[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 21 (Wednesday, January 31, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6056-6074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-00763]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 91, 125, 135, 137, and 145
[Docket No.: FAA-2024-0025; Notice No. 24-08]
RIN 2120-AL20
Inspection Programs for Single-Engine Turbine-Powered Airplanes
and Unmanned Aircraft; and Miscellaneous Maintenance-Related Updates
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action would revise certain aircraft maintenance
inspection rules for small, corporate-sized, and unmanned aircraft. The
proposed changes include additional inspection program options for
owners of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes and unmanned
aircraft, relaxed mechanical reliability reporting requirements for
certain aircraft, and several changes to clarify and simplify various
maintenance-related regulations. These proposed amendments would
relieve aircraft owners, operators, maintenance providers, and the FAA.
The proposed amendments would provide greater flexibility for aircraft
maintenance, standardized reporting requirements, and provide
clarification of various maintenance-related regulations.
DATES: Send comments on or before April 1, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2024-0025
using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and
follow the online instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at (202) 493-2251.
Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Bryan B. Davis, Airmen & Special Projects Branch,
AFS-320, Aircraft Maintenance Division, Flight Standards Service,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-1675; email
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Overview of Proposed Rule
B. Background
II. Authority for This Rulemaking
III. Discussion of the Proposal
A. Inspection Programs for Single-Engine Turbine-Powered
Airplanes and Unmanned Aircraft (Sec. 91.409)
B. Scope of Covered Aircraft (Sec. 91.409(e))
C. Clarifications of Inspection Program Options (Sec.
91.409(f))
D. Conforming and Clarifying Changes to Subpart E of Part 91
E. Other Miscellaneous Inspection Program and Maintenance
Program Updates
F. Clarification of Part 145 Requirements on Documents and Data
and Contract Maintenance
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Summary of the Regulatory Impact Analysis
B. Statement of Need for Regulatory Action
C. Summary of Benefits and Costs
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. International Trade Impact Assessment
F. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. International Compatibility
I. Environmental Analysis
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
B. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
D. Executive Order 13609, International Cooperation
VI. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
C. Confidential Business Information
D. Electronic Access and Filing
E. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
I. Executive Summary
A. Overview of Proposed Rule
The FAA proposes to revise certain rules for small, corporate-
sized, and unmanned aircraft maintenance inspections. The most
substantial change would be the increase in inspection program options
for owners and operators of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes and
unmanned aircraft. Currently, when operating under the rules in part 91
of title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), owners and
operators of these aircraft must comply with annual or 100-hour
inspection requirements or adopt progressive inspection programs in
lieu of those requirements. For single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes, this proposed rule would expand inspection options to
include, among others, an inspection program recommended by the
manufacturer or an inspection program established by the registered
owner or operator and approved by the Administrator. For unmanned
aircraft, including unmanned aircraft operating under 14 CFR part 135
that are authorized to use the inspection rules in part 91, this
proposal would enable the selection of either an inspection program
recommended by the manufacturer or a program established by the
registered owner or operator and approved by the Administrator. The FAA
believes this change would enhance safety and would provide unmanned
and single-engine turbine-powered aircraft owners and operators with
greater flexibility with aircraft maintenance.
Additionally, for aircraft operating under part 91, subpart K,
fractional ownership rules, the FAA proposes to lengthen the reporting
interval for aircraft mechanical reliability reports from 72 to 96
hours and to allow electronic report submissions. This would align the
reporting interval requirement with those found in other regulations
(e.g., 14 CFR 121.703, 135.415, and 145.221).
Finally, the FAA proposes several changes to clarify and simplify
various maintenance-related regulations in areas that have confusing or
ambiguous
[[Page 6057]]
language, to include maintenance and inspection requirements for part
91 and 125 operators and document retention. It also proposes to
clarify part 145 regulations pertaining to repair station maintenance
documentation and contract maintenance.
B. Background
Subpart E of 14 CFR part 91 prescribes general rules governing the
maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations of United States
(U.S.)-registered civil aircraft operating within or outside of the
United States. For aircraft operated under, or otherwise subject to,
part 91, subpart E, Sec. 91.409 contains the requirements for aircraft
inspections, including requirements for annual inspections and 100-hour
inspections. Section 91.409(c) provides exceptions to those inspection
requirements; aircraft with special flight permits, experimental
certificates, light-sport category, or provisional airworthiness
certificates, and aircraft for which progressive inspection programs
have been adopted are not required to meet the annual and 100-hour
inspection requirements.
Paragraph (c)(3) excludes the types of airplanes identified in
Sec. 91.409(e). These types of airplanes--large airplanes (to which
part 125 is not applicable), turbojet multiengine airplanes, and
turbopropeller-powered multiengine airplanes--must be inspected in
accordance with one of the inspection program options specified in
Sec. 91.409(f) in lieu of the annual or 100-hour inspection. These
options include: (1) a continuous airworthiness inspection program
under a part 121 or 135 operator's Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance
Program (CAMP); (2) an approved aircraft inspection program under part
135; (3) a current inspection program recommended by the manufacturer;
or (4) any other inspection program established by the owner or
operator and approved by the FAA.
Certain rotorcraft may, but are not required to, use one of these
inspection program options. See Sec. 91.409(c)(4) and (e). In 1989,
the FAA amended Sec. 91.409 [54 FR 34284, Aug. 18, 1989] to allow
turbine-powered rotorcraft (both single- and multiengine) owners and
operators to choose between performing an annual, a progressive, or an
inspection program under Sec. 91.409(f).
In 2016, an aircraft manufacturer petitioned the FAA for rulemaking
to include single-engine turbine-powered airplanes within the scope of
Sec. 91.409(e) and (f).\1\ Single-engine turbine-powered airplanes are
not currently permitted to use one of the inspection options in Sec.
91.409(f) as an alternative to the annual or 100-hour inspection. Since
single-engine turbine-powered airplanes were rare at the time the
options were introduced for turbine-powered rotorcraft, they were not
included in that rule. Today, there are over 4,500 registered single-
engine turbine-powered airplanes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Textron Aviation Inc. Petition for Rulemaking for 14 CFR
91.409, September 15, 2016, Public Docket No. FAA-2016-9166,
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) commercial
utilization and National Airspace System integration has increased
since 2016. While 14 CFR part 107 addresses small UAS operations, the
FAA has also granted exemptions and waivers from certain part 91 and
part 135 rules to permit UAS operations under those parts. Under these
exemptions (in the conditions and limitations), the FAA has generally
required that unmanned aircraft be inspected in accordance with the
manufacturer's inspection instructions or for those instructions to be
incorporated into the operator's approved maintenance or inspection
program.
II. Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in
title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
This rulemaking is issued under the authority described in Subtitle
VII, part A, subpart III, section 447, section 44701(a)(2)(A) and (B)
and (a)(5), and section 44707. Under section 44701(a)(2)(A) and (B),
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations and minimum standards
in the interest of safety for inspecting, servicing, and overhauling
aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances, and equipment
and facilities for, and the timing of and manner of, the inspecting,
servicing, and overhauling the FAA finds necessary for safety and
commerce. Section 44701(a)(5) authorizes the FAA to prescribe
regulations and minimum standards for other practices, methods, and
procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce
and national security. Under section 44707, the FAA may examine and
rate repair stations. Specifically, under section 44707(2), the FAA is
charged with inspecting and rating repair stations on the adequacy and
suitability of the equipment, facilities, and materials for, and
methods of, repair and overhaul, and the competency of the individuals
doing the work or giving instruction in the work. The regulations
proposed are within the scope of that authority.
III. Discussion of the Proposal
A. Inspection Programs for Single-Engine Turbine-Powered Airplanes and
Unmanned Aircraft (Sec. 91.409)
Currently, Sec. 91.409(e) prohibits the operation of a large
airplane, turbojet multiengine airplane, turbopropeller-powered
multiengine airplane, or turbine-powered rotorcraft unless the
replacement times for life-limited parts specified in the aircraft
specifications, type data sheets, or other documents approved by the
Administrator are complied with and the airplane or turbine-powered
rotorcraft is inspected in accordance with an inspection program
selected under Sec. 91.409(f), except that the owner or operator of a
turbine-powered rotorcraft may elect to use the inspection provisions
of Sec. 91.409(a), (b), (c), or (d) instead. We propose to expand
Sec. 91.409(e) to apply to single-engine turbine-powered airplanes and
unmanned aircraft. Unmanned aircraft would be required to be inspected
in accordance with an inspection program selected under Sec.
91.409(f). Owners and operators of single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes would be able to select a Sec. 91.409(f) inspection program
or use the inspection provisions of Sec. 91.409(a), (b), (c), or (d).
This change would provide single-engine turbine-powered airplane
owners and operators more options for inspecting their aircraft. It
would give those owners and operators the same choice of inspection
program options currently available to owners and operators of turbine-
powered rotorcraft. Providing these additional options would harmonize
the requirements for similarly-sized turbine-powered airplanes and
rotorcraft. Owners and operators would retain the ability to use their
existing annual inspection program if they do not want to select any of
the newly available options.
Currently, if operating under part 91, single-engine turbine-
powered airplane owners and operators only have several inspection
options: an annual, a 100-hour, or adopt a progressive inspection
program. This proposed rule would expand inspection options to include
the types of inspection programs authorized under Sec. 91.409(f). This
includes, among others, a manufacturer-
[[Page 6058]]
recommended inspection program, or an inspection program established by
the registered owner, or operator, and approved by the Administrator.
The FAA believes this change increases regulatory flexibility and
will allow owners and operators the ability to select the program that
works best for them. In 1989, the FAA amended Sec. 91.409(e) to allow
more inspection options for turbine-powered rotorcraft, which enabled
operators to schedule inspections in a manner that has allowed a higher
level of rotorcraft utilization. At that time, in the early 1980s, the
number of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes was small compared to
turbine-powered rotorcraft, which estimated approximately 3,000
aircraft during that time. Today, there are over 4,500 registered
single-engine turbine-powered airplanes. The FAA does not believe there
are any safety reasons why single-engine turbine-powered airplanes
should not be afforded the same regulatory flexibilities as turbine-
powered rotorcraft regarding part 91 inspection options. A turbine-
powered rotorcraft's use of a manufacturer-recommended inspection
program has been shown to be a safe and effective aircraft inspection
method instead of the annual or 100-hour inspection requirements. The
FAA expects that the same will be true for single-engine turbine-
powered airplane manufacturer-recommended inspection programs. In its
rulemaking petition, Textron Aviation, Inc., argued that manufacturer-
recommended inspection programs are in the public interest because they
are geared more specifically to the manufacturer's aircraft model and
involve less invasive scheduled maintenance compared to an annual or
100-hour inspection because of less frequent component disassembly,
inspection, and reassembly.\2\ The FAA agrees these inspection programs
can provide these articulated benefits, when applicable, when compared
to an annual or a 100-hour inspection. Additionally, a manufacturer-
recommended inspection program can contain inspection intervals at more
appropriate times for each product and article based on the design and
functional history of the same, coupled with the manufacturer's
detailed technical knowledge of how best to maintain them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See note 1 at *2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing regulations regarding maintenance and inspection
development during the aircraft's part 21 certification process contain
the requirements for how a manufacturer-recommended inspection program
shall be developed--to include the inspection intervals for products
and articles. Section 21.50 requires that the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness and manufacturer's maintenance manuals must be
developed in accordance with 14 CFR parts 23, 25, 27, 29, etc., as
appropriate. Within each of these parts, the applicable regulation
references its appendix, which contains specific requirements that the
maintenance inspection program must possess. For example, when
developing inspection interval timing for an aircraft while complying
with Sec. 21.50, a part 23 aircraft manufacturer is referred to Sec.
23.1529 (Instructions for continued airworthiness), which states an
applicant must prepare the same and further refers the applicant to
appendix A for part 23. Appendix A, instruction A.23.3(b)(1) requires
the manufacturer to develop maintenance/inspection scheduling
instructions for all products and articles and must include an
inspection program that includes the inspection frequency and extent
necessary to provide for the aircraft's continued airworthiness. The
recommended inspection intervals are part of the overall Instructions
for Continued Airworthiness that would subsequently be submitted to the
FAA for acceptance.
During the unmanned aircraft's certification process, whether it
undergoes a traditional part 21 type certification or a 49 U.S.C. 44807
exemption request,\3\ the manufacturer must submit an aircraft
inspection program, for FAA approval, that meets certain requirements
for life-limited part replacement times specified in the aircraft
specifications, type certificate data sheets, or ``other documents
approved by the Administrator (i.e., the sec. 44807 exemption and its
associated Conditions & Limitations).'' \4\ These manufacturer-
recommended inspection programs--to include inspection intervals for
products and articles--must include the airframe, engines, propellers,
rotors, appliances, emergency equipment, etc., which are ultimately
approved by the FAA only when they are found to be adequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 49 U.S.C. 44807 provides the Secretary of Transportation
with authority to determine whether a certificate of waiver,
certificate of authorization, or a certificate under sec. 44703 or
44704 is required for certain unmanned aircraft system (UAS)
operations. Section 44807(b) instructs the Secretary to base their
determination on which types of unmanned aircraft do not create a
hazard to users of the National Airspace System or the public. In
making this determination, the Secretary must consider the unmanned
aircraft's size, weight, speed, operational capability, and other
aspects of the proposed operation. On October 1, 2021, the Secretary
delegated this authority to the FAA Administrator. Unmanned aircraft
exemptions have been subsequently issued with conditions &
limitations that require the operator to follow the manufacturer's
maintenance instructions, service bulletins, inspections, etc.
\4\ Section 44807 exemption grants contain a Conditions &
Limitations section, which must be followed. The exemptions contain
language such as: ``The Operator must follow the UAS manufacturer's
operating limitations, maintenance instructions, service bulletins,
overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life-limit requirements for
the UAS and UAS components. Each UAS operated under this exemption
must comply with all manufacturers' safety bulletins. Maintenance
must be performed by individuals who have been trained by the
Operator in proper techniques and procedures for these UAS. All
maintenance must be recorded in the UAS records including a brief
description of the work performed, date of completion, and the name
of the person performing the work.'' See Exemption No. 21079, Docket
No. FAA-2023-1483, August 29, 2023. See also Exemption Nos.: 21079,
Docket No. FAA-2023-1483, Aug. 29, 2023; 11204, Docket No. FAA-2014-
0886, Oct. 23, 2014; 12145, Docket No. FAA-2015-1464, July 24, 2015;
21034, Docket No. FAA-2023-1303, Aug. 30, 2023, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding unmanned aircraft inspection program selection, excluding
those operated under part 107, it is necessary for owners and operators
to have the ability to select a program that is most appropriate for
the design and configuration of their specific aircraft because of the
wide variety in aircraft, which cannot be done in the existing
regulations. Currently, part 135 unmanned aircraft applicants and
approved operators can only use a CAMP, under Sec. 135.411(a)(2), or
an approved aircraft inspection program, under Sec. Sec. 135.411(a)(1)
and 135.419, because other inspection program options cannot be
selected, as these aircraft are not incorporated in the regulations.
The FAA has not approved part 135 unmanned aircraft operators to use an
annual or a 100-hour inspection because the FAA has determined the
scope and detail criteria \5\ contained in these two options do not
adequately cover the component characteristics that are typically
installed on these aircraft (e.g., multiple electric motors, circuit
boards, batteries, etc.). Additionally, a manufacturer-recommended
inspection program--that traditional aircraft may currently select--is
not available to unmanned aircraft, despite CAMPs and AAIPs being
primarily based on a manufacturer-recommended inspection
[[Page 6059]]
program. Because of these issues, a CAMP or an AAIP has been the only
option for part 135 unmanned aircraft operators to select.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Appendix D to part 43 (Scope and Detail of Items (as
Applicable to the Particular Aircraft) To Be Included in Annual and
100-Hour Inspections). Many of the 100-hour inspection requirements
do not apply to the majority of unmanned aircraft. For example,
paragraph (c) contains inspection criteria for the cabin and cockpit
group, which unmanned aircraft do not possess. Similarly, paragraph
(d) pertains to reciprocated engines and their associated components
(oil, fuel, and hydraulic hoses, engine cylinders, etc.), which the
majority of unmanned aircraft do not have because they possess
electric propulsion systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the FAA proposes to include unmanned aircraft, excluding
part 107 aircraft, in Sec. 91.409(e), which would apply to unmanned
aircraft operating under, or otherwise required to be inspected in
accordance with, part 91. In particular, the FAA intends for this
proposal to apply to unmanned aircraft being operated under part 91 or
135 and that are required to select a maintenance program in accordance
with Sec. 91.409(f). While an unmanned aircraft operator would have
the option to select a manufacturer-recommended inspection program,
they could still continue to use an AAIP or CAMP. This proposal would
be applicable to the unmanned aircraft inspections and not unmanned
aircraft systems, as defined in 14 CFR 1.1.
The following discusses our proposal to amend certain Sec. 91.409
paragraphs to reflect these changes and additional proposed revisions
to this section to enhance clarification.
B. Scope of Covered Aircraft (Sec. 91.409(e))
For the reasons discussed above, we propose to expand Sec.
91.409(e) to include all turbine-powered aircraft, including unmanned
aircraft, and separate it into Sec. 91.409(e)(1) and (2) to better
organize the different regulatory frameworks.
Currently, paragraph (e) is limited to large airplanes (to which
part 125 is not applicable), turbojet multiengine airplanes,
turbopropeller-powered multiengine airplanes, and turbine-powered
rotorcraft. Owners and operators of these covered aircraft, except for
turbine-powered rotorcraft, are required to comply with replacement
times for life-limited parts and have their airplanes inspected using
one of the inspection programs specified in paragraph (f) instead of
the annual or 100-hour inspection provisions. Owners and operators of
turbine-powered rotorcraft, in contrast, can use one of the inspection
program options in paragraph (f), or they can elect to use the annual,
100-hour, or progressive inspection provisions (paragraphs (a), (b),
and (d), respectively)).
This proposed rule would add single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes to Sec. 91.409(e) and provide these owners and operators
with the same inspection options that are currently available to owners
and operators of turbine-powered rotorcraft. With the proposed addition
of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes, Sec. 91.409(e) would apply
to all turbine-powered airplanes. These amendments will enable owners
and operators of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes to inspect
their aircraft using one of the inspection program options in paragraph
(f) or elect to use the annual, 100-hour, or progressive inspection
provisions.
We also propose to revise Sec. 91.409(e) to include unmanned
aircraft. Unmanned aircraft owners and operators subject to the
regulation would be required to select one of the inspection programs
in paragraph (f). This proposed change would incorporate the
requirement, in the conditions & limitations section, that has been
required in the existing UAS sec. 44807 exemptions \6\ for unmanned
aircraft inspections using the UAS manufacturer's inspection program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We propose to separate Sec. 91.409(e) into two paragraphs to
increase clarity and readability, as stated above. Proposed paragraph
(e)(1) would cover all current and proposed aircraft that would be
required to be inspected in accordance with a Sec. 91.409(f) program
(i.e., large airplanes, multiengine turbine-powered airplanes, and
unmanned aircraft). Regarding large airplanes and multiengine turbine-
powered airplanes, the proposed rule would not make any changes to the
currently available inspection programs. Regarding unmanned aircraft,
as previously described, the annual, 100-hour, and progressive
inspection options are not viable inspection programs because of the
significant differences between unmanned aircraft and traditional
manned aircraft for which those provisions were designed. Unmanned
aircraft would be included under the new Sec. 91.409(e)(1) because
they should comply with time-limited parts replacement and the better-
suited inspection programs contained in paragraph (f). Proposed
paragraph (e)(2) would cover all current and proposed aircraft that
have the option to use the inspection options in paragraph (f) in lieu
of the inspection provisions of Sec. 91.409(a), (b), or (d) (i.e.,
turbine-powered rotorcraft and single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes).
C. Clarifications of Inspection Program Options (Sec. 91.409(f))
We intend to make several clarifying amendments to the inspection
program options specified in Sec. 91.409(f) and the manner in which
these programs are to be submitted.
Paragraph (f)(1) currently specifies the first inspection program
option available. The registered aircraft owner or operator under Sec.
91.409(e) may use ``[a] continuous airworthiness inspection program''
that is part of a CAMP currently in use by a part 121 or 135 operator
and operating that make and model aircraft under part 121 or operating
that make and model under part 135 and maintaining it under Sec.
135.411(a)(2). The FAA proposes to clarify the intent of this section
by replacing the phrase ``[a] continuous airworthiness inspection
program'' because it is not defined or referenced anywhere else in
regulations. Instead, the FAA proposes to revise the phrase so that the
paragraph refers only to ``[a]n inspection program'' that is part of a
[CAMP]. This change would have no substantive effect and is only
proposed to eliminate confusion by the phrase ``[a] continuous
airworthiness inspection program.''
We will also amend paragraph (f)(1) to remove the word
``operating'' from the phrase ``air carrier operating certificate.''
This change would leave separate references to ``air carrier
certificate'' and ``operating certificate,'' a change consistent with
the separate usage of the terms in 14 CFR 119.5.
Current paragraph (f)(3) provides the third inspection program
option: ``A current inspection program recommended by the
manufacturer.'' The FAA proposes to revise paragraph (f)(3) to clarify
that ``current inspection program'' means one that is available for
selection at the time the selection is made. That inspection program
would remain the ``current'' program to be used by that operator for
that aircraft during subsequent inspections, without regard to changes
that the manufacturer may have made to the recommended inspection
program since the date of selection. This is consistent with an FAA
legal interpretation on the subject, which states, ``to comply with
Sec. 91.409(f)(3) an operator need only adopt a manufacturer's
inspection program that is `current' as of the time they adopt it, and
that program remains `current' unless the FAA mandates revisions to it
in accordance with Sec. 91.415(a).'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See, e.g., Legal Interpretation of 14 CFR 91.409(f)(3),
Memorandum Opinion to Manager, Aircraft Maintenance Division, AFS-
300, from Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations, AGC-200 (Dec. 5,
2008); and Legal Interpretation of ''Current'' as it Applies to
Maintenance Manuals and Other Documents Referenced in 14 CFR
43.13(a) and 145.109(d), Memorandum Opinion to Manager, AWP-230 and
Manager, Sacramento FSDO, from Assistant Chief Counsel for
Regulations, AGC-200 (Aug. 13, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We do not intend for future changes to inspection programs issued
by manufacturers to be binding on an owner or operator who had already
selected a specific program that was
[[Page 6060]]
current at the time of selection.\8\ Therefore, to comply with Sec.
91.409(f)(3), an owner or operator need only select a manufacturer-
recommended inspection program that is ``current'' at the time of
selection, and that program would remain ``current'' for purposes of
complying with the regulation--unless the FAA mandated a revision with
an Airworthiness Directive or an amendment to an applicable operating
rule. Although operators would not be required to revise their
inspection programs when a manufacturer issues inspection program
revisions, operators may choose to incorporate these revisions if they
are applicable. This practice would comply with Sec. 91.409(f)(3). In
keeping with this interpretation and to clarify the requirement of
paragraph (f)(3), we propose to revise the phrase ``current inspection
program'' and replace it with the following: a program ``that was the
most current program available at the time of selection and identified
in the aircraft maintenance records.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 36 FR 19507, October 7, 1971, and 37 FR 14758, July 25,
1972.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current paragraph (f)(4) provides the fourth inspection program
option, which is the option to select any other inspection program
established by the registered owner or operator ``of that airplane or
turbine-powered rotorcraft'' and approved by the Administrator. The FAA
proposes to revise Sec. 91.409(f)(4) to remove the phrase ``of that
airplane or turbine-powered rotorcraft'' and replace it with ``for that
aircraft'' for simplicity because it would cover all the types of
aircraft referenced in the proposed revisions to paragraph (e) of the
section, including unmanned aircraft.
Also, the phrase ``and approved by the Administrator'' would be
moved from preceding the phrase ``under paragraph (g) of this
section,'' to follow the phrase ``established by the registered owner
or operator'' that appears earlier in the sentence. Accordingly, it
would precede the phrase ``for that aircraft.'' This change would help
clarify that the inspection program approval is specific to the
specific aircraft.
Additionally, in the undesignated, concluding text of Sec.
91.409(f), the FAA proposes to remove the requirement to include the
name and address of the person responsible for scheduling inspections
in the selected program. This requirement has resulted in unnecessary
administrative revisions as personnel and addresses change. This is a
burden to both the FAA and industry and has little or no safety
benefit, as the owner and operator of the aircraft are ultimately
responsible for ensuring all the required inspections are accomplished.
D. Conforming and Clarifying Changes to Subpart E of Part 91
1. Applicability Statement (Sec. 91.401)
The FAA proposes to amend Sec. 91.401 (the applicability section
for subpart E to part 91) to incorporate certain applicability
provisions that are currently found in other sections of subpart E.
These provisions would be better suited in subpart E's overall
applicability section. The agency also proposes to make other
clarifying changes to this section.
Specifically, Sec. 91.401 would be revised to incorporate two
provisions in Sec. 91.409(c) that exempt certain aircraft from
inspection requirements. As noted above, current Sec. 91.409(c)
provides, in part, that the requirements for annual inspections,
airworthiness certification inspections, and 100-hour inspections
(paragraphs (a) and (b) of Sec. 91.409)) do not apply to certain
aircraft under specified circumstances. This includes, in pertinent
part, the following:
1. An aircraft that carries a special flight permit, a current
experimental certificate, or a light-sport, or provisional
airworthiness certificate (Sec. 91.409(c)(1)); and
2. An aircraft inspected in accordance with an approved aircraft
inspection program under part 125 or 135 and so identified by the
registration number in the operations specifications of the certificate
holder having the approved inspection program (Sec. 91.409(c)(2)).
As Sec. 91.409(c) is currently written, it excludes these aircraft
from the inspection requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) only and
does not expressly exclude them from the alternative inspection
programs in paragraphs (d) and (e). This language may be construed
incorrectly to suggest that these aircraft are subject to the
alternative inspection programs in paragraphs (d) and (e). It was not
the FAA's intent to require that those covered aircraft comply with any
other inspection program in Sec. 91.409.
The FAA proposes to move the exception in Sec. 91.409(c)(1) for
aircraft that carry a special flight permit into a new Sec.
91.401(c)(3). The FAA issues special flight permits for specific
purposes under Sec. 21.197 to aircraft that may not at the time meet
applicable airworthiness standards but remain capable of safe flight
for the intended purpose; therefore, under these circumstances, it is
inconsistent to require compliance with an inspection program in
subpart E. Accordingly, such aircraft should be excluded from the
inspections required by paragraphs Sec. 91.409(a) and (b), the other
inspection requirements of that section, and Sec. 91.405 because the
special flight permit itself, when issued to the operator, already
assures the aircraft has been inspected and found to be in a condition
for safe flight for the intended operation.
The FAA also proposes to move the current Sec. 91.409(c)(2)
exceptions to new Sec. 91.401(c)(1) and (2). The current Sec.
91.409(c)(2) provides that paragraphs (a) and (b) do not apply to
aircraft inspected in accordance with an approved aircraft inspection
program under part 125 or 135. The current language in Sec. 91.409
could be misread to suggest the other Sec. 91.409 inspection program
requirements apply to those aircraft in addition to those of part 125
or Sec. 135.419, as applicable; this was not the FAA's intent. By
moving this exception requirement to Sec. 91.401, we would clarify
that an aircraft inspected in accordance with part 125 or an approved
aircraft inspection program, under Sec. 135.419, is not subject to the
other inspection requirements of Sec. 91.409 or Sec. 91.405.
Similarly, the FAA proposes to move the inspection exception
provision for aircraft that carry a current experimental certificate, a
light-sport airworthiness certificate, or a provisional airworthiness
certificate in Sec. 91.409(c)(1) to a new Sec. 91.401(c)(4) because
Sec. 91.409(c)(1) does not expressly exclude these aircraft from the
alternative inspection programs in paragraphs (d) and (e). However, the
FAA also proposes to clarify that these aircraft types must comply with
any portions of Sec. 91.409 that are specified in the operating
limitations under Sec. 91.317 or Sec. 91.319. This would remove
conflicting requirements that occur when the current regulation excepts
these aircraft from the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b), but the
operating limitations issued by the FAA for the aircraft require
compliance with specified portions of the regulation.
2. Compliance With General Airworthiness Requirements (Sec. 91.403)
We propose to amend Sec. 91.403(c) by revising the text and
dividing the alternative compliance options located in that single
paragraph into three new paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (3) for clarity.
The paragraph currently holds the requirement that no person may
operate an aircraft for which a manufacturer's maintenance manual or
instructions for continued airworthiness has been issued that contains
an airworthiness limitations section unless the person has complied
with any mandatory replacement times, inspection intervals,
[[Page 6061]]
and related procedures specified in that section or alternative
inspection intervals and related procedures set forth in an operations
specification approved by the Administrator under part 121 or 135 or in
accordance with an inspection program approved under Sec. 91.409(e).
The proposed revision is intended to more clearly convey the
alternative options available to maintain compliance with the FAA-
approved Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICA) provided by the manufacturer.
The proposed options follow closely those in the current rule but
with minor changes. The first option in paragraph (c)(1) would still
mandate compliance with the replacement times, inspection intervals,
and related procedures found in the airworthiness limitations section
of the manufacturer's maintenance manual or ICA. The second option in
paragraph (c)(2) would provide for alternative inspection intervals and
related procedures set forth in a CAMP for parts 121 and 135 operators,
which would be approved by the FAA and authorized by operations
specifications issued to the operator. In addition to including
operations under parts 121 and 135 as provided in the current rule,
this alternative would include operations under subpart K of part 91 if
the operators are utilizing a CAMP under Sec. 91.1411. This is because
the authorization process for a CAMP under part 91, subpart K, would be
similar to the process for CAMPs under parts 121 and 135. The FAA may
review and authorize any potential changes to an approved airworthiness
limitations section during the review process of the CAMP.
The third option in Sec. 91.403(c)(3) would be to use any
alternative inspection intervals and related procedures set forth in an
inspection program identified under Sec. 91.409(f). Section 91.409(f)
lists the inspection programs that the FAA authorizes for use. The FAA
considers these inspection programs to be permissible inspection
options for these aircraft. Currently, the reference in Sec.
91.403(c), now proposed as Sec. 91.403(c)(3), referred to inspection
intervals within authorized inspection programs under Sec. 91.409(e).
This reference has been updated for clarity to Sec. 91.409(f) because
that paragraph directly lists the inspection programs.
Finally, the FAA proposes to add a new paragraph (e) to Sec.
91.403 that clarifies that aircraft operating under a special flight
permit must do so in accordance with conditions and limitations issued
by the Administrator. The proposed revision would also state that the
aircraft must be inspected, at least to the extent necessary, to
determine the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation for the
intended flight. While this is the current practice in the issuance of
a special flight permit, the revision would make that requirement
explicit. These requirements are necessary for safety because the
aircraft in question would not otherwise meet applicable airworthiness
requirements.
3. Clarification of Maintenance Required To Correct Discrepancies
(Sec. 91.405)
The FAA proposes to revise Sec. 91.405(a) to state that, between
required inspections, the owner or operator would be required to
evaluate and disposition or correct, as appropriate, any discrepancies
through inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation, or the replacement
of parts, in accordance with part 43, or appropriately deferred as
provided in Sec. 91.213. The paragraph currently requires that each
owner or operator of an aircraft ``[s]hall have that aircraft inspected
as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required
inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have
discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter.''
The current text requires only that those discrepancies must be
``repaired,'' which does not properly include all ``maintenance''
elements, as it is defined in 14 CFR 1.1, and discrepancy disposition
may be done through several different types of maintenance actions,
such as inspection, preservation, or the replacement of parts. The FAA
also proposes to add, in paragraph (a), a reference to Sec. 91.213
(Inoperative instruments and equipment) as that section permits
deferral of qualifying instruments and equipment under specific
conditions and limitations.
The FAA also proposes to revise Sec. 91.405(c), which provides an
exception to the requirement in paragraph (a) to repair discrepancies.
Paragraph (c) is narrowly tailored to only instruments or equipment
permitted to be inoperative by Sec. 91.213(d)(2), and those must be
``repaired, replaced, removed, or inspected at the next required
inspection.'' The FAA proposes to change paragraph (c) to clarify that
an inoperative instrument or item of equipment would be required to be
inspected at each required inspection to ensure it will not have an
adverse effect on the aircraft's continued safe operation.
We discussed this issue in the 1988 \9\ rule preamble in response
to a commenter, who had requested clarification on the length of time
an inoperative instrument or equipment item could remain inoperative
after deactivation or removal. In the FAA's response, we explained that
the rule required a person to determine whether an aircraft with
inoperative instruments and equipment is in condition for safe
operation. Additionally, at every required inspection thereafter, the
aircraft owner or operator would need to have any inoperative
instrument and equipment reevaluated to ensure the discrepancy would
not affect the operation of any other installed instrument or
equipment. Therefore, the FAA believed that the rule provided adequate
safeguards without having to impose time limits on the repair or
replacement of inoperative instruments and equipment. The intent of the
rule was that if the inoperative instrument or item of equipment is not
repaired, replaced, or removed at or before the next required
inspection, the inoperative item must be inspected again (i.e.,
reevaluated) at the required inspection to ensure that it will not have
an adverse effect on the aircraft's safe operation.\10\ Revised
paragraph (c) would provide clarification that there is no time
limitation as to how long the inoperative instrument or item of
equipment could remain inoperative so long as it is inspected at each
required inspection and there is no adverse effect on the aircraft's
continued safe operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 53 FR 50190, 50193; December 13, 1988 (inoperative
instruments or equipment final rule document for 14 CFR 91.30 and
91.165 (re-codified as 14 CFR 91.213 and 91.405, respectively, on
August 18, 1989)).
\10\ FAA Legal Interpretation, Peri-Aircraft Electronics
Association (June 13, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the FAA proposes to revise paragraph (d) to grammatically
follow the unnumbered introductory text of Sec. 91.405. That text
states: ``Each owner or operator of an aircraft--.'' The beginning of
revised paragraph (d) would grammatically follow the section's
introductory text by stating: ``Shall ensure that when inoperative
instruments or equipment are present, a placard marking it
`Inoperative' has been installed as required by Sec. 43.11 of this
chapter.'' The FAA proposes to add the phrase ``marking it
`Inoperative' '' for clarity and to be consistent with the requirements
in Sec. Sec. 43.11(b) and 91.213(d)(3)(ii). The following table is
added for clarity.
[[Page 6062]]
Table 1--List of Proposed Revisions to Sec. 91.405
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contains the
Current regulation: requirements for: Revised in proposed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
91.405.................... Each owner or N/A.
operator of an
aircraft--.
91.405(a)................. Shall have that 91.405(a) shall have
aircraft inspected that aircraft
as prescribed in inspected as
subpart E of part 91 prescribed in
and shall between subpart E of part 91
required and shall, between
inspections, except required
as provided in Sec. inspections, except
91.405(c), have as provided in Sec.
discrepancies 91.405(c), have
repaired as discrepancies
prescribed in part evaluated and
43. dispositioned or
corrected, as
appropriate, through
inspection,
overhaul, repair,
preservation, or the
replacement of
parts, in accordance
with part 43, or
appropriately
deferred as provided
in Sec. 91.213;
91.405(b)................. ..................... N/A.
91.405(c)................. Shall have any 91.405(c) shall, at
inoperative the next required
instrument or item inspection, have any
of equipment, inoperative
permitted to be instrument or item
inoperative by Sec. of equipment that is
91.213(d)(2) permitted to be
repaired, replaced, inoperative by Sec.
removed, or 91.213(d)(2) and
inspected at the that has not been
next required repaired, replaced,
inspection. or removed,
inspected to ensure
that the inoperative
instrument or item
of equipment will
not have an adverse
effect on the
continued safe
operation of the
aircraft.
91.405(d)................. When listed 91.405(d) shall
discrepancies ensure that when
include inoperative inoperative
instruments or instruments or
equipment, shall equipment are
ensure that a present, a placard
placard has been marking it
installed as ``inoperative'' has
required by Sec. been installed as
43.11. required by Sec.
43.11.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Additional Clarifications of the Aircraft Inspection Requirements
(Sec. 91.409)
In addition to the proposal to extend the inspection program
options in Sec. 91.409(f) to single-engine turbine-powered airplanes
and unmanned aircraft, we propose other minor clarifications to Sec.
91.409. As discussed under the proposal to revise Sec. 91.401,
Applicability, aircraft that carry a special flight permit, a current
experimental certificate, or a light-sport, or provisional
airworthiness certificate as described in Sec. 91.409(c)(1), are
specifically excluded from the inspection requirements of Sec.
91.409(a). The same is true for aircraft inspected in accordance with
an approved aircraft inspection program under part 125 or 135 as
described in Sec. 91.409(c)(2). This proposal would relocate the
exemption language of Sec. 91.409(c)(1) and (2) placing it under Sec.
91.401(c). This change would be part of our proposed clarification and
streamlining of subpart E of part 91.
We also propose to revise Sec. 91.409(c)(1) through (4), which
provide an exception to the inspection requirements in paragraphs (a)
and (b). As previously stated, Sec. 91.409(c)(1) and (2) would be
relocated to Sec. 91.401(c), which will leave Sec. 91.409(c)(1) and
(2) vacant. We propose relocating Sec. 91.409(c)(3), aircraft that are
``subject to the requirements of paragraph (d) or (e) of this
section,'' into the vacant paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) positions.
Additionally, we propose to relocate the progressive inspection program
exception to paragraphs (a) and (b) from Sec. 91.409(d) to paragraph
(c)(1). We also propose to move the exception of large airplanes,
multiengine turbine-powered airplanes, and unmanned aircraft that are
subject to the proposed Sec. 91.409(e)(1) into the vacant Sec.
91.409(c)(2) position. Furthermore, we propose to move Sec.
91.409(c)(4), aircraft that are subject to the proposed Sec.
91.409(e)(2) (i.e., turbine-powered rotorcraft and single-engine
turbine-powered airplanes) into Sec. 91.409(c)(3). Existing Sec.
91.409(c)(4) will be deleted because these changes leave it vacant.
Headings have been added for clarity and consistency to Sec.
91.409(a), (b), and (c).
Finally, we propose to update the language in paragraph (g), which
establishes the requirement for covered operators to submit new or
changed inspection programs for FAA approval, to require simply that
the program be submitted in a manner acceptable to the FAA. The
proposed revision would provide both the FAA and operators more
flexibility in the way these types of programs are submitted, reviewed,
and approved. The FAA is also proposing conforming amendments to
paragraphs (g) introductory text and (g)(1) to modify language that
currently specifies ``airplane'' or ``rotorcraft'' so that it would
read ``aircraft,'' to apply to airplanes, rotorcraft, and unmanned
aircraft. The following table is added for clarity.
Table 2--List of Reorganized Requirements (Sec. 91.409)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contains the Reorganized in
Current regulation: requirements for: proposed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
91.409(c)(1).............. Inspection Moved to Sec.
requirements that 91.401(c)(3) and
are not applicable (4).
to an aircraft that
carries a current
experimental, light-
sport, or
provisional
airworthiness
certificate.
91.409(c)(2).............. Inspection Moved to Sec.
requirements that 91.401(c)(1) and
are not applicable (2).
to aircraft
inspected in
accordance with an
approved aircraft
inspection program
under part 125 or
135.
91.409(c)(3).............. Inspection Moved to Sec.
requirements that 91.409(c)(1) and
are not applicable (2).
to aircraft subject
to the requirements
of paragraph (d) or
(e).
91.409(c)(4).............. Inspection Moved to Sec.
requirements that 91.409(c)(3). Note:
are not applicable Section 91.409(c)(4)
to turbine-powered would be vacant.
rotorcraft when the
operator elects to
inspect that
rotorcraft in
accordance with
paragraph (e).
91.409(e)................. Large Airplanes (not Revised and separated
inspected in into Sec.
accordance with part 91.409(e)(1) and
125). (2).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 6063]]
5. Language Used in Reference to Inspection Programs (Sec. 91.415(a))
We propose to clarify the language in Sec. 91.415(a) by changing
the phrase ``approved aircraft inspection program'' to ``an inspection
program approved under Sec. 91.409(f)(4) or Sec. 91.1109, or Sec.
125.247(e)(3) of this chapter'' to remain consistent with inspection
program terminology in other 14 CFR sections. The FAA uses the term
``approved aircraft inspection program,'' or ``AAIP,'' for a program
approved under Sec. 135.419, whereas programs approved under parts 121
and 135 (10 or more), and part 91, subpart K, would be referred to as
``inspection programs.''
Additionally, we propose to add Sec. 125.247(e)(3) to the list of
inspection programs to which the Administrator can mandate revisions,
if the Administrator finds that revisions are necessary for the
continued adequacy of the program. This is to align with the changes
being made to Sec. 125.247(e)(3), discussed below.
E. Other Miscellaneous Inspection Program and Maintenance Program
Updates
1. Removal of Reference to Sec. 91.409 (Sec. 91.501(a))
We propose to revise Sec. 91.501(a) to remove the information in
parenthesis: ``(Section 91.409 prescribes an inspection program for
large and for turbine-powered (turbojet and turboprop) multiengine
airplanes and turbine-powered rotorcraft of U.S. registry when they are
operated under this part or part 129 or 137.).'' This language is
informational only, does not convey any regulatory requirement, and was
only a specific reference to inspection requirements in subpart G that
continue to apply to aircraft operated under subpart F. Moreover, the
introductory sentence of the section states that the regulations in
this subpart are in addition to the requirements prescribed in other
subparts, which includes the requirements in Sec. 91.409.
2. Mechanical Reliability Reporting Requirements (Sec. 91.1415(d))
We propose to revise the reporting requirements in Sec. 91.1415(d)
to align them with the equivalent service difficulty reporting
requirements found in Sec. Sec. 121.703, 125.409, 135.415, and
145.221. Section 91.1415 prescribes the requirements for occurrence and
detection reporting for aircraft failures, malfunctions, and defects by
fractional ownership program managers under subpart K, who maintain
aircraft under a CAMP. Paragraph (d) sets forth the procedural
requirements for report submission to the FAA.
When the FAA revised similar reporting requirements in parts 121,
125, 135, and 145 [70 FR 76979, Dec. 29, 2005], Sec. 91.1415(d) was
not included in the change. The proposed change would standardize the
reporting requirements by increasing Sec. 91.1415(d) from 72 to 96
hours, as it is in the others, to be consistent. Accordingly, the FAA
proposes to change the section heading from ``Mechanical reliability
reports'' to ``Service difficulty reports.'' Additionally, we would
require that the reports be submitted ``to the FAA offices in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma,'' rather than specifying the reports be submitted
directly ``to the Flight Standards office that issued the program
manager's management specifications.'' This would be accomplished by
submitting reports to the FAA Service Difficulty Reporting online
database.
3. Part 125 Inspection Program and Maintenance Requirements (Sec.
125.247(d) and (e))
We propose to amend the text in Sec. 125.247(d)(1), which
prohibits operation of an airplane subject to part 125 unless the
``installed engines have been maintained in accordance with the
overhaul periods recommended by the manufacturer or a program approved
by the Administrator.'' Specifically, we will remove the phrase ``a
program approved by the Administrator'' because there is no FAA-
approved maintenance program required by part 125 that includes
overhaul periods, nor will we establish one.
Similarly, we would revise paragraph (d)(2), which prohibits
operation unless the ``engine overhaul periods are specified in the
inspection programs required by Sec. 125.247(a)(3),'' to remove the
reference to overhaul periods being specified in an inspection program.
The proposed text would state: ``The engine overhaul periods, or a
reference to where they can be found, are specified in the certificate
holder's operations specifications'' because inspection programs do not
include overhaul limits; overhaul limits are part of maintenance
programs, not inspection programs.
Additionally, we would revise the introductory paragraph in Sec.
125.247(e) from ``Inspection programs which may be approved for use
under this part . . .'' to ``Inspection programs that may be authorized
for use under this part . . . [.]'' The inspection programs referenced
in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) do not require additional FAA acceptance
or approval because authorization is contained in the operating
specifications. In conjunction with this change, we propose to revise
paragraph (a)(3) to replace the word ``approved'' with ``authorized,''
so the paragraph would conclude with the phrase ``inspection program
authorized by the Administrator under paragraph (e).''
Finally, we will revise the text in paragraphs (e)(1), (2), and (3)
to align with the proposed changes in Sec. 91.409(f) (e.g., in
paragraph (e)(1), we would remove ``continuous'' from ``continuous
inspection program'' because a ``continuous inspection program'' is not
defined in the regulations, although an inspection program may be part
of a CAMP). Additionally, we will add ``maintenance'' after
``airworthiness'' in the phrase ``continuous airworthiness program''
because these programs have the same requirements as a CAMP. To be
consistent with the revision proposed for Sec. 91.409(f)(3) to replace
the reference to ``[a] current inspection program recommended by the
manufacturer'' with ``[a]n inspection program recommended by the
manufacturer that was the most current program available at the time of
selection . . . , '' we will make the same revision to paragraph (e)(2)
for the same reasons. This change would eliminate confusion over the
use of the word ``current.''
Also, to be consistent with current Sec. 91.409(f)(4), we will
revise paragraph (e)(3) of this section to provide that an inspection
program developed by the certificate holder for use under this part
must be approved by the FAA. Further, we will incorporate into this
paragraph the additional requirement in current Sec. 91.409(f)(4) that
the Administrator may require revision of the inspection program in
accordance with the provisions of Sec. 91.415. This would allow the
Administrator to mandate changes to the program if it were found
inadequate. The procedures of Sec. 91.415 would be followed, and
certificate holders would have the opportunity to file for a petition
for reconsideration.
4. Terminology in the Applicability of Part 135, Subpart J (Sec.
135.411(a)(2))
The FAA proposes to clarify that a maintenance program referenced
in Sec. 135.411(a)(2) is a CAMP. Currently, Sec. 135.411(a)(2) lists
only the part 135 sections under which the operator's aircraft must be
maintained, but it does not refer to that combination of sections as a
``continuous airworthiness maintenance program.'' This term is
referenced in Sec. 135.429(d)(3) and in other regulations, such as
Sec. 91.409(f)(1), which refers directly to a CAMP for aircraft
maintained under Sec. 135.411(a)(2). Therefore, we will
[[Page 6064]]
change ``maintained under a maintenance program . . .'' in paragraph
(a)(2) to ``under a continuous airworthiness maintenance program . .
.'' for consistency with other regulatory requirements.
5. Part 137 Inspection Requirements for Operations Over Congested Areas
(Sec. 137.53(c))
The FAA proposes to revise Sec. 137.53(c) by removing the text in
paragraph (c)(1) of the section. Paragraph (c)(1)(i) currently provides
an aircraft inspection requirement that must be met before the aircraft
may be operated over a congested area. It requires that, except for the
larger aircraft addressed by paragraph (c)(1)(ii), the aircraft must
have had, within the preceding 100 hours of time in service, a 100-hour
or annual inspection or have been inspected under a progressive
inspection system. The FAA proposes to move this inspection requirement
to Sec. 91.409, the inspections regulation. Specifically, the 100-hour
or annual inspection requirement would be re-located to Sec. 91.409(b)
to be included with the other 100-hour or annual inspection
requirements for aircraft operated for hire or flight instruction. The
option for the aircraft to be inspected under a progressive inspection
system would be included under the Sec. 91.409(c)(1) exception annual
and 100-hour requirements in Sec. 91.409.
Section 137.53(c)(1)(ii) specifies the inspection program
requirements for ``a large or turbine-powered multiengine civil
airplane . . .'' if it will be operated over congested areas under part
137. It directs that such aircraft be inspected in accordance with the
applicable inspection program requirements of Sec. 91.409. Large or
turbine-powered multiengine civil airplanes are already required to be
inspected in accordance with Sec. 91.409, specifically paragraph (e),
regardless of whether the aircraft is operated over congested areas
under part 137. We propose to remove Sec. 137.53(c)(1)(ii) in its
entirety so only the Sec. 91.409(e) inspection requirements will apply
to remove redundancy and to eliminate possible confusion.
F. Clarification of Part 145 Requirements on Documents and Data and
Contract Maintenance
1. Current and Accessible Documents and Data (Sec. 145.109(d))
The FAA proposes to remove the last sentence and its prescriptive
list of documents in Sec. 145.109(d),\11\ that repair stations must
keep ``current and accessible'' when performing maintenance, preventive
maintenance, or alterations. The prescriptive list requires that the
documents be ``current and accessible when the relevant work is being
done;'' however, this conflicts with Sec. 43.13(a) because not all of
these documents must be ``current'' when used. For example, repair
stations are also authorized to use maintenance and overhaul manuals
that were current at the aircraft's certification instead of the
manufacturer's most current version in time. Repair stations may also
use other documents (including a manual revision that pre-dates the
current version if the maintenance is performed using other acceptable
methods, techniques, and practices).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Section 145.109(d) prescribes the following document list:
airworthiness directives, Instructions for Continued Airworthiness,
maintenance manuals, overhaul manuals, standard practice manuals,
service bulletins, and other applicable data acceptable to or
approved by the FAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A 2010 FAA legal interpretation \12\ clarified that ``current'' in
Sec. 145.109(d) means ``up to date,'' i.e., the most recent version
(revision) of the document (e.g., maintenance manual) issued by the
manufacturer. This interpretation also clarified that if a maintenance
provider used a prior version or revision of a manual in performing
maintenance, that person would not be in violation of the maintenance
performance rules in Sec. 43.13 unless the FAA could show that the
information used was no longer acceptable. This is because of the
flexibility provided in the maintenance regulations. For example, Sec.
43.13(a) provides that the person performing maintenance shall use the
current manufacturer's maintenance manual or ICA, ``or other methods,
techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator. . . .'' If a
repair station were to use ``other methods, techniques, and practices
acceptable to the Administrator'' (for example, those contained in a
prior manual revision), then the repair station would not be required
to use the latest revision provided by the manufacturer. Therefore, the
FAA proposes to remove the requirement in Sec. 145.109(d) that the
documents and data referred to in that section must be current.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Legal Interpretation of ``Current'' as it Applies to
Maintenance Manuals and Other Documents Referenced in 14 CFR
43.13(a) and 145.109(d), Memorandum Opinion to Manager, AWP-230 and
Manager, Sacramento FSDO, from Assistant Chief Counsel for
Regulations, AGC-200 (Aug. 13, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The means for assuring appropriate data would be provided by the
repair station's quality control system. Currently, Sec. 145.211(a)
requires that each repair station establish and maintain a quality
control system acceptable to the FAA that ensures the airworthiness of
the articles being maintained. Section 145.211(c) provides that, as
part of a repair station's acceptable quality control system, the
repair station must keep current a quality control manual in a format
acceptable to the FAA and specify what that manual must include.
Section 145.211(c)(1)(v) provides specifically that the manual must
include a description of the procedures used for ``[e]stablishing and
maintaining current technical data for maintaining articles.'' In
developing acceptable procedures for assuring the currency of the
technical data, repair stations typically work with their responsible
Flight Standards office to tailor procedures that consider realistic
time frames in which to incorporate manual revisions and other changes
and updates into their systems. Further, Sec. 145.211(c)(2) requires
that the manual include ``[r]eferences, where applicable, to the
manufacturer's inspection standards for a particular article, including
reference to any data specified by that manufacturer.''
Based on the above considerations, the FAA invites the public to
comment on this proposal to remove the current requirement that a
repair station must maintain the specified documents and that the
documents be ``current'' and accessible when the relevant work is being
done. In particular, we seek comments that address any concerns
associated with repair stations using a manual that is not the most
current revision issued by the manufacturer, in the context of the
maintenance performance rule that permits using other acceptable
methods, techniques, and practices, and any potential unintended
impacts of the proposal. Based on the comments received, the FAA may
consider alternatives to removing the requirements in Sec. 145.109(d),
including retaining or amending the provision.
2. FAA Contract Maintenance (Sec. Sec. 145.201(a)(2) and 145.217)
Approval
We propose to amend Sec. Sec. 145.201(a)(2) and 145.217, which
address contract maintenance by a certificated repair station, to
clarify that the requirements in Sec. 145.217, including the need to
obtain FAA approval of contract maintenance, are applicable only when
the certificated repair station is assuming responsibility for the
maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations work performed by
an outside source.
Section 145.201(a)(2) contains the general authority for a
certificated repair station to arrange (i.e., contract) for another
person to perform maintenance,
[[Page 6065]]
preventive maintenance, or alterations of any article for which it is
rated. That regulation further requires that if the person to whom the
work is contracted is not certificated under part 145, the certificated
repair station must ensure that the non-certificated person follows a
quality control system equivalent to the system followed by the
certificated repair station.
Section 145.217 contains additional specific procedures that a
repair station must follow when contracting a maintenance function to
an outside source. By the plain language of Sec. 145.217(a)(1), FAA
approval is required for a maintenance function to be contracted to an
outside source, whether the outside source is an FAA-certificated
repair station or a non-certificated person. This requirement has
caused confusion in the past as some repair stations believed pre-
approval was not required if: (1) the contract was with another FAA-
certificated repair station that was rated for the task; and (2) after
completing the requested work, the contracted repair station made the
requisite airworthiness determination and approved the work performed
for return to service.
In 2006, we attempted to address this confusion in a larger part
145 proposed rulemaking. In our proposal to amend Sec. 145.217 [71 FR
70253, 70266, December 1, 2006], we proposed to remove the requirement
in paragraph (a)(1) that maintenance functions contracted to all
outside sources be approved by the FAA. We proposed to limit FAA
approval to a maintenance function contracted to an outside source not
certificated under part 145. A repair station contracting a maintenance
function to a repair station certificated under part 145 would not have
to obtain FAA approval. The FAA withdrew the large part 145 2006 NPRM
because it did not adequately address the repair station operating
environment at that time. It was also withdrawn because of the many
significant issues commenters to the NPRM raised.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The FAA summarized and responded to comments in the NPRM
withdrawal, which did not include reference to negative comments
regarding the contract maintenance proposal. See 74 FR 21287, May 7,
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe the confusion surrounding the approval requirement is
part of a broader misunderstanding of contract maintenance regulations.
Section 145.217 applies when a certificated repair station contracts a
maintenance function to an outside source with the intent of then
assuming regulatory responsibility for the maintenance work performed
by the outside source, regardless of whether that outside source is
certificated under part 145. The certificated repair station, rather
than the outside source, would approve the article for return to
service. The originating certificated repair station would be
responsible for making the maintenance record entry required by 14 CFR
43.9(a), if applicable. Because it assumes responsibility for the
outside source's performed maintenance, the certificated repair station
must meet the requirements in Sec. 145.217, notably to obtain FAA
approval of the contract maintenance and to ensure that the work is
accomplished in a satisfactory manner.
As written, however, Sec. Sec. 145.201(a)(2) and 145.217 can be
read to apply even to contract maintenance arrangements where the
originating certificated repair station contracts work to another
certificated repair station and that outside repair station then
performs the work and approves the article for return to service under
its own certificate, rating(s), and quality control system. This
construction of the regulations was never intended. Compliance with
this additional administrative procedure in Sec. 145.217 does not
provide any additional safety benefit in this scenario because the
outside source is also certificated under part 145 with the appropriate
rating(s) and will be using the privileges of its own certificate to
perform the work and approve the article for return to service; \14\
therefore, this constitutes an unnecessary administrative burden on the
requesting repair station and the FAA. The FAA would have already
determined, through the issuance of the repair station certificate,
operations specifications, ratings, and other authorizations or
approvals, that the outside certificated repair station meets the
qualifications under part 145 to perform, independently, the
maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations on the type of
article(s) in question.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 14 CFR 145.5(a) and 145.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the FAA proposes to amend Sec. 145.201(a)(2) to
clarify that compliance with Sec. 145.217 is required only where the
certificated repair station assumes responsibility for the outside
source's performed work. Section 145.201(a)(2) currently authorizes a
certificated repair station to ``[a]rrange for another person to
perform the maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations of any
article for which the certificated repair station is rated.'' The
phrase ``for which the certificated repair station is rated'' is
confusing because it can be read to imply that the certificated repair
station may not arrange for another person to perform the maintenance,
preventive maintenance, or alterations of any article for which the
certificated repair station is not rated. Repair stations routinely
arrange for other repair stations to perform work on articles for which
the originating repair station is not rated or otherwise qualified to
maintain or alter as long as the other repair station is rated to
perform the work and approves the article for return to service. Thus,
we will remove the phrase ``for which the certificated station is
rated'' from Sec. 145.201(a)(2) to clarify that part 145 contains no
restriction on the ability of repair stations to arrange for other
persons to perform work on articles for which the originating repair
station is not rated. The section would now provide that a certificated
repair station may ``[a]rrange for another person to perform the
maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations of any article.''
As discussed below, we are also proposing clarifications to limitations
on contract maintenance in Sec. 145.217.
The FAA proposes to add language to Sec. 145.201(a)(2) that would
permit the originating certificated repair station to approve an
article for return to service after work performed by an outside person
only if the originating certificated repair station is: (1) rated to
perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations on the
article; and (2) complies with the requirements in Sec. 145.217 for
contract maintenance. This will make it more explicit that while a
repair station can make arrangements for other persons to perform
maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations, the repair station
would be able to approve the article(s) for return to service only if
it meets the additional contract maintenance requirements in Sec.
145.217, including the requirement in Sec. 145.217(a)(1) to obtain FAA
approval, regardless of whether the outside person is certificated
under part 145.
In addition, we will remove the second sentence in Sec.
145.201(a)(2) because it is redundant; this subsection requires a
certificated repair station that enters into an arrangement with a
noncertificated person to ``ensure that the noncertificated person
follows a quality control system equivalent to the system followed by
the certificated repair station.'' This requirement is already
contained in Sec. 145.217(b)(1), and its inclusion in Sec.
145.201(a)(2) is superfluous.
Additionally, the FAA proposes to revise paragraph Sec. 145.217(a)
to reflect the same proposal for Sec. 145.201(a)(2) to clarify that
the approval and other
[[Page 6066]]
requirements in Sec. 145.217 only apply when the originating
certificated repair station approves an article for return to service
after an outside source performs maintenance, preventive maintenance,
or alterations.
The FAA is also proposing to move existing Sec. 145.217(b)(3) into
a new paragraph (a)(3). This provision currently applies when a
certificated repair station contracts a maintenance function to a
noncertificated person and requires that the originating certificated
repair station verify, by test and/or inspection, that the work has
been performed satisfactorily by the noncertificated person and that
the article is airworthy before approving it for return to service. We
believe the requirement to verify an outside person's work should be
applicable any time the originating certificated repair station
approves an article for return to service following work performed by
an outside person, regardless of whether that outside person is
certificated. Even if the outside person is another certificated repair
station, that person would not be exercising the full privileges of its
certificate because it will not be approving the article(s) for return
to service. Therefore, it is imperative that the originating
certificated repair station, which will be approving the article for
return to service, verify that the work has been performed
satisfactorily and that the article is airworthy. By moving the
requirement into paragraph (a), the originating certificated repair
station would be required to verify the satisfactory performance of
work performed by both certificated and noncertificated outside persons
and the airworthiness of the article prior to approving it for return
to service.
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
Federal agencies consider impacts of regulatory actions under a
variety of executive orders and other requirements. First, Executive
Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563, as amended by Executive Order
14094 (``Modernizing Regulatory Review''), direct that each Federal
agency to propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354)
requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes
on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39)
prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Fourth, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies
to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other
effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by State, local, or Tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. The current
threshold after adjustment for inflation is $177 million using the most
current (2022) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product.
This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the
economic impacts of this proposed rule. We suggest readers seeking
greater detail read the full regulatory analysis available in the
docket for this rulemaking.
In conducting these analyses, we determined that this proposed
rule: (1) has benefits that justify its costs; (2) is not an
economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866; (3) would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; (4) would
not create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States; and (5) would not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local,
or Tribal governments, or on the private sector by exceeding the
threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized below.
A. Summary of the Regulatory Impact Analysis
The estimated per aircraft savings is $7,974, and if 20 percent of
the estimated single-engine turboprops are inspected under a
manufacturer-recommended inspection program, the net annualized cost
savings would be $7.4 million using a seven percent discount rate.
These estimates are based on only one manufacturer offering a
manufacturer-recommended inspection program (i.e., the manufacturer who
has developed and provided us with cost savings estimates). The FAA
does not identify any new costs for unmanned aircraft, and there are
unquantifiable cost savings and benefits.
B. Statement of Need for Regulatory Action
The rule proposes to revise the aircraft maintenance inspection
rules for small, corporate-sized, and unmanned aircraft. The most
substantial change is the addition of more inspection program options
for owners and operators of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes and
unmanned aircraft. Currently, owners and operators of these types of
aircraft operating under part 91 are limited to annual, 100-hour, or
progressive inspection programs, while unmanned aircraft operating
under part 135 are limited to AAIPs or CAMPs.
This change would increase these options or, in the case of
unmanned aircraft, require the selection of one of the options to
include, among others, a manufacturer-recommended inspection program
and an inspection program established by the registered owner or
operator and approved by the Administrator. The added inspection
programs would afford aircraft owners and operators more flexibility in
performing aircraft inspections because they would have more options
and would likely reduce inspection costs for the same. These programs
would provide owners and operators of single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes and unmanned aircraft with more aircraft inspection options
without reducing safety.
Manufacturers will also be able to implement more efficient and
effective inspection programs for new and existing fleets of aircraft,
which would bolster safety, control associated costs, and likely be
attractive to new and existing owners. This rulemaking does not create
a burden for single-engine turbine-powered airplane owners or operators
because the decision to switch aircraft inspection programs is
voluntary. This rulemaking does not create a burden for unmanned
aircraft owners or operators because these aircraft are already using
manufacturer inspection programs under authorized exemptions. Generally
speaking, a manufacturer's inspection requirements are optimized for a
particular unmanned aircraft model when compared to annual inspection
requirements or inspections under an AAIP or CAMP. Additionally, some
maintenance-related regulations have confusing language, which has
resulted in legal interpretation requests. This proposed rule would
make several changes to clarify and simplify maintenance and inspection
requirements for part 91 and part 125 operators and contract
maintenance document retention requirements for part 145 repair
stations. These clarifications would help ensure consistency in use and
interpretation.
Furthermore, the FAA proposes to align reporting requirements with
similar requirements in other regulations, for example, Sec. Sec.
121.703, 135.415, and 145.221. Specifically, the rule proposed would
lengthen the reporting interval for mechanical reliability reports, for
aircraft operating under part 91, subpart K, fractional ownership
rules, from 72 to 96 hours;
[[Page 6067]]
and (2) allow electronic report submissions.
C. Summary of Benefits and Costs
By increasing inspection options available to owners and operators
of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes and unmanned aircraft, this
proposal is expected to result in improved safety and net cost savings.
The FAA does not identify any new costs; there are unquantifiable cost
savings and benefits. Unmanned aircraft manufacturers seeking type
certification or operational approval are already required to have an
inspection program developed at the time the aircraft receives
certification.
One manufacturer estimated that inspecting aircraft under a
Maintenance Steering Group--3rd Task Force (MSG-3) (used by
manufacturers to develop initial scheduled maintenance/inspection
requirements) inspection program could save owners/operators
approximately $7,974 per aircraft compared to an annual inspection
program.
Manufacturers would incur costs to update inspection programs, but
these costs would be voluntary, as the rule would not require
manufacturers to develop new inspection programs. However, most
manufacturers would likely choose to do so, given the relatively low
associated costs compared to potential safety and customer satisfaction
benefits. Furthermore, even if a manufacturer does not choose to create
an inspection program for a specific type of aircraft, this rule still
provides a benefit to aircraft owners and operators because it allows
them to develop their own inspection program.
Improved safety will be one of this proposal's benefits because a
manufacturer-developed or owner-created inspection program would be
customized to the specific aircraft. This is due to the utilization of
more relevant and appropriate inspection tasks and intervals. A
manufacturer-developed program likely would be less invasive compared
with the annual or 100-hour inspection. For example, high-utilization
operators performing a 100-hour inspection frequently generate
maintenance issues due to frequent disassembly, inspection, and
reassembly of components. Aircraft safety would be improved by having a
less invasive scheduled maintenance process. The FAA estimated cost and
cost savings over a 10-year time horizon as presented in the table
below. Safety benefits were not quantified.
Table 1 below presents a summary of estimated costs and cost
savings for this proposal's manned aircraft maintenance programs over a
10-year time period. These estimates are based on only one manufacturer
offering a manufacturer-developed inspection program, i.e., the
manufacturer who has developed and provided us with cost savings
estimates. They result in an annualized net cost savings of $7.4
million using a 7 percent discount rate.
Table 3--Summary of Costs and Cost Savings
[$2020 U.S. Dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-Year total cost 10-Year net cost
savings 10-Year total costs savings Net cost savings 7% Net cost savings 3% Annualized net cost Annualized net cost
(undiscounted) (undiscounted) (undiscounted) present value present value savings 7% savings 3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$77,757,841 $3,526,016 $74,231,825 $52,058,197 $63,278,086 $7,372,660 $7,392,755
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To understand the maximum potential cost savings for single-engine
turbine-powered airplane and unmanned aircraft owners and operators, we
ran a sensitivity analysis based on the assumption that all
manufacturers of this type of aircraft would develop and make available
manufacturer-developed inspection programs to those owners and
operators. The sensitivity analysis indicates that annualized net cost
savings reach $36.8 million at a 7 percent discount rate if all
manufacturers offer similar inspection programs.
1. Who is potentially affected by this proposed rule?
Owners and operators of single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes and unmanned aircraft operating under or otherwise using the
inspection provisions of part 91.
Manufacturers who choose to develop inspection programs.
2. Assumptions
Estimates are in 2020 dollars.
The period of analysis is 10 years.
Annual cost savings per aircraft of opting for a
manufacturer-developed and recommended inspection program over an
annual inspection program is $7,974.
The FAA uses a wage rate of $84.76 per hour adjusted for
total compensation and benefits to estimate costs. This is based on
compensation data for an Aerospace Engineer from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
Development of manufacturer-recommended inspection program
would require four aerospace engineers full-time for 1 year.
Update of these programs would require two aerospace
engineers full time each year.
Estimates of the number of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes
are computed using estimates of turboprops (years 2021 through 2030)
from the 2018 FAA Aerospace Forecast times the average number of
single-engine turboprops as a percent of total turboprops from 2012 to
2019 from the FAA General Aviation Survey, Calendar Year 2019
3. Benefits
This proposal will result in improved safety because a
manufacturer-developed inspection program would be less invasive
compared with an annual or 100-hour inspection. For example, high-
utilization operators performing 100-hour inspections may encounter
more maintenance issues due to frequent disassembly, inspection, and
reassembly of components.\15\ The proposed inspection programs would
meet the current minimum inspection requirements for turbine-powered
multi-engine airplanes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Textron Aviation Inc. Petition for Rulemaking for 14 CFR
91.409.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another benefit would be more flexible scheduling for high-
utilization operators because a 100-hour or annual inspection may
require more aircraft downtime.\16\ The FAA has not quantified these
benefits; those who benefit would be passengers and owners and
operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Due to less time in maintenance the improved aircraft
availability would enable our high-utilization operators more
flexible scheduling. An annual or 100-hour inspection is costly
considering shop equipment, labor, and aircraft downtime. Reduced
operating costs may lower fares, therefore making air travel
available to a wider segment of the public.'' Textron Aviation Inc.
Petition for Rulemaking for 14 CFR 91.409.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 6068]]
4. Costs and Cost Savings
This proposed rule would result in net cost savings. The proposal
might potentially affect all the single-engine turbine airplanes. To
estimate the number of affected aircraft and the proposed rule's impact
on aircraft owners and operators, we use the FAA's general aviation
survey (GA Survey) that tracks the number of single-engine turbine-
powered airplanes. Estimates of the number of single-engine turboprop
aircraft form the basis of the analysis and, accordingly, the number of
aircraft that potentially could be inspected under one of the proposed
optional inspection programs instead of the annual inspection program.
However, we acknowledge the uncertainty on how many manufacturers of
single-engine turbine airplanes would follow the example of one
manufacturer that already developed its own inspection program.
That general aviation aircraft manufacturer provided estimates of
the cost differential between an MSG-3 inspection program and an annual
inspection program. An MSG-3 program is a manufacturers' inspection
program. Their analysis found that the total cost savings over 5 years
would be $39,871 or $7,974 on average per year, per aircraft.
The cost savings would apply to only 20 percent of the estimated
number of single-engine turboprops fleet ranging from 4,847 in year 1
to 4,960 in year 10. The manufacturer that has developed this
inspection program and supplied us with these estimates manufactures 20
percent of single-engine turbine aircraft. As this manufacturer has
actively developed the program, we think it highly likely the company
would offer it to owners and operators of its aircraft. As it is likely
to save these owners and operators money, we think that owners and
operators would adopt the manufacturer's recommended inspection
program. The result would be the following total cost savings estimate
in year 1:
Savings per aircraft x estimated Single-Engine turboprops x
20% = $7,974 x 4,847 x .2 = $7,730,502.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ These numbers are subject to rounding.
The manufacturer has already developed the program; therefore, the
development costs have already been incurred, and these development
costs would not be accounted for in this analysis. This manufacturer
would only incur the annual costs to maintain its inspection program it
already developed. Below is the estimate of annual maintenance costs:
The annual manufacturer cost to maintain a manufacturer-recommended
inspection program is as follows:
Two aerospace engineers x loaded hourly wage rate x 2,080
hours = 2 x $84.76 x 2,080 = $352,602.
The estimated annual per aircraft savings is $7,974, and if 20
percent of the estimated single-engine turboprops are inspected under
this manufacturer's inspection program, the net cost savings in the
first year would be $7.3 million, undiscounted ($7.7 million
undiscounted cost savings - $.4 million undiscounted maintenance
costs).\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ These numbers are subject to rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 presents undiscounted cost savings, costs, net costs,
discounted net cost savings, and annualized cost savings based on only
one manufacturer offering its recommended inspection program. The
annualized net cost savings would be $7.4 million at a 7 percent
discount rate.
Table 4--Estimated Net Cost Savings of One Manufacturer
[$2020 U.S. dollars] *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated 20% of the
number of fleet achieves Costs Net cost Net cost Net cost
Year single-engine cost savings (undiscounted) savings savings 7% savings 3%
turboprops (undiscounted) (undiscounted) present value present value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................................... 4,847 $7,730,502 $352,602 $7,377,900 $6,895,234 $7,163,010
2....................................................... 4,836 7,712,810 352,602 7,360,209 6,428,691 6,937,703
3....................................................... 4,834 7,708,955 352,602 7,356,354 6,004,976 6,732,106
4....................................................... 4,841 7,720,321 352,602 7,367,719 5,620,798 6,546,123
5....................................................... 4,852 7,738,000 352,602 7,385,399 5,265,687 6,370,710
6....................................................... 4,866 7,760,935 352,602 7,408,333 4,936,485 6,204,363
7....................................................... 4,882 7,786,358 352,602 7,433,757 4,629,370 6,044,324
8....................................................... 4,905 7,823,019 352,602 7,470,417 4,347,851 5,897,216
9....................................................... 4,933 7,867,064 352,602 7,514,462 4,087,369 5,759,209
10...................................................... 4,960 7,909,877 352,602 7,557,275 3,841,736 5,623,323
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... .............. 77,757,841 3,526,016 74,231,825 52,058,197 63,278,086
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Net Cost Savings......................... .............. .............. .............. .............. 7,411,916 7,418,122
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These numbers are subject to rounding.
5. Sensitivity Analysis
Since there are four other manufacturers producing single-engine
turbine-powered aircraft in this market segment, we conducted a
sensitivity analysis to illustrate the maximum potential cost savings
that could be achieved by all five manufacturers--and the owners and
operators of the estimated aircraft fleet if the proposed rule is
adopted. The following table shows cost savings if all owners and
operators of single-engine turbine-powered aircraft were to transfer to
an MSG-3 program and were able to achieve an annual cost savings of
$7,974 per airplane.
For Year 1 in Table 3, using 2022 forecast estimates, the annual
potential cost savings of the proposed rule would be $38,652,509
[$7,974 (estimated cost savings per aircraft) x 4,847 (estimated single
turboprops)]. In the remaining years in the 10-year period of analysis
in Table 3, annual potential cost savings are calculated in the same
manner as in Year 1 by multiplying $7,974 cost savings per aircraft
with the number of forecasted aircrafts.
[[Page 6069]]
Table 5--Sensitivity Analysis: Maximum Potential Cost Savings
[$2020 U.S. dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum potential
Year cost savings 7% present value 3% present value
(undiscounted)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................. $38,652,509 $36,123,840 $37,526,708
2............................................. 38,564,051 33,683,336 36,350,317
3............................................. 38,544,776 31,464,019 35,273,930
4............................................. 38,601,603 29,448,978 34,297,025
5............................................. 38,690,001 27,585,436 33,374,335
6............................................. 38,804,675 25,857,193 32,498,304
7............................................. 38,931,791 24,244,763 31,655,109
8............................................. 39,115,095 22,765,341 30,877,817
9............................................. 39,335,318 21,395,807 30,147,246
10............................................ 39,549,385 20,104,902 29,428,457
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total..................................... 388,789,204 272,673,615 331,429,247
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Cost Savings................... .................... 38,822,588 38,853,618
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airplane manufacturers would have had to develop the inspection
programs and incur the necessary annual costs to maintain and update
their inspection programs for airplane owners and operators to realize
these cost savings. We estimate that each manufacturer will devote four
aerospace engineers full-time for 1 year to develop the inspection
program in the first year of the analysis. The development costs for
five manufacturers are as follows:
Five manufacturers x development costs = 5 x $705,203 =
$3,526,016
Presented in the following table are cost savings, costs, net
costs, discounted net cost savings, and annualized cost savings at
their maximum potential. If all five manufacturers were to develop and
offer manufacturer-recommended inspection programs, and all owners and
operators of single-engine turbine-powered airplanes were to adopt
these programs in place of their annual inspection programs, the
annualized net cost savings would be $36.8 million at a 7 percent
discount rate.
Table 6--Sensitivity Analysis: Maximum Potential Net Cost Savings *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
potential cost Costs Maximum potential Maximum potential Maximum potential
Year savings (undiscounted) net cost savings net cost savings 7% net cost Savings 3%
(undiscounted) (undiscounted) present value present value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................................ $38,652,509 $3,526,016 $35,126,493 $32,828,498 $34,103,391
2........................................................ 38,564,051 1,763,008 36,801,043 32,143,456 34,688,513
3........................................................ 38,544,776 1,763,008 36,781,768 30,024,879 33,660,528
4........................................................ 38,601,603 1,763,008 36,838,595 28,103,988 32,730,615
5........................................................ 38,690,001 1,763,008 36,926,993 26,328,436 31,853,548
6........................................................ 38,804,675 1,763,008 37,041,667 24,682,427 31,021,813
7........................................................ 38,931,791 1,763,008 37,168,783 23,146,850 30,221,622
8........................................................ 39,115,095 1,763,008 37,352,087 21,739,255 29,486,082
9........................................................ 39,335,318 1,763,008 37,572,310 20,436,847 28,796,047
10....................................................... 39,549,385 1,763,008 37,786,377 19,208,678 28,116,613
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................................ 388,789,204 19,393,088 369,396,116 258,643,314 314,678,773
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Net Cost Savings.......................... .............. .............. ................... 36,824,989 36,889,952
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals may not add due to rounding.
We request additional information regarding who would take
advantage of this type of manufacturer's inspection program and
quantified data on potential cost savings or costs. After the comment
period closes and depending on what information we receive, the FAA may
choose to update the estimates.
While the FAA quantified costs and cost savings, the rule would
also result in unquantified cost savings by simplifying, clarifying,
correcting terms, allowing for electronic data submission, and allowing
an additional 24 hours to submit a mechanical reliability report.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, (5 U.S.C. 601-612),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (Pub. L. 104-121) and the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Pub. L.
111-240), requires Federal agencies to consider regulatory action
effects on small business and other small entities and to minimize any
significant impact. The term ``small entities'' comprises small
businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields and
governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
We believe this proposed rule would not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of entities for the following reasons:
The rule would not impose mandatory costs on small
entities or result in any new costs to maintain the manufacturer
inspection program.
It is likely to result in cost savings on the order of
about $8,000 per aircraft
[[Page 6070]]
for those small entities who voluntarily choose to use a manufacturer
inspection program on their aircraft.
Therefore, for the reasons provided, we certify that this proposed
rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The FAA solicits comments regarding this determination.
E. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this proposed rule and
determined that it would only have a domestic impact; therefore, it
will not create unnecessary obstacles to United States foreign
commerce.
F. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded
mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State,
local, or Tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs
without the Federal government having first provided the funds to pay
those costs.
The FAA determined that the proposed rule will not result in the
expenditure of $165 million or more by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, in any one year.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. We have determined this
proposed rule will not result in any new information collection
requirements.
The FAA proposes to lengthen the reporting interval for mechanical
reliability reports, for aircraft operating under part 91, subpart K,
fractional ownership rules, from 72 to 96 hours, and allow electronic
report submissions. This increase in the reporting interval would align
the requirement with similar reporting requirements in other
regulations, for example, 14 CFR 121.703, 135.415, and 145.221.
Currently, the general aviation public, including part 91, subpart
K, owners and operators, use FAA Form 8010-4, Malfunction and Defect
Report, to submit voluntary reporting of occurrences or detection of
failure, malfunctions, or defects. Approval to collect such information
previously was granted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3507(d)) and was assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0663.
The supporting statement submitted to OMB for renewal of the
Collection of Information 2120-0663 in October 2020 estimated that
2,000 respondents from the General Aviation public each year would use
Form 8010-4 by spending 10 minutes each for an annual 334 total burden
hours. The proposed change would simply align the required reporting
interval from 72 hours to 96 hours with similar requirements for part
121, part 135, and part 145 operators of 14 CFR and would neither
decrease nor increase the current burden hours on 2,000 respondents.
Therefore, we determined that there would be no new information
collection requirements associated with the proposal to increase the
reporting timeframe for mechanical reliability reports in 14 CFR
91.1415 from 72 to 96 hours and to allow for electronic submissions.
H. International Compatibility
In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and
has identified no differences with these proposed regulations.
I. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6f and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, Federalism. We determined
this action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
or the relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government; therefore, it will not have any federalism
implications.
B. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Consistent with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,\19\ and FAA Order 1210.20,
American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and
Procedures,\20\ the FAA ensures that Federally Recognized Tribes
(Tribes) are given the opportunity to provide meaningful and timely
input regarding proposed Federal actions that have the potential to
affect uniquely or significantly their respective Tribes. Our proposal
analysis has not identified any unique or significant effects,
environmental or otherwise, on tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
\20\ FAA Order No. 1210.20 (Jan. 28, 2004), available at
www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/1210.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
We analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001) and determined that it would not be
a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order and would not
be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
D. Executive Order 13609, International Cooperation
Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
[[Page 6071]]
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
We analyzed this action under the policies and agency
responsibilities of E.O. 13609 and determined that this action would
have no effect on international regulatory cooperation.
VI. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
We invite interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments
relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts
that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The
most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal,
explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting
data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments,
commenters should submit only one time if comments are filed
electronically, or commenters should send only one copy of written
comments if comments are filed in writing.
We will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments that we receive on or before the comments
closing date; however, we will consider comments filed after the
comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments
that are received.
B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
internet by--
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal www.regulations.gov;
2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies web page at
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's web page at
www.GovInfo.com.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9677.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed from
the internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in item
(1) above.
C. Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page
of your submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat
such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will
not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing
CBI should be sent to the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this document. Any commentary that the FAA receives that is
not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket
for this rulemaking.
D. Electronic Access and Filing
A copy of this NPRM, all comments received, any final rule, and all
background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov using
the docket number listed above. A copy of this proposed rule will be
placed in the docket. Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are
available on the website. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days
each year. An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded
from the Office of the Federal Register's website at
www.federalregister.gov and the Government Publishing Office's website
at www.govinfo.gov. A copy may also be found at the FAA's Regulations
and Policies website at www.faa.gov/regulations_policies.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9677.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed in
the electronic docket for this rulemaking.
E. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this
document may contact its local FAA official or the person listed under
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the
preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the internet, visit
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 91
Air carrier, Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Charter flights,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
14 CFR Part 125
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
14 CFR Part 135
Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety.
14 CFR Part 137
Agriculture, Aircraft, Aviation safety.
14 CFR Part 145
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, 40103, 40105, 40113,
40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715,
44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122,
47508, 47528-47531, 47534, Pub. L. 114-190, 130 Stat. 615 (49 U.S.C.
44703 note); articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
0
2. Amend Sec. 91.401 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.401 Applicability.
* * * * *
(c) Sections 91.405 and 91.409 do not apply to--
(1) An airplane inspected in accordance with part 125 of this
chapter.
(2) An aircraft inspected in accordance with an approved aircraft
[[Page 6072]]
inspection program under part 135 of this chapter and so identified by
the registration number in the operations specifications of the
certificate holder having the approved aircraft inspection program.
(3) An aircraft that carries a special flight permit.
(4) An aircraft that carries a current experimental, light-sport,
or provisional airworthiness certificate, unless specified in an
additional operating limitation under Sec. 91.317 or Sec. 91.319.
0
3. Amend Sec. 91.403 by revising paragraph (c) and adding paragraph
(e) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.403 General.
* * * * *
(c) No person may operate an aircraft for which a manufacturer's
maintenance manual or instructions for continued airworthiness has been
issued that contains an airworthiness limitations section unless:
(1) The mandatory replacement times, inspection intervals, and
related procedures specified in the airworthiness limitations section
have been complied with; or
(2) Alternative inspection intervals and related procedures set
forth in a continuous airworthiness maintenance program approved by the
Administrator and authorized by operations specifications under part
121 or 135 of this chapter, or management specifications under subpart
K of this part have been complied with; or
(3) Alternative inspection intervals and related procedures set
forth in an inspection program authorized for use under Sec. 91.409(f)
have been complied with.
* * * * *
(e) No person may operate an aircraft under a special flight permit
unless it is operated in accordance with any conditions and limitations
issued by the Administrator and it has been inspected to the extent
necessary to determine the aircraft is in a condition for safe
operation for the intended flight.
0
4. Amend Sec. 91.405 by revising paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) to read
as follows:
Sec. 91.405 Maintenance required.
* * * * *
(a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in this
subpart and shall, between required inspections, except as provided in
paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies evaluated and
dispositioned or corrected, as appropriate, through inspection,
overhaul, repair, preservation, or the replacement of parts, in
accordance with part 43 of this chapter, or appropriately deferred as
provided in Sec. 91.213;
* * * * *
(c) Shall, at each required inspection, have any inoperative
instrument or item of equipment that is permitted to be inoperative by
Sec. 91.213(d)(2), and that has not been repaired, replaced, or
removed inspected to ensure that the inoperative instrument or item of
equipment will not have an adverse effect on the continued safe
operation of the aircraft; and
(d) Shall ensure that when inoperative instruments or equipment are
present, a placard marking it ``inoperative'' has been installed as
required by Sec. 43.11 of this chapter.
0
5. Amend Sec. 91.409 by:
0
a. Adding a heading for paragraph (a);
0
b. Revising paragraphs (b), (c), (e), (f) introductory text, and
(f)(1), (3), and (4);
0
c. Removing the undesignated paragraph following paragraph (f)(4); and
0
d. Revising paragraphs (g) introductory text and (g)(1).
The addition and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 91.409 Inspections.
(a) Annual inspections. * * *
(b) 100 hour inspections. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of
this section, no person may operate an aircraft carrying any person
(other than a crewmember) for hire, no person may give flight
instruction for hire in an aircraft which that person provides, and no
person may operate an aircraft over congested areas under part 137 of
this chapter unless within the preceding 100 hours of time in service
the aircraft has received an annual or 100-hour inspection and been
approved for return to service in accordance with part 43 of this
chapter or has received an inspection for the issuance of an
airworthiness certificate in accordance with part 21 of this chapter.
The 100-hour limitation may be exceeded by not more than 10 hours while
en route to reach a place where the inspection can be done. The excess
time used to reach a place where the inspection can be done must be
included in computing the next 100 hours of time in service.
(c) Applicability of annual and 100 hour inspections. Paragraphs
(a) and (b) of this section do not apply to--
(1) An aircraft authorized by the Administrator to be inspected in
accordance with a progressive inspection program under paragraph (d) of
this section;
(2) An aircraft subject to the requirements of paragraph (e)(1) of
this section; or
(3) Turbine-powered rotorcraft or single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes when the owner or operator elects to inspect that aircraft in
accordance with paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
(e) Large airplanes (which are not inspected in accordance with
part 125 of this chapter), turbine-powered airplanes and rotorcraft,
and unmanned aircraft--(1) Large airplanes, multiengine turbine-powered
airplanes, and unmanned aircraft. Except as specified in Sec. 91.401,
no person may operate a large airplane, multiengine turbine-powered
airplane, or unmanned aircraft unless the replacement times for life-
limited parts specified in the aircraft specifications, type data
sheets, or other documents approved by the Administrator are complied
with and the aircraft, including the airframe, engines, propellers,
rotors, appliances, survival equipment, and emergency equipment, is
inspected in accordance with an inspection program selected under the
provisions of paragraph (f) of this section.
(2) Turbine-powered rotorcraft and single-engine turbine-powered
airplanes. In lieu of paragraph (a), (b), or (d) of this section, the
owner or operator of a turbine-powered rotorcraft or a single-engine
turbine-powered airplane may elect to use an inspection program
selected under the provisions of paragraph (f) of this section. If an
alternate inspection program is selected, no person may operate the
aircraft unless the replacement times for life-limited parts specified
in the aircraft specifications, type data sheets, or other documents
approved by the Administrator are complied with and the aircraft,
including the airframe, engines, propellers, rotors, appliances,
survival equipment, and emergency equipment, is inspected in accordance
with the inspection program.
(f) Selection of inspection program under paragraph (e) of this
section. The registered owner or operator of each aircraft that is
required to or has opted to use an inspection program under this
section, as described in paragraph (e) of this section, must select,
identify in the aircraft maintenance records, and use one of the
following programs for the inspection of the aircraft. Each operator
shall make a copy of the selected program available to the person
performing inspections on the aircraft and, upon request, to the
Administrator.
(1) An inspection program that is part of a continuous
airworthiness maintenance program currently in use by a person holding
an air carrier certificate or an operating certificate
[[Page 6073]]
issued under part 121 or 135 of this chapter and operating that make
and model aircraft under part 121 of this chapter or operating that
make and model under part 135 of this chapter and maintaining it under
Sec. 135.411(a)(2) of this chapter.
* * * * *
(3) An inspection program recommended by the manufacturer that was
the most current program available at the time of selection and
identified in the aircraft maintenance records.
(4) Any other inspection program established by the registered
owner or operator and approved by the Administrator for that aircraft
under paragraph (g) of this section. The Administrator may require
revision of this inspection program in accordance with the provisions
of Sec. 91.415.
(g) Inspection program approved under paragraph (e) of this
section. Each operator of an aircraft desiring to establish or change
an approved inspection program under paragraph (f)(4) of this section
must submit the program for approval in a manner acceptable to the FAA.
The program must be in writing and include at least the following
information:
(1) Instructions and procedures for the conduct of inspections for
the particular make and model aircraft, including necessary tests and
checks. The instructions and procedures must set forth in detail the
parts and areas of the airframe, engines, propellers, rotors, and
appliances, including survival and emergency equipment required to be
inspected.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 91.415 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.415 Changes to aircraft inspection programs.
(a) Whenever the Administrator finds that revisions to an
inspection program approved under Sec. 91.409(f)(4) or Sec. 91.1109
or Sec. 125.247(e)(3) of this chapter are necessary for the continued
adequacy of the program, the owner or operator must, after notification
by the Administrator, make any changes in the program found to be
necessary by the Administrator.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 91.501 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.501 Applicability.
(a) This subpart prescribes operating rules, in addition to those
prescribed in other subparts of this part, governing the operation of
large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil
airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft
of U.S. registry that are operating under subpart K of this part in
operations not involving common carriage. The operating rules in this
subpart do not apply to those aircraft when they are required to be
operated under parts 121, 125, 129, 135, and 137 of this chapter.
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec. 91.1415 by revising the section heading and paragraph
(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.1415 CAMP: Service difficulty reports.
* * * * *
(d) Each program manager shall submit each report required by this
section, covering each 24-hour period beginning at 0900 local time of
each day and ending at 0900 local time on the next day, to the FAA
offices in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Each report of occurrences during a
24-hour period shall be submitted to the collection point within the
next 96 hours. However, a report that is due on Saturday or Sunday may
be submitted on the following Monday, and a report due on a holiday may
be submitted on the next workday.
* * * * *
PART 125--CERTIFICATION AND OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A SEATING
CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF
6,000 POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH
AIRCRAFT
0
9. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44705,
44710-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722.
0
10. Amend Sec. 125.247 by revising paragraphs (a)(3), (d), and (e) to
read as follows:
Sec. 125.247 Inspection programs and maintenance.
(a) * * *
(3) The airplane, including airframe, aircraft engines, propellers,
appliances, and survival and emergency equipment, and their component
parts, is inspected in accordance with an inspection program authorized
by the Administrator under paragraph (e) of this section.
* * * * *
(d) No person may operate an airplane subject to this part unless--
(1) The installed engines have been maintained in accordance with
the overhaul periods recommended by the manufacturer or a period
approved by the Administrator; and
(2) The engine overhaul periods, or a reference to where they can
be found, are specified in the certificate holder's operations
specifications.
(e) Inspection programs that may be authorized for use under this
part include, but are not limited to--
(1) An inspection program that is a part of a current continuous
airworthiness maintenance program approved for use by a certificate
holder under part 121 or 135 of this chapter;
(2) An inspection program recommended by the manufacturer of the
aircraft that was the most current program available at the time of
selection and authorization under this part; or
(3) An inspection program developed by a certificate holder under
this part and approved by the Administrator. The Administrator may
require revision of this inspection program in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 91.415 of this chapter.
PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS
AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT
0
11. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 41706, 44701-44702,
44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 44730, 45101-45105;
Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C. 44730).
0
12. Amend Sec. 135.411 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 135.411 Applicability.
(a) * * *
(2) Aircraft that are type certificated for a passenger seating
configuration, excluding any pilot seat, of ten seats or more, shall be
maintained under a continuous airworthiness maintenance program in
Sec. Sec. 135.415, 135.417, and 135.423 through 135.443.
* * * * *
PART 137--AGRICULTURAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
0
13. The authority citation for part 137 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 44701-44702.
0
14. Amend Sec. 137.53 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 137.53 Operation over congested areas: Pilots and aircraft.
* * * * *
(c) Aircraft. Each aircraft, other than a helicopter, must be
equipped with a device capable of jettisoning at least
[[Page 6074]]
one-half of the aircraft's maximum authorized load of agricultural
material within 45 seconds. If the aircraft is equipped with a device
for releasing the tank or hopper as a unit, there must be a means to
prevent inadvertent release by the pilot or other crewmember.
PART 145--REPAIR STATIONS
0
15. The authority citation for part 145 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44707, 44709,
44717.
0
16. Amend Sec. 145.109 by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 145.109 Equipment, materials, and data requirements.
* * * * *
(d) A certificated repair station must maintain, in a format
acceptable to the FAA, the documents and data required for the
performance of maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations
under its repair station certificate and operations specifications in
accordance with part 43 of this chapter. These documents and data must
be accessible when the relevant work is being done.
0
17. Amend Sec. 145.201 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 145.201 Privileges and limitations of certificate.
(a) * * *
(2) Arrange for another person to perform the maintenance,
preventive maintenance, or alterations of any article. The certificated
repair station may approve an article for return to service following
the maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations performed on
the article by the other person if--
(i) The certificated repair station is rated to perform
maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations on the article; and
(ii) The requirements for contract maintenance in Sec. 145.217
have been met.
* * * * *
0
18. Amend Sec. 145.217 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. Removing ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (a)(1) and adding a
period in its place;
0
c. Adding paragraph (a)(3);
0
d. Adding the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (b)(1);
0
e. Removing ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (b)(2) and adding a
period in its place; and
0
f. Removing paragraph (b)(3).
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 145.217 Contract maintenance.
(a) A certificated repair station may approve an article for return
to service following the maintenance, preventive maintenance, or
alterations performed on an article by an outside source under contract
or other arrangement, in accordance with Sec. 145.201(a)(2), provided
all the following conditions are met:
* * * * *
(3) The certificated repair station verifies, by test and/or
inspection, that the work has been performed satisfactorily by the
other person and that the article is airworthy before approving it for
return to service.
* * * * *
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a),
and 44707 in Washington, DC.
Robert M. Ruiz,
Deputy Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-00763 Filed 1-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P