Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2011/05/24/2011-12733/proposed-airworthiness-directives-legal-interpretation
Timestamp: 2017-09-26 08:10:29
Document Index: 629292464

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 39', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', 'art 39', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', '§\u200939', '§\u200939']

Federal Register :: Proposed Airworthiness Directives Legal Interpretation
Proposed Airworthiness Directives Legal Interpretation
30040-30043 (4 pages)
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2011-12733 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2011-12733
Extension of comment period for a proposed airworthiness directives legal interpretation.
The Federal Aviation Administration published a proposed airworthiness directives legal interpretation for comment. In response to several requests, we are extending the comment period to allow additional time for comment. Comments from the public are requested to assist the agency in developing the final legal interpretation.
You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2010-1167 using any of the following methods:Start Printed Page 30041
On April 14, 2011, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published a proposed airworthiness directives legal interpretation in the Federal Register for comment (72 FR 20898). The FAA received numerous comments by the close of the comment period on May 16, 2011. Included in the comments were requests to extend the comment period to allow additional time for comment. The FAA is granting an extension until June 30, 2011, for the public to review the proposed interpretation and provide comments. We are repeating the publication of the proposal for the convenience of the reader.
The FAA's Organization/Procedures Working Group (WG) of the Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (AD ARC) requested that the FAA provide a legal interpretation of several provisions in 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that would help resolve a number of issues that have been debated within the WG. These issues partly result from certain changes made in the plain language revision to CFR part 39 in 2002 (see 67 FR 47998, July 22, 2002).
§ 39.7 What is the legal effect of failing to comply with an airworthiness directive?
§ 39.9 What if I operate an aircraft or use a product that does not meet the requirements of an airworthiness directive?
The minority WG opinion is that if the unsafe condition identified in the AD was fixed at a moment in time, then § 39.7 no longer applies. The conclusion of the WG minority was that even if the product was determined to be in a condition contrary to the requirements of the AD at a later time, this change in configuration may be a violation of CFR 43.l3 (b), but not § 39.7.
The opinion of these WG members is that a reasonable interpretation of the language in § 39.11 directing action to “resolve an unsafe condition” limits the FAA from requiring actions that do “not relate to correcting” the identified unsafe condition. In other words, an AD is limited to those tasks that resolve the unsafe condition, even if other tasks are explicitly listed in the AD or in a referenced service bulletin (SB). Even if § 39.11 doesn't explicitly limit the types of actions that the FAA may mandate in ADs, these members believe that ADs are limited to imposing requirements that are both necessary and “directly related” to addressing an unsafe condition because that is the sole purpose of ADs, as defined in part 39. The belief is that this would allow an operator to comply with those actions that, in the operator's opinion, correct Start Printed Page 30042the unsafe condition without having to obtain an alternative means of compliance (AMOC) for other actions, such as access and close-up procedures, that are “not directly related” to addressing that identified unsafe condition.
§ 39.11 What actions do airworthiness directives require?
We understand that some members of the AD ARC believe that some ADs are overly prescriptive with respect to mandated actions that they believe are unnecessary to address the unsafe condition. As explained previously, § 39.11 does not address this concern. Rather, the rulemaking process by which individual ADs are adopted provides the public with an opportunity to identify and comment upon these concerns with each AD. In addition, each AD contains a provision allowing for approval of an AMOC, which allows operators to obtain relief from requirements they consider unnecessary or unduly burdensome.
The WG member asked for an explanation of the FAA's use of the word “applicable” in the two instances of its use in the paragraph (f) of the AD.
§ 39.15 Does an airworthiness directive apply if the product has been changed?
§ 39.17 What must I do if a change in a product affects my ability to accomplish the Start Printed Page 30043actions required in an airworthiness directive?
[FR Doc. 2011-12733 Filed 5-23-11; 8:45 am]