An
Aviation Rule Making Committee (ARC) issued a 346 page report to the
FAA on how to streamline small airplane certification in ways that
maintain and improve safety while cutting costs. In that report is the
recommendation for a new certification category called Primary
Non-Commercial (PNC).
An airplane in the PNC category could be maintained by its owner, and
would not need to use FAA certified equipment or replacement parts. A
PNC would be very much like a homebuilt in terms of maintenance and
equipment requirements.
To qualify for PNC category an airplane or glider would need to have a
standard production category airworthiness certificate, be at least 20
years old, not be turbine powered and be unpressurized. The airplane
would need to have a current annual inspection with all ADs addressed.
The airplane owner would apply for PNC which would be granted jointly to
him and the airplane. The only physical changes required would be
placards to announce to passengers that the airplane in in the PNC
category.
Once the owner completes a yet to be created FAA approved maintenance
course he could maintain his PNC airplane, add new equipment, and
modify it. The only requirement is that the owner use aviation
appropriate equipment and maintenance techniques and keep very complete
records of all modifications and maintenance procedures.
Once each year the PNC would be required to have a condition
inspection by a licensed A&P mechanic. This is different from the
annual inspection required for standard category airplanes. An annual is
intended to confirm that the airplane conforms in every respect to its
type certificate. The condition inspection confirms only that the
airplane is airworthy.
A PNC could be returned to standard category by going through an
annual inspection to determine that every part of the airplane conforms
to its type certificate, STCs and ADs. In other words, any non-certified
equipment or modifications made to a PNC would need to be removed or
brought into conformity for the airplane to return to standard category.
The PNC would actually operate in a dual certification category. The
operating limitations of its standard certificate would still apply, but
maintenance and modification procedures would not. A PNC could not be
used for hire in any way, except the owner could pay a flight instructor
to fly with him in the PNC.
The owner of a PNC could also make major modifications but that would
put the airplane into a Phase 1 flight test program similar to newly
built or highly modified homebuilts. For example, if a PNC owner dropped
a 300 hp engine into his Skyhawk that would almost certainly require a
Phase 1 flight test program. But if an owner installs non-certified
avionics, for example, no additional approval would be required. Or he
could install an improved restraint system, or better wheels and brakes
and so on without needing approval. Many of the better and less costly
equipment options that are now available for the homebuilt airplane
could be installed in the PNC.
The ARC report on changing FAR 23 is 346 pages long, but there are
still missing details of how the changes would exactly work. In one part
of the report it recommends the PNC be limited to any fixed wing CAR
3/FAR 23 airplane that is not turbine powered or pressurized. In another
section you can see a proposal that limits PNC to basic fixed gear
singles with no more than four seats. Who can guess what a final rule
may be.
In many respects I think PNC airplane owners will self-sort to basic
airplanes, including classics and antiques. It makes sense to do your
own maintenance on a basic airplane where construction methods and
materials are common and systems are simple. To do your own maintenance
on a high performance rectractable, for example, is more daunting, would
demand more specific tools, and may risk your investment.
For example, a 20 year old A36 Bonanza is still worth a lot of money.
If an owner converted the Bonanza to PNC, made many non-certified
changes, and then wants to sell it what will it be worth? Less than a
standard A36 I would guess because a new owner may not agree with the
changes the PNC owner made. The ARC is very upfront about the airplane
value issue and they believe that risk of resale value will restrain
really big modifications to many airplanes.
So what are the chances we will see the PNC category become a rule.
It’s hard to say. Even though the PNC was in the final ARC report it did
not make it to a final version that Congress requires the FAA to adopt.
The fact that the committee recommends it is powerful, but not a done
deal.
Most of the recommendations in the report deal with the process of
certification, and how a manufacturer can demonstrate conformity with
less variability and uncertainty. Those are worthy goals, but not many
are concrete actions. Creation of the PNC category is a very specific
recommendation, not a process change.
Yes, the devil is still in the many details of a PNC that may emerge
from the FAR 23 rewrite. We can keep the pressure on FAA to include the
PNC even though it is not yet under the Congressional mandate.
I think the PNC fits in perfectly with the growing demand for changes
in the Third Class medical. When flying is totally personal and private
it should be lightly regulated. There is no reason that an airplane
built in a factory can’t be maintained and updated by a trained owner
just as owners of experimental airplanes have done for decades.
Posts
