Aircraft Maintenance ("N" Registered Aircraft): New FAA interpretation could devastate GA

This is relevant to "N" Registered Aircraft owners/operators who undertake aircraft maintenance on their aircraft.

AOPA US are reporting that on September 3, FAA attorneys released a legal interpretation of 14 CFR §43.3(d), effectively changing the FAA’s view of the standard maintenance supervision model that has been in place for the past 60 years. Without industry intervention to have the FAA reconsider its new view, the A&P experience-based training and owner-assisted maintenance models cannot survive.

Although the regulations allow for uncertificated people to perform supervised maintenance, it is vitally important to point out that only the holder of a mechanic or repairman certificate may approve the work and return the aircraft or component to service. This is the catch-all that ensures safety in our industry. Only the supervising mechanic can make the logbook entry, and it is that individual’s certificate and liability on the line. Therefore, it is in the supervising mechanic’s interest to inspect the work and verify that everything was done properly and is truly airworthy before attesting to it in writing.

The Moss interpretation

FAA regulations under 14 CFR are the rules that those who operate under FAA jurisdiction must follow, or risk facing violation or prosecution. However, in cases where a particular regulation may be ambiguous, a request for interpretation may be made to the FAA chief counsel. The response, in the form of a letter or memo, becomes the agency’s legal position that FAA staff will follow. This means that enforcement actions against individuals and businesses will be based on both the text in applicable regulations, and any relevant legal opinions or interpretations made by FAA attorneys.

The Moss interpretation began on July 8, 2022, when Jonathan Moss, manager of the Little Rock Flight Standards District Office, requested an interpretation of 14 CFR §43.3(d), essentially asking if a supervisor must be physically present at the site of the maintenance, or if he may supervise remotely, through Zoom, FaceTime, live feed TV, photographs, downloadable video, or other electronic means.

It took over two years for the FAA to respond with an interpretation, and as is often the risk with asking for an interpretation, the response went much further than a yes/no answer to the question being asked. Included in the three-page Moss interpretation were two essential elements.

The first addressed the concept of remote, video supervision:

The Office of the Chief Counsel finds that the phrase “in person” explicitly requires physical presence. Virtual presence, through a live video feed or other technological means, cannot replace the physical presence of a supervising mechanic.

The second addressed the concept of supervision itself:

The phrase “readily available, in person, for consultation” contemplates a physical, hands-on approach to supervision. The certificated mechanic must be available, not just to answer questions, but to notice mistakes and take over if necessary.

The problem with the Moss interpretation

There are two issues with the Moss interpretation:

The first issue is concerning, but not necessarily devastating. The FAA Office of the Chief Counsel found that virtual technologies cannot be used in lieu of in-person supervision. This is surprising in a world where medicine—even surgery—is sometimes performed using remote technologies and, it should be pointed out, much of the FAA’s own supervisory work with the industry is done remotely.

The second part of the interpretation is what could have devastating repercussions for general aviation. "The certificated mechanic must be available, not just to answer questions, but to notice mistakes and take over if necessary,” as the new FAA interpretation states, completely discounts the concept of supervisor discretion and, in fact, does not acknowledge the text in 14 CFR §43.3(d) that specifically says “to the extent necessary to ensure that it is being done properly.”

As soon as the Moss Interpretation was published, it became “the official view of the FAA” that will be enforced.

AOPA USA is putting AOPA’s resources into action.