Revisions to Maintenance and Preventive Maintenance Rules

SUMMARY: This NPRM proposes to amend the maintenance rules to allow

properly trained pilots of aircraft type certificated for 9 or fewer

passenger seats and operated under 14 CFR Part 135 to perform certain

maintenance tasks on their aircraft. This NPRM also proposes to add

certain tasks to those items considered to be preventive maintenance.

The proposed changes are needed because a large number of exemption

requests has demonstrated a need for pilots conducting certain types of

operations to be able to respond more rapidly to emergency medical

missions and to reconfigure cabins to accommodate changing needs to

transport varying combinations of passenger and/or cargo in situations

when a certificated mechanic is not available to perform the required

maintenance task. The proposed rules, if adopted, would improve

emergency response and flight turnaround times for these operations,

and would relieve the public and agency burdens of filing and

processing exemptions.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 18, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice should be mailed, in triplicate, to:

Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket (AGC-10), Docket No. 28273, 800 Independence

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20591. Comments delivered must be marked

Docket No. 28273.

Comments may also be submitted electronically to the following

Internet address: [email protected]. Comments may be examined in

Room 915G weekdays between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m., except on Federal

holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward L. Ortiz, General Aviation

Commercial Branch (AFS-340), Aircraft Maintenance Division, Federal

Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20591, (202) 267-9952.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Comments relating to the environmental, energy,

federalism, or economic impact that might result from adopting the

proposals in this notice are also invited. Substantive comments should

be accompanied by cost estimates. Comments should identify the

regulatory docket or notice number and should be submitted in

triplicate to the Rules Docket address specified above. All comments

received on or before the closing date for comments specified will be

considered by the Administrator before taking action on this proposed

rulemaking. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in

light of comments received. All comments received will be available,

both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules

Docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each

substantive public contract with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice must include a preaddressed,

stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments

to Docket No. 28273''. The postcard will be date stamped and mailed to

the commenter.

Availability of NPRM's

Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request

to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public Affairs,

Attention: Public Inquiry Center, APA-430, 800 Independence Avenue,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20591, or by calling (202) 267-3483.

Communications must identify the notice number of this NPRM. Persons

interested in being placed on the mailing list for future NPRM's should

request from the above office a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A,

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the

application procedure.

Background

Statement of the Problem

Many small air carriers operating under 14 CFR part 135 (part 135)

perform missions in locations where or during times when a certificated

mechanic may not be available to perform certain maintenance tasks that

need immediate attention. These air carriers provide emergency

ambulance service; transport internal organs for emergency medical

treatment; transport packages, parts, and electronic equipment whose

delivery is of a time-critical nature; and provide normal passenger-

carrying service, occasionally with freight as a secondary load.

Because the demand for these services varies and, especially in the

case of medical emergency calls, arises at all times of the day, it is

impossible for air carriers to anticipate airplane configuration

requirements.

Performing cabin conversions to aircraft operating under part 135

is considered either maintenance (if extensive) or preventive

maintenance (if minor), and must currently be performed by a

certificated mechanic as required by Sec. 43.3. Similarly, the removal

and replacement of medical oxygen bottles is considered maintenance and

must be performed by a certificated mechanic.

For many carriers, locating a mechanic each time a request for

service occurs creates lengthy delays that are costly and could be

potentially life threatening to injured or ill passengers. Similarly,

providing a maintenance crew on ``24-hour call'' is cost prohibitive

for many carriers.

In addition to imposing these burdens, the current regulations also

prohibit general aviation pilots from removing and replacing easily

removable communication and navigation devices, and from updating

easily replaceable data bases. Certain aviation communication and

navigation systems are now designed for easy removal and data base

update. Many privately-owned aircraft owners and operators prefer to

remove this self-contained equipment (a job that normally requires only

an allen wrench and no disassembly of the unit) to prevent theft. They

also would like to be able to insert flight plans or update the Air

Traffic Control (ATC) software data base. Current regulations require

that a mechanic perform this task.

