Service Difficulty Reports

SUMMARY: This document modifies a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

published on August 14, 1995, that proposed revising the reporting

requirements for air carrier certificate holders and certificated

domestic and foreign repair stations concerning failures, malfunctions,

and defects of aircraft, aircraft engines, systems, and components. The

original proposed action was prompted by an internal Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) review of the effectiveness of the reporting

system and by air carrier industry concern over the quality of the data

being reported by air carriers. This SNPRM addresses the concerns

raised by the commenters on the original proposal. The objective of

this SNPRM is to update and improve the reporting system to effectively

collect and disseminate clear and concise safety information to the

aviation industry.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 1, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this document should be delivered, in

triplicate, to: Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief

Counsel, Attn: Rules Docket (AGC-200), Docket No. 28293, Room 915G, 800

Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591. Comments delivered must

be marked Docket No. 28293. Comments also may be submitted

electronically to the following Internet address: 9-NPRM-

[email protected] Comments may be examined in Room 915G weekdays,

except Federal holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Corcoran, Maintenance Support

Branch, AFS-640, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation

Administration, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125; telephone

(405) 954-6508.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

This document modifies Notice No. 95-12 (60 FR 41992, August 14,

1995). Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposal 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 also are 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 specified closing date for

comments will be considered by the Administrator before taking further

rulemaking action. 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 contact with FAA personnel concerning this

rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this

document must include a preaddressed, stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. 28293.'' The

postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRM

Any person may obtain a copy of this document by submitting a

request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking,

Attn: ARM-1, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by

calling (202) 267-9680. Communications must identify the notice number

of this SNPRM.

Using a modem and suitable communications software, an electronic

copy of this document may be downloaded from the FAA regulations

section of the FedWorld electronic bulletin board service (telephone:

(703) 321-3339) or the Government Printing Office's electronic bulletin

board service (telephone: (202) 512-1661) or the FAA Aviation

Rulemaking Advisory Committee bulletin board service (telephone: (800)

322-2722 or (202) 267-5948).

Internet users may reach the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/

avr/arm/nprm/nprm.htm or the Government Printing Office's web page at

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara for access to recently published

rulemaking documents.

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

to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1,

800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202)

267-9680. Communications must identify the notice number or docket

number of this SNPRM.

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.

Availability of the Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code

Copies of the JASC Code are available from the FAA's Regulatory

Support Division (AFS-600) or on-line from the FAA regulations section

of the FedWorld electronic bulletin board service (telephone: (703)

321-3339).

Background

On August 14, 1995, the FAA issued an NPRM titled ``Operational and

Structural Difficulty Reports,'' Notice No. 95-12 (60 FR 41992). That

document proposed to revise the reporting requirements for air carrier

certificate holders and certificated domestic and foreign repair

stations concerning failures, malfunctions, and defects of aircraft,

aircraft engines, systems, and components.

The reports submitted by certificate holders and certificated

repair stations, known as service difficulty reports (SDR's), provide

the FAA with airworthiness statistical data necessary for planning,

directing, controlling, and evaluating certain assigned safety-related

programs. The reporting system provides FAA managers and inspectors

with a means for monitoring the effectiveness of self-evaluation

techniques being employed by certain segments of the civil aviation

industry.

Currently, Secs. 121.703 and 135.415 of Title 14, Code of Federal

Regulations (14 CFR) require that holders of certificates issued under

part 121 or part 135, respectively, submit reports on certain failures,

malfunctions, or defects of specific systems and on all other failures,

malfunctions, or defects that, in the opinion of the certificate

holder, have endangered or may endanger the safe operation of an

aircraft. Similarly, 14 CFR Sec. 125.409 requires that part 125

certificate holders report the occurrence or detection of each failure,

malfunction, or defect. In addition, 14 CFR Secs. 145.63 and 145.79

contain provisions for certificated domestic and foreign repair

stations, respectively, to report to the FAA serious defects in, or

other recurring unairworthy conditions of, an aircraft, powerplant,

propeller, or component. Air carrier certificate

[[Page 18767]]

holders and certificated repair stations must submit to the FAA the

reports described above. In accordance with the FAA Flight Standards'

Service Difficulty Program, set forth in FAA Order No. 8010.2, the

information is reviewed and evaluated by the assigned Principal

Maintenance Inspector (PMI) and mailed to the FAA's Mike Monroney

Aeronautical Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for input into the

Service Difficulty Reporting Subsystem (SDRS). The report data are

entered into the SDRS and compiled to generate a weekly summary

distributed to aircraft manufacturers, air carriers, repair stations,

members of the general aviation community, and various offices of the

FAA. Additional review and evaluation of the data are accomplished at

the Aeronautical Center to identify trends or significant reports, and

the appropriate FAA office is notified if trends or significant safety

items are noted.

Sections 121.705 and 135.417 contain provisions for submitting a

summary report to the FAA on known or suspected mechanical difficulties

or malfunctions that interrupt a flight or cause unscheduled aircraft

changes, stops, or diversions en route that are not required to be

reported under Sec. 121.703 or Sec. 135.415, respectively. Section

121.705 also requires a summary report containing information on the

number of aircraft engines removed prematurely because of a

malfunction, failure, or defect and the number of propeller featherings

that occur in flight for other than training purposes, demonstrations,

or flight checks. Section 135.417 requires summary reports on the

number of propeller featherings that occur in flight for purposes other

than training, demonstrations, or flight checks.

The comment period for Notice No. 95-12 closed on November 13,

1995. Comments on the proposed rule addressing numerous issues were

received from individuals, part 121 and part 135 certificate holders,

aviation consulting firms, industry associations, manufacturers, and

labor organizations. The FAA has reviewed the comments and the changes

recommended by the commenters and has made substantive changes to the

proposed rule based on the comments received. Accordingly, the FAA is

issuing this supplemental notice to give all interested parties an

opportunity to comment on the modified proposed rule.

Discussion of Comments and Modifications to the Proposal

This preamble discussion addresses the comments received in

response to Notice No. 95-12 and describes only the modifications to

that proposal. However, for the convenience of the public, the text of

the proposed rule is reprinted in its entirety.

14 CFR Part 127

The final rule for 14 CFR part 119, ``Commuter Operations and

General Certification and Operations Requirements,'' was published on

December 20, 1995 (60 FR 65832). That final rule removed part 127,

``Certification and Operations of Scheduled Air Carriers with

Helicopters.'' Therefore, the proposed revisions to part 127 are no

longer appropriate, and all references to part 127 have been removed

from the proposal.

Section Headings

Several commenters state that the name of the proposed section

headings should be changed. They state that because ``Service

difficulty report'' is the generally recognized term for the required

reports, it should be used for the section headings, instead of

``Operational difficulty reports'' or ``Structural difficulty

reports,'' as previously proposed.

The FAA agrees. Therefore, the headings of proposed Secs. 121.703,

125.409, and 135.415 have been changed from ``Operational difficulty

reports'' to ``Service difficulty reports (operational).'' The headings

of proposed Secs. 121.704, 125.410, and 135.416 have been changed from

``Structural difficulty reports'' to ``Service difficulty reports

(structural).''

Airworthiness Directives and Service Bulletins

The FAA received six comments addressing the continued submission

of reports following the issuance of an airworthiness directive (AD) or

service bulletin (SB). These commenters express their disappointment

that a provision that would have discontinued this practice was removed

from the draft NPRM presented to the FAA by the Aviation Rulemaking

Advisory Committee.

Several commenters state that AD's or SB's are often issued to

address a deficiency identified through the SDR program. These

commenters contend that because these AD's or SB's provide a corrective

action, subsequent reporting is not necessary. Commenters indicate that

the continued reporting of information after the issuance of an AD only

fills the SDR data base with unneeded information.

The FAA disagrees. In theory, after the issuance of an AD to

address a specific problem, continued service difficulties should not

occur if the prescribed correction was developed and implemented

properly. If the FAA continues to receive SDR's for a particular

problem after an AD has been issued and incorporated, it could indicate

that the AD did not correct the original deficiency and that more work

is necessary to ensure appropriate corrective action. The FAA then

could revise an AD or issue subsequent AD's to address continued

service difficulties.

Several other commenters contend that the proposed reporting for

certain discrepancies combined with the reporting requirements for

certain AD's constitutes dual reporting. These commenters state that

certain AD's addressing aging aircraft issues prescribe the use of

supplemental inspection documents and corrosion prevention and control

programs and currently require reports of certain defects. As a result,

requiring similar reports under the SDR program is unnecessary.

The FAA disagrees. The AD reporting requirements, while containing

some information common to the SDRS, usually request information that

is different from the type of information collected for input into the

SDRS. Also, the reported AD information is used for reasons other than

the analysis function of the SDRS. The aging aircraft information

reported by certificate holders is submitted to the appropriate FAA

aircraft certification office to determine the extent of aircraft

deterioration because of age and to monitor the effectiveness of the

supplemental inspection documents and corrosion prevention and control

programs. Information submitted to the SDRS is used for the

identification of recurring service problems.

The Proposed SDR and ODR Forms

The FAA received six comments regarding the proposed structural

difficulty report and operation difficulty report forms, which were

published with Notice No. 95-12 in the Federal Register. These forms

were examples of the proposed forms that a certificate holder would be

permitted to use if it chose to use a method other than electronically

submitting the required reports. Unfortunately, commenters were given

the impression that the forms would be the only acceptable method of

report submission. Additionally, the use of two forms may have left

commenters with the impression that two data bases were under

development in which data from the forms would be entered. However,

this is not the case.

[[Page 18768]]

Based on these concerns, the FAA has consolidated the proposed

forms into one form titled ``Service Difficulty Report.'' The proposed

form would not be the only acceptable method of providing the report

information. As stated in the proposed rule, a certificate holder would

be permitted to submit the required information in an electronic or

other form acceptable to the Administrator. However, as described later

in the discussion of the proposed changes to Secs. 121.703(e) and

121.704(d), the proposal would require part 121 certificate holders to

submit the information electronically beginning one year after the

effective date of a final rule. After that date no other format would

be acceptable for submission of SDR's under part 121.

One commenter believes that the existing data base would be deleted

and replaced by information collected after the effective date of the

rule. This is not the case. The existing data base will remain

available for research and use by industry, and future information

collected, as proposed, would be added to the existing data base.

FAA Form 337

Several commenters state that the discrepancies required to be

reported by proposed Secs. 121.703(a), 125.409(a), and 135.415(a) would

likely result in the accomplishment of a major repair for corrective

action. They state that the subsequent submission of FAA Form 337,

Major Repair and Alteration (Airframe, Powerplant, Propeller, or

Appliance), in addition to an SDR, constitutes a dual reporting

requirement.

The FAA disagrees. FAA Form 337 serves two purposes: one is to

provide an owner or operator with a record of a major repair or

alteration indicating details and approval; the other is to provide the

FAA with a copy of the form for inclusion in an aircraft's permanent

record maintained by the FAA. In general, if the submitted FAA Form 337

uses previously approved data, it is forwarded by the Flight Standards

District Office (FSDO) to the Aircraft Registration Branch in Oklahoma

City, Oklahoma. However, if the data used have not been previously

approved, the FSDO reviews the data to ensure compliance with

applicable regulations and conformity with accepted industry practices.

