14 CFR Part 145, Subpart E - Operating Rules

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is revising its repair station rules to remove the requirement that a repair station with an airframe rating provide suitable permanent housing to enclose the largest type and model aircraft listed on its operations specifications. The FAA is also revising its general housing and facilities regulation to provide that a repair station's housing for its facilities, equipment, materials, and personnel must be consistent not only with its ratings, but also with its limitations to those ratings. Finally, the FAA is adding an additional general purpose limited rating to cover maintenance work not covered by the existing 12 limited rating categories. These changes are necessary because the existing ratings and housing rules impose unnecessary housing requirements on certain repair stations that work only on component parts of an aircraft. These changes will enable some repair stations to obtain a limited rating that is tailored to their intended scope of work, and will relieve repair stations that have a limited airframe rating, but that work only on component parts of an aircraft, from having to provide large and expensive housing to enclose the entire aircraft when that type of housing is not needed for the limited scope of their work.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is correcting a final rule published in the Federal Register on August 12, 2014, (79 FR 46974). In that rule, the FAA removed a word to address what the agency perceived to be a previous oversight. After publication, and based on information in a petition for rulemaking, the FAA realized that the word should remain. Since the final rule's changes do not become effective until November 10, 2014, this correction will ensure that the word remains in the regulation.

This action extends the comment period for the Notice of availability of proposed revision to Advisory Circular for Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) that was published on September 5, 2014. In that document, the FAA proposed to clarify FAA policy, facilitate achievement of an ASAP's safety goals, and encourage wider participation in the program. Multiple industry groups have requested that the FAA extend the comment period closing date to allow time to prepare comments.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is announcing the availability of proposed Advisory Circular (AC) 120-66C. AC 120-66C provides guidance for establishing an air transportation Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP).

This rule amends the FAA's repair station regulations to allow the FAA to deny an application for a new repair station certificate if the applicant or certain associated key individuals had materially contributed to the circumstances that caused a previous repair station certificate revocation action. The rule also adds a new section prohibiting fraudulent or intentionally false entries or omissions of material facts in any application, record, or report made under the repair station rules, and provides that making the fraudulent or intentionally false entry or omitting or concealing the material fact is grounds for imposing a civil penalty and for suspending or revoking any certificate, approval, or authorization issued by the FAA to the person who made or caused the entry or omission. These changes are necessary because the repair station rules do not presently provide these safeguards as do other parts of the FAA's regulations. Both of these changes will enhance safety by reducing the number of individuals in the repair station industry who commit intentional and serious violations of the regulations or who demonstrate they are otherwise unqualified to hold repair stations certificates.

This action extends the comment period for an NPRM that was published on May 21, 2012. In that document, the FAA proposed to update and revise the regulations for repair stations. This extension is a result of formal requests from repair stations and industry associations to extend the comment period to the proposal. This extension is necessary to afford all interested parties an opportunity to present their views on the proposed rulemaking.