History

As of March 1995, the FAA had addressed over 250 petitions for

exemption from the sections of part 43 governing these ``maintenance''

items. A majority of these petitions were from nonhelicopter, air taxi

operators who learned from local FAA inspectors that their pilots are

not authorized to reconfigure their cabins or exchange medical oxygen

bottles. The petitions for exemption highlight several common issues:

(1) Many small part 135 air carriers operate in areas where they

[[Page 36927]]

undergo a hardship due to their regions' lack of certificated

mechanics; (2) many others operate during times when certificated

mechanics are not normally on duty (these missions are usually time-

critical); and (3) many of these operators are unable to operate their

aircraft in only one configuration. Passenger-to-cargo or passenger-to-

stretcher conversion ensures the most efficient utilization of cabin

space on each flight. In most instances, seats, stretchers, base

assemblies, and other items used in the conversion are approved for

aircraft installation, and the procedures for installation and removal

are designed to be accomplished safely by a trained person.

Historically, the FAA has granted exemptions to permit pilots of

aircraft operated under part 135 to perform seat removal and

replacement tasks only if the aircraft was operated in a remote area

such as the Alaskan bush or sparsely populated areas of the

Northwestern United States. Certificated mechanics servicing these

areas are scarce. Many of the operations include such essential

services as flying food, mail, needed goods and people into and out of

areas that may not be accessible by other modes of transportation.

More recently, however, exemptions have been granted to part 135

air carriers to permit their properly trained pilots to reconfigure

cabin seats when flying missions of an emergency nature during times--

at night and on weekends--when certificated mechanics are not normally

available, and when a time delay incurred by locating a mechanic could

cause undue burden or create a life-threatening situation.

The FAA has determined that if a properly trained pilot can change

seat configurations in a remote area where a certificated mechanic is

not available (and which might be performed under adverse conditions),

he or she would be capable of and should be allowed to perform the same

conversions under better conditions such as those present at the

operator's maintenance base.

Passenger-to-cargo and passenger-to-stretcher conversions have been

performed safely by pilots who have been trained to do so and who are

employed by air carriers holding exemptions allowing their pilots to

perform the tasks. No reported incidents or accidents have been

attributed to properly trained pilots changing aircraft cabin

configurations. If an air taxi operator develops a program for

performing seat conversions and appropriately instructs and trains its

pilots according to the program, safety levels equivalent to those

achieved by certificated mechanics would be maintained.

Also, on January 10, 1994, the FAA published a Request for Comments

(59 FR 1326; docket No. 27581) to solicit from the public a list of

those regulations that are believed to be unwarranted or inappropriate.

The agency received eight comments that addressed the maintenance and

preventive maintenance regulations of part 43. The commenters noted

that current regulations do not allow a pilot of a part 135 operator to

remove and reinstall aircraft cabin seats and stretchers. The

commenters feel that the current regulations are unnecessary and are

financially and physically burdensome. They point out that the FAA has

issued a number of exemptions to relieve the burden, and that the

exemption process itself is burdensome and time consuming.

The FAA has determined that the concern shown for this issue is

significant, and that this rulemaking action is consistent with the

agency's responsibility to review the continuing need for its

regulations and to eliminate regulations that impose unnecessary

burdens.

Related Rulemaking

The Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), which is a

committee composed of aviation community and FAA personnel, has been

tasked with reviewing part 43 and Appendix A to determine what

revisions, if any, should be made. It is anticipated that any ARAC

action taken regarding this task would not be complete before a final

rule resulting from this proposed rulemaking would be issued.

The Current Rule

Part 43 requires air carriers to use certificated mechanics for

their aircrafts' maintenance and preventive maintenance needs. This

requirement reflects an FAA position that passengers of all aircraft be

given a high degree of safety protection through the proper

installation of cabin seats and appointments. As outlined in Appendix

A, paragraph (c), of this part, removal and replacement of aircraft

seats is considered preventive maintenance. Several years ago, the FAA

recognized the need for pilots operating helicopters under part 135 to

be able to perform certain preventive maintenance tasks when operating

in remote areas. Accordingly, the agency amended part 43, effective

January 6, 1987 (51 FR 40702, Nov. 7, 1986), by adding a new

Sec. 43.3(h), which authorized part 135 certificate holders to allow

their pilots, when operating rotorcraft, to perform specific preventive

maintenance tasks, under the following conditions:

(1) The items of preventive maintenance must be a result of a known

or suspected mechanical difficulty or malfunction that occurred en

route to or in a remote area.

(2) The pilot must have satisfactorily completed an approved

training program and is authorized, in writing, by the certificate

holder for each item of preventive maintenance that the pilot is

authorized to perform.

(3) There must be no certificated mechanic available to perform

preventive maintenance.

(4) The certificate holder must have procedures to evaluate the

accomplishment of a preventive maintenance item that requires a

decision concerning the airworthiness of the rotorcraft.

(5) The items of preventive maintenance authorized by this section

must be those listed in paragraph (c) of Appendix A of part 43.

General Discussion of the Proposal

This proposal addresses only those aircraft type certificated with

9 or fewer passenger seats operating in part 135 operations. Operators

of aircraft type certificated with 10 or more passenger seats operating

under part 135 would not be provided relief under this rulemaking

action because they are required to have a maintenance organization in

place to support their part 135 operations, and their aircraft tend to

be more complex in design and construction.

Because certificated mechanics are not available at all times in

all places, the current requirements of part 43 impose an economic

hardship on some operators. The operational difficulties experienced by

these operators and the attendant passenger inconvenience is evidenced

in the content and quantity of exemption petitions submitted to the

FAA. In response to these petitions, the agency proposes to add a new

Sec. 43.3(i) to allow a pilot of a small aircraft (9 or fewer passenger

seats) to remove and reinstall approved aircraft cabin seats, approved

cabin-mounted stretchers, and, when no tools are required, approved

cabin-mounted medical oxygen bottles (gaseous and liquid).

In view of the demonstrated public benefit from permitting pilots

to perform the relatively simple maintenance and preventive maintenance

tasks of removing and replacing seats, stretchers, and medical oxygen

bottles, and the demonstrated safety record of the performance of these

[[Page 36928]]

tasks, the FAA has determined that a level of safety will be maintained

that is equivalent to the level of safety provided when a certificated

mechanic performs the maintenance.

Granting the authority for pilots to perform the above maintenance

and preventive maintenance tasks under the conditions proposed would

not only reduce the burden of petitioning for exemption for part 135

operators, but it would greatly expedite flight turnaround times when a

certificated mechanic is not available, thus benefiting passengers

requiring immediate medical evacuation.

Given that the FAA has determined that safety would not be

compromised, this proposed rule would not require the absence of

certificated maintenance personnel for a trained pilot to perform

certain tasks. The FAA realizes that this action may encourage pilots

to undertake the maintenance tasks on a regular basis, thereby taking

time away from pilot-related tasks that are required before flight. The

FAA also realizes that by allowing pilots to perform certain tasks even

when certificated maintenance personnel are present may take work from

the maintenance personnel. This document solicits public comment on

these two issues.

In addition, the FAA recognizes the technological advances in

communication and navigation systems and the ease with which these

devices may be removed, replaced, and updated. The agency has

determined that safety would not be compromised if pilots were allowed

to perform certain tasks. Therefore, this proposal would amend Appendix

A, paragraph (c), to add to the list of work items considered to be

preventive maintenance the removal and replacement of instrument panel-

mounted, self-contained navigation and communication devices, which the

manufacture has designed for frequent removal and replacement. This

authorization would not extend to automatic flight control systems,

transponders, and microwave frequency distance measuring equipment

(DME). Similarly, this proposal would also add to the list the updating

of Air Traffic Control (ATC) navigational software data bases, provided

no disassembly of the unit is required and pertinent instructions are

provided by the equipment manufacturer.

This proposed rulemaking would also amend Appendix A, paragraph

(c)(30)(i) to correct and editorial error. During its review of the

regulations, a Flight Standards District Office found that the

reference to Sec. 147.21(f) should read Sec. 147.21(e).

In addition, the FAA has received a petition for rulemaking from

Mr. John W. Caulkins requesting that a reference in Sec. 43.7(d) that

currently reads ``Sec. 43.3(h)'' be corrected to read ``Sec. 43.3(i).''

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on June

21, 1993 (58 FR 33783), and one comment, which was favorable, was

received. The FAA has determined the petition has merit, and proposes

to correct the reference in this rulemaking action, taking into

account, however, the proposed redesignation of current paragraph (i)

to new paragraph (j).

