Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67343 

(7) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 4, 2014. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26706 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0594; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–CE–022–AD; Amendment 

39–18005; AD 2014–22–01] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; PILATUS 

AIRCRAFT LTD. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012–26– 

16 for all PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. 

Models PC–12, PC–12/45, PC–12/47, 

and PC–12/47E airplanes. This AD 

results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as a need to incorporate new 

revisions into the Limitations section, 

Chapter 4, of the FAA-approved 

maintenance program (e.g., maintenance 

manual). We are issuing this AD to 

require actions to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective December 

18, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in the AD 

as of December 18, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0594; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact PILATUS AIRCRAFT 

LTD., Customer Service Manager, CH– 

6371 STANS, Switzerland; telephone: 

+41 (0) 41 619 33 33; fax: +41 (0) 41 619 

73 11; Internet: http://www.pilatusaircraft.com or email: SupportPC12@

pilatus-aircraft.com. You may view this 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call (816) 329– 

4148. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4059; fax: (816) 329–4090; email: 

doug.rudolph@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to add an AD that would apply 

to all PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. Models 

PC–12, PC–12/45, PC–12/47, and PC– 

12/47E airplanes. That NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 18, 2014 (79 FR 48701), and 

proposed to supersede AD 2012–26–16, 

Amendment 39–17311 (78 FR 11572, 

February 19, 2013). 

Since we issued AD 2012–26–16, 

Amendment 39–17311 (78 FR 11572, 

February 19, 2013), PILATUS 

AIRCRAFT LTD. has issued revisions to 

the Limitations section of the airplane 

maintenance manual to include 

repetitive inspections of the inboard 

flap drive arms for cracks. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued AD No. 2014– 

0170, dated July 17, 2014 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

The maintenance instructions and 

airworthiness limitations applicable to the 

Structure and Components of PC–12 

aeroplanes are specified in the Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual (AMM) under Chapter 

4, Airworthiness Limitation Section (ALS). 

The instructions contained in the ALS 

document have been identified as mandatory 

actions for continued airworthiness and 

failure to comply with these instructions and 

limitations could potentially lead to an 

unsafe condition. 

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. recently issued Pilatus 

PC–12 AMM report 02049 issue 28 for PC– 

12, PC–12/45 and PC–12/47 aeroplanes and 

PC–12 AMM report 02300 issue 11 for PC– 

12/47E aeroplanes to incorporate new 

repetitive inspection intervals of the inboard 

flap drive arms because of the detection of 

cracked parts. 

For the reason described above, this AD 

retains the requirements of EASA AD 2013– 

0031, which is superseded, and requires 

implementation of the new maintenance 

requirements and/or airworthiness 

limitations. 

The MCAI can be found in the AD 

docket on the Internet at: http://

www.regulations.gov/

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0594- 

0003. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Remove Actions Retained 

From AD 2012–26–16, Amendment 39– 

17311 (78 FR 11572, February 19, 2013) 

(‘‘AD 2012–26–16’’) 

Johan Kruger, Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., 

requested that we remove the actions 

retained from AD 2012–26–16, 

paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of the 

proposed AD from the final rule AD 

action. These actions were originally in 

AD 2009–14–13, Amendment 39–15963 

(74 FR 34213, July 15, 2009), which was 

superseded by AD 2012–26–16. 

Johan Kruger stated that the need to 

retain the actions previously required in 

AD 2012–26–16, paragraphs (f)(1) and 

(f)(2) of the proposed AD, no longer 

exists for the following reasons: 

• In AD 2012–26–16, the initial 

compliance time for replacing the nose 

landing gear (NLG) torque tubes part 

number (P/N) 532.50.12.047 on Models 

PC–12 and PC–12/45 airplanes is within 

the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) 

after August 19, 2009 (the effective date 

retained from AD 2009–14–13) or 1 year 

after August 19, 2009, whichever occurs 

first. Compliance with this requirement 

should have been completed by 

September 20, 2010. AD 2012–26–16 

also prohibits installing any NLG torque 

tube P/N 532.50.12.047 as of March 26, 

2013 (the effective date retained from 

AD 2012–26–16). 

