AD 2001-26-13

This AD becomes effective on February 12, 2002.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of February 12, 2002.

You may get the service information referenced in this AD from Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison Manager, CH-6371 Stans, Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 6509; facsimile: +41 41 610 3351. You may view this information at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001-CE-30-AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, DC.

Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4059; facsimile: (816) 329-4090.

What Events Have Caused This AD?

The Federal Office for Civil Aviation (FOCA), which is the airworthiness authority for Switzerland, recently notified FAA that an unsafe condition may exist on certain Pilatus Model PC-7 airplanes. The FOCA reports one occurrence of restricted movement of the temperature control lever. Investigation of the problem revealed that the landing-gear emergency-extension cable was caught on the temperature-control lever mechanism. Insufficient clearance between the landing-gear emergency-extension cable and the temperature-control lever caused the interference. This interference could also cause damage to the landing-gear emergency-extension cable.

What Is the Potential Impact if FAA Took No Action?

If not detected and corrected, damage to or interference with the landing-gear emergency-extension cable could lead to a malfunction of the emergency landing-gear extension system.

Has FAA Taken Any Action to This Point?

We issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that would apply to certain Pilatus Model PC-7 airplanes. This proposal was published in the Federal Register as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on October 10, 2001 (66 FR 51611). The NPRM proposed to require you to inspect the landing-gear emergency-extension cable for damage; replace any damaged landing-gear emergency-extension cable; verify the correct installation of the bowden-cable conduit clamp; correct improper installation of the clamp; and install a new bolt and a new nut on the temperature-control lever mechanism.

Was the Public Invited To Comment?

The FAA encouraged interested persons to participate in the making of this amendment. We did not receive any comments on the proposed rule or on our determination of the cost to the public.

What Is FAA's Final Determination on This Issue?

After careful review of all available information related to the subject presented above, we have determined that air safety and the public interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed except for minor editorial corrections. We have determined that these minor corrections:

—Provide the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and

—Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.

How Many Airplanes Does This AD Impact

We estimate that this AD affects 13 airplanes in the U.S. registry.

What Is the Cost Impact of This AD on Owners/Operators of the Affected Airplanes?

The manufacturer has agreed to pay the costs for the inspection, replacement parts, and installation workhours.

The only impact this AD will have on the owners/operators of the affected airplanes is the time it will take to have the actions of this AD incorporated.

What Will Be the Compliance Time of This AD?

The compliance time of this AD is “within the next 12 calendar months after the effective date of this AD.”

Why Is the Compliance Time Presented in Calendar Time Instead of Hours Time-in-Service (TIS)?

Although malfunction of the emergency landing gear extension system is unsafe during flight, the condition is not a direct result of airplane operation. The chance of this situation occurring is the same for an airplane with 10 hours TIS as it would be for an airplane with 500 hours TIS. A calendar time for compliance will ensure that the unsafe condition is addressed on all airplanes in a reasonable time period.

Does This AD Impact Various Entities?

The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

Does This AD Involve a Significant Rule or Regulatory Action?

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) 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. A copy of the final evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

2. FAA amends § 39.13 by adding a new AD to read as follows: