11/30/07                         FY08 FIRST quarter Editorial updates               8900.1 CHG 0

Volume 2  Air Operator AND AIR AGENCY Certification and ApplicATION PROCESS

chapter 6  Title 14 CFR PART 125 CERTIFICATION AND OPERATING RULES

Section 1  Introduction to Part 125 Related Tasks

2-656   GENERAL. All the job tasks related to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 125, Certification and Operations: Airplanes Having a Seating Capacity of 20 or More Passengers or a Maximum Payload Capacity of 6,000 Pounds or More; and Rules Governing Persons On Board Such Aircraft, are detailed in volumes 2, 3, 5 and 6.

A.     Types of Operations. Part 125 provides for the operation of large aircraft that are not conducting “common carriage” operations.

 

1)      Noncommon carriage for hire operations are allowed, but must be reviewed carefully  to verify that the operation is not common carriage. Operators are not permitted to “hold out” directly or indirectly.

 

2)      Private Carriage operations in which persons or cargo are transported without compensation for hire, for example, private or corporate operators carrying company personnel, property and guest, including cost sharing under 14 CFR § 91.501 (d), or historic (museum or collection) flight operations.

 

3)      Operations not involving the transportation of persons or cargo.

 

2-657   RENEWAL, AMENDMENT, OR CANCELLATION OF A PART 125 CERTIFICATE. A certificate issued under part 125 is effective until surrendered, suspended, or revoked. The district office that has charge of the operator’s file may replace a current effective certificate, operations specifications (OpSpecs), or Deviation Authority that has been lost or destroyed. These documents must duplicate those that were lost or destroyed. The replacement certificate issued must have the word “DUPLICATE” and the date of preparation as well as the original issuance date.

A.     Renewals. Not applicable to part 125 operator certificates.

B.     Amendments. A part 125 operator may apply to amend either the operating certificate or the OpSpec. The FAA may also amend the operating certificate or the OpSpec as the result of actions taken under Title 49 of the United States Code (U.S.C), § 44709 and 14 CFR part 13.

1)      If the certificate holder wishes to change the legal name on a certificate or change the address of its principal business office or its principal operations base, the operator must apply to amend the existing operating certificate. The application will be in letter form (see Figure 2‑20) to the certificate-holding office. All supporting documents should accompany the request for amendment.
2)      The certificate will be reissued with the proper changes, will keep the original date of issuance, and will show the amended date of issuance.
3)      Part 125, § 125.35 provides the authority and requirements for the amendment of OpSpecs. Procedures for this are found Volume 3, Chapter 2, Section 1, Paragraph 3‑32, Amendment of Operations Specifications (OpSpecs).

C.     Cancellation. Certificates and OpSpecs which are voluntarily surrendered for cancellation should be accepted. The certificate must be accompanied by a written request from the operator stating the reason for cancellation. The request must be signed by either a person authorized to act for the company or by the owner. The request may not be conditional. If the operating certificate or OpSpecs has been lost or destroyed, a statement by the operator to this effect shall be included in this written request.

2-658   FOREIGN OPERATORS OF LARGE PART 125, SECTION 125.1(a)
U.S.-REGISTERED AIRCRAFT.
Foreign operations fall into three categories:

A.     Air carrier operations conducted under 14 CFR part 129.

B.     Foreign citizens operating U.S.‑registered aircraft outside the United States under 14 CFR part 91. Operators in this category must comply with the maintenance inspection requirements of part 125, § 125.247. This requirement provides a satisfactory level of airworthiness and is responsive to international treaty obligations; and

C.     Foreign citizens operating large § 125.1(a) U.S.‑registered aircraft into the United States are required to comply with part 125. Foreign operators of U.S.-registered aircraft must comply with the requirements of 14 CFR part 47, § 47.9. To operate under part 125, the foreign operator must make application for a part 125 certificate or for Deviation Authority to the district office nearest to the proposed port of entry. If necessary, the district office may prepare a special flight authorization, with appropriate limitations and valid only over U.S. territory, to a specific destination airport where the required inspections may be conducted. The special flight authorization may also include instructions and authorization for a one‑time exit flight if the operator fails to meet the certification requirements.

NOTE:  Foreign operators of large § 125.1(a) U.S.-registered aircraft are not to be certificated to operate outside of the U.S. or its territories.

 

RESERVED. Paragraphs 2‑659 through 2‑675.

Figure 2–20, Application for Certificate Amendment

Fred’s People & Fish, Inc.

189 Highland Avenue

Winthrop, MA 02152

Federal Aviation Administration

Flight Standards District Office

Westfield, MA 01085

Dear Mr./Ms. _____:

Fred’s People and Fish, Inc., holder of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 125 Certificate Number FPFB011A is requesting amendment to that certificate to reflect the new address of its business office. The new address, effective in 30 days, will be Fred’s People and Fish, Inc., 39 Harvard Yard Road, Boston, MA 01234.

Our operations and management personnel remain the same as for our initial certification.

Yours truly,

Fred Brown

President

 

12/31/07                                                                                                                       8900.1 CHG 9

Volume 2  AIR OPERATOR AND AIR AGENCY CERTIFICATION AND APPLICATION PROCESS

Volume 10  TRAINING CENTERS: CERTIFICATION OF PART 142 TRAINING CENTERS

10-1151          GENERAL. This process applies to the initial certification as well as the addition of satellites to existing certificates.

A.     This section provides guidance on the certification process of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 142 training centers and the addition of a satellite(s) to a principal center’s certificate. The processes outlined in this section, if followed, will ensure compliance with Title 49 United States Code (49 U.S.C.), 14 CFR, and appropriate Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) policy and procedures. During the certification process, the certificate-holding district office (CHDO) and the assigned Training Center Program Manager (TCPM) will follow the guidance provided in this section. The CHDO and regional flight standards division offices must be confident that the applicant is capable of fulfilling the required regulatory responsibilities and willing to comply with 14 CFR in an appropriate and continuing manner. The certification of a training center follows a four-phase process composed of three gates and is similar to the air carrier certification process described in Volume 2, Chapter 1, Section 1.

B.     The FAA instituted the gate concept for certification processes to conserve assets and ensure applicants progress through their certification process in an orderly and structured manner. It also ensures that an applicant’s programs, systems, and intended methods of compliance are thoroughly reviewed, evaluated, and tested. The gate concept requires that an applicant complete specific phase items before progressing past a particular gate. Once the FAA accepts the items associated with a particular gate, the applicant may continue to the next phase of the certification process.

C.     Once completed, the gate process provides reasonable assurance that the applicant’s infrastructure (programs, methods, and systems) will result in continued compliance after certification. The CHDO is responsible for ensuring that the applicant completes the certification process in accordance with these guidelines. Based on the applicant’s proposal(s), the CHDO may adjust certain elements within the certification phases to facilitate the CHDO’s administration of the project.

D.    A graphical depiction of the four-phase, three-gate certification process may be found on AFS-210’s part 142 training center Web site.

10-1152    INITIAL INQUIRIES, REQUESTS, AND PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS.

A.     Initial or preliminary inquiries concerning the certification of part 142 training centers may come in various formats from individuals or organizations. These inquiries may be in writing or the result of meetings with FAA personnel. Requests for applications may come from inexperienced and poorly prepared individuals, from well prepared and financially sound organizations, or from individuals and organizations ranging between these extremes. Upon receipt of an initial inquiry, the receiving office manager will determine if his or her office has geographical responsibility for the area, in which the applicant’s principal business will be located. If the FAA office initially contacted has jurisdiction, the manager should begin the certification process. If not, the manager will direct the applicant to the proper field office. Once the appropriate CHDO has been identified, office personnel should become familiar with the certification processes outlined in this section.

NOTE: The CHDO with geographic responsibility must review FAA Order 8000.92, AFS Certification Service Oversight Process (CSOP), to ensure the appropriate resource evaluation, workload index, and dashboard activities are completed prior to beginning the certification process.

B.     The CHDO manager or assigned certification program manager (CPM) must advise AFS-210 of the potential certification project and provide pertinent details of the applicant.

C.     The FAA inspector assigned to the project (normally the TCPM) should briefly explain the application process and the FAA requirements that the applicant is required to meet throughout the certification process. The inspector should advise the applicant to schedule a
Preapplication meeting, when the applicant has had sufficient time to thoroughly review and understand the certification requirements. During preliminary discussions with the applicant, the assigned inspector will:

1)      Provide the applicant with a brief overview of the certification process and the information that they must submit as part of their pre application letter of intent (LOI).
2)      Direct the applicant to AFS-210’s part 142 training center Web site, request they become familiar with the training center requirements in part 142, the airman certification requirements of 14 CFR parts 61, 63, and 65, as applicable, and other regulatory guidance appropriate to the curricula and evaluations the applicant proposes to offer. This Web site provides links to the following:

·        AC 120-92, Introduction to Safety Management Systems for Air Operators;

·        14 CFR part 187 (as amended) for training centers or satellites located outside of the US;

·        Certification Process Document;

·        Pre application LOI;

·        Sample Formal Application Letter;

·        Sample Letter of Compliance;

·        Sample Training Specifications;

·        Additional publications or documents that the TCPM considers appropriate,

·        Sample Company Training Manuals; and

·        Title 49 CFR Subpart A, Flight Training for Aliens and Other Designated Individuals. TSA regulatory guidance concerning foreign (alien) pilot training.

3)      Advise that all certification submissions must be provided in both electronic and hard copy. Electronic versions of the applicant’s submission may be in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF format.
4)      Advise the applicant that after they have completed their review of the part 142 training center Web site, applicable regulatory guidance, completed their Preapplication LOI, prepared in accordance with the guidance located on the Web site and submitted their Preapplication LOI, they should schedule their Preapplication meeting.
5)      The Preapplication LOI and attachments should be forwarded to the CHDO at least 2 weeks before the Preapplication meeting. The applicant must be advised that key management personnel be expected to attend the Preapplication meeting.

NOTE: Training Center Certification requests for both domestic and international centers must be referred to AFS-210 for coordination prior to progressing past Gate I of the certification process. Requests to add satellite(s) to an existing center’s training specifications must also be forwarded to AFS-210 for review and comment prior to approving such requests.

10-1153    THE FOUR PHASE CERTIFICATION PROCESS INCLUDING
PREAPPLICATION EVENTS.

·        Phase ONE  Preapplication                                                       Gate I Complete

·        Phase TWO Formal Application                                                  Gate II Complete

·        Phase THREE  Document Compliance

·        Phase THREE System Assessment and Validation                  Gate III Complete

·        Phase FOUR Administrative

A.     Preapplication Phase and Gate I. Submit the Preapplication LOI and all subsequent written material electronically in Microsoft Word or in PDF format. The LOI should contain the following information:

·        Corporate and business name, mailing address, telephone number, e-mail;

·        Proposed schedule of events (including proposed initial start of operations);

·        Proposed management personnel and position;

·        Proposed training courses; and

·        Flight training equipment including advanced flight training device (AFTD) simulators.

NOTE: Certification of a training center under part 142 requires the use of simulators and/or AFTDs (qualified as Level 6 or 7). An application that proposes to conduct training, testing, and checking using aircraft only will not be accepted.

·        Proposed location of the training center and any proposed satellite centers;

·        Training records; and

·        Any additional information that may be required to provide a better understanding of the proposed training center and activities.

1)      The applicant will be advised to become familiar with training center requirements in part 142, airman certification requirements of 14 CFR, part 61/63 and other requirements appropriate for the proposed airman training and evaluation to be offered.
2)      Preapplication Meeting, Phase ONE and Gate I Requirements:
a)      The FAA CHDO, AFS-210 and the, applicant’s management personnel will complete a Preapplication meeting. This meeting will be a preliminary discussion in which the applicant will generally describe the proposed training center activities and submit the Preapplication letter including plans for personnel, facilities, flight training equipment. The applicant should also be able to demonstrate a basic knowledge of the appropriate regulations and requirements of airman training and evaluation. The CHDO and AFS-210 personnel will use this opportunity to discuss in detail the entire certification process and provide the applicant with information and documentation concerning the certification and continued approval of a training center, qualification of personnel, approval of flight training equipment, and approval of training center curriculum and associated courseware.
b)      It is essential that the applicant understand which regulations are applicable to the proposed operation. The applicant and the applicant’s personnel must be made aware of their responsibilities during the certification process. It is to their benefit to submit required items as soon as they become available in order to meet Gate I requirements and to notify the CHDO immediately of any problems or changes in the proposed operation.
c)      Training center applicants located outside the United States must understand that there are fees associated with the certification process. The fees are based on the time also spent by FAA Inspectors conducting certification and inspection activities. Fees, as well as associated expenses, are provided for in 14 CFR part 187, and must be paid in accordance with current editions of AC 187-1, Flight Standards Service Schedule of Charges outside the United States, before the issuance of the center’s training specifications and training center certificate.
d)      Based on preliminary meetings, discussions, and the content of the Preapplication LOI, the CHDO will make an initial determination as to whether the potential applicant is qualified and intends to pursue certification. The applicant must also declare his/her intention to proceed with the certification process.
e)      The CHDO will ascertain that the proposed operation is consistent with the regulatory requirements of part 142 and accept or reject the Preapplication LOI. If acceptable, the applicant will be advised the Gate I requirements have been completed and to proceed with the Formal Application phase. The CHDO will contact AFS-620 to obtain a pre-certification number, once received the CHDO shall notify AFS-210 who will in turn request a Labor Distribution Reporting (LDR) code for tracking activity.
e)

B.     Phase Two—Formal Application and Gate II.

1)      Applicants must submit a formal letter of application to the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) that has jurisdiction over the area in which the applicant’s principal business office will be located. The LOI and attachments must contain the following information:

·        Corporate or Business name (including “doing business as”), mailing address, and telephone number of the applicant;

·        Formal schedule of events; including updated proposed start date;

·        Proposed instructor and evaluator training program including curriculum, courseware, procedures, and any other supporting documentation;

·        A copy of a purchase contract or adequate lease of flight training equipment, to substantiate that it has exclusive use of all simulation media for periods of time adequate to conduct all training checking and testing proposed in the training plan. If the applicant is the sponsor and/or operator of the proposed flight training equipment, the letter should so indicate that the equipment is either currently FAA qualified or that arrangements have been made for qualification;

·        Proposed evaluation authorization(s);

·        Proposed National Simulator Team (NST evaluation) evaluation date;

·        A description of the applicant’s training facilities, equipment, and qualifications of personnel to be used;

·        The proposed core and specialty training curricula and associated syllabus including courseware, procedures, checklists, and any other supporting documentation for the training of students, instructors, and evaluators;

·        Company Policy Manual(s);

·        Management qualifications must be stated in specific terms. This document must also include acknowledgment that the applicant must notify the FAA within 10 working days of any change made in the management positions;

·        A description of a recordkeeping system that will identify and document the details of training and the qualifications and certification of students, instructors, and evaluators;

·        If the applicant proposes to provide training for certificate or rating in fewer than the minimum hours prescribed in 14 CFR part 61, a method of demonstrating qualification and ability to provide training must be submitted;

·        A description of the quality control program that will identify and document the details of the quality control measures to be used;

·        Training Agreements;

·        Deviation and Waivers requests if applicable; and

·        A compliance statement.

Preparation of the compliance statement benefits the applicant by systematically ensuring that all applicable regulatory aspects are appropriately addressed during the certification process. The compliance statement must be in the form of a complete listing of all appropriate CFR sections (for example, 14 CFR parts 61, 63, and 91) pertinent to the training curricula the applicant is proposing. The compliance document must address each section within part 142. This list should reference any applicable subpart and each relevant section of the subpart. Next to each subparagraph, the applicant must provide a specific reference to a manual or other document, and may provide a brief narrative description that describes how the applicant will comply with each regulation. This is a procedures document (i.e., what system the applicant will use to ensure compliance), not a policy document. The compliance statement will be used throughout the applicant’s certification process and become an ongoing source of information throughout the certificate holders continued operations. After the certification process is completed, the compliance statement should be kept current as changes are incorporated in the applicant’s system. This statement also serves as a master index to the applicant’s manual system to expedite FAA’s review and approval of the operation and manual systems.

2)      The formal application must be received by the CHDO a minimum of 120 days before the start of proposed operations. The proposed schedule of events included in the applicant’s LOI should be used by the CHDO as a preliminary planning tool for the certification process.
3)      The following signatures are required on a completed formal application letter:

·        An application from an individual must be signed by that individual;

·        An application from a partnership must be signed by all partners or, if applicable laws permit this authority to be delegated to one partner, by the delegated partner;

·        An application from a corporation must be signed by the corporate secretary, by the president or officer(s) authorized by the corporation, and by any other designated official of the corporation who should attest to the individual’s authority to sign such a document;

·        An application from a partnership, club, or association must be signed by the president or such other officer or director as authorized by the organization’s bylaws and attested to by the secretary; and

·        The equivalent of the positions listed in the above subparagraphs as determined by the certificating FAA office for training centers located outside the United States.

NOTE: The above items must be completed prior to passing through Gate II.

4)      If it becomes apparent that the applicant will not be able to prepare an acceptable formal application, the FSDO will advise the applicant that the FAA is ceasing any further efforts to certificate the applicant.

C.     Phase Three (2 parts)-(a)—Document Compliance and System Assessment & Validation (Gate III applies).

1)      The CHDO will review the documents that the applicant has submitted to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements, policy, and other guidance material. The review will include the following areas:
a)      Management Personnel.

1.      The training center applicant must employ sufficient qualified and competent management personnel to perform the duties to which they are assigned.

NOTE: One method of determining if the proposed management team is qualified to provide required supervision is to evaluate the job requirements stated in the formal application and measure them against the resumes provided for each of the proposed managers and ask the following question. Is it apparent that the proposed managers have the knowledge and skills required to accomplish the stated job functions? Minimally, a tabletop exercise should be run to evaluate the manager’s knowledge of the requirements of an air agency certificated under  part 142.

2.      The applicant must provide résumés for proposed management personnel. This must include the individual’s name and address, as well as the individual’s qualifications and airman certificate number, certificates and ratings, work history, and compliance history. Medical certificate information must also be provided if it is appropriate to the position assigned.

NOTE: One method of determining if the proposed management team is qualified to provide required supervision is to evaluate the job requirements stated in the formal application and measure them against the resumes provided for each of the proposed managers and ask the following question. Is it apparent that the proposed managers have the knowledge and skills required to accomplish the stated job functions? Minimally, a tabletop exercise should be run to evaluate the manager’s knowledge of the requirements of an air agency certificated under
part 142.

3.      A person whose employment contributed materially to the revocation, suspension, or termination of that certificate within the previous five years should not manage, be in control of, or have substantial ownership of a training center.

b)      Evaluators. Detailed guidance for appointment of evaluators can be found in 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 2. Persons who conduct training or an evaluation of a student must be able to read, write, understand, and fluently speak the English language.
c)      Instructors.

1.      Must meet the eligibility requirements of part 142, § 142.47.

2.      Must complete the training prescribed by part 142, § 142.53.

3.      Persons who conduct training or an evaluation of a student must be able to read, write, understand, and fluently speak the English language.

d)      Required Documents. Each applicant must present the following documents for review and approval:

1.      Copies of the leases, agreements, and contracts, if any, to show compliance with the exclusive use of equipment requirements of part 142, § 142.15. If the TCPM determines that it is necessary, he or she may ask the General Counsel’s office to review any of these documents to determine if the intent of the exclusive use requirement is met. (PTRS code 1395.)

2.      If a training agreement exists with a 14 CFR, part 141 certificated pilot schools to provide training, testing, or checking for a training center, a copy of that training agreement must be provided. Each training agreement should meet the requirements of part 141, § 141.26 and part 142, § 142.33. (PTRS code 1395.)

3.      Deviations and Waivers. Deviations and waivers are issued under part 142, § 142.9 must be submitted in accordance with 8900.1 Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 4. To ensure standardization and consistent application of policy, such requests must be forwarded to the Air Carrier Training Branch, AFS-210, for review prior to issuing final approval to the applicant. Submissions to AFS-210 should be made no less than 15 business days in advance of the requested implementation date.

e)      Approved Program for Maintenance and Inspection of Aircraft, (if required). Each certificate holder must ensure that aircraft used to provide training under part 142 are maintained and inspected in accordance with (IAW) 14 CFR part 91, subpart E (or foreign equivalent), and/or an approved program for maintenance and inspection. The FAA may assign an aviation safety inspector (ASI) (Airworthiness) to verify the existence and adequacy of an approved program for maintenance and inspection. The ASI will also review the center’s minimum equipment list (MEL) if the applicant seeks relief under a MEL for aircraft that the training center owns or leases. MELs are not a certification requirement of part 142. (PTRS code 1372.)
f)        A simulator component inoperative guide (SCIG) if one is to be used. SCIGs are not a certification requirement of part 142. (PTRS code 1372.)
g)      Flight Simulators and Flight Training devices (FTD). Documentation to show qualification by the National Simulator Program team, AFS-205 or a request for such evaluation and qualification must be provided. See details for inspection and demonstration in Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 2. (PTRS code 1351.)
h)      Training Program. The FAA will evaluate submitted curricula, and associated courseware in this phase. Curricula leading to the issuance of pilot certificates, ratings and/or meeting currency requirements of 14 CFR parts 61 and/or 65 must be based on advanced simulation devices (see Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 6 for approval processes and procedures). Curriculum approval and requirements will follow the general process for review and format that is found in Volume 3, Chapter 19.

1.      Core and Specialty Curricula. The TCPM will review the curriculum for format and content. (See Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 6 of this Chapter for detailed guidance on curriculum approvals.) To indicate initial approval, the TCPM will stamp each page of the list of effective pages indicating that the curriculum has been granted initial approval.

2.      Courseware. The FAA must approve checklists not prepared by the manufacturer. Pictorial means of preflight inspection courseware must be approved.

i)        Training Records (Recordkeeping). Training records must document training, qualification, and currency. Each certificate holder must keep records at the applicable training center or satellite training center, or other place approved by the FAA, and must provide those records to the FAA upon request or at a reasonable time. The FAA may use the following information to determine training record system adequacy. (PTRS code 1334.)

·        See part 142, § 142.73(a) for a checklist of trainee record requirements.

·        See part 142, § 142.73(b) for a checklist of instructor record requirements.

2)      Quality Control Measures. Part 142, § 142.11(b)(9) requires that training centers present quality control measures. As a required part of a training center certification process, applicants must formulate an operational strategy and provide specific process instructions as to how they plan to conduct the training center’s operations. Many of a center’s day to day operations are influenced by these measures such as:

·        Customer registration,

·        Training program application,

·        Simulator discrepancies,

·        Recordkeeping, and

·        Personnel qualification assurance.

a)      Quality control measures provide guidance for operations, a benchmark as to their effectiveness, and usability of the training center’s processes. Management personnel who are responsible for the implementation of the quality control measures must be identified. Quality control measures are established by means of a quality assurance program and can be broken down into two categories:

1.      Static Quality Control Measures: define an overall management plan that guarantees the integrity of operations. Static quality control measures must define the policies and procedures of the training center, provide guidance, and identify those personnel responsible for tasks. Static quality control measures guarantee that the training center will conduct operations in accordance with regulatory requirements and the philosophy of the company.

2.      Active Quality Control Measures: Gauge the effectiveness of static quality control, provide a means to resolve nonconformities, and identify areas in need of improvement. Active quality control measures must consist of:

·        An audit program to determine the compliance and effectiveness of established procedures; and

·        A process reengineering program that will identify and document nonconformities and areas in need of improvement. This program must include a followup process to ensure that nonconformities and areas in need of improvement are identified, solutions are proposed, and the responsibility for implementation of corrective action is assigned.

b)      As part of the quality assurance program, static and active quality control measures must be developed for at least the following:

1.      Conduct and effectiveness of all training programs.

2.      Curricula.

·        Control of courseware,

·        Adequacy of program content, and

·        Compliance with rule requirements.

3.      Recordkeeping system.

·        Student and instructor/evaluator,

·        Content of records,

·        Security,

·        Prescribed method of recordkeeping followed, and

·        Documentation of completion of required events.

4.      Adequacy of facilities and equipment.

5.      Revision processes for curricula, courseware, and general policy guidelines.

c)      Instructor and Evaluator Qualifications and Ability.

1.      Effectiveness of associated training program.

2.      Determination of eligibility and authorizations.

d)      Effectiveness of Management.

·        Delegation of authority and responsibility,

·        Approachability, and

·        Delineation of information.

e)      Simulator and FTD functionality and training suitability.

·        Daily checks,

·        System to identify and address discrepancies,

·        Availability of simulator readiness status to end users, and

·        Review documents detailing the measures to be implemented as part of the quality control measures. Ensure all elements contain static and active control measures.

D.    Phase Three-(b)—System Assessment and Validation (Gate III applies).

1)      The FAA will conduct inspections to determine a training center’s compliance with, or eligibility under, the U.S. Transportation Laws, 49 U.S.C., and the regulations. Each certificate applicant must allow the Administrator to inspect training center facilities, equipment, and records at any reasonable time and place. The CHDO should inspect those proposed training centers or satellite training centers within their area of geographic responsibility. For other inspections, the CHDO should request the services of the FSDO with geographic responsibility over the areas where the satellite training centers, equipment, or remote sites are located.
2)      The FAA will include the following specific requirements during the inspections. (PTRS codes 1334, 1351, 1371, 1603, 1607, 1612, 1621, 1626, 1629, 1630, 1640, 1641, 1642, 1643, 1644, 1645, 1646, 1647, 1649, 1650, 1652, 1653, 1654, 1662, and 1673.)
a)      Facilities and Equipment Described in an Applicant’s Formal Application Letter. The purpose of these inspections is to ensure that the applicant represents the facilities and equipment and that they meet the certification requirements of the regulations. (PTRS codes 1371, 1640, and 1647.)
b)      Automated Recordkeeping Systems Proposed by the Applicant. Refer to FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 31, Section 4 for specific guidance. Operators that can adequately demonstrate their ability to use automated/electronic recordkeeping systems will receive authorization in the training specifications. (PTRS code 1334.)
c)      Qualification and Approval of FTDs and Flight Simulators. Inspect each flight simulator or FTD used for training, checking, testing, or recency of experience under part 142 for qualification and approval. (PTRS codes 1351, 1630, 1654.)

1.      The National Simulator Program Manager (NSPM) will qualify all Level 4 through 7 FTDs and flight simulators. The NSPM will qualify training devices IAW the procedures and criteria contained in AC 120-45, Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification, and AC 120 40, Airplane Simulator Qualification, as appropriate. Rotorcraft simulators and rotorcraft FTDs will be qualified IAW AC 120-63, Helicopter Simulator Qualification.

2.      NSPM qualification of the respective devices is required prior to TCPM approval for use within the centers approved curricula. The NSPM will be responsible for the initial evaluation of FTDs, Levels 4 and 5, but may delegate this responsibility to the CHDO as necessary. All new FTDs manufactured or placed into service after August 6, 1996, are ineligible for conferred status and must be evaluated, qualified, and approved under the regulations that apply at the time. The previously reserved Level 1 classification for FTDs will be used to identify those devices.

3.      The TCPM approves FTDs and flight simulators for intended use in the center training programs. Each training center must identify each Level 1 through 3 FTD by the manufacturer’s serial number, unless the FAA has issued an identification number for that purpose. FAA identification numbers must identify levels 4 through 7 FTDs and all flight simulators.

4.      The FAA will qualify each rotorcraft flight simulator and rotorcraft FTD IAW the procedures and criteria contained in AC 120-63.

5.      Only flight simulators and FTDs that have been properly qualified by the NSPM or otherwise authorized by the Administrator may be approved for use in a centers curricula and listed in a center’s training specifications.

6.      A training center may use a flight simulator or FTD for instruction if it is listed in the training center’s approved training specifications and meets the flight training equipment requirements of the lesson for which it is to be used, as stated in the training center’s approved curriculum.

7.      A training center may offer 100 percent training, checking, and testing through approved curricula in a Level C or D simulator only when that course has approved pictorial courseware for 100 percent training, checking, and testing curricula. The FAA must approve pictorial courseware for each curriculum in which it is to be used.

3)      Quality Control Measures.
a)      Inspect the effectiveness of the quality control measures and their applicability to actual operations.
b)      Determine if the operations can be conducted in accordance with the proposed measures.
c)      Determine if personnel understand and comply with the quality control systems.
4)      Validation. Gate III requirements must be completed prior to observing an actual class for initial approval of a training curriculum and certification of a training center.
a)      Training curricula and courseware approved;
b)      Sufficient instructors and evaluators trained and designated; and
c)      Facilities evaluated and found satisfactory.

E.     Phase Four—Administration.

1)      Issuance of Certificate and Training Specifications. The CHDO will issue FAA Form 8000-43, Training Center Certificate, and training specifications after satisfactory completion of the previous phases. (PTRS code 1396.) See new standardized training specifications form.

The Training Center number will be the basis for the final LDR code that will be used for all future activities associated with this center.

a)      Training specifications are defined in Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 1 and
§ 142.3. Training specifications are documents issued to a training center certificate holder by the Administrator. For international centers, all applicable 14 CFR part 187, § 187.1 fees must be collected prior to the issuance of the certificate and training specifications.
b)      Standard training specifications are available on the automated OPSS.

NOTE: Applicants must complete the necessary training to qualify for the issuance of automated Training Specifications prior to the completion of the certification process.

c)      Training specifications are readily available to inspectors and potential users. Consequently, in the interest of brevity, those training specifications will not be repeated in this Chapter. A sample list of training specifications may be found on AFS-210’s, part 142 training center Web site.
d)      The FAA may deny certification to an applicant if deficiencies exist. If so, the FSDO will state the reasons for certificate denial. The FSDO will make such denial in writing and will describe corrective actions that may lead to certification.

1.      An applicant that has been denied certification and desires to continue to seek certification should notify the FSDO in writing when corrective action has been taken. The FSDO may require a second or subsequent inspection of training center or satellite training center facilities.

2.      After evaluation of the applicant’s corrective actions, the FSDO will either approve or deny certification. If denied, state which requested changes have not been properly addressed. If the applicant is again denied certification, the applicant may again follow the steps described in the paragraphs above.

e)      The TCPM or their designee will assemble a certification file. The district office file shall include:

·        A copy of the preapplication statement of intent or LOI, as appropriate;

·        A copy of the application;

·        A copy of the training center’s certificate;

·        A copy of any manuals or approved curricula;

·        A copy of the completed certification job aid, if applicable;

·        A copy of the training specification ;

·        A summary of any difficulties encountered during any phase of the certification or recommendations for future surveillance (Certification Report);

·        Copies of leases, agreements, and contracts, if applicable;

·        Compliance statement, if applicable; and

·        Any correspondence between the applicant and the FAA.

f)        After the training center is certificated, the TCPM establishes a post certification plan using the national work program guidelines as a basis for inspection and surveillance.
g)      The TCPM is responsible for assembling a Certification Report, including the names and titles of each team member. The report shall be signed by the TCPM and have a summary of difficulties, if any, encountered during the certification process and any recommendations made by the team. This report may assist in preparing surveillance plans.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 2-1154 through 2-1180.

 

11/7/07                                                                                                                         8900.1 CHG 3

Volume 2  Air Operator AND AIR AGENCY Certification and ApplicATION PROCESS

chapter 11  CERTIFICATION OF A 14 CFR PART 145 REPAIR STATION

Section 1  Introduction

2-1181              PURPOSE. This chapter defines relevant terms for Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 145 repair stations. It also explains the policies and procedures applicable to a repair station, regardless of its geographic location.

2-1182              GENERAL.

A.     Definitions.

1)      Air Agency Certificate. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 8000‑4, Air Agency Certificate, is the authority granted by the FAA for a repair station to conduct business. The certificate states the following information:

·        Repair station number;

·        What the repair station’s ratings are to include;

·        Class ratings;

·        Limited ratings;

·        Limited specialized service ratings;

·        The location and name of the repair station; and

·        The expiration date, as applicable.

2)      Accountable Manager. The accountable manager is designated by the certificated repair station as responsible for, and having authority over all repair station operations conducted under part 145. This person’s duties include ensuring that repair station personnel follow the regulations and serving as the primary contact with the FAA.

NOTE: The FAA’s definition of an accountable manager may differ from the European Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) definition of an accountable manager; however, one person may serve both positions. The operations specifications (OpSpecs) and Vital Information Subsystem (VIS) have been revised to include both.

3)      Article. An article is an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part.
4)      Capability List. A capability list (CL) is a list of articles, on which the repair station is rated to perform maintenance, preventative maintenance, or alterations.
5)      Class Ratings. Class ratings are issued if the repair station can prove the capability to maintain a representative number of products under this rating. A class rating should not be issued and then restricted to a specific product. For such a case, a limited rating should be issued.
6)      Contracting. Contracting means entering into an agreement between two or more persons for the performance of maintenance functions on an article.
7)      Correction. A correction is an action taken to eliminate a detected nonconformity as it relates to the articles or maintenance processes.
8)      Corrective Action. Corrective action is taken to eliminate the cause of a detected nonconformity or other undesirable condition to prevent its recurrence.
9)      Correspondence Acceptable to the FAA—Documents, Manual or a Revision Submitted to the FAA for Acceptance. The air agency may immediately initiate and utilize the submitted correspondence contents without formal FAA acceptance. A document, manual or revision is considered acceptable to the FAA. There is no requirement for the FAA to acknowledge receipt of or initiate a formal letter of acceptance upon review of the submitted correspondence. This document may be submitted as a written or electronic document.
10)        Directly in Charge. The person directly in charge is responsible for the work of a certificated repair station that performs maintenance, preventive maintenance, alterations, or other functions affecting aircraft airworthiness.
a)      A person directly in charge does not need to physically observe and direct each worker constantly, but must be available for consultation on matters requiring instruction or decision from a higher authority.
b)      A person designated as “directly in charge” of maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations must hold an appropriate airman certificate.

NOTE: This provision is not required for repair station certificated outside the United States.

c)      The repair station is responsible for providing adequate personnel who can perform, supervise, and inspect the work for which the station is rated. Additionally, each repair station determines the abilities of its supervisors and ensures that there are enough supervisory personnel for all phases of its activities.
11)        Domestic Repair Station. A domestic repair station is an automated OpSpecs term used to describe an FAA‑certificated facility within the United States that performs maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations on articles.
12)        Foreign Repair Station. A foreign repair station is an automated OpSpecs term that describes an FAA‑certificated facility located outside of the United States that performs maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations on articles.

NOTE: The part 145 rule has removed the “foreign” and “domestic” terms; however, these terms are still valid when revising OpSpecs due to the current repair station certificate numbering system.

13)        Geographic Authorization. Geographic authorization is issued to a certificated repair station outside the United States to maintain U.S.‑registered aircraft where an appropriately rated repair station is not available. This provision is limited to repair stations located solely outside the United States that hold an airframe rating for an aircraft of the same make and model for which the repair station is rated.
14)        Limited Ratings. Limited ratings are issued to repair stations for the performance of maintenance on particular makes and models of airframes, powerplants, propellers, radios, instruments, accessories, and/or parts.
15)        Limited Specialized Service Ratings. Limited specialized service ratings are issued for a special maintenance function when the function is performed in accordance with a specification or data acceptable to the FAA. The OpSpecs must include the specifications or data used by the repair station to perform that service in accordance with part 145, § 145.61(c). Hydrostatic testing of pressure cylinders falls under Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (49 CFR) part 180. Ratings for this testing will not be issued. Questions regarding hydrostatic testing of pressure cylinders should be directed to Department of Transportation (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (http://www.phmsa.dot.gov).

NOTE: The repair station may request a limited rating for specialized services utilizing a civil or military specification currently used by industry, the principal inspector (PI) should carefully consider if this specification covers all areas required for the repair prior to approval. Will this repair when completed, allow approval for return to service for the article? In some cases, the PI may need assistance from the Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) to determine if the specification is adequate for the rating requested. The PI is responsible for ensuring that the applicant can accomplish the work outlined in the specification. If the specification does not meet the requirements of 14 CFR part 43, § 43.13, then the PI should inform the applicant, that the specification may be used as part of a process the applicant can develop under the provisions of § 145.61(c)(2). The PI must evaluate if the process is appropriate for the article. The PI should annotate if any additional limitations are needed in the limitation section of the OpSpecs. Many civil and military specifications currently used by industry are generic. The PI should verify the repair station has provisions in its manual for evaluation of the article to determine if anything would prohibit the specification utilization.

16)        Line Station Maintenance. Line station maintenance is unscheduled maintenance resulting from unforeseen events, or scheduled checks that contain servicing and/or inspections that do not require specialized training, equipment, or facilities.
17)        Maintenance Function. A maintenance function is a step or series of steps in the process of performing maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations, which may result in approving an article for return to service. Only persons authorized under part 145, §§ 145.157(a) and 145.213(d) may approve an article for return to service, perform a final inspection, or sign a maintenance release.
18)        OpSpecs. OpSpecs are issued by the FAA to indicate the authorizations and limitations to ratings as specified on the Air Agency Certificate.
19)        Quality Control Manual (QCM). The QCM describes the inspection and quality control system and procedures used by the repair station.
20)        Repair Station Manual (RSM). The RSM describes the procedures and policies of a repair station’s operations.
21)        Satellite Repair Station. A satellite repair station is an additional certificated facility or location under the managerial control of another certificated repair station.
22)        Part 145 does not dictate the ratio of supervisors to individuals being supervised. This ratio is established by the repair station. However, § 145.153 states in part that a certificated repair station must ensure it has a sufficient number of supervisors to direct the work performed under the repair station certificate and operations specifications.
a)      The supervisors must oversee the work performed by any individuals who are unfamiliar with the methods, techniques, practices, aids, equipment, and tools used to perform the maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations. Each supervisor must, if employed by a repair station located inside the United States, be certificated under part 65.
b)      The preamble to part 145 (see § 145.153) indicates there is a difference between a “supervisor” and a “person directly in charge.” Directly in charge means having the responsibility for the work of a certificated repair station that performs maintenance, preventive maintenance, alterations, or other functions affecting aircraft airworthiness. A person directly in charge does not need to physically observe and direct each worker constantly but must be available for consultation on matters requiring instruction or decision from higher authority. A supervisor would physically observe and direct a worker when needed.
c)      Part 43 identifies persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations. Section 43.3(d) states in part that a person working under the supervision of a mechanic or repairman certificate holder may perform the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations that his supervisor is authorized to perform, if:

·        The supervisor personally observes the work being done to the extent necessary to ensure that it is being done properly, and

·        The supervisor is readily available, in person, for consultation.

NOTE:  The definition of “in person” is “in one’s bodily presence.” An example of this is “applicants are requested to apply in person”.

d)      In summary, each supervisor employed by a repair station located inside the United States must be properly certificated under part 65 for the supervisory position held. The supervisor must personally observe the work being done to the extent necessary to ensure it is being done properly. The supervisor must be readily available, in person, for consultation. However, this would not preclude the repair station from assigning one supervisor to multiple shops or areas provided the supervisor is properly certificated and qualified. The supervisor’s workload should allow adequate time to oversee the work performed by individuals who are unfamiliar with the methods, techniques, practices, aids, equipment, and tools used to perform the assigned maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations.

B.     CL. A certificated repair station with a limited rating may perform maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations on an article if it is listed on a current CL acceptable to the FAA or on the repair station’s OpSpecs.

1)      If the repair station chooses to use a CL, the RSM must:

·        Contain procedures for revising the list and notifying the certificate-holding district office (CHDO),

·        Include how often the CHDO will be notified of revision,

·        Contain procedures for the self‑evaluation required under part 145, § 145.215(c) for revising the CL,

·        Describe the methods and frequency of such evaluations, and

·        Contain procedures for reporting the results to the appropriate manager for review and action.

2)      The CL itself may be included as part of the RSM or as a separate document; however, the procedures for revising the list and for performing the self‑evaluation must be in the manual.
3)      If the repair station elects to maintain a separate CL, it must perform a self‑evaluation before adding an article to the CL. The individual(s) performing the self‑evaluation should be familiar with the repair station processes and be able to perform an audit to determine compliance with part 145. The self‑evaluation procedures in the RSM should ensure that the repair station has:

·        The appropriate limited rating;

·        Adequate housing and facilities;

·        The recommended tools, equipment, and materials;

·        Current technical data; and

·        Sufficient qualified personnel.

4)      The results of the self‑evaluation must be reported to the appropriate repair station manager for review. If the self‑evaluation was satisfactory, the CL may be revised. The revised list and any other necessary technical data can be submitted with a transmittal document to the PI at the CHDO.

NOTE: Transmittal documents include cover letters, memos, e‑mails, faxes, or any other media acceptable to the Flight Standards District Office (FSDO).

5)      If the capabilities are maintained on the OpSpecs, each article will be listed by make, model, or manufacturer’s name under each limited rating. If the repair station maintains a separate CL, the OpSpecs will indicate that the certificate holder is authorized to use a CL as revised.
6)      If the repair station does not maintain or have the necessary tools, equipment, housing, facilities, and trained personnel to perform the required maintenance on the article(s) listed on the CL, the article(s) should be deleted from the CL.

NOTE: The repair station must maintain, or have written evidence that it can obtain, the tools and equipment required to maintain the articles on the CL.

C.     Additional Fixed Locations. A repair station may have additional fixed locations (facilities) without certificating each facility as a stand‑alone or satellite repair station. This authorization may be granted if all of the facilities are localized and within a defined area, such as several buildings or hangars, which may be on or near the same airport or at or near the address stated on the repair station certificate. All locations will be operated under the authority of a single repair station certificate.

1)      Additional locations are not separate facilities and must collectively be considered one repair station. A geographic authorization or other repair station certificate is not required. However, the repair station must have procedures in its manual to describe how it will operate in this manner and stay compliant with its manual and the requirements of part 145. This situation is not considered work away from the station.

NOTE: The aviation safety inspector (ASI) and repair station accountable manager must collaborate when making a determination that additional locations are required for repair station operations. A primary concern to the FAA is that all the facilities be localized and within a defined area of operation. ASIs must be assured reasonable access to all locations and not be inconvenienced by extended travel distances. Extended travel between facilities may have an adverse impact on FAA oversight and surveillance capabilities.

2)      Multiple locations may be particularly useful when other federal laws or local ordinances require a repair station to use remote sites when performing some maintenance actions, such as functional testing of turbine engines. Local laws and noise abatement programs may force a repair station to another work site. The FAA may find that the additional locations do not have a significant impact on the maintenance performed, provided the manual has sufficient procedures to ensure the airworthiness of articles being maintained.
3)      All additional locations must be under the full control of the primary facility. It is not necessary that each location be completely equipped since tools, equipment, parts, etc., can be transported between facilities.
4)      The repair station must apply and be approved for the use of additional locations before exercising the privileges of its certificate and ratings at these facilities. The application must list each facility and its physical address. The repair station must submit a revision to its manuals detailing the procedures it will follow when transporting equipment or parts, how it will ensure adequate and appropriate personnel are available at each site when needed, and how it will continue to meet the requirements of part 145.

NOTE: Under normal circumstances, additional fixed locations should not be authorized across FSDO or regional boundaries since ASIs are responsible for overseeing the entire operation.

5)      Additional fixed locations outside regional boundaries should be coordinated with each regional aircraft maintenance division with concurrence from the General Aviation and Repair Station Branch, AFS‑340.

D.    Maintenance Functions.

1)      Maintenance functions must be approved by the FAA prior to a certificated repair station contracting out the performance of maintenance, preventative maintenance, or alterations of an article. Maintenance functions requiring approval are those items for which a repair station is rated to maintain but chooses to outsource as referenced in part 145, § 145.201(a) to a noncertificated maintenance provider.
2)      Maintenance function approval is not required for certificated repair stations listed on the repair station’s contract maintenance list, and, certificated or noncertificated facilities performing maintenance on an article for which the repair station is not rated.

NOTE: The repair station rule already prohibits a repair station from maintaining any article for which it is not rated. Outsourcing of these maintenance functions does not require approval since the repair station cannot approve the article for return to service.

E.     Contract Maintenance. A repair station must have the material and equipment necessary to perform the functions appropriate to its rating. However, it does not need to have the tools and equipment for functions it is authorized to contract out pursuant to its FAA‑approved list of maintenance functions. The repair station must request approval before it can contract a maintenance function to a noncertificated provider. If the FAA approves the contracted maintenance function, the repair station can determine who will perform the maintenance.

NOTE:  Although the repair station is allowed to contract a maintenance function to an outside source, the ASI must verify the repair station requesting the rating is capable of performing the maintenance under the rating requested. Contracted maintenance functions must not circumvent the certification requirements.

NOTE:  A repair station may contract maintenance functions to both FAA‑certificated and non‑FAA certificated facilities. The FAA only approves only the maintenance functions contracted to a noncertificated facility that are within the scope of its ratings.

1)      If a repair station contracts a maintenance function to another FAA‑certificated repair station, the repair station doing the maintenance is responsible for providing the approval for return to service of maintenance performed on each article. The originating repair station must determine that the contracted repair station is properly rated to perform the maintenance. The contracted repair station performing the maintenance must approve the article for return to service for the work they perform. Articles received from a certificated facility must be properly processed through the repair station’s receiving inspection procedures before further maintenance is performed.
2)      If the repair station contracts to non‑FAA certificated facilities, the repair station must include provisions that allow the FAA to inspect and observe the work performed on those articles at the noncertificated facilities. The individual in charge of the contract maintenance program may be required to accompany the FAA during these inspections. These inspections may determine if the repair station is able to continue to contract the maintenance functions to this source and ensures that:

·        The non‑FAA certificated facility follows a quality control program equivalent to the FAA‑certificated repair station’s system with respect to the work being performed for the certificated repair station.

·        The work performed on the article is verified by testing and/or inspection.

·        The article is airworthy with respect to the work performed by the noncertificated source.

·        The RSM should include a procedure ensuring that contracts contain a provision for FAA inspections.

3)      The repair station is responsible for approving for return to service any article on which work has been performed and for ensuring the article’s airworthiness. Inspection procedures within the manual must enable the repair station to determine the airworthiness of the work performed on each article received. If the repair station cannot determine the quality of the contracted work by inspection or test, the work can be contracted only to an FAA‑certificated facility that is able to inspect the work performed for compliance with part 43.

NOTE: It is not enough for the contracting repair station to give its QCM to the noncertificated contractor and assume the proper procedures will be followed. The certificated repair station must provide adequate surveillance to ensure its quality control procedures are followed.

4)      Part 43, § 43.17(c) authorizes an AMO whose system of quality control has been approved by Transport Canada to perform maintenance on U.S. aeronautical products. Section 43.17(d) requires that this maintenance be performed in accordance with part 43, §§ 43.13, 43.15, and 43.16.
a)      These are the same regulations that must be followed by a U.S.‑certificated repair station. Section 43.17(e)(1) requires the AMO to approve the article for return to service after performing maintenance. Section 43.17(d) states that the work must be performed and recorded in accordance with part 43. The Canadian form, Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) Form 24‑0078, Authorized Release Certificate, is similar to our FAA Form 8130‑3, Airworthiness Approval Tag, and meets the recording requirements when filled out properly.
b)      Since their quality control system is approved by Transport Canada, the organization is viewed as similar to the U.S.‑certificated repair station system.
c)      Although not FAA‑certificated repair stations, Canadian AMOs performing work per § 43.17 comply with the same requirements that U.S. repair stations must when performing maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations. Because of the similarities, an on‑site inspection would not be required.
5)      Part 43 authorizes a certificated mechanic to provide approval for return to service after performing maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations. This person is also held to the same performance requirements as the repair station. The mechanic approves the article for return to service by providing documentation that complies with part 43, § 43.9. The repair station would not be required to conduct an on‑site inspection of the mechanic’s facilities.

NOTE: A repair station desiring to contract maintenance functions that are outside the scope of its ratings may use the services of another certificated person. For example, an avionics facility without a limited airframe rating installing a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) may contract the airframe portion to a certificated person.

F.      Maintenance Performed at Another Location. A repair station may perform work away from its fixed location for a one‑time special circumstance or on a recurring basis.

1)      A repair station may perform maintenance away from its fixed location for special circumstance, such as an aircraft on the ground or in preparation for a ferry flight. (OpSpec D100 is not required.)

NOTE: This is not work on a recurring basis. The preamble (August 6, 2001) defined recurring work as that “work away from a repair station’s fixed location as part of everyday business practices.”

a)      Part 145, § 145.203(a) states that the FAA determines these special circumstances. If the repair station does not include a procedure in its manual for work away from station for emergency repairs, then each request must be submitted to the PI and be evaluated on a case‑by‑case basis. The PI will make a determination and inform the repair station of any parameters that must be followed to perform the requested maintenance. The repair station may elect to put a procedure in its manual to cover special circumstances for emergency repair (aircraft on ground, preparation for special flight permit, etc.).
b)      The CHDO will review the manual procedure to verify it contains information on how the repair station will notify the PI when it must perform work away from station. The PI must verify this procedure is for emergency purposes only and not on a recurring basis or extended work away from station.
2)      A repair station may perform maintenance away from its fixed location for extended periods of time if it meets certain criteria. Additionally, this type of operation does not constitute the establishment of another repair station or a satellite repair station because it is temporary in nature. After the contracted maintenance is completed, the repair station must transport its tools, equipment, and personnel back to its fixed location. This request must be submitted to the PI and be evaluated on a case‑by‑case basis. The PI will keep a copy of the request, the repair station’s procedure, and the PI’s approval document in the repair station file. (OpSpec D100 is not required.) The repair station must meet the following criteria to provide maintenance away from its fixed location for extended periods of time:
a)      Extended contracted work away from station must not exceed one year.

NOTE:  If additional time is needed, the repair station must submit another request updating the original information and providing any new details on the contracted maintenance.

b)      Section 145.203(a) states that the FAA determines these special circumstances.
c)      The repair station must furnish its own tools and equipment unless it has procedures for leasing or contracting tools and equipment that comply with the regulations and the procedures in the RSM.
d)      The repair station must ensure its personnel understand that repair station procedures must be followed when performing maintenance away from station.
e)      The repair station must have all required data to complete the contracted maintenance at the location.
f)        The request to the CHDO must include the aircraft (make/model/series), the project to be accomplished, the duration of the maintenance, the location of the maintenance, and a statement that the temporary facilities are suitable for the repair station’s maintenance.
g)      Housing that is suitable for one repair station’s use may not automatically be suitable for the purposes and scope of maintenance for another repair station’s ratings, privileges, or limitations. The repair station requesting to provide maintenance away from its fixed location for extended periods of time must evaluate the housing and facilities where the maintenance will take place to ensure the location meets the requirements of the rule.

NOTE:  This type of operation must not be allowed to become a permanent operation. After the specific project or contract is completed, the repair station must return to performing maintenance at its fixed location. If maintenance must occur at this location on a continuing basis, the repair station must apply for a repair station or a satellite repair station certificate.

3)      As stated in § 145.203(b), a repair station may perform maintenance away from its fixed location on a recurring basis when necessary, such as to perform mobile field services. This will allow maintenance away from the repair station’s fixed location as a part of everyday business rather than under special circumstances only. (OpSpec D100 is required.)
a)      If the repair station intends to perform maintenance on a recurring basis at places other than its fixed location, the manual must include procedures for accomplishing the maintenance, preventive maintenance, alterations, or specialized services.
b)      The procedures must address issues related to transportation, tools, equipment, personnel, technical data, and records. These procedures should ensure the repair station at the remote location remains in compliance with part 145 and its manual, just as if the maintenance was performed at the repair station’s fixed location.

G.    Transfer of a Part 145 Certificate from One CHDO to Another. Part 145 prescribes that the FAA must approve in writing any change of a repair station location, housing, or facilities.

1)      The application for change of location is FAA Form 8310‑3, Application for Repair Station Certificate and/or Rating. The applicant will complete Form 8310‑3 and select “Change in Location or Housing and Facilities,” located in block 2, Reason for Submission.
2)      The PI or the PI’s representative at the office from which the certificate holder is leaving will coordinate the repair station change in location with the regional office. The regional office will further coordinate with the office to which the certificate holder is transferring (if in the same region). If the CHDO is in a different region, the office from which the certificate holder is coming will coordinate with the new CHDO. Direct communication between the two field offices is encouraged.
3)      After regional coordination, a decision on the repair station’s request for change of location will be approved or denied in writing, and provided to the repair station by the current CHDO as required by § 145.105. If the request is denied, further activity supporting the change of location will cease until the issues causing the denial are resolved to the regional office’s satisfaction.
4)      The PI at the office from which the certificate holder is leaving will identify items in his or her office pertaining to the repair station that must be closed, revised, transferred, archived, or otherwise administered in block 6 of the applicants submitted Form 8310‑3 (or in a separate document). As the required activities for those items are completed, it will be noted. Once the transfer is complete, the office from which the applicant left will provide all affected FAA offices with a copy noting all completed actions.
5)      If the repair station intends to operate during the change in location, it will present the office from which it is leaving with a transition plan to identify and address potential gaps in the repair station’s quality system. The PI at the office from which the certificate holder is leaving will coordinate with the new office, provide a copy of the transition plan, and note in block 6 any conditions or limitations under which the repair station must operate. A copy of the limitations must be provided to, and receipt acknowledged by, the repair station. The PI at the office from which the certificate holder is leaving or the PI’s representative will provide oversight for compliance with those conditions or limitations applicable to the repair station at the original location.
6)      The new office will assign a PI to provide oversight of the repair station change in location activity. The new office PI or the PI’s representative will identify in block 6 of the applicant’s submitted Form 8310‑3 (or in a separate document) those items in the gaining office that pertain to the repair station that must be opened, revised, transferred, or otherwise administered. It is noted when the required activities for those items are completed. Once all items are completed, a copy of the document will be provided to affected regional offices.
7)      If the repair station intends to operate during the change in location, the new office PI or the PI’s representative will provide oversight for compliance with any conditions or limitations under which the repair station must operate at the new location.
8)      The procedures for transferring a certificate will include assurances that at least the following are considered:
a)      Coordinating with any affected regional office (old and new field and regional offices).
b)      Transfer of current and complete office files (old office).
c)      Ensuring Vital Information Subsystem (VIS) is updated (old office).
d)      Administering any open required surveillance tasks in accordance with (IAW) FAA Order 1800.56, National Flight Standards Work Program Guidelines (old office).
e)      Ensuring appropriate conditions and limitations are placed on the repair station during the relocation (old office coordinating with the new office).
f)        Inspection of the new housing and associated facilities, equipment, materials, and data (new office).
g)      Ensuring ratings and OpSpecs continue to be appropriate, or are amended as necessary (new office).
h)      Ensuring the repair station certifies in writing compliance with HAZMAT requirements of § 145.53(c) or (d), as appropriate. A previous compliance statement may continue to be valid (new office).
i)        Reviewing repair station and quality manuals for revisions, if necessary (new office).
j)        Updating all necessary repair station file documents with current information, paying particular attention to the air agency certificate, OpSpecs, VIS, and repairmen certificates (new office).
k)      Establishing normal surveillance IAW current FAA Order 1800.56 (new office).

H.    Taking Corrective Actions on Deficiencies. Part 145, § 145.211(c)(1)(ix) states that the QCM must include procedures used for taking corrective action on deficiencies. A corrective action is taken to remedy an undesirable situation. The correction of deficiencies is normally an integral part of a repair station’s improvement process, and could include revisions to procedures that were not working properly. (Refer to the current edition of Advisory Circular (AC) 145‑9, Guide for Developing and Evaluating Repair Station and Quality Control Manuals, for additional guidance.)

NOTE: The repair station is not required at this time to have an internal evaluation program, quality assurance program, or a continuous improvement program.

1)      Corrective action requires that a fact‑based investigation determine the root cause or causes in order to eliminate them. Corrective action is applicable in two situations: before the article is approved for return to service and after the article has been approved for return to service.
2)      If a deficiency is found before the article is approved for return to service, the repair station should follow its procedures describing how the corrective work will be accomplished. If the deficiency is noted after the article is approved for return to service, the repair station should follow its procedures to notify the CHDO and the owner/operator of any potential problems and recall any unairworthy product. The objective of the investigation into the cause of the deficiency, and the corrective actions taken, is to prevent a recurrence of the same or similar problems.
3)      The procedures in the QCM should include a system for documenting any deficiencies and the corrective actions taken to prevent a recurrence. The system should provide the ability to track any open corrective action requests and the date the corrective action is due. The program should also include audits of the corrective action(s) taken to ensure it was effective. These audits should also be tracked to ensure they are completed in a timely fashion.

2-1183              PREREQUISITES AND COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS.

A.     Prerequisites.

·        Knowledge of the regulatory requirements of 14 CFR part 145.

·        Successful completion of appropriate Airworthiness Indoctrination course(s).

·        Successful completion of the Airworthiness Inspection/Surveillance of Foreign/Domestic Repair Stations Course and the on‑the‑job training (OJT) program related to part 145.

·        Successful completion of the Operations Specifications Subsystem course.

B.     Coordination. These tasks require coordination among the ASIs (maintenance and avionics). Regional coordination may be required.

C.     Electronic Media. Air agencies that elect to use electronic media (CD‑ROM, LAN‑based or internet‑based systems) must be allowed to use those systems without interference or extra procedures. It is incumbent upon the air agency to ensure its CHDO is equipped for the media it selects to ensure delays or other hindrances do not occur. To ensure a consistent approach to document and manual submissions and revisions, the requirement for signing the title page or revision page will be replaced by transmittal documents.

NOTE: Transmittal documents include cover letters, memos, e‑mails, faxes, and any other media acceptable to the FSDO.

1)      This procedure must be followed for the remaining submissions discussed in this chapter.
2)      Repair stations and applicants will submit documents for FAA acceptance or approval accompanied by a transmittal document with the information captured in the note below.
3)      PIs will approve, or reject submissions using a transmittal document with the information captured in the note below.

NOTE:  Repair station document submissions requiring approval must be accompanied by a transmittal document that describes the submission and is signed by the appropriate manager. PIs will accept or approve submissions with a transmittal document indicating the date, document, manual, or revision number, and an acceptance or approval statement. Additionally, PIs will reject a certificate holder’s submission using a transmittal document that indicates the date, document, manual, or revision number, and a detailed explanation of the discrepancies or nonconformances noted. Office copies of correspondence transmittals will be maintained in the certificate holder’s folder or maintained electronically if equipped.

4)      PIs will accept or reject document submissions using the information captured in the note below.

NOTE:  Regulatory language defines certain document submittals by an air agency. RSM, QCM, CL and others must be acceptable to the FAA. A document, manual or revision is considered acceptable to the FAA unless a list of discrepancies is provided to the air agency explaining the unacceptability of the submitted correspondence. There is no requirement for the FAA to acknowledge receipt of or initiate a formal letter of acceptance upon review of the submitted correspondence. A rejection of a certificate holder’s submission may be initiated by a transmittal document that indicates the date, document, manual, or revision number and a detailed explanation of the discrepancies. Office copies of correspondence transmittals will be maintained in the certificate holder’s file or maintained electronically, if equipped.

D.    Use of Electronic Transmissions (E‑mail or Facsimile). E‑mail or fax responses are an acceptable alternative to the cover letter if the repair station is equipped to transmit and receive any necessary attachments. This may include the use of electronic signatures. This method should be addressed in the repair station’s procedures and be found acceptable to the FAA.

2-1184              CAPABILITY LIST.

A.     Review the Air Agency’s CL.

1)      Review the CL to ensure the repair station is rated for the articles identified on the list.
2)      Review the RSM procedure for:

·        The revision process, including CHDO notification;

·        Where and how the list will be maintained;

·        Frequency and method of revising the list; and

·        Reporting self‑evaluation results to the appropriate manager.

3)      Review the self‑evaluation process for:

·        Records of training of persons performing the self‑evaluations;

·        Performance of the self‑evaluation before modifying the CL; and

·        Adequately identifying the tools, equipment, materials, technical data, adequate housing and facilities, and qualified personnel that are available before modifying the CL.

B.     Accept the CL. If the submission or revision is found acceptable, ASIs will:

1)      If a paper revision, remove the affected pages and insert the revised pages in the CL or replace the list in its entirety, if that is the method used by the repair station, and file the transmittal documents in the appropriate office file.
2)      If in electronic format, replace the outdated disk or file with the current CL or revised pages in the certificate holder’s office file.

C.     Reject the CL. If the submission or revision is not acceptable, the ASI will:

1)      Initiate a transmittal document indicating the date, document, and revision number of the CL or revision being rejected.
2)      Return all copies to the applicant with an explanation of discrepancies that must be corrected and instructions for resubmitting the documents.

2-1185              ADDITIONAL FIXED LOCATIONS.

A.     Submit Application. A repair station may request additional fixed locations be added to its OpSpecs by submitting the request on FAA Form 8310‑3, Application for Repair Station Certificate and/or Rating. The repair station must:

1)      List the physical address of all additional fixed locations to be added to its OpSpecs.
2)      Submit repair station and QCM revisions, to include how it will continue to meet the requirements of part 145 and its manual at each additional location.
3)      ASIs must approve the additional locations prior to the repair station exercising the privileges of its certificate at the additional facility. Supply any additional information needed by the FAA to consider the request.

B.     Review Application. The PI receives the application, manual revisions, and any other information necessary to determine the appropriateness of the request. The inspector must:

1)      Review the manual revisions that detail how the repair station will perform maintenance at the additional location.
2)      Review any other material or information submitted to assist the inspector in completing his or her review.
3)      Inspect the additional location to ensure that:

·        It is within the local commuting area and does not pose an inconvenience to the inspector for traveling to all locations,

·        It is appropriate for the work to be accomplished under the repair station’s certificate and ratings as listed on the OpSpecs, and

·        It is under the full control of the repair station.

C.     Approve Additional Fixed Location. The PI approves the additional fixed location address by adding it to the repair station’s OpSpecs.

2-1186              CONTRACT MAINTENANCE.

NOTE:  With the removal of appendix A from part 145, the prohibition of limited‑rated repair stations to contract out work has also been removed. The FAA does not intend to allow “virtual repair stations” that provide only the approval for return to service. This means that ASIs must be attentive to the maintenance functions they are approving for each facility. Although a list such as appendix A was a convenient way to maintain certain levels of maintenance for each repair station, it was impossible to maintain it in a current status without this rule being in constant revision.

A.     Maintenance Functions. A repair station can submit its maintenance functions in any manner acceptable to the FAA, but cannot contract maintenance functions to noncertificated sources until they have been approved. RSMs must contain a procedure that describes how the repair station will submit its maintenance functions to the CHDO. The RSM must also describe how the repair station will revise the list of maintenance functions. Maintenance functions must be approved if they are contracted to a noncertificated provider. Each function that is approved must be covered under the repair station rating.

1)      Repair stations will submit the list of maintenance functions for approval to the CHDO with a transmittal document that describes the document being submitted and shows the date and/or revision number of the document. The repair station may also wish to provide a method for which a maintenance function can be added to its FAA‑approved list on an emergency basis. ASIs should ensure that the procedure accepted in the RSM regarding these emergency procedures sufficiently addresses how the maintenance function would be added, and how the FAA approval would be obtained in a short period of time.
2)      ASIs will approve or reject the maintenance function list by:

·        Initiating a transmittal document identifying the document, date, revision number, and stating the function is either approved or rejected.

·        Filing a copy of the transmittal in the repair station folder and providing a copy to the certificated repair station by mail or electronic media.

NOTE:  Regulatory language defines certain document submittals by air agency (e.g., RSM, QCM, CL and others) must be acceptable to the FAA. A document, manual or revision is considered acceptable to the FAA unless a list of discrepancies is provided to the air agency explaining the unacceptability of the submitted correspondence. There is no requirement for the FAA to acknowledge receipt of or initiate a formal letter of acceptance upon review of the submitted correspondence. A rejection of a certificate holder’s submission may be initiated by a transmittal document that indicates the date, document, manual, or revision number and a detailed explanation of the discrepancies. Office copies of correspondence transmittals will be maintained in the certificate holder’s file or maintained electronically, if equipped.

3)      ASIs should provide a reason for rejecting the maintenance functions to assist repair stations in determining which functions would be allowed. Some reasons for rejecting maintenance functions include:

·        Too much “core business” contracted out, leaving the repair station to provide little, if any, actual maintenance on the articles it is rated to work on;

·        Continually using contracting out as a means to keep staffing below adequate levels for the work the repair station is obligated to accomplish; and

·        Contracting out a maintenance function without prior approval.

NOTE:  Contracting out maintenance functions should not be used to replace the need for adequately staffed and trained maintenance personnel. ASIs should be cautious of repair stations that constantly revise the maintenance function list on an emergency basis in order to complete work in a timely manner. ASIs should ensure that a repair station has the necessary trained personnel for the scope and complexity of the ratings it holds.

B.     Contract Maintenance. Repair stations that do not intend to contract out maintenance functions must have the housing, facilities, material, and equipment necessary to perform the functions appropriate to its ratings. The tools, equipment, and technical data must be available at the time the work is performed. Repair stations wishing to contract maintenance functions out to noncertificated providers must submit a list of those maintenance functions to the FAA for approval.

NOTE:  A repair station with a limited rating specialized services may not contract out any function required in the process specification listed in the OpSpec.

1)      The repair station must make available a list that includes the maintenance functions, the name of the contractor that will perform the function(s), and the contractor’s physical address.
2)      To approve or reject a list of contracted maintenance functions, the ASI must determine:

·        That the RSM has adequate procedures that dictate how the maintenance functions will be submitted and revised,

·        How the repair station will qualify and/or inspect noncertificated contractors, and

·        How the approval for return to service will be applied once an article returns from a contractor’s facility.

3)      A certificated repair station may not provide only approval for return to service of a type‑certificated (TC) article following maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations.

NOTE:  A certificated repair station may not contract out to a noncertificated person unless it provides in its contract that the FAA may conduct inspections or observe maintenance functions that are being performed for the repair station. If a noncertificated person refuses to allow the FAA access, the certificated repair station cannot approve the articles for return to service.

2-1187              MAINTENANCE PERFORMED AT ANOTHER LOCATION. Repair stations may:

·        Elect not to perform maintenance away from the main base station.

·        Need to perform emergency maintenance away from station.

·        Have a need to perform maintenance over an expended period of time away from station.

·        Have a need to perform maintenance on a recurring basis away from station.

NOTE: The PI should consider the need of the repair station carefully.

A.     No Maintenance Away From Main Base Station. Should it be determined the repair station never has a need to perform maintenance away from the main base station, the requirements for a procedure in its manual and OpSpec D100 would not be required. However, the PI should inform the repair station that if a need arises, the repair station will be required to notify the CHDO and wait for a determination from the PI.

B.     Emergency Maintenance Away From Main Base Station. If the repair station determines it needs to perform maintenance away from the main base station on an emergency basis, it may put a procedure in its manual for the types of emergency maintenance that may be required, stating how it will control the work, material, equipment, personnel, data inspection procedure, etc., and stating how it will notify the PI.

1)      If the PI determines these procedures meet the requirements of § 145.203(a), the repair station would not have to wait for a reply from the PI before performing the work.
2)      The PI will send the repair station a letter stating the procedure meets the requirements of § 145.203(a). The CHDO will keep a copy of the letter in the repair station file.

C.     Extended Maintenance Away From Main Base Station. If the repair station should have a special circumstance, such as a need to perform maintenance for an extended period of time, then this request must be presented to the PI for determination. (OpSpec D100 is not required.) The repair station must present to the PI a plan, for review, on how the repair station will control the maintenance. The PI will verify the following:

1)      The contracted work away from station must not exceed one year.
2)      The repair station must furnish its own tools and equipment unless it has procedures for leasing or contracting tools and equipment that comply with the regulations and with the procedures in the RSM.
3)      How the repair station will assure its personnel understand that the repair station procedures must be followed when performing maintenance away from station.
4)      How the repair station will have all required data to complete the contracted maintenance at the location.
5)      The request to the CHDO included the aircraft (make/model/series), the project to be accomplished, the duration of the maintenance, the location of the maintenance, and a statement that the temporary facilities are suitable.
6)      The repair station can perform the work requested. The PI will send the repair station a letter stating the procedure meets the requirements of § 145.203(a). The CHDO will keep a copy of the letter in the repair station file.

D.    Recurring Maintenance Away From Main Base Station. If the repair station is performing maintenance away from the main base station on a recurring basis (part of everyday business rather than under special circumstances) there must be a procedure in the manual on how the repair station controls the work away from station. This type of work could include fuel cell repair, Nondestructive Testing (NDT), etc. where most if not all of the work is completed away from the base station. (OpSpec D100 is required.)

NOTE:  Ratings must not be given for any product that is non‑TC’d or used on a non‑TC’d aircraft, such as certain military aircraft. Part 145, § 145.57(a) requires a repair station to perform maintenance in accordance with part 43. Section 43.1(a) states, in part, that “This part prescribes rules governing the maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, and alterations of any aircraft having a U.S. airworthiness certificate.”

NOTE:  Ratings are defined in § 145.59. Adding or removing an aircraft, engine, or component to a rating is an amendment to the rating not an added rating. The addition or removal of an aircraft, engine, or component is a change to the limitations under the rating.

2-1188              AIRFRAME RATINGS AND CLASSIFICATIONS UNDER § 145.59.

A.     Airframe Maintenance or Alteration.

1)      Repair stations require an appropriate airframe rating when performing maintenance or alterations on articles (see Table 2‑8, Airframe Ratings and Classifications under § 145.59) such as:

·        Seats,

·        Seat belts,

·        Berths,

·        Galleys,

·        Lavatories,

·        Cabinetry,

·        Aircraft composite components,

·        Cabin/cockpit interior foam and fabric upholstered parts,

·        Electrical wiring harnesses,

·        Dividers,

·        Curtains,

·        Windows, and

·        Any other interior structure.

2)      Additionally, repair stations require an appropriate airframe rating when performing maintenance or alterations on external aircraft structures or fuselage articles such as:

·        Aircraft painting,

·        Landing gear removal and installation,

·        Doors and the attaching components,

·        Fuselage repairs or alterations, or

·        Flight controls and attaching hardware.

3)      Similarly, articles of all‑cargo configured aircraft are considered part of the airframe and require an appropriate airframe rating. These include:

·        Unit loading devices,

·        Cargo pallets or containers,

·        Bulkheads,

·        Ball mats,

·        Floor roller tracks, and

·        Floor or side locks.

4)      An appropriate airframe rating is also required to perform maintenance or alterations on articles associated with an emergency medical support installation, such as stretchers, litters, and supporting hardware or structures.

B.     Ratings.

1)      A revised or amended rating is not an added rating. If the repair station desires to add an additional aircraft under the present rating it will be a change or an amendment to the rating and will not require a reissue of the certificate. If the repair station uses a CL as authorized by § 145.215, then a copy of the change will be sent to the CHDO, and the OpSpecs will not have to be changed. If the repair station does not use the provisions of § 145.215, then an amendment to the rating will require a submission of Form 8310‑3. The OpSpecs will be changed to add the aircraft. Whenever there is a change to the rating in the OpSpecs, a new FAA Form 8310‑3 must be submitted. For example, if the repair station has a Limited Airframe‑Cessna 100 series and they would like to add Piper PA‑28 series to the limited airframe rating:
a)      If a repair station has a certificate issued for Airframe Class 3 and would like to add a Powerplant Class 1:

·        The repair station submits an application to add the powerplant rating.

·        After the ASI verifies that the repair station meets all of the applicable requirements, the certificate will be changed to add the powerplant rating and the OpSpecs will be amended to add powerplant under the class ratings.

b)      If a repair station has a Limited Airframe Rating‑Cessna and would like to add a Limited Powerplant‑Lycoming this added rating will be the same as example number one.
2)      A revised or amended rating is not an added rating. If the repair station desires to add an additional aircraft under the present rating it will be a change or an amendment to the rating and will not require a reissue of the certificate. If the repair station uses a CL as authorized by § 145.215, then a copy of the change will be sent to the CHDO, and the OpSpecs will not have to be changed. If the repair station does not use the provisions of § 145.215, then an amendment to the rating will require a submission of Form 8310‑3. The OpSpecs will be changed to add the aircraft. Whenever the OpSpecs change, a new FAA Form 8310‑3 must be submitted. For example, if the repair station has a Limited Airframe‑Cessna 100 series and they would like to add Piper PA‑28 series to the limited airframe rating:
a)      The repair station does not use a CL.
b)      Form 8310‑3 would be submitted to the CHDO with the request to add the Piper aircraft to the limited airframe rating.
c)      The ASI would then add the Piper PA‑28 series to the Operations Specifications but the Air Agency Certificate would not change.
3)      Section 145.51 requirements are for original application for certification and for added ratings that change the Air Agency Certificate.

C.     Limited Ratings.

1)      Limited ratings listed in part 145, § 145.61 have long been interpreted as being limited to all the functions on a particular make and model of aircraft, powerplant, or propeller. Although this interpretation was appropriate when the current rating system was developed in the 1950s, the repair and maintenance industry has developed numerous “niche” businesses that are limited to not only a particular article make or model, but also to certain maintenance functions on a particular make or model.
2)      The current OpSpecs allow the limitation of make and models, as well as maintenance functions, to be properly identified in the “Limitations” section. Limitations must not be vague and undefined. If painting, for instance, is the only maintenance function a repair station intends to do, the limitation should read, “Limited to painting airframe structure and components on Boeing 737 series aircraft,” or similar language. If the repair station is limited to performing maintenance on only a certain part of the airframe, that language should specify the manufacturer, make, and model of the component, and describe exactly what the repair station is limited to do.

NOTE:  ASIs must ensure that the limitations of repair stations adequately address the capabilities of the repair station both by the make and model of the aircraft, powerplant, propeller, or component part of those articles, and by the maintenance capabilities for which it has the tools, equipment, housing, data, and trained personnel to maintain. At no time should a repair station be issued a rating if it does not have the required supporting components (tools, equipment, etc.) to perform the maintenance required of the rating.

3)      A repair station may apply for and be issued a repair station certificate and rating for a limited airframe for line maintenance.
a)      The limited airframe is needed to perform inspections and minor flight line repairs to air carrier aircraft. The OpSpecs should list all the aircraft, the airlines for which the repair station is contracted to perform line maintenance, and the locations where line maintenance is to be performed.

NOTE:  A repair station must not perform line maintenance on articles that are outside the scope of its repair station certificate and ratings. Additionally, a repair station that is certificated to perform line maintenance must not operate at a location that is not listed in its OpSpecs.

b)      Repair stations certificated to perform only line maintenance must meet all of the eligibility requirements of the rule, including the requirement for suitable housing. The housing need not be on the airport grounds, but must adequately support the maintenance that the repair station is authorized to accomplish. However, the housing should adequately hold the repair station’s tools, equipment, technical data, and any owner/operator or spare parts to be installed in aircraft.

NOTE:  All certificated repair stations must have suitable housing and facilities. Although part 145, § 145.205(d) allows some deviation from the housing requirement, that requirement is based on the repair station having suitable housing at another location that meets the requirements of part 145. If line maintenance is the only maintenance a repair station is certificated to perform, the repair station must still meet the housing and all other requirements of part 145.

D.    Limited “Other” Category. With the implementation of the final part 145 rule on January 31, 2004, the limited “other” category rating was eliminated. This action was necessary because there were no limitations directing ASIs to ensure that this rating was being directed to articles to which part 43 applied. ASIs need to be aware that all repair station ratings must apply to an aircraft, powerplant, propeller, or component part thereof. If an applicant’s request does not meet these criteria, a repair station certificate and rating is not appropriate.

NOTE:  Repair stations and applicants are receiving requests from air carriers, Department of Defense maintenance contractors, or other repair stations to obtain part 145 certification. Although these requests may seem reasonable, part 145 certification is not required and does not apply to public aircraft operated by Federal, State, or local governments. Also, air carriers are requesting part 145 certification for the performance of certain functions on articles where part 43 doesn’t apply using engineering orders or other documents as “approved data.” Though these items may be used in or carried on the operator’s aircraft during revenue flights, this does not mean these items meet the part 43 applicability requirements. These items may include galley utensils/items, portable medical oxygen bottles, and so forth.

E.     Line Maintenance Authorization.

1)      A repair station may apply for and be issued a repair station certificate with a limited airframe rating to perform line maintenance, if it meets the eligibility requirements for the rule. A limited airframe rating will be needed to perform inspections and minor flight line repairs to aircraft listed on its OpSpecs.
2)      A repair station that also desires to perform flight line maintenance to powerplants must also apply for, and meet the eligibility requirements for, a limited powerplant rating. The limited airframe rating allows the repair station to inspect powerplants installed on aircraft and to install powerplants, but does not authorize maintenance that exceeds the scope of its ratings.

NOTE:  A repair station must not perform line maintenance on articles that are outside the capabilities of its ratings or the limitations listed in its OpSpecs. Additionally, a repair station that is certificated to perform line maintenance must not operate at a location not listed in its OpSpecs.

3)      The OpSpecs should list:

·        All aircraft types, makes, and/or models;

·        The operators for which the repair station is contracted to perform line maintenance; and

·        The location(s) where the line maintenance is to be performed.

a)      Inspectors should not rely solely on manual procedures to detail a repair station’s privileges and limitations. Privileges and limitations should be included in the appropriate sections of the repair station’s OpSpecs and be detailed enough to identify the capabilities of the certificate holder.
b)      Inspectors should review the maintenance or inspection cards to ensure the requirements that must be met are within the scope and definition of line maintenance. For example, some repair stations have submitted requests to perform “B” checks for air carriers under a line maintenance authorization. Some “B” checks are more complex than others and could result in critical areas of the airframe being exposed to the environment or other contamination if the repair station has no housing or facilities available at the location. These inspections must be performed in an enclosed environment so that collateral damage is not introduced into the aircraft, airframe, powerplant, or components.
4)      Repair stations certificated to perform line maintenance must meet all of the eligibility requirements of the rule, including the requirement for suitable housing. The housing need not be on the airport, but must adequately support the maintenance that the repair station is authorized to perform.
a)      The repair station’s housing should provide adequate storage for the repair station’s tools, equipment, technical data, and any owner/operator spare parts or components to be installed on aircraft.
b)      Repair stations performing line maintenance do not need a hangar. Housing facilities located near the airport are acceptable provided they meet the requirements of § 145.103.

NOTE: All certificated repair stations must have suitable permanent housing and facilities. Although § 145.205(d) allows some deviation from the housing requirement, that requirement is based upon the repair station having suitable housing at another location that meets the requirements of part 145. If line maintenance is the only maintenance a repair station is authorized to perform, the repair station must still meet the housing and all other applicable requirements of part 145. Housing need not be on the airport where the line maintenance is performed, but the street address must be listed on the repair station OpSpecs.

c)   Line maintenance authorization is only given to U.S. air carriers certificated under part 121/135 or a foreign air carrier or foreign person operating a U.S.-registered aircraft in common carriage under part 129. Line maintenance authorization can not be given to a repair station to provide maintenance on foreign air carriers that do not have U.S.-registered aircraft. Foreign air carriers and persons operating under part 129 that do not have U.S.-registered aircraft can not be listed on the OpSpec D107.
5)      Repair stations must maintain the tools and equipment needed to perform line maintenance. Seldom‑used tools may be leased as specified in § 145.51(b) and not maintained if the repair station has a signed contract from the owner of the tool or equipment. As with all repair stations, the required tools and equipment must either be on the premises and in use when the work is being performed, or the repair station must have a contract that stipulates that the recommended tools are available.
6)      Certificating or adding a rating to authorize a repair station to perform line maintenance will follow the same certification procedures found in the next sections, Section 2, Procedures for Certificating Part 145 Repair Stations/Satellites Located Within the United States and Its Territories, or Section 3, International Field Office Procedures for Certificating/Renewing/Renewing/Amending a Part 145 Repair Station Located Outside the United States and Its Territories, as appropriate.
7)      Repair stations that may desire to perform line maintenance at more than one location must apply for, and provide the airport and operator information for each.
8)      Locations where the repair station performs line maintenance will be listed in the repair station’s OpSpec D107.
1)      OpSpec D107.
a)      OpSpec D107, Line Maintenance Authorization, authorizes a part 145 repair station to perform line maintenance functions that apply only to the certificate holders conducting operations under parts 121 and 135, and for foreign air carriers or foreign persons operating a U.S.-registered aircraft in common carriage under part 129.

1.      The authorization of line maintenance can only be added to the OpSpecs for repair stations that provide line maintenance for air carriers as defined in the regulation. Line maintenance is not authorized for general aviation operators.

2.      The authorization for providing line maintenance through the issuance of OpSpec D107 is not a rating.

3.      The OpSpec D107 authorization is a limitation to a rating, and as such it must be a clearly stated in the limitation section as to the types of aircraft the repair station is authorized to maintain and where the line station will be located.

b)      As stated in FAA Order 8900.1, the ASI must review the scope of work the repair station will provide for each air carrier, which becomes the limitation added to OpSpec D107. A blanket authorization cannot be given. The PI must complete the review as required for each location and determine if the repair station can complete the requested maintenance for the air carrier at each location.
c)      Repair stations that are not limited to line maintenance should not be issued OpSpec D107 for line maintenance at their home location or airport.

1.      However, if they need to perform line maintenance away from the home location, then all of the provisions of the line maintenance apply, and OpSpec D107 is issued listing each location.

2.      The PI must complete the review as required for each location and determine if the repair station can complete the requested maintenance for the air carrier at each location.

3.      If the repair station is limited to line maintenance at the home airport the OpSpec D107 must be issued for that repair station.

2)      Other Issues.
a)      It has been noted that OpSpec D100, Work Away from Station, has been inappropriately issued for repair stations that were limited to line maintenance only in OpSpec D107. OpSpec D100 should not be issued to a repair station that is only authorized line maintenance. A repair station is only authorized line maintenance based upon a demonstrated ability to perform the scope of work for a specific air carrier at a specified location. Emergency maintenance and any work away from that location can not be authorized.
b)      This does not prevent the appropriately rated main base from doing work away from station unless its OpSpec A003 has a “line maintenance only” limitation. However, work away from cannot be authorized from any location listed on the OpSpec D107. The OpSpec D107 is an authorization for a specific maintenance function and air carrier at a specified location.
c)      Additionally, several repair stations had multiple locations for line maintenance all under separate certificates. If a repair station requests to have multiple locations, the rating on OpSpec A003 would remain the same but the additional location(s) are recorded on OpSpec D107 specific to the air carrier and the scope of work for that air carrier.

1.      Each location must be evaluated to determine if the repair station meets all requirements from the scope of work for each air carrier and the parts, equipment, and personnel to support the requested maintenance for each air carrier at that location.

2.      The PI for the parent repair station will assume the responsibility for all certification and surveillance of the additional locations. Certification at each FSDO is not required.

NOTE:  During surveillance activities, ASIs must ensure that repair stations performing line maintenance are using the correct data from the correct operator, are operating from a location authorized in OpSpecs, and are in compliance with part 145. The RSM must reflect how it operates at each location and, if the repair station has elected to use other rule provisions such as work away from the fixed location, that there are procedures contained in the manual that detail these operations.

Table 2‑8, Airframe Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59

Rating

Class

Definitions and Notes

Airframe

Class 1: Composite construction of small aircraft

May perform maintenance and alterations of airframes and airframe components in accordance with part 43 on any article for which it is rated and within the limitations in its OpSpecs. This rating also allows the removal and installation of powerplants, propellers, radios, instruments, and passenger convenience items, but not the performance of maintenance to internal sections of these components.

Airframe: Fuselage, booms, nacelles, cowlings, fairings, airfoil surfaces (including rotors but excluding propellers and rotating airfoils of engines) and landing gear of an aircraft and its accessories and controls.

Large Aircraft: Gross takeoff weight of more than 12,500 lbs. Typically considered transport‑category aircraft.

Small Aircraft: Gross takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds or less. Typically considered general aviation aircraft.

Class 2: Composite construction of large aircraft

Class 3: All‑metal construction of small aircraft

 

Class 4: All‑metal construction of large aircraft

 

NOTE:  A repair station may maintain and alter any airframe or part thereof for which it is rated. However, it may not maintain any type certificated products (engine or propeller) installed on the aircraft without the appropriate rating. Additional ratings will be required to maintain powerplants, propellers, radios, and instruments. Nor may it maintain or alter any part thereof unless it has evaluated its capability and assured it has the tool, equipment, data, and personnel to do so.

2-1189              POWERPLANT RATINGS AND CLASSIFICATIONS UNDER § 145.59.

A.     Components and Articles. Components and articles included in the powerplant rating are turbo‑superchargers, magnetos, carburetors, appurtenances, and other articles necessary for the proper operation of the powerplant. Although “powerplant” is not defined in the regulations, “aircraft engine” is. This rating does not include removal and installation of the powerplant onto the aircraft. If a repair station wishes to maintain and also install the powerplant, it must obtain an appropriate limited airframe rating. (See Table 2‑9, Powerplant Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59.)

NOTE:  The guidance on limited ratings provided in paragraph 2-1188B1)b) also applies to limited powerplant ratings.

B.     Limited Powerplant Ratings. Limited powerplant ratings for certain maintenance functions must identify the powerplant manufacturer and make and model of the powerplant the repair station intends to maintain.

1)      This type of rating allows complete repair or alteration of powerplants limited to a particular make and model. However, powerplant maintenance has also found numerous “niche” businesses that may include the performance of a specific maintenance function on a wide variety of powerplants.
2)      The OpSpecs must identify all makes and models, as well as any limitations to its maintenance capabilities, such as, “Limited to plasma spray operations on Pratt and Whitney series turbine blades.” This rating allows the repair station to plasma spray all Pratt and Whitney turbine blades, regardless of the make or model powerplant the blades came from. Additional manufacturers would need to be listed if they also had the technical data, tools, and equipment to perform this maintenance function on General Electric or Rolls Royce powerplants.

NOTE:  Because maintenance procedures, tools, equipment, and technical data may differ between manufacturers, ASIs must ensure that a repair station obtains the appropriate supporting requirements for the capabilities it is requesting. Using tools, equipment, or data from another manufacturer conflicts with part 43 requirements and the FAA does not endorse this practice.

C.     Auxiliary Power Units (APU). Currently, confusion exists when determining the appropriate rating for APU. An APU is considered an accessory by virtue of its function of providing power to the aircraft when the aircraft is not in flight. However, APUs are also used as powerplants for some of the newer models of aircraft, which further blurs the lines between what has been considered general aviation and corporate or commuter aircraft. Until a new rating system is developed, ASIs should consider those articles used as the primary means of propulsion for these newer aircraft as powerplants, not APUs, and repair stations should be rated appropriately. However, repair stations performing maintenance or alterations on APUs used strictly to produce auxiliary power for transport‑category aircraft should obtain an accessory rating.

 

Table 2‑9, Powerplant Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59

Rating

Class

Definitions and Notes

Powerplant

Class 1: Reciprocating engines of 400 horsepower or less

May perform maintenance and alterations of powerplants but not to adjoining airframe or propeller components. Repair stations may remove access panels, doors, and nacelles, as needed, to gain access to the powerplant.

This rating does not include the installation of powerplants to the aircraft. A powerplant‑rated repair station will also need a limited airframe rating to remove or install powerplants on the aircraft.

Class 2: Reciprocating engines of more than 400 horsepower

Class 3: Turbine engines

2-1190              PROPELLER RATINGS AND CLASSIFICATIONS UNDER § 145.59. See Table 2‑10, propeller ratings and classifications under § 145.59.

NOTE:  The guidance on limited ratings provided in paragraph 1B also applies to limited propeller ratings.

NOTE:  Because maintenance procedures, tools, equipment, and technical data may differ between manufacturers, ASIs must ensure that repair stations obtain the appropriate supporting requirements for the capabilities that the repair station is requesting. Using tools, equipment, or data from another manufacturer conflicts with part 43 requirements and the FAA does not endorse this practice.

Table 2‑10, Propeller Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59

Rating

Class

Definitions and Notes

Propeller

Class 1: All fixed pitch and ground adjustable propellers of wood, metal, or composite construction

May perform maintenance and alterations on propellers, but not to adjoining airframe or powerplant components.

A propeller, powerplant, or airframe‑rated repair station may accomplish installation of propellers.

Class 2: All other propellers, by make

2-1191              PROPELLER RATINGS. A repair station certificated as a propeller, powerplant, or airframe‑rated repair station may install propellers and the attaching hardware. Because the process of installing a propeller does not significantly differ between aircraft and powerplants versus a propeller test bench, repair stations with an airframe, powerplant, or propeller rating with appropriate privileges and limitations may install propeller assemblies.

2-1192              RADIO AND INSTRUMENT RATINGS AND CLASSIFICATIONS UNDER § 145.59.

A.     Radio Rating. The radio rating is divided into communication, navigation, and radar classes. (See Table 2‑11, Radio and Instrument Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59.) The first two classes, communication and navigation, are based on intended function in the airplane, whereas the radar class is based on a specific technology or mode of operation. Modern avionics equipment typically integrates communications and navigation functions into a single appliance. Also, radar equipment or a radio that operates using pulse technology also serves communication and/or navigation functions. The combination of functionality and operations of these articles may require the repair station to attain a rating for all three classes, depending on the complexity of the article.

B.     Instrument Rating. The instrument rating is divided into four classes—mechanical, electrical, gyroscopic, and electronic—based on the article’s general principles of operation. Multiple class ratings may be necessary to perform repairs on these articles.

NOTE:  ASIs must ensure that a repair station obtains the appropriate supporting requirements for the capabilities it is requesting. Using tools, equipment, or data from another manufacturer conflicts with part 43 requirements and the FAA does not endorse this practice.

NOTE:  The guidance on limited ratings provided in paragraph 1B also applies to limited radio and instrument ratings.

NOTE:  A repair station with a radio rating must also have a limited airframe rating if it removes or installs components, or alters the aircraft.

 

Table 2‑11, Radio and Instrument Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59

Rating

Class

Definitions and Notes

Radio

Class 1: Communication equipment

Radio transmitting and/or receiving equipment used in an aircraft to send or receive communications in flight, including auxiliary and related aircraft inter‑phone systems, electrical or electronic inter‑crew signaling devices, and similar equipment. Does not include equipment for navigating or aiding navigation of aircraft.

Class 2: Navigational equipment

A radio system used in an aircraft for en route or approach navigation. This does not include equipment operated on pulsed radio frequency principles, or equipment used for measuring altitude or terrain clearance.

 

Class 3: Radar equipment

An aircraft electronic system operated on radar or pulsed radio frequency principles.

Instrument

Class 1: Mechanical

A diaphragm, bourdon tube, aneroid, optical, or mechanically‑driven centrifugal instrument used on aircraft or to operate aircraft, including tachometers, airspeed indicators, pressure gauges drift sights, magnetic compasses, altimeters, or similar mechanical instruments.

Class 2: Electrical

Self‑synchronous and electrical indicating instruments and systems, including remote indicating instruments, cylinder head temperature gauges, or similar electrical instruments.

Class 3: Gyroscopic

An instrument or system using gyroscopic principles and motivated by air pressure or electrical energy, including automatic pilot control units, turn and bank indicators, directional gyros, and their parts, and flux gate and gyrosyn compasses.

Class 4: Electronic

An instrument whose operation depends on electron tubes, transistors, or similar devices, including capacitance type quantity gauges, system amplifiers, and engine analyzers.

2-1193              ACCESSORIES RATINGS AND CLASSIFICATIONS UNDER § 145.59. The accessory rating is divided into mechanical, electrical, and electronic classes, based on an article’s principle of operation. (See Table 2‑12, Accessories Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59.) The combination of functionality and operations of these articles may require the repair station to attain a rating for all three classes, depending on the complexity of the article.

NOTE:  ASIs must ensure that a repair station obtains the appropriate supporting requirements for the capabilities it is requesting. Using tools, equipment, or data from another manufacturer conflicts with part 43 requirements and the FAA does not endorse this practice.

NOTE:  The guidance on limited ratings provided in paragraph 1B also applies to limited accessory ratings.

Table 2‑12, Accessories Ratings and Classifications Under § 145.59

Rating

Class

Definitions and Notes

Accessory

Class 1: Mechanical

An accessory that depends on friction, hydraulics, mechanical linkage, or pneumatic pressure for operation, including aircraft wheel brakes, mechanically driven pumps, carburetors, aircraft wheel assemblies, shock absorber struts, and hydraulic servo units.

Class 2: Electrical

An accessory that depends on electrical energy for its operation, and a generator, including starters, voltage regulators, electric motors, electrically driven fuel pumps, magnetos, or similar accessories.

Class 3: Electronic

An accessory that depends on the use of an electron tube transistor, or similar device, including supercharger, temperature, air conditioning controls, or similar electronic controls.

2-1194              LIMITED SPECIALIZED SERVICE RATINGS, § 145.61. Limited specialized service ratings are issued to an applicant or a certificated repair station that performs specific processes associated with the maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations of an article. Generally, limited specialized service ratings are issued for maintenance functions, which are performed in accordance with an approved process specification. A limited specialized service rating allows a repair station to perform specific processes associated with the maintenance, preventative maintenance, or alteration of articles, and approve them for return to service.

A.     Limited Specialized Service Rating. All repair stations that have a limited specialized service rating use process specifications, in lieu of manufacturer’s maintenance data, when performing maintenance or alterations. However, just because a repair station uses a process specification does not mean the repair station needs a limited specialized service rating. It is inappropriate for an ASI to initiate action to alter a repair station’s ratings and OpSpecs based solely on the repair station’s use of a process specification.

B.     Processes. The process specification must involve a repair process or work scheme that is novel, unique, or unusual in application, for which the manufacturer’s data is not used for approving an article to its original condition, and that specifies repair limits. The repair station’s OpSpecs must contain the specification used in performing that specialized service. The specification could be a military, civil, or applicant‑developed specification that was approved by the FAA. Specialized services would include, but not be limited to, welding, heat treating, plating, and plasma spraying.

NOTE:  An example of a novel and unique procedure for which a limited specialized service rating would be issued is the inspection of turbine blades using Krypton gas. This is a unique procedure not normally found or used in industry. The specialized service rating should only be given if the process or procedure is unique, as explained in this example.

C.     Materials and Personnel. The limited specialized service rating would require a repair station to have the housing, facilities, equipment, tools, trained personnel, and data to perform the process on an aviation article. The process specification on the OpSpecs would set forth the minimum standards for performing the generic process (specialized service). For example, the process specification would include an explanation of the housing, facilities, equipment, tools, trained personnel, and data necessary for the overall process. The applicable manufacturer’s maintenance manual, air carrier manual, or other data acceptable to or approved by the FAA would define the specific parameters associated with performing the process on the particular aviation article.

2-1195              EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT. When a certificated repair station operator requests an amended OpSpecs to perform maintenance/alteration of aircraft that have been issued experimental airworthiness certificates, the following should be accomplished:

A.     Formal Request. The repair station operator formally requests, in writing, an amendment to the current OpSpecs and includes the type of aircraft to be maintained/altered and degree of maintenance/alteration to be performed.

B.     Maintenance/Alteration Plan. With the written request, the certificated repair station operator must submit for approval by the certificate holding office a documented detailed maintenance/alteration plan to be used to perform the maintenance/alteration.

C.     Plan Criteria. The plan that is to be submitted for approval can be composed of criteria described in the current maintenance regulation, ACs, applicable technical orders, data published by kit manufacturer’s plan designers as a part of the fabrication data, or other information found acceptable to the Administrator.

D.    Issuance and Amendment of OpSpecs. When the above conditions have been satisfied and found acceptable to the certificate holding office, the OpSpecs should be amended and issued. Procedures for subcontracting of work or services must clearly reflect that the item came off an experimental aircraft, engine, or propeller and specifically define the criteria by which the work will be performed.

E.     Reference to Approved Maintenance/Alteration Plan. The amended OpSpecs must incorporate the reference to the approved maintenance/alteration plan for each make/model of aircraft. (See Table 2-13.)

F.      Aircraft Returning to Service. Returning to service of aircraft that have been issued experimental airworthiness certificates will be made by the repair station upon completion of maintenance/alteration using the following: “I certify that this aircraft (insert make, model, S/N and Registration Number) was maintained/inspected/altered in accordance with the approved maintenance/alteration/ inspection program as delineated in the operations specifications in effect for this (name of repair station) and is in a condition for safe operation. Additionally, the entry will include the total time in service, name, signature, and certificate type and number and/or the number of the repair station.”

Table  2‑13, Sample Experimental Aircraft Ratings and Classifications

Rating

Manufacturer

Make/Model

                           Limitations

Limited Airframe

K.D.

Firefly 23

Limited to inspections, removals/installations of components, rigging of controls, installation of equipment, alterations, removal/installation of powerplants, propellers. All work must be accomplished in accordance with the repair station's approved maintenance/alteration plan identified as (insert title of plan), dated (insert date), or other procedures found acceptable to the Administrator.

Limited Powerplant

K.D.

Lycoming/320

Limited to inspections, repairs, removal installation of accessories and components, adjustments, but excluding overhaul or disassembly of turbine engine modules. All work must be accomplished in accordance with the repair station's approved maintenance/alteration plan identified as (insert title of plan), dated (insert date), or other procedures found acceptable to the Administrator.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 2‑1196 through 2‑1210.

 

12/31/07                                                                                                                       8900.1 CHG 0

Volume 3  GENERAL TECHNICAL ADMINISTRATION

chapter 11  TRAINING PROGRAMS AND AIRMAN QUALIFICATIONS

Section 7  Flightcrew Qualification Curriculum Segments

3‑1271   GENERAL. This section contains direction and guidance concerning qualification curriculum segments and qualification modules. A qualification curriculum segment is the final segment of each of the six categories of training defined in Volume 3, Chapter 19, Section 1, Scope, Concepts, and Definitions. A qualification curriculum segment is composed of the testing, checking, and experience modules that a flight crewmember must successfully complete after formal training and before being qualified to serve unsupervised as a required flight crewmember in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 or 135 operations.

A.     Primary Objectives. A qualification curriculum segment has the following primary objectives:

·        To ensure that each flight crewmember has reached an acceptable level of proficiency in all assigned duties before being released from training and supervision; and

·        To provide a means for measuring the effectiveness of the training program, and for identifying and correcting training deficiencies.

B.     Guidance Application. The guidance in this section applies to the development and approval of qualification curriculum segments for both part 121 and 135 training curricula. In general, equivalent qualification modules are required by both of these regulatory parts. Differences do exist, however, between part 121 and 135 curriculum segments in both terminology and details. When the guidance in this section applies specifically to one flightcrew duty position or regulatory part, the duty position or regulatory part will be specified.

3‑1272   TYPES OF QUALIFICATION MODULES. Qualification curriculum segments are composed of qualification modules. Qualification modules are generally divided into testing, checking, and experience modules.

A.     Definitions. The following definitions are used in this section:

1)      Qualification Curriculum Segment. The segment of a specified curriculum that begins when formal training has been completed, and ends when the airman is fully qualified to perform unsupervised and without restriction in revenue service.
2)      Testing. Any form of examination of knowledge or skill, whether oral, written, or practical.
3)      Checking. Specifically, a practical skills test. (For flight crewmembers, a check consists of physical manipulation of aircraft controls in real time.)
4)      Basic Checking Module. The proficiency or competency check listed in a qualification segment of a curriculum outline required for qualification in the basic duties of an airman position.
5)      Additional Checking Module. A check conducted to qualify an airman for an additional level of responsibility or skill, beyond that of the basic crew position.
6)      Experience Module. An operation conducted in revenue service that is either under supervision or under restriction, and is measured in flight hours or in the number of repetitions of an event.
7)      Line‑Oriented Flight Training (LOFT). LOFT is a module of training conducted in a simulator after completion of a basic checking module to satisfy the requirements of part 121, appendix H.

C.     Experience Modules. 14 CFR requires that experience modules be completed before a crewmember perform unsupervised and without restriction in revenue service. Other experience modules are required for special authorizations or to reestablish currency. One or more of the following experience modules may be required in a qualification curriculum segment:

·        Operating experience (OE),

·        Pilot in command (PIC) experience (required to use standard turbojet minimums),

·        Special operations experience (such as Class II long‑range navigation), or

·        Currency (to reestablish landing or instrument currency).

3‑1273   FORMAT OF QUALIFICATION CURRICULUM SEGMENTS. The content of a qualification curriculum segment for part 121 operations is almost entirely controlled by regulation. A part 121 operator may, however, use more than one means of accomplishing these requirements. For example, an operator could conduct checks for most categories of training in a C‑level simulator. In such a case, the operator would be required to conduct a LOFT training module after the completion of the basic checking module. An operator that uses an A‑level simulator would be required to conduct the basic checking module in the simulator and a second module in the airplane. The requirements of a part 135 competency check are not specified in 14 CFR, but are left to the discretion of the Administrator and the check airman conducting the check. To ensure that a clear understanding exists between the operator and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the principal operations inspector (POI) should require that the operator list each element or event in a qualification module along with the device to be used. The operator’s format may either be a simple outline, a table such as those contained in Tables 3‑70, Part 135 Checking Modules—Airplanes and 3‑71, Part 135 Checking Modules—Helicopters or any other format that the POI finds clearly establishes the methods to be used and elements and events to be checked.

3‑1274   PART 121 REQUIRED CERTIFICATES. All flight crewmembers must hold specific certificates and ratings before performing duties in part 121 revenue service. If a flight crewmember does not hold the required certificates and/or ratings, they must be obtained when the flight crewmember completes the qualification curriculum segment.

A.     A PIC in part 121 operations must hold the following:

·        Airline transport pilot certificate (ATPC),

·        Airplane category rating,

·        Appropriate class rating,

·        Applicable type rating, and

·        First‑class medical certificate.

B.     A second in command (SIC) in part 121 operations must hold the following:

·        Commercial pilot certificate or ATPC,

·        Instrument rating or ATPC

·        Airplane category rating,

·        Appropriate class rating, and

·        At least a second‑class medical certificate.

C.     A flight engineer (FE) must hold the following:

·        FE certificate,

·        Applicable class rating, and

·        At least a second‑class medical certificate.

3‑1275   PART 135 REQUIRED CERTIFICATES. All pilots must hold specific certificates and ratings before performing duties in part 135 revenue service. If a pilot does not hold the required certificates than SICs must hold at least the following:

A.     Pilot Certification Requirements—Airplanes. Commercial pilot certification requirements for part 135 airplane operations depend on the kind and type of operation being conducted and the types of aircraft used.

1)      PICs conducting passenger‑carrying operations using either a turbojet airplane or ATPC must hold the following:

·        Airplane category rating,

·        Helicopter class rating, and

·        At least a second‑class medical certificate.

2)      PICs conducting part 135 flight operations in airplanes other than those described in subparagraph 3‑1274A, must hold the following:

·        Commercial pilot certificate or ATPC,

·        Instrument rating or ATPC,

·        Airplane category rating,

·        Appropriate class ratings,

·        Type rating (for all airplanes over 12,500 pounds and turbojet airplanes) and,

·        At least a second‑class medical certificate.

3)      SICs conducting any part 135 airplane operations must hold the following:

·        Commercial pilot certificate or ATPC,

·        Instrument rating or ATPC,

·        Airplane category rating,

·        Applicable class rating, and

·        At least a second‑class medical certificate.

4)      Pilots conducting part 135, visual flight rules (VFR)‑only operations in isolated areas with single‑engine, reciprocating‑powered airplanes may be relieved of the requirement to hold an instrument rating when authorized by operations specification (OpSpec) paragraph A20. (These operations are subject to the restrictions of part 135, § 135.243(d).)

B.     Pilot Certification Requirements—Helicopters. The pilot certification requirements for pilots conducting part 135 helicopter operations are as follows:

1)      All PICs and SICs must hold at least the following:

·        Commercial pilot certificate or ATPC,

·        Rotorcraft category rating,

·        Helicopter class rating, and

·        At least a second‑class medical certificate.

2)      All PICs must hold a type rating, if a type rating is required.
3)      PICs conducting part 135 instrument flight rules (IFR) or VFR over‑the‑top operations in helicopters must hold a helicopter instrument rating or an ATPC that is not limited to VFR.

3‑1276   PART 135 MINIMUM PIC FLIGHT EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS. Part 135, § 135.243(b) and (c) require that a PIC who does not hold an ATPC and who conducts operations that do not require an ATPC, must have acquired a minimum number of flight hours before serving as a PIC.

A.     Before serving as a PIC in a VFR operation, the pilot must have accumulated at least the following flight hour experience:

·        500 total pilot flight hours,

·        100 cross‑country flight hours, and

·        25 night, cross‑country flight hours.

B.     Before serving as a PIC in an IFR operation, the pilot must have accumulated at least the following flight hour experience:

·        1,200 total pilot flight hours,

·        500 cross‑country flight hours,

·        100 night flight hours, and

·        75 actual or simulated instrument flight hours, 50 of which must have been in actual flight.

Refer to Volume 5, Chapter 3, Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) Certification Under Title 14 CFR Part 121, 135, or 91 Subpart K, for guidance concerning the crediting of flight time in airplanes and helicopters to meet these requirements.

3‑1277   THE BASIC CHECKING MODULE. The basic checking modules for both parts 121 and 135 are composed of two parts. One part consists of the written or oral test elements and the other part consists of the flight check events. Although they are distinct and separate parts, when combined they make up a single checking module.

A.     Basic Checking Module Content. The subject areas that must be addressed in the written or oral test for the part 121 basic checking module are described in appendix F of part 121. The subject areas that must be addressed in the written or oral test for the part 135 basic checking module are described in part 135, § 135.293(a) and, for those PICs conducting IFR operations, in part 135, § 135.297(c). These regulations require a written or oral test element as a distinct part of the basic checking module. The basic checking modules required for parts 121 and 135 are further discussed in paragraphs 3‑1278 and 3‑1279 respectively.

B.     Performance Standards. In part 121 and 135 operations, a higher standard of proficiency may be required than that required for initial pilot certification. The standard required for basic checks is at least that required for obtaining the certificate which must be held to act as PIC. For example, an SIC holding a commercial certificate with an instrument rating who is making an instrument landing system (ILS) approach in a DC‑10 must perform to the same standard of proficiency as the PIC seated in the left seat who holds an ATPC and a DC‑10 type rating. POIs should bring the following guidance pertaining to proficiency and competency checks in Volume 5, Airman Certification, to the operator’s and check airman’s attention:

Table 3‑69, Volume 5 Guidance Pertaining to Proficiency and Competency Checks

PARAGRAPH NUMBER(S)

SUBPARAGRAPH NUMBER(S)

13

B through D

15, 31, and 33

All

77

A through D

109

C through H

111–122, 129–144, 147–170, 173, 177–194, 241, and 249–268

All

C.     Use of Simulators. An operator may take maximum advantage of simulators and training devices in designing qualification curriculum segments. For example, an operator may evaluate a PIC and an SIC simultaneously on many normal, non‑normal, and emergency procedures when a simulator is used. POIs should encourage operators to design qualification modules accordingly.

D.    LOFT Training. A LOFT training module is considered to be part of the qualification curriculum segment, but is an experience event, not a checking event. A pilot who qualifies for a certificate or rating in a C or D level simulator is issued the certificate or rating immediately after satisfactorily completing the basic check. The pilot is not qualified to either exercise the privileges of the certificate or rating, or enter revenue service until the pilot has successfully completed the LOFT training module.

3‑1278   PART 121 BASIC CHECKING MODULE. The basic checking module required in part 121 is referred to as a proficiency check. For pilots, a proficiency check consists of the written or oral test elements and the flight‑test events specified in part 121, appendix F. Figure 3‑80, Pilot Proficiency Check (Part 121), summarizes the elements and events that make up a proficiency check. A proficiency check qualifies pilots for both VFR and IFR Class I navigation and instrument approaches to standard minimums (Category (CAT) I, if approved for the operator). Operations such as CAT II or CAT III approaches require additional checking modules. For a flight engineer, the proficiency check consists of the flight test events summarized in Figure 3‑81, Flight Engineer Proficiency Check (Part 121). Although part 121 does not specifically require a written or oral test element as part of the FE proficiency check, it is an FAA safety policy that a written or oral test be part of the FE proficiency check. POIs must ensure the test is included as an element of the basic checking module.

Figure 3‑80, Pilot Proficiency Check (Part 121)

ORAL OR WRITTEN EQUIPMENT EXAM        Both

GROUND OPERATIONS

Preflight inspection....................................................... Both

Taxiing/Runway Operations.......................................... Both

Powerplant checks....................................................... Both

TAKEOFFS

Normal........................................................................ Both

Instrument.................................................................... Both

Crosswind................................................................... Both

With powerplant failure................................................ Both

Rejected takeoff........................................................... Both*1

INSTRUMENT PROCEDURES

• Area departure............................................................. Both*

• Area arrival.................................................................. Both*

• Holding........................................................................ Both*

• Normal ILS approach.................................................. Both

• Engine‑out ILS............................................................. Both

• Coupled ILS approach................................................. Both1

• Nonprecision approach................................................ Both

• Second nonprecision approach..................................... Both

• Missed approach from an ILS...................................... Both

• Second missed approach.............................................. PIC

• Circling approach......................................................... Both*2

IN‑FLIGHT MANEUVERS

• Steep turns................................................................... PIC*

• Specific flight characteristics......................................... Both5

• Approaches to stalls..................................................... Both*

• Powerplant failure........................................................ Both

• 2‑engine inoperative approach...................................... Both

(3‑ and 4‑engine aircraft)

• Normal landing............................................................. Both

• Landing from an ILS.................................................... Both

• Crosswind landing........................................................ Both

• Landing with engine‑out................................................ Both

• Landing from circling approach..................................... Both*2

NORMAL AND NONNORMAL PROCEDURES   Both3

• Rejected landing........................................................... Both

• Two‑engine inoperative approach................................. PIC

(Three‑ and Four‑engine aircraft)

OTHER EVENTS........................................................ At Check Airman’s Discretion*4

NOTES:

“Both”: The term “Both” applies to PICs and SICs.

* May be waived under certain conditions. (Refer to Volume 5, Chapter 3, Section 2, Flight Test Events in Airplanes ATP Applicants Engaged in Operations Under Title 14 CFR Part 121, 135, or 91 Subpart K.)

1          PIC and SIC may both simultaneously take credit for this event.

2          When the operator is authorized to conduct circling approaches according to paragraph 53 of the OpSpecs (This is not required for SICs if the operator’s manual prohibits SICs from making this approach.

3          See guidance contained in volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

4          The check airman is authorized to evaluate any event required for the ATPC. (Refer to Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 2, Inspector Qualifications and Status.)

Figure 3‑81, Flight Engineer Proficiency Check (Part 121)

NORMAL PROCEDURES

• Oral or Written Examination

• Exterior preflight

• Interior preflight

• Panel setup

• Fuel load

• Engine start procedures

• Taxi and before takeoff procedures

• Takeoff and climb

• Pressurization

• Cruise and fuel management

• Descent and approach

• After landing and securing

• Crew coordination

• Situational awareness, traffic scan, etc.

• Performance computations

• Anti‑ice, deice

NON‑NORMAL AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

Sample as many non‑normal and emergency procedures as needed to evaluate performance:

• Troubleshooting,

• Knowledge of checklist,

• Ability to perform procedures,

• Crew coordination, and

• Minimum equipment list (MEL) and configuration deviation list (CDL).

3‑1279 PART 135 BASIC CHECKING MODULE. The flight test required to qualify a pilot for revenue service is termed a basic checking module when listed in a curriculum outline. Operators must design the basic checking module of a part 135 curriculum to satisfy the requirements of § 135.293. In addition, operators must satisfy the requirements of § 135.297 for PICs conducting IFR operations. Those operators whose PICs are authorized to use an autopilot in lieu of an SIC in IFR operations must include a demonstration of these skills in the basic checking module. This paragraph contains guidance POIs will use to review and approve basic checking modules and to conduct these checks.

A.     Part 135, § 135.293 Requirements. All pilots who are qualifying in an aircraft type are required by § 135.293 to complete a check in that type of aircraft before entering revenue service and annually thereafter. Section 135.293(b) allows the Administrator to define airplanes with similar characteristics as a single type for purposes of this rule (refer to Volume 3, Chapter 19, Section 1, Paragraph 3‑1073, Aircraft Families, for aircraft of the equivalent series which are defined as a single type). The rule refers to this check as a competency check. The requirements of § 135.293 are aircraft specific; that is, each pilot must satisfactorily complete a competency check in each type of aircraft (as defined in paragraph 3‑1073) prior to operating that aircraft in revenue service. Section 135.293 does not specify the maneuvers (events) that must be accomplished on a competency check. The rule authorizes the Administrator or check airman to make this determination. To ensure standardization and an adequate level of safety, the minimum acceptable content of competency checks for a part 135 curriculum is established by this paragraph and is listed in Tables 3‑70 and 3‑71. Because operators may be authorized to conduct VFR‑only operations or a combination of VFR and IFR operations, separate requirements have been established for VFR‑only competency checks and for combined VFR and IFR operations competency checks. These requirements are indicated in columns marked “VFR COMP” and “IFR COMP” on each figure. As a matter of national safety policy, some demonstration of competency of the pilot’s ability to maneuver the aircraft solely by reference to instruments will be included on each competency check. For VFR competency checks, this demonstration will be appropriate to the aircraft’s installed equipment and the operating environment. (Refer to note 7 to Table 3‑70 and note 4 to Table 3‑71.)

B.     Part 135, § 135.297 Requirements. Section 135.297 requires that PICs complete an instrument proficiency check prior to conducting IFR revenue operations. Thereafter, the PIC must have completed an instrument proficiency check within the preceding 6 months to continue IFR revenue operations. The requirements of § 135.297 are not aircraft specific; that is, a single check fulfilling the requirements of § 135.297 is sufficient to qualify a PIC to conduct IFR operations in all types of aircraft in which the PIC is qualified according to § 135.293. Section 135.293(c) specifies that the check conducted to satisfy § 135.297 simultaneously satisfies the requirements of § 135.293 for the type of aircraft in which the check is accomplished.

The oral or written test requirements of § 135.293(a) must be completed.

1)      Operations Requiring ATPC. Section 135.297(c)(1) requires that for operations requiring an ATPC, the instrument proficiency check must consist of the maneuvers required for original issuance of that certificate and any applicable type rating.
2)      Operations Requiring Commercial Certificates. Section 135.297(c)(1) also requires that for operations requiring a commercial certificate and an instrument rating, the instrument proficiency check must consist of the maneuvers required for the original issuance of a commercial certificate, an instrument rating, and any applicable type rating.

C.     Basic Checking Modules for § 135.293 VFR Competency Check. The minimum events for a § 135.293 VFR competency check are listed in the columns marked “VFR COMP” in Table 3‑70 for airplanes and in Table 3‑71 for helicopters.

D.    Basic Checking Modules for § 135.293 IFR Competency Check. The minimum events for a § 135.293 IFR competency check are listed in the column marked “IFR COMP” in Table 3‑70 for airplanes and in Table 3‑71 for helicopters.

1)      PIC Requirements. PICs being trained in initial equipment and transition Curricula for IFR operations have normally completed the requirements of § 135.297 within the preceding 6 months. If this is the case, the qualification module for these categories of training need only satisfy the requirements of § 135.293. The columns marked “IFR COMP” in Tables 3‑70 and 3‑71 reflect this assumption. When this assumption is not true, the operator must ensure that PICs meet the requirements of § 135.297.
2)      Multiengine, General Purpose Family. Volume 3 chapter 19, section 1, subparagraph 3‑1073C lists airplanes of the multiengine, general‑purpose family that the Administrator has determined to be of the same type for purposes of training and checking. Table 3‑70 is constructed on the assumption that pilots in the transition category are qualifying in airplanes that are not of the same series. The basic qualification module of a transition training course for airplanes of the same series of the multiengine general purpose family of airplanes consists of the oral or written test required by § 135.293(a)(2).
3)      Single‑Engine, General Purpose Family. All single–engine, general purpose airplanes are considered to be a single type for the purpose of training and checking. The qualification module of the transition category of training is the written or oral test required by § 135.293(a)(2).

E.     Requalification Category. The minimum events of the requalification checking module are dependent upon whether the pilot is requalifying for VFR or IFR operations and the duty position. PICs who conduct IFR operations and have completed a § 135.297 check in the past 6 months but are overdue for a check required by § 135.293 may regain qualification by completing the items listed in the columns marked “IFR COMP” in Table 3‑70 for airplanes and Table 3‑71 for helicopters. PICs overdue in respect to the requirements of § 135.297 must complete the items listed in the columns marked “INST PROF” in Table 3‑70 for airplanes and Table 3‑71 for helicopters.

F.      Recurrent Category. The minimum events of the “Recurrent” checking module are dependent upon whether the pilot is maintaining currency for VFR or IFR operations and the duty position. PICs who conduct IFR operations and have completed a § 135.297 check in the past 6 months must complete a § 135.293 competency check to remain current. Complete those items listed in the columns marked “IFR COMP” in Table 3‑70 for airplanes and Table 3‑71 for helicopters. PICs due both a competency check and an instrument proficiency check must complete the items listed in the columns marked “INST PROF” in Table 3‑70 for airplanes and Table 3‑71 for helicopters. Section 135.297 requires PICs to complete instrument proficiency checks by rotating aircraft types. When one airplane is multiengine and the other a single‑engine airplane, § 135.297(f) requires that this rotation begin with the multiengine airplane.

Part 135, § 135.301 allows airmen and operators to consider a check conducted in the month before due or the month after due to have been accomplished in the month due.

G.    SIC Qualification in Aircraft Not Requiring an SIC. The basic qualification module for an SIC in any operation (VFR or IFR) for which no SIC is required by regulation is either an instrument proficiency or VFR competency check in any aircraft of the same category and class and the written or oral test required by 14 CFR § 135.293(a)(2) for the type of aircraft involved.

H.    Listing Module Events. To ensure that the content of the basic checking module is adequate and appropriate, the operator may choose (or the POI may require) that the minimum required events of each basic checking module be listed on the curriculum outline.

I.       Recording Checks. Record the checks for those operators whose flightcrew members get all their checks from FAA inspectors (single pilot, single PIC, and basic operators) on FAA Form 8410‑3, Airman Competency/Proficiency Check. POIs should encourage all other operators to create specifically tailored forms to record these checks which reflect the requirements listed in the operator’s curriculum outline.

Table 3‑70, Part 135 Checking Modules—Airplanes

EVENTS

VFR COMP.

IFR COMP.

INST. PROF.

NOTES

WRITTEN OR ORAL TEST

14 CFR § 135.297

 

 

P

 

14 CFR § 135.293

B

B

 

 

GROUND OPERATIONS

Preflight Inspection

B

B

P

#

Start Procedures

B

B

P

#

Taxiing/Runway Operations

B

B

P

#

Pretakeoff checks

B

B

P

#

TAKEOFF AND DEPARTURES

Normal

B

B

P

 

Crosswind

B

B

P

1

Instrument

 

P

P

2

With powerplant failure

B

B

P

ME Only

Rejected takeoff

P

P

P

3, ME Only

Short field

P

P

P**

SE Only

Only Area departure

 

 

P*

 

IN‑FLIGHT MANEUVERS

Steep turns

P**

P**

P**

 

Approaches to stalls

B

P

P

10

Powerplant failure

P

P

P

 

2‑engine inop. approach

P

P

P

3 & 4 Eng. Aircraft

INSTRUMENT PROCEDURES

Area arrival

 

 

P*

 

Holding

 

 

P**

 

Normal ILS approach

 

L

P

4, 8

Engine‑out ILS

 

P

P

8, ME Only

Coupled approach

 

P

P

4, 8

Nonprecision approach

 

B

P

11

Second nonprecision approach

 

 

P

11

Missed approach from an ILS

 

 

P

 

Second missed approach

 

 

P

 

Circling approach

 

 

P

13

LANDINGS AND APPROACHES TO LANDINGS

Normal

B

B

P

12

Crosswind

B

B

P

5

Landing from an ILS

 

 

P

 

Landing with engine‑out

B

B

P

ME Only

Circling approach

 

 

P

13

Rejected landing

 

 

P

 

2‑engine inop. landing

P

P

P

3 & 4 Eng. Aircraft

Short Field landing

P

P

P

SE

Only No Flap approach

P

P

P

6, 14

SEA & SKI OPERATIONS

(If applicable) Normal TO & Landing

B

B

P

 

Step Turns

P **

P **

P **

 

Glassy & Rough Water

P **

P **

P **

 

Sailing

P **

P **

P **

 

Docking

P **

P **

P **

 

NONNORMAL AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

System Malfunction

B

B

P

#

Maneuver by Partial Panel

B

B

P

9

Unusual attitude Rec.

B

B

P

 

Emergency Landing

B

B

P

SE Only

Instrument Approach

B

 

 

7

NOTES TO TABLE “PART 135 CHECKING MODULES AIRPLANES”

P

PIC.

B

Both the PIC and SIC.

#

Both PIC and SIC may be evaluated performing their assigned duties in these events simultaneously when the check pilot is not seated at the controls.

*

May be waved at the discretion of the POI and the check airman when the check is not simultaneously conducted for certification. (Refer to volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.)

**

May be waived at the discretion of the POI and the check airman when the check is not conducted in conjunction with initial new‑hire or initial equipment training.

1

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

2

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

3

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

4

The applicant must demonstrate the ability to use all installed equipment including autopilots and flight directors. In multiengine airplanes, an engine out ILS may be substituted for the normal ILS at the option of the inspector or check airman administering the check.

5

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

6

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

7

POIs must ensure applicants accomplish this event in an aircraft the operator uses in revenue operations (or in an appropriately equipped simulator or training device.) The event should reflect a realistic course of action the pilot might take to escape from an inadvertent encounter with IFR conditions. POIs should approve methods appropriate to the aircraft, equipment, and facilities available. When the pilot is authorized to operate an appropriately equipped aircraft and the check is conducted at a location where an ILS is operational, demonstrate an ILS approach. POIs may also approve a letdown on partial panel when this would be an appropriate course of action.

8

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

9

Airplanes not having standby instrumentation.

10

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

11

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2. Any two nonprecision approaches authorized by the OpSpecs may be accomplished at the discretion of the inspector or check airman conducting the check.

12

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 2.

13

SICs need not be evaluated in circling approaches when the operator’s procedures restrict SICs from conducting this event in revenue service.

14

Required only for transport, commuter, turboprop, and Special Federal Aviation Regulations aircraft families as described in volume 3, chapter 19, section 1.

Table 3‑71, Part 135 Checking Modules—Helicopters

EVENTS

VFR COMP.

IFR COMP.

INST. PROF.

NVED/

NVG

NOTES

WRITTEN OR ORAL TEST

Section 135.297

 

 

P

 

 

Section 135.293

B

B

 

B

 

GROUND OPERATIONS

Preflight Inspection

B

B

P

B

#

Start Procedures

B

B

P

B

#

Taxiing and Ground Hover

B

B

P

B

#

Pretakeoff checks

B

B

P

B

#

TAKEOFF AND DEPARTURES

Normal

B

B

P

B

12

Instrument

 

P

P

 

1

With powerplant failure

B

B

P

B

ME Only, 12

Rapid Deceleration

P

P

P

B

2, 12

Area departure

 

 

P **

 

 

IN‑FLIGHT MANEUVERS

Steep turns

 

 

P **

 

 

Settling with power

B

B

P

 

 

Unusual Attitude Recovery

B

B

P

B

4

INSTRUMENT PROCEDURES

Area arrival

 

 

P **

 

 

Holding

 

 

P **

 

 

Normal ILS approach

 

B

P

 

3,5

Engine‑out ILS

 

P

P

 

5, ME Only

Coupled approach

 

P

P

 

3, 5

Nonprecision approach

 

B

P

 

7

Second nonprecision approach

 

 

P

 

7

Missed approach from an ILS

 

 

P

 

 

Second missed approach

 

 

P

 

 

Circling approach

 

 

P

 

9

LANDINGS AND APPROACHES TO LANDINGS

Normal

 

B

 

B

 

P

B

 

8, 12

Landing from an ILS

 

 

P

 

 

Landing with engine‑out

B

B

P

B

ME Only, 12

Circling approach

 

 

P

 

9

SEA & SKI OPERATIONS (If applicable)

Normal TO & Landing

 

B

 

B

 

P

 

B

 

12

NONNORMAL AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

System Malfunction

 

B

 

B

 

P

 

B *

 

#

Recovery from IMC

B

B

B

B

4

Maneuver by Partial Panel

B

B

P

 

6

Instrument Approach

B

B

P

 

4

Power failure and Autorotation

to a power recovery

B

B

P

B

SE Only

Hovering Autorotations

B

B

P

B

SE Only, 12

Tail Rotor Failure

B

B

P

 

Oral Only

Dynamic Rollover

B

B

P

 

Oral Only

Low Rotor RPM

B

B

P

 

Oral Only

Anti‑Torque System Failure

B

B

P

 

Oral Only

Confined Area/Pinnacle Operations

P

 

P

B

 

10, 12

Slope Operations

P

 

P

B

12

NOTES TO THE TABLE “PART 135 CHECKING MODULES HELICOPTERS”

#

Both PIC and SIC may be evaluated performing their assigned duties in these events simultaneously when the check pilot is not seated at the controls.

*

This will include a simulated night vision goggle (NVG) failure with appropriate recovery procedures.

**

May be waived at the discretion of the POI and the check airman when the check is not conducted in conjunction with initial new‑hire or initial equipment training.

***

This maneuver is only required if the certificate holder is operating under 14 CFR part 121. This maneuver may be waived at the discretion of the POI and check airman when the check is not conducted in conjunction with initial new‑hire or initial equipment training. Initial night vision enhancement device (NVED)/NVG training does not require this maneuver to be demonstrated or performed.

1

See Volume 5, Chapter 3, Section 5, Oral and Flight Test Events in Helicopters for ATP Applicants Engaged in Operations Under Title 14 CFR Part 121, 135, or 91 Subpart K.

2

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 5.

3

The applicant must demonstrate the ability to use all installed equipment including autopilots and flight directors. In multiengine helicopters, an engine out ILS may be substituted for the normal ILS at the option of the inspector or check airman administering the check.

4

The event should reflect a realistic course of action the pilot might take to escape from an encounter with inadvertent instrument meteorological conditions. POIs should approve methods appropriate to the aircraft, equipment, and facilities available. Training and checking must provide emphasis on avoidance of inadvertent IFR, including the discipline and decisionmaking required to divert, make a precautionary landing, or make an emergency transition to IFR, as appropriate to the circumstances. This event must include attitude instrument flying, recovery from unusual attitudes, navigation, ATC communications, and at least one instrument approach. If the aircraft is appropriately equipped and the check is conducted at a location where an ILS is operational, demonstrate an ILS approach. If unable to conduct an ILS approach, if the aircraft is equipped with an IFR approach capable GPS receiver, and the operator maintains their GPS to IFR standards, including a current IFR database, and the check conducted where a GPS approach is available, demonstrate a GPS approach. If neither an ILS nor GPS procedures can be performed, another instrument approach must be performed. Partial panel operations should be considered if attitude and gyroscopic heading information are available from single sources.

5

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 5.

6

Helicopters not having standby instrumentation.

7

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 5. Any two nonprecision approaches authorized by the OpSpecs may be accomplished at the discretion of the inspector or check airman conducting the check.

8

See volume 5, chapter 3, section 5.

9

SICs need not be evaluated in circling approaches when the operator’s procedures restrict SICs from conducting this event in revenue service.

10

Evaluate flight maneuver in aircraft with trained observer/crewmember wearing NVEDs if required by the supplemental type certificate. The evaluator will observe crew resource management between the pilot and the observer/crewmember.

11

The accomplishment of the NVG check does not meet the requirements of a § 135.293 “A” and “B” check, unless all requirements for VFR and IFR (competency check), if required, are completed.

12

For NVED/NVG checks, these maneuvers are not required if the NVG RFM Supplement does not authorize takeoffs and landings or operations below 100 feet AGL using NVGs.

3-1280CREDIT FOR CERTIFICATION FLIGHT CHECKS.

A.     When a flight check is conducted for an ATPC or for an additional type rating to an ATPC, the certification flight check, if conducted in accordance with the applicable air carrier’s program, may simultaneously be credited for a part 121 proficiency check, a part 135 competency check, or a part 135 instrument proficiency check, as applicable.

B.     The certification flight test for a FE certificate or class rating simultaneously satisfies the part 121 proficiency check requirement.

3‑1281 CONDUCT OF PROFICIENCY AND COMPETENCY CHECKS. Specific direction and guidance for the conduct of certification flight tests is in Volume 5, Airman Certification, chapters 1, 3, and 4. The same standards and direction and guidance are applicable to both inspectors and check airmen when conducting proficiency checks, VFR competency checks, and IFR competency checks. POIs must evaluate the operator’s check airman program to ensure that check airmen are applying the same standards and are adhering to the direction and guidance for proficiency and competency checks that is applicable to certification flight checks.

A.     Waiving of Events. Inspectors and check airmen may waive those events indicated by an asterisk in Figures 3‑80 and 3‑81, and Tables 3‑70, and 3‑71. This provision applies to all checks conducted under part 121 and those part 135 checks which do not involve certification. The waiver provisions of part 61, appendix A apply only to airmen employed by part 121 operators (see part 61, § 61.157(c)).

1)      The use of waiver authority is not automatic. Check airmen are cautioned to exercise judgment in the use of this authority. When an applicant demonstrates a high level of performance, check airmen should make liberal use of the waiver authority. When an applicant’s performance only approaches the minimum acceptable standards, however, none of the events of the flight test should be waived.
2)      Inspectors and check airmen are cautioned that some waiver provisions apply to portions of an event rather than to a whole event (for example, the stall series). Other events have specific conditions which must be fully met before waiver authority may be exercised (for example, the second nonprecision approach). See the discussion of the conditions and limitations of waiver authority and the guidance on acceptable means and standards for conducting specific checking events in Volume 5, Chapter 3, Section 2, Flight Test Events in Airplanes ATP Applicants Engaged in Operations Under Title 14 CFR Part 121, 135, or 91 Subpart K.
3)      Part 121, appendix F contains certain restrictions on waiving events. For example, when a circling approach is required but cannot be accomplished due to traffic or other reasons, it may be waived. Circling approaches, however, may not be waived for two successive checks. POIs will observe these same provisions for part 135 operators under the Administrator’s authority to determine the content of part 135 checks.

B.     Training to Proficiency. When a check airman determines that an event is unsatisfactory, the check airman may conduct training and repeat the testing of that event. This provision is made in the interest of fairness and to avoid undue hardship and expense for airmen and operators. Training may not be conducted, however, without recording the failure of these events. The quality control of a training program is accomplished, among other means, by identifying those events on checks which crewmembers fail. POIs must ensure the following guidance is supplied to operators and check airmen concerning the practice of training to proficiency:

1)      Training and checking cannot be conducted simultaneously. When training is required, the check must be temporarily suspended, training conducted, and then the check resumed.
2)      When training to proficiency is required, the check airman must record the events which were initially failed and in which training was given.
3)      When training to proficiency is conducted and the check is subsequently completed within the original session, the overall grade for the check may be recorded as satisfactory. When the training required to reach proficiency cannot be completed in the original checking session, the check must be recorded as unsatisfactory and the crewmember entered into requalification training.
4)      When training to proficiency is required and it is practical to do so, the remaining events of the flight test phase should be completed before training in the failed event is conducted. If it is more practical, the failed event may be repeated at the end of a logical sequence. For example, training on a stall might be conducted at altitude after all other air work has been completed, but before returning to the traffic pattern.
5)      If, after having received training, the airman fails an event again, the failure must be recorded, and the crewmember must be entered into requalification training.

If for mechanical or other reasons the check cannot be completed after the failure of an event and before training and retesting can be accomplished, the check is considered terminated; however, the crewmember may not serve in revenue operations until the check is successfully completed.

3‑1282   USE OF FLIGHT TRAINING DEVICES AND SIMULATORS FOR PROFICIENCY AND COMPETENCY CHECKS. The guidance of this paragraph applies to the use of flight training devices and simulators in conducting either part 121 proficiency checks or part 135 competency and instrument proficiency checks. The level of flight training device or flight simulator that can be used for any particular flight test event in these checks depends on the crewmember’s duty position and on the category of training. The maneuvers and procedures tables along with the introductory information in paragraphs 3‑1245 through 3‑1251 of the previous section of this chapter specify the minimum level of flight training device or simulator that can be used for a particular training event. This minimum level is also the level that can be used to test the event during a proficiency or competency check. Before beginning a proficiency or competency check, inspectors and check airmen must determine which flight test events can be conducted in the flight-training device or simulator to be used.

3‑1283   THE OPERATING EXPERIENCE (OE) QUALIFICATION MODULE. PICs and SICs in part 121 operations who have been trained under an initial new hire, initial equipment, transition, or upgrade category of training, must acquire OE. Part 135 specifies that before a pilot may be assigned as a PIC in a commuter passenger carrying operation, that pilot must acquire OE in each make and basic model of aircraft in which the pilot is to serve as a PIC. The qualification curriculum segment outline that is applicable to these flight crewmember positions must list the appropriate requirements for each duty position. Both parts 121 and 135 specify the minimum flight hour requirements for these duty positions. An operator may elect to specify a greater flight hour requirement than the regulatory minimum. Inspectors must not approve any qualification curriculum segment that lists a flight hour requirement that is less than that specified by the appropriate regulation. When a pilot is actually acquiring OE, however, both part 121, § 121.434(f) and part 121, § 135.244(b)(4) provide for a reduction in the minimum flight hours. These regulations specify that the minimum hours may be reduced to 50 percent of the total required flight hours by the substitution of 1 takeoff and landing for 1 hour of flight.

A.     Part 121 Minimum OE Flight Hours.

1)      The minimum OE flight hours for pilots who have been trained under an initial new hire or an initial equipment curriculum or a PIC transition curriculum which includes training in a flight simulator under part 121, § 121.409, are as follows:

·        Group I reciprocating—15 hours,

·        Group I turbopropeller—20 hours, and

·        Group II turbojet—25 hours.

2)      Part 121, § 121.434(c)(3)(ii) specifies the minimum flight hours for pilots who have been trained under a transition curriculum which does not include an approved course of training in a flight simulator, are as follows:

·        Group I reciprocating—10 hours,

·        Group I turbopropeller—12 hours, and

·        Group II turbojet—15 hours.

3)      Although part 121 requires OE for pilots who have been trained under an upgrade curriculum, the minimum flight hours are not specified. The following minimum flight hours are recommended, however, for an SIC upgrading to PIC, and for a FE upgrading to SIC, regardless of whether or not the upgrade curriculum includes training in a flight simulator:

·        Group I reciprocating—SIC to PIC, 8 hours; FE to SIC, 15 hours,

·        Group I turbopropeller—SIC to PIC, 8 hours; FE to SIC, 15 hours, and

·        Group II turbojet—SIC to PIC, 10 hours; FE to SIC, 25 hours.

4)      In accordance with part 121, § 121.434(d), the minimum OE flight hours for FEs who have been trained under an initial new hire, initial equipment, or transition curriculum are as follows:

·        Group I reciprocating—8 hours,

·        Group I turbopropeller—10 hours, and

·        Group II turbojet—12 hours.

B.     Part 135 Minimum Flight Hours.

1)      The part 135 flight hour requirement applies only to pilots who will be assigned to serve as PIC in a commuter passenger carrying operation. In addition, the minimum OE must be acquired for each make and basic model of aircraft in which the pilot is to serve as PIC. Part 135, § 135.244 specifies that the type of engine powering the aircraft determines the minimum flight hours for commuter PICs, which are as follows:

·        Single‑engine airplanes and helicopters—10 hours,

·        Multiengine, reciprocating powered, airplanes and helicopters—15 hours,

·        Multiengine, turbine‑powered airplanes and helicopters—20 hours, and

·        Turbojet powered airplanes—25 hours.

2)      Part 135 does not require that SICs who are to serve in commuter operations acquire OE. POIs should, however, encourage part 135 commuter operators to include an OE module in their qualification curriculum segments for SICs. For example, the SIC qualification module could require the pairing of a newly trained SIC with only a highly experienced PIC for a specified number of hours or until an experienced PIC has certified that the SIC is proficient in assigned duties.

C.     Conduct of OE. All flight crewmembers must have successfully completed a flight check before starting OE, and are therefore considered to be qualified to serve in revenue operations, under the appropriate supervision. OE must be acquired while conducting revenue operations, except when the aircraft has not been previously used by the operator. In this case, the flight hours acquired while conducting proving flights, ferry flights, or training flights may be credited towards the OE requirement.

1)      A pilot in the process of acquiring OE as a PIC under the provisions of parts 121 and 135 must occupy the appropriate pilot position and perform PIC duties under the supervision of a check airman. The check airman must also occupy a pilot position. In the case of a PIC trained under a transition curriculum, however, the check airman may occupy a jump seat after the qualifying PIC has made at least two takeoffs and landings and the check airman is satisfied that the pilot candidate is competent to perform the duties of PIC. During the time that a qualifying PIC is acquiring OE, the supervising check airman should give instruction as needed and help to refine the pilot’s proficiency as a PIC. The check airman must determine when the PIC is fully proficient and ready to be administered an initial line check. If the qualifying PIC is not ready for an initial line check after the minimum flight hours have been completed, the supervision must be continued until the PIC is proficient. The check airman should not recommend an initial line check until the check airman is satisfied that the qualifying PIC is proficient. If the check airman recommends the PIC for an initial line check before the minimum flight hours are acquired, the time spent conducting the line check may be credited toward the required flight hours. In all cases, however, the qualifying PIC must acquire the minimum flight hours under the supervision of a check airman before the PIC can be released to operate unsupervised in revenue flights.
2)      A pilot in the process of acquiring OE as an SIC under the provisions of part 121 must perform the duties of an SIC in a pilot seat under the supervision of a check airman, or must observe the performance of those duties from the jump seat. The preferred method is for the qualifying SIC to occupy the appropriate pilot position and perform the duties of an SIC. It is important that operators use the preferred method for an SIC when the SIC has received all flight training and flight testing solely in a simulator or when the aircraft involved has advanced instrument displays and computer based systems. In either case, the qualifying SIC must acquire the minimum flight hours before being assigned as the required SIC in revenue operations. When an operator schedules an SIC to acquire OE by occupying the jump seat (not under the supervision of a check airman) the POI should consider special en route surveillance of that SIC after the SIC is assigned as the required SIC in revenue operations. The purpose of this special surveillance is to determine whether the operator’s training and flight-testing program sufficiently prepares SICs for line operations.
3)      A FE in the process of acquiring OE must perform the duties of a FE at the FE station under the supervision of a FE check airman or a qualified FE. In either case, the qualifying FE must acquire the minimum flight hours before being assigned as the required FE in revenue operations. When an operator schedules FEs to acquire OE under the supervision of a qualified FE who has not been trained as a check airman, the POI should consider special en route surveillance of those FEs after they are assigned as required FEs in revenue operations. The purpose of this special surveillance is to determine whether the operator’s training, flight-testing, and OE programs sufficiently prepare the FEs for line operations.

D.    OE Qualification Guides. POIs should encourage operators to develop an OE qualification guide to be used by supervisors and check airman. The purpose of the qualification guide is to ensure that a crewmember systematically gains experience in all required duties the crewmember will later be required to perform without supervision. Some of the typical experience events that might be incorporated in a qualification guide are as follows:

·        Terminal security procedures;

·        Aircraft security and anti‑hijacking procedures;

·        Weather forecasts and information sources;

·        Flight planning;

·        Dispatch procedures;

·        Cockpit setup, initialization of computers, entering present position and way points, confirming navigation set up;

·        Weight and balance computation (including last minute changes);

·        Air traffic control (ATC) flow control procedures;

·        MEL and CDL procedures;

·        Pushback and powerback procedures and limitations;

·        Procedures for fueling and confirming fuel loads;

·        Familiarity with major terminal areas;

·        Terminal and en route communications;

·        Flight progress and fuel monitoring procedures;

·        In flight weather watch; and

·        Diversion procedures.

3‑1284   THE LINE CHECK QUALIFICATION MODULE. Both parts 121 and 135 specify that before a pilot can serve as an unsupervised PIC in revenue operations, that pilot must have satisfactorily completed a line check. Except for requalification training, the qualification curriculum segment for PICs should include a line check module as a requirement for all other categories of training. Requalification training curricula that are used to requalify PICs who have been unqualified for 12 months or more should include a required PIC line check module. Both parts 121 and 135 specify that all PICs must satisfactorily complete a line check once every 12 calendar-months in at least one of the aircraft types in which the PIC is to serve. Therefore, the qualification curriculum segment for recurrent training should include a line check module for the PIC.

A.     General Direction and Guidance. Part 121 specifies that the line check is to be given by a check airman who is properly qualified in the particular airplane being used. In certain unique situations, such as when an operator is qualifying an initial cadre of check airmen, the only practical way of completing the line check requirement may be for an FAA inspector to conduct the line check and to certify to the PIC’s performance. Part 135 specifies that the line check may be given by an approved check airman or an FAA inspector. For both parts 121 and 135, the amount of time flown during a line check may be credited to the OE flight hour requirement. The line check, however, should not be conducted until the OE flight hour requirement has been substantially completed. When a PIC serves in both part 121 and 135 operations, a line check conducted in a part 121 aircraft satisfies the part 135 line check requirement. POIs should encourage operators to place emphasis on their line check programs. A well run line check program can provide detection of deficiencies and adverse trends and establish the need for a revision of old procedures or an initiation of new procedures. POIs should encourage operators to design and use line check forms to facilitate the collection of such information.

B.     Part 121 Line Checks. For part 121 operations, the line check must be conducted over at least one typical route in which the PIC may be assigned. If the typical route the PIC will be flying includes Class II navigation, the line check must be conducted on a route where Class II navigation is used. The line check may be conducted during either revenue or nonrevenue operations.

C.     Part 135 Line Checks. For part 135 operations, the line check must consist of at least one route segment over a civil airway, an approved off airway route, or a portion of either, including takeoffs and landings at one or more airports that are representative of the operator’s type of operation. In certain part 135 operations, it may not be practical to conduct a line check during revenue operations. In these cases the POI may authorize that the line check be conducted during the same flight period that the competency check is conducted. If the line check is conducted in this manner, the line check portion of this flight period must include the requirements previously discussed in this paragraph.

3‑1285   ADDITIONAL CHECKING MODULES. Additional checking modules include flight test events that must be conducted to qualify flight crewmembers for special operations, such as CAT II or CAT III instrument approach procedures. Another example of an additional checking module is the requirement that a PIC be initially qualified over a route or area requiring a special type of navigation such as INS, OMEGA, or LORAN‑C (see part 121, § 121.445(d)(2)).

A.     Additional checking modules are frequently conducted concurrently with a proficiency check, competency check, or line check.

1)      The regulations and advisory circulars (AC) require additional checks, but usually do not specify the content of these checks. Since there are often several acceptable means of conducting these checks, the additional checking module outline must specify the content of these checks (see examples in paragraph 3‑1272).
2)      When a part 121 or 135 operator chooses to conduct an additional checking module in conjunction with a basic checking module, the requirements of both modules must be accomplished. A single event may, however, be credited for both modules simultaneously. For example, an operator who conducts basic checking modules and CAT II additional checking modules at the same time may combine the ILS approach requirements. The basic checking module requires a normal ILS; a manually flown, engine out ILS; a coupled ILS; a landing from an ILS; and a missed approach from an ILS. The normal ILS and the coupled ILS may be combined in the basic checking module for a minimum of two ILS approaches. In this case, one approach must terminate in a landing and one in a missed approach. For an operator who conducts only coupled CAT II approaches, the CAT II additional checking module requires a minimum of two approaches to CAT II minimums; one approach must be to a landing and one to a missed approach. A POI may approve combining the compatible events of these two modules. In this case, the combined requirement is one engine out, manually flown ILS to CAT I minimums; one coupled, CAT II ILS to a landing, and one coupled, CAT II ILS approach to a missed approach. POIs who have concerns over what combinations are permissible should consult the regional Flight Standards division (RFSD). The RFSD should coordinate with Air Carrier Training Branch (AFS‑210) when necessary.

B.     Operators may choose to conduct additional checking modules separately from a proficiency check, a competency check, or a line check. It may be more practical to accomplish an additional flight test separately because of high minimum PIC requirements or because of pilot bidding practices for international routes. When an operator conducts separate checking modules, the operator must limit the use of flight crewmembers to those operations that do not involve the special operations until the flight crewmembers have satisfactorily completed the additional testing.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 3‑1286 through 3‑1300.

 

12/14/07                                                                                                                       8900.1 CHG 0

Volume 5  AIRMAN CERTIFICATION

chapter 5  Title 14 CFR PART 65—AIRMEN OTHER THAN FLIGHT CREWMEMBERS

Section 2  Certificate Airframe and/or Powerplant Mechanic/Added Rating

5-1131              PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODES.