Also, current Sec. 43.11(b) makes reference to Sec. 91.30(d)(2). In

August 1989, 14 CFR part 91 (part 91) was recodified to make the

general operating and flight rules more understandable and easier to

use. All references in the Federal Aviation Regulations were to be

changed at that time to correspond with the new part 91. During this

recodification, Sec. 91.30(d)(2) was renumbered Sec. 91.213(d)(2). The

text of the section was unchanged. The old reference to

Sec. 91.30(d)(2) in Sec. 43.11 was inadvertently overlooked. This

rulemaking action will correct this error.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Information collection requirements in the proposed amendment to

Sec. 43.3 have been previously approved by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980 (Pub. L. 96-511) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-

0021. For further information contact: the Information Requirements

Division, M-34, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, 400 Seventh

Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4735.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

Executive Order 12866 established the requirement that, within the

extent permitted by law, a Federal regulatory action may be undertaken

only if the potential benefits to society for the regulation outweigh

the potential costs to society. In response to this requirement, and in

accordance with Department of Transportation policies and procedures,

the FAA has estimated the anticipated benefits and costs of this

rulemaking action. The FAA has determined that this rule change is not

a significant rulemaking action as defined by Executive Order 12866

(Regulatory Planning and Review). The results are summarized in this

section. For more detailed economic information, see the full

regulatory evaluation contained in the docket.

The proposed revisions are cost relieving because they would

eliminate the need for operators to carry mechanics on trips to remote

areas or make special trips to maintenance facilities for the purpose

of altering seat configurations or exchanging medical oxygen bottles.

Currently, even if a mechanic is not needed at a remote site, operators

may have to hire the services of a local mechanic to reconfigure a

cabin, which can be especially expensive for emergency medical

evacuation operations conducted at night during off-duty hours. For the

purposes of this regulatory evaluation, the FAA assumes that typical

air taxi operators that fly into remote areas where mechanics would be

scarce could make 36 trips per year that would require cabin

reconfiguration. The FAA further assumes that a pilot flying into a

remote area would have to fly the airplane for an additional hour

(roundtrip) to a larger airport where a mechanic would be available to

perform the required maintenance.

The FAA estimates that a mechanic would have to be paid for \1/2\

hour of working time at a loaded wage rate (including benefits) of

$18.16 per hour. The FAA also estimates that, in the event a cabin

reconfiguration had to be performed in a remote area, the airplane

would burn an additional 30 gallons of fuel during the one hour of

flying time needed to reach an available mechanic, which would add $60

to operating costs. The additional cost per trip would therefore amount

to $69. On an annual basis, these cost-savings would amount to $2484

($69 x 36) based on the assumption of 36 trips per year. The FAA

further estimates that at least 30 operators per year would have a

recurring need to reconfigure cabins in remote areas based on the

number of requests for exemption from the requirements of Sec. 43.3

submitted to the FAA each year. This number is a very conservative

estimate; many air taxi operators are unaware of this option and forego

the additional revenue that could be earned through reconfiguring their

cabins. The FAA estimates that industry-wide cost savings from the

proposed rule amendment would amount to $74,520 per year ($2484 x

30). Over a 10-year period, the discounted value of these cost savings

would amount to $523,382.

Since January 1987, part 135 rotorcraft operators have been

permitted to allow their pilots to perform certain preventive

maintenance tasks, under very limited specified conditions, one of

which is that the item of preventive maintenance must be the result of

a malfunction that occurred en route to or in a remote area. In

addition, numerous of the exemptions that permitted pilots

[[Page 36929]]

of aircraft operating under part 135 to reconfigure cabins were granted

to operators of rotorcraft. Each of the above authorizations contained

a requirement that the pilot be properly trained for the preventive

maintenance task that would be undertaken. Rotorcraft pilots operating

under part 91 rules are authorized to perform preventive maintenance

tasks under Sec. 43.3(g).

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) accident report

reveals no instance of rotorcraft accidents where the removal and

replacement of cabin seats by a rotorcraft pilot was suspected as a

possible cause. In fact, a search of the FAA and NTSB accident and

incident data recorded for part 91 and part 135 operations over the

1972-present period did not reveal a single instance in which the

performance by a pilot of any of the tasks that would be authorized

under this proposal was suspected as having had a casual role in an

accident. The FAA has therefore determined that this proposed rule

would be cost relieving and would not reduce the current level of

safety.

The FAA solicits information from the public to refine this

estimate of cost savings. Information of use to the agency would

pertain to the frequency of the practices covered by this proposal

(e.g., cabin reconfiguration) as well as the additional expenses

involved (e.g., cost of transporting and compensating mechanics).

International Trade Impact Analysis

The proposed rulemaking action would affect only those operators

engaged in part 135 operations of a localized or regional nature. No

impact is expected on international trade because these domestic

operators seldom compete with foreign firms in the markets they serve.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by

Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and

disproportionately burdened by government regulations. The RFA requires

agencies to review rules that may have ``a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small entities.'' The proposed rule

amendment is of a cost relieving nature and would therefore afford cost

savings to individual part 135 operators.

Under FAA Order 2100.14A, the criterion for a ``substantial

number'' is a number that is not less than 11 and that is more than one

third of the small entities subject to the rule. This proposal would

affect all part 135 operators who operate aircraft type certificated

for 9 or fewer passenger seats. For operators of aircraft for hire, a

small operator is one that owns, but not necessarily operates, nine or

fewer aircraft.

The FAA's criterion for a ``significant impact'' is $4,330 or more

per year for an unscheduled operator. The extent of the cost savings

per operator was estimated at $2484 per operator in the section on

economic impacts. The FAA concludes, therefore, that this proposed rule

would not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on

a substantial number of small entities.

Federalism Implications

The regulations proposed herein will not have substantial direct

effects on the States, on the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant

the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Conclusion

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and based on the

findings in the Regulatory Flexibility Determination and the

International Trade Impact Analysis, the FAA has determined that this

proposed regulation is not a significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866. In addition, the FAA certifies that this

proposal, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact,

positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under

the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This proposal is

considered nonsignificant under Order DOT 2100.5, Policies and

Procedures for Simplification, Analysis, and Review of Regulations. A

draft regulatory evaluation of the proposal, including an initial

Regulatory Flexibility Determination and International Trade Impact

Analysis, has been placed in the docket. A copy may be obtained by

contacting the person identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 43

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

The Proposed Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 43 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations as follows:

PART 43--MAINTENANCE, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE, REBUILDING, AND

ALTERATION

1. The authority citation for part 43 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354, 1421 through 1430; 49 U.S.C.

106(g).

2. In Sec. 43.3, paragraph (i) is redesignated as paragraph (j),

and a new paragraph (i) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 43.3 Persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventive

maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations.

* * * * *

(i) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (g) of this

section, in accordance with an approval issued to the holder of a

certificate issued under part 135 of this chapter, a pilot of an

aircraft type-certificated for 9 or fewer passenger seats, excluding

any pilot seat, may perform the removal and reinstallation of approved

aircraft cabin seats, approved cabin-mounted stretchers, and when no

tools are required, approved cabin-mounted medical oxygen bottles,

provided--

(1) The pilot has satisfactorily completed an approved training

program and is authorized in writing by the certificate holder to

perform each task; and

(2) The certificate holder has procedures to evaluate the

accomplishment of the task.

* * * * *

Appendix A to Part 43--[Amended]

3. In Appendix A to part 43, paragraph (c)(30)(i), the reference

``Sec. 147.21(f)'' is corrected to read ``Sec. 147.21(e) of this

chapter''.

4. In Appendix A to part 43, paragraphs (c)(31) and (c)(32) are

added to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 43--Major Alterations, Major Repairs, and Preventive

Maintenance

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(31) Removing and replacing self-contained, instrument panel-

mounted navigation and communication devices (excluding automatic

flight control systems, transponders, and microwave frequency distance

measuring equipment (DME)) if the approved unit is designed to be

readily and repeatedly removed and replaced, and pertinent instructions

are provided.

(32) Updating self-contained, instrument panel-mounted Air Traffic

Control (ATC) navigational software data bases (excluding those of

automatic flight control systems, transponders, and microwave frequency

distance

[[Page 36930]]

measuring equipment (DME)) provided no disassembly of the unit is

required and pertinent instructions are provided.

Sec. 43.7 [Amended]

5. In section 43.7(d), the reference ``Sec. 43.3(h)'' is corrected

to read ``Sec. 43.3(j)''.

Sec. 43.11 [Amended]

6. In section 43.11(b), the reference ``Sec. 91.30(d)(2)'' is

corrected to read ``Sec. 91.213(d)(2) of this chapter''.

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 30, 1995.

William J. White,

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service.

[FR Doc. 95-17393 Filed 7-17-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M