Upon favorable review, data approval is indicated by entering an

appropriate statement on the form, and the form is returned to the

applicant. This individual then completes the form and provides the

completed copies to the owner or operator and the FSDO.

Because the information submitted on an FAA Form 337 and the

information provided in an SDR vary considerably, the FAA has

determined that these reports do not constitute a duplicate reporting

requirement. For example, when submitting an SDR under the proposed

rules, the required information would include the stage of flight

operation or ground operation during which the discrepancy was

discovered; the nature of the failure, malfunction, or defect; aircraft

total time and cycles; and other information necessary for a more

complete analysis of the cause of the failure, malfunction, or defect,

including available information pertaining to type designation of the

major component and the time since the last maintenance overhaul,

repair, or inspection. None of this information is requested or

required on FAA Form 337. Furthermore, the FAA contends that the

discrepancies described by proposed Secs. 121.703(a), 125.409(a), and

135.415(a) may not always result in the accomplishment of a major

repair, and that submission of either an FAA Form 337 or an SDR will

not always require the submission of the other form.

Sections 121.703(a)(2), 121.703(a)(4), 125.409(a)(2), 125.409(a)(4),

135.415(a)(2), and 135.415(a)(4)

The FAA received three comments regarding the submission of reports

concerning any false fire or smoke warnings that require the use of

emergency procedures. One commenter states that the phrase ``use of

emergency procedures'' could be misinterpreted. This commenter states

that the phrase could mean anything from reference to the abnormal

procedures checklist to the declaration of an emergency to air traffic

control. Another commenter contends that all false fire or smoke

warnings should be reported, whether or not emergency action is taken.

The third commenter questions whether the rule should require the

reporting of indications that occurred only during revenue service and

not during maintenance checks.

To clarify what information must be reported, the FAA has removed

the phrase ``that require the use of emergency procedures'' from these

sections of the proposal. Similar revisions have been made to

Secs. 121.703(a)(4), 125.409(a)(4), and 135.415(a)(4). The FAA also has

revised the remaining language in paragraph (a)(2) of each section to

read ``any false warning of fire or smoke.'' In addition, proposed

Secs. 121.703(e)(5), 125.409(e)(5), and 135.415(e)(5) are revised to

clarify the requirement that failures, malfunctions, or defects

occurring during flight operations and ground operations must be

reported.

Sections 121.703(a)(5), 125.409(a)(5), and 135.415(a)(5)

The FAA received two comments regarding the reporting of an engine

flameout or shutdown. Each of these commenters states that an engine

flameout during ground operations or taxi should not be a reportable

item. One commenter states that an engine flameout should be reportable

only if it occurs after the initiation of the takeoff roll.

The FAA disagrees. The FAA contends that an engine flameout or

uncommanded engine shutdown is not a normal occurrence regardless of

when it occurs. Such incidents could be an indication of a system

malfunction or fault. The proposed rule language would require the

reporting of an engine flameout or shutdown during ground or flight

operations as previously proposed. The FAA notes, however, the proposed

rule would require the reporting of an engine flameout or shutdown only

if it is the result of a failure, malfunction, or defect. Reports of

intentional engine shutdowns such as those that occur during flightcrew

training, test flights, or while taxiing to reduce fuel consumption

would not be required.

Sections 121.703(a)(7), 125.409(a)(7), and 135.415(a)(7)

One comment was received regarding the dumping of fuel by aircraft

in flight. The commenter states that he is familiar with several events

during which aircraft dumped significant amounts of fuel in preparation

for a landing following an engine malfunction that occurred shortly

after takeoff. The commenter states that fuel dumping has received

little attention from environmental groups, but reports of fuel dumping

should be required by the Federal Aviation Regulations.

While the comment may have merit, reporting of fuel dumping with

regard to environmental effects is beyond the scope of this rulemaking

action, and therefore is not addressed in this proposal.

During preparation of this document, the FAA determined that any

failure, malfunction, or defect concerning a fuel system or fuel

dumping system that affects fuel flow or causes hazardous leakage

should be reported regardless of whether it occurs during ground or

flight operations. Therefore, the FAA has revised the proposed rule by

removing the language that limited the

[[Page 18769]]

reporting of such service difficulties to those that occur during

flight.

Sections 121.703(a)(8), 125.409(a)(8), and 135.415(a)(8)

Two commenters express confusion about the proposed reporting

requirements for landing gear failures, malfunctions, or defects. These

commenters indicate that the proposed rule language could require a

report whether a landing gear defect ``resulted'' in an extension or

retraction, or ``became apparent'' during a landing gear extension or

retraction that was selected by the pilot. The commenters contend that

the rule language is not consistent with the explanation in the

preamble.

The FAA intends that all failures, malfunctions, or defects

associated with landing gear extension or retraction during flight be

reported. Therefore, the proposed rule language remains unchanged.

The final rule for part 119 revised current Sec. 121.703(a)(12) to

require the reporting of an ``unwanted'' landing gear extension or

retraction, or an ``unwanted'' opening or closing of landing gear doors

during flight. The use of the term ``unwanted'' is superfluous because

this section only requires the reporting of failures, malfunctions, or

defects associated with landing gear extension or retraction.

Therefore, the FAA proposes to remove the term ``unwanted'' from

Sec. 121.703(a)(8). Similar changes are proposed in Secs. 125.409(a)(8)

and 135.415(a)(8).

Sections 121.703(a)(9), 125.409(a)(9), and 135.415(a)(9)

The FAA received one comment regarding the reporting of a failure,

malfunction, or defect concerning any brake system component that

results in any detectable loss of brake actuating force when the

aircraft is in motion on the ground. The commenter states that the

subsequent statement that excludes defects deferrable according to the

Minimum Equipment List (MEL), as provided for in 14 CFR Sec. 91.213, is

confusing. The commenter states that the MEL item may have induced the

problem and that excluding a report of such a failure would prevent the

collection of information that may be beneficial for analysis. Another

comment concerning the MEL states that if MEL discrepancies are

reported, the adequacy of the MEL can be assessed objectively.

The FAA's intent was to avoid having discrepancies such as

hydraulic leaks and inoperative anti-skid systems reported to the SDRS

because, under certain circumstances, these discrepancies may not be

critical to the continued safe operation of the braking system.

However, the FAA has reconsidered this proposal and agrees with the

commenters that such information, regardless of deferability in

accordance with the MEL, should be reported. Therefore, the FAA has

revised the proposal accordingly.

Sections 121.703(a)(10), 125.409(a)(10), and 135.415(a)(10)

The FAA received six comments that address the reporting of

failures, malfunctions, or defects that result in rejected takeoffs

(RTO's) after initiation of the takeoff roll or emergency actions

during flight. Two of these commenters state that the proposed rule

language should be amended to include ``when that defect or malfunction

has endangered or may endanger the safe operation of the aircraft.''

One commenter recommends only reporting those RTO's that occur above a

certain speed and recommends the establishment of a standard

V1 percentage above which RTO's would be reported. Another

commenter states that reports of RTO's should be limited to those that

involve a ``significant'' safety problem. One commenter questions the

need for reporting when the RTO's occur during maintenance activities,

such as test flights.

The FAA has determined that the rule, as proposed, would result in

the collection of useful data on all RTO's. The FAA contends that

attempting to define terms such as ``significant,'' as suggested, is

not feasible because of the subjective nature of the term. Because one

commenter states that the use of the term ``emergency'' is ambiguous,

the FAA has added for clarification the phrase ``as defined by the

Aircraft Flight Manual or Pilot's Operating Handbook'' to the proposed

rule language. The FAA notes that the collected data would not include

RTO's associated with animals or debris on runways because such events

would not be the result of an aircraft component or system failure,

malfunction, or defect.

Sections 121.703(a)(11), 125.409(a)(11), and 135.415(a)(11)

The FAA received five comments concerning the reporting of

failures, malfunctions, or defects associated with emergency evacuation

systems or components. These commenters similarly state that reports on

the failure of emergency lighting or the degradation of emergency

egress lighting batteries should be excluded from the reporting

requirements. The commenters state that individual component failures

that do not affect the operation of the emergency evacuation system

should not be reported.

The FAA disagrees. The current rules pertaining to the reporting of

the described failures provide the FAA with an indication of evacuation

system reliability, as well as the reliability of components within

evacuation systems. The FAA contends that if an evacuation slide has an

on-aircraft life of 12 months, for example, the components within that

slide should last 12 months. Failure of a slide's emergency egress

lighting batteries is an indication of their reliability and may

indicate that a change in maintenance procedures or life limits is

necessary. The proposed rule language has been revised to require

reporting of all failures, malfunctions, or defects of an emergency

evacuation system or component including those deferred in accordance

with a MEL.

Sections 121.703(a)(12), 125.409(a)(12), and 135.415(a)(12)

In this supplemental notice, the FAA proposes to add a new

reporting requirement for failures, malfunctions, or defects that are

not reported under the current regulations. Reports would be required

for failures, malfunctions, or defects of autothrottle, autoflight, or

flight control systems or components found to be defective or that fail

to perform their intended function. The reporting requirements would

include scenarios in which the primary mode of a system fails, and a

secondary system immediately and appropriately assumes operation. Under

such a scenario, the failure of the primary mode would be reportable.

There have been two air carrier accidents in the United States that

immediately followed unexplained airplane rolls. The FAA is aware of

other roll, pitch, or yaw events that have occurred, although reports

are not always made to the SDRS. The FAA notes that some of these

events have required full deflection of the flight controls to regain

control of the aircraft. Other events have occurred involving ice in

autopilot actuators, which prevented the actuators from disengaging

when the autopilot was disengaged.

Although such events could be reported under current

Sec. 121.703(c) or Sec. 135.415(c), the SDR data base does not indicate

that such reports are being made. Therefore, the FAA has added a

proposed requirement to report failures, malfunctions, or defects of

autothrottle, autoflight, or flight control systems or components in

proposed

[[Page 18770]]

Sec. Sec. 121.703(a)(12), 125.409(a)(12), and 135.415(a)(12).

Sections 121.703(c), 121.704(b), 125.409(c), 125.410(b), 135.415(c),

and 135.416(b)

In this supplemental notice, the FAA proposes to revise the

language in Secs. 121.703(c), 125.409(c), and 135.415(c). The proposed

rule states that each certificate holder shall report any failure,

malfunction, or defect in an aircraft system, component, or powerplant

that occurs or is detected at any time if that failure, malfunction, or

defect has endangered or may endanger the safe operation of an

aircraft. The phrase ``in its opinion'' would no longer be included in

the rule language. The proposed provision would provide the FAA with

additional information concerning failures, malfunctions, or defects,

not otherwise specified in the proposed rule, involving modern, complex

aircraft. Similar revisions would be included in proposed

Secs. 121.704(b), 125.410(b), and 135.416(b).

Sections 121.703(d), 121.704(c), 125.409(d), 125.410(c), 135.415(d),

and 135.416(c)

The FAA received six comments that address the provisions of

proposed Secs. 121.703(d), 125.409(d), and 135.415(d). These comments

address the submission of reports directly to a centralized collection

point rather than the certificate holder's FSDO, the 72-hour reporting

requirement, the availability of reports for examination by the FSDO,

and the perception that the proposed rule prescribes dual reporting

requirements. One commenter asserts that the requirements for reports

to be reviewed by the FSDO before they are entered into the SDR

database should be retained.

The FAA disagrees. The current requirement for FSDO review before

forwarding the report to Oklahoma City allows the FSDO to review the

reports for completion and accuracy and assess certificate holder

trends. Because the proposed reporting requirements are more precise

than the existing rules, an accuracy review of the report by the FSDO

should no longer be required. Current routing requirements create a

delay of approximately 4 to 5 weeks from the date of occurrence to the

date of data entry. The FAA contends that the continued FSDO review

would only delay the timely entry of data into the SDRS.

Because of concerns raised by the commenters about making the

reports available for FSDO review, the duration of such availability,

and the perception that this constitutes a dual reporting requirement,

the FAA has added a statement to the proposed rule that the reports be

made available for review for 30 days. The FAA contends that

certificate holders usually retain SDR's indefinitely; therefore, a 30-

day retention requirement should place minimal burden on the

certificate holders. Certificate holders would not be required to

submit a copy of the report to their PMI, but would be required to

permit the inspector to review any reports submitted within the

previous 30 days.

FAA inspectors have expressed concern that their lack of review

would ``take them out of the loop'' and would not permit them to remain

aware of difficulties experienced by the certificate holder; however,

inspectors have access to the FAA's SDR data base and the reports are

currently available for review in the SDR Summary (provided by AFS-600)

on computer services such as FedWorld and the Integrated Safety

Information System. The FAA will use inspector guidance to emphasize

that inspectors should use available computer systems to review SDR

data. However, as previously noted, certificate holders would be

required to permit inspectors to review any reports submitted within

the previous 30 days.

The FAA notes that, with regard to the provision for certificate

holders to make reports available to the FSDO for review as proposed in

the NPRM, the final rule for part 119 removed the references to

``Flight Standards District Office'' in Sec. 121.703. Specifically, the

FAA revised the report submission requirements of Sec. 121.703(d) by

replacing ``FAA Flight Standards District Office charged with the

overall inspection of the certificate holder'' with ``certificate-

holding district office.'' In addition, Sec. 119.3 defines the

certificate-holding district office as the FSDO that has responsibility

for administering the certificate and is charged with the overall

inspection of the certificate holder's operations. Therefore, to

maintain consistency, proposed Secs. 121.703(d), 121.704(c),

125.409(d), 125.410(c), 135.415(d), and 135.416(c) have been revised to

reflect this change.

Four commenters mention the 72-hour reporting requirement. Two of

these commenters state that the 72-hour reporting requirement is

inappropriate, and at times is impossible to meet for aircraft

undergoing heavy maintenance. The commenters recommend revising the

current rule so that, under such circumstances, reports would be

required 72 hours after the aircraft is returned to service. One

commenter states that the 72-hour reporting requirement should only be

required for those discrepancies that could cause the ``sudden loss of

an aircraft.'' Another commenter states that there is no justification

for the 72-hour reporting requirement.

The FAA has reviewed the comments and determined that a 96-hour

requirement for the submission of reports is more appropriate than the

current 72-hour reporting requirement. However, the FAA disagrees with

the comment that for aircraft undergoing heavy maintenance, the 96-hour

reporting requirement should begin when the aircraft is approved for

return to service, because there may be a substantial period of time

between discovery of the failure, malfunction, or defect during a heavy

maintenance check and the return of the aircraft to service. In

addition, the FAA contends that the increase from 72 hours to 96 hours

for reporting would allow ample time for certificate holders to gather

the necessary information to submit a detailed report and reduce

supplemental reporting.

One commenter notes that the text of proposed Sec. 135.415(d)

states that reports must be submitted to the ``location where the data

base is maintained'' rather than a centralized collection point, as

stated in the similar sections of the proposal. The FAA notes that this

was an inadvertent error, and the proposed rule language has been

revised to read ``to a centralized collection point'' for consistency

with similar proposed sections.

For the reasons discussed above proposed Secs. 121.704(c),

125.410(c), and 135.416(c) also have been revised to increase the

reporting requirement to 96 hours and require that SDR's be made

available for 30 days for examination by the certificate holding

district office.

Sections 121.703(e), 125.409(e), and 135.415(e)

The FAA received two comments concerning the introductory text of

Secs. 121.703(e), 125.409(e), and 135.415(e). One commenter indicates

the perception that the proposed rule language would require both an

electronic copy and a paper copy of any reports submitted. That

commenter also states that reporting electronically should be optional.

In addition, that commenter states that the word ``should'' is not

appropriate language for a rule. The other commenter expresses concern

that the rule as proposed would not require the submission of

information that is necessary to conduct meaningful analysis because

items

[[Page 18771]]

contained in previously proposed paragraphs (e)(7) through (e)(9) would

be optional information that certificate holders could but would not be

required to submit.

The FAA has revised the proposed rule language to clarify that a

report must be submitted electronically or in another form acceptable

to the Administrator. It was not the FAA's intention to require the

submission of reports in both electronic and paper form. However, the

FAA proposes revising Sec. 121.703(e) to provide that 1 year after the

effective date of the rule, part 121 certificate holders would be

required to submit reports in an electronic form. This proposed

revision is consistent with Department of Transportation (DOT)

requirements, contained in 14 CFR Sec. 234.5 and section 19-1 of 14 CFR

part 241, for the electronic submission of certain reports and data,

and should impose little additional burden on part 121 certificate

holders. Part 125 and part 135 certificate holders would retain the

option of submitting the required information in electronic or paper

form. Part 145 certificate holders also would retain this option unless

the repair facility submits the information on behalf of a part 121

certificate holder in accordance with proposed Secs. 121.703(g) and

121.704(f).

The proposed rule also has been reworded to require the submission

of all of the information listed in paragraph (e). The increase from 72

hours to 96 hours for the submission of the reports should permit the

timely collection of the information previously proposed as optional in

paragraphs (e)(7) through (e)(9). The increase in the amount of time

allowed for submission of reports should reduce the number of

supplemental reports submitted to update the SDR data base, a concern

that was expressed by several other commenters.

Sections 121.703(e)(1), 125.409(e)(1), and 135.415(e)(1)

As previously proposed, these sections required that an SDR include

the manufacturer, the model, the serial number, and the registration

number of the aircraft. When the service difficulty involves an engine

or propeller, the manufacturer, the model, and the serial number of

those items are necessary for accurate trend analysis. Therefore, these

sections have been revised to require the reporting of the

manufacturer, the model, and the serial number of the aircraft, engine,

or propeller. The requirement to provide the registration number of the

aircraft is now contained in proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(2),

125.409(e)(2), and 135.415(e)(2).

Sections 121.703(e)(3), 125.409(e)(3), and 135.415(e)(3)

The FAA has revised the proposed rule language in these sections to

require that an SDR include the operator designator rather than the

name of the operator. Each certificate holder is assigned a certificate

number. The operator designator is the first four alphanumeric

characters of the certificate number. This revision is necessary to

avoid potential confusion when operators have similar names (for

example, American Airlines, Inc.; American Trans Air, Inc.; and America

West Airlines, Inc.).

Proposed Secs. 121.704(d)(2), 125.410(d)(2), and 135.416(d)(2) also

would require that an SDR submitted under these sections include an

operator designator.

Sections 121.703(e)(4), 125.409(e)(4), and 135.415(e)(4)

Two commenters address the content of previously proposed

Secs. 121.703(e)(3), 125.409(e)(3), and 135.415(e)(3) and indicate that

providing all the information required by those paragraphs may not be

possible. One commenter states that his operation does not use flight

numbers. The other commenter states that a flight number may not be

appropriate if the defect was discovered during maintenance. This

commenter also questions what station information would be appropriate

if a discrepancy occurred during flight.

After further review, the FAA has determined that the proposed

requirement for submission of the flight number and the station where

the failure, malfunction, or defect was detected is not necessary.

Proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(4), 125.409(e)(4), and 135.415(e)(4) would

now require only the date on which the failure, malfunction, or defect

was discovered. The requirement to report the stage of operation during

which the service difficulty occurred (previously included in proposed

Secs. 121.703(e)(3), 125.409(e)(3), and 135.415(e)(3)) is now contained

in Secs. 121.703(e)(5), 125.409(e)(5), and 135.415(e)(5) as discussed

in the following paragraph.

Sections 121.703(e)(5), 125.409(e)(5), and 135.415(e)(5)

The FAA has clarified the requirement to report the stage of

operation during which the service difficulty occurred by revising it

to read ``the stage of flight or ground operation during which the

failure, malfunction, or defect was discovered.'' These operations may

include, for example, ground handling, taxi, takeoff, climb, cruise,

descent, approach, landing, or maintenance inspections. The intent of

the proposal is to require reports for all of the listed failures,

malfunctions, or defects, regardless of when they are detected. This

clarification also addresses comments on Secs. 121.703(a), 125.409(a),

and 135.415(a) about whether reports would be required only for defects

detected during flight or if defects occurring during ground operations

also would be reportable.

Sections 121.703(e)(7), 121.704(d)(6), 125.409(e)(7), 125.410(d)(6),

135.415(e)(7), and 135.416(d)(6)

The FAA received seven comments concerning the inclusion of the

applicable FAA-modified Air Transport Association Specification 100

(ATA Code) in the reporting requirements. The commenters cite various

reasons for their lack of support for this requirement. Commenters

express concern that the use of the FAA-modified system would become

required throughout their operations, resulting in tremendous expense

for manual revisions and computer system modifications. They also

express concern that required use of the proposed codes would result in

additional review requirements and that the modified codes add no value

or safety benefit to the current system. Commenters also state that not

all manufacturers prepare their manuals in accordance with the ATA Code

system and that requiring the use of the codes creates the opportunity

for inconsistent compliance.

To address these concerns, the FAA has modified the proposed rule,

which would require use of the applicable JASC Code. In May 1991, the

FAA introduced the coding scheme used in the JASC Code for the

technical classification of SDR's. This code, which was developed by

the Safety Data Analysis Section of the FAA's Flight Standards Service

with input from Transport Canada, is a modified version of the ATA

Code. The JASC Code has been adopted by the Civil Aviation Authority of

Australia and by Transport Canada. The current ATA Code system

basically is consistent with the JASC Code system; therefore, users of

the ATA Code should not need to significantly revise their procedures

to adopt the JASC Code. The Safety Data Analysis Section often changes

reporters' incorrect codes to the appropriate JASC Code before data are

entered in the SDRS to ensure that correct data are captured during

queries. This procedure ensures proper subsequent data analysis.

[[Page 18772]]

Use of the JASC Code provides standardization between users and

nonusers of the ATA Code, just as the ATA Code provides consistency for

its users. Copies of the JASC Code are available from the FAA's

Regulatory Support Division (AFS-600) or on-line via the FedWorld

system (see ``Availability of JASC Code'').

Sections 121.703(e)(8), 121.703(d)(7), 125.409(e)(8), 125.410(d)(7),

135.415(e)(8), and 135.416(d)(7)

The FAA received four comments concerning the proposed requirement

for submitting aircraft total time and total cycles. The commenters

state that if the failure, malfunction, or defect involves a component,

the aircraft total time and total cycles may not be readily available,

especially if an outside vendor is involved in providing the corrective

action. In the case of a component defect, the aircraft total time and

total cycles may be irrelevant and too time consuming to determine. Two

commenters state that total cycles may not be available for certain

certificate holders who use aircraft for which cycle recording is not

required. These commenters question whether the proposed rule would

require those certificate holders to begin tracking aircraft total

cycles.

The FAA agrees with these comments and has revised the proposed

rule accordingly. Because tracking the accumulation of aircraft cycles

may not be a requirement for certain type designs, this information

would only be required, if applicable. Proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(8),

121.704(d)(7), 125.409(e)(8), 125.410(d)(7), 135.415(e)(8), and

135.416(d)(7) have been modified accordingly. Also, the FAA has made

the total time and total cycle information requirement more specific in

proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(8), 121.409(e)(8), and 135.415(e)(8) so that

information on the affected part would be required, rather than only

aircraft total time and total cycles.

Sections 121.703(e)(9), 125.409(e)(9), and 135.415(e)(9)

One commenter states that requiring the identification of the

engine or component serial number is not justifiable when it is not

required to report the engine or component manufacturer and part

number.

The FAA agrees and has added the requirement for the submission of

the manufacturer, manufacturer part number, and part name of the

malfunctioning item to the proposed rule. In addition, the location of

the malfunctioning item would be required.

The FAA also has revised these sections to require that the

information be provided for the component that failed, malfunctioned,

or was defective, if applicable. In some instances, it may be possible

to further identify the specific part, within that component, that

failed, malfunctioned, or was defective. For example, when a generator

fails, during disassembly it may be discovered that the failure was

caused by a problem with a bearing. In such cases, the FAA has

determined that it also is necessary for accurate trend analysis that

an SDR contain the manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name,

serial number, and location of that part (the bearing, in this

example). Therefore, proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(10), 125.409(e)(10), and

135.415(e)(10) have been added to require the reporting of this

information. The FAA notes that in some cases the component causing the

service difficulty may not contain any parts (for example, a cracked

windscreen). In those cases, no information would be required under

proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(10), 125.409(e)(10), and 135.415(e)(10).

Sections 121.703(e)(11), 125.409(e)(11), and 135.415(e)(11)

During the review of comments and preparation of this document, the

FAA determined that the proposed rule language should be clarified by

substituting the phrase ``precautionary or emergency action taken'' for

``emergency procedure effected.'' This revision is necessary because

certain indications may require an aircraft to return to the gate for

precautionary reasons (for example, an unusual or abnormal fuel

quantity indication while taxiing for takeoff). Such events may not

require the use of emergency procedures; therefore, certain certificate

holders may not report the information under the existing or previously

proposed rules. However, to ensure that all appropriate information is

collected, the FAA wants reports of the precautionary or emergency

action taken.

Sections 121.703(e)(13), 121.704(d)(9), 125.409(e)(13), 125.410(d)(9),

135.415(e)(13), and 135.416(d)(9)

The FAA has revised the proposed rule language by adding a

requirement that an SDR include a unique control number for an

occurrence, in a form acceptable to the Administrator. The following

describes an acceptable form for the unique control number. The control

number would begin with the first four alphanumeric characters of the

submitter's certificate number. The next four numbers would be used to

designate the calendar year in which the SDR is submitted. The

remaining numbers would be generated by the submitter. For example, for

the unique control number ABCD199700001, ``ABCD'' would denote the

first four characters of the submitter's certificate number, ``1997''

would indicate that the SDR was filed in 1997, and ``0000001'' would

indicate that the SDR relates to the first occurrence reported by the

submitter for that year. When a supplemental SDR is submitted, the

submitter would use the unique control number from the original SDR,

add the new or modified information to the original SDR, and submit the

supplemental report.

The use of the unique control number will reduce the number of

duplicate reports for the same occurrence in the SDR data base and

provide a more simplified method for the FAA and industry to reference

an SDR. Currently, FAA resources are expended to relate supplemental

information to the original report.

Proposed Secs. 121.704(d)(9), 125.410(d)(9), and 135.416(d)(9) also

would require that an SDR submitted under these sections include a

unique control number for the occurrence.

Sections 121.703(f), 125.409(f), and 135.415(f)

Two commenters state that the proposed rule language pertaining to

reporting under 14 CFR Sec. 21.3 provides manufacturers with a loophole

to avoid SDR reporting, thereby preventing a meaningful comparison to

service difficulties.

The FAA disagrees. Sections 121.703(f), 125.409(f), and 135.415(f)

apply to the few operators who also happen to be the type certificate

holder of the aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller in which a

failure, malfunction, or defect has been discovered. Other certificate

holders would make a report as prescribed by the other provisions of

the proposed rule. Although reports made under to Sec. 21.3 and

proposed Secs. 121.703(a), 125.409(a), and 135.415(a) would contain

common information, the FAA disagrees with the commenters' contention

that the information should be compiled into a single data base for

meaningful comparison. Comparison of the information may not result in

useful data. Reports submitted under Secs. 121.703(a), 125.409(a), and

135.415(a) identify problems on aircraft that are in service. Reports

submitted under Sec. 21.3 identify manufacturing deficiencies and are

used by the appropriate FAA Aircraft Certification

[[Page 18773]]

Office to address such deficiencies and correct them during subsequent

manufacturing activity. The FAA contends that the information gathered

through these separate reporting requirements should remain separate.

The reporting requirements of Sec. 21.3 may be reviewed in a separate

rulemaking action in the future; however, such review and potential

revision is beyond the scope of this rulemaking activity.

Sections 121.703(g), 125.409(g), and 135.415(g)

Three commenters request clarification of the proposed provision

which would permit a part 121, part 125, or part 135 certificate holder

to assign the service difficulty reporting task to a certificated

repair station. Two of these commenters indicate that without clear

lines of responsibility, inconsistent reporting will result. These two

commenters also recommend that reporting be the responsibility of the

person returning the aircraft or other item to service. Another

commenter questions whether the certificate holder would have to grant

reporting authority in writing to the repair station and whether

certificate holders would be required to maintain lists of repair

stations to which they have granted such authority.

The FAA offers the following for clarification: The reporting

responsibility ultimately lies with the certificate holder for the

aircraft. However, a certificate holder could, in the contractual

agreement for the maintenance activity made with a repair station,

assign to the repair station the task of submitting the required

reports. This assignment would permit the repair station to submit the

reports as the repair station discovers discrepancies during

maintenance of the operator's equipment without repeatedly contacting

the operator. If such an arrangement is made to meet the proposed

requirements, the repair station would submit the data required by the

proposed SDR requirements, although repair stations are not governed by

part 121, part 125, or part 135. The FAA emphasizes that such

arrangements are optional and that the details of such arrangements are

contractual, not regulatory. The FAA also emphasizes that the

responsibility for the submission of the reports would still remain

with the certificate holder, and that the certificate holder would

still be required to make the reports available for review for 30 days.

Sections 121.703(h) and (i), 121.704(g) and (h), 125.409(h) and (i),

125.410(g) and (h), 135.415(h) and (i), and 135.416(g) and (h)

During preparation of this supplemental notice, the FAA noted that

the requirements prescribed by current Secs. 121.703(g) and (h) and

135.415(g) and (h) were not retained in Notice No. 95-12. These

sections address the withholding of incomplete reports and the

submission of supplemental reports. Although the change from 72 hours

to 96 hours for the submission of reports is intended to reduce the

number of supplemental reports required, the intent was not to

eliminate supplemental reporting. Under the proposal, supplemental

reports would still be required for the submission of information that

was not available at the time the original report was submitted, as is

required under the existing rules. Therefore, proposed Secs. 121.703(h)

and (i), 125.409(h) and (i), and 135.415(h) and (i), which address the

submission of supplemental reports, have been added in this proposal.

Equivalent requirements are contained in proposed Secs. 121.704(g) and

(h), 125.410(g) and (h), and 135.416(g) and (h).

In adding the proposed requirement for submission of supplemental

reports, the FAA has modified the current language of Secs. 121.703(h)

and 135.415(h). The FAA intends that all additional information, from

whatever source, be submitted in the supplemental reports, including

information obtained from the manufacturer, the operator's internal

maintenance organization, or a certificated repair station. The FAA has

further modified the current language to require the certificate holder

to reference the unique control number from the original report. As

previously discussed, use of this number will ensure that the

supplemental information is traceable to the original report.

Sections 121.704(a), 125.410(a), and 135.416(a)

The FAA received six comments concerning use of the terms ``primary

structure'' (PS) and ``principal structural element'' (PSE) in the

introductory text of proposed Secs. 121.704(a), 125.410(a), and

135.416(a). These commenters express concern that not all manufacturers

of aircraft operated under parts 121, part 125, and part 135 identify

portions of the airframe as a PS or a PSE. The commenters state that

although in many cases the identification of a PS or a PSE is possible

by evaluation of an item's function, this is not always the case. Two

commenters note inconsistencies within paragraph (a) of each section.

The FAA agrees with the concerns of the commenters. Because of

these concerns, the FAA has revised proposed Secs. 121.704(a),

125.410(a), and 135.416(a). The revised sections would require each

certificate holder to report the occurrence or detection of each

failure or defect related to corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that

requires replacement of the affected part, or that requires rework or

blendout because the corrosion, cracks, or disbonding exceeds the

manufacturer's established allowable damage limits. The revised

sections also would require reports for cracks, fractures, or

disbonding in a composite structure that the equipment manufacturer has

designated as a PS or a PSE. This clarification would alleviate the

requirement for submitting reports about cracked composite radomes,

fairings, or lift spoilers, while ensuring that cracks in composite

wing structures are reported.

The previously proposed requirement for the submission of

information on failures or defects repaired in accordance with data

approved by a Designated Engineering Representative (DER) or other

approved data not contained in the manufacturer's maintenance manual

also has been revised. In addition to reports of other failures or

defects, the revised proposal would require the submission of

information on any failures or defects repaired in accordance with data

not contained in the manufacturer's maintenance manual so that

information on aircraft without prescribed allowable damage limits also

would be reported.

Sections 121.704(d), 125.410(d), and 135.416(d)

The FAA received six comments regarding proposed Secs. 121.704(d),

125.410(d), and 135.416(d). The majority of these comments were similar

to comments on Secs. 121.703(e), 125.409(e), and 135.415(e), described

previously, regarding the reporting of optional information.

One commenter specifically addresses previously proposed paragraph

(d)(7) of each section and states that the identification of a

structural part should remain optional because many structural parts

are several feet in length and the part number alone may not provide an

adequate description of the damage location. The commenter notes that a

part number may add no value when a detailed description of the damage

location (including station, waterline, butt line) is provided.

[[Page 18774]]

The FAA agrees. Therefore, the FAA has not included the

manufacturer's part number and serial number of the defective item in

the list of reportable items. The FAA notes that proposed

Secs. 121.704(d)(5), 125.410(d)(5), and 135.416(d)(5) would require the

certificate holder to report the part name, part condition, and

location of the failure or defect. The addition of a reporting

requirement for the part name and part condition is necessary for

accurate trend analysis.

The FAA also has added a requirement in proposed

Secs. 121.704(d)(4), 125.410(d)(4), and 135.416(d)(4) that an SDR

include the stage of ground operation during which the failure or

defect was discovered. Such operations may include scheduled and

unscheduled maintenance or servicing of the aircraft. The FAA has

deleted the previously proposed requirement to report the ``nature of

the failure or defect.''

In addition, the FAA has revised the proposed rule to require the

submission of all of the information listed in Secs. 121.704(d),

125.410(d), and 135.416(d). The FAA has determined that this

requirement is necessary to ensure that information such as corrosion

classification and crack length is reported. The FAA notes that only

those certificate holders who have a required corrosion prevention and

control program are required to report corrosion classification

information. The addition of proposed Secs. 121.704(g) and (h),

125.410(g) and (h), and 135.416(g) and (h) would permit the reporting

of this information when it becomes available.

Consistent with the proposed revision to Sec. 121.703(e), the FAA

has revised Sec. 121.704(d) to provide that 1 year after the effective

date of the rule, part 121 certificate holders would be required to

submit reports in an electronic form.

Sections 121.705 and 135.417

The FAA received three comments concerning Sec. 135.417. Two of

these comments address the proposal that would require reports

following each interruption to a flight for any aircraft, rather than

for just multiengine aircraft, as required by the existing rule. These

commenters state that this change is significant and needs to be

addressed.

The FAA agrees. The proposal would require reports for all such

interruptions, regardless of whether they occurred in a single- or

multiengine aircraft for operations conducted under part 135. The FAA

contends that many aircraft use parts or engines that are in common use

between part 121, part 125, or part 135 certificate holders (for

example, the Cessna Caravan and the Beechcraft 1900, which both use the

Pratt & Whitney PT-6 engine). Also, the FAA has added unscheduled

engine removals caused by known or suspected mechanical difficulties to

the list of items that would be required to be reported. This change

will facilitate the continued compilation of data for preparation of

the FAA's Air Carrier Aircraft Utilization and Propulsion Reliability

Report.

One commenter addresses the proposed change in Sec. 135.417 for the

submission of reports from the 10th day of the month following an

interruption to the regular and prompt submission of reports, which

would have made part 135 consistent with current Sec. 121.705. The

commenter contends that the phrase ``regularly and promptly'' is too

vague.

The FAA agrees and has changed the language of proposed

Secs. 121.705 and 135.417 to require that reports be submitted by the

10th day of the month following the occurrence.

Sections 145.63 and 145.79

For consistency with the proposed requirements of part 121, part

125, and part 135, the FAA has revised these sections to require that

reports of serious defects or recurring unairworthy conditions be

submitted to a centralized collection point as specified by the

Administrator. The FAA has revised the time period for reporting

serious defects or unairworthy conditions from 72 hours to 96 hours for

the same reason.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposal contains information collections that are subject to

review by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-

13). The title, description, and respondent description of the annual

burden are shown below.

Title: Service Difficulty Reports.

Description: Under current regulations, certificate holders

operating under parts 121, 125, and 135 and part 145 certificated

domestic and foreign repair stations are required to report service

difficulties to the FAA. The objective of the revised proposed rule is

to update and improve the reporting system to effectively collect and

disseminate clear and concise safety information to the aviation

industry. This would be done through a series of changes that include:

Permitting part 121, 125, and 135 certificate holders to

authorize a repair station to submit an SDR on their behalf;

Permitting the electronic submission of SDR data

(certificate holders operating under part 121 would be required to

report electronically 1 year after the effective date of a final rule);

Eliminating dual reporting from both air carriers and

repair stations;

Reducing the Principal Maintenance Inspector's (PMI's)

workload;

Requiring that each SDR include a unique control number

for an occurrence; and

Adding some additional reporting requirements for part

121, 125, and 135 certificate holders on information that has not been

collected before or had been collected through voluntary reporting.

Description of Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit

organizations.

This proposal would constitute a recordkeeping burden for

certificate holders operating under parts 121, 125, and 135, and part

145 certificated repair stations that currently must report service

difficulties. The FAA notes that the current service difficulty

reporting requirements were approved under OMB assigned Control Numbers

2120-0008, 2120-0085, 2120-0003, and 2120-0039.

The FAA expects that this proposal would affect 156 part 121

certificated air carriers, 2,940 part 125 and 135 certificated air

carriers, and 4,599 part 145 certificated repair stations. The proposed

rules, while imposing additional reporting and recordkeeping

requirements on those operators, would have the following impacts on

these businesses:

Allowing a repair station to file an SDR on behalf of a

certificate holder operating under part 121, 125, or 135 (saving 385

hours annually); and

Require certificate holders to report certain additional

service difficulties and include new information in the SDR (adding

1,725 hours annually for air carriers and 57.5 hours annually for

repair stations).

Accordingly, the FAA estimates that these proposed rules increase

the reporting and paperwork requirements for industry by 1,398 hours

annually. The total annual reporting burden costs sums to $31,464.

These cost figures are based on estimates provided in the FAA's

``Regulatory Analysis.''

In addition, under the proposal, certificate holders operating

under part 121 would be required to report SDR's electronically 1 year

after the effective date of the rule. The FAA estimates that it would

take approximately 1 hour for a certificate holder to program its

computers to permit electronic submission of the report. In addition,

it may be necessary for some certificate

[[Page 18775]]

holders to install additional software to convert to an IBM-compatible

system to run the necessary software. Total first year costs are

expected to sum to $7,719.

The proposed regulations would decrease paperwork for the Federal

Government by reducing the workload for PMI's and SDR data entry

employees as follows:

Allowing a repair station to file an SDR on behalf of a

certificate holder operating under part 121, 125, or 135, hence,

reducing dual reporting (saving 385 hours annually for data entry

personnel);

Requiring certificate holders to submit these reports

directly to Oklahoma City (saving as much as 3,083 hours annually for

PMI's);

Requiring that an SDR include a unique control number for

an occurrence (saving as much as 228 hours annually for data entry

personnel); and

Require certificate holders to report certain additional

service difficulties and include new information in the SDR (adding 863

hours annually for data entry personnel).

Accordingly, the FAA estimates that these proposed rules decrease

the reporting and paperwork requirements for the government by 2,834

hours annually. The total annual reporting burden costs savings sums to

$18,164. These cost figures are based on estimates provided in the

FAA's ``Regulatory Analysis.''

The agency solicits public comment on the information collection

requirements to (1) evaluate whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of

the agency, including whether the information will have practical

utility; (2) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the

burden of the proposed collection of information, including the

validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) enhance the

quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,

electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

Individuals and organizations may submit comments on the

information collection requirement by June 1, 1999, and should direct

them to the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

Persons are not required to respond to a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The burden

associated with this proposal has been submitted to OMB for review. The

FAA will publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public

of the approval numbers and expiration date.

International Compatibility

The FAA has reviewed corresponding International Civil Aviation

Organization standards and recommended practices and Joint Aviation

Authorities requirements and has identified no differences in these

proposed amendments and the foreign regulations.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

Executive Order 12866 (issued October 4, 1993) established the

requirement that each agency shall assess both the costs and benefits

of every regulation and propose or adjust a regulation only upon a

reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation

justify its costs. 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.

In addition to a summary of the regulatory evaluation, this section

also contains a regulatory flexibility determination required by the

1980 Regulatory Flexibility Act, an international trade impact

assessment, and an unfunded mandates determination. (A detailed

discussion of costs and benefits is contained in the full evaluation in

the docket for this rule.)

In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this

proposed rule would generate cost-savings that would exceed any costs,

and is not ``significant'' as defined under section 3(f) of Executive

Order 12866 and Department of Transportation's (DOT) policies and

procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). In addition, under the

Regulatory Flexibility Determination, the FAA certifies that this

proposal would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of

small entities. Furthermore, this proposal would not impose restraints

on international trade. Finally, the FAA has determined that the

proposal would not impose a federal mandate on state, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector of $100 million per year. These

analyses, available in the docket, are summarized below.

Cost of Compliance

The FAA has estimated the expected costs and benefits of this

regulatory proposal. In this analysis, the FAA estimated costs for a

10-year period, from 1999 through 2008. The present value of this

stream was calculated using a discount factor of 7 percent as required

by the OMB. All costs in this analysis are in 1996 dollars.

While 17 of the proposed sections would increase costs, the changes

in 15 of them would modify existing reporting requirements or add

additional reporting requirements for information that has not been

collected before or had been collected through voluntary reporting.

Accordingly, because there is little or no historical data on the

proposed data collection and reporting requirements, the FAA does not

know how many extra reports these new requirements would generate. For

these proposed sections that lack historical data, the FAA believes

that there would be few new reports and that the overall burden would

be minimal. However, to provide the public with an estimation of the

potential total impact of these sections, the FAA assumed that each of

these proposed sections could increase the total number of SDR's

processed each year by 1 percent. Over 10 years, these costs sum to

$674,300 (net present value, $473,600). The FAA calls for comments on

these assumptions, specifically what the extra number of reports and

the total impact would be in each of these cases.

Proposed Secs. 121.703(e) and 121.704(d) would require 1 year after

the effective date of the rule, that part 121 certificate holders

submit reports in an electronic form. Electronic reporting would

necessitate having a computer and a modem. The software needed to

interface with the SDRS runs only on IBM-compatible systems; almost all

part 121 certificate holders have such systems.

The costs associated with this section would be for those

certificate holders who use non-IBM compatible computers. It would be

necessary for them to convert to an IBM-compatible system and for a

programmer to install the requisite software. In addition, the software

necessary to interface with the SDRS would need to be installed at all

locations; the FAA would provide this software at no charge. Total

first year costs sum to approximately $7,700 (net present value,

$7,200).

Proposed sections Secs. 121.703(g), 121.704(f), 125.409(g),

125.410(f), 135.415(g), and 135.416(f) would permit parts 121, 125, and

135 certificate holders to authorize a repair station to submit an SDR

on their behalf. Proposed Secs. 145.63(e) and 145.79(f) would require

that the repair stations provide a copy of the report submitted by the

repair

[[Page 18776]]

station to the part 121, 125, or 135 certificate holder on whose behalf

the report was submitted. These proposed sections would result in

increased costs for the repair stations. However, these proposed

sections would allow for cost savings by eliminating duplicate reports;

repair stations would submit the report for input into the SDRS

currently submitted by both repair stations and air carriers.

The elimination of the air carrier operator's duplicate report

would not diminish safety. The SDR system is used to spot equipment

malfunction trends and to get an overview of airplane mechanical

malfunctions by fleet type; they are not intended to give an

operational view of what is wrong with an operator's individual

airplane. Based on the existing regulations, before an airplane can be

put back into service, the air carrier will need to be aware of what

was wrong and what corrective actions were taken. Alleviating the air

carrier operator of the responsibility of submitting an SDR in this

case does not lessen the information the air carrier would have about

their aircraft.

There were 2,311 SDR's from repair stations entered into the SDR

data base that also were submitted from air carriers in 1996. Each

report would need to be sent from the repair station to the air

carrier. The FAA assumes in this analysis that all reports are

photostated and mailed. Over 10 years, the costs of these reports would

be $55,900 (net present value, $39,300).

Total quantifiable costs, over 10 years, sum to $738,000 (net

present value, $520,100).

Proposed sections Secs. 121.703(d), 125.409(d), and 135.415(d) may

reduce the PMI's workload. Currently, all reports go from the

certificate holder to the Flight Service District Office (FSDO) where

the PMI spends time reviewing the SDR before forwarding it to the SDRS

in Oklahoma City. The proposal would require certificate holders and

operators to submit these reports directly to Oklahoma City, thus

possibly reducing the PMI's workload. The certificate holder or

operator would be required to make the SDR data available to the FSDO

for examination. Hence, while the PMI could still remain informed, he

or she may not have to spend as much time inspecting each report and

would not have to forward the material. Over 10 years, this cost

savings would be $1.12 million (net present value, $786,000).

Proposed Secs. 121.703(e)(13), 121.704(d)(9), 125.409(e)(13),

125.410(d)(9), 135.415(e)(13), and 135.416(d)(9) would add a

requirement that an SDR include a unique control number for each

occurrence. This proposal would yield cost savings that would come from

both the reduction in the number of duplicate reports for the same

occurrence in the SDR data base and from the more simplified,

methodical method for the FAA and industry to reference an SDR.

Traditionally, when a supplemental report was submitted to the SDRS, it

was entered as if it were a separate report, thus making it difficult

to link to the original report. Using a unique identification number

for each occurrence would reduce the total number of reports within the

SDRS. The potential cost savings would be based on the reduction in the

amount of time spent to find and link these reports within the SDRS.

Over 10 years, the cost savings would be $143,800 (net present value,

$101,000). The actual cost savings would almost certainly be lower

because some certificate holders already are using a control number.

Proposed sections Secs. 121.703(g), 125.409(g), and 135.415(g)

would reduce dual reporting. When a repair station identifies a

failure, malfunction, or defect, this information currently is being

reported by both the repair station and the certificate holder or

operator. Therefore, information about the same problem may be reported

twice to the FAA. The proposed revision is intended to eliminate these

duplicate reports. The proposed rule would require that the part 121,

125, or 135 certificate holder or operator receive a copy of the report

submitted by the repair station (these costs were covered above).

Cost savings would accrue, for each repair, because one less report

would need to be processed. In 1996, 2,311 repair station SDR's were

enter into the SDR data base, so this analysis will assume that this

number of reports would not have to be processed. Over 10 years, this

cost reduction would be $227,300 (net present value, $194,800).

Total cost savings over 10 years sum to $1.54 million (net present

value, $1.08 million). Net cost savings would be $802,200 (net present

value, $561,600); these savings could be lower (1) if any of the

proposed sections the FAA is calling for comment on have higher costs

than those assumed; and (2) if the total cost savings from using a

unique control number is less (but the FAA does not have the data to

determine how much less it may be).

Analysis of Benefits

These proposals would help to eliminate the number of duplicate

reports that have been entered into this system. In addition, the

increased interval for submitting reports should reduce the number of

supplemental reports filed. A more efficient system would preserve and

improve the integrity of the data base and allow for better and more

complete analyses. Additional specific benefits of these proposals

include standardizing reporting procedures among air carriers.

In addition to the above, the proposed regulations would enhance

air carrier safety by collecting additional and more timely data that

identify mechanical failures, malfunctions, and defects that may be a

serious hazard to the operation of an aircraft. The information

collected could be used to develop and implement corrective actions to

help prevent future occurrences of these failures, malfunctions, and

defects.

As noted above, the SDR system is used to identify trends and to

provide an overview of product service data. Identifying these trends

could help to catch problems early, which could allow AD's to be based

on better information. In addition, an SDR will give an operator the

ability to use trend information (and knowledge of potential problems)

to better plan its maintenance scheduling, a major benefit for airplane

operators. In addition, the FAA believes that because of the improved

SDR information resulting from these proposed regulations, additional

information and equipment malfunction trends could be identified that

would lead, over time, to safer airplanes.

Comparison of Costs and Benefits

This proposed rule would result in cost savings. Duplicate reports,

as well as duplicate entries in the SDRS, would be reduced. The only

costs would include software and hardware costs for the part 121 air

carriers and copies of reports from repair stations to certificate

holders who would no longer need to file SDR's. These proposed changes

are expected to generate net cost savings over 10 years of $802,200

(net present value, $561,600).

In addition to eliminating the number of duplicate reports that

have been entered into this system, the proposed regulations would

enhance air carrier safety by collecting additional and more timely

data that identify mechanical failures, malfunctions, and defects that

may be a serious hazard to the operation of an aircraft. This data

could be used to identify trends that could help to catch problems

early and to better plan its maintenance scheduling. All of this could

lead, over time, to safer airplanes.

Based on the proposed rule's cost savings and benefits, the FAA

finds this proposed rule to be cost beneficial.

[[Page 18777]]

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 establishes ``as a principle

of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with

the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory

and informational requirements to the scale of the business,

organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation.''

To achieve that principle, the Act requires agencies to solicit and

consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rational for

their actions. The Act covers a wide range of small entities, including

small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental

jurisdictions.

Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or

final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, the

agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as

described in the Act.

However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is

not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities, section 605(b) of the Act provides that the

head of the agency may so certify and an RFA is not required. The

certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for

this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.

For this proposed rule, the small entity group is considered to be

parts 121, 125, and 135 air carriers (Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) Code 4512) and part 145 repair stations (SIC Codes

4581, 7622, 7629, and 7699). The FAA has identified a total of 98 part

121 air carriers, 2,118 part 125 and part 135 air carriers, and 2,790

part 145 repair stations that would be considered small entities.

These proposed regulations would cost all air carriers $396,400

(net present value, $280,200) and repair stations $64,300 (net present

value, $45,100) over the next 10 years. On average, it would cost each

air carrier $15 per year and each repair station $1 per year.

The FAA conducted the required review of this proposal and

determined that it would not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, pursuant to the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal Aviation

Administration certifies that this rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small entities. The FAA specifically

requests comments from small entities on this certification.

International Trade Impact Analysis

In accordance with the OMB memorandum dated March 1983, Federal

agencies engaged in rulemaking activities are required to assess the

effects of regulatory changes on international trade. There would be no

impact on international trade for the domestic certificate holders and

operators affected by this proposed rule. In addition, the impact on

both domestic and foreign repair stations would be the same, so there

would be no cost advantage to using either. Accordingly, there would be

no impact on international trade.

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.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, enacted as

Public Law 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal agency, to

the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment of the

effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that

may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments,

in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more

(adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1 year.

Section 204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal

agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by

elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal

governments on a proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A

``significant intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any

provision in a Federal agency regulation that will impose an

enforceable duty upon State, local, and tribal governments, in the

aggregate, of $100 million (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1

year. Section 203 of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements section

204(a), provides that before establishing any regulatory requirements

that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the

agency shall have developed a plan that, among other things, provides

for notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a

meaningful and timely opportunity to provide input in the development

of regulatory proposals.

This proposed rule does not contain any Federal intergovernmental

mandates or private sector mandates.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 121

Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

14 CFR Part 125

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

14 CFR Part 135

Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

14 CFR Part 145

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

The Proposed Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR parts 121, 125, 135, and 145 as

follows:

PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL

OPERATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 44101, 44701-44702,

44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903-44904,

44912, 46105.

2. Amend Sec. 121.703 by revising the section heading and

paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (e), and (f); redesignating paragraph (g) as

paragraph (h); revising paragraph (h) and redesignating it as paragraph

(i); and adding a new paragraph (g) to read as follows:

Sec. 121.703 Service difficulty reports (operational).

(a) Each certificate holder shall report the occurrence or

detection of each failure, malfunction, or defect concerning--

(1) Any fire and, when monitored by a related fire-warning system,

whether the fire-warning system functioned properly;

(2) Any false warning of fire or smoke;

(3) An engine exhaust system that causes damage to the engine,

adjacent structure, equipment, or components;

(4) An aircraft component that causes the accumulation or

circulation of smoke, vapor, or toxic or noxious fumes;

(5) Any engine flameout or shutdown during flight or ground

operations;

[[Page 18778]]

(6) A propeller feathering system or ability of the system to

control overspeed;

(7) A fuel or fuel-dumping system that affects fuel flow or causes

hazardous leakage;

(8) A landing gear extension or retraction, or the opening or

closing of landing gear doors during flight;

(9) Any brake system component that results in any detectable loss

of brake actuating force when the aircraft is in motion on the ground;

(10) Any aircraft component or system that results in a rejected

takeoff after initiation of the takeoff roll or the taking of emergency

actions, as defined by the Aircraft Flight Manual or Pilot's Operating

Handbook;

(11) Any emergency evacuation system or component including any

exit door, passenger emergency evacuation lighting system, or

evacuation equipment found to be defective or that fails to perform the

intended function during an actual emergency or during training,

testing, maintenance, demonstrations, or inadvertent deployments; and

(12) Autothrottle, autoflight, or flight control systems or

components of these systems.

* * * * *

(c) In addition to the reports required by paragraph (a) of this

section, each certificate holder shall report any other failure,

malfunction, or defect in an aircraft, system, component, or powerplant

that occurs or is detected at any time if that failure, malfunction, or

defect has endangered or may endanger the safe operation of an

aircraft.

(d) Each certificate holder 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 a

centralized collection point as specified by the Administrator. Each

report of occurrences during a 24-hour period shall be submitted to the

FAA within the next 96 hours. However, a report 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 work day. Each certificate holder

also shall make the report data available for 30 days for examination

by the certificate-holding district office in a form and manner

acceptable to the Administrator.

(e) The certificate holder shall submit the reports required by

this section in an electronic or other form acceptable to the

Administrator. After [1 year from the effective date of the rule], the

certificate holder shall submit the reports required by this section in

an electronic form acceptable to the Administrator. The reports shall

include the following information:

(1) The manufacturer, model, and serial number of the aircraft,

engine, or propeller;

(2) The registration number of the aircraft;

(3) The operator designator;

(4) The date on which the failure, malfunction, or defect was

discovered;

(5) The stage of flight or ground operation during which the

failure, malfunction, or defect was discovered;

(6) The nature of the failure, malfunction, or defect;

(7) The applicable Joint Aircraft System/Component Code;

(8) The total cycles, if applicable, and total time of the

aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or component;

(9) The manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name, serial

number, and location of the component that failed, malfunctioned, or

was defective, if applicable;

(10) The manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name, serial

number, and location of the part that failed, malfunctioned, or was

defective, if applicable;

(11) The precautionary or emergency action taken;

(12) Other information necessary for a more complete analysis of

the cause of the failure, malfunction, or defect, including available

information pertaining to type designation of the major component and

the time since the last maintenance overhaul, repair, or inspection;

and

(13) A unique control number for the occurrence, in a form

acceptable to the Administrator.

(f) A certificate holder that also is the holder of a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order authorization, or

that is a licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure, malfunction, or defect under this section if the failure,

malfunction, or defect has been reported by that certificate holder

under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter or under the accident reporting

provisions of 49 CFR part 830.

(g) A report required by this section may be submitted by a

certificated repair station when the reporting task has been assigned

to that repair station by a part 121 certificate holder. However, the

part 121 certificate holder remains primarily responsible for ensuring

compliance with the provisions of this section. The part 121

certificate holder shall receive a copy of each report submitted by the

repair station.

(h) No person may withhold a report required by this section

although all information required by this section is not available.

(i) When a certificate holder gets additional information

concerning a report required by this section, the certificate holder

shall expeditiously submit that information as a supplement to the

original report and use the unique control number from the original

report.

3. Add Sec. 121.704 to read as follows:

Sec. 121.704 Service difficulty reports (structural).

(a) Each certificate holder shall report the occurrence or

detection of each failure or defect related to--

(1) Corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that requires replacement of

the affected part;

(2) Corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that requires rework or

blendout because the corrosion, cracks, or disbonding exceeds the

manufacturer's established allowable damage limits;

(3) Cracks, fractures, or disbonding in a composite structure that

the equipment manufacturer has designated as a primary structure or a

principal structural element; or

(4) Failures or defects repaired in accordance with approved data

not contained in the manufacturer's maintenance manual.

(b) In addition to the reports required by paragraph (a) of this

section, each certificate holder shall report any other failure or

defect in aircraft structure that occurs or is detected at any time if

that failure or defect has endangered or may endanger the safe

operation of an aircraft.

(c) Each certificate holder 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 a

centralized collection point as specified by the Administrator. Each

report of occurrences during a 24-hour period shall be submitted to the

FAA within the next 96 hours. However, a report 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 work day. Each certificate holder

also shall make the report data available for 30 days for examination

by the certificate-holding district office in a form and manner

acceptable to the Administrator.

(d) The certificate holder shall submit the reports required by

this section in an electronic or other form acceptable to the

Administrator. After [1 year from the

[[Page 18779]]

effective date of the rule], the certificate holder shall submit the

reports required by this section in an electronic form acceptable to

the Administrator. The reports shall include the following information:

(1) The manufacturer, model, serial number, and registration number

of the aircraft;

(2) The operator designator;

(3) The date on which the failure or defect was discovered;

(4) The stage of ground operation during which the failure or

defect was discovered;

(5) The part name, part condition, and location of the failure or

defect;

(6) The applicable Joint Aircraft System/Component Code;

(7) The total cycles, if applicable, and total time of the

aircraft;

(8) Other information necessary for a more complete analysis of the

cause of the failure or defect, including corrosion classification, if

applicable, or crack length and available information pertaining to

type designation of the major component and the time since the last

maintenance overhaul, repair, or inspection; and

(9) A unique control number for the occurrence, in a form

acceptable to the Administrator.

(e) A certificate holder that also is the holder of a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order authorization, or

that is a licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure or defect under this section if the failure or defect has been

reported by that certificate holder under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter or

under the accident reporting provisions of 49 CFR part 830.

(f) A report required by this section may be submitted by a

certificated repair station when the reporting task has been assigned

to that repair station by the part 121 certificate holder. However, the

part 121 certificate holder remains primarily responsible for ensuring

compliance with the provisions of this section. The part 121

certificate holder shall receive a copy of each report submitted by the

repair station.

(g) No person may withhold a report required by this section

although all information required by this section is not available.

(h) When a certificate holder gets additional information

concerning a report required by this section, the certificate holder

shall expeditiously submit that information as a supplement to the

original report and use the unique control number from the original

report.

4. Revise Sec. 121.705 to read as follows:

Sec. 121.705 Mechanical interruption summary report.

Each certificate holder shall submit to the Administrator, before

the end of the 10th day of the following month, a summary report for

the previous month of each interruption to a flight, unscheduled change

of aircraft en route, unscheduled stop or diversion from a route, or

unscheduled engine removal caused by known or suspected mechanical

difficulties or malfunctions that are not required to be reported under

Sec. 121.703 or Sec. 121.704 of this part.

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

5. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44710-

44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722.

6. Revise Sec. 125.409 to read as follows:

Sec. 125.409 Service difficulty reports (operational).

(a) Each certificate holder shall report the occurrence or

detection of each failure, malfunction, or defect concerning--

(1) Any fire and, when monitored by a related fire-warning system,

whether the fire-warning system functioned properly;

(2) Any false warning of fire or smoke;

(3) An engine exhaust system that causes damage to the engine,

adjacent structure, equipment, or components;

(4) An aircraft component that causes the accumulation or

circulation of smoke, vapor, or toxic or noxious fumes;

(5) Any engine flameout or shutdown during flight or ground

operations;

(6) A propeller feathering system or ability of the system to

control overspeed;

(7) A fuel or fuel-dumping system that affects fuel flow or causes

hazardous leakage;

(8) A landing gear extension or retraction, or the opening or

closing of landing gear doors during flight;

(9) Any brake system component that results in any detectable loss

of brake actuating force when the aircraft is in motion on the ground;

(10) Any aircraft component or system that results in a rejected

takeoff after initiation of the takeoff roll or the taking of emergency

actions, as defined by the Aircraft Flight Manual or Pilot's Operating

Handbook;

(11) Any emergency evacuation system or component including any

exit door, passenger emergency evacuation lighting system, or

evacuation equipment found to be defective or that fails to perform the

intended function during an actual emergency or during training,

testing, maintenance, demonstrations, or inadvertent deployments; and

(12) Autothrottle, autoflight, or flight control systems or

components of these systems.

(b) For the purposes of this section, during flight means the

period from the moment the aircraft leaves the surface of the earth on

takeoff until it touches down on landing.

(c) In addition to the reports required by paragraph (a) of this

section, each certificate holder shall report any other failure,

malfunction, or defect in an aircraft, system, component, or powerplant

that occurs or is detected at any time if that failure, malfunction, or

defect has endangered or may endanger the safe operation of an

aircraft.

(d) Each certificate holder 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 a

centralized collection point as specified by the Administrator. Each

report of occurrences during a 24-hour period shall be submitted to the

FAA within the next 96 hours. However, a report 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 work day. For aircraft operating

in areas where mail is not collected, reports may be submitted within

24 hours after the aircraft returns to a point where the mail is

collected. Each certificate holder also shall make the report data

available for 30 days for examination by the certificate-holding

district office in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator.

(e) The certificate holder shall submit the reports required by

this section in an electronic or other form acceptable to the

Administrator. The reports shall include the following information:

(1) The manufacturer, model, and serial number of the aircraft,

engine, or propeller;

(2) The registration number of the aircraft;

(3) The operator designator;

(4) The date on which the failure, malfunction, or defect was

discovered;

(5) The stage of flight or ground operation during which the

failure, malfunction, or defect was discovered;

(6) The nature of the failure, malfunction, or defect;

(7) The applicable Joint Aircraft System/Component Code;

[[Page 18780]]

(8) The total cycles, if applicable, and total time of the

aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or component;

(9) The manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name, serial

number, and location of the component that failed, malfunctioned, or

was defective, if applicable;

(10) The manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name, serial

number, and location of the part that failed, malfunctioned, or was

defective, if applicable;

(11) The precautionary or emergency action taken;

(12) Other information necessary for a more complete analysis of

the cause of the failure, malfunction, or defect, including available

information pertaining to type designation of the major component and

the time since the last maintenance overhaul, repair, or inspection;

and

(13) A unique control number for the occurrence, in a form

acceptable to the Administrator.

(f) A certificate holder that also is the holder of a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order authorization, or

that is a licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure, malfunction, or defect under this section if the failure,

malfunction, or defect has been reported by that certificate holder

under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter or under the accident reporting

provisions of 49 CFR part 830.

(g) A report required by this section may be submitted by a

certificated repair station when the reporting task has been assigned

to that repair station by a part 125 certificate holder. However, the

part 125 certificate holder remains primarily responsible for ensuring

compliance with the provisions of this section. The part 125

certificate holder shall receive a copy of each report submitted by the

repair station.

(h) No person may withhold a report required by this section

although all information required by this section is not available.

(i) When a certificate holder gets additional information

concerning a report required by this section, the certificate holder

shall expeditiously submit that information as a supplement to the

original report and use the unique control number from the original

report.

7. Add Sec. 125.410 to read as follows:

Sec. 125.410 Service difficulty reports (structural).

(a) Each certificate holder shall report the occurrence or

detection of each failure or defect related to--

(1) Corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that requires replacement of

the affected part;

(2) Corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that requires rework or

blendout because the corrosion, cracks, or disbonding exceeds the

manufacturer's established allowable damage limits;

(3) Cracks, fractures, or disbonding in a composite structure that

the equipment manufacturer has designated as a primary structure or a

principal structural element; or

(4) Failures or defects repaired in accordance with approved data

not contained in the manufacturer's maintenance manual.

(b) In addition to the reports required by paragraph (a) of this

section, each certificate holder shall report any other failure or

defect in aircraft structure that occurs or is detected at any time if

that failure or defect has endangered or may endanger the safe

operation of an aircraft.

(c) Each certificate holder 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 a

centralized collection point as specified by the Administrator. Each

report of occurrences during a 24-hour period shall be submitted to the

FAA within the next 96 hours. However, a report 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 work day. For aircraft operating

in areas where mail is not collected, reports may be submitted within

24 hours after the aircraft returns to a point where the mail is

collected. Each certificate holder also shall make the report data

available for 30 days for examination by the certificate-holding

district office in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator.

(d) The certificate holder shall submit the reports required by

this section in an electronic or other form acceptable to the

Administrator. The reports shall include the following information:

(1) The manufacturer, model, serial number, and registration number

of the aircraft;

(2) The operator designator;

(3) The date on which the failure or defect was discovered;

(4) The stage of ground operation during which the failure or

defect was discovered;

(5) The part name, part condition, and location of the failure or

defect;

(6) The applicable Joint Aircraft System/Component Code;

(7) The total cycles, if applicable, and total time of the

aircraft;

(8) Other information necessary for a more complete analysis of the

cause of the failure or defect, including corrosion classification, if

applicable, or crack length and available information pertaining to

type designation of the major component and the time since the last

maintenance overhaul, repair, or inspection; and

(9) A unique control number for the occurrence, in a form

acceptable to the Administrator.

(e) A certificate holder that also is the holder of a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order authorization, or

that is a licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure or defect under this section if the failure or defect has been

reported by that certificate holder under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter or

under the accident reporting provisions of 49 CFR part 830.

(f) A report required by this section may be submitted by a

certificated repair station when the reporting task has been assigned

to that repair station by the part 125 certificate holder. However, the

part 125 certificate holder remains primarily responsible for ensuring

compliance with the provisions of this section. The part 125

certificate holder shall receive a copy of each report submitted by the

repair station.

(g) No person may withhold a report required by this section

although all information required by this section is not available.

(h) When a certificate holder gets additional information

concerning a report required by this section, the certificate holder

shall expeditiously submit that information as a supplement to the

original report and use the unique control number from the original

report.

PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON-DEMAND OPERATIONS

8. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 44113, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709,

44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722.

9. Amend Sec. 135.415 by revising the section heading and

paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (e), and (f); redesignating paragraph (g) as

paragraph (h); revising paragraph (h) and redesignating it as paragraph

(i); and adding a new paragraph (g) to read as follows:

Sec. 135.415 Service difficulty reports (operational).

(a) Each certificate holder shall report the occurrence or

detection of each

[[Page 18781]]

failure, malfunction, or defect concerning--

(1) Any fire and, when monitored by a related fire-warning system,

whether the fire-warning system functioned properly;

(2) Any false warning of fire or smoke;

(3) An engine exhaust system that causes damage to the engine,

adjacent structure, equipment, or components;

(4) An aircraft component that causes the accumulation or

circulation of smoke, vapor, or toxic or noxious fumes;

(5) Any engine flameout or shutdown during flight or ground

operations;

(6) A propeller feathering system or ability of the system to

control overspeed;

(7) A fuel or fuel-dumping system that affects fuel flow or causes

hazardous leakage;

(8) A landing gear extension or retraction, or the opening or

closing of landing gear doors during flight;

(9) Any brake system component that results in any detectable loss

of brake actuating force when the aircraft is in motion on the ground;

(10) Any aircraft component or system that results in a rejected

takeoff after initiation of the takeoff roll or the taking of emergency

action, as defined by the Aircraft Flight Manual or Pilot's Operating

Handbook;

(11) Any emergency evacuation system or component including any

exit door, passenger emergency evacuation lighting system, or

evacuation equipment found to be defective, or that fails to perform

the intended function during an actual emergency or during training,

testing, maintenance, demonstrations, or inadvertent deployments; and

(12) Autothrottle, autoflight, or flight control systems or

components of these systems.

* * * * *

(c) In addition to the reports required by paragraph (a) of this

section, each certificate holder shall report any other failure,

malfunction, or defect in an aircraft, system, component, or powerplant

that occurs or is detected at any time if that failure, malfunction, or

defect has endangered or may endanger the safe operation of an

aircraft.

(d) Each certificate holder 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 a

centralized collection point as specified by the Administrator. Each

report of occurrences during a 24-hour period shall be submitted to the

FAA within the next 96 hours. However, a report 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 work day. For aircraft operating

in areas where mail is not collected, reports may be submitted within

24 hours after the aircraft returns to a point where the mail is

collected. Each certificate holder also shall make the report data

available for 30 days for examination by the certificate-holding

district office in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator.

(e) The certificate holder shall submit the reports required by

this section in an electronic or other form acceptable to the

Administrator. The reports shall include the following information:

(1) The manufacturer, model, and serial number of the aircraft,

engine, or propeller;

(2) The registration number of the aircraft;

(3) The operator designator;

(4) The date on which the failure, malfunction, or defect was

discovered;

(5) The stage of flight or ground operation during which the

failure, malfunction, or defect was discovered;

(6) The nature of the failure, malfunction, or defect;

(7) The applicable Joint Aircraft System/Component Code;

(8) The total cycles, if applicable, and total time of the

aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or component;

(9) The manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name, serial

number, and location of the component that failed, malfunctioned, or

was defective, if applicable;

(10) The manufacturer, manufacturer part number, part name, serial

number, and location of the part that failed, malfunctioned, or was

defective, if applicable;

(11) The precautionary or emergency action taken;

(12) Other information necessary for more complete analysis of the

cause of the failure, malfunction, or defect, including available

information pertaining to type designation of the major component and

the time since the last maintenance overhaul, repair, or inspection;

and

(13) A unique control number for the occurrence, in a form

acceptable to the Administrator.

(f) A certificate holder that also is the holder of a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order authorization, or

that is a licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure, malfunction, or defect under this section if the failure,

malfunction, or defect has been reported by that certificate holder

under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter or under the accident reporting

provisions of 49 CFR part 830.

(g) A report required by this section may be submitted by a

certificated repair station when the reporting task has been assigned

to that repair station by a part 135 certificate holder. However, the

part 135 certificate holder remains primarily responsible for ensuring

compliance with the provisions of this section. The part 135

certificate holder shall receive a copy of each report submitted by the

repair station.

(h) No person may withhold a report required by this section

although all information required by this section is not available.

(i) When a certificate holder gets additional information

concerning a report required by this section, the certificate holder

shall expeditiously submit that information as a supplement to the

original report and use the unique control number from the original

report.

10. Add Sec. 135.416 to read as follows:

Sec. 135.416 Service difficulty reports (structural).

(a) Each certificate holder shall report the occurrence or

detection of each failure or defect related to--

(1) Corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that requires replacement of

the affected part;

(2) Corrosion, cracks, or disbonding that requires rework or

blendout because the corrosion, cracks, or disbonding exceeds the

manufacturer's established allowable damage limits;

(3) Cracks, fractures, or disbonding in a composite structure that

the equipment manufacturer has designated as a primary structure or a

principal structural element; or

(4) Failures or defects repaired in accordance with approved data

not contained in the manufacturer's maintenance manual.

(b) In addition to the reports required by paragraph (a) of this

section, each certificate holder shall report any other failure or

defect in aircraft structure that occurs or is detected at any time if

that failure or defect has endangered or may endanger the safe

operation of an aircraft.

(c) Each certificate holder 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 a

centralized collection point as specified by the Administrator. Each

report of occurrences during a 24-hour period shall be submitted to the

FAA within the next 96 hours. However, a report due on Saturday or

[[Page 18782]]

Sunday may be submitted on the following Monday, and a report due on a

holiday may be submitted on the next work day. For aircraft operating

in areas where mail is not collected, reports may be submitted within

24 hours after the aircraft returns to a point where the mail is

collected. Each certificate holder also shall make the report data

available for 30 days for examination by the certificate-holding

district office in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator.

(d) The certificate holder shall submit the reports required by

this section in an electronic or other form acceptable to the

Administrator. The reports shall include the following information:

(1) The manufacturer, model, serial number, and registration number

of the aircraft;

(2) The operator designator;

(3) The date on which the failure or defect was discovered;

(4) The stage of ground operation during which the failure or

defect was discovered;

(5) The part name, part condition, and location of the failure or

defect;

(6) The applicable Joint Aircraft System/Component Code;

(7) The total cycles, if applicable, and total time of the

aircraft;

(8) Other information necessary for a more complete analysis of the

cause of the failure or defect, including corrosion classification, if

applicable, or crack length and available information pertaining to

type designation of the major component and the time since the last

maintenance overhaul, repair, or inspection; and

(9) A unique control number for the occurrence, in a form

acceptable to the Administrator.

(e) A certificate holder that also is the holder of a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order authorization, or

that is a licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure or defect under this section if the failure or defect has been

reported by that certificate holder under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter or

under the accident reporting provisions of 49 CFR part 830.

(f) A report required by this section may be submitted by a

certificated repair station when the reporting task has been assigned

to that repair station by the part 135 certificate holder. However, the

part 135 certificate holder remains primarily responsible for ensuring

compliance with the provisions of this section. The part 135

certificate holder shall receive a copy of each report submitted by the

repair station.

(g) No person may withhold a report required by this section

although all information required by this section is not available.

(h) When a certificate holder gets additional information

concerning a report required by this section, the certificate holder

shall expeditiously submit that information as a supplement to the

original report and use the unique control number from the original

report.

11. Revise Sec. 135.417 to read as follows:

Sec. 135.417 Mechanical interruption summary report.

Each certificate holder shall submit to the Administrator, before

the end of the 10th day of the following month, a summary report for

the previous month of each interruption to a flight, unscheduled change

of aircraft en route, unscheduled stop or diversion from a route, or

unscheduled engine removal caused by known or suspected mechanical

difficulties or malfunctions that are not required to be reported under

Sec. 135.415 or Sec. 135.416 of this part.

PART 145--REPAIR STATIONS

12. The authority citation for part 145 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44707, 44717.

13. Amend Sec. 145.63 by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) and adding

paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:

Sec. 145.63 Reports of defects or unairworthy conditions.

(a) Each certificated domestic repair station shall, within 96

hours after it discovers any serious defect in, or other recurring

unairworthy condition of, an aircraft, powerplant, or propeller, or any

component of any of them, submit a report to a central collection point

as specified by the Administrator. The report shall be made in a form

and in a manner acceptable to the Administrator, describing the defect

or unairworthy condition completely without withholding any pertinent

information.

* * * * *

(c) The holder of a domestic repair station certificate that also

is the holder of a part 121, part 125, or part 135 certificate, a Type

Certificate (including a Supplemental Type Certificate), a Parts

Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard Order Authorization, or

that is the licensee of a Type Certificate holder, need not report a

failure, malfunction, or defect under this section if the failure,

malfunction, or defect has been reported by it under Sec. 21.3,

Sec. 121.703, Sec. 121.704, Sec. 125.409, Sec. 125.410, Sec. 135.415,

or Sec. 135.416 of this chapter.

(d) A certificated domestic repair station may submit a Service

Difficulty Report (operational or structural) for--

(1) A part 121 certificate holder under Sec. 121.703(g) or

Sec. 121.704(f) provided that the report meets the requirements of

Secs. 121.703(d) and 121.703(e), or Secs. 121.704(c) and 121.704(d) of

this chapter, as appropriate;

(2) A part 125 certificate holder under Sec. 125.409(g) or

Sec. 125.410(f) provided that the report meets the requirements of

Secs. 125.409(d) and 125.409(e), or Secs. 125.410(c) and 125.410(d) of

this chapter, as appropriate;

(3) A part 135 certificate holder under Sec. 135.415(g) or

Sec. 135.416(f) provided that the report meets the requirements of

Secs. 135.415(d) and 135.415(e), or Secs. 135.416(c) and 135.416(d) of

this chapter, as appropriate.

(e) A certificated domestic repair station authorized to report a

failure, malfunction, or defect under paragraph (d) of this section

shall not report the same failure, malfunction, or defect under

paragraph (a) of this section. A copy of the report submitted under

paragraph (d) of this section shall be forwarded to the certificate

holder.

14. Amend Sec. 145.79 by revising paragraphs (c) and (d) and adding

paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as follows:

Sec. 145.79 Records and reports.

* * * * *

(c) Each certificated foreign repair station shall, within 96 hours

after it discovers any serious defect in, or other recurring

unairworthy condition of, any aircraft, powerplant, propeller, or any

component of any of them, submit a report to a central collection point

as specified by the Administrator. The report shall be made in a form

and in a manner acceptable to the Administrator, describing the defect

or unairworthy condition completely without withholding any pertinent

information.

(d) The holder of a foreign repair station certificate that also is

the holder of a Type Certificate (including a Supplemental Type

Certificate), a Parts Manufacturer Approval, or a Technical Standard

Order Authorization or that is the licensee of a Type Certificate

holder need not report a failure, malfunction, or defect under this

section if the failure, malfunction, or defect has been reported by it

under Sec. 21.3 of this chapter.

(e) A certificated foreign repair station may submit a Service

Difficulty Report (operational or structural) for--

[[Page 18783]]

(1) A part 121 certificate holder under Sec. 121.703(g) or

Sec. 121.704(f) provided that the report meets the requirements of

Secs. 121.703(d) and 121.703(e) or Secs. 121.704(c) and 121.704(d) of

this chapter, as appropriate;

(2) A part 125 certificate holder under Sec. 125.409(g) or

Sec. 125.410(f) provided that the report meets the requirements of

Secs. 125.409(d) and 125.409(e) or Secs. 125.410(c) and 125.410(d) of

this chapter, as appropriate;

(3) A part 135 certificate holder under Sec. 135.415(g) or

Sec. 135.416(f) provided that the report meets the requirements of

Secs. 135.415(d) and 135.415(e) or Secs. 135.416(c) and 135.416(d) of

this chapter, as appropriate.

(f) A certificated foreign repair station authorized to report a

failure, malfunction, or defect under paragraph (e) of this section

shall not report the same failure, malfunction, or defect under

paragraph (c) of this section. A copy of the report submitted under

paragraph (e) of this section shall be forwarded to the certificate

holder.

Issued in Washington, D.C., on April 7, 1999.

Nicholas L. Lacey,

Director, Flight Standards Service.

[FR Doc. 99-9299 Filed 4-14-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P