Aviation Industry Groups Request Suspension Of New Maintenance Interpretation | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-10.27.25

AirborneNextGen-
10.28.25

Airborne-Unlimited-10.29.25

Airborne-Unlimited-10.30.25

AirborneUnlimited-10.17.25

Sat, Oct 12, 2024

Aviation Industry Groups Request Suspension Of New Maintenance Interpretation

AEA And ARSA Request Meeting To Discuss and Vet  Language In FAR 43.3(d)

The Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA), the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA), and other aviation industry groups have requested a suspension of the FAA’s interpretation of the requirement for a maintenance supervisor to be “in-person” until a meeting can be arranged to resolve the discrepancies in the ruling.

The legal interpretation was issued in response to a question from Little Rock Flight Standards District Office Manager Jonathan Moss. He had asked for clarification of the agency’s meaning of the term “in person.”

In a joint letter to Laura J. Megan-Posch, FAA Assistant Chief Counsel for regulations, the groups stated, in part:

"Although the above referenced legal interpretation was directed at the obligation of mechanic or repairman certificate holders when supervising maintenance activities, its application to the term 'in person' has had an immediate detrimental impact on all persons subject to 14 CFR, and the agency that oversees or enforces those regulations.”

"The interpretation goes beyond the simple questions asked and is replete with errors and inconsistencies. Most troubling is the fact that the case cited to support the memorandum had nothing to do with § 43.3(d). While the agency attempted to claim § 43.3(d) was violated, the court disagreed and dismissed the charge. In addition, the interpretation’s conclusion is contrary to the plain language of the regulation at issue and numerous agency policies regarding use of remote technology."

The letter goes on to request an in-person meeting:

“Since the Office of Chief Counsel’s memorandum does not evaluate all applicable requirements in part 43 and is not based upon facts, we believe the best course of action is to suspend the opinion until the issues can be fully vetted. We request an in-person meeting by remote technology or on your premises at your earliest convenience."

Nothing like using their own confusing language to help clarify the situation. Gotta love it.

FMI:  aea.net/

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (10.31.25): Minimum Sector Altitude [ICAO]

Minimum Sector Altitude The lowest altitude which may be used under emergency conditions which will provide a minimum clearance of 300 m (1,000 feet) above all obstacles located in>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (10.31.25)

Aero Linx: African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC) At AFCAC, our Safety Strategic Objective is to enhance Aviation Safety and the efficiency of Air Navigation Services in Africa.>[...]

NTSB Final Report: Airbus A321-271N (A1); Cessna 172N (A2)

The Local Controller’s Poor Judgment In Prioritization Of Their Ground Traffic Ahead Of Their Airborne Traffic Analysis: Hawaiian Airlines flight 70 (HAL70), N2165HA, an Airb>[...]

ANN FAQ: Follow Us On Instagram!

Get The Latest in Aviation News NOW on Instagram Are you on Instagram yet? It's been around for a few years, quietly picking up traction mostly thanks to everybody's new obsession >[...]

Airborne 10.30.25: Earhart Search, SpaceX Speed Limit, Welcome Back, Xyla!

Also: Beech M-346N, Metro Gains H160 EMS STC, New Bell Boss, Affordable Flying Expo Tickets NOW On Sale! Purdue University’s Research Foundation and the Archaeological Legacy>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC