2017 – Edition 6 – July 7, 2017

the hotline 1984

Table of Contents

Note: The order of material varies in hotline emails, but is always presented the same on this landing page. Readers scrolling through content on or printing this page will find it organized consistent with the table of contents.

Brett’s Beat
SLC 2017
ARSA Works
Legal Briefs
ARSA on the Hill
Quick Questions
Quality Time
Industry Calendar

Levanto’s Lead

We’re Certifiable

By Brett Levanto, Vice President of Communications

Over the past two years, ARSA’s training program has blossomed. From the fall of 2015 through this year’s symposium, we hosted an online session almost every week. “This concludes today’s webinar,” I would say to close each one, knowing those words would be reborn the next day when the recording would become available for unlimited on-demand viewing.

Slowly but surely – with the commitment of the entire association team as well as some very attentive students – our training platform has amassed more than 50 recordings. You can go look at them now, in fact I encourage it (click here). All sessions can be accessed immediately, played on a mobile device if you want (by accessing the training platform via your smart phone’s browser) and provide an immediate certificate of completion. An hour from now, you could be 60 minutes smarter about parts 21, 43, 145 or a host of other regulatory or legal issues.

It’s been a while since we hosted one of those sessions, but behind the scenes we’ve been working hard to identify the next steps of our training program development. The goal remains a fully-formed certificate program that will allow ARSA members to demonstrate deep knowledge of the rules, their application and how to avoid the pitfalls of compliance. People have told us we’re certifiable – or at least zealous – in the search for reasonable regulation, but our passion and experience will sometime soon become your certification.

While you will still see live sessions, our newest phase will focus on rolling out new recorded sessions. ARSA’s regulatory and legislative teams develop and produce the content independently (after all, these are learning tools for us, too) then make them available for you.

So, I’m proud to unveil the first of these newly recorded sessions: an overview of 14 CFR part 65:

Part 65 – Overview
Sarah MacLeod
Description: This session overviews 14 CFR part 65, Certification: Airmen Other than Flight Crewmembers. It introduces the statutory authority through which the FAA administers certificates and outlines the rules for application, issuance, testing, disqualification and duration of agency-issued certificates. It then introduces the five different certifications issued under part 65 by reviewing the relevant eligibility requirements for each.
Click here to register and get access for 90 days.

I’m particularly proud of this session because Sarah, the “official” instructor, gave me the chance to develop the materials, work out the substantive details with her, prepare speaker notes and actively participate in its presentation. As a result, you get a fully-formed discussion on the rules governing the administration of your certificate, about which you should care deeply.

Stay tuned for more sessions from our “production team” and the further development of the ARSA training certificate program.

Also, after you’ve completed the overview session on part 65, you’ll breeze through this month’s compliance training sheet on § 65.71…


Return to Top of Page

SLC 2017

Book Your Room

The Washington Court Hotel is known for its independent spirit, just like the men and women of the repair station community. This October, the downtown boutique hotel will host top level maintenance executives during the 2017 Strategic Leadership Conference in Washington, D.C.

The group code for SLC hotel booking is now active. Click here to make your reservation directly and be sure “AMIS1017” is input in the “Special Codes” section.

Reserve your room today. When the aviation world comes to the American capital to “engage for impact,” it demands world-class accommodations. 

Event registration is extremely limited in order to maintain the high-level focus of the SLC. If you haven’t already, register today to ensure you have a place at the table:

Click here to visit the main event page (then bookmark it).

Don't need more information? Register now...

2017 Registration & Sponsorship Form

2017 SLC Registration & Sponsorship Form

Oops! We could not locate your form.


Return to Top of Page

ARSA Works

ARSA Asks RCCB to Clarify Guidance on 100 Percent Replacement

On June 29, ARSA submitted a request to the Regulatory Consistency Communication Board (RCCB) to help the FAA clarify that repair stations can replace 100 percent of an article while performing maintenance.

Previous agency attempts to determine when a particular action is manufacturing, thus requiring a production approval, are not supported by a plain read of regulations. “The regulations do not directly or indirectly prohibit the replacement of all parts in an article during a single maintenance visit,” the submission said. “There are no limits on the number of parts that can or should be replaced during a maintenance action.”

The request cites the definitions of “maintenance” and “repair” under § 1.1 and their relation to the term “replacement of parts.” It also addresses the prohibition against the reuse of § 45.11 identification plates. Based on a plain reading of these definitions as well as parts 21 and 43 and a review of existing agency guidance, ARSA informed the RCCB that both the Aircraft Certification and Flight Standards services should provide clear direction on how compliance can be shown.

The FAA created the RCCB based on recommendations of the Consistency of Regulatory Interpretation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (CRI ARC). The board’s goal is to provide clarification to FAA personnel, certificate/approval holders and applicants on issues that span the jurisdiction of multiple FAA divisions. In this case, it can provide sensible instruction on the duties and obligations of maintenance providers when performing part replacement.

To read the full submission, click here.

To learn more about the RCCB and ARSA’s recommendations for its development, visit


Filler Adds Maintenance to FAA-EASA Conference

ARSA Managing Director and General Counsel Marshall Filler attended the EASA-FAA International Aviation Safety Conference in Brussels, Belgium from June 14-16. He also represented the association in the industry pre-meeting held on June 14 to discuss the agenda and the activities of various government-industry working groups dealing with Aircraft Certification (AIR) and Flight Standards (AFS) issues. According to Patrick Ky, EASA’s Executive Director, approximately 300 people attended the conference representing 51 countries, 22 Civil Aviation Authorities, 26 trade associations and 82 individual companies.

The conference focused on building trust and the need for early communication and collaboration between government and industry, whether it be rulemaking, guidance development or certificating new products. There were panels dealing with performance-based rulemaking (a trend that will undoubtedly continue), such as the new FAA part 23 and EASA CS-23 (which become effective in August of this year), the use of big data in identifying potential operational safety issues at an early stage, recent activities in regulating unmanned aircraft systems, challenges and opportunities in aircraft and engine certification and certificating products with emerging technologies.

Conspicuous by its absence and for the first time in recent memory: There was no panel devoted to maintenance on this year’s agenda, in spite of ARSA having suggested topics for discussion when the agenda was first being developed. Filler commented on that during the industry pre-meeting and again during the audience participation phase of the first plenary session, stating that he hoped this was the last such conference he would attend where maintenance was omitted from the planned discussion. While Filler was assured privately by FAA and EASA officials that it was unintentional, the omission reinforces a longstanding and unfortunate issue with perception of a very important link in the safety chain. Several attendees from the maintenance industry echoed those concerns. Judging by the regrets expressed privately by American and European officials the association is hopeful the omission was an outlier.

For most attendees, networking opportunities with both regulators and industry colleagues are the greatest value in attending this annual safety conference. While that is true, recent budget reductions have reduced the number of agency people that attend from both sides of the Atlantic. Most of the government attendees were high-level people (i.e., FAA service directors and a few others in non-technical, policy making roles). None of the “working-level” AFS or AIR division managers were present, nor were their EASA counterparts. In the association’s view, this diminishes the value of the conference especially considering the costs associated with long-distance travel. Nevertheless, that reality is not likely to change and fortunately, the conference alternates annually between Europe and the United States

As expected, next year’s conference will be held in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, according to FAA Flight Standards Director John Duncan who made the announcement at the close of the June 15th session. Stay tuned to ARSA and the agencies to see when exactly the June, 2018 event will be.

To see more about the conference (and past events), visit


ARSA, Industry Partners Help FAA Reconstruct Recordkeeping Guidance

On June 12, an ARSA-led coalition of ten industry partners submitted a complete rewrite of the agency’s proposed Advisory Circular 43-ARTS, “Use of FAA Form 8130-3 for Approval to Return to Service Under Part 43.”

The signatories, most of whom also joined a February request for extension to the comment period, made good use of the additional time provided. They compared the draft AC as written to existing maintenance recordkeeping rules and agency guidance and determined that the draft should not be issued.

“Release of the draft AC without a complete rewrite will, among other things, cause both industry and the FAA to expend considerable resources to ensure continued compliance with section 43.9 and international commitments,” the letter said.

The coalition instead submitted a replacement for the existing AC 43-9C, which is not current and fails to address 43.9 requirements. The new draft walks through the rule and described what it requires for mechanics, repairmen and repair stations performing work on aircraft with U.S. airworthiness certificates. The submission also describes the steps for handling, correcting or reissuing maintenance records as well as completion of FAA Form 8130-3 for the FAA, EASA and other civil aviation agencies.

“[Maintenance records] associated with a civil aviation aircraft, its installed products, appliance and articles are essential to making determinations of the aircraft’s airworthiness,” the group’s draft AC describes, underscoring the importance of correctly aligning agency guidance with recordkeeping regulations. “Maintenance records provide tangible evidence that the work on the aircraft and its installed products and articles was performed appropriately and correctly.”

In addition to providing the replacement for AC 43-9C, the signatories also urged the agency to issue separate advisory circulars on 43.11 inspection records and part 91 owner/operator records.

To read the full submission (cover letter and rewritten AC), click here.

The following organizations joined ARSA in the submission:

Aircraft Electronics Association
Airlines for America
Aviation Suppliers Association
General Aviation Manufacturers Association
Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation
Modification and Replacement Parts Association
MOOG Aircraft Group
National Air Transportation Association
Professional Aviation Maintenance Association

Follow along with the issue at


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.

To view the list, click here.



Return to Top of Page

Legal Briefs

Editor’s note: This material is provided as a service to association members for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal or professional advice and is not privileged or confidential.

The Voluntary Surrender Question – Why Such a Big Deal?

By Ryan M. Poteet, Regulatory Affairs Director

Thanks to ARSA’s legislative team, repair stations may regain the right to voluntarily surrender their certificates.

Once you finish this “Legal Brief,” get to the “ARSA on the Hill” section to get the full story about the association’s efforts in Congress.

As the association has worked the issue on the Hill, it has repeatedly been asked, “why is this such a big deal?” Most of us don’t think too far into the future, but at some point, we’re all going to hang up our hat to pursue other endeavors. Some might decide to sell the business. Others may, as Ayn Rand would call it, “Going Gault” and simply shut the front door and disappear to someplace nice and warm. Whether you are retirement planning or just can’t take it anymore, the ability to wind-down a business should be protected.

For the longest time the right of repair stations to voluntarily surrender a certificate was protected, just like all other FAA certificate holders. In November 2014, however, the agency revised 14 CFR part 145 to require affirmative agency acceptance of voluntarily surrendered repair station certificates. This unprecedented rulemaking was predicated on dubious claims of aviation safety and a fundamental failure to understand the existing regulatory and statutory scheme.

In the preamble to the final rule, the FAA asserted that requiring acceptance of a surrendered certificate “will prevent a repair station under investigation from attempting to circumvent a possible enforcement action.” This reasoning confuses the individual “bad actors” with the repair station. The 2014 rulemaking was preoccupied with – almost fanatical about – eradicating (and keeping out) these “bad actors.” The FAA had already given itself the authority to deny a repair station certificate where key positions would be filled with individuals who had “materially contributed” to the revocation of a repair station certificate or one that was “in the process of being revoked.”

This last stipulation is important. If the goal is to prevent these persons from operating a repair station, and the revocation process alone is sufficient to prevent them from being party to a new certificate, then why prevent them from surrendering an existing one?

Claims that the existence of a certificate is necessary for the FAA to investigate repair station employees is equally without merit. Nothing stops the FAA thoroughly investigating and bringing enforcement against individual bad actors. The two-year recordkeeping requirement in 145.219(c) extends beyond the life of the certificate, thereby preserving the agency’s ability to collect evidence in future enforcement proceedings. Likewise, the corporate entity and any employees will be jointly liable for criminal prosecution. The initiation of criminal proceedings triggers holds on company records and federal law imposes criminal liability for the willful destruction of evidence. As such, existing statutes and regulations already prevent individual bad actors from escaping liability for regulatory violations or criminal conduct.

Ultimately, requiring affirmative agency acceptance of a repair station certificate undermines the FAA’s safety interest. The FAA’s primary objective has been – and should continue to be – the immediate cessation of work when individual bad actors are using a certificate in a way that jeopardizes safety. This is exactly why there is no equivalent requirement for any other FAA certificate holder. Under the current rule, however, a repair station may continue to operate even though it allegedly employs individual the agency finds to be a danger to the system. How that protects aviation safety is a mystery.

Since the rule’s first issuance, ARSA and industry stakeholders have petitioned the FAA to reinstate the voluntary surrender provision. The FAA rejected that petition by regurgitating its previous assertion in the preamble to the final rule. In August 2015, industry once again asked the agency to address the issued by filing a timely petition for reconsideration. The FAA has yet to respond. The association was forced to take the issue to the Hill due to FAA’s unresponsiveness, despite ARSA’s policy of fighting congressional “micromanagement.” 

On June 29, ARSA’s efforts paid off when Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) introduced an amendment during the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee’s markup of the FAA Reauthorization Bill. The amendment—which was successfully adopted—would require the FAA to initiate a rulemaking to restore the right to voluntarily surrender a certificate. This is a big win for industry but there is still a long way to go as the Reauthorization bill moves to the Senate floor and ultimately to conference where the differences between the House and Senate bills will be reconciled.

Hopefully, both houses of Congress will recognize the importance of every certificate holder’s ability wind-down their business at a time of their choosing and that such right in no way impacts action safety. Stay tuned this summer as ARSA follows the legislative process. 


Return to Top of Page

ARSA on the Hill

House, Senate FAA Bills Include Key ARSA-Supported Provisions

By Christian A. Klein, Executive Vice President

The last week of June was the busiest and most successful for ARSA on Capitol Hill in recent memory.  The focus of all the activity was the markup of FAA reauthorization bills by the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee (June 27) and Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee (June 29). 

For the maintenance industry, the news from the Hill is generally positive: For the first time in decades, neither original bill included language hostile to repair stations (i.e., no new mandates or certification bans) and no hostile amendments were offered during either markup. 

We’ve proven that a strong offense is a strong defense. Since January, ARSA has mounted an aggressive campaign to educate policymakers about the maintenance industry’s economic and employment impact and the importance of international trade to the small businesses in our sector.  Apparently, those messages have broken through, at least with most members of the key committees.

Because we weren’t playing defense, we were able to focus on positive policy initiatives and amendments to address the aviation maintenance industry technician shortage and improve the regulatory environment for repair stations. The following table provides a quick review of where several ARSA-supported amendments stand.

FAA Bill Maintenance Amendments Box Score

Bill Provision In House Bill In Senate Bill
Adding “aviation maintenance” to stakeholders on new Certification & Oversight Advisory Committee Yes – Amendment by Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) adopted by voice vote Yes – Amendment by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) adopted by voice vote
Asking FAA to explore making repairman certificates portable No – ARSA is working to identify sponsor Yes – Amendment by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) adopted by voice vote
Directing FAA to undertake rulemaking to reinstate voluntary surrender of repair station certificates No – ARSA is working with Rep. Dan Webster (R-Fla.) to include in House bill Yes – Amendment by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) adopted by voice vote
Directing GAO to study causes, effects, and solutions to aviation technician shortage Yes – Amendment by Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.) adopted by voice vote No – ARSA is working to identify sponsor
Creating grant program to support aviation maintenance workforce development initiatives No – Amendment by Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) withdrawn to identify source of revenue No – Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) may sponsor amendment on Senate floor

Getting MRO a Seat at the Table

As part of a certification reform initiative, the House and Senate bills create a new Certification & Oversight Advisory Committee made up of a wide range of aviation stakeholders, including manufacturers and air carriers.  However, the list of stakeholders in the draft bills (which used old legislative language from the last Congress) did not include maintenance.  Thanks to Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Reps. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Rob Woodall (R-Ga.) both the House and Senate bills were amended in committee at ARSA’s request to include our sector (click here to view the House amendment; click here to view the Senate amendment). 

Tackling the Skilled Worker Shortage

During the markups, industry allies in Congress also proposed three amendments suggested by ARSA to address the technical skills gap.  The first, by Sen. Inhofe and Rep. Johnson, would create a pilot program administered by the FAA to award grants to schools, governmental entities and businesses that work together to improve technical education, create apprenticeship programs, help former military personnel transition to civilian aviation maintenance careers and attract new talent to the industry (click here to view the House amendment).  Johnson offered and then withdrew the amendment during markup due to concerns expressed by T&I Committee leaders about how to pay for the program.  Similar concerns led Sen. Inhofe to withdraw it prior to Senate committee consideration. In the weeks ahead, ARSA will work hammer out the funding details and work with our allies to add the grant language prior to House and Senate passage.

The second workforce amendment by Reps. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.), Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) and Brenda Lawrence (D-Mich.) would task the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study causes, effects and solutions to the technician shortage (click here to view the House amendment). That proposal was unanimously approved by the committee as part of an en bloc amendment.

The final workforce-related provision, which was sponsored by Sen. Inhofe, tasks the FAA’s Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee to consider whether and how repairman certificates issued by the FAA should be made portable. Under current rules, a repairman loses his or her certificate when he or she changes jobs and must reapply and be recommended for a new certificate by the next employer. Portability would reduce the burden on employees and companies, address an area of bureaucratic inefficiency, improve labor mobility and make the certificate a more valuable professional credential, thereby encouraging more people to pursue aviation industry careers.  The repairman certificate provision was added to the Senate bill during markup by voice vote. ARSA will be working to get parallel language added to the House bill.

Restoring Voluntary Surrender

Inhofe also offered an amendment, which was adopted by voice vote, directing an FAA rulemaking to restore the right of repair stations to voluntarily and unilaterally surrender their repair station certificates, a right enjoyed by all other certificate holders. The FAA’s 2014 updates to part 145 added a requirement for “affirmative acceptance” by the agency of a surrendered certificate, but there is no defined process, no enumerated criteria for acceptance or even an indication of who at FAA makes the acceptance decision. This creates considerable uncertainty for companies that wish to cease operations, merge or restructure. 

ARSA has a longstanding policy against Congress micromanaging the agency, but the association was forced to take the issue to the Hill due to FAA’s unresponsiveness.  In 2015, ARSA and several other aviation industry trade associations petitioned the FAA to restore the right to surrender. The agency denied the petition and has never acted on our petition for reconsideration. Inhofe’s proposed language would direct a rulemaking to restore the right to surrender while ensuring that surrender cannot be used by “bad actors” to avoid certificate action. ARSA is working with Rep. Dan Webster (R-Fla.) to explore the possibility of getting parallel voluntary surrender language in the House bill.

See this month’s “Legal Briefs” for more information on the fight to surrender.

Say Thanks To Our Champions!

As we prepared for the FAA markups, ARSA was fortunate have several members of Congress who were willing to go to bat for repair stations and sponsor amendments.  If someone from your state is on the list, shoot a quick note of thanks.  It doesn’t have to be anything fancy and could be as simple as: “Thank you for your leadership on aviation maintenance issues during the recent FAA markup.  As a member of YOURSTATE’s repair station industry, I sincerely appreciate your efforts on our behalf.”

(Clicking on the names below will open up a blank email address to their aviation staffers.)

Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.)
  Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla)   Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.)
Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-Mich.)   Rep. Dan Webster (R-Fla.)   Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.)
    Rep. Rob Woodall (R-Ga.)     

Success Is No Accident

Our unprecedented success on the Hill this past month was no accident. Association members and staff have held scores of meetings both in Washington and at facilities back home this year. The association is now reaching out to members around the country on a targeted basis to weigh in with key lawmakers in support of our efforts. Those who have done so – or who will answer the call very soon – are providing a great service in amplifying the voice of the maintenance community. We still have a long road ahead to enact our provisions into law and our future success will be a direct function of your willingness to stand up and get involved.

Despite all the activity in recent weeks, the outlook for the FAA bills is still highly uncertain. There is considerable disagreement between House Republicans and Democrats and between the House and Senate over privatization of air traffic control (The House bill would privatize but the Senate bill wouldn’t). Other issues – including pilot training – are also potential deal breakers.  If lawmakers cannot reach consensus, it’s likely that Congress will pass another short-term extension and then return and reconsider FAA issues later this year or early next year.

ARSA’s position is that the FAA needs a long-term budget and policy blueprint and is urging lawmakers to enact a multi-year bill as soon as possible.  (Click here to read ARSA’s letter urging swift action on the FAA bill.)

Of course, if you’d like more information or want to become involved in our legislative efforts (communicating with Congress, hosting a facility visit, etc.), please contact me at or 703.739.9543.

Unanimity Reigns in House Effort to Reform Technical Education

On June 22, the House of Representatives unanimously approved the “Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act.” It has been popular since its introduction: ARSA and a broad range of industry and academic groups have praised its policies and not a single member of the Education and Workforce Committee dissented when considering it in May.

H.R. 2353, which bears the same title as legislation that passed the House in 2016 by 400 votes but saw no action in the Senate, builds on recent reforms to the K-12 education system and enhancements to federal resources for workforce development in order to enhance flexibility for states and increase engagement of technical employers. Like its predecessor from the 114th Congress, this year’s legislation seeks to:

(1) Empower state and local community leaders by simplifying application requirements and maximizing flexibility.
(2) Improve alignment with in-demand jobs by building industry-sector partnerships.
(3) Increase transparency and accountability by giving a voice to students, parents and stakeholders in assessing programs.
(4) Ensure a limited federal role by minimizing the authority of the secretary of education.

The morning of the House vote, ARSA Executive Vice President Christian A. Klein delivered a message supporting the bill to the Hill. “Like so many other sectors of the economy, the aviation maintenance industry is facing a chronic skilled worker shortage,” Klein said, addressing staffers working labor and workforce issues. “While the skills gap won’t be closed entirely by federal policy, [ARSA believes] that H.R. 2253 is an important step in the right direction and that it will significantly improve coordination and flexibility as businesses, schools and governmental entities work together to better align technical education with in-demand jobs.”

The legislation now heads to the Senate. Stay tuned to ARSA for updates as the process moves forward.

To read a fact sheet on the bill, click here.
To read a detailed bill summary, click here.
To read the bill, click here.

See more updates on workforce development issues at


ARSA, Allies Take Voluntary Surrender Fight to Congress

On June 18, an ARSA-led coalition of aviation interests asked Congress to direct the FAA to reinstate the right of a repair station to voluntarily surrender its certificate.

In its November 2014 updates to 14 CFR part 145, the FAA took the unprecedented step of subjecting surrendered repair station certificates to “acceptance for cancellation” (see, § 145.55). ARSA led an effort calling for the removal of the requirement, since it is unique among aviation certificates, runs counter to the interest of aviation safety and increases regulatory administrative burden without any agency explanation as to how its discretion will be utilized. The initial petition was denied by the FAA and a subsequent request for reconsideration remains unaddressed.

As the FAA reauthorization process gets moving, the “fight to surrender” moves to Capitol Hill. Six aviation-centric trade associations signed a letter to the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate transportation committees and their aviation subcommittees. The signatories, all of which supported the two 2015 petitions to the agency on the same topic, explained that the requirement does not connect to the facts of aviation safety.

“[The] requirement for affirmative agency acceptance of a surrendered certificate runs counter to that purpose [of furthering the interest of safety],” the letter said, noting the agency’s rationale that voluntary surrender is a loophole through which supposed “ad actors” could escape enforcement action. “Where there are in fact ‘bad actors,’ the agency’s aim is the immediate cessation of work on civil aviation articles. By requiring the agency to accept surrender, the certificate remains effective longer and work (or operations) may continue to jeopardize safety.”

The letter proposed specific language to be included in the FAA reauthorization bill. The proposal directs the FAA to undertake rulemaking that would eliminate the words “and the FAA accepts it for cancellation” from § 145.55(a).

To read the full letter, click here.

In addition to ARSA, the letter was signed by:

Aircraft Electronics Association
Aviation Suppliers Association
Modification and Replacement Parts Association
National Air Carrier Association
National Air Transportation Association.

See all of ARSA’s work on the surrender issue at


Return to Top of Page


Return to Top of Page

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.

Carrier Liability vs. Freight Insurance – What’s the Difference?

ARSA members may utilize the ARSA Shipping Program to save on standard and guaranteed less-than-truckload shipping. In addition to managing the program, the association’s support team from PartnerShip provides shipping-related guidance and insight for the repair station community. After reading this month’s piece, get more information at or call 800-599-2902.

Freight damage and loss is a reality of shipping. It’s not a matter of if it will happen to you; it’s a matter of when. When damage or loss occurs, your first thought is, “How will I be compensated?” To answer the question, you need to understand the difference between carrier liability and freight insurance. 

Carrier Liability 

Every freight shipment is covered by some form of liability coverage, determined by the carrier. The amount of coverage is based on the commodity type or freight class of the goods being shipped and covers up to a certain dollar amount per pound of freight. 

In some cases, the carrier liability coverage may be less than the actual value of the freight. It’s common to see liability restricted to $0.25 per lb. or less for LTL or $100,000 for a full truckload. Also, if your goods are used, the liability value per pound will be significantly less than that of new goods. When you arrange your freight to be shipped, it’s very important to know the carrier’s liability for freight loss and how much is covered. 

Freight damage and loss is a headache. In order to receive compensation, a shipper must file a claim proving the carrier is at fault for the damaged or lost freight. Carrier liability limitations include instances where damage is due to acts of God (e.g., weather-related causes) or acts of the shipper (e.g., the freight was packaged or loaded improperly). In these cases, the carrier is not at fault. Additionally, if damage is not noted on the delivery receipt, carriers will deny any liability.  

If the carrier accepts the claim evidence provided by the shipping customer, then they will pay for the cost of repair (if applicable) or manufacturing cost, not the retail sell price. The carrier may also pay a partial claim with an explanation as to why they are not 100 percent liable. The carrier will try to decrease their cost for the claim as much as possible.

Freight Insurance

Freight insurance (sometimes called cargo insurance or goods-in-transit insurance) does not require you to prove the carrier was at fault for damage or loss, just that damage or loss occurred. Freight insurance is a good way to protect your customers and your business from loss or damage to your freight while in transit. There is an extra charge of course that is typically based on the declared value of the goods being shipped. Most freight insurance plans are provided by third-party insurers.

As mentioned earlier, your freight might have a higher value than what is covered by carrier liability, such as when shipping used goods. Another example is very heavy items. Carrier liability may only pay $0.25 per pound for textbooks that have a much higher value. This is a great example of when freight insurance is extremely helpful in the event of damage or loss.

Carrier Liability vs. Freight Insurance in the Claims Process

If your freight is only covered by carrier liability coverage: 

  • Your claim must be filed within 9 months of delivery.
  • The delivery receipt must include notice of damage.
  • Proof of value and proof of loss is required.
  • The carrier has 30 days to acknowledge your claim and must respond within 120 days.
  • Carrier negligence must be proven.

If your shipment is covered by freight insurance: 

  • Proof of value and proof of loss is required.
  • Claims are typically paid within 30 days.
  • You are not required to prove carrier negligence.

Carrier liability coverage and freight insurance can be complicated and each carrier has its own policies. If you have questions like “how much does freight insurance cost?” or “what does freight insurance cover?” or to get a freight insurance quote, visit and shipping smarter.

To see more content from PartnerShip, visit



Part 65 – Overview 

This session overviews 14 CFR part 65, Certification: Airmen Other than Flight Crewmembers. It introduces the statutory authority through which the FAA administers certificates and outlines the rules for application, issuance, testing, disqualification and duration of agency-issued certificates. It then introduces the five different certifications issued under part 65 by reviewing the relevant eligibility requirements for each.

Click here to register and get access for 90 days.

Registration for an ARSA-provided training session includes:

  • Unlimited access for 90 days to the recording.
  • A copy of the presentation and all reference material with links to relevant resources and citations.
  • A certificate upon completion of the class, as well as any test material.

The association’s training program is provided through Obadal, Filler, MacLeod & Klein, P.L.C., the firm that manages ARSA. To go directly to OFM&K’s online training portal, visit To learn more about the association’s training program and see course availability, visit


How I Built a Jet Suit

A bit of personal development from the entertaining story of Richard Browning, which was presented at a TED conference and is presented here courtesy of We’ve all dreamed of flying, but for Browning it was an obsession. He’s built an Iron Man-like suit that leans on an elegant collaboration of mind, body and technology, bringing science fiction dreams a little closer to reality.

Learn more about the trial and error process behind his invention and take flight with Browning in an unforgettable demo.


Public Aircraft

ARSA’s three-part series on the regulations and guidance for public aircraft operation is ready for on-demand purchase. Purchase now and get 90 days access – unlimited viewing – to all three sessions. After completing the substantive presentation on the law and regulations and a review of FAA guidance pertaining to PAO, challenge your staff with 11 case studies designed to test comprehension and apply the rules and guidance to “ripped from the headlines” examples.

Description: This three-part series on the regulations and guidance for public aircraft operation will provide in-depth analysis and case-study review of various requirements. Sessions must be purchased together and viewed in order, completion of each pre-requisite – either via a live session or on-demand recording – is required for access to subsequent classes.
Instructor: Marshall S. Filler

Session 1 – The Law and Regulations
Session 2 – FAA Guidance
Session 3 – Case Study 

Entire Series On Demand – Available Anytime. Click her for package information.

Note: Public aircraft sessions must be viewed in order. Completion of each pre-requisite is required for access to subsequent classes.

Registration for an ARSA-provided training session includes:

  • Unlimited access for 90 days to the recording.
  • A copy of the presentation and all reference material with links to relevant resources and citations.
  • A certificate upon completion of the class, as well as any test material.

The association’s training program is provided through Obadal, Filler, MacLeod & Klein, P.L.C., the firm that manages ARSA. To go directly to OFM&K’s online training portal, visit To learn more about the association’s training program and see course availability, visit


Free Export Compliance Training from Williams Mullen

On Sept. 8, 2016, Thomas B. McVey, chair of the international section at Williams Mullen and resource for ARSA members, hosted a free webinar on export controls for repair stations. The session is part of ongoing collaboration between ARSA and McVey, who displayed his experience in international business law during a presentation at the 2016 Annual Repair Symposium and is the author of a continuing series in the monthly hotline newsletter on import/export issues.

ITAR and Export Controls for Aeronautical Repair Station Operators

An overview of export controls with specific application and examples for parties dealing with aircraft parts, aviation technical services and repairs for commercial and military aircraft.

To access the recording, complete the form below. Upon clicking the “View Recording” button, you will be automatically directed to to YouTube. For future access, please bookmark the video page or copy the web address.



Regulatory Compliance Training

By ARSA Training and Regulatory Teams

Test your knowledge of 14 CFR § 65.71 – Eligibility requirements: general [for mechanics].

Click here to download the training sheet.


Return to Top of Page



Quick Question: Tax Accounting for Parts Inventory

As part of the tax reform debate, Congress is considering changing inventory accounting rules and getting rid of the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method.  Companies currently using LIFO could face significant retroactive tax liability.  ARSA wants to get a sense of its members’ exposure in this area.

Please note that the survey appears on this page in an embedded window; you can scroll in the window to access the “Done” button and complete the questionnaire.

If you have questions or want to provide additional information, contact Brett Levanto ( Click here to see what questions have been asked and answered…and keep a lookout for more.


Have You Seen These [New] Officials? – Dan Elwell & Ali Bahrami

Dan Elwell, Deputy Administrator, FAA

Image result for dan elwellOn June 28, Dan Elwell was sworn in FAA Deputy Administrator.  Appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Elwell is the agency’s second highest-ranking official at the agency responsible for ensuring aviation safety and air traffic control services for the nation. 

ARSA has long experience with Elwell, who previously served the agency as assistant administrator for aviation policy, planning and environment and then in advocacy roles with Aerospace Industries Association and Airlines for America. After leaving A4A, he was president and managing partner of Elwell and Associates, an aviation consulting firm. Most recently, he has been serving as the Senior Advisor on Aviation to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao. 

Ali Bahrami, Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety, FAA

Image result for ali bahramiOn July 10, Elwell will be joined Ali Bahrami, who was selected in May to replace recently-retired Peggy Gilligan as head of aviation safety.

Bahrami also has previous experience with the FAA; his original 24-year career with the agency saw him become manager of the Transport Airplane Directorate in Seattle. After his first run of government service, he became a vice president at Aerospace Industries Association focusing on civil aviation issues. In this position, he worked with ARSA on a wide range of issues and often supported the association’s initiatives by signing letters, petitions and requests for action by the FAA.

ARSA looks forward to continuing its work with these two in support of the agency, its certificate holders and the flying public.


A Member Asked…

Q: Do I have to check every day for revisions to technical data? 

A: No.

14 C.F.R. § 145.211(c)(1)(v) requires repair stations to have a procedure in place for determining whether the technical data required by § 43.13(a) and § 145.109(d) is current, accurate and complete. The only data that you would need to potentially check for every day are Airworthiness Directives. Nothing in either part 43 or part 145 requires such vigilance. It’s also important to remember that the reliance on outdated technical data is not a violation of part 43.13(a)’s performance standard. A repair station must use methods, techniques and practices acceptable to the administrator; the only time outdated technical data (e.g., a previous version of a component maintenance manual) would be unacceptable is if it did not return the article to an airworthy condition. For instance, if an AD was issued and the previous version of the CMM would not resolve the unsafe condition and the revised manual would, then this would constitute data that was not acceptable. 

To ensure that a repair station’s technical data is current, as required by 145.109(d), ARSA suggests verifying the currency of the data when articles are processed for maintenance. The repair station should maintain currency through appropriate arrangements with the manufacturer of the articles it maintains. When new data is received, the repair station’s quality system must ensure it is reviewed to determine whether work in progress will be impacted. Most times it won’t (as discussed above). Provided that work isn’t interrupted, the new data will then be incorporated into existing work instructions. Under FAA guidance, the work instructions should be revised within ninety days of receiving the updated data. See: FAA Order 8900.1, CHG 147, vol. 6, ch. 14, sec. 1, paras. 6-2960(A)(3)(a)(3), 6-2960(A)(3)(b)(4) (Jul. 14, 2015).

Have a question for ARSA? Click here to let us hear it.


Make ARSA’s Voice Your Own: Advertise

ARSA has a menu of advertising opportunities for, 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


Stand Up for ARSA by Sponsoring in 2017

In order to provide world-class resources for its members, the association depends on the commitment of the aviation community. By sponsoring events and activities, supporters can help ARSA’s work on behalf of repair stations to endure.

Need a place to start? For information about opportunities, including sponsorship of the Strategic Leadership Conference in October (click here for info), contact Vice President of Communications Brett Levanto (


Return to Top of Page


ARSA strives to provide resources to educate the general public about the work of the association’s member organizations; should you need to provide a quick reference or introductory overview to the global MRO industry, please utilize

AVMRO Industry Roundup

ARSA monitors media coverage on aviation maintenance to spread the word about the valuable role repair stations play globally by providing jobs and economic opportunities and in civic engagement. These are some of this month’s top stories highlighting the industry’s contributions.

You can explore these stories through ARSA’s Dispatch news portal.


Return to Top of Page

Industry Calendar

EAA Airventure – Oshkosk, Wisconsin – July 24-30
ATEC Fly-In – Washington – Sep. 6-7
Aero-Engines Europe – Madrid – Sep. 13-14
MRO Europe – London – Oct. 3-5
Airline Engineering & Maintenance: North America – Miami – Oct. 18-19
AVMRO Strategic Leadership Conference – Washington – Oct. 18-19 
MRO Asia-Pacific – Singapore – Oct.31-Nov. 2
Aerospace Manufacturing Asia-Pacific – Singapore – Nov. 1-2
Aero-Engines Asia-Pacific – Singapore – Nov. 1-2


Previous Editions

2017: Jan Feb Mar Apr May  June            
2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 
2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2013: Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
2012:           June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Return to Top of Page

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 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.

© 2017 Aeronautical Repair Station Association