AOPA Pilot Magazine - April 2015 - 22

PILOT COUNSEL

Try to comply

BY JOHN S. YODICE

Inoperative instruments and equipment

JOHN S. YODICE

provides legal
counsel to AOPA
members through
Pilot Protection
Services.

22 | AOPA PILOT April 2015

FAR 91.213 is a rule that has troubled general aviation
pilots and owners for years: "No person may take off
an aircraft with [any] inoperative instruments or equipment installed," whether the instrument or equipment
is important to the flight or not. There are two exceptions to the rule adopted by the FAA in an effort to
provide some relief from this general prohibition. The
FAA's chief counsel just issued a legal interpretation that
provides a format for a review of the rule.
The first exception is for approved minimum equipment lists. MELs exist mostly for airliners, commuters,
air taxi operators, and the higher end of general aviation aircraft. A takeoff with an inoperative instrument
or piece of equipment is allowed if it is expressly permitted by the aircraft's MEL. MELs have not been obtained
for most light GA aircraft because of the administrative
burden in obtaining one, and the FAA's limited capacity
in handling the number of applications.
The second exception, the subsection (d) exception,
is available for any aircraft for which a Master Minimum
Equipment List (MMEL) has not been developed, and
generally for "small rotorcraft, nonturbine-powered
small airplane, glider, and lighter-than-air aircraft"-in
some cases even if a MMEL has been developed. Small
aircraft are defined as aircraft of 12,500 pounds or less,
maximum certificated takeoff weight.
The interpretation formats the subsection (d)
exception by saying: "A person may take off an aircraft
with inoperative instruments and equipment without
an approved MEL provided: 1. The flight is conducted
in one of the types of aircraft listed in Section 91.213(d)
(1); 2. The inoperative instruments and equipment are
not those listed in Section 91.213(d)(2)(i)-(iv); 3. The
inoperative instruments and equipment are either
a. Removed from the aircraft, the cockpit control placarded, and the maintenance recorded in accordance to
FAR 43.9, or b. Deactivated and placarded 'inoperative'
in accordance with Part 43; and 4. A determination is
made by an appropriate person that the inoperative
instrument or equipment does not constitute a hazard
to the aircraft."
Fundamental to the subsection (d) exception is placarding as "inoperative" plus deactivation or removal,
and the logbook recording of maintenance and preventive maintenance. At the first and each succeeding
required inspection of the aircraft, placards may be
installed only by maintenance personnel. Deactivation

may be as simple as the pilot pulling a circuit breaker to
the open position or as complex as a maintenance task
requiring a certificated and appropriately rated maintenance person to perform and record the deactivation. A
pilot deactivating or removing an instrument or piece of
equipment must record it in the aircraft logbook.
What is most complex for typical general aviation
pilots and owners is the number two requirement.
Section 91.213(d)(2)(i)-(iv) specifies that the inoperative
instruments and equipment must not be (i) part of the
VFR-day type certification instruments and equipment
prescribed in the applicable airworthiness regulations
under which the aircraft was type certificated (not
typically seen by the owner or pilot); (ii) indicated as
required on the aircraft's equipment list, or on the Kinds
of Operations Equipment List for the kind of operation
being conducted; (iii) required by Section 91.205 or any
other rule of Part 91 for the specific kind of flight operation being conducted; or (iv) required to be operational
by an airworthiness directive.
Most FAA inspectors have been reasonable in the
enforcement of this rule. Most! Hopefully you won't
run into the FAA inspector who prosecuted (under the
Part 135 companion rule) a single-pilot charter operator who was fined $5,000 for operating a 20-year-old
Piper Cherokee with one of its two glideslope indicators placarded "inoperative." The glideslope had been
working intermittently, and after several efforts at repair
(it would work on the bench), the pilot operator, who
was also an A&P and AI, placarded the nav receiver "GS
INOP." The other glideslope was working. It is ironic
that the inspector was alerted to a possible violation by
looking into the cockpit and noticing the placard (in an
effort at compliance). Even more ironic, the FAA's operations specifications prohibited IFR operations. And
still more ironic, the island airport to which the operator periodically flew his passengers (a teacher, a social
worker, and a speech therapist who worked with children with special needs) did not have an ILS.
The $5,000 penalty amounted to 100 percent of the
net revenues of the charter operation for the year. Most
FAA inspectors would not have prosecuted this case,
at worst providing a warning. Nevertheless, prudence
requires that GA pilots and owners make a good-faith
effort to comply with the rule.
AOPA
WEB www.aopa.org/pps

http://www.aopa.org/pps

AOPA Pilot Magazine - April 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Pilot Magazine - April 2015