On May 5, the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy submitted comments to the Department of Transportation’s regulatory reform request for information. The comments compiled small business issues from across transportation modes, leading its aviation section with multiple recommendations based on ARSA’s analysis of countless Operations Specifications Requirements without regulatory authority.

The SBA comments began with paperwork burdens. The agency noted, on behalf of the more than 100 representatives (including ARSA’s) participating in its April roundtable discussion of issues to be highlighted for DOT, the government’s burdensome imposition of recordkeeping requirements: “Even with the [protections of the Paperwork Reduction Act]…DOT and its subagencies have more than 500 active collections of information, resulting in more than 178 million annual burden hours and more than 2.4 billion in annual costs.” In 2024, the FAA acknowledged – with the support of ARSA comments – its application requirements alone cost repair stations more than 240,000 hours and $11 million each year.

The association’s April recommendations to SBA (covered in the most-recent edition of the hotline newsletter) aligned well with this foundational focus on paperwork. The FAA adds requirements through OpSpecs paragraphs issued under 14 CFR parts 119, 145, and 147 (among others) that (a) are not contained in the regulation and in some cases have been specifically rejected during informal rulemaking, and (b) create unnecessary expenditures of time and money by the agency, applicants, certificate holders, and the public.

The following recommendations led the section of the SBA’s comments concerning the FAA:

(Recommendation 17) Operations Specification A025 – Electronic Signatures, Electronic Recordkeeping Systems, and Electronic Manual Systems

The issue: The FAA requires detailed reports about how aircraft operators will use electronic signatures, manuals, and records.

Small business impact: This authorization may have been helpful when it was new or novel to use a computer to support a business. However, today nearly every aircraft operator uses electronic signatures, records, and manuals. Additionally, the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of 2000 gave electronic signatures and records the same binding authority as paper signatures and records in interstate commerce. Congress already gave businesses the right to use computers in furtherance of their business, but the FAA’s outdated rules are complicated and burdensome. These processes are commonplace among all businesses.

The process is a waste of time, as the end result is already authorized by Congress and has no impact on aviation safety.

Small business recommendation: The FAA should rescind Operations Specification A025. This change would eliminate policies requiring operators to document how they use computers. It would also save time for FAA personnel and aviation operators without diminishing safety.

(Recommendation 18) 14 CFR parts 119, 145, and 147 among others that require the issuance of operations specifications paragraphs

The issue: The FAA issues mandates on applicants and certificate holders through policy rather than the notice and comment rulemaking. Specifically, the agency has added requirements through “operations specifications” paragraphs issued under 14 C.F.R. parts 119, 145, and 147 (among others). These requirements are not contained in the regulation and in some cases have been specifically rejected during informal rulemaking. They also create unnecessary expenditures of time and money by the agency, applicants, certificate holders, and the public.

Small business impact: This practice adds to the financial and time burdens associated with obtaining and maintaining certificates issued by the FAA. Furthermore, since policy can change at the discretion of the agency without notice or comment from the public, new or differing “requirements” can result in requests for “corrective actions,” issuance of letters of investigation, and notices of proposed civil penalty and/or certificate action that unnecessarily burden the agency and industry, particularly small businesses.

Small business recommendation: The FAA should follow the advice of the industry representatives, which has been provided in numerous solicited and unsolicited recommendations, and create a method of developing operations specifications paragraphs that clearly distinguish among those 1) required by regulation, 2) requested by a certificate holder that can and should be issued in the interest of safety, and 3) developed for the convenience of the agency. This would remove unnecessary burdens from all applicants and certificate holders subject to 14 CFR requirements and would reduce the work for the agency to issue and keep the operations specifications paragraphs current.

For context, ARSA provided SBA the following letters and recommendations associated with operations specifications paragraphs:

• November 21, 2007 request for Chief Counsel to review unilateral changes to repair station operations specifications without due process.
• January 17, 2013 recommendation from the FAA appointed Consistency of Regulatory Interpretation Aviation Rulemaking Committee (CRI-ARC), followed by October 19, 2015 industry letter supporting creation of guidance based solely on regulations and a November 22, 2019 letter from ARSA to the new chief counsel on the same subject.
• April 13, 2018 industry letter supporting the congressional mandate that without “a written finding of necessity, based on objective and historical evidence of imminent threat to safety, the Administrator shall not promulgate any operations specification, policy, or guidance document that is more restrictive than, or requires procedures that are not expressly stated in, the regulations.”
• December 8, 2022 Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee final report on part 145 Repair Stations recommending changes to operations specifications paragraphs “automatically” issued to repair stations that are NOT limitations.
• A December 2024 FAA letter to ARSA stating: “We are also in the process of revising the requirements for part 145 Operations Specification paragraph A025, Electronic/Digital Recordkeeping System, Electronic/Digital Signature, and Electronic Media, which is not grounded in a regulatory mandate or safety limitation.” (Emphasis added.)

By focusing on something like Operations Specifications that are directed at applicants and certificate holders, the agency can eliminate any and all guidance that requires action from the public (applicant or certificate holder) unsupported by the plain language of a regulation.

Current FAA bureaucracy functions through “requirements” placed in the agency’s own “orders/policies” to its own workforce that require action by an applicant or certificate holder. Without the action being taken, the FAA employee cannot do its job, but there is no requirement in the regulation to obtain the information or action from an applicant or certificate holder. To “deviate” from the order or policy, the FAA employee must ask permission; if the employee does not “wish” to ask permission, the applicant or certificate holder is forced to request a deviation for the order which is not required to be followed by the applicant or certificate holder in the first place.

The association encourages members to connect with the Office of Advocacy, utilizing resources (including the “Red Tape Hotline”) and participating in industry outreach. Stay tuned for more on ARSA’s engagement and go to arsa.org/about/contact-us or use arsa@arsa.org to share updates on your own advocacy.

To read SBA’s complete comments to the DOT RFI, click here.

To see all comments submitted to the DOT RFI, click here.

The RFI is closed, but the agency will continue to review (and docket) observations provided to Transportation.RegulatoryInfo@dot.gov.

ARSA Urges SBA Review of Maintenance Manual Availability

More from ARSA