• Even if P/N 532.50.12.047 had not 

been replaced as required in AD 2012– 

26–16, the life limit for P/N 

532.50.12.047 in the airworthiness 

limitations section (ALS) of the airplane 

maintenance manual (AMM) referenced 

in the proposed AD is deemed adequate 

to address the potential unsafe 

condition. 

• Since August 19, 2009, the effective 

date of AD 2009–14–13, Pilatus has not 

provided any P/N 532.50.12.047 as 

spares to any owners/operators in the 

United States. Pilatus is implying that 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
67344 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

after the issuance of AD 2009–14–13, 

NLG torque tube P/N 532.50.12.047 has 

not been installed as a spare on any 

affected Model PC–12 and PC–12/45 

airplane in the United States. 

Johan Kruger clarified that the unsafe 

condition caused by NLG torque tube 

P/N 532.50.12.047 that was addressed in 

AD 2012–26–16, which was a carryover 

from AD 2009–14–13, has sufficiently 

been addressed and is now covered by 

the ALS of the AMM that is referenced 

in the proposed AD, which is 

unchanged from AD 2012–26–16. 

We agree with the commenter. We 

have changed the final rule AD action 

based on this comment and have 

removed paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) as 

presented in the proposed AD from this 

final rule AD action. Any airplane that 

has not operated since the torque tube 

requirement was initiated through AD 

2009–14–13 may apply for an 

alternative method of compliance. 

Request To Remove the Effective Date 

Imposed in the Proposed AD 

Johan Kruger, Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., 

and Gerard Terpstra requested that the 

effective date imposed in paragraph 

(f)(3) of the proposed AD be removed. 

The commenters stated that it is out 

of the ordinary to have a compliance 

effective date imposed in a proposed 

AD. The commenters also pointed out 

that the effective date is before the 

comment close date. 

We agree with the commenters that 

compliance effective dates are not 

normally put in a proposed AD. The 

September 22, 2014, effective date in 

paragraph (f)(3) of the proposed AD was 

a mistake. There will be no enforcement 

for that date in the final rule AD action 

and comments were still allowed 

through the comment close date of 

October 6, 2014, before final rule action 

was taken. 

We changed the final rule AD action 

based on these comments. 

Request To Withdraw the Proposed AD 

Gerard Terpstra requested that the 

proposed AD be withdrawn because 

compliance with the new airworthiness 

limitations is already mandatory under 

federal regulations. 

Gerard Terpstra stated that Title 14 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

part 23, Appendix G, makes the 

requirements in the ALS of the AMM 

mandatory and 14 CFR 91.403 

additionally prohibits the operation of 

an airplane unless the requirements of 

the ALS of the AMM are complied with. 

Therefore, 14 CFR 39.5 cannot be the 

basis for issuing the proposed AD 

because no unsafe condition exists. 

Gerard Terpstra also stated that by 

using 14 CFR part 39 here the FAA has 

in fact induced an unintended 

consequence of allowing an operator to 

delay the implementation of the new 

ALS requirements. For example, the 

FAA publishes an AD periodically to 

require compliance with the then 

‘‘current’’ version of the ALS of the 

Pilatus PC–12 AMM, most recently with 

AD 2012–26–16, which became effective 

on March 26, 2013. Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. 

subsequently revised the ALS of the 

AMM by publishing two temporary 

revisions on March 13, 2014. Gerard 

Terpstra estimated the compliance date 

for the final rule AD action to be around 

the first week of November 2014 (if the 

FAA observes the 45-day comment 

period and the 35 days for complying 

with the AD after it becomes effective). 

Between the time that Pilatus Aircraft 

Ltd. published their temporary revision 

and the time the proposed AD becomes 

effective as a final rule AD action is 

approximately six months, thereby 

delaying compliance with the ALS by 

around six months. 

Gerard Terpstra stated his 

understanding of the desire and 

requirement to have regulations 

harmonized between different countries 

and that is what is being done here. 

EASA issues an AD and the FAA 

follows suit and issues an AD. But in 

this instance the proposed AD is not 

required as the proper and appropriate 

Federal regulations are already in place 

to ensure that the ALS of the AMM are 

complied with. 

