SEO Title
FAA Rescinds Burdensome Maintenance Supervision Interpretation
Subtitle
Industry experts believed the FAA letter overstepped bounds
Subject Area
Teaser Text
An FAA legal interpretation that appeared to prohibit arms-length monitoring of apprentice mechanics has been rescinded. 
Content Body

The FAA has rescinded a legal interpretation that would have required supervising aircraft mechanics to observe apprentices closely enough to intervene if needed, according to the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA).

Referred to as the Moss Interpretation, the response was from an FAA lawyer to a request for clarification by Little Rock, Arkansas Flight Standards District Office manager Jonathan Moss. His request sought to determine whether it is legal for mechanics to supervise non-licensed technicians remotely—for example, via streaming video calls or similar technology.

The response to the request disallowed that remote supervision capability but then went further to define the meaning of “in person” when a supervising mechanic is overseeing a non-licensed technician’s activities, such as an apprentice performing work under the supervision of a licensed technician. According to the legal interpretation, “in person” means essentially that the supervisor be watching the non-licensed technician closely enough to intervene if something was done incorrectly.

Supervised work has been long accomplished safely with the supervisor observing as needed, sometimes closely and also often from elsewhere in the facility or even in a different location. This is a long-standing practice in aviation and an important capability for training new technicians and helping non-licensed personnel log the time needed to qualify to take the written and practical tests for the FAA mechanic certificate with airframe and powerplant (A&P) ratings.

ARSA and 15 other aviation organizations asked the FAA to suspend the interpretation, following a request for reconsideration submitted to the FAA by Savvy Aviation. The group’s letter to the FAA noted: “The only time a mechanic or repairman should be subject to enforcement is if the supervision was insufficient to determine the work was performed correctly. To presume that result before the work is approved for return to service is beyond the plain language of the regulations that allows the certificated person to determine the amount and extent of supervision required.”

On October 15, the FAA responded to the group and Savvy Aviation. “This letter is to inform you that the FAA is issuing a stay of the legal Interpretation of 14 CFR § 43.3(d) dated September 3, 2024, while the agency reviews its policies and regulatory options. This stay does not represent a conclusion on the contents of that interpretation and will be effective until such time as the agency issues new or supplemental guidance.”

Expert Opinion
False
Ads Enabled
True
Used in Print
True
Writer(s) - Credited
Newsletter Headline
FAA Rescinds Burdensome Maintenance Interpretation
Newsletter Body

The FAA has rescinded a legal interpretation that would have required supervising mechanics to observe apprentices closely enough to intervene if needed, according to the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA).

Referred to as the Moss Interpretation, the response was from an FAA lawyer to a request for clarification by Little Rock, Arkansas Flight Standards District Office manager Jonathan Moss. His request sought to determine whether it is legal for mechanics to supervise non-licensed technicians remotely—for example, via streaming video calls or similar technology.

The response to the request disallowed that remote supervision capability but then went further to define the meaning of “in person” when a supervising mechanic is overseeing a non-licensed technician’s activities, such as an apprentice performing work under the supervision of a licensed technician. According to the legal interpretation, “in person” means essentially that the supervisor be watching the non-licensed technician closely enough to intervene if something was done incorrectly.

Supervised work has been long accomplished safely with the supervisor observing as needed, sometimes closely and also often from elsewhere in the facility or even in a different location.

ARSA and 15 other aviation organizations asked the FAA to suspend the interpretation, following a request for reconsideration submitted to the FAA by Savvy Aviation. On October 15, the FAA responded to the group and Savvy Aviation.

Solutions in Business Aviation
0
AIN Publication Date
----------------------------