[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 14, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34401-34405]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-11703]


 ========================================================================
 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. 70, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 14, 2005 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 34401]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-20515; Directorate Identifier 2005-CE-09-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-6, PC-
6-H1, PC-6-H2, PC-6/350, PC-6/350-H1, PC-6/350-H2, PC-6/A, PC-6/A-H1, 
PC-6/A-H2, PC-6/B-H2, PC-6/B1-H2, PC-6/B2-H2, PC-6/B2-H4, PC-6/C-H2, 
and PC-6/C1-H2 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); Reopening of 
the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise an earlier proposed airworthiness 
directive (AD) that applies to all Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus) 
(also identified as Fairchild Republic Company and Fairchild Heli 
Porter) Model PC-6 airplanes. The earlier NPRM proposed to require you 
to repetitively inspect the stabilizer-trim attachment and structural 
components for cracks, corrosion, and discrepancies and replace any 
defective part with a new part. The earlier NPRM also proposed to 
require you to replace all Fairchild connecting pieces with a Pilatus 
connecting piece. The earlier NPRM resulted from mandatory continuing 
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority 
for Switzerland. This proposed AD would retain the actions from the 
earlier NPRM and would require you to replace fittings without an index 
after the part number (P/N) with an improved part. This proposed AD 
results from incorporating revised manufacture service information to 
include a procedure for replacing certain fittings with an improved 
part and to correct the allowable limits of the actuator attachment 
hole diameters. This proposed AD also clarifies the applicability. 
Since this action imposes an additional burden over that proposed in 
the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the 
chance to comment on this additional action.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by July 13, 
2005.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to submit comments on this proposed 
AD:
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-Wide Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590-001.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    To get the service information identified in this proposed AD, 
contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison Manager, CH-6371 Stans, 
Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 6580; facsimile: +41 41 619 6576.
    To view the comments on this proposed AD, go to http://dms.dot.gov. 
The docket number is FAA-2005-20515; Directorate Identifier 2005-CE-09-
AD.

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? We invite you to submit any 
written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. 
Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include the 
docket number, ``FAA-2005-20515; Directorate Identifier 2005-CE-09-AD'' 
at the beginning of your comments. We will post all comments we 
receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal 
information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each 
substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed 
rulemaking. Using the search function of our docket web site, anyone 
can find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, 
including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed 
the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). 
This is docket number FAA-2005-20515. You may review the DOT's complete 
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 
2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.
    Are there any specific portions of this proposed AD I should pay 
attention to? We specifically invite comments on the overall 
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this 
proposed AD. If you contact us through a nonwritten communication and 
that contact relates to a substantive part of this proposed AD, we will 
summarize the contact and place the summary in the docket. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this 
proposed AD in light of those comments and contacts.

Docket Information

    Where can I go to view the docket information? You may view the AD 
docket that contains this proposal, any comments received, and any 
final disposition in person at the DMS Docket Offices between 9 a.m. 
and 5 p.m. (eastern standard time), Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5227) is 
located on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation NASSIF 
Building at the street address stated in ADDRESSES. You may also view 
the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. The comments will 
be available in the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them.

Discussion

    What is the background of the subject matter? The Federal Office 
for Civil Aviation (FOCA), which is the airworthiness authority for 
Switzerland, recently notified FAA that an unsafe condition may exist 
on all Pilatus Model PC-6 airplanes. The FOCA reports that the lower 
attachment bracket of the horizontal stabilizer actuator broke which 
resulted in an emergency landing outside the airport.

[[Page 34402]]

    The FOCA also reports two other instances of total failure of the 
stabilizer trim attachment on in-service airplanes.
    What is the potential impact if FAA took no action? If not detected 
and corrected, defects in the stabilizer-trim attachment and 
surrounding structural components could cause the stabilizer-trim 
attachment to fail. This failure could lead to loss of control of the 
airplane.
    Has FAA taken any action to this point? We issued a proposal to 
amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to 
include an AD that would apply to all Pilatus Model PC-6 airplanes. 
This proposal was published in the Federal Register as a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on March 24, 2005 (70 FR 15019). The NPRM 
proposed to require you to:

--Inspect the stabilizer-trim attachment and structural components (the 
fitting, the connecting piece, the bearing fork, the bearing support 
assembly, and the auxiliary frame, as applicable) for cracks and 
corrosion;
--Inspect the diameters of the boltholes on the fittings, auxiliary 
frame, and connecting piece (as applicable) for discrepancies;
--Replace any cracked, corroded, or defective part with a new part; and
--Replace all Fairchild connecting pieces with a Pilatus connecting 
piece.

    Was the public invited to comment? The FAA encouraged interested 
persons to participate in developing this amendment. The following 
presents the comments received on the proposal and FAA's response to 
each comment:

Comment Issue No. 1: Incorporate Revised Service Bulletin

    What is the commenter's concern? Pilatus has revised the original 
service bulletin to include a requirement to replace fittings, part 
number (P/N) 116.40.06.033 without an index of ``A'' or ``B'' with an 
improved part, P/N 116.40.06.112.
    Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 147, dated May 1985, requires you to 
inspect P/N 116.40.06.033 for cracks and to replace all cracked P/Ns 
116.40.06.033 with an improved part, P/N 116.40.06.112. If no cracks 
are found, P/N 116.40.06.033 without an index of ``A'' or ``B'' can 
remain installed provided it is repetitively inspected for cracks every 
100 hours time-in-service (TIS).
    Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 147, dated May 1985, states that P/N 
116.40.06.033 with an Index A is not subject to the 100-hour repetitive 
inspection.
    Pilatus PC-6 Service Bulletin No. 53-001, Rev. No. 1, dated June 1, 
2005, terminates the 100-hour repetitive inspection specified in 
Service Bulletin No. 147. The 100-hour repetitive inspection is 
terminated by requiring you to replace all P/Ns 116.40.06.033 without 
an index of ``A'' or ``B'' with an improved part, P/N 116.40.04.112.
    Pilatus requests the actions in the revised service bulletin be 
included in the proposed AD action.
    What is FAA's response to the concern? We agree with the commenter.
    It is FAA's policy that reliance on critical repetitive inspections 
on airplanes utilized in commuter service for hire carries an 
unnecessary safety risk when a design change exists that could 
eliminate or, in certain instances, reduce the number of those critical 
inspections. In determining what inspections are critical, the FAA 
considers (1) The safety consequences of the airplane if the known 
problem is not detected by the inspection; (2) the reliability of the 
inspection such as the probability of not detecting the known problem; 
(3) whether the inspection area is difficult to access; and (4) the 
possibility of damage to an adjacent structure as a result of the 
problem.
    The fitting is considered a critical structural component. 
Requiring replacement of all P/Ns 116.40.06.033 without an index of 
``A'' or ``B'' with a P/N 116.40.06.112 terminates the 100-hour 
repetitive inspection specified in Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 147, 
dated May 1985.
    We have confirmed with Pilatus that replacing P/Ns 116.40.06.033 
without an index of ``A'' or ``B'' with a P/N 116.40.06.033 with an 
index of ``A'' or ``B'' also terminates the 100-hour repetitive 
inspection specified in Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 147, dated May 
1985.
    Since a design change exists that reduces the number of critical 
inspections, we will change this proposed AD to include this action.
    Including this action imposes an additional burden over that 
proposed in the earlier NPRM. We are reopening the comment period to 
allow the public the opportunity to comment on this additional action.

Comment Issue No. 2: Change the Repetitive Inspection Intervals

    What is the commenter's concern? The commenter states that 
repetitive dye-penetrant inspection of all affected parts at 100-hour 
TIS intervals could cause more damage. Dye-penetrant inspections 
require considerable paint stripping.
    The Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) for these airplanes currently 
requires a repetitive dye-penetrant inspection on the affected parts 
every 3,500 hours TIS or every 7 years, whichever occurs first.
    The commenter requests the repetitive inspection intervals be 
changed to every 3,500 hours TIS or every 7 years, whichever occurs 
first, to coincide with the AMM.
    What is FAA's response to the concern? We agree that the repetitive 
100-hour TIS inspections could cause additional damage to the affected 
parts. The FAA's intent was to mandate the repetitive inspections of 
the AMM. The NPRM inadvertently carried 100 hours TIS as the repetitive 
interval. The correct interval for the repetitive inspection is 3,500 
hours TIS.
    The AMM specifies the inspection every 3,500 hours TIS or every 7 
years, whichever occurs first. However, the only way we can ensure that 
all operators follow this AMM specification is through an AD. 
Therefore, we will make this change in the proposed AD action to ensure 
the inspections are done.

Comment Issue No. 3: Clarify the Applicability of the Affected 
Airplanes

    What is the commenter's concern? A commenter states that it is not 
clear whether the proposed AD applied to Fairchild built Model PC-6 
airplanes or to both Pilatus and Fairchild built Model PC-6 airplanes.
    Also, it is unclear whether the proposed AD applies only to Model 
PC-6 airplanes or to all PC-6 series airplanes.
    The commenter requests clarification on the applicability of the 
affected airplanes.
    What is FAA's response to the concern? We agree with commenter that 
the applicability may be unclear.
    Fairchild Republic Company and Fairchild Heli Porter manufactured 
certain Model PC-6 airplanes under the license agreement shown on the 
United States (U.S.) type certificate data sheet (TCDS) No. 7A15, which 
is currently held by Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.
    This proposed AD applies to all PC-6 series airplanes, including 
those built by Fairchild Republic Company and Fairchild Heli Porter.
    We will change the proposed AD action to clarify the applicability.
    What events have caused FAA to issue a supplemental NPRM? In 
addition to the changes noted above, the manufacturer revised the 
service information to include a requirement for replacing the fitting 
without an index after the part number with an improved

[[Page 34403]]

part and to correct the allowable limits of the actuator attachment 
hole diameters.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    What has FAA decided? After examining the circumstances and 
reviewing all available information related to the incidents described 
above, we have determined that:
--The unsafe condition referenced in this document exists or could 
develop on other Pilatus Model PC-6 airplanes of the same type design 
that are on the U.S. registry;
--We should change the NPRM to incorporate the concerns addressed by 
the commenters and incorporate the revised service information; and
--We should take AD action to correct this unsafe condition.

The Supplemental NPRM

    How will the changes to the NPRM impact the public? Proposing to 
require you to replace fittings without an index after the part number 
with a different part goes beyond the scope of what was originally 
proposed in the NPRM. Therefore, we are reopening the comment period 
and allowing the public the chance to comment on these additional 
actions.
    What are the provisions of the supplemental NPRM? The proposed AD 
would require you to:
--Inspect the stabilizer-trim attachment and structural components (the 
fitting, the connecting piece, the bearing fork, the bearing support 
assembly, and the auxiliary frame, as applicable) for cracks and 
corrosion;
--Inspect the diameters of the boltholes on the fittings, auxiliary 
frame, and connecting piece (as applicable) for discrepancies;
--Replace any cracked, corroded, or defective part with a new part;
--Replace all Fairchild connecting pieces, P/N 6232.0026.XX with a 
Pilatus connecting piece. The Fairchild part has a rivet in the middle 
that is not on the Pilatus part; and
--Replace all fittings, P/N 116.40.06.033 without an index after the P/
N with an improved part, P/N 116.40.06.033 with an index after the P/N 
or P/N 116.40.06.112.
    How does the revision to 14 CFR part 39 affect this proposed AD? On 
July 10, 2002, we published a new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 
47997, July 22, 2002), which governs FAA's AD system. This regulation 
now includes material that relates to altered products, special flight 
permits, and alternative methods of compliance. This material 
previously was included in each individual AD. Since this material is 
included in 14 CFR part 39, we will not include it in future AD 
actions.

Costs of Compliance

    How many airplanes would this proposed AD impact? We estimate that 
this proposed AD affects 41 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 
do the proposed inspections:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Total cost per
             Labor cost                    Parts cost          airplane         Total cost on U.S.  operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 work hours x $65 per hour = $715  Not applicable.......            $715  $715 x 41 = $29,315.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements 
that would be required based on the results of the proposed 
inspections. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that 
may need these replacements:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Total cost per airplane to replace all
              Labor cost                         Parts cost                              parts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 work hours x $65 = $650...........  $2,000 to replace all parts..  $650 + $2,000 = $2,650.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    What authority does FAA have for issuing this rulemaking action? 
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 AD.

Regulatory Findings

    Would this proposed AD impact various entities? We have determined 
that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under 
Executive Order 13132. This proposed 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.
    Would this proposed AD involve a significant rule or regulatory 
action? For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
AD:
    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. 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.
    We prepared a summary of the costs to comply with this proposed AD 
(and other information as included in the Regulatory Evaluation) and 
placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary by 
sending a request to us at the address listed under ADDRESSES. Include 
``AD Docket FAA-2005-20515; Directorate Identifier 2005-CE-09-AD'' in 
your request.

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 14 
CFR part 39 as follows:

[[Page 34404]]

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 directive (AD):

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: Docket No. FAA-2005-20515; Directorate 
Identifier 2005-CE-09-AD.

When is the Last Date I Can Submit Comments on This Proposed AD?

    (a) We must receive comments on this proposed airworthiness 
directive (AD) by July 13, 2005.

What Other ADs Are Affected By This Action?

    (b) None.

What Airplanes Are Affected by This AD?

    (c) This AD affects the following airplanes, all manufacturer 
serial numbers (MSN), that are certificated in any category.


    Note 1: These airplanes are also identified as Fairchild 
Republic Company PC-6 series airplanes and Fairchild Heli Porter PC-
6 series airplanes.

Models

(1) PC-6
(2) PC-6-H1
(3) PC-6-H2
(4) PC-6/350
(5) PC-6/350-H1
(6) PC-6/350-H2
(7) PC-6/A
(8) PC-6/A-H1
(9) PC-6/A-H2
(10) PC-6/B-H2
(11) PC-6/B1-H2
(12) PC-6/B2-H2
(13) PC-6/B2-H4
(14) PC-6/C-H2
(15) PC-6/C1-H2
    What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in This AD?
    (d) This AD is the result of mandatory continuing airworthiness 
information (MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority for 
Switzerland. We are issuing this proposed AD to detect and correct 
cracks in the stabilizer-trim attachment and surrounding structural 
components, which could result in failure of the stabilizer-trim 
attachment. This failure could lead to loss of control of the 
airplane.

What Must I Do To Address This Problem?

    (e) To address this problem, you must do the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Actions                  Compliance          Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Inspect the following:
    (i) the stabilizer-trim       Within the next     Follow Pilatus PC-
     attachment and structural     100 hours time-in-  6 Service
     components (fitting,          service (TIS)       Bulletin No. 53-
     connecting piece, bearing     after the           001, Rev. No. 1,
     fork, bearing support         effective date of   dated June 1,
     assembly, and auxiliary       this AD.            2005.
     frame, as applicable) for     Repetitively
     cracks and corrosion; and.    inspect
    (ii) the diameters of the      thereafter at
     actuator attachment bolt      intervals not-to-
     holes on the fittings,        exceed 3,500
     auxiliary frame, and          hours TIS or 7
     connecting piece (as          years, whichever
     applicable) for               occurs first.
     discrepancies.
---------------------------------
(2) If cracks are found during    Replace the         Follow Pilatus PC-
 any inspection required in        defective part      6 Service
 paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this AD,   before further      Bulletin No. 53-
 replace the defective part with   flight after the    001, Rev. No. 1,
 a new part.                       inspection in       dated June 1,
                                   which cracks are    2005.
                                   found. After each
                                   replacement,
                                   continue with the
                                   repetitive
                                   inspection
                                   requirement in
                                   paragraph (e)(1)
                                   of this AD.
---------------------------------
(3) If corrosion or
 discrepancies are found during
 any inspection required in
 paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and
 (e)(1)(ii) of this AD, do the
 following:
    (i) replace the defective     Replace or repair   Follow Pilatus PC-
     part with a new part if the   the defective       6 Service
     corrosion or discrepancy is   part before         Bulletin No. 53-
     beyond the repairable         further flight      001, Rev. No. 1,
     limits stated in the          after the           dated June 1,
     service information; or.      inspection in       2005.
    (ii) repair the defective      which corrosion
     part if the corrosion or      or discrepancies
     discrepancy is within the     are found. After
     repairable limits stated in   each replacement
     the service information..     or repair,
                                   continue with the
                                   repetitive
                                   inspection
                                   requirement in
                                   paragraph (e)(1)
                                   of this AD.
---------------------------------
 
---------------------------------
(4) Replace the following:
    (i) all Fairchild connecting  Within the next     Follow Pilatus PC-
     pieces, part number (P/N)     100 hours TIS       6 Service
     6232.0026.XX, with a          after the           Bulletin No. 53-
     Pilatus connecting piece, P/  effective date of   001, Rev. No. 1,
     N 6232.0026.XX. The           this AD. After      dated June 1,
     Fairchild part has a rivet    replacement,        2005.
     in the middle that is not     repetitively
     on the Pilatus part; and.     inspect
    (ii) all fittings, P/N         thereafter at
     116.40.06.033 without an      intervals not-to-
     index after the P/N, with     exceed 3,500
     an improved part, P/N         hours TIS or 7
     116.40.06.033 with an index   years, whichever
     of ``A'' or ``B'' after the   occurs first. If
     P/N or with P/N               after the
     116.40.06.112.                inspection
                                   required in
                                   paragraph (e)(1)
                                   of this AD, you
                                   determine that
                                   you already have
                                   a P/N
                                   116.40.06.033
                                   with an index of
                                   ``A'' or ``B'' or
                                   a P/N
                                   116.40.06.112
                                   installed,
                                   repetitively
                                   inspect
                                   thereafter at
                                   intervals not-to-
                                   exceed 3,500
                                   hours TIS or 7
                                   years, whichever
                                   occurs first
                                   after the part
                                   was installed.
---------------------------------
(5) Do not install any of the
 following:
    (i) Fairchild connecting      As of the           Follow Pilatus PC-
     piece, P/N 6232.0026.XX (it   effective date of   6 Service
     has a rivet in the middle     this AD.            Bulletin No. 53-
     that is not on the Pilatus                        001, Rev. No. 1,
     part); and.                                       dated June 1,
    (ii) fitting, P/N                                  2005.
     116.40.06.033, without an
     index after the part number.
------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page 34405]]

    Note 2: Even though not required in this AD, the FAA recommends 
that you send all defective parts to Pilatus at the address 
specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. With the part, include the 
aircraft serial number, flying hours, and cycles.

May I Request an Alternative Method of Compliance?

    (f) You may request a different method of compliance or a 
different compliance time for this AD by following the procedures in 
14 CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise, send your request to 
your principal inspector. The principal inspector may add comments 
and will send your request to the Manager, Standards Office, Small 
Airplane Directorate, FAA. For information on 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.

Is There Other Information That Relates to This Subject?

    (g) Swiss AD HB-2005-080, effective date March 2, 2005, also 
addresses the subject of this AD. The Federal Office for Civil 
Aviation (FOCA), which is the airworthiness authority for 
Switzerland, classified Pilatus PC-6 Service Bulletin No. 53-001, 
Rev. No. 1, dated June 1, 2005, as mandatory. The FAA anticipates 
that the FOCA will issue a new Swiss AD in order to ensure the 
continued airworthiness of these airplanes in Switzerland.

May I Get Copies of the Documents Referenced in This AD?

    (h) 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 6580; facsimile: +41 41 619 6576. 
To view the AD docket, go to the Docket Management Facility; U.S. 
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif 
Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC, or on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. The docket number is FAA-2005-20515.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 7, 2005.
Kim Smith,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-11703 Filed 6-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P