EAA, along with its
Vintage Aircraft Association division, is objecting strongly to
language in a proposed FAA rule change that would jeopardize future
historic aircraft restorations. The proposed rule's preamble,
specifically, would prohibit a historic aircraft that had been
destroyed - as indicated by National Transportation Safety Board
reports - from being rebuilt and receiving a type certificate to
operate as a standard category aircraft.
In its written comments to FAA presented this week, EAA and VAA
said that there is no evidence of a safety concern with aircraft
restored after receiving substantial damage or even being deemed
totaled by an insurance company. The NTSB actually has no
definition for "destroyed" as used in its reports, and is
considering dropping the term from aviation accident reports.
"There are many, many examples of beautiful aircraft
restorations taking place from a few remaining aircraft parts or
what are commonly known as 'basket cases,'" said Earl Lawrence,
EAA's vice president of industry and regulatory affairs.
"In addition, FAA is using language in the rule preamble to
create policies that should be handled through a regular rulemaking
process, which includes full economic and safety effects. The
agency, in this case, is circumventing its own process."
EAA does not have any objections to the specific changes within
the rule (14 CFR 21 and 91) that are proposed; the strong
objections are only with the preamble language. Contrary to some
reports, the rule change would not completely ground or halt the
restoration of such aircraft. It would, however, subject the
restored aircraft to more restrictive categories such as
Experimental/Exhibition.
It is important to note that the proposal does NOT
affect aircraft restorations of aircraft that have never been
classified as "destroyed or totaled", and removed from the FAA
registration database.
"There are two wrongs in this proposal that need immediate
correction," said H.G. Frautschy, executive director of the Vintage
Aircraft Association. "First is FAA's impression that the full
restoration of a 'destroyed' type-certificated aircraft cannot be
considered a 'used' aircraft for certification purposes. Secondly,
and perhaps more threatening, is FAA's use of preamble language to
create language that is open to wide interpretation and will not
only cause confusion, but hinder safe and successful restoration of
many wonderful aircraft in the future."