On Oct. 15, the FAA responded to a request by ARSA and 15 other industry organizations by suspending a recently released legal interpretation that reversed years of well-established policy and contravened recognized legal precedent to require certificated individuals to be physically present while supervising others.
The problematic interpretation was issued on Sept. 3 in response to a request from Little Rock FSDO Manager Jonathan Moss. In it, the FAA Office of Chief Counsel distinguished physical presence from “mere virtual or remote” oversight as the determining “in person” standard.
“Although the [“Moss” interpretation] was directed at the obligation of mechanic or repairman certificate holders when supervising maintenance activities,” an Oct. 10 industry letter to the FAA said, “its application to the term ‘in person’ has had an immediate detrimental impact on all persons subject to 14 CFR, and the agency that oversees or enforces those regulations.”
The Oct. 10 industry coalition letter requesting the suspension followed a previous request by Savvy Aviation and considerable discussion among and between industry stakeholders. The request included multiple citations to regulatory and rulemaking documents as well as existing case law. It highlighted the agency’s responsiveness during the 2020 pandemic in utilizing permissive performance-based rules to allow the use of remote technology for various supervisory and inspection functions. Overall, the group’s submission urged the chief counsel’s office to focus on the plain language of the rules:
“The only time a mechanic or repairman should be subject to enforcement is if the supervision was insufficient to determine the work was performed correctly. To presume that result before the work is approved for return to service is beyond the plain language of the regulations that allows the certificated person to determine the amount and extent of supervision required.”
The agency responded on Oct. 15 it had issued a stay of the “Moss” interpretation, explaining it will be effective “until such time as the Agency issues new or supplemental guidance.” ARSA and its allies will continue to follow up on their request for industry discussion of the now-suspended interpretation.
To read the industry’s Oct. 10 letter, click here.
To read the FAA’s Oct. 15 response, click here.
In addition to ARSA, the following organizations supported the Oct. 10 industry letter:
Aerospace Industries Association
Aircraft Electronics Association
Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association
Aviation Suppliers Association
Aviation Technician Education Council
Cargo Airline Association
Commemorative Air Force
Experimental Aircraft Association
General Aviation Manufacturers Association
International Air Transport Association
Modification and Replacement Parts Association
National Air Carrier Association
National Air Transportation Association
National Business Aviation Association
Regional Airline Association