A.     Maintenance. 3501, 3508.

B.     Avionics. 5501, 5508.

5-1132              OBJECTIVE. This section provides guidance for certificating applicants for mechanic certificates and ratings. All airworthiness or avionics inspectors who review these documents shall hold a mechanic certificate with both an Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) rating. Aviation safety technicians (AST) who review these documents shall hold a mechanic certificate with either an Airframe or Powerplant rating, however, review would be limited to the rating held by the authorized AST.

5-1133              JOINT SERVICES AVIATION MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN CERTIFICATION COUNCIL (JSAMTCC) AIRFRAME AND POWERPLANT (A&P) CERTIFICATION PROGRAM.

A.     A recent FAA/JSAMTCC plan provides for military applicant certification integrity by completely specifying the applicant’s military training and experience in a level of detail that exceeds the minimum standards set forth in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 65, § 65.77(b), Aviation Maintenance Technician Schools (AMTS). Furthermore, this training and/or experience must be certified by authorized persons in the applicant’s branch of service and recorded on the joint service, CG‑G‑EAE‑2 form, FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks (see Figure 5‑136). This form has been used by the U.S. Coast Guard to certify eligibility for A&P certification for many years and has now been adopted by the Department of Defense as a standard form used for personnel certification.

B.     The appropriate office in each of the joint services will then use the data on the CG‑G‑EAE‑2 to issue CG‑G‑EAE‑4 form, Certificate of Eligibility (see Figure 5‑137), to each qualifying applicant. The applicant may then present the completed Certificate of Eligibility and the FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks form to a Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) as evidence that he/she qualifies for testing authorization under § 65.77. This certificate will serve the same qualification function as a Certificate of Completion or Graduation from a part 147 AMTS.

C.     The Aircraft Maintenance Division, AFS‑300, formally recognizes the JSAMTCC as the functional advisory body to each respective United States Military Service’s Aviation Maintenance Division and the FAA.

1)      The military services and JSAMTCC remain primarily responsible for the integrity of the program within the referenced JSAMTCC Policy and Procedures Manual (PPM).
2)      The JSAMTCC developed the PPM in cooperation with AFS‑300 to ensure the contained procedures are well defined and adhered to by all branches of service.
3)      Changes to the JSAMTCC PPM are subject to acceptance by the Manager, AFS‑300, and oversight of the program shall be maintained at that level.
4)      AFS‑300 has assigned a program manager to act as FAA liaison to the JSAMTCC and coordinate oversight and review any changes to the program.

NOTE: Military applicants that have not completed the JSAMTCC program may still be evaluated for authorization to take the mechanic knowledge test based on documented experience and MOS or AFSC codes, as authorized in § 65.77

5-1134              ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. Applicants for a mechanic certificate must meet the requirements of 14 CFR part 65, subparts A and D. (For the certification of foreign applicants physically located outside the United States as per § 65.3, see Volume 5, Chapter 5, Section 3, Certificate Foreign Applicants Located Outside the United States for Part 65 Mechanic Certificates/Ratings).

A.     All applicants must be at least 18 years of age. An applicant under 18 may take the tests, but no mechanic certificate will be issued until the applicant’s 18th birthday.

B.     All applicants must be able to read, write, speak, and understand English. See the current version of Advisory Circular (AC) 60‑28, English Language Skill Standards Required by 14 CFR parts 61, 63, and 65, which states for all certification testing, the applicant will be required to read a section of a technical manual, and then write and explain their interpretation of the reading. (An appropriate technical manual in this sense means an airplane flight manual, maintenance manual, or other publication as appropriate for the certificate or rating sought.)

C.     Once the tests have begun, applicants must pass all the required tests within a 24‑month period.

5-1135              EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS. Section 65.77 requires the applicant to have documented practical experience in maintaining airframes and/or powerplants. At least 18 months of practical experience is required for the appropriate rating requested. For a certificate with both ratings, the requirement is for at least 30 months experience concurrently performing the duties appropriate to both ratings. If the 30 months concurrently performing the duties appropriate to both ratings has not been met, then calculate each rating separately using the 18‑month requirement for each.

A.     The practical experience must provide the applicant with basic knowledge of and skills with the procedures, practices, materials, tools, machine tools, and equipment used in aircraft construction, alteration, maintenance, and inspection.

B.     With exception to the JSAMTCC A&P certification program experience gained from the military, work as an airframe or powerplant mechanic or work on an experimental amateur‑built aircraft will be evaluated on its own merits to determine whether it fulfills the experience requirements. When evaluating military experience, aviation safety inspector’s (ASI) and ASTs are not to accept military occupational specialty (MOS) or Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSC) “carte blanche” as qualifications to accepting experience of § 65.77. Even though the MOS suggest authorization for either the airframe, powerplant, or both the A&P certificates, the inspector will only endorse FAA Form 8610‑2, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application, after ensuring, by a thorough interview and detailed review of records, that the person qualifies under § 65.77.

C.     An applicant is not expected to be highly proficient in overhauls, major repairs, or major alterations in the minimum 18 months experience.

D.    Powerplant tests will include questions and projects on propellers that must be completed successfully regardless of the applicant’s experience.

E.     In evaluating documented part‑time practical aviation mechanic experience, an equivalent of 18 months (or 30 months) based on a standard 40‑hour workweek is acceptable. The months need not be consecutive. A standard workweek has 8 hours per day for 5 days per week, thus totaling 40 hours per week and approximately 160 hours per month.

F.      For foreign applicants located in the United States, all of the requirements for a citizen of the United States apply. This includes applicants who come to the United States just to take the mechanic test. For those located outside the United States, refer to volume 5, chapter 5, section 3. The following are types of documents that will be acceptable to establish the required record of time and experience:

1)      A detailed original statement from a foreign airworthiness authority of the country in which the experience was gained.
2)      A detailed statement from an advisor of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) that will validate the applicant’s experience.
3)      If the foreign civil authority refuses to provide this information, the inspector will take appropriate action to determine that the experience is valid.

NOTE: Appropriate action is whatever the inspector deems appropriate to determine that the experience is valid, i.e., review supporting documentation presented to satisfy authorization, without expending an excessive amount of time or resources on behalf of the applicant.

4)      Foreign military experience is considered acceptable experience towards authorization to take the knowledge test based on the context of § 65.77. The applicant must present verifiable documentation from the foreign military or government substantiating the military work experience. Review the current version of AC 65‑11, Airframe and Power Plant Mechanics Certification Information, for guidance.

NOTE: If the applicant shows only foreign military work experience on aircraft that are not manufactured to U.S. standards, that is not an issue; the experience still has to meet the requirements of § 65.77.

G.    Applicants who have not graduated from an FAA‑approved AMTS or JSAMTCC A&P certification program must present documents from an employer, co‑worker, or other sources satisfactory to the Administrator to establish the required record of time and experience.

1)      Applicants will document a proportionate amount of experience directly applicable to the certificate and ratings sought. The applicant must have verifiable experience in 50 percent of the subject areas listed for the rating sought (see 14 CFR part 147, appendices B, C, and D) in order to be eligible.
2)      The FAA inspector must evaluate the documents submitted to determine the applicants’ eligibility for a test authorization.
3)      There is no expiration for this eligibility.

H.    Applicants who have not graduated from an FAA‑approved AMTS or JSAMTCC A&P certification program and are applying based on military experience must prove that their military aviation experience, gained in 50 percent of subject areas, meets the requirements of part 147.

1)      To help speed the review process, the applicant may supply the following documentation to the FAA:
a)      A positive form of picture identification, such as a driver’s license, passport, or military I.D.
b)      A properly completed Form DD‑214, which lists the total time in service and the MOS codes the applicant was assigned (for current MOS codes, see Figure 5‑135).
c)      A letter from the applicant’s executive officer, maintenance officer, or classification officer that certifies the applicant’s length of military service, the amount of time the applicant worked in each MOS, the make and model of aircraft and/or engine on which the applicant acquired the practical experience, and where the experience was obtained.
d)      Training records showing the type of aviation schools the applicant attended and/or a record of on‑the‑job training. Active duty Air Force, selective guard, and reserve are eligible for a transcript.
2)      Time spent in training or in a MOS for supervision and/or inspection will not be counted toward the 18 or 30 months of practical experience required in § 65.77. Only actual hands‑on experience is acceptable.
3)      The JSAMTCC A&P certification program permits military applicants to be granted authorization to take the Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) Knowledge Test upon presentation of a military Certificate of Eligibility (see Figure 5‑137), and a Certification Performance of Job Tasks form (see Figure 5‑136).
4)      As required by the JSAMTCC A&P certification program process, military technicians will be provided with an individual FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks by their branch of service. Upon the completion of the program and validation of all signed tasks, an official Certificate of Eligibility will be issued by the participant’s branch of service along with a signed copy of the FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks.

NOTE:  Individuals issued a Certificate of Eligibility by the military may be
verified through the SGL Inspector online database at the following address:

http://av-info.avr.faa.gov/SGLInspector/InspectorLoginList.asp. By utilizing the Advanced Search feature on the Web site, ASIs can access individuals by name or
issue control number as shown on their Certificate of Eligibility prior to authorization
in Block V of FAA Form 8610.2, Mechanics Certificate and/ or Rating Application.

5)      Sample copies of the FAA Certification and Performance of Job Task and the Certificate of Eligibility are located in Figures 5‑136 and 5‑137, respectively. On the certificate, the seal affixed in the lower right corner is gold in color and carries a raised embossed stamp from the applicant’s training organization.
6)      The military experience must be directly applicable to the certificate and ratings sought.
7)      There is no expiration for this eligibility.
8)      Applicants must be advised that the authorization to test is only valid for testing by Designated Mechanic Examiners (DME) who exercise privileges within the geographic area served by the FSDO where the authorization is granted. Should the applicant wish to test with a DME in another district, additional FAA approval will be required. The DME must gain permission from their FSDO/international field office by any written means to conduct a test for an applicant authorized in block 5 from an inspector from another geographical location.

5-1136              ORAL AND PRACTICAL SKILL TEST PREREQUISITES. Applicants for a mechanic certificate and/or added rating(s) must meet the applicable knowledge and skill test requirements of part 65, § 65.79.

A.     Applicants for the oral and practical tests must present a valid airman test report (with raised, embossed seal) from a computer test center to show proof of successful completion of all sections of the knowledge test. Part 65, § 65.71 (a)(3) and (b) require that all of the prescribed tests, which include the knowledge, oral, and practical skill tests, be passed within a 24‑month period.

1)      Graduates of an approved part 147 AMTS must complete two (2) originals of FAA Form 8610‑2 when applying for oral and practical tests.
2)      Individuals applying based on civilian or military experience must present two (2) originals of FAA Form 8610‑2, at the district office. Sections I, II, and III must be completed. Section IV must be signed and dated by the applicant. Section V must be signed and dated by an airworthiness aviation safety inspector (ASI) who holds a mechanic certificate with an A&P.

B.     Per part 65, § 65.80, when an AMTS student certificated under part 147 shows an FAA inspector that he/she has made satisfactory progress at the school and is prepared to take the oral and practical tests prescribed by § 65.79, that student may take those tests during the final subjects of his/her training.

1)      The AMTS must show that a student is in the final phase of training, has made satisfactory progress, and is prepared for the test. The authorized school official will complete section II E (1) and (2) of FAA Form 8610‑2 before the oral and practical tests are administered. The reviewing ASI in the district office will fill out Section II F (1) through (4), ensuring that the expiration date is not later than the anticipated graduation date as shown in Section II D (4).
2)      In completing FAA Form 8610‑2, the student will show the school’s name and location, school certificate number, the student’s curriculum, and the expected graduation date.
3)      After completion of the FAA Form 8610‑2, ensure that the “Remarks” section on the reverse side of the application indicates the airman’s identification, i.e. driver’s license number and expiration date. Verify that the DME has completed the “Results of Oral and Practical Tests” and the “Designated Examiner’s Report” portions, accordingly. Verify that the “FAA Inspector’s Report” has been completed in its entirety to include approval date, signature, and the FAA district office number.

NOTE: Applications made under § 65.80, “hold for age,” and disapproved applications are required to be reviewed by the district office. These applications must have the “FAA Inspector’s Report” portion completed.

5-1137              ORAL AND PRACTICAL SKILL TEST ADMINISTRATION.

A.     FAA Order 8610.4, Aviation Mechanic Examiner Handbook, provides standardized procedures for conducting and processing mechanic oral and practical tests. Inspectors and examiners conducting the tests must use this handbook to ensure a satisfactory standard of competency by applicants for mechanic certificates.

B.     The only acceptable evidence of having passed a required oral or practical test is FAA Form 8610‑2. In the “Results of Oral and Practical Tests” portion on the reverse side, the form must indicate either that the applicant has passed, with an expiration date, or that the applicant has failed, listing the questions and/or projects failed.

C.     An applicant for a retest must first present a valid airman test report (with raised, embossed seal) from a computer test center, two (2) newly completed FAA Forms 8610‑2, and the failed FAA Form 8610‑2. If less than 30 days have passed since the last test, the applicant must present a letter from an appropriate source indicating additional instruction received in each subject previously failed. The letter of additional instruction should mention the minimum requirements for the person providing the training. That person must hold an airman certificate with at least the rating the applicant is testing for. The retest must cover all subject areas in the failed, incomplete, or expired section. However, applicants who apply for retest within 60 days to the same DME who gave the failed test may, at the option of the DME, be tested only in the subject areas failed, not completed, or that have expired.

D.    Applicants for additional rating(s) who have passed the General section of the test need not retake the General section. Proof that the General section has been passed may be in the form of a current mechanic certificate or FAA Form 8610‑2 indicating that section had previously been passed.

5-1138              CHANGE OF ADDRESS/‌NAME/‌GENDER/‌NATIONALITY/‌DATE OF BIRTH.

NOTE: For changes to the name, gender, nationality and birth date on an airman certificate, FAA Form 8610‑2 must be used. On the form, Section I; Section II; the “FAA Inspector’s Report” portion (with the “approved” box marked, and date, signature, and FAA district office number included); and the method of ID shown in the “Remarks” section on the reverse side of the application, must be completed. The date the inspector signed the “Inspector’s Report” will be the same date shown on the temporary certificate.

A.     Change of Address. The holder of an airman certificate issued under part 65 must notify the FAA in writing within 30 days after any change in permanent mailing address. The change of address may be submitted by using AC Form 8060‑55, Change of Address, by letter or through the online services on the Airmen Certification Branch website. Ensure a map or directions are furnished if a personal mailbox, post office box or rural route is used.

B.      Change of Name. The application for change of name on a certificate must be made in person at a FSDO.

1)      The application is made by completing FAA Form 8610‑2 as specified in the note under paragraph 5‑1138. The application package should be accompanied by appropriate documents verifying the change, such as court order stating name or gender change, copy of marriage license, divorce decree, birth certificate, or other state‑approved document upholding the name change. Each document must conform to the laws of the state of residence.
2)      The applicant’s current certificate should accompany the application. The applicant will be issued a temporary certificate to use while awaiting the changes.

C.     Change of Gender. Application for a change of gender on a certificate must be made in person at a FSDO.

1)      Application is made by completing FAA Form 8610‑2 as specified in the note under paragraph 5‑1138. The application package should include a court order issued by a court of the United States or its territories stating that the applicant has changed his/her gender, or a statement from a physician or clinical psychologist treating the applicant that contains:
a)      Identification of the applicant by name and address, or
b)      Verification that the applicant is undergoing treatment that has altered or will alter the applicant’s gender.
2)      The applicant’s current certificate should accompany the application. The applicant will be issued a temporary certificate to use while awaiting the changes.

D.    Change of Nationality. Application for a change of nationality on a certificate must be made in person at a FSDO.

1)      Application is made by completing FAA Form 8610‑2 as stated in the note under paragraph 5‑1138. The application package should include the name and location of the court, the date of naturalization, and the docket number. Under no circumstances should the Naturalization papers be copied. In the case of a new rating, a new application is required.
2)      The applicant’s current certificate should accompany the application. The applicant will be issued a temporary certificate to use while awaiting the changes.

E.     Change Date of Birth. Application for a change of birth must be made in person at a FSDO.

1)      Application is made by completing FAA Form 8610‑2 as specified in the note under paragraph 5‑1138. The application package should include appropriate documents verifying the change, such as a birth certificate or other legal document that verifies the date of birth change.
2)      The applicant’s current certificate should accompany the application. The applicant will be issued a temporary certificate to use while awaiting the changes.

F.      Replacement of Certificate. An application for a replacement certificate must be in the form of a letter to the Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Airman Certification Branch, P.O. Box 25802, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125. The letter must be signed, dated, and:

1)      Contain the name in which the certificate was issued, the permanent mailing address (including zip code), social security number (if any), date and place of birth of the certificate holder, and any available information regarding the grade, number, and date of issue of the certificate and the ratings on it; and
2)      Be accompanied by a check or money order made payable to the FAA. The fee for a replacement airman certificate is $2.00 for each certificate being reissued.

NOTE: Aeronautical Circular (AC) Form 8060‑55, AC Form 8060‑56, Application for Replacement of Lost of Destroyed Airman Certificate(s) as well as an Application for Replacement of Lost or Destroyed Knowledge Test Reports(s), and other certification resources including Airmen Certification’s Online Services are available at http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/airmen_certification.

5-1139              FALSIFICATION, FRAUDULENT REPRODUCTION, OR ALTERATION OF DOCUMENTS. Persons who falsify, fraudulently reproduce, or alter certificates or other documents required to support the issuance of a certificate are subject to suspension or revocation of any airman or ground instructor certificate held by that person. Applicants should also be reminded that Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C.) § 1001 applies, which states that whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or devise a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or entries, shall be fined under 18 U.S.C. or imprisoned, or both.

5-1140              INELIGIBLE APPLICANTS.

A.     An airman whose mechanic certificate is suspended or revoked may not apply for another rating during the period of suspension/revocation. The inspector must review the suspension/revocation order, which will specify any unique terms regarding its duration. An airman whose mechanic certificate is revoked may not reapply for that certificate for a period of up to one year after the date of revocation. The inspector must review the revocation order if that applicant attempts to apply before one year has expired.

B.     Part 65, § 65.12(a) and (b) are grounds for denial of application of a certificate to any person convicted of a drug‑related offense within the previous 12 months.

NOTE: Although § 65.12 is titled Offenses Involving Alcohol or Drugs, General Counsel has determined that § 65.12 does not cover alcohol‑related convictions.

NOTE: A conviction that is under legal appeal is not considered a final conviction.

5-1141              COMPETENCY EXAMINATIONS/ REEXAMINATIONS. Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.), § 44709 (formerly Section 609 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958) provides for reexamination.

A.     An airman demonstrating questionable competency while exercising the privileges of the certificate and ratings may be reexamined.

1)      Inspectors must consider airman competency as a factor in the following:

·        Complaint investigations;

·        Surveillance;

·        Unairworthy aircraft notice issuance;

·        Incident investigations;

·        Accident investigations;

·        Enforcement investigations; and

·        Hearings, both formal and informal.

2)      Questions of airman competency may arise from any source.

B.     Based on the results of a reexamination, the FAA must approve, amend, suspend, or revoke the airman’s certificate.

5-1142              PREREQUISITES AND COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS.

A.     Prerequisites. Knowledge of the regulatory requirements of part 65.

B.     Coordination. None.

5-1143              REFERENCES, FORMS, AND JOB AIDS.

A.     References (current editions):

·        Volume 5, Chapter 5, Section 2;

·        FAA Order 8080.6, Conduct of Airman Knowledge Tests;

·        FAA Order 8610.4, Aviation Mechanic Examiner Handbook;

·        AC 60‑28, English Language Skill Standards Required by 14 CFR Parts 61, 63, and 65; and

·        AC 65‑2D, Airframe and Powerplant Mechanics Certification Guide.

B.     Forms:

·        FAA Form 8610‑2, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application;

·        FAA Form 8060‑4, Temporary Airman Certificate;

·        Aeronautical Center Form, AC 8060‑55, Change of Address Notification (Airmen Certificate Holder);

·        Aeronautical Center Form, AC 8060‑56, Application for Replacement of Lost Destroyed, or Paper Airman Certificate(s);

·        Application for Replacement of Lost or Destroyed Knowledge Test Report(s); and

·        Computer Airman Test Report (with raised embossed seal).

C.     Job Aids:

·        JTA: M3.1.22;

·        Figure 5‑135, Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) Codes;

·        Figure 5‑136, FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks; and

·        Figure 5‑137, Certificate of Eligibility.

5-1144              PROCEDURES.

A.     Review Application. The ASI will check the VIS and PTRS system to determine the status of any existing certificates and to determine if the applicant has made previous attempts to obtain authorization for testing. If the PTRS indicates that the applicant may have been previously denied due to lack of qualification or knowledge, then further research should be performed prior to issuing an authorization. The results of the research should be entered in the PTRS comments section when the authorization or denial is recorded.

1)      If the applicant has previously held or currently holds an airman’s certificate, check the Vital Information Subsystem (VIS). Obtain a copy of any suspension/revocation order for review. If the applicant is ineligible for a certificate/rating, return the application and take enforcement action under part 65, § 65.20, if appropriate.
2)      If the applicant is eligible, proceed with the certification.

B.     Ensure that the Applicant Meets Requirements for Certificate/Rating.

1)      Ensure that the applicant has met the experience requirements. If the applicant is eligible for only one rating, ensure that FAA Form 8610‑2 has a line through the rating for which the applicant is not eligible.

NOTE: See FAA Order 8610.4, appendix 1, for examples of completed FAA Form 8610‑2.

2)      Determine if the applicant can read, write, speak, and understand English (see 14 CFR part 61 rewrite, effective 8/4/97).
3)      Verify that the applicant is at least 18 years old. If the applicant is under 18, explain that no certificate will be issued until the applicant’s 18th birthday.
4)      The following tasks must be completed at the field office:
a)      The applicant must present the Certificate of Eligibility, CG‑G‑EAE‑4 (Figure 5‑137), photo identification, and FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks, Form CG‑G‑EAE‑2 (Figure 5‑136). The inspector is not required to review or match MOS codes to the applicant’s documentation.
b)      An Airworthiness or Avionics ASI who holds a mechanic certificate with an A&P rating will review the submitted items.
c)      Applicants must complete two original copies of FAA Form 8610‑2 with Sections I, II, III, and IV filled out.

NOTE: Applicants applying based on civil experience must complete Section III B. Applicants applying based on military experience must complete Section III A and B. Section III should reflect completion of the FAA/Military Certification of Performance of Job Tasks program along with the issuance control number as recorded on the applicant’s Certificate of Eligibility Form CG‑G‑EAE‑4. In addition, the applicant must also list his or her total length of military service.

5)      The inspector will complete the following tasks:
a)      Return original to the applicant.
b)      Sign Section V of FAA Form 8610‑2.
c)      Enter PTRS Code “3501”.

NOTE: Military applicants may still be evaluated for authorization to take the mechanic knowledge test based on documented experience and MOS codes, as authorized in § 65.77.

C.     Ensure that the Application for Oral and Practical Tests Includes Proof of Successful Completion of Applicable Knowledge Tests. Review appropriate airman test report to ensure that all appropriate sections of the knowledge test have been passed within a 24‑month period.

D.    Ensure that Oral and Practical Tests are Administered and Passed. If necessary, administer these tests to the applicant according to FAA Order 8610.4.

E.     Review Oral and Practical Test Results. Verify that all applicable sections have been successfully completed within a 24‑month period.

F.      Verify Completed “Inspector’s Report.” After verifying all information previously mentioned, ensure the “Inspector’s Report” has been completed. Check the appropriate boxes, sign, date and include the FAA district office number. The “approved” box need only be marked if the Inspector is the one issuing the temporary certificate.

G.    Emergency Replacement Certificates. In an emergency, a Temporary Airman Certificate may be issued to replace a lost or destroyed certificate.

1)      The following conditions must be met before issuing an emergency replacement certificate:
a)      The mechanic must show that an immediate replacement of the lost or destroyed certificate is necessary to start or continue employment.
b)      The mechanic must show that it is not possible or feasible to obtain a faxed temporary authority from Airmen Certification Branch, AFS‑760. An online request for temporary fax authority can be obtained at http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/airmen_certification.
c)      The mechanic either must be known personally to the inspector or must present, in person, acceptable evidence of identity.
d)      Contact AFS‑760 to confirm the validity and ratings of the lost or destroyed certificate.
2)      The temporary certificate issued will be marked clearly “EMERGENCY FIELD ISSUANCE” and be limited to the reasonable time necessary for the mechanic to obtain a duplicate certificate from AFS‑760. In no case will the temporary certificate be issued for more than 60 days. Copies of Emergency Field Issuance temporary certificates are maintained at the FSDO level. No application will be sent to AFS‑760.
3)       An expired temporary certificate may be reissued provided the inspector contacts AFS‑760 to determine why a permanent certificate has not been issued.

5-1145              TASK OUTCOMES.

A.     Complete the PTRS Record.

B.     Issue a Certificate/Added Rating in Accordance With Instructions in Order 8610.4.

1)      After the applicant has met all the requirements for the certificate/rating successfully, issue FAA Form 8060‑4. This form must be either typewritten or filled out in ink and signed by the issuing official and the applicant.
a)       No original airman certificates will be issued with the social security number (SSN) of the applicant as the certificate number. The applicant may still supply their SSN on the application, but it will not be used as the certificate number on the temporary airman certificate. This has been in effect since June 1, 2002. The word “pending” will always be used in the “Certificate Number” block on the temporary airman certificate.
b)      Examiners and Inspectors should issue and handle FAA Form 8060‑4 as follows:

1.      No person other than a Flight Standards Inspector of the Federal Aviation Administration or properly designated examiner may issue these forms.

2.      No FAA Form 8060‑4 is to be issued unless an inspector or an authorized designated examiner has signed it.

3.      When an applicant has accomplished the prescribed examinations, the examining official will prepare FAA Form 8060‑4 in duplicate with the applicant’s name and address plainly typed or printed with ballpoint pen, and sign his name in the appropriate space provided. The examiner will also insert his or her designation number in the space provided.

4.      Ensure that the duplicate copy given to the applicant is legible.

5.      Enter the word PENDING in the certificate number space if the applicant has never held a permanent numbered certificate. A unique certificate number will be assigned by AFS‑760; otherwise enter the permanent certificate number. On an original issuance, a SSN as a certificate number is no longer used.

NOTE: The reverse side of FAA Form 8060‑4, conditions of issuance states: This is an interim certificate issued subject to the approval of the Federal Aviation Administration pending the issue of a greater duration. As such the use of PENDING during this period is considered tantamount to a digital number for the purposes of meeting the recording requirements of 14 CFR §§ 43.9 and 43.11 as applicable.

NOTE: On FAA Form 8610‑2, when an applicant, such as a foreign applicant, does not have a SSN, then the application will have the word “none” in the SSN Block. If an applicant does not wish to provide a SSN, the applicant will use the words “Do Not Use” in the SSN block on the application.

2)       For a reissuance, the previously assigned certificate number will continue to be shown in block 3. A certificate may be reissued with a U.S. SSN as the certificate number if the airman wishes to retain that number as the certificate number. If a U.S. SSN is provided on the application, enter the SSN number without dashes or spaces immediately above the applicant’s date of birth.
a)       Fill out FAA Form 8610‑2.
b)      When the applicant passes a section, check the “Pass” block and indicate the expiration date. Complete the “FAA Inspector Report” portion of FAA Form 8610‑2. Sign the form with the office identifier and date.

NOTE: The inspector’s signature in the “FAA Inspector’s Report” block on the back of the application indicates that the form has only been reviewed for completeness if “Examined this applicant’s papers” is checked. If the inspector actually gave the test, the “Personally Tested” block is checked. The signature is not an endorsement of the applicant’s eligibility.

c)      Give the applicant the other signed original of FAA Form 8610‑2 with instructions to keep it until the permanent certificate is issued and received.
3)      Complete and submit to AFS‑760 an application file with the following:
a)      A typewritten original, FAA Form 8060‑4, signed by the issuing inspector/examiner.
b)      The original copy of FAA Form 8610‑2 with completed Sections I, II, III, IV, and V (as appropriate.) For retests, also send a copy of FAA Form 8610‑2, completed and signed in Section V, by the Inspector who originally authorized the test.
c)      Airman test report or valid Computer Airman Test Report (with raised, embossed seal) from the Computer Test Center.
d)      A document certifying additional instruction, if the test was retaken within 30 days.
e)      AC Form 8060‑1, Mechanic Certificate, when adding a rating.
f)        Certification files will be sent to AFS‑760 at the following address as soon as possible to permit the necessary review and processing to take place before the expiration of the temporary certificate:

Attn: Airman Certification Branch, AFS‑760
P.O. Box 25082
Oklahoma City, OK 73125‑4940

C.     Deny a Certificate/Added Rating. When the applicant fails any required section of the oral or practical test or does not complete the test, accomplish the following:

1)      Complete the “FAA Inspector Report” portion of FAA Form 8610‑2 on the reverse side of the application. Check and complete all appropriate block(s) in the “Inspector’s Report.” Ensure the application is completed in Sections I, II, III, IV and V, as appropriate.
2)      Send to the Airman Certification Branch, AFS‑760, Oklahoma City.
3)      Return the duplicate copy to the applicant as a record of the sections passed or failed.
4)      Return other documents to the applicant, as appropriate.

D.    Retest After Failure.

1)      Conduct knowledge retests (FAA Order 8080.6).
2)      Conduct oral and practical retest.
a)      The oral and practical retests must cover all the subject areas in the failed section, as indicated on the application; however, applicants who apply for retest within 60 days of the failure and/or incomplete test to the same DME who gave the failure may, at the option of the DME, be examined in only the subject areas failed on the previous test.
b)      If the applicant fails again, complete FAA Form 8610‑2 only for the sections included in the retest. A valid airman test report (with raised embossed seal) from the Computer Test Center presented by an unsuccessful applicant for the oral/practical retest must be returned to the applicant with the second original of FAA Form 8610‑2.

E.     Investigate Discrepancies. Investigate all indications or reports of falsification, fraudulent reproduction, or alteration of airman certification documents and applications.

5-1146              FUTURE ACTIVITIES. Conduct routine surveillance.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 5‑1147 through 5‑1165.

Figure 2–21, Military Occupational Specialty Codes

Following are the updated, new, and the older MOS codes for the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard enlisted personnel. The new codes are used for active duty time after January, 1990. The older codes are still valid for persons wishing to credit their military aviation maintenance experience toward meeting the requirements of the FAA airframe and powerplant mechanic certificate.

 

US Air Force, Continued

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (AFSC) Code

Previous MOS (AFSC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

2A331

45231, 45233, 32636, 32637, 32638

A-10, F-15, and U-2 Avionics Systems Apprentice

Airframe

2A351

45251, 45253, 32656, 32657, 32658

A-10, F-15, and U-2 Avionics Systems Journeyman

Airframe

2A371

45271, 45273, 32676, 32677, 32678

A-10, F-15, and U-2 Avionics Systems Craftsman

Airframe

2A332

45232, 32636, 32637, 32638

F-16, F-117, RQ-1, CV-22 Avionics Systems Apprentice

Airframe

2A352

45252, 32656, 32657, 32658

F-16, F-117, RQ-1, CV-22 Avionics Systems Journeyman

Airframe

2A372

45272, 32676, 32677, 32678

F-16, F-117, RQ-1, CV-22 Avionics Systems Craftsman

Airframe

2A333

45234, 43131

Tactical Aircraft Maintenance Apprentice

Airframe

2A353

45254, 43151

Tactical Aircraft Maintenance Journeyman

Airframe & Powerplant

2A373

45274, 43171

Tactical Aircraft Maintenance Craftsman

Airframe & Powerplant

2A531

45730, 45732, 43131, 43132, 43133, 45333

Aerospace Maintenance Apprentice

Airframe

2A551

45750, 45752, 43151, 43152, 43153, 45353

Aerospace Maintenance Journeyman

Airframe & Powerplant

2A571

45770, 45772, 43171, 43172, 43173, 45373

Aerospace Maintenance Craftsman

Airframe & Powerplant

2A532

45731, 43131

Helicopter/Tiltrotor Maintenance Apprentice

Airframe

2A552

45751, 43150

Helicopter/Tiltrotor Maintenance Journeyman

Airframe & Powerplant

2A572

45771, 43170

Helicopter/Tiltrotor Maintenance Craftsman

Airframe & Powerplant

2A533

45733, 32331, 32332, 32333, 32531, 32830, 32831, 32834

Integrated Avionics Systems Apprentice

Airframe

2A553

45753, 32351, 32352, 32353, 32551, 32850, 32851, 32854

Integrated Avionics Systems Journeyman

Airframe

US Air Force, Continued

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (AFSC) Code

Previous MOS (AFSC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

2A573

45773, 32371, 32372, 32373, 32571, 32870, 32871, 32874

Integrated Avionics Systems Craftsman

Airframe

2A631

45430, 42632, 42633, 43132

Aerospace Propulsion Apprentice

Powerplant

2A651

45450, 42652, 42653, 43152

Aerospace Propulsion Journeyman

Powerplant

2A671

45470, 42672, 42673, 43172

Aerospace Propulsion Craftsman

Powerplant

2A691

45490, 42692, 42693, 43192

Aerospace Propulsion Superintendent

Powerplant

2A634

45433, 42333

Aircraft Fuel Systems Apprentice

Airframe

2A654

45453, 42353

Aircraft Fuel Systems Journeyman

Airframe

2A674

45473, 42373

Aircraft Fuel Systems Craftsman

Airframe

2A635

45434, 42334

Aircraft Hydraulic Systems Apprentice

Airframe

2A655

45454, 42354

Aircraft Hydraulic Systems Journeyman

Airframe

2A675

45474, 42374

Aircraft Hydraulic Systems Craftsman

Airframe

2A636

45235, 45435, 45436, 42330, 42331

Aircraft Electrical & Environmental Systems Apprentice

Airframe

2A656

45255, 45455, 45456, 42350, 42351

Aircraft Electrical & Environmental Systems Journeyman

Airframe

2A676

45275, 45475, 45476, 42370, 42371

Aircraft Electrical & Environmental Systems Craftsman

Airframe

2A733

45832, 42731, 42735

Aircraft Structural Maintenance Apprentice

Airframe

2A753

45852, 42751, 42755

Aircraft Structural Maintenance Journeyman

Airframe

2A773

45872, 42771, 42775

Aircraft Structural Maintenance Craftsman

Airframe

 

 

 

 

 

US Air Force, Continued

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (AFSC) Code

Previous MOS (AFSC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

2A390

45292, 32690, 32691, 32692, 32699, 45299, 43191, 43199

Tactical Aircraft Superintendent

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

2A590

45799, 43191, 43199, 45791, 43190, 2A490, 45793, 32390, 32391, 32591, 32894, 32899, 32900

Aerospace Maintenance Superintendent

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

2A690

45493, 42396, 45494, 45295, 45495, 45496, 42390

Aircraft Systems Superintendent

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

2A790

45899, 42799

Aircraft Fabrication Superintendent

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

2A300

45100, 45200, 45400, 32900, 43200

Aircraft Chief Enlisted Manager

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

2A600

45200, 45400, 32900, 43200

Systems Chief Enlisted Manager

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

 

 

US Army

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS Code

Previous MOS Code

Title

Creditable Experience

15B10/30

68B10/30

Aircraft Powerplant Repairer

Powerplant

15D10/30

68D10/30

Aircraft Powertrain Repairer

Powerplant

15F10/30

68F10/30

Aircraft Electrician

Airframe

15G10/30

68G10/30

Aircraft Structural Repairer

Airframe

15H10/30

68H10/30

Aircraft Pneudraulics Repairer

Airframe

15J10/30

68J10/30

Aircraft Armament/Missile Systems Repairer

Airframe

15K40

68K40

Aircraft Components Repairer Supervisor

Airframe

15M10/30

67N10/30

UH-1 Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15N10/30

68N10/30

Avionic Mechanic

Airframe

15R10/40

67R10/40

AH-64 Attack Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15R10/40

67Y10/40

AH-1 Attack Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15S10/40

67S10/40

OD-58D Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15T10/40

67T10/40

UH-60 Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15U10/40

67U10/40

CH-47 Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15V10/30

67V10/30

Observation/Scout Helicopter Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

15X10/30

68X10/30

AH-64 Armament/Electrical Systems

Airframe

15Y10/30

68Y10/30

AH-64 Longbow Armament/Electrical Systems

Airframe

15Z50

67Z50

Aircraft Maintenance Senior Sergeant

Airframe & Powerplant

67G10/40

67G10/40

Utility Airplane Repairer

Airframe & Powerplant

 

US Navy

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (NEC) Code

Previous MOS (NEC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

AD-6410

 

F-110 Turbofan Jet Engine First Degree Repair/IMA Technician

Powerplant

AD-6415

 

TF-30 Turbofan Jet Engine First Degree Repair/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6416

 

J-52 Turbojet Engine First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6417

 

T-400 Turboshaft Jet Engine First Degree Repair/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6418

 

T-56 Turboprop Engine and 54H60 Series Propeller First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

 

 

 

 

 

US Navy CONTINUED

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (NEC) Code

Previous MOS (NEC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

AD-6419

 

T-58 Turboshaft Jet Engine First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6420

 

F-404 Turbofan Jet Engine First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6421

 

TF-34 Turbofan Jet Engine First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6422

 

Test Cell Operator/Maintainer

Powerplant

AD-6423

 

T-56-425/427 Turboprop Engine and Propeller IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6424

 

T-64 Turboshaft Jet Engine First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6425

 

F414-GE-400 Turbofan Jet Engine Third Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6426

 

T-700 Turboshaft Jet Engine First Degree/IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AD-6428

 

Helicopter Rotors/Related Components IMA Mechanic

Powerplant

AM-7232

 

Advanced Composite Structural Repair IMA Technician

Airframe

 

Note: The following NECs may qualify for both an A and/or P. FSDOs will need to evaluate individuals to determine appropriate rating:

8206

 

C-130 Flight Mechanic

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8209

 

C-40A Crew Chief

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8229

 

E-6B In-flight Technician

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8235

 

E-6B Flight Engineer

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8245

 

C-20/C-37 Crew Chief

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8250

 

C-9 Crew Chief

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8251

 

P-3 Flight Engineer

Airframe &/or Powerplant

 

 

 

 

US Navy CONTINUED

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (NEC) Code

Previous MOS (NEC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

8252

 

C-130 Flight Engineer

Airframe &/or Powerplant

8279

 

C-2 Transport Aircrewman

Airframe &/or Powerplant

 

 

 

 

NOTE: The following NECs are aircraft specific and are awarded to individuals advancing from the AD (powerplant), AM (structures), AE (electronics), or AT (avionics). The only individuals that should be given consideration for an A and/or P rating are ones who have held an AM or AD rating. Therefore, the FSDO needs to determine individuals’ background to ascertain if they have held an AM or AD rating. If so, then the FSDO can determine, through the interview process, on whether the individual meets the qualifications for an A and/or P rating:

8303

 

CH/MH-53E Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8305

 

C2/E2 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8306

 

E2C Group II Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8307

 

C-2A Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8310

 

C-9B Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8313

 

C-40A Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8314

 

C-20G Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8318

 

C-130 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8319

 

P-3 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8332

 

EA-6B Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8335

 

F-14B/D Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8341

 

F/A-18 E/F Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8342

 

F/A-18 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8343

 

E-6A Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8345

 

F-14 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8347

8346/S-3A

S-3B Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

 

8351

A-4 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

 

8370

SH-2G Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

 

8375

H-2 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8378

 

H-60 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8379

 

H-46 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8380

 

UH-1N Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8388 (AE Only)

 

SH-60R Electronic Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe

 

 

 

 

US Navy CONTINUED

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (NEC) Code

Previous MOS (NEC) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

8389 (AE Only)

 

CH-60 Electronic Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe

8392

 

C-20 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8805

 

C2/E2 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8806

 

E-2C Group II Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8807 (AE Only)

 

SH-60R Electronic Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe

8808 (AE Only)

 

CH-60S Electronic Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe

8819

 

P-3 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8832

 

EA-6B Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8835 (AD Only)

 

F-14B/D Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Powerplant

8841

 

F/A-18 E/F Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8842

 

F/A-18 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8843

 

E-6A Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8845

 

F-14 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8847

 

S-3 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8877

 

H-3 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

8878

 

H-60 Systems Organizational Maint. Tech.

Airframe or Powerplant

 

 

 

 

Old Codes

 

 

 

AD

 

Aviation Machinist Mate

Powerplant

ADJ

 

Aviation Machinist Mate

Powerplant

ADR

 

Aviation Machinist Mate

Powerplant

AM

 

Aviation Structural Mechanic

Airframe

AME

 

Aviation Structural Mechanic

Airframe

AMH

 

Aviation Structural Mechanic

Airframe

AMS

 

Aviation Structural Mechanic

Airframe

 

US Marine Corps

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS Code

Previous MOS Code

Title

Creditable Experience

6062

 

Aircraft Intermediate Hydraulic/Pneumatic Mech

Airframe

6092

 

Aircraft Intermediate Level Structures Mech

Airframe

6112

 

Helicopter Mechanic CH-46

Airframe & Powerplant

6113

 

Helicopter Mechanic CH-53

Airframe & Powerplant

6114

 

Helicopter MechanicA/UH-1

Airframe & Powerplant

6116

 

Tiltrotor Mech MV-22

Airframe & Powerplant

6122

 

Helicopter P/P Mech T-58

Powerplant

6123

 

Helicopter P/P Mech T-64

Powerplant

6124

 

Helicopter P/P Mech T-400/T-700

Powerplant

6132

 

Helicopter / Tiltrotor Dynamic Comp Mech

Airframe

6152

 

Helicopter Airframe Mech CH-46

Airframe

6153

 

Helicopter Airframe Mech CH-53

Airframe

6154

 

Helicopter Airframe Mech UH/AH-1

Airframe

6156

 

Tiltrotor Airframe Mech MV-22

Airframe

6172

 

Helicopter Crew Chief CH-46

Airframe & Powerplant

6173

 

Helicopter Crew Chief CH-53

Airframe & Powerplant

6174

 

Helicopter Crew Chief UH-1

Airframe & Powerplant

6176

 

Tiltrotor Crew Chief MV-22

Airframe & Powerplant

6212

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft Mech AV-8/TAV-8

Airframe & Powerplant

6213

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft Mech EA-6

Airframe & Powerplant

6214

 

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Mech UAV

Airframe & Powerplant

6216

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft Mech KC-130

Airframe & Powerplant

6217

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft Mech FA-18

Airframe & Powerplant

6222

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft P/P Mech F-402

Powerplant

6223

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft P/P Mech J-52

Powerplant

6226

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft P/P Mech T-56

Powerplant

6227

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft P/P Mech F-404

Powerplant

6252

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft A/F Mech AV-8/TAV-8

Airframe

6253

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft A/F Mech EA-6

Airframe

6256

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft A/F Mech KC-130

Airframe

6257

 

Fixed-Wing Aircraft A/F Mech FA-18

Airframe

6276

6232 / 6242

Fixed-Wing Aircraft Crew Chief KC-130

Airframe & Powerplant

 

 

US Coast Guard

Current as of:  13 Nov 07

Current MOS (Rating) Code

Previous MOS (Rating) Code

Title

Creditable Experience

AMT

 

Aviation Maintenance Technician

Airframe & Powerplant

AMT

AD

Aviation Machinist Mate

Airframe & Powerplant

AMT

AE

Aviation Electrician’s Mate

Airframe & Powerplant

AMT

AM

Aviation Structural Mechanic

Airframe & Powerplant

AET

 

Avionics Electrical Technician

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

AET

AE

Aviation Electrician’s Mate

May qualify for Airframe and/or Powerplant rating. ASI evaluation required to determine appropriate rating.

 

Figure 2–22, FAA Certification Performance of Job Tasks

 

 

Figure 2–23, Certificate of Eligibility

Sample completed certificate of eligibility for an airframe and powerplant (A&P)  mechanic.

 

11/26/07                                                                                                                   8900.1 CHG 0

Volume 6  SURVEILLANCE

chapter 9  PART 145 INSPECTIONS

Section 13  Inspect a Part 145 Repair Station and its Authorization for Work Away From its Fixed Location

6-1926.      PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODES.

A.  Maintenance. 3606.

B.  Avionics. 5606.

6-1927.      OBJECTIVE. This section provides guidance for authorization and surveillance of a Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 145 repair station that performs aircraft maintenance away from its fixed location.

6-1928.      GENERAL. The following are the circumstances that allow a part 145 repair station to do work away from the station:

A.  Special Circumstances. When a “special circumstance” arises that allows work to be done away from the repair station on a temporary basis.

1)  Temporary Basis—Short Term. When a special circumstance arises such as a blown tire, radio, or navigation equipment changes, etc.
2)  Temporary Basis—Extended. When the repair or alteration requires the repair station to make repairs or alterations over an extended period, e.g., the aircraft is in for extended maintenance and an interior shop is requested to install a new interior at that location.

B.  Recurring Basis. When it is necessary to perform such work on a recurring basis with operations specification (OpSpec) D100 authority.

NOTE: Working away from the repair station is not equivalent to line maintenance or a geographic authorization. Volume 2 (this handbook), Chapter 11, Section 3, International Field Office Procedures for Certificating/ Renewing/Amending a Part 145 Repair Station Located Outside the United States and Its Territories, provides geographical authorization guidance.

NOTE: The circumstances in subparagraphs A(1) and A(2) require the repair station to submit a request to the PI for evaluation on a case by case basis, except for emergency short term work when the repair station has a procedure in its manual. In this case, the repair station only needs to notify the PI in accordance with the procedure.

6.-1929.      PREREQUISITES AND COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS.

A.  Prerequisites:

·        Knowledge of the regulatory requirements of part 145;

·        Successful completion of appropriate Airworthiness Indoctrination course(s); and

·        Previous experience with certification or surveillance of part 145 repair stations.

B.  Coordination. If the repair station has an assigned principal maintenance inspector (PMI) and a principal avionics inspector (PAI), this inspection should be coordinated between both inspectors.

6-1930.       REFERENCES, FORMS, AND JOB AIDS.

A.  References (current editions):

·        Part 145;

·        Volume 2 (this handbook), chapter 11, section 1, and section 3;

·        Advisory Circular (AC) 145-9, Guide for Developing and Evaluating Repair Station and Quality Control Manuals; and

·        OpSpec D100.

B.  Forms. None.

C.  Job Aid. None.

6-1931.       PROCEDURES.

A.  Review Applicable Information. Before inspection, the PI should carefully review:

1)  Part 145.
2)  The repair station manual/quality control manual (RSM/QCM) procedures on work away from the station.
3)  OpSpec D100, if authorized.
4)  The Safety Performance Analysis System (SPAS).
a)  SPAS is the organization’s primary source of comprehensive, integrated safety information that is used by inspectors, analysts, and managers in developing and adjusting field surveillance, investigation, and other oversight programs.
b)  SPAS interfaces with key fielded oversight programs (such as Air Transportation Oversight System (ATOS), Surveillance and Evaluation Program (SEP), and the National Program Guidelines (NPG)), as well as other government and industry sources, providing critical information in the form of graphs, tables, and reports. These SPAS outputs are then used to:

·        Identify safety hazard and risk areas;

·        Target inspection efforts for repair stations and to areas of greatest risk; and

·        Monitor the effectiveness of targeted oversight actions.

c)  SPAS repair station profile and repair station analytical model (RSAM) are available for use. This data provides additional information on performance and risk associated with individual repair station facilities.
5)  Vital Information Subsystem (VIS).

NOTE: OpSpec D100 will only be issued for those repair stations that perform repairs or alterations on a recurring basis. For example, engine on wing repair, nondestructive testing, tank, and fuel cell repair.

B.  Inspect a Repair Station Performing Work Away From the Fixed Location Under Special Circumstances.

1)  Temporary Basis—Short Term.
a)  Review the repair station procedures to verify that procedures are in place to:

1.                  Control equipment, tools, required forms, etc.

2.                  Ensure qualified personnel for the required work.

3.                  Conduct emergency work away from the station. The procedure should contain an explanation of emergency work away from station as it relates to the repair station ratings. The procedures should detail how the CHDO and the PI are notified; if approval is required, they must be notified before dispatching the work crew.

b)  The repair station must be able to provide written documentation that reflects the air carrier’s method for the acceptance of all repair station programs, and the repair station’s standard operating procedures (SOP) to ensure all maintenance is performed in accordance with the air carrier’s Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP). The air carrier must be informed of all contracted out work and if the maintenance provider must be inspected by the air carrier’s Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS) auditors and all findings corrected before work is performed.

NOTE: It may not be necessary for the PI to approve each short term temporary situation; however, all situations will require the PI to be notified.

2)  Temporary Basis—Extended.
a)  Contracted line maintenance that is authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) may require several months to complete; this type of operation does not constitute the establishment of another repair station or a satellite repair station because it is temporary in nature.
b)  The repair station requesting to perform maintenance away from its fixed location for extended periods of time must evaluate the housing and facilities where the maintenance is to be performed to ensure the location meets the intent of part 145.
c)  If additional time is needed, the repair station must submit another request updating the original information and providing any new details on the contracted maintenance.
d)  Review the repair station procedures to verify that the procedures will:

4.      1.  Control equipment, tools, required forms, etc.

5.      2.  Ensure qualified personnel for the required project.

6.      3.  Provide the CHDO and the PI with a plan on how and where the project will be performed, to include:

·        Controlling of parts;

·        Tools;

·        Personnel;

·        Required inspectors;

·        Length of time the project will take; and

·        Title of the person in charge of the project.

NOTE: The PI must approve extended temporary projects before the crews are sent and must have a start date and an estimated completion date. The PI should only approve this request after ensuring the repair station will be able to control the project as if it were being completed at the home station.

C.  Inspect a Repair Station Doing Work Away From the Fixed Location on a Recurring Basis.

1)  Verify that the procedure for performing work away from the station on a continuing basis is clearly defined in the RSM/QCM. OpSpec D100 must reference the section and chapter where these procedures are located in the RSM/QCM.
2)  Review all work packages completed away from station to confirm the work was completed per the procedures in the RSM/QCM.

NOTE: Part 145 does not allow continuous, uninterrupted maintenance or alteration operations to be performed at another location.

a)  Verify that the repair station furnished its own tools and equipment.

NOTE: The repair station can have a lease agreement for tools and equipment if the procedures are contained in the RSM.

b)  Verify that after the contracted maintenance is completed, the repair station transported its tools, equipment, and personnel back to its fixed location.
c)  Verify that the repair station maintained a permanent fixed location even if the majority of its work is done at another facility.
3)  Verify the RSM contains procedures for the following:

·        Transporting tools and equipment to and from the work site without damage;

·        Ensuring that only qualified personnel are assigned to perform, supervise, and inspect the work completed; and

·        Ensuring that all air carrier maintenance programs are followed.

4)  Verify the repair station is following its quality control system, and confirm that:

·        All forms are properly completed per the quality control system;

·        The repair station follows their calibration system for calibrated tools; and

·        All parts are stored and protected as required in the quality control system.

5)  Verify that the repair station only uses approved data.

D.  Analyze Findings. Upon completion of the inspection, record all deficiencies; determine the appropriate corrective action(s).

E.  Conduct Debriefing. Brief the certificate holder on the inspection results. Discuss any deficiencies and possible corrective actions.

6-1932.       TASK OUTCOMES.

A.  Complete the PTRS Record.

1)  Section IV of the PTRS Record. Enter an “E” in the Primary Area block. List all deficiencies, findings, and irregularities noted during the inspection, using the appropriate keywords that are allowed in the drop down menu of the Keyword block. For each keyword used, write a brief description of the concern in the Comment block.

2)  PTRS Activity Code 3606/5606 (Overall Subsystem Evaluation). In Section I, the Assessment block, select the appropriate word picture number 1–10 in the drop down menu that best describes the condition of the repair station for the completed inspection.

B.  Complete the Task. Completion of this task may result in the following:

·        Sending a letter to the operator documenting all deficiencies and initiating an Enforcement Investigation Report (EIR), if necessary; and

·        A satisfactory inspection with no deficiencies.

C.  Document Task. File all supporting paperwork in the file. Update the VIS as required.

NOTE: After completing the 3606/5606 surveillance, and it is determined the repair station does not perform work away from the station, close the record in the following manner. Enter “C” (closed) in the Status block and “I” (information) in the Results block. In section IV, Comments, enter “E” in the Primary Area block, enter “973” in the Keyword block, and enter “I” in the Opinion Code block with the following statement, “After completing the surveillance it was determined this repair station does not perform work away from the station.” Correct the VIS information. Close the Section I Assessment block with a number 10 from the drop down menu.

6-1933.      FUTURE ACTIVITIES. Schedule and conduct followup inspections as applicable.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 6-1934 through 6-1950.

 

11/08/07                                                                                                                   8900.1 CHG 0

Volume 11  FLIGHT STANDARDS PROGRAMS

chapter 2  VOLUNTARY SAFETY PROGRAMS

Section 1  Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP)

11-35                  PURPOSE. Aviation Safety Action Programs (ASAP) prevent accidents and incidents by encouraging employees of certificate holders to voluntarily report safety issues and events. ASAPs provide for education of appropriate parties and the analysis and correction of safety concerns that are identified in the program. ASAPs are intended to create a nonthreatening environment to encourage the employee to voluntarily report safety issues even though they may involve violation of Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.), Subtitle VII, or violation of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). ASAP is based on a safety partnership between the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the certificate holder and may include any third party such as an employee labor organization. These programs are intended to generate safety information that may not otherwise be obtainable.

A.     Information obtained from these programs will permit ASAP participants to identify actual or potential risks throughout their operations. Once identified, the parties to an ASAP can implement corrective actions in order to reduce the potential for occurrence of accidents, incidents, and other safety‑related events. In order to gain the greatest possible positive benefit from ASAP, it may be necessary for certificate holders to develop programs with compatible data collection, analysis, storage, and retrieval systems. The information and data, which are collected and analyzed, can be used as a measure of aviation system safety.

B.     An ASAP provides a vehicle whereby employees of participating air carrier and domestic repair station certificate holders can identify and report safety issues to management and to the FAA for resolution, without fear that the FAA will use reports accepted under the program to take legal enforcement action against them, or that companies will use such information to take disciplinary action. These programs are designed to encourage participation from various employee groups, such as flight crewmembers, mechanics, flight attendants, and dispatchers.

The FAA may use ASAP reports for legal enforcement purposes where such reports disclose events that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification.

C.     The elements of ASAP are set forth in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between FAA, certificate holder management, and an appropriate third party, such as an employee labor organization or other employee representatives.

11-36             BACKGROUND. The FAA’s safety mission requires it to take action to reduce or eliminate the possibility or recurrence of accidents in air transportation. The FAA and the air transportation industry have sought innovative means for addressing safety problems and identifying potential safety hazards. The FAA, in cooperation with industry, established several demonstration ASAPs in an effort to increase the flow of safety information to both the air carrier and FAA, and issued Advisory Circular (AC) 120‑66, Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP), January 1997. Among these programs were the USAir Altitude Awareness Program, the American Airlines Safety Action Partnership, and the Alaska Airlines Altitude Awareness Program. These programs included incentives to encourage employees of air carriers participating in the programs to disclose information which may include possible violations of 14 CFR without fear of punitive enforcement sanctions or company disciplinary action. Events reported under a program that involved an apparent violation of the regulations by the air carriers were handled under the Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program, provided that the elements of the policy were satisfied. In view of the positive safety results from those programs, the FAA issued a revised AC 120‑66 in March 2000 (AC 120‑66A), which established industry‑wide guidelines for participation. The FAA revised AC 120‑66 again in November 2002 (AC 120‑66B), incorporating the lessons learned from over two dozen programs that have been established. This chapter contains revised guidance to facilitate achievement of ASAP’s safety goals, as well as to encourage wider participation in the program. ASAP includes incentives that encourage participating employees to disclose safety information which may include possible violations of 14 CFR.

11-37             KEY TERMS. The following key terms and phrases are defined for the purposes of ASAP to ensure a standard interpretation of the guidance.

A.     Administrative Action. Under paragraph 205 of the current edition of FAA Order 2150.3, Compliance and Enforcement Program, administrative action is a means for disposing of violations or alleged violations that do not warrant the use of enforcement sanctions. The two types of administrative action are a warning notice and a letter of correction.

B.     Air Carrier. A person who undertakes directly by lease, or other arrangement, to engage in air transportation.

C.     ASAP Manager. The person serving as the focal point for program administration, including but not limited to: recording and acknowledging receipt of reports, maintaining the ASAP database, providing information about, and responding to, inquiries concerning the status of ASAP reports, and for the coordination and tracking of Event Review Committee (ERC) corrective action recommendations. The ASAP manager may or may not be the voting representative from company management on the ERC

D.    Certificate Holder. Refers to a person authorized to operate under 14 CFR part 121, or who holds a certificate issued under 14 CFR part 145.

E.     Certificate‑Holding District Office (CHDO). The Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) or certificate management office (CMO) having overall responsibility for all FAA reporting requirements, technical administration requirements, and regulatory oversight of a certificate holder.

F.      Consensus of the ERC. Under ASAP, consensus of the ERC means the voluntary agreement of all voting representatives of the ERC to each decision required by the MOU.

G.    Corrective Action. For the purposes of ASAP, corrective action refers to any safety‑related action or recommendation determined necessary by the ERC based upon a review and analysis of the reports submitted under an ASAP. Corrective action may involve joint or individual action by the parties to the ASAP MOU.

H.    Covered Under the Program/Qualified for Inclusion/Included in ASAP. For the purposes of ASAP, these terms all have the same meaning. They mean that the enforcement‑related incentives and other provisions of the ASAP apply to the employee who submitted the report.

I.       Enforcement Decision Tool (EDT). The EDT is utilized to determine the safety risk posed by an event as a function of the type of conduct involved. The EDT process uses systems safety risk management principles. (See FAA Order 2150.3, appendix F.) For non‑sole source reports accepted by the ASAP ERC and determined by the ERC to be supported with sufficient evidence of a violation, the ERC may use the EDT along with associated guidance to determine the type of corrective action to take under ASAP (administrative or informal action).

J.      Enforcement‑Related Incentive. Refers to an assurance that lesser enforcement action will be used to address certain alleged violations of the regulations to encourage participation by the employees of a certificate holder.

K.    ERC. A group comprised of a representative from each party to an ASAP MOU. The group reviews and analyzes reports submitted under an ASAP. The ERC may share and exchange information and identify actual or potential safety problems from the information contained in the reports. The ERC is usually comprised of a management representative from the certificate holder, a representative from the employee labor association (if applicable), and a specifically qualified FAA inspector from the CHDO. Where an employee group is not represented by a labor association, the ERC may include a voting representative chosen from the employee group, even though in that case the labor group is not a signatory to the ASAP MOU.

L.     Informal Action. Oral or written counseling of individuals.

M.  Intentional Falsification. For the purposes of ASAP, intentional falsification means a false statement in reference to a material fact made with knowledge of its falsity. It does not include mistakes or inadvertent omissions or errors.

N.    Major Domestic Repair Station. Refers to a part 145 certificated repair station located in the United States that is certificated to perform airframe and/or engine maintenance for certificate holders.

O.    Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Refers to the written agreement between two or more parties setting forth the purposes for, and terms of, an ASAP.

P.      Party/Parties. Refers to the certificate holder, the FAA, and any other person or entity (e.g., labor union or other industry or Government entity) that is a signatory to the MOU.

Q.    Person. A person refers to an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, company, association, joint stock association, or government entity. It includes a trustee, receiver, assignee, or similar representative of any of them.

R.    Runway Incursion Information Evaluation Program (RIIEP). An FAA‑sponsored initiative for gathering critical safety data not otherwise available concerning the root causes of runway incursions and surface incidents. The primary means of gathering the data is through in‑depth interviews of pilots and maintenance technicians involved in these incidents, as well as completion of a RIIEP questionnaire. ASAP participants are encouraged to incorporate RIIEP as a voluntary part of their ASAP process by providing RIIEP awareness information to their pilot and maintenance‑technician groups. ERC members should provide the RIIEP Questionnaire to a pilot or maintenance technician who submits an ASAP report involving a runway incursion or surface incident, and request voluntary completion of the questionnaire by that employee. In the case of a sole source report, the employee should be instructed not to enter the name identification information requested in section 1 of the RIIEP questionnaire.

S.      Safety‑Related Report. Refers to a written account of an event that involves an operational or maintenance issue related to aviation safety reported through an ASAP. The reporting venue is specified in the ASAP MOU.

T.     Streamlined No Action and Administrative Action Process (SNAAP). The SNAAP provides an automated means for issuance of a warning notice, letter of correction, or FAA letter of no action. The automated process does not replace the more formal process for administrative action described in Order 2150.3. The SNAAP is not be used for remedial training, voluntary disclosures, or cases where further corrective action must be taken. It should not be used when an inspector determines that inclusion in an administrative action letter of summary of facts text is appropriate, since SNAAP does not allow for entry of such text. It should not be used for ASAP administrative action letters when, based on the consensus of the ASAP ERC, inclusion of summary of facts information in the letter is determined to be appropriate. The SNAAP is highly recommended for letters of no action and should replace the manual preparation of such letters.

U.     Sole‑Source Report. For the purposes of FAA action under ASAP, the ERC shall consider a report to be sole source when all evidence of the event available to the FAA outside of ASAP is discovered by or otherwise predicated on the ASAP report. It is possible to have more than one sole source report for the same event.

V.     Sufficient Evidence. Sufficient evidence means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual’s safety‑related report. There must be sufficient evidence to prove the violation, other than the individual’s safety‑related report. In order to be considered sufficient evidence under ASAP, the ERC must determine through consensus that the evidence (other than the individual’s safety‑related report) would likely have resulted in the processing of an FAA enforcement action had the individual’s safety‑related report not been accepted under ASAP. Accepted ASAP reports for which there is sufficient evidence must be closed with FAA administrative action unless the ERC has elected through unanimous consensus to employ the EDT for an accepted non‑sole source report and determines through the EDT process that informal action is appropriate, as follows: If sufficient evidence supports a violation for an accepted non‑sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix may be used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non‑sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action if appropriate).

W.   Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program. A policy under which regulated entities may voluntarily report apparent violations of the regulations and develop corrective action satisfactory to the FAA to preclude their recurrence. Certificate holders that satisfy the elements of the Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP) receive a letter of correction in lieu of civil penalty action. Voluntary disclosure reporting procedures are outlined in the current edition of AC 00‑58, Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program.

11-38             APPLICABILITY. ASAPs are intended for air carriers that operate under part 121 and major domestic repair stations certificated under part 145. Other certificated entities may also apply, and will be evaluated for acceptance on a case‑by‑case basis to determine whether adequate resources are available to maintain program quality control. ASAPs are entered into voluntarily by the FAA, a certificate holder, and if appropriate, other parties.

11-39             DEVELOPMENT. Certificate holders may develop programs and submit them to the FAA for review and acceptance in accordance with the guidance provided. Ordinarily, programs are developed for specific employee groups, such as flight crewmembers, flight attendants, mechanics, or dispatchers. The FAA will determine whether a program is accepted. The FAA may suggest, but may not require, that a certificate holder develop an ASAP to resolve an identified safety problem.

A.     Development and Implementation of an ASAP.

1)      The certificate holder, employee group, and the FAA must first develop a relationship that will promote the ASAP concept. The reluctance of one or more parties to commit to the program is detrimental to the process.
2)      The process for report review must be outlined in detail.
3)      Safety data collection, analysis, and retention processes must be developed and agreed upon.
4)      Event investigation tasks must be assigned.
5)      Before implementing the ASAP, a comprehensive company employee and management education program must be undertaken.
6)      The ASAP process may require cultural change for all parties involved.
7)      Continuity of ERC representation personnel during the early stages of program implementation will promote the desired partnership relationship between program members.

B.     Demonstration Programs. Certificate holders initially must develop a demonstration program for each employee group sought to be covered by an ASAP. The objective of a demonstration program is to measure its effectiveness and ensure that it meets the safety objectives of the specific ASAP.

1)      The initial demonstration program should have a duration of 18 months. However, the FAA may authorize extension of a demonstration program, when the FAA determines that a longer period of time is needed to achieve the desired goals and benefits articulated in the program.
2)      At the conclusion of the initial demonstration program, all parties will review the program. Demonstration programs that require modification may be extended for an additional time, ordinarily not to exceed 12 months, to effectively measure any change(s) made to the original program to address a deficiency identified by any of the parties to the MOU.
3)      The ERC is responsible for preparing a final report on the demonstration program at its conclusion. If an application for a continuing program is anticipated, the ERC will prepare and submit a report with the certificate holder’s application to the FAA 60 days in advance of the termination date of the demonstration program. All demonstration programs will be subject to an FAA program review prior to transition from a demonstration to a continuing ASAP.

C.     Continuing Programs. After a demonstration program is reviewed and determined to be successful by the parties to the agreement, it may be accepted as a continuing program, subject to review and renewal every 2 years by the FAA.

D.    Withdrawal. Regardless of the duration of a program, any party to the ASAP MOU may withdraw from the program at any time for any reason.

11-40             RESOURCES. An ASAP can result in a significant commitment of both human and fiscal resources by the parties to the program. During the development of a program, it is important that each party is willing to commit the necessary personnel, time, and monetary resources to support the program. Programs for which adequate resources from all parties are not available, including the FAA in particular, should not be recommended by a CHDO for acceptance.

11-41             ASAP CONCEPTS. The specific provisions of an ASAP are described by an MOU which is primarily developed by the certificate holder, FAA CHDO, and in some cases, a third party such as an employee labor union. A sample MOU is provided in AC 120‑66, current edition. An automated MOU template is also available through the FSS Web page at: http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_initiatives/aircraft_aviation/asap. The guidance material contained in this section and in the current edition of AC 120‑66 provide structure and guidance in preparing a program acceptable for FAA participation. Several workable concepts have emerged from the ASAP demonstration programs. These concepts should be addressed in the MOU, and are explained below:

A.     ERC. The determination of whether reports qualify for inclusion in the ASAP will be made by a consensus (unanimous agreement) of the ERC.

1)      The ERC is composed of one designated representative and an alternate each from the FAA, the certificate holder, and a third party, if applicable (e.g., a representative from the employee’s union or a person chosen from the employee group to serve as an employee voting representative on the ERC).
2)      The ERC will:

·        Review and analyze reports submitted under the ASAP.

·        Determine whether such reports qualify for inclusion, including, if appropriate, interviewing or requesting clarification from the reporter. The ERC may elect to interview an employee prior to an acceptance decision.

·        Identify actual or potential problems from the information contained in the reports.

·        Propose solutions for those problems.

·        Conduct an annual review of the ASAP database to determine whether corrective actions have been effective in preventing or reducing the recurrence of targeted safety‑related events.

3)      For official meeting purposes, a quorum exists when all designated ERC representatives or their alternates are present. Some reported events may involve matters that are complex or sensitive, or that require the expertise of other FAA or industry persons. The ERC representatives are encouraged to consult with such persons as needed during the ASAP process.

B.     FAA ERC Member Responsibilities.

1)      Determine if the FAA has received independent evidence on a reported event (e.g., preliminary pilot deviation report, Administrator’s Daily Alert Bulletin, etc.).
2)      Assist in determination of a possible 14 CFR regulatory violation.
3)      Assure ERC investigation ascertains all pertinent facts and circumstances prior to acceptance/exclusion, including, where appropriate, ERC interview of the employee(s) prior to acceptance of a report.
4)      Assist in determining event resolution in the best interest of safety.
5)      Recommend corrective action whenever it is appropriate.
6)      Follow‑through on corrective action to ascertain satisfactory completion.

Some reported events may involve matters that are complex or sensitive, or that require the expertise of other FAA or industry persons. FAA ERC representatives are encouraged to consult with such persons as may be needed during the ASAP process to better understand the nature of an event and its appropriate disposition. FAA management should be advised when potentially controversial events have been submitted for consideration under ASAP. Providing briefings and information to other FAA personnel concerning the nature of the safety event and associated results of ERC/FAA investigation is appropriate, provided that the identity of the reporting employee is not disclosed outside of the ERC. It is appropriate for the FAA member of an ASAP ERC to share information on safety issues identified through ASAP with other FAA personnel.

C.     Consensus of the ERC. The success of ASAP is built on the ability of the ERC to achieve consensus on each event that is reported. Consensus of the ERC means the voluntary agreement of all representatives of the ERC.

1)      The ERC must reach a consensus when deciding whether a report is accepted into the program and when deciding on corrective action recommendations arising from the event, including whether FAA administrative action is appropriate. It does not require that all members believe that a particular decision or recommendation is the most desirable solution, but that the result falls within each member’s range of acceptable solutions for that event in the best interest of safety. In order for this concept to work effectively, the ERC representative must be empowered to make decisions within the context of the ERC discussions on a given report. Senior management and supervisors should ordinarily not preempt their respective ERC representative’s decisionmaking discretion for an event reported under ASAP. If the parties to an ASAP MOU do not permit their respective ERC representative to exercise this discretion, the capacity of the ERC to achieve consensus will be undermined, and the program will ultimately fail.
2)      Recognizing that the FAA holds statutory authority to enforce the necessary rules and regulations, it is understood that the FAA retains all legal rights and responsibilities contained in 49 U.S.C. and FAA Order 2150.3. In the event there is not a consensus of the ERC on decisions concerning a report involving an apparent violation(s), a qualification issue, or medical certification or qualification issue, the FAA ERC representative will decide how the report should be handled (e.g., acceptance or exclusion of the report, or corrective action for an event accepted under ASAP). The FAA will not use the content of an ASAP report in any subsequent enforcement action except as described in paragraph 11‑43B1).
3)      When the ERC becomes aware of an issue involving the medical qualification or medical certification of an airman, the ERC must immediately advise the appropriate Regional Flight Surgeon about the issue. The ERC will work with the Regional Flight Surgeon and the certificate holder’s medical department or medical consultants to resolve any medical certification or medical qualification issues or concerns revealed in an ASAP report, or through the processing of that report. The FAA ERC member must follow the direction(s) of the Regional Flight Surgeon with respect to any medical certification or qualification issue(s) revealed in an ASAP report.
4)      The program may be terminated at any time by any party for any reason.
5)      Report De‑identification. ASAP provides for confidentiality of reporter identity outside of the ERC, but not reporter anonymity within the ERC itself. The ASAP manager may elect to remove the employee’s name (but should not remove any other information, such as date of the event, tail number, etc.) for initial ERC report review. The purpose of removing the reporters name is simply to reduce the likelihood that personal knowledge of the individual may bias the initial evaluation of the event. FAA ERC members need the specifics (other than employee identity) concerning the event (date, flight number, location, etc.) in order to efficiently accomplish their responsibility to determine whether the FAA has received independent information (i.e., information, such as a preliminary pilot deviation report, outside of ASAP) concerning the event.
6)      Safety Data Collection, Analysis, and Retention Processes. Through the collection and aggregation of de‑identified ASAP data, the parties to the MOU can identify and analyze trends and target resources to reduce risks. Data are gathered from the reports and used to identify trends. Corrective actions are devised to counter adverse trends. Data are again gathered to determine the effectiveness of any corrective actions undertaken. If needed, new or additional corrective actions are devised and implemented. Data are used to evaluate the effectiveness of these new actions. This process continues until the actions are deemed successful, and then data are used to monitor long‑term success and ensure there is no recurrence.
7)      ASAP Manager. The person, designated by the air carrier, serving as the focal point for information about, and inquiries concerning the status of, ASAP reports, and for the coordination and tracking of ERC recommendations. Duties include:
a)      Receives, records, tracks, analyzes and responds to ASAP reports.
b)      Maintaining the ASAP database and facilitating ERC member access, as needed.
c)      Preparing meeting agenda.
d)      Tracking corrective action(s).
e)      Recording repeat instances of noncompliance with 14 CFR.
f)        Providing employee feedback.
8)      ASAP Database. Individual program participants may develop data acquisition, event categorization, and risk analysis schemes that work best for them. However, FAA representatives should be cognizant of FAA‑sponsored development and implementation of a voluntary national information sharing venue for ASAP, and should convey that information to their ERC counterparts, as well as to the ASAP manager. In order to enable voluntary sharing of ASAP information from multiple program participants, a common taxonomy (classification scheme) tailored to the type of events and corrective actions appropriate for a particular employee group must be created. Although not required to do so, operators interested in participating in safety information sharing at a national level may want to consider adopting part or all of the endorsed national classification scheme for a given employee group, in order to facilitate their participation in that initiative. In any case, regardless of a participant’s internal classification scheme for ASAP events, participants who wish to participate in national information sharing will need to map their events to the agreed upon national scheme for a given employee group in order to participate in that information sharing effort. Information concerning the national information sharing initiative for ASAP is available from the Manager, Voluntary Safety Programs Branch, AFS‑230.
a)      Suggested items for inclusion in a report tracking/categorization scheme include:

·        Report number (certificate holder defined),

·        Event category (certificate holder defined),

·        Report type (sole or non‑sole source),

·        Referred to another line of business (when, what department, followup),

·        Possible 14 CFR violation (yes/no),

·        Sufficient evidence (yes/no),

·        Risk category (certificate holder defined),

·        ATOS element (if appropriate),

·        Corrective action recommendation (description),

·        FAA action, if any (letter of correction, warning notice or letter of no action),

·        Written counseling, or oral counseling action accomplished, if any,

·        Completion date, followup required (yes/no),

·        Corrective action effective (yes/no),

·        Time to completion, and

·        Person responsible for additional information (investigation/interview, etc.).

b)      Database information retention requirements: safety related information should be retained for a period of time sufficient for the ERC to determine whether its recommended corrective actions have been effective, but not less than for two years.

D.    Sole‑Source Reporting. Often, the only information available concerning a safety event will be the individual’s ASAP report. Under ASAP this is referred to as a “sole source” report. Therefore, for the purposes of FAA action under ASAP, an individual’ s ASAP report is considered sole source when all evidence of the individual reporter’s involvement in the event available to the FAA is discovered by or otherwise predicated on the report. The intent of the ASAP is to correct safety concerns that are identified by the program. Safety risks/threats identified in sole source reports must be addressed by the ASAP ERC. Corrective action for the individual and/or the air carrier should be recommended, if appropriate.

1)      The ERC will close the sole source report and provide feedback to the reporting employee in a form and manner acceptable to the ERC.
2)      It is possible to have more than one sole source report for the same event.
3)      After the investigation is complete and the only evidence of the individual reporter’s involvement in the event available to the FAA is obtained from the reporting individual, or is caused by or predicated upon that individual’s accepted sole source report, no additional FAA enforcement action or correspondence outside of the ERC is required. Such reports are closed with an ERC response to the submitter, and corrective action under ASAP, if the ERC determines that such corrective action is appropriate.
4)      Accepted sole source reports shall NOT be closed with an FAA Letter of No Action, letter of correction or a warning notice.

E.     Sufficient Evidence. Sufficient evidence means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual’s safety‑related report. (See paragraph 11‑37V for the complete definition.) Reports which are accepted into the program and supported by sufficient evidence are referred to as non‑sole source reports.

1)      For accepted non‑sole source reports, the inspector should only open an Enforcement Investigative Report (EIR) at such time during the investigation that it is determined that sufficient evidence of an apparent violation exists, as defined in paragraph 11‑37V.
a)      For non‑sole source reports that are accepted under an ASAP, neither administrative action nor informal action will be taken against an individual for an apparent violation unless there is sufficient evidence of the violation, other than the individual’s safety‑related report.

If sufficient evidence supports a violation for a non‑sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3, current edition). This matrix may be used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non‑sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action if appropriate).

b)      For non‑sole source reports that are accepted under ASAP, an FAA warning notice, letter of correction, or informal action (see note above), in addition to an appropriate ERC reply to the reporter, would be used to close an ERC investigation when the evidence provided for the accepted non‑sole source report is sufficient to prove a violation.
c)      For non‑sole source reports that are accepted under ASAP, an FAA letter of no action, in addition to an appropriate ERC reply to the reporter, would be used to close an ERC investigation when there is not sufficient evidence, as defined in paragraph 11‑37V.
2)      Under ASAP, except for reports that appear to involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification, the content of any individual’s ASAP report will not be used as evidence by FAA for any purpose in an FAA enforcement action.
3)      Corrective action refers to any safety‑related action determined necessary by the ERC based upon a review and analysis of the reports submitted under an ASAP. Corrective action may involve joint or individual action by the parties to the ASAP MOU.
a)      Corrective action for employees is any safety‑related action determined necessary by the ERC based upon a review, investigation, and analysis of the event(s).
b)      Corrective action for certificate holder systemic issues is any safety‑related recommendation determined necessary by the ERC, based upon a review, investigation, and analysis of the event(s).

1.      The ASAP manager should convey such ERC recommendations to the appropriate company department head for consideration.

2.      The certificate holder may implement as recommended, modify, or decline to implement.

3.      The ASAP manager must record, track, and followup company response and action.

4.      Any recommended corrective action that is not implemented will be recorded along with the stated reason why it was not implemented.

5.      Repeated occurrences of systemic issues should be brought to the attention of company and FAA management.

4)      FAA ERC representative:
a)      Should recommend corrective action whenever it is appropriate given the nature of the event, regardless of whether it is sole source or non‑sole source.
b)      Is responsible for tracking and followup for ERC‑recommended corrective action to assure that it has been accomplished to the satisfaction of the FAA.
c)      May elect to observe accomplishment of corrective action to ascertain acceptability.

F.      Enforcement‑Related Incentive. An enforcement‑related incentive is the minimum FAA enforcement action that is needed to achieve the desired goal(s) and results of the program when alleged infractions of 14 CFR are involved.

If sufficient evidence supports a violation for a non‑sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix is used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non‑sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action if appropriate).

1)      Apparent violations of the regulations by employees of a certificate holder disclosed through safety‑related reports will be addressed with administrative action or informal action if (see note above):
a)      Sufficient evidence exists; and
b)      The apparent violation(s) is inadvertent and does not involve an intentional disregard for safety.
2)      Violations that are not inadvertent or that involve an intentional disregard for safety are specifically excluded from the program and any enforcement‑related incentive will not apply to these violations.

ASAP ERC members are encouraged to consider the conduct definitions and associated attributes found in Order 2150.3, when determining whether a report should or should not be accepted under the ASAP.

3)      Reports that appear to involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification are automatically excluded from the program and are turned over to the proper authorities for further investigation.
4)      Conduct that raises a question of a lack of airman competence or qualification, medical certification or other employee competence/qualification issues may be addressed by ASAP; however, the employee must successfully complete all of the recommendations in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC to be covered by the program and the ERC must comply with paragraph 11‑41C3).
5)      Reports initially accepted under an ASAP will be excluded from the program if the employee fails to complete the recommended corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC. Failure of a certificate holder to follow through with corrective action acceptable to all members of the ERC to resolve any safety deficiencies will ordinarily result in termination of the program. In addition, failure of any individual to complete corrective action for an apparent violation, a competence or qualification issue, or medical certification issue in a manner acceptable to all members of the ERC, may result in the reopening of the case and referral of the matter for appropriate action.

11-42             GUIDELINES FOR ACCEPTANCE AND EXCLUSION OF REPORTS UNDER ASAP. Participation in ASAP is limited to certificate holder employees and to events occurring while acting in that capacity. Each employee participating in ASAP must individually submit a report in order to receive the enforcement‑related incentives and benefits of the ASAP policy. However, in cases where an event may be reported by more than one person, each individual who seeks coverage under ASAP must either sign the same report or submit separate signed reports. The ERC should not complete its deliberations on acceptance/exclusion of a report, classification as sole source/non‑sole source, etc., until the FAA member informs the ERC that he/she has completed the investigation of the event.

A.     Criteria for Acceptance. The following criteria must be met in order for a report involving a possible violation to be covered under ASAP:

1)      The employee must submit a report in a timely manner. In order to be considered timely, a report must be submitted in accordance with either of the following two criteria:
a)      Within a time period following the event that is defined in the MOU, such as within 24 hours of the end of the duty day in which the event occurred. If the ERC reaches consensus that this criterion has been met, a report would not be rejected for timeliness, even if the FAA was already aware of the possible noncompliance with the regulations, and may have brought it to the attention of the employee;
b)      Within 24 hours of having become aware of possible noncompliance with 14 CFR in accordance with the following criteria:

1.      If a report is submitted later than the time period after the occurrence of an event stated in the MOU, the ERC will review all available information to determine whether the employee knew or should have known about the possible noncompliance with 14 CFR within that time period.

2.      If the employee did not know or could not have known about the apparent noncompliance with 14 CFR within that time period, then the report would be included in ASAP, provided the report is submitted within 24 hours of having become aware of possible noncompliance with 14 CFR, and provided all other ASAP acceptance criteria have been met.

3.      If the employee knew or should have known about the apparent noncompliance with 14 CFR, then the report will not be included in ASAP, unless the MOU states that a sole source report that meets all other ASAP acceptance criteria except timeliness will be accepted.

2)      The alleged regulatory violation must be inadvertent, and must not appear to involve an intentional disregard for safety. As stated in Order 2150.3, inadvertent apparent violations are generally the result of simple failure to exercise reasonable care.

ASAP ERC members are encouraged to consider the conduct definitions and associated attributes found in Order 2150.3, when determining whether a report should or should not be accepted under the ASAP.

3)      The reported event must not appear to involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification.
4)      Sole source reports that meet all of the MOU acceptance criteria except timely submission will be accepted under ASAP, provided that the ASAP MOU includes a specific provision to that effect.
5)      Reports involving the same or similar possible noncompliance with 14 CFR that were previously addressed with administrative action under ASAP will be accepted into the program, provided they otherwise satisfy the acceptance criteria under paragraph 11‑42A above. The ERC will consider on a case‑by‑case basis the corrective action that is appropriate for such reports.

B.     Nonreporting Employees. Nonreporting employees are employees of the certificate holder that have been identified in an ASAP report as possibly having been involved in an alleged violation and have neither signed that report nor submitted a separate report. For the purposes of ASAP, there are two types of nonreporting employees—those employees of the group covered by an ASAP MOU and those employees that are not covered by an ASAP MOU.

1)      If an ASAP report identifies another covered employee of the certificate holder in a possible violation, and that employee has neither signed that report nor submitted a separate report, the ERC will determine on a case‑by‑case basis whether that employee knew or reasonably should have known about the possible violation. If the ERC determines that the employee did not know or could not have known about the apparent violation(s), and the original report otherwise qualifies for inclusion under ASAP, the ERC will offer the nonreporting employee the opportunity to submit his/her own ASAP report.
a)      If the nonreporting employee submits his/her own report within 24 hours of notification from the ERC, that report will be afforded the same consideration under ASAP as that accorded the report from the original reporting employee, provided all other ASAP acceptance criteria are met.
b)      If the nonreporting employee fails to submit his/her own report within 24 hours of notification by the ERC, the possible violation by that employee will be referred to an appropriate office within the FAA for additional investigation and reexamination and/or enforcement action, as appropriate, and for referral to law enforcement authorities, if warranted.
2)      If an ASAP report identifies another employee of the certificate holder who is not covered under an ASAP MOU, and the report indicates that employee may have been involved in a possible violation, the ERC will determine on a case‑by‑case basis whether it would be appropriate to offer that employee the opportunity to submit an ASAP report. If the ERC determines that it is appropriate, the ERC will provide that employee with information about ASAP and invite the employee to submit an ASAP report.
a)      If the employee submits an ASAP report within 24 hours of notification by the ERC, that report will be covered under ASAP.
b)      If the employee fails to submit an ASAP report within 24 hours of notification by the ERC, the possible violation by that employee will be referred to an appropriate office within the FAA for additional investigation and reexamination and/or enforcement action, as appropriate, and for referral to law enforcement agencies, if warranted.

C.     Excluding Reports from ASAP. The following types of reports are excluded under an ASAP:

1)      Reports involving an apparent violation that is not inadvertent or that appears to involve an intentional disregard for safety. For example, a pilot misreading an item on a checklist ordinarily would be considered inadvertent. Failure to use the checklist, however, would not be considered inadvertent.

ASAP ERC members are encouraged to consider the conduct definitions and associated attributes found in Order 2150.3, when determining whether a report should or should not be accepted under the ASAP.

2)      Reports that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification;
3)      Untimely reports excluded under paragraph 11‑42A1) or reports where a consensus on acceptance under paragraph 11‑42 is not reached by the ERC;
4)      Reports of events that occurred when NOT acting as an employee of the certificate holder; and
5)      Reports initially included in an ASAP will be excluded from the program if the employee fails to complete the recommended corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC. In those cases, failure of any individual to complete corrective action for an apparent violation, a competence or qualification issue, or medical certification or qualification issue in a manner acceptable to all members of the ERC may result in the reopening of the case and referral of the matter for appropriate action. Failure of a certificate holder to follow through with corrective action acceptable to all members of the ERC to resolve any safety deficiencies will ordinarily result in termination of the program.

11-43             ENFORCEMENT POLICY. The content of the ASAP report will not be used to initiate or support any company disciplinary action, or as evidence for any purpose in an FAA enforcement action, except as provided in paragraph 11‑43B1). The following enforcement policy shall apply to reports submitted under ASAP:

A.     Reports Accepted Under ASAP. An individual’s report that is accepted into ASAP will be addressed using the following enforcement policy:

1)      Those non‑sole source reports included in ASAP with sufficient evidence (see paragraph 11‑37V for the definition of sufficient evidence) to support a violation of 14 CFR will be closed with administrative action or informal action (see note). Those non‑sole source reports without sufficient evidence to support a violation of 14 CFR will be closed with an FAA letter of no action.

If sufficient evidence supports a violation for a non‑sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix may be used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non‑sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action if appropriate).

Important: If the Streamlined No Action and Administrative Action Process (SNAAP) is used, source code 44 must be entered on the SNAAP job aid. If it is not used, code 44 must be entered on the FAA Form 2150‑5, Enforcement Investigation Report,  for those non‑sole source reports included in ASAP supported by sufficient evidence and closed with administrative action. Code 44 signifies that the information is protected from release under 14 CFR part 193.

2)      Those sole source reports that are included in ASAP will be closed with appropriate corrective action and an ERC response to the submitter (no FAA action).
3)      Those reports included in ASAP that demonstrate a lack of qualification or competence, or raise a question of a lack of qualification or competence, will be addressed with appropriate corrective action recommended by the ERC, provided the employee completes the corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC.

B.     Reports Excluded from ASAP. Reported events that are excluded from ASAP will be referred to the FAA for possible enforcement action and/or re‑examination under 49 U.S.C., Subtitle VII, and as prescribed in the current edition of FAA Order 2150.3.

1)      Reports of events that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification will be referred to an appropriate FAA office for further handling. The FAA may use such reports for any enforcement purposes, and will refer such reports to law enforcement agencies, if appropriate. If upon completion of subsequent investigation it is determined that the event did not involve any of the aforementioned activities, then the report will be referred back to the ERC for a determination of acceptability under ASAP. Such reports will be accepted under ASAP provided they otherwise meet the acceptance criteria contained in paragraph 11‑42A.
2)      Neither the written ASAP report nor the content of the written ASAP report will be used to initiate or support company discipline or as evidence for any purpose in an FAA enforcement action except as provided for in paragraph 11‑43B1). The FAA may conduct an independent investigation of an event disclosed in a report.

C.     Reopening  Reports Based o n New Evidence. All safety‑related reports should be fully evaluated and, to the extent appropriate, investigated by the FAA. The ERC should not accept or close a report until all member investigations concerning the event are completed, including the determination of whether independent information on the event (i.e., information not obtained from, or predicated upon, the ASAP report) is known to the FAA. A closed ASAP case, including any related EIR, involving a violation addressed with administrative action, informal action, or for which no action has been taken, may be reopened and appropriate enforcement action taken if evidence later is discovered that establishes that the violation should have been excluded from the program.

D.    Violations of Certificate Holders. Apparent violations of certificate holders disclosed through a safety‑related report under an ASAP may be handled under the VDRP, provided the certificate holder voluntarily reports the apparent violations to the FAA and the other elements of that policy are met. (See the current edition of AC 00‑58 and FAA Order 2150.3) The FAA shall use the knowledge of the event to conduct such independent investigation of the operator’s apparent violation(s) as is deemed appropriate, including opening an enforcement investigative report, and, where the FAA has accepted the voluntary disclosure of a violation by the regulated entity, the FAA shall close the event with an FAA letter of correction (administrative action).

1)      Special provisions exist for apparent violations by certificate holders when a voluntary disclosure is made based on information in an ASAP report. If the FAA has learned of an apparent violation by a certificate holder from an ASAP report, a voluntary disclosure can still be accepted by the FAA, even though the FAA has already learned of the violation from the ASAP. In such cases, the FAA may, at its sole discretion, accept the corrective action recommended by an ASAP ERC for an accepted ASAP report as the comprehensive fix for the voluntary disclosure. This is acceptable when the following conditions all apply (even when an apparent employee qualification or competency issue is involved):
a)      The FAA determines that the violation is due entirely to the actions of the employee(s) and not to a systematic or procedural deficiency of the company; and
b)      The employee completes the corrective action recommended by the ASAP ERC to the satisfaction of the FAA.

E.     Enforcement Investigation Coordination. The CHDO is the focal point of all enforcement‑related investigations resulting from events reported through the ASAP.

1)      If an event occurs within the jurisdiction of a FSDO other than the CHDO of the certificate holder involved, the FSDO will contact the CHDO of the certificate holder to coordinate appropriate action. The FSDO should delay opening an EIR until establishing contact with the appropriate CHDO. The FSDO should determine whether the certificate holder has an ASAP for the applicable employee group by accessing the Flight Standards Service (AFS) ASAP Web page at http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_initiatives/aircraft_aviation/asap/.
2)      The CHDO, upon learning of an ASAP event that may involve a violation of 14 CFR, will contact the investigating FSDO which has jurisdiction over the geographical area where the event occurred. If the alleged violator has submitted an ASAP report that has been accepted into the certificate holder’s ASAP, that FSDO shall transfer the investigation, including any open EIR, to the CHDO for further investigation and disposition. If the ASAP report was not accepted into the program, the investigation and EIR remain at the FSDO where the ASAP‑reported event occurred unless the Regional headquarters agrees to transfer the case in accordance with chapter 6, paragraph 8b of Order 2150.3.

Other related reports, such as an incident report or preliminary pilot deviation report, must be completed in accordance with current guidance materials regarding such reports. These reports should normally be completed by the FAA office having jurisdiction over the event. However, the CHDO may request the transfer of an incident, preliminary pilot deviation report. or other report associated with an event reported under ASAP. If the CHDO requests transfer of a report, the CHDO must ensure that AFS responsibilities with respect to that report are completed in a timely manner.

11-44             MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. The elements of an ASAP are set forth in an MOU between the FAA, certificate holder management, and an appropriate third party, such as an employee labor organization or their representatives. A program will be implemented in accordance with the provisions of its MOU. Each MOU will be based on the parties’ different needs and purposes for an ASAP. Required elements of an MOU are identified in the ASAP MOU Checklist Job Aid (see Figure 11‑11).

A.     Parties to the MOU. For the purpose, the term “party/parties” refers to the certificate holder, FAA, and any other person or entity that is a signatory to the MOU and would be a major contributor to the success of the respective ASAP. This could include labor unions or other industry or government entities. It should be noted that FAA only regulates certificate holders and other persons subject to 14 CFR. However, all signatories are expected to conform to the provisions of the MOU.

B.     Development Theme. The MOU should be written with the theme of open communication and trust between the parties to the agreement.

C.     MOU Elements. Each MOU will be based on the parties’ different needs and purposes for an ASAP. The MOU shall set forth the elements of the ASAP.

1)      An automated AFS ASAP MOU template is available for downloading at http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_initiatives/aircraft_aviation/asap/. While use of this template is not mandatory, it is recommended for use by certificate holders in developing their ASAP MOU. Benefits of using this template include expedited review and acceptance processes of the MOU.
2)      Certificate holders may develop a proposed ASAP MOU that does not make use of the template referenced in the preceding paragraph. In these cases, the checklist provided (see Figure 11‑11) shall be used by the FAA when the MOU is being reviewed. Certificate holders should use this checklist during development of their MOU to verify that all of the required content is present. This checklist provides the minimum elements necessary for an ASAP MOU to be accepted by the FAA. The checklist should be completed in its entirety and forwarded with the MOU for processing. The CHDO should verify accurate completion of the checklist by the certificate holder prior to forwarding the MOU for review at the respective regional FAA headquarters and AFS‑230.

D.    MOU Signatories. The MOU must be signed by an authorized representative of each party. The MOU will be signed by the CHDO office manager on behalf of the FAA following receipt of a letter of authorization from the Director, Flight Standards Service, AFS‑1.

11-45             ASAP PROGRAM ACCEPTANCE, EXTENSION, RENEWAL, AND AMENDMENT PROCEDURES. When a certificate holder submits an MOU, assigned inspectors should review the key terms and concepts in AC 120‑66, current edition, and this section. The checklist job aid (Figure 11‑11) should then be completed if applicable, to ensure that the MOU complies with FAA policy.

A.     Initial Review by CHDO. The certificate holder should initially develop and present the program to the CHDO for review.

1)      The CHDO and the certificate holder will review it to ensure that it satisfies the guidance in AC 120‑66, current edition, and this section. Prior to acceptance, the program should be reviewed to ensure that sufficient FAA and company resources are available to administer the program effectively. Program proposals that require agency resources exceeding available levels should not be recommended by the CHDO for acceptance.
2)      When the CHDO is satisfied that the program is acceptable under the guidance of ASAP, the CHDO manager forwards an electronic copy of the proposed MOU, and the CHDO’s recommendation for acceptance, to the respective Flight Standards division regional office and to the ASAP program office, AFS‑230. If the proposed MOU does not employ the ASAP MOU Flight Standards Service automated template referenced in paragraph 11‑45F, a completed ASAP checklist (Figure 11‑11) shall accompany the proposed MOU for processing.

For the purposes of review by the Flight Standards division regional office and Headquarters FAA, AFS‑230, a signed copy of the MOU is not required. The MOU may be signed by the respective parties following receipt by the FAA CHDO manager authorized by the Director, Flight Standards Service, to sign the MOU on behalf of the FAA.

a)      The ASAP program office shall review and, if required, forward a copy of the MOU to the Office of the Chief Counsel, Enforcement Division, AGC‑300, for appropriate legal review. MOUs that utilize the template do not require AGC review.
b)      All programs, except for renewals of continuing programs, shall receive authorization on final acceptance from AFS‑1. AFS‑1 will indicate authorization for acceptance of the MOU by FAA memorandum to the CHDO manager through the regional division manager. AFS‑230 will be responsible for preparing the memorandum for AFS‑1’s signature and submitting it with the ASAP package to AFS‑1.
c)      Following authorization by AFS‑1, the CHDO manager shall sign the MOU on behalf of the FAA. The certificate holder should allow a minimum of 60 days for the FAA acceptance process to be completed once its ASAP program is received at FAA headquarters for review.

B.     Demonstration Program Extensions. If the company requests an extension of the initial demonstration program beyond 18 months, the local CHDO manager shall inform the Manager, AFS‑230, of the request by electronic message. Upon receipt of authorization from AFS‑230 by return electronic message, the CHDO manager shall grant the request by CHDO letter to the company. The CHDO manager must forward a signed copy of the extension letter to the ASAP program office, AFS‑230, for program tracking purposes.

C.     Continuing Program Initial Acceptance. Initial acceptance of a continuing program is processed in the same manner as described in paragraph 11‑45A.

D.    Renewal of a Continuing Program. The renewal of an existing continuing program is accomplished every 2 years after a review by the parties to the MOU to ensure the particular ASAP program is meeting its objectives. The renewal may be accomplished at the local CHDO level by the CHDO manager signing the MOU on behalf of FAA. The company should notify the CHDO of its request for renewal 60 days in advance of the expiration of an existing continuing program ASAP MOU. The CHDO manager shall notify the ASAP program office, AFS‑230, by email 45 days in advance of renewing an existing continuing ASAP program.

E.     Program Reviews and Reports.

1)      Annual Review. The ERC conducts an annual review of the ASAP database with emphasis on determining whether corrective actions have been effective in preventing or reducing the recurrence of safety‑related events of a similar nature. That review will include recommendations for corrective action for recurring events indicative of adverse safety trends.
2)      End of Demonstration Program Report. The ERC is responsible for preparing a final report on the demonstration program at its conclusion. If an application for a continuing program is anticipated, the ERC will prepare and submit a report with the certificate holder’s application to the FAA 60 days in advance of the termination date of the demonstration program. This allows the effective measurement of any change(s) made to the original program that addresses a deficiency identified by any of the parties to the MOU.
3)      FAA Program Review. The purpose of the program review is to collect information, data, and feedback from participants that will enable an assessment of whether the safety objectives of the program are being achieved, and whether those results are being effectively documented. To the maximum extent possible the FAA program review is scheduled to coincide with the end of demonstration or first continuing program MOU expiration. The review is completed on site during a regularly scheduled ERC meeting. The review incorporates a survey questionnaire combined with an observation of the ERC meeting followed by feedback concerning the conduct of the meeting, including a discussion of the program review questionnaire responses. In addition the reviewer provides clarification of ASAP policy, guidance, discussions of national program trends, and concludes with a short question and answer session.

F.      FAA ASAP Policy Updates. As the FAA and industry gain experience with ASAP, §FAA ASAP policy will evolve to reflect lessons learned. AFS has established a Web page (http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_initiatives/aircraft_aviation/asap/) to provide the most current information on ASAP policy updates. If the FAA makes changes to ASAP policy, they will appear on the ASAP Web page prior to publication elsewhere. The Web page also contains an automated template to facilitate the generation of an ASAP MOU by airlines and major domestic repair stations interested in starting new programs. Although not required, use of the automated template is strongly encouraged, because MOUs that use the standard language from that program can be quickly accepted. The template will always reflect the most current FAA policy on ASAP. If the certificate holder and, where applicable, its associated labor association elect to revise an accepted MOU to incorporate updates to FAA ASAP policy, the following acceptance procedures will apply:

1)      The AFS ASAP Web page will serve as the reference source for updates to FAA ASAP policy. Until revised, guidance to industry provided in AC 120‑66, current edition, will continue to apply, except as noted on the ASAP Web page. The ASAP Web page will contain the exact language that describes policy updates to these documents.
2)      The CHDO manager will accept revisions to accepted ASAP MOUs that are revised to incorporate updates to FAA ASAP policy when such revisions employ the exact policy language that appears in the MOU template on the AFS ASAP Web page. The FAA does not require coordination and review of such revisions above the level of the CHDO manager. However, an information copy of the revised MOU shall be provided to the Manager, AFS‑230, P.O. Box 20027, Washington, DC 20041, following acceptance.
3)      Following CHDO review, revisions to accepted ASAP MOUs that do not incorporate the exact policy language that appears in the MOU template on the AFS ASAP Web page must be forwarded for further review through FAA regional headquarters to AFS‑230. The CHDO must provide, by cover letter, its recommendations regarding acceptance of such revisions.

G.    Revision Control. Certificate holder should employ standard revision control methodology with respect to revisions to the MOU. The original and subsequent revisions should include:

1)      For each revision to an original MOU, a change control page, identifying the revision number, a brief synopsis of each change to the original document, and specifying which pages are to be removed and replaced.
2)      A list of effective pages.
3)      A table of contents.
4)      On each page of the MOU, a calendar date for when that page was prepared or revised.
5)      For all revisions to an original MOU, a revision number on each page that is revised.
6)      Sequential page numbers on all pages of the MOU (except the cover page, if applicable, which shall be understood to constitute page (i)).

H.    Recordkeeping. The parties should maintain those records necessary for a program’s administration and evaluation. Records submitted to the FAA for review relating to an ASAP are protected to the extent allowed by law under applicable exemptions of the Freedom of Information Act. All records and documents relating to an ASAP must be kept in a manner that ensures compliance with 14 CFR and all applicable laws, including the Pilots Records Improvement Act.

I.       Aviation Safety Inspector (ASI) Training. ASIs should be adequately prepared to perform ASAP‑related duties as outlined below:

1)      ASIs who will review an ASAP MOU for recommended acceptance or will participate in an ERC should attend training as prescribed by the Flight Standards Training Division.
2)      ASIs who will serve as ERC representatives should meet the following minimum qualifications:
a)      Three years of AFS experience (Series 1825).
b)      One year of 14 CFR part 121 certificate management experience.
c)      ASAP initial/continuing training.
d)      Except for new ASAP programs, attendance at three ERC meetings. For a new ASAP program, inspector attendance, if feasible, at another certificate holder’s ERC is recommended for training purposes prior to the inspector’s participation in the new program.

11-46             PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) INPUT. For activity associated with participation in the ASAP review committee, operations and cabin safety inspectors should enter the PTRS code 1391 for each set of such reports reviewed; maintenance inspectors should use PTRS code 3395, and avionics inspectors should use 5395 for these reviews. Enter the designator code appropriate to the air carrier or major domestic repair station whose ASAP program was associated with the reports. Use the numeric‑miscellaneous field to record the number of reports reviewed. Comments regarding the report content or conduct of the ASAP program may be entered as necessary. For sole source reports regarding actions of individual employees, the inspector should not enter the name of the employees.

A.     If an enforcement investigation associated with an ASAP report is initiated, the inspector shall enter the code ASAP in the National Use block of the PTRS initiated, in order to track aspects of ASAP. This entry is in addition to the PTRS code appropriate for the specific activity (e.g., 1735/33, 3731/33, 5731/33). It is also important to complete the Designator Block with the appropriate air carrier or major domestic repair station designator code even when completing a PTRS activity involving an employee of the certificate holder.

B.     General comments regarding the report content or conduct of the ASAP program may be entered as necessary. For sole source reports regarding actions of individual employees, the inspector should not enter the name of the employees.

11-47             QUARTERLY REPORTS ON SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS.

A.     The fundamental purpose of ASAP is to enhance safety. It is therefore important to maintain an audit trail of the extent to which the program is achieving that objective. Office managers shall prepare a summary report of safety enhancements achieved each quarter by each certificate holder’s ASAP program(s) for which they have oversight responsibility. Quarterly reports shall be sent by electronic mail to the respective regional headquarters AFS division office and to the Manager, AFS‑230, using the report format provided in the example, Figure 11‑12.

B.     This information is maintained on an FAA internal SharePoint site, access to which is available to any AFS inspector upon request to AFS‑230. Regional division ASAP coordinators should use the SharePoint site to track compliance by individual FAA offices with the quarterly report submission requirement, as well as to review safety enhancements achieved in their region through ASAP. The information should be considered protected from public release under FAA Order 8000.82, Designation of Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Information as Protected from Public Disclosure under 14 CFR Part 193, and part 193. Direct access requests should be sent to the Manager, AFS‑230.

11-48             ASAP DATA AND INFORMATION CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON‑DISCLOSURE CRITERIA.

A.     A significant impediment to the sharing of ASAP information with the FAA is the aviation industry’s concern over public disclosure of the information, and, if disclosed, the potential for it to be used for other than the safety enhancement purposes for which the ASAP was created. Under Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.), § 40123, certain voluntarily provided safety and security information is protected from disclosure in order to encourage persons to provide the information to the FAA.

B.     Order 8000.82 designates information received by the agency from an ASAP as protected from public disclosure in accordance with the provisions of part 193.

C.     Title 14 CFR part 193 protection—with the exception of ASAP MOUs, and de‑identified summarized information as specified in Order 8000.82, other ASAP data and information is protected from disclosure under FOIA.

D.    FAA Guidelines on Use of Information from ASAP

1)      Classification—“Protected from disclosure under 49 U.S.C., section 40123 and 14 CFR part 193” and therefore should be considered “For Official Use Only”—to be disclosed within the FAA on a “need to know” basis.
2)      ASAP Reports—De‑identified information on an event may be used within the FAA for mission pertinent purposes, such as surveillance planning, policy development, or rulemaking.
3)      ERC Deliberations—the FAA ERC member may communicate within the FAA the facts disclosed by the investigation and disposition of any event reported under ASAP, including follow‑up for corrective actions. However, it is not considered a “best practice” for office managers and supervisors in inquire as to specific content of discussion within the ERC.
 

Figure 2–24, Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Checklist

If the certificate holder chooses not to use the ASAP Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) template, available on the Web at: http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs_initiatives/aircraft_aviation/asap/, when developing an MOU, it should use the following checklist to ensure that the MOU adequately addresses all necessary elements. FAA personnel shall use this checklist when reviewing an MOU developed without the aid of the template. An MOU may contain additional information not included in the checklist that is necessary for the operation of the program. This checklist shall be submitted to the FAA certificate‑holding district office (CHDO) along with the completed MOU at the time of submission for FAA acceptance. The CHDO shall review this checklist to ensure that all provisions of the ASAP have been met in accordance with the guidance material and that the certificate holder has accurately completed the checklist. The CHDO shall include the completed checklist along with other applicable items discussed in this section for Regional and Headquarters review. The RESPONSE column should be answered for each question. The response should be YES, NO, or NA (not applicable). All NO or NA responses should include a brief explanation as to why that item was marked NO or NA. The REFERENCE column should also be completed by identifying the location of the particular item’s response in the certificate holder’s MOU (e.g., MOU, page 2, paragraph 3a).

ASAP MOU Checklist

NO.

ITEM

RESPONSE

(Circle Yes, No, or NA)

MOU Paragraph

REFERENCE

1

Does this program involve a part 121 Air Carrier or part 145 Major Domestic Repair Station?

Yes      No       NA

 

2

Is this ASAP:

 

 

a

Specific to an employee group(s)?

Yes      No       NA

 

b

A Demonstration program?

Yes      No       NA

 

c

An Extension of a Demonstration program?

Yes      No       NA

 

d

A Continuing program?

Yes      No       NA

 

e

A renewal of a Continuing program?

Yes      No       NA

 

3

Is the duration of the program limited to the period of time needed to achieve the desired goals and benefits articulated in the program? Demonstration programs initially should have a duration of no longer than 18 months and should be reviewed prior to renewal. Demonstration programs that undergo changes after their initial review may be renewed for no longer than 12 months. Programs that are classified as Continuing must be reviewed and renewed every 2 years.

Yes      No       NA

 

4

Have all parties to the ASAP entered into this agreement voluntarily?

Yes      No       NA

 

5

Is there a description of the objective(s) of the program which includes:

 

 

a

The essential safety information that is reasonably expected to be obtained through the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

b

Any specific safety issues that are of a concern to any of the parties?

Yes      No       NA

 

c

The benefits to be gained through the use of the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

6

Is there a description of any enforcement‑related incentive that is needed to achieve the desired goal and results of the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

7

Is there a statement that all safety‑related reports shall be fully evaluated and, to the extent appropriate, investigated by the ERC?

Yes      No       NA

 

8

Is there a description of the manner in which ASAP records and reports shall be kept that ensures compliance with Federal Aviation Regulations or the Pilot Records Improvement Act (PRIA), and any other applicable laws?

Yes      No       NA

 

9

Is there a description of the process for timely reporting to the ERC all events disclosed under the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

10

Is there a description of the procedures that provide for:

 

 

a

The resolution of safety‑related events?

Yes      No       NA

 

b

Continuous tracking of those events?

Yes      No       NA

 

c

The analysis of safety‑related events?

Yes      No       NA

 

11

Is there a description of the ERC ASAP report acceptance and exclusion criteria?

Yes      No       NA

 

12

Is there a description of the frequency of periodic reviews by the parties to determine whether the program is achieving the desired results? (These reviews are in addition to any other review conducted by the FAA or any other party individually).

Yes      No       NA

 

13

Is there a statement that the ERC shall be comprised of one representative from each party to the MOU, and a description of the duties of the ASAP manager? (The ASAP manager may either be the same individual assigned as the company management representative to the ERC, or it may be another individual from company management who will not serve as a voting member of the ERC.)

Yes      No       NA

 

14

Is there a description of the process for training and distributing information about the program to certificate holder management and employees and procedures for providing feedback to individuals who make safety‑related reports under the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

15

Is there a statement that modifications to the MOU must be accepted by all parties?

Yes      No       NA

 

16

Is there a statement that termination or modification of a program will not adversely affect anyone who acted in reliance on the terms of a program in effect at the time of that action. (i.e., when a program is terminated, all reports and investigations that were in progress will be handled under the provisions of the program until they are completed.)

Yes      No       NA

 

17

Is there a statement that the program can be terminated at any time, by any party?

Yes      No       NA

 

18

Is there a statement that failure of any party to follow the terms of the agreement ordinarily will result in termination of the program

Yes      No       NA

 

19

Is there a statement that failure of a certificate holder to follow through with corrective action acceptable to FAA, to resolve any safety deficiencies, will ordinarily result in termination of the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

20

Is there a detailed description of the following concepts if they are included in the program and, if appropriate, how they will be used:

 

 

a

ERC?

Yes      No       NA

 

b

Consensus of the ERC?

Yes      No       NA

 

c

Sole‑source reporting?

Yes      No       NA

 

d

Sufficient evidence?

Yes      No       NA

 

e

Enforcement‑related incentive?

Yes      No       NA

 

21

Is there a statement that repeated instances involving the same or similar possible noncompliance with 14 CFR that were previously addressed with Administrative Action under the ASAP will be accepted into the program, provided that they otherwise meet the acceptance criteria of ASAP? (The ERC will consider on a case‑by‑case basis the corrective action that is appropriate for such reports.)

Yes      No       NA

 

22

Does the ASAP include an MOU procedure to identify the date, time, location or fix, altitude, flight number, and ATC frequency at the time the event occurred? (This applies to ASAP MOUs that contain provisions for ATC events.)

Yes      No       NA

 

23

Is there a statement that employees initially covered under an ASAP will be excluded from the program and not entitled to the enforcement‑related incentive if they fail to complete the recommended corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC? (These cases may result in the reopening of the case and referral of the matter for appropriate action.)

Yes      No       NA

 

24

Is there a statement that any safety‑related ASAP event that concerns an apparent violation(s) that is EXCLUDED from ASAP, will be referred by the FAA ERC representative to an appropriate office within the FAA for any additional investigation and reexamination and/or enforcement action, as appropriate?

Yes      No       NA

 

25

Is there a statement that a closed ASAP case, including a related EIR, that involves a violation addressed with Administrative Action or for which no action has been taken, may be reopened if evidence is later discovered that establishes the event should have been excluded from the program?

Yes      No       NA

 

26

Is there a statement that when the ERC becomes aware of an issue involving the medical qualification or medical certification of an airman, the ERC must immediately advise the appropriate Regional Flight Surgeon about the issue? (The ERC will work with the Regional Flight Surgeon and the certificate holder’s medical department or medical consultants to resolve any medical certification or qualification issues or concerns revealed in an ASAP report, or through the processing of that report. The FAA ERC member must follow the direction(s) of the Regional Flight Surgeon with respect to any medical certification or medical qualification issue(s) revealed in an ASAP report.)

Yes      No       NA

 

27

Is there a statement that reports that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification will be referred to an appropriate FAA office for further handling? The FAA may use such reports for any enforcement purposes and will refer such reports to law enforcement agencies, as appropriate.

Yes      No       NA

 

28

Is there a statement that the ASAP manager will maintain an electronic database that tracks each event through and including closure of that event by the ERC and enables trend analysis?

Yes      No       NA

 

Figure 2–25, ASAP Safety Enhancement Report Format Example

CHDO: AEA‑FSDO‑99

REGION: EA

FISCAL YEAR: 2007

FISCAL YEAR (SEPT ‑ OCT) QUARTER: 1ST

ASAP MOU HOLDER NAME: ABC Airlines

ASAP MOU HOLDER FAA DESIGNATOR: ABCA

ASAP MOU EMPLOYEE GROUP(S): Pilot, Mechanic

ASAP ERC CONTACT INFORMATION & PRESENT QUARTER STATISTICS

Pilot MOU

FAA Member: John Smith, john.smith@faa.gov, (718) 456‑7890

Company Member: Fred Jones, fsjones@abcair.com, (718) 567‑8901

Labor Member: Allan Doe, adoe@labor.org, (718) 678‑9012

ASAP Manager: Mary Moppett, mmop@abcair.com (718) 567 ‑9001

Number of ASAP reports submitted present quarter: 20

Number of ASAP reports accepted present quarter: 19

Number of accepted reports present quarter that were sole source to the FAA: 17

Number of accepted reports present quarter (both sole source & non‑sole source) closed with corrective action under ASAP for the employee: 12

Number of reports present quarter which resulted in recommendations to the company for corrective action: 5

Mechanic MOU

FAA Member: James Goodrench, james.goodrench@faa.gov, (718) 654‑0987

Company Member: Miles Togo, mtogo@abcair.com, (718) 765‑1098

Labor Member: Will Walker, wwalker@labor.org, (718) 876‑2109

ASAP Manager: Miles Togo, mtogo@abcair.com

Number of ASAP reports submitted present quarter: 15

Number of ASAP reports accepted present quarter: 15

Number of accepted reports present quarter that were sole source to the FAA: 10

Number of accepted reports (both sole source & non‑sole source) closed with corrective action under ASAP for the employee: 14

Number of reports present quarter which resulted in recommendations to the company for corrective action: 2

DESCRIPTION OF SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS:

Pilot ASAP:

Safety Issue Identified: Ambiguous procedures for radio frequency change on landing: An ASAP report was submitted stating that after landing in San Francisco, CA (SFO), the flight crew was never advised to change frequency to Ramp Control. The report stated that the crew was under the impression that they were not supposed to change frequency unless advised to do so, and they therefore had taxied to the gate without contacting Ramp Control.

Corrective Action Taken: A Pilot Bulletin was issued to change the Jeppesen page 10‑7 instructions, replacing “expect to contact Ramp Control on 127.57” with “You are required to contact Ramp Control on 127.57.”

Safety Issue Identified: Repeated instances of flightcrew members failing to take immediate and decisive aircraft flightpath modification in response to TCAS Warnings

Corrective Action Taken: Need for pilot immediate compliance to TCAS warnings highlighted in quarterly Safety Newsletter. TCAS events added to LOFT scenarios for all pilot recurrent training

Mechanic ASAP:

Safety Issue Identified: Conflicting guidance between the General Procedures Manual (GPM) and the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). The GPM requires a leak check of the static lines after using a quick disconnect. The AMM does not require leak checks for quick disconnects.

Corrective Action Taken: A Quality Control Alert was issued to notify everyone that the GPM procedures take priority over the AMM and quick disconnects will be leak checked prior to returning the aircraft to service.

Safety Issue Identified: Repeated instances of failure to use the torque wrench required in the maintenance manual, resulting in bolts coming loose during flight

Corrective Action Taken: Purchased additional torque wrench equipment to increase availability at all maintenance locations. Highlighted need to use torque wrenches as prescribed by maintenance manual procedures in monthly mechanic newsletter. Emphasized the safety issue to all maintenance supervisors in quarterly maintenance safety meeting.

 

 

 

 

John Doe

CHDO/CMO Manager

Copy to:  AEA‑230

AFS‑230

This report should be prepared and forwarded electronically to the regional division office and to the Manager, AFS‑230, as a Word document. In order to preclude submission of multiple files with the same file name and to facilitate archiving of reports over time, a specific file naming format should be used, as follows: ASAP‑AIRLINE DESIGNATOR‑FISCAL YEAR‑FISCAL QUARTER‑EMPLOYEE CATEGORY CODE(S).DOC. The following employee category codes should be employed: P for Pilot, D for Dispatch (or flight follower), M for Maintenance, L for Load Planners, F for Flight Attendant, R for ramp worker, X for other. For reports containing safety enhancements for more than one employee group, multiple employee category codes should be strung together in the file name. Examples: ASAP‑ABCA‑2007‑1‑PM.doc; ASAP‑ABCA‑2007‑1‑PDM.doc.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 11‑49 through 11‑62.

 

12/31/07                                                                                                                       8900.1 CHG 9

Volume 13  FLIGHT STANDARDS DESIGNEES

chapter 1  Air TRANSPORTATION designated examiners

Section 2  Managing Programs

13‑24   SELECTION OF EXAMINERS. This section applies to the selection of examiners in the Air Carrier Designated Examiner (ACDE) Program. Selection criteria for training center evaluators (TCE) are located in 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 54, Section 2.

NOTE: Preferred sources for examiner candidates are (1) airmen who are actively engaged in the activity for which examinations are to be conducted and (2) retired or former inspectors. Prior experience as a designated examiner or aviation safety inspector may be considered to meet the examiner requirement for check airman experience.

A.     Application. Examiner candidates must submit the following before designation:

1)      A completed statement of professional qualifications on Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 8710‑6, Examiner Designation and Qualification Record (Figure 13‑1). The supervising inspector will review the candidate’s qualifications to ensure that the candidate meets the requirements and standards for an examiner designation;
2)      A copy of a completed and current FAA Form 8430‑9, Certificate of Authority (Figure 13-3), if the candidate currently holds an examiner designation(s) and examiner letters of authority issued to the candidate; and
3)      Copies of any current check airman letters of approval issued to the candidate.

Figure 13‑1, FAA Form 8710‑6, Examiner Designation and Qualification Record

Figure 13‑1, FAA Form 8710‑6, Examiner Designation and Qualification Record (Continued)

B.     Qualifications of Aircrew Program Designees (APD) and TCEs. Candidates must have the following qualifications:

1)      A recommendation from the operator that includes a résumé of training and professional experience;
2)      A good record as a pilot and flight instructor and a good record of compliance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) (isolated and unrelated violations or incidents are not disqualifying);
3)      Approval as a check airman for the operator in its 14 CFR part 121 or 135 training program;
4)      A reputation for integrity and dependability in the industry and the community;
5)      An Airline Transport Pilot Certificate and applicable type rating for pilot examiners, or the appropriate airman certificate for flight engineer (FE)/aircraft dispatcher examiners. (Examiners authorized to conduct evaluations in aircraft must possess at least a third class medical certificate. A medical certificate is not required for simulator evaluators. (Ref. Order 8710.3E, Designated Pilot and FE Examiners Handbook));
6)      APDs must have successfully completed the operator’s approved training program in which the candidate will be authorized to conduct evaluations for the issuance of certificates; and
7)      Satisfactorily completed a formal ground school conducted by the FAA that includes the subjects contained in paragraph 13‑25.

NOTE: See Volume 13, Chapter 2, Section 3 for more detail regarding APD qualifications.

C.     Qualifications of Candidates Other Than Pilots. Examiner candidates who are not pilots must have the following qualifications:

1)      Designated FE examiner (FEE) candidates must have successfully completed the operator’s approved training program in which the candidate will be authorized to conduct evaluations for the issuance of certificates, or the training program conducted by the training center and the appropriate training in the differences between the operator’s approved training program and that of the training center;
2)      Designated FE and aircraft dispatcher examiner candidates must have satisfactorily completed a formal ground school conducted by the FAA that includes the subjects contained in paragraph 13‑25;
3)      Hold the appropriate airman certificate and rating(s), if applicable;
4)      Status as a FE check airman or dispatcher supervisor, as appropriate, in the operator’s training program;
5)      A recommendation from the operator that includes a résumé of training and professional experience; and
6)      A good record of compliance with the 14 CFRs. (Isolated and unrelated violations or incidents are not disqualifying.)

13‑25   EXAMINER CANDIDATE TRAINING AND OBSERVATION. The supervising inspector will ensure that examiner candidates are trained and observed in their functions prior to designation. TCEs must also complete the employing center’s approved instructor and TCE training as well as the training described in this section.

A.     Candidate Training. Examiner candidates must be trained in certification policies, procedures, and standards. The supervising inspector must ensure that the candidate is trained in the following specific areas:

7)      The knowledge, abilities, and skill requirements for the original issuance of the certificate and added ratings, as applicable;
8)      The procedures, methods, and techniques associated with administering the required certification tests;
9)      Examiner responsibilities, authority, and limitations under 14 CFR and applicable FAA orders;
10)  The use of FAA forms and job aids associated with the particular examiner function; and
11)  Administrative procedures and relationships with supervisory inspectors.

D.    Representing the FAA. Inspectors will stress to examiner candidates that in performing the functions of an examiner, they are representatives of the Administrator. Candidates must understand that matters such as company loyalties, economic conditions, union affiliations, and seniority are not relevant to the certification of airmen.

E.     FAA Observation of the Candidate. After the examiner candidate has been trained, a qualified inspector will observe the examiner candidate conducting a complete certification test consisting of oral, simulator, and aircraft portions, (or practical evaluation) as applicable. The following methods of observation may be used, in descending order of preference:

1)      An Actual Certification Evaluation. The preferred method is that the inspector observes an examiner conducting all portions of an actual certification test.
2)      Simulated Certification Evaluation. When circumstances make the observation of an actual certification test impractical, inspectors may observe the examiner candidate conducting a competency or proficiency check as if the check were being conducted for certification.
3)      Other methods. Other methods, such as the inspector acting as the applicant, may be used when preferred methods are not practical.

F.      Recording Examiner Training. Supervising inspectors who conduct training for an examiner candidate will complete FAA Form 8000‑36, Program Tracking and Reporting Subsystem (PTRS) Data Sheet, using activity code 1595 for each examiner candidate trained. The inspector will use Section IV and J799 to identify the type of training activities that are conducted.

13‑26   OVERSIGHT AND SUPPORT OF DESIGNATED EXAMINERS. Supervising inspectors are responsible for the oversight and support of designated examiners. The following guidance applies:

B.     Meeting with Examiners. Supervising inspectors will ensure competent performance by each designated examiner in respect to handling of applicants, maintenance of desired test standards, and accurate completion and processing of certification paperwork. Designated examiners should be encouraged to contact their supervising inspectors to resolve questions or difficulties. Sufficient contact is essential, and will include regular and special meetings and annual briefings, as follows:

1)      Regular Safety Standardization Meetings. At least annually, supervising inspectors will conduct regularly scheduled meetings with designated examiners for the purpose of maintaining desirable standards and effective working relationships. These meetings will be recorded in the PTRS system under activity code 1595.
2)      Special Safety Standardization Meetings. Supervising inspectors will call special meetings whenever a significant change affects the process of FAA airman certification in respect to air transportation examiners.
3)      Annual FAA Briefing of Examiner. Each designated examiner must attend an annual briefing conducted by a supervising inspector which specifically addresses the functions of a designated examiner. This briefing may be accomplished in conjunction with a safety standardization meeting, but must be accomplished as a condition of renewal.

G.    Examiner Supplies and Materials. Supervising inspectors will ensure that each designated examiner has access to the materials necessary for the examiner’s tasks. The following materials will be made available before designation of any candidate, and revisions to the materials, will be made readily accessible to the designee thereafter:

1)      Volume 3, Chapter 20, Check Airman, Instructor, and Supervisor Programs for Part 121 and 135 Certificate Holders;
2)      Volume 5, Airman Certification;
3)      FAA Order 8710.3E, Chapter 5, Conduct Practical Test/Certification Functions, Chapter 11, Conduct an Airline Transport Certification, including Additional Category/Class Ratings at the Airline Transport Certification Level, Chapter 13, Conduct a Pilot Type Rating Certification, and Chapter 14, Conduct a Flight Instructor Practical Test for an Initial, Renewal, Reinstatement Certification, or an Additional Category/Class Rating to a Flight Instructor Certificate. Chapter 5 contains samples of applications, completed certificates and other information;
4)      Appropriate job aids;
5)      FAA Form 8060‑4, Temporary Airman Certificate;
6)      FAA Form 8060‑5, Notice of Disapproval of Application; and
7)      FAA Form 8000‑36, PTRS Data Sheet.

13‑27   EXAMINER RECORDS FILE. The designating Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) or certificate management office (CMO) will maintain an examiner records file for each designated examiner. This file will contain the following:

·        FAA Form 8710‑6, for each original designation and renewal;

·        FAA Form 8430‑9, for each original designation of authority and renewal;

·        FAA Form 8000‑5, Certificate of Designation for each original designation and renewal;

·        Violations history, if any, available from the Flight Standards Information System (FSIS); and

·        Any pertinent correspondence.

NOTE: This information may be obtained through the national Flight Standards Automation System (FSAS)/Integrated Safety Information Subsystem (ISIS) database. It will provide the supervising inspector with a complete record of the candidate’s qualifications, accident, incident, and enforcement history, and PTRS activity as selected during the query process.

13‑28   PROCESSING INITIAL EXAMINER DESIGNATIONS. Supervising inspectors will ensure that all the requirements for an examiner designation have been met and will prepare the necessary paperwork as follows:

A.     PTRS Codes, Part 183:

·        1551—Pilot Examiner—Large/Turbine (ATPE/DPE),

·        1552—Pilot Examiner—Other (DPE),

·        1553—Pilot Proficiency Examiner (PPE),

·        1555—Aircraft Dispatcher,

·        1559—Training Center Evaluator  (TCE),

·        1561—FEE, and

·        1562—Aircrew Program Designee (APD).

B.     FAA Form 8710‑6, Examiner Designation and Qualification Record. After the examiner applicant has completed and signed the front of FAA Form 8710‑6, the supervising inspector will complete the form as follows:

1)      On the back of the form under the block labeled “Additional Qualifications,” enter the certificates, ratings, and aircraft type, as applicable, for which the designated examiner is authorized to conduct certification tests.
2)      In the action block at the bottom on the reverse side of the form, cross out the word “region” and enter the word “district” or “certificate management,” as applicable.
3)      Check both sides of the form for accuracy and completeness.
4)      Enter the type of designation, “APD” or “TCE,” followed by the certificate and airplane type in the space labeled, “Type of Designation,” below the “District Office Action” block. (i.e., ATP AMEL B‑727).
5)      Enter the designated examiner’s airman certificate number and designation identification in the space labeled, “Certificate of Authority Issued” in the space titled, “No.” If the examiner candidate is to be an APD for an air carrier, use the designator for that air carrier. If the candidate is to be a TCE, use the designator for the training center.
6)      Enter the expiration date, which is normally the last day of the mouth in the following year corresponding to the month of designation. Special circumstances may call for an earlier expiration date.
7)      Enter the applicable Flight Standards office in the “DO to Serve Under” block.
8)      Sign the “Inspector’s Signature” block.

C.     Examiner Designation Numbers. For APDs and TCEs the airman’s certificate number, coupled with the applicable 4‑character air carrier or training center designator, may be used in all instances when an examiner designation number may be called for. If the examiner candidate is to be an APD for an air carrier, use the designator for that air carrier. If the candidate is to be a TCE, use the designator for the training center (i.e., an APD for Delta Airlines would be 123456789DALA).

D.    Other Forms. Supervising inspectors will prepare FAA Form 8000‑5, and FAA Form 8430‑9 (see Figures 13‑2 and 13‑3, respectively). The originals of these forms will be issued to the designated examiner. Copies will be retained in the appropriate examiner’s record file.

Figure 13‑2, FAA Form 8000‑5, Certificate of Designation

Figure 13‑3, FAA Form 8430‑9, Certificate of Authority

E.     Approval Authority. The office manager, principal operations inspector (POI), Training Center Program Manager (TCPM), or an inspector authorized to act for these individuals, will indicate approval of each examiner candidate by completing the first line of the block labeled, “District Office Action” on the FAA Form 8710‑6, and by signing in the appropriate spaces on FAA Forms 8710‑6, 8430‑9, and 8000‑5.

F.      Letter of Authority (LOA). The inspector approving the candidate’s designation as an examiner will prepare the LOA. The LOA serves two purposes:

·        It specifies the exact authority conveyed to the examiner by the designation, which may not be otherwise possible to include on FAA Form 8430‑9 due to space limitations; and

·        It provides a record of approval and a basis for subsequent amendment and dissemination of information to affected FAA offices which may be transmitted via electronic mail.

13‑29   DESIGNATED EXAMINERS ABROAD. An examiner may be designated to serve at locations outside of the United States, provided the designated examiner will examine only U.S. citizens or applicants trained under a training center’s approved program, or individuals employed as flight crewmembers of a 14 CFR part 121 or 135 air carrier and trained under that operator’s approved training program. An FAA inspector must adequately supervise the designated examiner’s activities. POIs may depend upon inspectors provided by International Field Offices (IFO) or by another domestic field office for this supervision. A person who is not a U.S. citizen may be designated as an examiner abroad only when the need cannot be filled by a U.S. citizen and the individual has met the U.S. certification requirements for the examining authority requested. Additionally, approval must be obtained from the applicable regional Flight Standards division (RFSD) manager.

13‑30   SHARED OVERSIGHT OF EXAMINERS. A check airman may be designated as more than one type of designated examiner or as a designated examiner for more than one operator. In such a case, more than one inspector may supervise a designated examiner. The following guidance applies:

C.     Supervisory Responsibilities. POIs and managers should delegate responsibility for supervising all of a designated examiner’s activities to a single inspector when practical. It may be necessary, however, for the supervisory responsibility to be divided in accordance with the activities the designated examiner is authorized to perform. For example, a check airman might be approved as an APD by authority of a FSDO in Florida; under that authority the examiner might conduct B‑747 type ratings for an operator whose certificate is held in that state. The same person might also be designated pilot examiner (DPE) for General Aviation (GA), by authority in Colorado. In such a case, the examiner would be supervised by an APM in Florida for B‑747 activities and by an appropriately rated inspector in Colorado for GA activities.

G.    Responsibility for Maintaining Examiner Files. An inspector must be assigned the responsibility for maintaining a particular designated examiner’s file. When more than one FSDO is involved, the file should normally be maintained by the office for which the designated examiner performs air transportation functions. When the examiner conducts certifications for more than one part 121 or 135 operator, the file should be maintained in the office of original designation. Other arrangements are permissible and may be negotiated to the satisfaction of the applicable FSDOs and CMOs.

H.    Procedure for Granting Additional Examination Authority. The training and observations required for an examiner’s second designation must be completed before the designated inspector can amend the examiner’s FAA Form 8710‑6, and FAA Form 8000‑5, FAA Form 8430‑9, and LOA.

1)      When the authority is requested for an examiner to be designated for a second operator, the examiner candidate must complete qualification as a check airman for the second operator as a precondition of designation.
2)      The inspector tasked with performing any required observations of the designated examiner is responsible for notifying the inspector who maintains the designated examiner’s file once the observations have been completed and the check airman designation has been made for the second operator.

I.       Expiration Date. All designations expire on the expiration date on the FAA Form 8710‑6, FAA Form 8430‑9, and LOA, which is the normally the last day of the month in the following year corresponding to the month of designation. Part 183 calls for a 1‑year term to expiration. Special circumstances may call for an earlier expiration date, but not a longer one.

1)      When an examiner performs multiple certification services under authority granted by a single FSDO, the supervising inspector should normally change the expiration date to the last day of the month in the following year corresponding to the month of the most recent designation.
2)      When an examiner performs multiple certifications under authority granted by a more than one FAA office (as in paragraph 13‑30A), the expiration date is not normally changed.

J.      Records. When the oversight of a designated examiner is shared by more than one FAA office, the FSDO manager or the CMO manager with responsibility for maintaining the designated examiner’s records file will coordinate with the other office(s), as appropriate, before approving the designation. When the designation has been completed, a copy of the LOA will be sent to those other office(s).

13‑31   AMENDMENT OF DESIGNATED EXAMINER DESIGNATIONS. The manager responsible for maintaining a designated examiner’s records file may amend an examiner’s Forms 8000‑5, 8710‑6, 8430‑9, and LOA at any appropriate time. An amendment is appropriate when any of the following elements of a designated examiner’s certification authority is changed: designation, certificate, aircraft type, operator, or training center. When a Form 8000‑5 is amended, the inspector must cancel any previously issued form by marking the words “CANCELED” across the face of the certificate, and issue a new one. When Form 8000‑5 is amended to include more than one designation, Form 8710‑6 must also be amended. The supervising inspector will enter an adequate description of each designation in the “Additional Qualifications Limitations” block. Form 8430‑9 will be changed as well to reflect the additional authorizations. When more than one FSDO or CMO is involved, the office supervising each activity must be listed on this certificate. The supervising inspector will show the additional authorities and limitations on the LOA and forward copies to the affected offices. The administrative steps for the issuance of an amended certificate of designation are the same as those outlined for initial designation (see paragraph 13‑26).

13‑32   RENEWAL OF DESIGNATIONS.

A.     PTRS Codes, Part 183:

·        1551—Pilot Examiner—Large/Turbine (ATPE/DPE),

·        1552—Pilot Examiner—Other (DPE),

·        1553—Pilot Proficiency Examiner (PPE),

·        1555—Aircraft Dispatcher,

·        1560—Training Center Evaluator (TCE),

·        1561—FEE, and

·        1562—Aircrew Program Designee (APD).

B.     An examiner designation expires no later than the last day of the month in the following year corresponding to the month of original issue or most recent renewal. The renewal process will normally be accomplished during the two months preceding or in the month that the designation will expire.

NOTE: Example: An examiner designated on January 15, 1994, would expire on January 31, 1995. The renewal process would normally be conducted in the period from November through January, completing the process no later than the end of January.

C.     The examiner will not conduct any evaluations after the due date if he/she has not been renewed and issued a new Form 8430‑9. If the renewal process is not completed within 30 days following the expiration date, the examiner may be reinstated using the same process used for initial designation. At expiration a designation does not continue in force. The inspector should ensure that the need for a designated examiner continues to exist before considering renewal. If conditions necessitating an examiner continue to exist, the examiner’s designation is normally renewed in the month corresponding to the month of original issue or most recent renewal. Inspectors should use the following procedures:

1)      Required Forms. The inspector assigned to the designated examiner will renew the designation after satisfactory completion of the required annual observation and required annual briefing. The following forms will be updated:

·        FAA Form 8710‑6,

·        FAA Form 8430‑9,

·        LOA, and

·        Initiate a new FAA Form 8000‑36 to record the renewal action after all actions have been completed.

2)      Annual FAA observation of check.

·        PTRS Code, part 183:

·        1664—Pilot Examiner—Large/Turbine (ATPE/DPE),

·        1665—Pilot Examiner—Other (DPE),

·        1666—Pilot Proficiency Examiner (PPE),

·        1668—FEE,

·        1669—Aircraft Dispatcher,

·        1672—Aircrew Program Designee (APD), and

·        1673—Training Center Evaluator (TCE).

a)      Within three calendar-months before expiration, the examiner will be observed conducting a complete check. In the case of pilot examiners (DPE, PPE, APD, TCE), this evaluation will include observation of oral, simulator and aircraft evaluation activities, as applicable. The observation will be conducted by the supervising inspector, or by another appropriately rated inspector appointed by the supervising inspector.
b)      For renewal purposes, inspectors may observe designated examiners conducting the following activities, in descending order of preference:

·        A certification check,

·        A proficiency check, or

·        A competency check.

NOTE 1: In rare cases, the inspector may observe the examiner’s own proficiency or competency check. To complement this observation, the inspector may perform maneuvers or procedures for the designated examiner to evaluate.

NOTE: 2: If the necessary observations cannot be accomplished within the required time frame, the inspector should evaluate the continued need for an evaluator.

c)      When the designated examiner has authorizations for certification services that are closely related (DPE/PPE/TCE), only one observation by an inspector may be required.

NOTE: Example: A TCE with examination authority for more than one operator under the same training program needs to be observed annually performing the applicable activities for only one of the operators if the operators’ curricula are essentially the same and the POI/TCPM concurs.

d)      Similarly, participation in a line observation program and demonstration of instructional proficiency need be accomplished on only one of the operators. When an individual is authorized to evaluate personnel of more than one operator, the observations should be rotated among the operators’ programs. On the other hand, an APD for the B‑747 who is concurrently a DPE in gliders needs at least two annual FAA observations, one in each activity.
e)      The designated examiner is responsible for scheduling each required annual FAA observation and each annual briefing far enough in advance to ensure that they may be accomplished before expiration. A designated examiner who is beyond expiration may not conduct any certification activity on behalf of the Administrator until all annual requirements are met and the renewal has been completed.
f)        Each designated examiner must attend a meeting or a briefing conducted by an inspector which specifically addresses the functions of a designated examiner. This briefing may be accomplished in conjunction with a safety or standardization meeting.

13‑33   PROCESSING DESIGNATED EXAMINER CERTIFICATION PAPERWORK. Section 183.17 requires that designated examiners make reports as prescribed by the Administrator. Designated examiners will forward airman certification paperwork to the designated FSDO for review, processing, and transmittal to the Airman Certification Branch. When a multiple designation with more than one supervising office is involved, certification paperwork will be sent to the supervising office for each designation. This paperwork will only be submitted to, and processed by, the specified office; it may not be accepted by other offices.

A.     Designated Examiner Responsibilities. Designated examiners must complete the airman certification paperwork in accordance with the requirements of this volume. The paperwork must be accurate, complete, and timely. Designated examiners must complete the PTRS data sheets for each test conducted. Satisfactory fulfillment of this responsibility is a requirement for renewed designation as an examiner.

B.     Supervising Inspector Responsibilities. Supervising inspectors are responsible for training designated examiners on correct documentation. Supervising inspectors should provide the designated examiners with ample PTRS data sheets, and should ensure that as much information as possible is overprinted on these forms. Inspectors may overprint forms or job aids in any convenient manner, such as by pen, pencil or copy machine.

13‑34   REVIEW OF DESIGNATED EXAMINER DECISIONS. If an airman is dissatisfied with a designated examiner’s decision, the airman may appeal to the supervising inspector for a retest. The airman must submit the appeal in writing and indicate the reasons for protesting the designated examiner’s decision. The responsible inspector will review the matter and decide if retesting is appropriate. If the inspector grants a retest, a new application must be completed by the airman, and the entire test must be accomplished again with an FAA inspector.

13‑35   TERMINATION AND CANCELLATION OF DESIGNATED EXAMINER DESIGNATION. An examiner designation normally terminates at the expiration date, but may be terminated early or canceled for cause.

A.     Normal and Early Termination. The termination of an examiner designation may be based on any of the following administrative factors:

·        A change in needs for examiner services;

·        A change in the designated examiner program policy;

·        A change in the designated examiner’s employment, base of operations, or professional activities, such as loss of check airman status;

·        Voluntary surrender of the designation, by the designated examiner’s written request for termination; or

·        A request for termination of examiner authority made by the designated examiner’s employer.

B.     Cancellation for Cause. An examiner designation may be canceled for cause by the FAA under certain circumstances. The cancellation of an examiner designation may be based on any of the following causes:

·        Evidence of malpractice, fraudulent use of the designation, or any actions by the designated examiner which discredit the FAA;

·        Unsatisfactory performance in any aspect of the designated examiner’s functions, including failure to complete certification paperwork accurately or unwillingness or inability to carry out the supervising inspector’s instructions;

·        Evidence indicating that requirements for the original designation were not met at the time of designation; or

·        Failure of the examiner to meet annual requirements for renewal in a conscientious and timely manner.

13‑36   CANCELLATION FOR CAUSE PROCEDURES. The following steps will be followed when implementing cancellation for cause:

A.     Certified Mail—Return Receipt Requested. POIs, TCPMs and FSDO/CMO managers will notify a designated examiner of the cancellation of the examiner’s designation for cause by Certified Mail—Return Receipt Requested (see Figures 13‑4 and 13‑5). A letter will also be sent by conventional mail to each operator or training center that is affected by the cancellation. The letter will be prepared by the supervising inspector and will contain the following:

·        A notification that the cancellation is effective immediately;

·        A statement that prohibits the designated examiner from conducting any further examinations until the matter is resolved;

·        A clear statement of the reasons for the cancellation action;

·        The specific reasons for the proposed action, together with relevant 14 CFR or FSIMS guidance;

·        In the case of unacceptable conduct by a designated examiner, specific examples of this conduct;

·        A statement that the designated examiner has the option to respond in writing or to appear in person within 10 days of receipt of the letter;

·        A statement that if the designated examiner chooses to appear in person, the examiner may be accompanied by counsel;

·        A statement that the designated examiner has a right to appeal to the RFSD manager in writing or in person;

·        A statement that a record will be made of any meeting concerning appeal; and

·        A statement that directs the designated examiner to return to the FSDO the FAA Form 8430‑9, and FAA Form 8000‑5, as well as all unused FAA materials and supplies.

Figure 13‑4, Sample Letter of Notification of Proposed Revocation

(Office Letterhead)

November 28, 2007

 

“CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED”

In Reply

Refer to: Jones

Mr. John J. Examiner

1011 S. Cottage Grove Ave.

Urbana, Illinois 33022

Dear Sir,

This office has evidence that indicates you issued a B‑787 type rating to Mr. John Smith on November 27, 2007, without conducting the required flight examination.

This is to inform you that this matter is under investigation by the Federal Aviation Administration, and this office is considering canceling your airman examination designation. We wish to offer you an opportunity to discuss the incident personally and/or submit a written statement. If you desire to do either, this should be accomplished within 10 days following receipt of this letter. Your statement should contain all pertinent facts and any extenuating or mitigating circumstances which you believe may have a bearing on this incident. You may contact this office by telephone at (303) 555‑1111.

Until this matter is resolved, you may not conduct any airman examinations and are directed to return all examiner materials and supplies issued to you.

Sincerely,

John Jones

Manager

Figure 13‑5, Sample Letter of Notification

(Office Letterhead)

December 1, 2007

 

“CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED”

In Reply

Refer to: Jones

Yucan Fly Aviation

141 Airport Road

Aileron, Illinois 33022

 

Dear Sir,

This letter serves as notice that Mr. John J. Examiner no longer has authorization to represent the Federal Aviation Administration as a pilot examiner.

Any questions regarding this matter may be directed to the Flight Standards District Office by telephone at (303) 555‑1111.

Sincerely,

John Jones

Manager

B.     Fact‑Finding Meeting. The manager having designation authority will conduct a fact‑finding meeting when requested by the designated examiner. A record of this meeting must be made by the inspector, in the form of notes taken by a secretary, a summary made by an inspector, or a transcript prepared by a court reporter. The designated examiner will be provided with a copy of the record and will be offered an opportunity to submit comments. The manager will attach to the record any comments submitted by the designated examiner.

C.     Decision of the Inspector—Notification Procedures. The inspector having approval authority for a designated examiner also has cancellation authority. Before reaching a decision, the inspector, usually the POI or FSDO manager, will consider the facts provided by the designated examiner and the advice provided by the certificate manager and the RFSD. Once a decision is reached, the inspector will notify the designated examiner by Certified Mail‑Return Receipt requested. The decision will be (1) to allow the designated examiner to resume examination activities at once; (2) to resume examination activities after having successfully completed specified training and reevaluation; or (3) to cancel the examiner’s designation.

D.    Appeal to the Regional Flight Standards Division Manager. An airman whose examiner designation has been canceled may appeal that decision to the RFSD manager. In making this appeal, the airman may provide a written statement or may request to appear in person. The following procedures apply:

1)      Appearance in Person. Should the airman request to appear in person, the regional division manager will invite regional counsel to attend. A record of the meeting will be made. The airman will be provided with a copy of the record and will be offered an opportunity to submit comments. These comments will be attached to the record.
2)      Decision of RFSD—Notification Procedures. The airman will be notified of the regional division manager’s decision and the reasons for it by Certified Mail ‑ Return Receipt Requested, with an information copy sent to the CHDO. Should the division manager concur with the inspector in favor of cancellation of the airman’s examiner designation, the letter will include advice to the airman about legal recourse. Recourse is available by petition for review to the United States Court of Appeals within 60 days of the postmark of the division manager’s letter.

E.     Recording the Cancellation for Cause. When an examiner designation is canceled for cause, the POI or office manager will complete the designated examiner’s current FAA Form 8710‑6 as follows:

1)      The word “CANCELED” will be stamped or typed in the block titled, “Inspector’s Recommendation Action,” in the section labeled, “Justification for Approval/Reasons for Disapproval.” In the same space, the inspector or office manager will enter an explanation of the reasons for the cancellation.
2)      The inspector will sign and date the form under the explanation of the reasons for cancellation.
3)      This form will be retained in the designated examiner’s records file in the CHDO for at least two years.

13‑37   OTHER ACTIONS. When an inspector or office manager confirms a report of unacceptable conduct by a designated examiner, such as irresponsibility or incompetence, or personally observes unacceptable conduct, appropriate action must be taken, as follows:

A.     Counseling or Training.

1)      PTRS 1595, parts 61, 63, 65, 121, 135, 142.
2)      Appropriate action may take the form of counseling or training. In such cases, the inspector must record the reason for the action and some description of the action itself, and will enter that information in the PTRS system and in the designated examiner’s records file.

B.     Reexamination for Competence.

1)      PTRS 1534—Reexamination (formerly 609 reexamination).
2)      In cases when professional incompetence is observed or when safety is jeopardized, the inspector may require a reexamination of the examiner’s competence in accordance with Title 49 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) § 44709 (formerly § 609a of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958).

C.     Criminal Prosecution. In extreme cases such as fraud, the facts in the case must be provided to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution.

13‑38   COORDINATION WITH RFSD. Before taking any action, POIs, TCPMs and FSDO managers will ensure the matter is thoroughly documented and will coordinate with the applicable RFSD office and the regional counsel.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 13‑39 through 13‑53.