July 2013
Table of Contents
Latest News
Sarah Says
ACA Employer Mandate Penalty Postponed Until 2015
Homeland Security Chief Napolitano to Resign
ARSA Looks Forward to Working with Sec. Foxx
Repair Station SMS Implementation Survey Results Are In
A Facility Visit a Day Keeps Bad Policy Away
DOT Sets Semiannual Regulatory Agenda
Irked by the Foreign Repair Station Ban?
Congressional, Senate Staff Visit Danbury AeroSpace
What’s at Stake for ARSA Members in the Farm Bill? More than Just the Price of Steak
Pennsylvania Lawmakers Eliminate Maintenance Tax
Tony Janco Receives Crown Circle Award
ARSA Blog: An Open Letter from Aviation Maintenance Industry to New DOT Sec. Foxx
ARSA Blog: What Does the Royal Baby Have to Do With Repair Stations
Legislative News
House Bill Jump-Starts Small Aircraft Innovation
Legal Briefs
The Unending Major Pain
Regulatory Outlook
Drug and Alcohol Testing: The Inconsistent Truth
Final Documents/ Your Two Cents
Quality Time
Employment Benefit Plans After the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Decision
Authority to Bind – “You Did What?”
Membership
Member Spotlight: Dallas Airmotive – Grapevine, Texas
Have You Seen This Person?
A Member Asked…
Check Out ARSA’s Library of Recorded Webinars and Online Training Classes
Take Advantage of ARSA’s Members Getting Members Program, Get 10% Off on Membership Dues
Target Your Message: Advertise in ARSA’s Newsletters and Website!
Exhibit, Sponsor the 2014 Repair Symposium
2013 Fall Communications/Public Policy Internship
International News
EASA Welcomes Newest Member Croatia
International Roundup
Regulatory Compliance Training
Latest News
Sarah Says: Directly Involved
By Sarah MacLeod, ARSA executive director
This month, ARSA Executive Director Sarah MacLeod discusses how direct involvement in the political process is a must for every business and what your repair station can do to impact policymaking and the local, state, and federal levels. To read MacLeod’s blog, as well as other commentary issued during the month of July, please visit http://blog.arsa.org/.
ACA Employer Mandate Penalty Postponed Until 2015
On July 2, the Obama administration announced the employer mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) will be delayed one year, until Jan. 1, 2015. The White House says it will use that time to simplify and streamline the reporting process, while allowing businesses more time to understand and plan for the implementation of the mandate. Read more at http://arsa.org/aca-employer-mandate-penalty-postponed-till-2015/.
Homeland Security Chief Napolitano to Resign
On July 12, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced she will be stepping down as head of the Department of Homeland Security to become president of the University of California system. Read more at http://arsa.org/homeland-security-chief-napolitano-to-resign/.
ARSA Looks Forward to Working with Sec. Foxx
On June 27, the Senate confirmed Anthony Foxx to the position of secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. ARSA Executive Vice President Christian Klein took a moment to comment on the confirmation and express the way in which the industry hopes to work with the new department chief. Read more at http://arsa.org/arsa-looks-forward-to-working-with-sec-foxx/.
A study from the Center for Aviation Safety Research at Saint Louis University analyzing repair stations safety management system (SMS) implementation indicates the majority (51.5 percent) of repair stations have not started any SMS development activities. The study also finds that there is far from a consensus regarding the actual safety implications of such a program. Read more at http://arsa.org/repair-station-sms-implementation-survey-results-are-in/.
A Facility Visit a Day Keeps Bad Policy Away
One of the challenges ARSA faces on Capitol Hill is that many lawmakers don’t even know the aviation maintenance industry exists. That is why it’s so important to invite elected officials to get a firsthand look at repair stations and the great contributions your company is making to the local economy and aviation safety. Read more at http://arsa.org/a-facility-visit-a-day-keeps-bad-policy-away/.
DOT Sets Semiannual Regulatory Agenda
On July 23, the Department of Transportation published a summary of all current and projected rulemakings, reviews of existing regulations and complete actions planned for the next 12 months. Included on the agenda are the Federal Aviation Administration’s current plans for long-term actions for air carrier maintenance training programs. Read more at http://arsa.org/dot-sets-semiannual-regulatory-agenda/.
Irked by the Foreign Repair Station Ban?
ARSA continues to work behind the scenes with the aviation maintenance industry’s strongest allies on Capitol Hill to introduce legislation to lift the ban on Federal Aviation Administration foreign repair station certifications. While ARSA has been sounding the alarm bells with lawmakers, we need your help. In order to get legislation introduced, it takes a combination of the association’s legislative team educating Congress and hearing from constituents who provide the votes that send them to Washington. Read more at http://arsa.org/irked-by-the-foreign-repair-station-ban/.
Three’s a Charm: ARSA Member Hosts Congressional Offices
Danbury Aerospace in San Antonio, Texas, hosted facility tours for the staff of their local member of Congress and senators over the course of three days, showing them first-hand the terrific contribution repair stations make to the aviation industry and to the local economies. Read more at http://arsa.org/congressional-senate-staff-visit-danbury-aerospace.
What’s at Stake for ARSA Members in the Farm Bill? More than Just the Price of Steak
ARSA Executive Vice President Christian Klein explains how a provision in the Farm Bill could improve the regulatory environment for businesses, including repair stations. Read more at http://blog.arsa.org/?p=220.
On July 9, the Pennsylvania state legislature passed a bill ridding the state tax code of a six percent levy on aircraft maintenance performed in the state. The exemption also applies to the purchase of aircraft parts and components. Supporters of the legislation hope the newly passed law will generate major cost savings for aircraft owners and boost Pennsylvania’s aviation industry. Read more at http://arsa.org/pennsylvania-lawmakers-eliminate-maintenance-tax/.
Tony Janco Receives Crown Circle Award
On July 3, the National Coalition for Aviation and Space Education announced the induction of Tony Janco into the Crown Circle, an award recognizing excellence in leadership and innovation in aerospace education. Janco, the 2011 recipient of ARSA’s Leo Westin Award, has more than 35 years of experience in aviation maintenance and now advises the FAA Aircraft Maintenance Division. Over the past four decades, he has developed programs to provide hands-on maintenance experience for kids and worked to draw more students into aviation repair careers. Read more at http://arsa.org/janco-receives-coveted-aviation-education-award/.
ARSA Blog: An Open Letter from Aviation Maintenance Industry to New DOT Sec. Foxx
ARSA Vice President of Legislative Affairs Daniel Fisher introduces the aviation maintenance industry to incoming Department of Transportation Sec. Foxx and lays out what repair stations hope to see in the coming years. Read more at http://blog.arsa.org/?p=243.
ARSA Blog: What Does the Royal Baby Have to Do With Repair Stations
ARSA Communications Manager Josh Pudnos discusses the error of false assumption and a future website ARSA is launching to serve as a resource about the aviation maintenance industry. Read more at http://blog.arsa.org/?p=233.
Legislative News
House Bill Jump-Starts Small Aircraft Innovation
The Small Airplane Revitalization Act (H.R. 1848) requires the Federal Aviation Administration to issue a final rule based on the Part 23 Reorganization Aviation Rulemaking Committee’s recommendations by the end of 2015. To address outdated regulations that hinder innovation and inhibit release of modern safety technologies, the bill would allow the industry and regulators to develop a more consensus-based compliance standard. Read more at http://arsa.org/house-bill-jump-starts-small-aircraft-innovation/.
Legal Briefs
The Unending Major Pain
Classifying repairs and alterations as major or minor has been a source of confusion to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and therefore the aviation industry, for many years. In fact, the problem dates back to 1931, when the first regulation governing this activity was issued.
The Department of Commerce, regulated aviation under its Aeronautics Branch, issued Aeronautics Bulletin No. 7-H specifying that a “licensed aircraft or a major component thereof” that “has been damaged to such an extent that it constitutes a major repair in the judgment of the Department of Commerce inspector” warranted heightened requirements under the regulations. While certificated repair stations were able to make major repairs “in accordance with the original design on aircraft of the class or classes of structure specified in the terms of its certificate,” any other instances of major repair required approval of technical data and inspection by the agency’s representative.
By the end of the decade, the Civil Aeronautics Authority was created as an independent agency to fulfill the duties of the Aeronautics Branch. The 1931 regulation transformed into 14 CFR part 18, the predecessor to part 43. In 1940, part 18 addressed both major and minor repairs, but not major or minor alterations.
In 1942, definitions of major and minor alterations appeared; the regulation defined minor alterations in detail and classified major alterations as “all alterations not within the definition of minor alterations.” Fast forwarding to the current definitions in 14 CFR § 1.1, the approach is opposite: major repairs and alterations are defined in detail whereas minor repairs and alterations are described as “other than…major.”
While this one-or-the-other approach may seem simplistic, it makes sense: the regulatory requirements for major and minor are different. Thus, from a practical standpoint there cannot be any crossover.
So what else do the current regulations have to say about major versus minor repairs and alterations? It is best to start with the difference between a repair and an alteration. Since 14 CFR § 1.1 does not define either term, we look to part 14 CFR § 43.13, which requires an article be returned “to its original or properly altered condition.” Therefore, a repair is an action that returns the article to its “original” condition, while an alteration creates a “properly altered” condition, or a “new original” (airworthy) condition.
After determining the activity is a repair or an alteration (or, indeed, has aspects of both), the next query is whether the action will be major or minor. Section § 1.1 gives the parameters for an evaluation.
For a repair, the first consideration is whether it is “improperly done.” There are two components to that evaluation: (1) What would happen if the action is improperly designed, and (2) What would happen if the repair is improperly implemented.
With respect to an alteration, however, the first consideration is whether the planned action is “listed in the [product’s] specification,” a definition that is elusive. There is no help in any regulations or FAA guidance materials, and there are several ways the term can be interpreted. One way to interpret product specification is as the configurations available from the type design or supplemental type certificate; if it is contained in the type design, the installation or change to a product is not major. On the other hand, the agency takes the position that changes to an existing product that impact airworthiness characteristics are major alterations even if the type certificate or type design includes all potential configurations and service bulletins are available to change from one to the other. In other words, the evaluation applies to the product being worked on, no matter what is available or possible under the type design or from a design approval holder, e.g., the type certificate holder.
The last evaluations are the same for both major repair and major alteration. First, whether the action can be done “according to accepted practices or…by elementary operations.” Accepted practices include standard procedures from or by the government (FAA, Department of Defense, etc.), the design or production approval holder, or an industry source.
What is elementary for one mechanic or repair station may not be elementary for another. To determine whether the operation is elementary, make sure it is in writing and repeatable, and whether it requires special education or training to accomplish in a standard (repeatable) manner. Even if it is in writing and repeatable, the action could be considered major if the technician performing the required methods, techniques and practices needs special training.
Finally, there is the consideration of whether the action (again, either repair or alteration) “might appreciably affect weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, flight characteristics, or other qualities affecting airworthiness.” That determination must consider the measurable impact on the article, the system, and the product under the applicable airworthiness standards.
The purpose of the entire evaluation is to eliminate the determination of “major” so the action defaults to minor under the regulations. The technical and engineering data required to make the determination will always be used to substantiate the action taken. Indeed, that data can be “approved” if it is determined the action is major. If the work performed is questioned by the agency, documentation of the determination will help ensure the result was airworthy, reducing anxiety and therefore the possibility of legal enforcement.
Ultimately, there are three reasons why you should care whether something is major or minor: (1) The recordkeeping requirements differ, (2) The persons who can approve the work for return to service differ, and (3) The substantiating data supporting a major action must be approved by the Administrator.
