Practice and Guidance Improves Conformity and Consistency Continued from page 53 hole, water hazard, and bunkers are always in the same place. Further, the rules don’t change from one course to another. Are you beginning to get a sense of the frustration of operating a business when the rules can change from loca- tion to location or FSDO to FSDO? Yes, it can be really overwhelming when the rules are lengthy, the process detailed, and the application inconsis- tent. This is why it is so refreshing that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recognized this and has taken steps to improve clarity and consis- tency, especially when it comes to Aircraft Conformity requirements. These welcome changes are thanks in large part to the work of the National Air Transportation Association (NATA). Over the years, one of the biggest issues that the NATA Aircraft Maintenance and Systems Technology Committee has heard from association members— and experienced themselves—was the FAA’s inconsistent practice of aircraft conformity inspection. For many owners who wanted to lease back their airplane for com- mercial operations or for commercial operators, this was a puzzle without many helpful clues. As a member of the committee, the concern I heard most was, “How can an airplane meet the requirements of Part 135 in one region and not in another part of the country?” And, yes, Aircraft Conformity was not the first time FAA inspectors didn’t follow their guidance consis- tently. NATA has worked those issues as well. This time, as part of NATA’s continuing commitment to work with the FAA on consistent application of regulations and policy, the Aircraft 54 Maintenance and Systems Technology Committee developed an Aircraft Conformity Process and Checklist for the FAA to provide guidance to both industry and FAA inspectors. The result: In September 2018, the FAA published Advisory Circular, AC 135-44. On page one, the FAA states it is the operator’s responsibility to determine the airworthiness of the air- craft and configure the aircraft to the operational requirements of Part 135. This is confirmed by the regulatory language found in §91.7 and §135.413, which both assign aircraft airworthi- ness to the owner and/or operator. Importantly, the first step for the operator, whether starting an operation or adding an aircraft to an existing certificate, is doing the homework and understanding the regulations, overall process, and steps involved. And, like me on the 9th hole, sometimes you may need the help of an expert, which could mean a good relationship with your FSDO. As for adding an aircraft, it’s impor- tant to understand that the Aircraft Conformity inspection must be com- pleted before the aircraft can oper- ate. The long-standing problem has been that most FAA inspectors think it is their responsibility, which led to differing requirements depending on which inspector you encountered. When I was an inspector, I thought I had to inspect the aircraft before I could issue the operations specifica- tions and allow the operator to put it into service. This was reinforced by a conformity checklist and the policy in the inspector guidance that instructed me how to accomplish the conformity inspection prior to issuing the opera- tions specifications. Now, as someone with an A&P certificate, I can under- stand the excitement of touching metal and inspecting an aircraft, but that is no longer the FAA’s job. The FAA revised the inspector guidance to match the language in the AC. The FAA Order 8900.1 Vol. 3 Ch. 18 Sec. 13 states, “Aircraft conformity is the responsibility of the certificate holder/program manager. PIs (prin- cipal inspectors) should ensure that certificate holders/program managers have, in their maintenance or inspec- tion program, policy, and procedures in enough detail to ascertain the con- figuration of the aircraft for the type of operation to be conducted.” So, you should be able to use the AC as part of your procedures to determine the aircraft configuration. In the same section, the FAA provides guidance for inspectors to accomplish an aircraft configuration evaluation when inspectors identify a risk or a finding during oversight of an operator’s program, such as failure to follow procedures or incomplete procedures. Inspectors have the authority to conduct their own con- formity inspections. While I hesitate to say that the process for adding an aircraft to a certificate or an initial certification has gotten easier—just as breaking 80 will always be a challenge—I can say, the FAA has provided the guidance necessary to take individual inspector preference out of the picture and cre- ate more consistency. Armed with the AC and well-developed procedures, your chances of a less burdensome conformity process have gone way up as delays have gone down. This means, you have a better chance to leave work on time and play a round of golf! Aviation Business Journal | Spring 2019