We don’t agree with the commenter. 

Based on guidance from the FAA’s 

Office of the Chief Counsel (AGC), the 

definition of the word ‘‘current’’ is the 

ALS of the AMM that was delivered 

with the original airworthiness (A/W) 

certificate of each airplane. The only 

way the FAA can enforce the use of a 

newer version of the ALS to the AMM 

on the entire existing fleet is through 14 

CFR part 39 AD action. 

We agree that the new ALS to the 

AMM is binding for a new airplane 

upon the issuance of the A/W certificate 

or existing airplanes that have the 

requirement as part of their operational 

specifications (e.g., 14 CFR part 135 

operations), but not for the entire 

existing fleet (e.g., 14 CFR part 91 

operations). EASA is in agreement with 

the FAA and understands that the only 

way to require the most recent revision 

to the ALS section for existing fleets in 

either state of registry system is through 

AD action. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 

48701, August 18, 2014) for correcting 

the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 48701, 

August 18, 2014). 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

770 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 16.5 

work-hours per product to comply with 

the basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts will cost about $300 per 

product. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. 

operators to be $1,310,925, or $1,702.50 

per product. This breaks down as 

follows: 

• New inspections, etc. through 

incorporating maintenance manual 

limitations: 3.5 work-hours with parts 

about $300 for a fleet cost of $460,075, 

or $597.50 per product. 

• Wing main spar fastener holes 

inspection: 12 work-hours with no parts 

cost for fleet cost of $785,400 or $1,020 

per product. 

• Inboard flap drive arm inspection: 1 

work-hour with no parts cost for fleet 

cost of $65,450 or $85 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary corrective actions (oncondition costs) that must be taken 

based on the above inspections, etc. will 

take about 16 work-hours and require 

parts costing approximately $10,000 for 

a cost of $11,360 per product. We have 

no way of determining the number of 

products that may need these necessary 

corrective actions. This breaks down as 

follows: 

• Replacements based on damaged 

parts or reduced life limits as a result of 

the new maintenance manual 

limitations: 6 work-hours with parts 

about $4,000 for a cost of $4,510 per 

product. 

• Repairs to the wing spar as a result 

of the wing main spar fastener holes 

inspection: 7 work-hours with parts 

about $5,000 for a cost of $5,595 per 

product. 

• Replacement of the inboard flap 

drive arm as a result of the inboard flap 

drive arm inspection: 3 work-hours with 

parts about $1,000 for a cost of $1,255. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67345 

The only costs that will be imposed 

by this AD over that already required by 

AD 2012–26–16 is the inboard flap arm 

inspection and replacement as 

necessary and the addition of 92 

airplanes from 678 airplanes to 770 

airplanes. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0594; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains the NPRM, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647– 

5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–17311 (78 FR 

11572, February 19, 2013), and adding 

the following new AD: 

2014–22–01 PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD.: 

Amendment 39–18005; Docket No. 

FAA–2014–0594; Directorate Identifier 

2014–CE–022–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes 

effective December 18, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2012–26–16, 

Amendment 39–17311 (78 FR 11572, 

February 19, 2013). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to PILATUS AIRCRAFT 

LTD. Models PC–12, PC–12/45, PC–12/47, 

and PC–12/47E airplanes, all manufacturer 

serial numbers (MSNs), certificated in any 

category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 5: Time Limits. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of another 

country to identify and correct an unsafe 

condition on an aviation product. The MCAI 

describes the unsafe condition as a need to 

incorporate new revisions into the 

Limitations section, Chapter 4, of the FAAapproved maintenance program (e.g., 

maintenance manual). The limitations were 

revised to include repetitive inspections of 

the inboard flap drive arms for crack(s). 

These actions are required to ensure the 

continued operational safety of the affected 

airplanes. 

