FAA Makes It Official: SBs Are NOT Mandatory | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

AMA Drone Report

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday

Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne-Unmanned w/AUVSI

Airborne On ANN

AMA 03.23.17

Airborne
03.20.17

Airborne
03.21.17

Airborne
03.22.17

Airborne
03.23.17

Airborne 03.24.17

Airborne-Unmanned 03.21.17

Airborne-YouTube

AMA 03.23.17

Airborne
03.20.17

Airborne
03.21.17

Airborne
03.22.17

Airborne
03.23.17

Airborne 03.24.17

Airborne-Unmanned 03.21.17

Thu, Aug 31, 2006

FAA Makes It Official: SBs Are NOT Mandatory

Says NTSB Judge's Ruling Confused Issue

The FAA has spoken: Service bulletins (SBs) are not —- we'll repeat that, not -- mandatory for most Part 91 aircraft operators. That's good news for private pilots -- and is exactly the decision the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association had encouraged and expected.

After all... up until an NTSB administrative law judge clouded the issue two months ago, that was everyone's understanding -- that a service bulletin was the recommendation from the manufacturer on how best to keep planes flying safely, but wasn't a mandatory rule.

But that was before the NTSB judge ruled against an aircraft mechanic, stating that by not using the manufacturer's prescribed inspection technique while rebuilding an engine, the mechanic had violated regulations -- implying that any manufacturer SB or instruction for doing something required by regulation took on the force of law itself.

Not so, said the FAA's Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations Rebecca MacPherson. In an "interpretation" of the regulations to answer a question raised by the Cessna Pilot Association's Mike Busch almost a year ago, McPherson says .that while properly heeding the bulletins is certainly encouraged, manufacturers may not make them mandatory.

"A contrary result would lead to serious legal objections," wrote MacPherson. "It would mean that our regulations effectively authorize manufacturers to issue "substantive rules," as that term is used in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), i.e., it would enable them to impose legal requirements on the public."

In essence, the FAA ruled, making SBs mandatory would give manufacturers regulatory control -- essentially bypassing the FAA, and circumventing its entire airworthiness directive process. You can imagine what the agency thought about that.

FMI: www.faa.gov, www.aopa.org, www.ntsb.gov

Advertisement

More News

Airborne-Unmanned 03.21.17: Heron 1 FOC, Canadian UAVs BVLOS, Quad Inspects C17

Also: Terra Drone, senseFly partners with MicaSense, Quadcopter Topology Optimization The Heron 1 UAV has attained Full Operational Capability (FOC), allowing two Republic of Singa>[...]

AMA Drone Report 03.23.17: New Canada Drone Regs, 'Anti-Drone' Race, Tiny Whoop

Also: SELFLY Camera-Kickstarter, Turtle Tracking Drones, Drones Save Lives! The Canadian government has recently released new regulations for recreational drone operators that carr>[...]

Airborne 03.24.17: GA v Privatization, FAA UAS $$$, Mexico Fines

Also: NASA Authorization, Av-Associations, Essential Air Services, Kite String, Rotax @SnF, Car v Plane, FAA Forecast With the need to authorize the FAA before September 30 of this>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (03.26.17)

"Every landing on a ship is a very precise thing. When you get 300,000, it's a pretty big testament to the skill of the aviators and the personnel who maintain the recovery equipme>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (03.26.17): Circle To Runway

Circle To Runway (Runway Number) Used by ATC to inform the pilot that he/she must circle to land because the runway in use is other than the runway aligned with the instrument appr>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2017 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC