DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2017-0967; Project Identifier 2017-NE-35-AD; Amendment
39-21167; AD 2020-15-04]
Airworthiness Directives; GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. Turboprop
Engines (Type Certificate Previously Held by WALTER Engines a.s.,
Walter a.s., and MOTORLET a.s.)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. M601D-11, M601E-11, M601E-11A, M601E-11AS,
M601E-11S, M601F, H80, H80-100, H80-200, H75-100, H75-200, H85-100, and
H85-200 model turboprop engines. This AD was prompted by a review by
the manufacturer that identified the possibility of a power turbine
(PT) rotor overspeed and the uncontained release of PT blades. This AD
requires installing a modified engine outlet system. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective August 31, 2020.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 31, 2020.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact GE Aviation Czech s.r.o., Beranovych 65, 199 02 Praha
9--Letnany, Czech Republic; phone: +420 222 538 111; fax: +420
222 538 222. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA, 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7759. It is also
available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0967.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0967; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Caufield, Aerospace Engineer,
ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:
781-238-7146; fax: 781-238-7199; email: email@example.com.
The FAA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all GE
Aviation Czech s.r.o. M601D-11, M601E-11, M601E-11A, M601E-11AS, M601E-
11S, M601F, H80, H80-100, H80-200, H75-100, H75-200, H85-100, and H85-
200 model turboprop engines. The SNPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 4, 2020 (85 FR 6110) ("the SNPRM"). The FAA
preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that
published in the Federal Register on January 24, 2018 (83 FR 3287)
("the NPRM"). The NPRM proposed to require installing a modified
engine outlet system. The NPRM was prompted by a review by the
manufacturer that identified the possibility of a PT rotor overspeed
and the uncontained release of PT blades. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.
The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has
issued EASA AD 2017-0151, dated August 18, 2017 (referred to after this
as "the MCAI"), to address the unsafe condition on these products.
The MCAI states:
A recent design review identified the possibility of failure of
the power turbine (PT) or quill shaft splines.
This condition, if not corrected, could lead to a PT rotor
overspeed, with consequent release of PT blade(s), possibly
resulting in high energy debris and damage to, and/or reduced
control of, the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition, GE Aviation Czech
(GEAC) designed a modification (mod) of the engine outlet system and
issued Alert Service Bulletins (ASB) ASB-M601E-72-00-00-0070, ASB-
M601D-72-00-00-0053, ASB-M601F-72-00-00-0036, ASB-M601T-72-00-00-
0029, ASB-M601Z-72-00-00-0039, ASB-H75-72-00-00-0011, ASB-H80-72-00-
00-0025 and ASB-H85-72-00-00-0007 (single document, hereafter
referred to as "the ASB" in this AD), providing instructions for
modification of engines in service.
For the reason described above, this AD requires modification of
the affected engines, and prohibits installation of pre-mod parts.
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0967.
The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the SNPRM,
on the determination of the cost to the public, or the impact of the
proposed rule on small entities.
The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
The FAA reviewed GE Aviation ASB ASB-M601E-72-00-00-0070, ASB-
M601D-72-00-00-0053, ASB-M601F-72-00-00-0036, ASB-M601T-72-00-
00-0029, ASB-M601Z-72-00-00-0039, ASB-H75-72-00-00-0011,
ASB-H80-72-00-00-0025, and ASB-H85-72-00-00-0007 (single
document; formatted as service bulletin identifier[revision number]),
dated July 24, 2018. The ASB describes procedures for removal and
replacement of the engine outlet system hardware. This service
information is reasonably available because the interested parties have
access to it through their normal course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.
Costs of Compliance
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 42 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
COST ON U.S.
|Replace exhaust system parts
|| 64 work-hours x $85 per hour = $5,440.
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.
The FAA is 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
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354, codified as
amended at 5 U.S.C. 601-612) (RFA) establishes "as a principle of
regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the
objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory
and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses,
organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To
achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider
flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their
actions to assure that such proposals are given serious
consideration." Public Law 96-354, 2(b), Sept. 19, 1980. The RFA
covers a wide-range of small entities, including small businesses, not-
for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
The FAA published an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
in the proposed rule to aid the public in commenting on the potential
impacts to small entities. The FAA considered the public comments in
developing the final rule and this Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA). A FRFA must contain the following:
(1) A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule;
(2) A statement of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the IRFA, a statement of the assessment of the
agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the
proposed rule as a result of such comments;
(3) The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in
response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change
made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the
(4) A description of and an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such
estimate is available;
(5) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the
requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
(6) A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative
adopted in the final rule and why each of the other significant
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the
impact on small entities was rejected.
1. Need for and Objectives of the Rule
This AD was prompted by a review by the manufacturer that
identified the possibility of a PT overspeed and the uncontained
release of PT blades. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent uncontained
release of the PT blades. This AD requires installing a modified engine
outlet system. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
failure of the PT blades, uncontained release of the blades, damage to
the engine, and damage to the airplane.
2. Significant Issues Raised in Public Comments
The FAA did not receive any public comments on the SNPRM.
3. Response to SBA Comments
The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration
(SBA) did not file any comments in response to the proposed rule. Thus,
the FAA did not make any changes to the proposed rule in the final
4. Small Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply
This AD applies to all GE Aviation Czech s.r.o. M601D-11, M601E-11,
M601E-11A, M601E-11AS, M601E-11S, M601F, H75-100, H75-200, H80, H80-
100, H80-200, H85-100, and H85-200 turboprop engines. These engines are
typically installed on airplanes that are owned and operated by aerial
application businesses, which is a small segment of the aviation
industry. These airplanes, also known as "crop-dusters," spread
fertilizer, insecticides, fungicides, and weed killers.\1\
\1\ "Flying Low Is Flying High As Demand for Crop-Dusters
Soars", by Jonathan
Welsh, updated Aug. 14, 2009: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125020758399330769.
Accessed on July 26,
The FAA searched the 2018 Aircraft Registration database that
contains the records of all U.S. Civil Aircraft maintained by the FAA's
Aircraft Registration Branch and identified 42 airplanes with GE H80
series engines or equivalent turboprop engines installed. The Aircraft
Registration database shows that 38 companies own these 42 airplanes, 4
companies own 2 airplanes, while the remaining 34 companies own 1
airplane each. Based on these registration records, the FAA assumes
that approximately each entity or business owned one airplane.
By using the Small Business Administration (SBA)'s size standards
and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code
classifications, the FAA is able to determine whether a business is
small or not. These entities operate under NAICS code 115112, Soil
Preparation, Planting, and Cultivating. The size standards for this
NAICS code as provided by SBA's Size Standards
Table \2\ is $7.5 million in annual revenues. Therefore, entities
generating less than $7.5 million in annual revenues would be treated
as small businesses for the purposes of this analysis.
Accessed on July 26, 2019.
The FAA assumes that all 38 operators above that are affected by
this AD are small businesses because $700,000 annual revenue for a
first-class, used turbine agricultural aviation plane \3\ is a
reasonable industry estimate. On average, entities operating in the
aerial application industry generate approximately $700,000 each year
($700,000 x 1 crop-duster airplane), which is below $7.5 million
revenue size standards for NAICS code 115112. Therefore, the FAA
assumes all 38 registered company owners or operators to be small
\3\ "How much does it cost?" by Bill Lavender, April 3, 2017.
Accessed on July 26,
5. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
There are no record-keeping costs or other compliance costs
associated with this final rule.
6. Significant Alternatives Considered
There is no direct safety alternative to the modification of the
engine outlet system. The modification addresses a safety issue aimed
at preventing an uncontained release of the PT blades. Compliance cost
of this AD comes from the removal and replacement of the exhaust system
parts. Estimated compliance cost per engine is identified below.
Labor cost = 64 repair hours per engine * $85 Mean Hourly Wage = $5,440.
Cost of Parts = $63,000 per engine (Source: GE Aviation Czech).
$5,440 labor per engine + $63,000 parts per engine = $68,440
compliance cost per engine.
To estimate the revenue impacts of the AD on these 38 small
operators, the FAA used the total estimated one-time costs of
compliance per each engine ($68,440) and divided it by the estimated
annual revenue of each entity ($700,000). The FAA determined all 38
small businesses that would be affected by this AD would experience
impacts of approximately 10 percent of their annual revenue during the
implementation of this AD ($68,440 / $700,000).
Therefore, the FAA determined that this AD rule will have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The FAA determined that this AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
(1) Is not a "significant regulatory action" under Executive
Order 12866, and
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
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
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. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness