ARSA Cautions FAA On Proposed 145 Changes | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

AMA Drone Report

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday

Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne-Unmanned w/AUVSI

Airborne On ANN

AMA 05.25.17

Airborne
05.22.17

Airborne
05.23.17

Airborne
05.24.17

Airborne
05.25.17

Airborne
05.26.17

Airborne-Unmanned 05.23.17

Airborne-YouTube

AMA 05.25.17

Airborne
05.22.17

Airborne
05.23.17

Airborne
05.24.17

Airborne
05.25.17

Airborne
05.26.17

Airborne-Unmanned 05.23.17

XPONENTIAL Innovation Preview -- www.allthingsunmanned.com

Wed, Nov 21, 2012

ARSA Cautions FAA On Proposed 145 Changes

Association Is Concerned The Proposed Rules Mean Unnecessary Regulatory Complications

In comments submitted Nov. 19 to the FAA’s rewrite of 14 CFR part 145, the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA) warned the FAA against further muddying the rules governing aviation maintenance. The association expressed concerns the agency’s proposed rulemaking unnecessarily complicates the regulatory framework.

While the FAA has said it wants to align regulations, current business models, and future safety management system requirements, the Association pointed out several instances where the proposed rule deviates from that purpose:

  • Absence of line maintenance rating—unlike the Canadian and European systems and current business arrangements, the FAA is not contemplating a line maintenance rating. The lack of such a rating is not conducive to business practices, in the past, now or in the future.
  • Permanent housing requirement—contract maintenance with mobility is necessary and certainly part of past, current, and future business models. To demand that a repair station have permanent “housing” belies reality and the ability of a company to ensure its system is under the control of a civil aviation authority.
  • Separating the operations specifications from the certificate—this would essentially allow the agency to unilaterally change operations specifications. The Association vehemently opposes the creation of separate operations specifications for repair stations. The FAA is merely necessitating an unnecessary burden on its own workforce and the industry.
  • Preventing certain “persons” from “controlling” a certificate—the FAA is attempting to prevent “bad actors” from “controlling” the quality of a repair station’s work. Since the FAA does not have or will not expend the resources to keep a list of “bad actors”, its workforce will have no objective criterion on which to investigation ownership of these corporate applicants. Further, ARSA pointed out that there is already a federal law prohibiting similar action (see 49 U.S.C. §§ 44726 and 44711).
  • Preventing the voluntary surrender of a certificate—the agency’s claim that it wants to prevent “bad actors” from obtaining and maintaining a certificate is laudable; its ability to prevent that action in a fair and uniform manner is nonexistent. The increase in safety that may result from the proposed requirements is well outweighed by the agency and industry burden.

The Association is also concerned about the agency’s cost estimates for implementing the proposed changes as they do not accurately reflect the true costs repair stations will bear.

Given these concerns, ARSA believes that the FAA should issue a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking that incorporates the substantive comments made by the Association and other interested parties that will help the agency more ably meet industry needs and maintain the highest standards of safety.

FMI: ARSA Comments
 

Advertisement

More News

Airborne 05.25.17: DJI Spark!, S. Lakeland Airport, Moon Rock Sample

Also: Airbus Corporate Helos, Airborne Expansion, Gulfstream G600, Gogo Business, MilFuel, Aerion And GE, Pro Line Fusion DJI has just introduced the Spark, which they call an "eas>[...]

AMA Drone Report 05.25.17: Court Kills FAA Model Drone Registration, DJI Spark!

Also: AMA Reacts To Court, FAA Reaction, AUVSI Reaction, Kittyhawk Flight Deck APP Score one for us little guys... As you may have heard, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D>[...]

Airborne-Unmanned 05.23.17: Courts Nix Model Regs, Autonymous Flt, WATT 300

Also: King Schools Update, Kittyhawk APP, Robird And Integrated Drone Solutions, ICAO Drone Tracking The unmanned community got a bit of a jolt late last week when the US Court of >[...]

Airborne 05.24.17: Snowbird Update, New K-MAX, Spirit Pilots Express 'Regret'

Also: Kyle Franklin, FAA’s Earl Lawrence, SpaceX, Citation Longitude, ACSS ODA, Embraer JetWave, Boeing-Saudi As previously reported, the Canadian Snowbirds precision demonst>[...]

Airborne 05.25.17: DJI Spark!, S. Lakeland Airport, Moon Rock Sample

Also: Airbus Corporate Helos, Airborne Expansion, Gulfstream G600, Gogo Business, MilFuel, Aerion And GE, Pro Line Fusion DJI has just introduced the Spark, which they call an "eas>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2017 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC