 hours. The
utilization rate of Rossiya Airlines is above 3,800 hours per year. The
current compliance equates to less than one year in which to fully
comply with the AD. The reason for this request is that the number of
spare and rotable engines does not support the compliance time rate
requirement.
We partially agree with increasing the initial compliance time. The
intent of the initial compliance time was to allow sufficient time for
all of the high-time impacted HMUs to be replaced. The 2,000-hour
allowance did not take into account the high-time utilization rates of
some operators. The initial inspection compliance times are revised to
allow up to 4,000 hours from the effective date of the AD. We disagree
with increasing the initial inspection compliance times to 4,200 hours
because that does not mitigate the unsafe condition.
Request To Delete Initial Cleaning Requirement
Lufthansa Technik noted that the lack of records for prior TS-1
fuel usage will make determination of usage extremely difficult. In
addition, this determination will need to be made for all engines and
HMUs worldwide. The reason for this request is that lease components,
lease engines, and component pools transferred between operators might
have exposed an HMU to TS-1 fuel. The exposed HMU might then get
transferred to a region where TS-1 fuel is not used, such as the United
States.
We do not agree. An initial inspection of the HMU is required
unless it can be shown that the HMU has never been exposed to TS-1
fuel. We did not change the AD.
Request for Consideration of Costs to Worldwide Fleet
Air France requested that we include consideration for the costs to
the worldwide fleet. The NPRM (78 FR 2644, January 14, 2013) stated
that there is no impact to U.S. operators; however, European operators
would be impacted. The reason for this request is to expand cost
considerations to include the worldwide fleet.
We do not agree. The AD only applies to U.S.-registered aircraft.
Foreign operators must comply with the regulations of their local
authority. The cost considerations listed in the AD reflect the impact
to U.S. operators only. We did not change the AD.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of this AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD will not affect any products of U.S.
registry. Based on these figures, we estimate this AD to have no cost
impact to U.S. operators.
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
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
(4) 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
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]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2013-14-06 CFM International, S. A.: Amendment 39-17511; Docket No.
FAA-2012-1114; Directorate Identifier 2012-NE-21-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective September 3, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to CFM International S.A. (CFM) model CFM56-5
and CFM56-5B series turbofan engines with any of the hydro-
mechanical unit (HMU) fuel control part numbers (P/Ns) in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, installed:
(1) CFM56-5: CFM P/Ns 1348M79P02; 1348M79P03; 1348M79P04;
1348M79P06; 1348M79P07; 1348M79P08; 1348M79P09; 1348M79P10;
1348M79P11; 1348M79P12; 1348M79P13; and 1348M79P14.
(2) CFM56-5B: CFM P/Ns: 1348M79P08; 1348M79P09; 1348M79P10;
1348M79P11; 1348M79P12; 1348M79P13; and 1348M79P14.
(d) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by corrosion of the delta-P valve in the
HMU fuel control caused by exposure to type TS-1 fuel. We are
issuing this AD to prevent seizure of the HMU, leading to failure of
one or more engines, and damage to the airplane.
(e) Compliance
Unless already done, do the following:
(f) Record Type TS-1 Fuel Usage
(1) From the effective date of this AD, record all TS-1 fuel
usage.
(2) If the HMU never uses TS-1 fuel, no further action is
required.
(g) Initial Inspection
If the HMU has operated on TS-1 fuel, inspect the HMU for
corrosion as follows:
(1) For an HMU that has operated for fewer than 6,000 hours
since new (HSN) or hours since last overhaul, inspect the HMU before
10,000 HSN or hours since last overhaul, whichever comes later.
(2) For an HMU that has operated for 6,000 or more HSN or hours
since last overhaul, inspect the HMU within 24 months or 4,000 hours
after the effective date of this AD, whichever comes first.
[[Page 45845]]
(3) Use paragraph 3.A(2) of CFM Service Bulletin (SB) No. CFM56-
5 S/B 73-0182, Revision 6, dated March 8, 2012, or CFM SB No. CFM56-
5B S/B 73-0122, Revision 8, dated March 8, 2012, to do the
inspection.
(h) Repetitive Inspections
Repeat the inspection required in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD
before 10,000 hours since last overhaul if, after last overhaul, the
HMU is exposed to TS-1 fuel.
(i) Credit for Previous Actions
If the HMU has not been exposed to TS-1 fuel since the last
overhaul, then the initial inspection in paragraph (g) of this AD is
not required.
(j) Definitions
For the purposes of this AD, overhaul is defined as HMU
maintenance, which includes inspection, cleaning, or replacement of
the HMU delta-P valve.
(k) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to
the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
The Manager, Engine Certification Office, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.
(m) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Martin Adler,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: 781-238-7157; fax: 781-238-7199; email:
[email protected].
(2) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency, AD 2012-0123,
dated July 9, 2012, for more information. You may examine this AD on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
(n) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) CFM International, S. A. (CFM) Service Bulletin No. CFM56-5
S/B 73-0182, Revision 6, dated March 8, 2012.
(ii) CFM Service Bulletin No. CFM56-5B S/B 73-0122, Revision 8,
dated March 8, 2012.
(3) For CFM International, S. A. service information identified
in this AD, contact CFM International Inc., Aviation Operations
Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125;
International phone: 513-552-3272; USA phone: 877-432-3272;
International fax: 513-552-3329; USA fax: 877-432-3329; email:
[email protected]; or CFM International SA, Customer Support Center,
International phone: 33 1 64 14 88 66; International fax: 33 1 64 79
85 55; email: [email protected].
(4) You may view this service information at FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call 781-238-7125.
(5) You may view this service information at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on July 9, 2013.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Assistant Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-17296 Filed 7-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P