[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7947-7949]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-3871]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 2003 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 7947]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2003-CE-06-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-12 and 
PC-12/45 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive 
(AD) that would apply to certain Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus) Models 
PC-12 and PC-12/45 airplanes. This proposed AD would require you to 
inspect the pedestal leg assembly on aft facing passenger seats for 
correct configuration. If incorrectly configured, this proposed AD 
would require you to modify to the correct configuration. This proposed 
AD is the result of mandatory continuing airworthiness information 
(MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority for Switzerland. The 
actions specified by this proposed AD are intended to detect and 
correct pedestal leg assemblies on aft facing passenger seats that are 
in nonconformance with manufacturing standards. Nonconforming passenger 
seats could result in passenger injury in an emergency situation.

DATES: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive any 
comments on this proposed rule on or before March 26, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to FAA, Central Region, Office of the 
Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003-CE-06-AD, 901 
Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. You may view any 
comments at this location between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also send comments 
electronically to the following address: [email protected]. 
Comments sent electronically must contain ``Docket No. 2003-CE-06-AD'' 
in the subject line. If you send comments electronically as attached 
electronic files, the files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 
Windows or ASCII text.
    You may get service information that applies to this proposed AD 
from Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison Manager, CH-6371 Stans, 
Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 63 19; facsimile: +41 41 619 6224; 
or from Pilatus Business Aircraft Ltd., Product Support Department, 
11755 Airport Way, Broomfield, Colorado 80021; telephone: (303) 465-
9099; facsimile: (303) 465-6040. You may also view this information at 
the Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 
64106; telephone: (816) 329-4059; facsimile: (816) 329-4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    How do I comment on this proposed AD? The FAA invites comments on 
this proposed rule. You may submit whatever written data, views, or 
arguments you choose. You need to include the rule's docket number and 
submit your comments to the address specified under the caption 
ADDRESSES. We will consider all comments received on or before the 
closing date. We may amend this proposed rule in light of comments 
received. Factual information that supports your ideas and suggestions 
is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of this proposed 
AD action and determining whether we need to take additional rulemaking 
action.
    Are there any specific portions of this proposed AD I should pay 
attention to? The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall 
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this 
proposed rule that might suggest a need to modify the proposed rule. 
You may view all comments we receive before and after the closing date 
of the proposed rule in the Rules Docket. We will file a report in the 
Rules Docket that summarizes each contact we have with the public that 
concerns the substantive parts of this proposed AD.
    How can I be sure FAA receives my comment? If you want FAA to 
acknowledge the receipt of your mailed comments, you must include a 
self-addressed, stamped postcard. On the postcard, write ``Comments to 
Docket No. 2003-CE-06-AD.'' We will date stamp and mail the postcard 
back to you.

Discussion

    What events have caused this proposed AD? The Federal Office for 
Civil Aviation (FOCA), which is the airworthiness authority for 
Switzerland, recently notified FAA that an unsafe condition may exist 
on certain Pilatus Models PC-12 and PC-12/45 airplanes. The FOCA 
reports that, during manufacture of certain aft facing aircraft 
passenger seats (vendor part numbers (VPN) 403008-1 and 403008-2), the 
forward pedestal legs were installed in reverse order. One instance was 
found during the seat manufacturer's final quality control inspection. 
Pilatus found another instance.
    What are the consequences if the condition is not corrected? This 
condition, if not corrected, could result in failure of the aircraft 
seat pedestal leg assembly. Such failure could result in passenger 
injury in an emergency situation.
    Is there service information that applies to this subject? Pilatus 
has issued Pilatus PC12 Service Bulletin No. 25-025, dated September 
27, 2002.
    What are the provisions of this service information? The service 
bulletin specifies inspecting the forward pedestal legs of certain 
aircraft aft facing passenger seats for correct configuration.
    This service bulletin also references Decrane Aircraft, ERDA, Inc., 
Service Bulletin SB02010, Revision A, June 3, 2002, which includes 
procedures for accomplishing the inspection and procedures for 
modifying incorrectly configured seat assemblies to the correct 
configuration.
    What action did the FOCA take? The FOCA classified these service 
bulletins as mandatory and issued Swiss AD Number HB 2002-658, dated 
November 30, 2002, in order to ensure the continued airworthiness of 
these airplanes in Switzerland.
    Was this in accordance with the bilateral airworthiness agreement? 
These airplane models are manufactured in Switzerland and are

[[Page 7948]]

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.
    Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the FOCA has 
kept FAA informed of the situation described above.

The FAA's Determination and an Explanation of the Provisions of This 
Proposed AD

    What has FAA decided? The FAA has examined the findings of the 
FOCA; reviewed all available information, including the service 
information referenced above; and determined that:

--The unsafe condition referenced in this document exists or could 
develop on other Pilatus PC-12 and PC-12/45 of the same type design 
that are on the U.S. registry;
--the actions specified in the previously-referenced service 
information should be accomplished on the affected airplanes; and
--AD action should be taken in order to correct this unsafe condition.

    What would this proposed AD require? This proposed AD would require 
you to inspect the pedestal leg assembly on aft facing passenger seats 
for correct configuration. If incorrectly configured, this proposed AD 
would require you to modify to the correct configuration.
    What are the differences between this proposed AD, the service 
information, and the FOCA AD? The FOCA AD and the service information 
require an inspection of the identification tag on certain passenger 
seats to determine if the Pilatus part number correctly corresponds to 
the ERDA vendor part number. The identification tag may incorrectly 
identify the Pilatus part number; although the ERDA vendor part number 
is correct. If the corresponding part numbers are incorrect, the FOCA 
AD and the service information require affixing a new identification 
tag with the correct corresponding Pilatus part number. The procedures 
for accomplishing this inspection and modification are contained in 
Decrane Aircraft, ERDA, Inc., Service Bulletin SB02011, Revision A, 
June 3, 2002.
    Because the ERDA part number is correct, we are not including this 
as part of the unsafe condition. However, we will include a note in 
this proposed AD recommending that you verify that the corresponding 
Pilatus part number is correct.

Cost Impact

    How many airplanes would this proposed AD impact? We estimate that 
this proposed AD affects 280 airplanes in the U.S. registry.
    What would be the cost impact of this proposed AD on owners/
operators of the affected airplanes? We estimate the following costs to 
accomplish the proposed inspection:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Total cost  per
             Labor cost                     Parts cost            airplane       Total cost  on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 workhour x $60 = $60..............  No parts required to               $60   $60 x 280 = $16,800
                                       perform inspection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to accomplish the proposed 
modification:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Total cost  per
             Labor cost                     Parts cost            airplane       Total cost  on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 workhours x $60 = $120............  $150..................            $270   $270 x 280 = $75,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compliance Time of This Proposed AD

    What would be the compliance time of this proposed AD? The 
compliance time of this proposed AD is ``within the next 90 days after 
the effective date of this AD.''
    Why is the proposed compliance time presented in calendar time 
instead of hours time-in-service (TIS)? The compliance of this proposed 
AD is presented in calendar time instead of hours TIS because the 
unsafe condition is a result of an improper installation. The unsafe 
condition has the same chance of occurring on an airplane with 50 hours 
TIS as it would for an airplane with 1,000 hours TIS. Therefore, we 
believe that a compliance time of 90 days will:

--Ensure that the unsafe condition does not go undetected for a long 
period of time on the affected airplanes; and
--Not inadvertently ground any of the affected airplanes.

Regulatory Impact

    Would this proposed AD impact various entities? The regulations 
proposed herein 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. Therefore, it is determined that this 
proposed rule would not have federalism implications under Executive 
Order 13132.
    Would this proposed AD involve a significant rule or regulatory 
action? For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
action (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); 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 has been placed 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, under 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. FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD) to read as follows:

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: Docket No. 2003-CE-06-AD

    (a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? This AD affects 
Models PC-12 and PC-12/45 airplanes, manufacturer serial numbers 
(MSN) 101 through 436 that:

[[Page 7949]]

    (1) Incorporate a passenger seat, ERDA Vendor Part Number (VPN) 
403008-1 or 403008-2 (also identified as Pilatus Part Number (P/N) 
959.30.01.601, 959.30.01.602, 959.30.01.613, or 959.30.01.614) (or 
FAA-approved equivalent part number), with a serial number as 
specified in Decrane Aircraft, ERDA, Inc., Service Bulletin SB02010, 
Revision A, June 3, 2002; and
    (2) Are certificated in any category.
    (b) Who must comply with this AD? Anyone who wishes to operate 
any of the airplanes identified in paragraph (a) of this AD must 
comply with this AD.
    (c) What problem does this AD address? The actions specified by 
this AD are intended to detect and correct pedestal leg assemblies 
on aft facing passenger seats that are in nonconformance with 
manufacturing standards. Nonconforming passenger seats could result 
in passenger injury in an emergency situation.
    (d) What actions must I accomplish to address this problem? To 
address this problem, you must accomplish the following, unless 
already accomplished:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Actions                 Compliance            Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Inspect the forward       Within the next 90    In accordance with
 pedestal legs on the          days after the        Decrane Aircraft,
 aircraft aft facing           effective date of     ERDA, Inc., Service
 passenger seat for correct    this AD.              Bulletin SB02010,
 configuration.                                      Revision A, June 3,
                                                     2002; as specified
                                                     in Pilatus PC12
                                                     Service Bulletin
                                                     No. 25-025, dated
                                                     September 27, 2002.
-----------------------------
(2) If the legs are           Prior to further      In accordance with
 incorrectly configured,       flight after the      Decrane Aircraft,
 modify to the correct         inspection required   ERDA, Inc., Service
 configuration.                in paragraph (d)(1)   Bulletin SB02010,
                               of this AD.           Revision A, June 3,
                                                     2002; as specified
                                                     in Pilatus PC12
                                                     Service Bulletin
                                                     No. 25-025, dated
                                                     September 27, 2002.
-----------------------------
(3) Do not install any        As of the the         In accordance with
 affected seat specified in    effective date of     Decrane Aircraft,
 paragraph (a) of this AD      this AD.              ERDA, Inc., Service
 unless it has been                                  Bulletin SB02010,
 inspected as specified in                           Revision A, June 3,
 paragraph (d)(1) of this AD                         2002; as specified
 and configured in                                   in Pilatus PC12
 accordance with Decrane                             Service Bulletin
 Aircraft, ERDA, Inc.,                               No. 25-025, dated
 Service Bulletin SB02010,                           September 27, 2002
 Revision A, June 3, 2002;
 as specified in Pilatus
 PC12 Service Bulletin No.
 25-025, dated September 27,
 2002.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note 1: Although not required by this AD, we recommend that you 
verify that the Pilatus part number correctly corresponds with the 
ERDA vendor part number on certain passenger seats. The procedures 
for accomplishing this action are contained in Decrane Aircraft, 
ERDA, Inc., Service Bulletin SB02011, Revision A, June 3, 2002.

    (e) Can I comply with this AD in any other way? You may use an 
alternative method of compliance or adjust the compliance time if:
    (1) Your alternative method of compliance provides an equivalent 
level of safety; and
    (2) The Manager, Standards Office, Small Airplane Directorate, 
approves your alternative. Submit your request through an FAA 
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send 
it to the Manager, Standards Office.

    Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane identified in paragraph 
(a) of this AD, regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, 
or repaired in the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For 
airplanes 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 (e) 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 you have not eliminated the unsafe condition, specific 
actions you propose to address it.

    (f) Where can I get information about any already-approved 
alternative methods of compliance? Contact Doug Rudolph, Aerospace 
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, 
Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4059; facsimile: 
(816) 329-4090.
    (g) What if I need to fly the airplane to another location to 
comply with this AD? The FAA can issue a special flight permit under 
Sec. Sec.  21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate your airplane to a location where 
you can accomplish the requirements of this AD.
    (h) How do I get copies of the documents referenced in this AD? 
You may get copies of the documents referenced in this AD from 
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison Manager, CH-6371 Stans, 
Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 63 19; facsimile: +41 41 619 
6224; or from Pilatus Business Aircraft Ltd., Product Support 
Department, 11755 Airport Way, Broomfield, Colorado 80021; 
telephone: (303) 465-9099; facsimile: (303) 465-6040. You may view 
these documents at FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional 
Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

    Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in Swiss AD Number 
HB 2002-658, dated November 30, 2002.


    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on February 10, 2003.
Michael Gallagher,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 03-3871 Filed 2-18-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P