# SAIB ANE-97-03: - Type: Special airworthiness information bulletin (advisory, not mandatory) - Status: Current - Revision: 0 - Issued: April 25, 1997 - Products: Pratt & Whitney JT3D, JT8D and JT9D - Product type: Engine - PDF: https://openairdocs.org/files/sha256/16/b4/16b4e6ec48a3224f4ddc63691547bd3a0f0c89678141eed6a138e8d1fb6486a0 - FAA DRS: https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/8137B78C3BFD719D8625721F0052EC22.0001 - Page: https://openairdocs.org/saib/ANE-97-03 ## Text **SPECIAL** **AIRWORTHINESS** **INFORMATION** **BULLETIN** **AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION SERVICE 800 INDEPENDENCE AVENUE, S.W.** **WASHINGTON, DC 20591** U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration No. ANE-97-03 April 25, 1997 Published by: FAA, AFS-610, P.O. Box 26460, Oklahoma City, OK 73125 This is issued for informational purposes only and any recommendation for corrective action is not mandatory. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin is to alert repair stations, owners/operators, and Principal Maintenance Insp ectors in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO’s) to the potential for unairworthy parts. AFFECTED PRODUCTS: All Pratt & Whitney JT3D, JT8D, and JT9D series engines. BACKGROUND: The FAA has received numerous reports of suspected unapproved parts that had been maintained as having been “overhauled” by certain repair stations . Those reports included a wide variety of part numbers and types of parts originating from seven re pair stations and a variet y of parts brokers. An investigation revealed that certain parts exhibite d conditions that exceeded the inspection requirements in the type certificate holder’s Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA). However, the FAA Engine Certification Office’s (ECO’s) assessment of those parts, and of other reports received by the FAA for which parts were not provided to corr oborate the reported conditions, concluded that Airworthiness Directive (AD) action was not warranted at this time to mandate reinspection of all parts maintained by the involved repair stations. Operators are reminded that showing compliance to ADs is the responsibility of the owner/operator as required by Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR’s) §§ 91.417(a)(2)(v) and 121.380(a)(2)(v) or 135.439(a)(2)(v), as applicable. The operator must document compliance with the AD by AD number AND the date and method of compliance. Many ADs are operational or installation specific; or may have repetitive requirements, and therefore only the operator may have the ability to determine whether an AD is applicable. Also, operators need to assure that the method of compliance applied by repair stations on their behalf is in accordance with the applicable AD. If the method of compliance is not the same as explicitly required by the AD, th en an Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) approval is required before the product (aircraft, engi ne, or propeller) can be returned to service. In such cases, the approval of the AMOC must be doc umented in the record of compliance. This documentation is also necessary because some AMOCs may require certain other mandatory compensating operational or maintenance actions that are specified in the AMOC approval. **2 ANE-97-03** RECOMMENDATIONS: By issuing this Special Airworthiness Informa tion Bulletin the FAA ECO is recommending that all repair stations, owners/operators, and princi pal maintenance inspectors place added emphasis on incoming inspection practices for parts and their associated records. It is further recommended that: • Parts received by repair stations for the perfor mance of maintenance are thoroughly inspected to identify all appropriate work required to be accomplished and that the work is properly completed before release of the part in accordance with FA R requirements whether it be for repair, alteration, or complete overhaul. • Records accurately reflect the work performed AND the actual condition of the part. • When AD compliance is applicable, a speci fic record of the AD compliance including documentation of the method of compliance should be evident in the record. In the absence of a specific record of AD compliance, operators shoul d not assume that applicable ADs have been complied with simply because a part has been “overhauled.” FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark C. Fulmer, Manager, Engine Certifi cation Office, ANE-140, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803. Telephone (617) 238-7140, Facsimile (617) 238-7199. ## Registered aircraft it may concern (OpenAirDocs) Registry models matched by make and model, the same way as ADs, most registered aircraft first. - [Pratt & Whitney JT8D series](https://openairdocs.org/engine/pratt-whitney-jt8d-series): 82 registered aircraft (engine model) - [Pratt & Whitney JT9D series](https://openairdocs.org/engine/pratt-whitney-jt9d-series): 13 registered aircraft (engine model) - [Pratt & Whitney JT3D series](https://openairdocs.org/engine/pratt-whitney-jt3d-series): 2 registered aircraft (engine model) --- OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.