Recordkeeping for major repairs and alterations requires more paperwork; Appendix B to part 43 requires major repairs or alterations to be documented on a Form 337. If the major repair is performed by a repair station “in accordance with a manual or specifications acceptable to the Administrator,” a work order with specified language will suffice; however, all major alterations require a Form 337 (unless another document is required by an air carrier or commercial operator under parts 121 or 135).
As for approving work for return to service, 14 CFR § 43.9 allows the person performing minor repairs and alterations to approve that work for return to service. However, if the repair or alteration is major, only an air carrier, appropriately rated repair station, or a mechanic with an inspection authorization may issue the approval for return to service.
Finally, there are requirements in parts 65, 121, 135, and 145 that major repairs and major alterations be performed in accordance with FAA-approved technical data, which should be referenced in the maintenance record.
ARSA on the Hill
By Daniel Fisher, ARSA vice president of legislative affairs
In July, ARSA continued to work behind the scenes with the aviation maintenance industry’s strongest Capitol Hill allies to introduce legislation to lift the ban on FAA foreign repair station certifications. If you’re interested in joining our push, please contact me. It takes a combination of the association’s legislative team educating Congress and hearing from constituents about the issue to get a bill introduced.
The legislative team is actively working to schedule lawmaker visits to ARSA member facilities during the August congressional recess. We have several already set up, but it’s not too late to get one on the calendar. Facility visits are the best way to educate policymakers about the industry and your business while raising your company’s visibility. Building relationships with your congressional delegation when things are calm is much better than waiting until you might actually need their assistance. To learn more or arrange for your lawmaker to visit your company, contact Josh Pudnos.
ARSA was represented at the Aeroclub of Washington’s July luncheon featuring Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. Her remarks focused on passenger screening efficiencies and cargo security.
ARSA PAC delivered campaign support to Congressman Steve Daines (R-Mont.). Daines, a member of both the House Aviation Subcommittee and the House Homeland Security Committee, has been a strong advocate for free enterprise and entrepreneurship during his congressional tenure.
To ensure lawmakers like Rep. Daines return to Capitol Hill, ARSA PAC is making a summer push for more members to grant solicitation consent. Federal election law requires ARSA members to give prior approval before ARSA PAC can provide more details about its political activities. Giving consent does not obligate you to do anything; it just allows ARSA to communicate with you about the association’s political activities.
Regulatory Outlook
Drug and Alcohol Testing: The Inconsistent Truth
Requirements for drug and alcohol testing of “safety-sensitive function” workers at Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certificated repair stations and carriers in the U.S. are not the same as for foreign FAA part holders within the American border. Learn about the role the International Civil Aviation Organization plays and the challenges of applying drug and alcohol testing standards to those who work within the FAA’s jurisdiction in the U.S. Read more at http://arsa.org/drug-and-alcohol-testing-the-inconsistent-truth/.
Final Documents/ Your Two Cents
This list includes Federal Register publications, such as final rules, Advisory Circulars, and policy statements, as well as proposed rules and policies of interest to ARSA members. Read more at http://arsa.org/final-documents-your-two-cents/.
Quality Time
Editor’s note: The views and opinions expressed by contributing authors do not necessarily state or reflect those of ARSA, and shall not be used for endorsement purposes.
Employee Benefit Plans After the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Decision
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Windsor made it clear that couples who married in states that recognize same-sex marriage are entitled to the same federal protections and privileges as traditional marriage.
The decision affects the administration of employee benefit plans, including sections of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The transition should be relatively easy for states that recognized same-sex marriages (14 states at last count).
The Court, however, did not address Section 2 of DOMA, which provides that no state “shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state… respecting a relationship between persons of the same-sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state… or a right or claim arising from such relationship.” So what happens if a couple legally married in one state moves where a same-sex marriage is not recognized? There are no answers readily available; however, it is likely the federal regulations will recognize same-sex marriages for benefit plans in states where same-sex marriages are unlawful.
Meanwhile, employers should consider the implications of the Supreme Court decision and identify which plan administration areas will be affected when determining beneficiary/survivor rights under 401(k) and other pension plans. For example, administrators for both self-funded and insured health plans must consider how to approach same-sex spouses as dependents, spousal COBRA obligations following a qualify event, and structures of health flexible spending accounts. Employers will need to review and likely revise payroll taxes and withholdings since health coverage for same-sex spouses is no longer a taxable benefit under the IRC.
In the short term, employers, especially multi-state employers, should be prepared to respond to questions and to address issues when an enrollment or benefits decision needs to be made for a same-sex couple and should be prepared to amend plan documents and summary plan descriptions. Employers cannot go wrong by taking a reasonable and good-faith approach applied on a consistent basis.
Authority to Bind – “You Did What?”
By Steven E. Pazar, Attorney at Law, 11 Carriage House Lane, Boxford, Massachusetts 01921. © 2013 Steven E. Pazar ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Steven is a counselor to businesses operating in high-risk industries, including aviation. He provides templates, tools, and training to improve contracting efficiency, close deals faster, and control costs.
“IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their officers or duly authorized representatives.”
Usually, just above the signature block of most contracts, this short representation doesn’t get much attention. So, just who are these officers and duly authorized representatives? Do they actually have the ability to legally bind their company; are they acting within their authority?
We exercise our understanding of authority on a daily basis. In our personal lives, for example, we sign a check for a purchase or authorize a medical provider to access our private health information. Likewise, most married folks check in with their spouse before committing to a “big” purchase or bringing home a new puppy. The failure to do so can result in the “you did what?” conversation – it’s generally better to avoid this result.
The same is true for businesses. Officers and/or employees in a business have certain levels and limits of authority. For officers (and perhaps directors) it should be expressed in writing as part of the corporate bylaws. For managers and staff it should be in a job description, but is more likely acquired by implication over time as part of job responsibilities and work assignments. Just like our personal lives, if we overstep our bounds, the boss will no doubt begin the conversation with: “You did what?” This can, however, lead to legal counsel declaring, “You didn’t have authority to do that.” Another result that is best avoided.
How is corporate authority obtained? How can we better understand when to seek confirmation of corporate authority? The answer lies in part in understanding the source of your authority and how actions bind companies.
Authority to legally bind a business or create an enforceable contract typically comes in one of two forms: “actual” or “apparent” authority. These sources of authority are quite different, but can be equally binding. The differences are keys to better decision making in day to day work, and ultimately protect from unwanted results.
It is generally good law that a principal (i.e. company) is responsible for the actions of its agents. Without describing the exceptions to this broad statement, the authority to bind a business is often specifically granted to officers (and perhaps directors) as part of the written corporate bylaws or other approved corporate resolutions. These approvals may come with limitations on the scope and/or dollar value of the authority for officers depending on their level in the organization. This is often referred to as a “signature authority” or an authority matrix. Approval to bind a business in this way is referred to as “express” actual authority. Express actual authority need not be in writing; you can also get it orally from a superior to do a particular task or represent that you are authorized to bind the business.
The other way businesses provide actual authority is through “implied” actual authority. Implied authority is usually the result of an individual understanding they are authorized to perform similar functions in the future after after a pattern of approvals to perform certain tasks or the ability to serve as a representative to authorize the binding of a business.
Separate from actual authority (express or implied) is “apparent” authority, which is viewed from the third person. It is the other party to the contract and how they view the representations by you (and the business) that determine whether the contract will be considered legally binding. If the third party can be seen as reasonably viewing your representations and actions as those of the business, then it is more likely that such reliance will result in a binding contract or obligation. It is apparent authority that can create unexpected risk for a business because the business is not in control of how the third party views the facts that created the authority to bind.
If you are unsure of whether you have actual authority to perform a particular task or make certain representations it is best to ask first – before you bring home that new puppy.
Membership
Member Spotlight: Dallas Airmotive – Grapevine, Texas
Dallas Airmotive began repairing and overhauling aircraft piston engines in 1932 at Dallas Love Field. The company quickly moved into turbine engine repair and overhaul to keep pace with the new and increasingly sophisticated engines introduced beginning in the 1950s. In 1997, Dallas Airmotive was acquired by BBA Aviation plc, a global leader in aviation support and aftermarket services. Today, Dallas Airmotive focuses on servicing turbine engines used by business and general aviation, government, military, airline, and rotor wing operators all around the world.
Dallas Airmotive is one of the leading independent OEM-authorized turbine engine repair and overhaul organizations in the world. Working with these OEMs, Dallas Airmotive is proud to have developed many of the repair and overhaul techniques that are standard in the industry today.
Ian Cheyne, chief technical & regulatory officer of BBA Aviation, represents engine maintenance on ARSA’s Board of Directors.
For more information, visit http://www.bbaaviationero.com/dai.
Are you an ARSA member who would like to be in the “Member Spotlight?” If so, please contact Josh Pudnos at Josh.Pudnos@arsa.org.
Each month, the hotline spotlights key regulatory, legislative, and business leaders making important contributions to the aviation industry. This month we look at Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., chairman of the House Transportation & Infrastructure (T&I) Committee.
Rep. Bill Shuster, chairman of the House T&I Committee
Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., was named chairman of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee last November following the 2012 elections. He served on the committee since coming to Congress in 2001. Shuster previously chaired the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, & Hazardous Materials and the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings & Emergency Management.
The T&I Committee has jurisdiction over all modes of transportation: aviation, maritime and waterborne transportation, roads, mass transit and railroads.
Prior to his congressional election, Shuster gained valuable marketing and management experience with the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Corporation and Bandag Incorporated. He is also an experienced small businessman, having owned and operated an automobile dealership in East Freedom, Pa.
Shuster received a Bachelor of Arts in political science and history from Dickinson College and a master’s of business administration from American University in Washington, D.C.
He resides in Hollidaysburg, Pa., with his wife and two children.
A Member Asked…
Q: What technical data is required to approve work on a parts manufacturer approval (PMA) article for return to service when you do not have instructions from the PMA holder?
A: 14 CFR § 145.109(d) requires a repair station to “maintain, in a format acceptable to the FAA, the documents and data required for the performance of maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations under its repair station certificate and operations specifications in accordance with part 43.”
14 CFR § 43.13(a) requires that “each person performing maintenance, alteration, or preventive maintenance on an aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance shall use the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the current manufacturer’s maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) prepared by its manufacturer, or other methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator, except as noted in § 43.16…”
So the work must be performed in accordance with: (1) methods, techniques, and practices contained in the manufacturers’ manuals, or (2) methods, techniques, and practices contained in the ICA, or (3) other methods, techniques, and practices acceptable to the Administrator.
A few examples of acceptable documents include: manufacturer documents (ICA), operator engineering orders, maintenance/alteration instructions substantiated by DER-approved technical data, repair station work instructions, industry standards and specifications, and Advisory Circulars.
Check Out ARSA’s Library of Recorded Webinars and Online Training Classes
ARSA is pleased to announce that recorded online training classes and webinars are now available for member purchase. Check back often as courses will be continually added. The next webinar on August 7, titled “Major Minor Primer,” will feature Sarah MacLeod, managing member, Obadal, Filler, MacLeod & Klein, and executive director, ARSA. Read more and register at http://arsa.org/training-2/online-training/.
The best form of advertising is word of mouth. Use the Members Getting Members Toolkit to recruit an ARSA member and your company will receive a discounted membership rate for your next membership term. Get more information at http://arsa.org/membership/members-getting-members/
Target Your Message: Advertise Today in ARSA’s Newsletters and Website!
ARSA recently updated its menu of advertising opportunities for arsa.org, the hotline and the ARSA Dispatch. Take advantage of these great opportunities today to showcase your company, a new product or event. For more information go to http://arsa.org/advertise/
Exhibit, Sponsor the 2014 Repair Symposium
As the maintenance industry’s top event devoted exclusively to regulatory compliance, the ARSA Symposium attracts a highly qualified professional audience. Use this opportunity to promote your company while showing support for ARSA. Get more information at http://arsa.org/news-media/events/arsa-symposium/arsa-annual-repair-symposium-sponsorship/
2013 Fall Communications/Public Policy Internship
Obadal, Filler, MacLeod & Klein (OFMK), a boutique law firm in Alexandria, Va. (across the river from Washington, D.C.), specializing in regulatory and legislative issues facing the aviation and construction industries, currently has an opening for its fall communications internship starting Sept. 3. To apply visit http://potomac-law.com/employment/.
Positive Publicity
As part of ARSA’s ongoing Positive Publicity Campaign (PPC), the association is actively working to enhance the media’s understanding of our $65 billion industry and its vital importance to global civil aviation. To accomplish this goal, ARSA monitors media coverage on aviation maintenance to spread the word about the valuable role repair stations provide their communities in jobs, economic opportunities, and community involvement. These are some of this month’s top stories highlighting the industry’s contributions.
International News
EASA Welcomes Newest Member Croatia
On July 1, Croatia become the 28th member state of the European Union and received full membership status in the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
Over the last six years, EASA has worked with the Central European country to make the transition to the new regulatory regime. The agency assisted in concluding bilateral working arrangements, technical assistance, and support programs such as the EASA Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance.
As part of the European trade bloc, Croatia’s aviation industry will also enjoy reduced taxes and greater access to the Union’s integrated economy.
The expansion is the first since 2007, when Bulgaria and Romania were accepted into the trade bloc.
International Roundup
To provide more international coverage, ARSA presents a monthly roundup of world events pertaining to the industry
AMS Welcomes New Clients and Expands to East Africa (Rotor)
Fokker Services Opens Component Repair Shop in Singapore (AviTrader)
Delta Air Lines Opens First Latin American Technical Operation Line Maintenance in Sao Paulo (AviTrader)
Melbourne Airport Poised for 100 New Jobs (Hume Weekly)
India Could Be Huge Attractor of MRO Business: AirAsia Chief (Zee News)
Welcome New Members
- Cox & Company, Plainview, N.Y.
- Oxigeno, Mexico City, Mexico
- Performance Repair Group, Memphis, Tenn.
Regulatory Compliance Training
Click here to test your knowledge on §145.51 Application for certificate.
Upcoming Events
FAA Regulations and International Cooperation: A Primer for U.S. Exporters– Oct. 22, 2013
FAA Regulations and International Cooperation: A Primer for U.S. Exporters– Oct. 23-25, 2013
AVM Summit, USA – November 21-22, 2013 – Nov. 21-22, 2013
ARSA Annual Repair Symposium and Legislative Fly-In – March 19-21, 2014
Previous 12 issues:
| 2013: | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | June | |
| 2012: | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
To view this publication in .pdf format, click here.
the hotline is the monthly publication of the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA), the not-for-profit international trade association for certificated repair stations. It is for the exclusive use of ARSA members and federal employees on the ARSA mailing list. For a membership application, please call 703 739 9543 or visit http://arsa.org/membership/join/
This material is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, consulting, tax or any other type of professional advice.
Law, regulations, guidance and government policies change frequently. While ARSA updates this material, we do not guarantee its accuracy. In addition, the application of this material to a particular situation is always dependent on the facts and circumstances involved. The use of this material is therefore at your own risk.
All content in the hotline, except where indicated otherwise, is the property of ARSA. This content may not be reproduced, distributed or displayed, nor may derivatives or presentations be created from it in whole or in part, in any manner without the prior written consent of ARSA.
ARSA grants its members a non-exclusive license to reproduce the content of the hotline. Employees of member organizations are the only parties authorized to receive a duplicate of the hotline.
ARSA reserves all remaining rights and will use any means necessary to protect its intellectual property.
© 2013 Aeronautical Repair Station Association