(f) Actions and Compliance 

Unless already done, do the actions in 

paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(5) of this AD: 

(1) Before further flight after December 18, 

2014 (the effective date of this AD), insert 

Data module code 12–A–04–00–00–00A– 

000A–A, ‘‘STRUCTURAL, COMPONENT 

AND MISCELLANEOUS—AIRWORTHINESS 

LIMITATIONS,’’ dated March 13, 2014, of 

the Pilatus Model type—PC–12, PC–12/45, 

PC–12/47, Aircraft Maintenance Manual 

(AMM), Document No. 02049, 12–A–AM– 

00–00–00–I, revision 28, dated May 31, 2014, 

for Models PC–12, PC–12/45, PC–12/47, and 

Data module code 12–B–04–00–00–00A– 

000A–A, ‘‘STRUCTURAL AND 

COMPONENT LIMITATIONS— 

AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS,’’ dated 

March 13, 2014, of the Pilatus Model type— 

PC–12/47E MSN–1001–UP, Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual (AMM), Document No. 

02300, 12- B–AM–00–00–00–I, revision 11, 

dated May 31, 2014, for Model PC–12/47E, 

into the Limitations section of the FAAapproved maintenance program (e.g., 

maintenance manual). These limitations 

section revisions do the following: 

(i) Establish an inspection of the inboard 

flap drive arms, 

(ii) Specify replacement of components 

before or upon reaching the applicable life 

limit, and 

(iii) Specify accomplishment of all 

applicable maintenance tasks within certain 

thresholds and intervals. 

(2) Only authorized Pilatus Service Centers 

can do the Supplemental Structural 

Inspection Document (SSID) as required by 

the documents in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD 

because deviations from the type design in 

critical locations could make the airplane 

ineligible for this life extension. 

(3) If no compliance time is specified in the 

documents listed in paragraph (f)(1) of this 

AD when doing any corrective actions where 

discrepancies are found as required in 

paragraph (f)(1)(iii) of this AD, do these 

corrective actions before further flight after 

doing the applicable maintenance task. 

(4) During the accomplishment of the 

actions required in paragraphs (f)(1)(i), 

(f)(1)(ii), and (f)(1)(iii) of this AD, if a 

discrepancy is found that is not identified in 

the documents listed in paragraph (f)(1) of 

this AD, before further flight after finding the 

discrepancy, contact PILATUS AIRCRAFT 

LTD. at the address specified in paragraph (i) 

of this AD for a repair scheme and 

incorporate that repair scheme. 

(5) Within the next 3 months after 

December 18, 2014 (the effective date of this 

AD) or within the next 150 hours TIS after 

December 18, 2014 (the effective date of this 

AD), whichever occurs first, inspect the 

inboard flap drive arms for cracks and take 

all necessary corrective actions. 

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
67346 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

1The statute uses the term ‘‘covered operations’’ 

to describe part 121 operations. See 49 U.S.C. 

44729(b). 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4059; fax: (816) 329– 

4090; email: doug.rudolph@faa.gov. 

(i) Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(ii) AMOCs approved for AD 2012–26–16, 

Amendment 39–17311 (77 FR 11572, 

February 19, 2013) are not approved as 

AMOCs for this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(h) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits are prohibited. 

(i) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD No. 2014–0170, dated 

July 17, 2014, for related information. The 

MCAI can be found in the AD docket on the 

Internet at: http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0594-0003. 

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Data module code 12–A–04–00–00– 

00A–000A–A, ‘‘STRUCTURAL, 

COMPONENT AND MISCELLANEOUS— 

AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS,’’ dated 

March 13, 2014, of the Pilatus Model type— 

PC–12, PC–12/45, PC–12/47, Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual (AMM), Document No. 

02049, 12–A–AM–00–00–00–I, revision 28, 

dated May 31, 2014. 

(ii) Data module code 12–B–04–00–00– 

00A–000A–A, ‘‘STRUCTURAL AND 

COMPONENT LIMITATIONS— 

AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS,’’ dated 

March 13, 2014, of the Pilatus Model type— 

PC–12/47E MSN–1001–UP, Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual (AMM), Document No. 

02300, 12- B–AM–00–00–00–I, revision 11, 

dated May 31, 2014. 

Note to paragraph (j)(2) of this AD: Data 

module code 12–A–04–00–00–00A–000A–A, 

‘‘STRUCTURAL, COMPONENT AND 

MISCELLANEOUS—AIRWORTHINESS 

LIMITATIONS,’’ dated March 13, 2014, of 

the Pilatus Model type—PC–12, PC–12/45, 

PC–12/47, Aircraft Maintenance Manual 

(AMM), Document No. 02049, 12–A–AM– 

00–00–00–I, revision 28, dated May 31, 2014; 

and Data module code 12–B–04–00–00–00A– 

000A–A, ‘‘STRUCTURAL AND 

COMPONENT LIMITATIONS— 

AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS,’’ dated 

March 13, 2014, of the Pilatus Model type— 

PC–12/47E MSN–1001–UP, Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual (AMM), Document No. 

02300, 12- B–AM–00–00–00–I, revision 11, 

dated May 31, 2014, were issued as complete 

updates to the AMM Airworthiness 

Limitations sections. 

(3) For Pilatus Aircraft LTD. service 

information identified in this AD, contact 

PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD., Customer Service 

Manager, CH–6371 STANS, Switzerland; 

telephone: +41 (0) 41 619 33 33; fax: +41 (0) 

41 619 73 11; Internet: http://www.pilatusaircraft.com or email: SupportPC12@pilatusaircraft.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

October 20, 2014. 

Derek Morgan, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26704 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 61 and 121 

Pilot Age Limit Crew Pairing 

Requirement 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of policy. 

SUMMARY: This document notifies the 

public of the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s policy regarding 

enforcement of the pilot pairing 

requirement in the ‘‘Part 121 Pilot Age 

Limit’’ final rule. Currently, while the 

International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) standards allow a 

person between the age of 60 and 65 to 

serve as pilot in command (PIC) of an 

airplane with two or more pilots, in 

international commercial air transport 

operations, the PIC must be paired with 

a pilot younger than 60 years of age. 

Parts 61 and 121 of title 14, of the Code 

of Federal Regulations contain similar 

limitations. However, a recent 

amendment to the ICAO standards 

would remove this pilot pairing 

requirement. Instead, all pilots serving 

on airplanes in international 

commercial air transport operations 

with more than one pilot may serve 

beyond 60 years of age (until age 65) 

without being paired with a pilot under 

60 years of age. This ICAO amendment 

triggers the sunset of the statutory 

authority that provides the basis for the 

crew pairing limitations in title 14. 

DATES: Effective November 13, 2014. If 

implementation by the International 

Civil Aviation Organization of 

Amendment 172 to Annex 1 is delayed, 

the FAA will publish notification of the 

date changes. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical questions concerning this 

document, contact Nancy Lauck 

Claussen, email: Nancy.L.Claussen@

faa.gov; Air Transportation Division 

(AFS–200), Flight Standards Service, 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–8166. For legal questions 

concerning this document, contact Sara 

Mikolop, email: Sara.Mikolop@faa.gov; 

Office of Chief Counsel (AGC–200), 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–3073. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Fair Treatment of Experienced Pilots 

Act 

On December 13, 2007, the Fair 

Treatment of Experienced Pilots Act 

(Pub. L. 110–135) amended title 49 of 

the United States Code by adding 

section 44729. Section 44729(a) raised 

the age limit for pilots serving in 

operations under part 121 1 from age 60 

to age 65, subject to the limitations in 

section 44729(c) applicable to pilots in 

command on international flights. 

Section 44729(c) specified a pilot 

pairing limitation for PICs serving on 

international flights. Specifically, 

section 44729(c)(1) provides, ‘‘A pilot 

who has attained 60 years of age may 

serve as pilot-in-command in covered 

operations between the United States 

and another country only if there is 

another pilot in the flight deck crew 

who has not yet attained 60 years of 

age.’’ The pilot pairing requirement in 

section 44729(c)(1) is consistent with 

the pilot pairing standard in ICAO 

Annex 1 (Personnel Licensing), Chapter 

2 (Licenses and Ratings for Pilots), 

Standard 2.1.10. 

The crew pairing requirement in 

section 44729(c)(1) will sunset in 

accordance with section 44729(c)(2), on 

the date that ICAO removes the pilot 

pairing limitation in Standard 2.1.10. 

Section 44729(c)(2) states, ‘‘Paragraph 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES