AMTonline Blogs

I just got news last night that my friend Rodger Holmstrom passed away.

I first met Rodger while I was working for Raytheon Aerospace in Selma, Alabama. Rodger was the FAA Safety Program Manager for the Birmingham FSDO. After I joined AMT, a friend of mine called me and said that Rodger had this new presentation that he was doing at IA seminars in the Alabama region that was really great. The presentation was called “Eye Opener.” In it, Rodger discussed accidents and incidents where well-meaning mechanics were the cause the accident. Throughout the presentation, Rodger would say to the mechanics, “you don’t know what you don’t know.”

I had to see this presentation for myself. I flew down to Mobile, Alabama and sat in on a seminar as Rodger gave his presentation to a room full of mechanics and IAs. I was so inspired by the presentation I wrote an article about it called “Eye Opener” and it appeared in the August 2001 issue of the magazine. You can click here to read that article (and I would encourage every mechanic to do so, because we often don’t know what we don’t know).

After the seminar, I invited Rodger to dinner. We had some burgers and a couple of beers and talked for about two hours. Rodger shared his thoughts about the industry and about life in the FAA. That’s where I first heard about the saying, “I’m with the FAA. We’re not happy until you’re not happy.”

Well, that was the beginning of a great friendship. I would call Rodger if I had a question about FAA regulations. If a reader would write in with a question, afraid to approach the local FSDO because of possible retribution, I would ask Rodger for his thoughts on the matter. Rodger would also give me editorial ideas. I even talked him into writing an article for us.

Rodger retired a few years ago. Yet, he did not equate retirement to doing nothing. He stayed active. He called me often to share ideas and insight. He was active in the AMTonline.com forum, answering questions from readers and getting mechanics to think about the regulations.

Rodger, we will miss you. You were a great friend to the magazine and to the readers of AMT. May you find peace and happiness turning wrenches for the Big Guy upstairs.

Your friend,

Joe Escobar

The New York Times reported on February 12 there is now a way for the flying public to offset the “global warming impact” of flying. They can purchase carbon credits. One company that sells carbon credits, TerraPass, offers travelers the option to buy carbon credits directly on Expedia’s travel website when they book air travel.

Out of curiosity, I visited TerrraPass.com to see what it was all about. The website discusses how the concept works. Basically, you calculate the emissions you produce and then purchase a TerraPass to offset those emissions.

The site has a calculator to help you determine the volume of carbon emissions you produce. I went ahead and entered the information for my wife’s Ford Explorer into the site’s emissions calculator. It tells me that based on our average annual usage, her 1999 Explorer produces approximately 13,000 pounds of CO2 per year. I find that hard to comprehend, since we generally fill up the tank once a week. At 15 gallons per fill up, and a gasoline weight of 7 pounds per gallon, that comes out to 5,460 pounds of gasoline per year. I can’t see how that produces 13,000 pounds of CO2, but I’ll take their word for the sake of discussion. Based on that figure, TerraPass recommends I purchase a “Road Tripper” TerraPass to offset the harmful effects of our vehicle’s emissions.

Maybe I am cynical, but I don’t see how buying a TerraPass will offset the “harmful effects” of my vehicle’s emissions or the airplane trip I take. Sure, wind farms produce energy a lot cleaner than other methods, and investing in them is a good thing. But will that make me change my driving habits? Will I now ride a bicycle to work? Will the airlines stop flying a particular route? No. The only way to reduce emissions is to change our habits. Funding a wind farm doesn’t reduce emissions, it only ensures that emissions are not increased as much in the future.

By the way, one of the projects that TerraPass supports is biomass. Basically, methane is captured from sources like cow manure and burned to produce energy. It says that burning methane from biomass is good because methane released into the atmosphere is about 22 times more harmful than CO2 (a byproduct of burning the methane) as a greenhouse gas.

And I thought those crazy kids burning their farts in college were just being stupid. I guess the whole time they were saving the planet!

Thanks for reading.

Joe Escobar

Last week, a change to IA renewal requirements was posted in the Federal Register. Effective March 1, this new rule would only require IAs to renew their certificate every two years with the FAA, although annual recurrency requirements would remain in effect. I discussed this topic in my last blog. You can read it by clicking here.

The Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA) took the opportunity to submit comments to the proposed rule change. In its comments, AEA took the opportunity to suggest that the FAA should further change Part 65 to implement a rating system for IAs. AEA says, “Aviation safety is a critical role of all who maintain aircraft and aviation products. The FAA has continually added additional controls to repair stations under their concern for aviation safety. The Association proposes to place the same limitation on the privileges of an A&P with Inspection Authorization that the Agency is placing on a repair station.”

Here are the proposed changes submitted by AEA:

… the Association proposes to establish a rating and limitation requirement for the issuance of Inspection Authorizations through the following changes to 14 CFR Section 65.95.

Amend paragraph a(1) to read:

Section 65.95 Inspection authorization: Privileges and limitations.

Section 65.97 Ratings.

AEA says, “Why should a business with a quality system, a reviewed and accepted business plan and an approved employee training program be regulated when 60,000 individuals without a quality system, a business plan or a training program have unlimited authority for return to service of aircraft, engines, and accessories?”

You can read AEA’s comments by clicking here or visiting www.aea.net.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks for reading,

Joe Escobar

The FAA has announced that it is extending the IA renewal period from every year to every two years. Effective March 1, 2007, the rule basically changes the expiration date of inspection authorization from March 31 of each year to March 31 of each odd-numbered year. You can click here to view the news release and read the entire rule as it appears in the Federal Register.

There is something quite strange with this new rule. Although an IA will now only be required to visit his local FAA office once every two years for IA renewal, he or she must still continue to meet the recurrency requirements each year in accordance with FAR 65.93(a)(1)-(5). So all of us who renew our IA this year will have a date of March 31, 2009 as the expiration. But if we do not meet the annual recurrency requirements between April 1 of this year and March 31 of 2008, even though we do not have to renew our certificate then, we “may not exercise the inspection authorization privileges after that date.”

Here is a scenario that is not too far-fetched. Suppose I get my IA renewed this year. According to the back of my certificate, I’m good until March 31, 2009. But the year goes by, and because of my own inadvertent oversight, I do not meet the recurrency requirements of FAR 65.93(a)(1)-(5). Technically, I can no longer exercise the privileges of an IA. But in April next year, I decide to supplement my income ’cause mama needs a new car. So I start doing some annuals in my spare time. One every two-weeks or so. By March 31 of 2009, I have roughly 20 annuals under my belt. But low and behold, when I go to my FSDO to renew for another two-year period, we find out that my IA is no longer valid because I didn’t meet the requirements during the first year of the two-year period.What happens then? Technically, I am in violation of the FARs; have been for a whole year. But what about the annuals? They were performed by an IA who was no longer authorized to perform the privileges granted to an IA, including annuals. But how was the owner supposed to know that? If the owner happened to ask to see my IA certificate, I could have shown them it showing I had another year to go before my renewal date. They did no wrong, but could be forced to have any inspections I signed off re-done before further flight.

The FAA says that this rulemaking will save the agency money. I don’t argue that. Will it save IAs money? Not really. Worse off, many IAs could be stepping into a regulatory minefield that they are not aware of until everything blows up in their face.

What do you think? Let us know. More importantly, let the FAA know. The deadline for comments is March 1.

 Thanks for reading!

Joe Escobar