AOPA Turbine Pilot Magazine - February 2023 - 96

RUDDER & WRENCH
in hearing what I'd have to say. My sense
was that the IA wasn't at all anxious to
see Morrie's engine torn down, but was
genuinely concerned about his potential
liability if it wasn't.
Teardown needed? Really?
While I understood the IA's concern, it
seemed to me that his proposed remedy-
an engine teardown-was way over the top.
I told Morrie that if he indeed had a 1999
logbook entry signed by the A&P who overhauled
his engine, and if that logbook entry
indeed contained the word " overhauled, "
then that's all his current IA should need
to be comfortable that AD 63-23-02 and all
other applicable ADs had been complied
with. I explained my thinking about this
in terms I hoped Morrie's IA would find
persuasive.
FAR 43.2 ( " Records of overhaul and
rebuilding " ) states the following:
(a) No person may describe in
any required maintenance entry
or form an aircraft, airframe, aircraft
engine, propeller, appliance, or
component part as being overhauled
unless -
(1) Using methods, techniques,
and practices acceptable to the
Administrator, it has been disassembled,
cleaned, inspected, repaired as
necessary, and reassembled;
This regulation states that the magic
word " overhauled " cannot be used in a logbook
entry unless the overhaul was done
" using methods, techniques, and practices
acceptable to the Administrator. " Clearly,
overhauling an engine would not have been
" acceptable to the Administrator " unless the
person signing the logbook entry ensured
that all ADs that were applicable at the time
were checked for compliance and complied
with if necessary. Thus, I argued, the
mechanic's signature in a logbook entry containing
the word " overhauled " means that
the mechanic did ensure that all applicable
ADs were complied with at the time
he signed the entry. Since AD 63-23-02
was obviously applicable in 1999, Morrie's
IA should feel comfortable that it was
complied with.
An IA performing an annual inspection
is required to determine that the
aircraft " meets all applicable airworthiness
96
AOPA PILOT / February 2023
requirements, " including compliance
with all applicable ADs. (FAR 43.15 says
so.) However, the IA is permitted to rely
on maintenance record entries made and
signed by other mechanics, and does not
have to personally verify compliance with
each applicable AD by direct observation
or other physical means. If there is a maintenance
record entry indicating that an AD
was complied with, that's good enough.
Just imagine the consequences if this
weren't true. If an IA could disbelieve
maintenance record entries made by others
and insist on verifying everything from
scratch, no aircraft or engine would ever
survive an annual inspection.
The IA's rebuttal
Morrie shared my email with his IA and
reported that " after some soul searching "
the IA had taken my point about FAR
43.2 and had reversed his position that an
engine teardown was necessary. Morrie
was clearly relieved to hear this.
However, the IA was still troubled by
the lack of specificity about AD compliance
in the 1999 logbook entry, and he cited
another regulation-FAR 91.417(a)(2)(v)-
as " a potential counter to 43.2 " and was
looking for my opinion.
Now, FAR 91.417 is titled " Maintenance
records " and defines what maintenance
records an aircraft owner must keep and
how long the owner must keep them. The
specific subparagraph of this regulation
cited by Morrie's IA states that an owner
must keep maintenance records of:
(v) The current status of applicable
airworthiness directives (AD)
and safety directives including, for
each, the method of compliance,
the AD or safety directive number
and revision date. If the AD or safety
directive involves recurring action,
the time and date when the next
action is required.
The regulation goes on to state that such
records of AD compliance " shall be retained
[by the owner] and transferred with the aircraft
at the time the aircraft is sold. "
Morrie's IA had raised an interesting
point. Clearly the 1999 logbook entry
did not provide all the information about
AD compliance that whoever owned the
Citabria in 1999 was required to keep
under this regulation and then pass on
to Morrie when he bought the airplane.
That entry didn't include the AD numbers,
revision dates, or methods of compliance,
all information that the aircraft owner is
required by regulation to keep.
Had the former aircraft owner fully
understood his obligations under 91.417
and had he looked carefully at the A&P's
logbook entry memorializing the engine
overhaul, the owner would have realized
that the A&P's logbook entry was inadequate
to satisfy the owner's recordkeeping
obligations, and should have sent it back
to the A&P for a do-over. Obviously, that
didn't happen. (It rarely does.)
However-and this is important-
responsibility for complying with 91.417
lies with the aircraft owner, not with the
mechanic. The owner is required to keep
records of a bunch of information about
AD compliance, but that doesn't mean
that the mechanic who did the overhaul
was required to put that information in
his logbook entry, nor that Morrie's IA
was required to make sure it was all there.
In making his 1999 logbook entry, the
mechanic who overhauled Morrie's engine
was bound by two regulations: 43.9, which
defines what information the mechanic
is required to put in a logbook entry, and
43.2, which defines what work is required
be done in order for the logbook entry to
contain the magic word " overhauled. "
FAR 43.9 simply requires the logbook
entry to contain a description of the work
performed, the date that the work was
completed, the name of the person who
did the work, and the signature, certificate
number, and certificate type of the person
who approved the work. That's all the logbook
entry must contain. Furthermore, this
regulation does not specify how detailed or
cursory the " description of the work performed "
may be. Arguably " overhauled the
engine IAW the Lycoming O-320 Overhaul
Manual " fully meets the requirements of
43.9. Neither 43.9 nor any other regulation
I can find obligates a mechanic to write
down the AD compliance information the
owner is obligated to keep under 91.417.
I'm not sure what the FAA's rulemaking
lawyers had in mind when they wrote
these regulations, but apparently the owner
needs to ask for the information called out
AOPA Turbine Pilot Magazine - February 2023

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Turbine Pilot Magazine - February 2023
