FAA throws a spanner in the works

[Father Peter Geldard]

Your recent article in General Aviation FAA throws a spanner in the works, although possibly correct at the time of writing, has been overtaken by events and needs to be corrected.
In the article you state categorically:

The only way is to go through the verification of authenticity process and meet with an FAA Inspector in the US.

This is NOT accurate.

Tom Hughston, http://www.faaeurope.us/, a FAA designated Examiner in the UK, states on his web site:

You can indeed be issued the new 61.75 by Captain Tom Hughston or Captain Adam House or any other authorized FAA inspector anywhere in Europe, Africa & the Middle East.

Since your article could influence some pilots to make the unecessary journey to the States - when the process could be done for a fee here in the UK - I think a correction should be published as soon as possible

[Mike Cross]

Fr Peter

If you wish to address a complaint to the editor of the magazine this is not the place to do it, this is a discussion forum. Feel free to post your views but if you want Pat Malone to respond you need to write to him

My own take on the situation is:-
Under the heading "Ways around it?" the article does mention the suggestion that it can be done outside the US but then goes on to say that the FAA Airmen Certification Dept when asked said that the only way was to apply in person in the US.

In those circumstances I don't think it would be sensible to publish something that says it can be done in a way the FAA say is not possible (wehether or not people have been able to do it by that route)

[Jonzarno]

I am affected by this having done my FAA instrument rating training and examination in the States in 2007.

Obviously, I am not keen to make a special journey to the US simply to persuade them that I speak English and I have, therefore, made extensive enquiries including contact with AOPA, AOPA USA and the FSDO in New York that is referenced in the web link referred to.

Neither AOPA office was able to shed any further light but the person that I have contacted several times both by phone and e-mail at the FSDO in New York, and who seemed genuinely keen to help all that he can, has confirmed, after lengthy consultation with the FAA in Oklahoma, that there is no way round this despite the fact that my UK licence does have an English-speaking proficiency endorsement.

The reason given is that it is related to the Transportation Security Agency requirements which came into affect following 911 and through which I had to go before being allowed to start training in the USA in 2007. Despite the fact that I went through those requirements and then, I have to do so again.

I have therefore started the licence verification process with the CAA and FAA and I am planning to make the trip to the USA as soon as I have the verification back.

I have sent my contact in the New York FSDO details of this website and asked for his comments on it and will post details of any reply that I get.

[Father Peter Geldard]

At 15.13 today on the Flyer Forum a contributor under the pseudonym 'Grumpy old pilot' wrote:

In the last 30 mins...

Have spoken with the FAA

They confirmed that Capt Tom Hughston can do this in Europe.

Have spoken with Capt Hughston and confirmed that he can do it,

and for a reasonable fee : GBP125

Maybe AOPA should mend some bridges here?

[Mike Cross]

The statement below was issued by AOPA UK on 5 Feb

I've removed this as I inadvertently posted an incorrect draft of the statement. Steve has posted the corrected version below.

That help?

It's also been posted on the AOPA discussion forum on Flyer.

[Father Peter Geldard]

Mike,
Thanks for that.
It should, hopefully, go a long way to erase the worries that some of the flying fraternity have had during the last few days over this matter.
Do you think, in its own time, IAOPA might be able to ciruculate the statement to those who received an electronic version of the original General Aviation article?
I do hope AOPA has got some good lawyers who can defend action when it is based on reasonable advice (even if it is found eventually to be technically wrong), since it pledge:

AOPA will therefore support all 61.75 holders who
have their 'English Proficiency' amendments made by Europe-based DPEs
with the authority of the New York field office, whatever the eventual
outcome (emphasis mine).

is a very bold one!

[Steve Copeland]

The correct text should read:

English proficiency

Confusion characterises the Federal Aviation Administration’s response to questions on amendments to 61.75 certificates, with different offices taking different positions. The Airmen Certification Branch of the Federal Aviation Administration is today (February 5) continuing to advise AOPA members that the only way to amend such certificates is by appointment at an FAA District Office in person in the USA. The New York field office, however, says certain DPEs in Europe are authorised to amend 61.75 certificates.

As long as the NY IFO FAA staff are maintaining there is a procedure whereby the requirements stipulated on the FAA website are not applicable to 61.75 holders in Europe ,AOPA will support the assertion that all 61.75 holders may have their 'English Proficiency' amendments made by Europe-based DPEs with the authority of the New York field office.

AOPA US continues to work with the FAA to establish an acceptable means of compliance that can be widely published.

[Beerdrinker]

I am in the process of applying for a new Plastic 61.75 Certificate with English Proficiency- I am planning to visit the States next month - so have been interested in the thread.

I have just, 1530z, 06 Feb, telephoned the FAA NY Field Office and spoken to Mr ACQUARO, a Aviation Safety Inspector, and he advised me that a personal visit to an FSDO was still required for any amendment to a 61.75 certificate. He confirmed that a DPE could not do it.

[derekf]

Beerdrinker.

Peter Acquaro is based at the New York City FSDO so is unlikely to know about international operations as carried out through the New York International Field Office.

It is unfortunate that the IAOPA email update referred to the New York field office as opposed to the New York International Field Office. See http://www.faaeurope.us for information and a link to the NY IFO where you can get verification

[Mike Cross]

For info
NYC FSDO Employee Directory
NY IFO Employee Directory

[Beerdrinker]

Derek & Mike,

Thanks for clarifying that. It is still shambolic that two FAA offices within spitting distance of each other are not agreeing.

I assume that AOPA US will persuade the NY International Office to advise their colleagues every where (including Airman Registry in Oklahoma) that in view of the number involved the sensible way of solving the English Proficiency problem is as via the DEP route.

However that still leaves the problem of the required plastic certificate by March 2010. I assume that a 61.75 holders with a paper/card certificate will still have to schedule a face to face at a FSDO.

Best wishes

PS Interesingly enough it is the NY International Office to where Oklahoma are in the process of sending my Verification of Validity of my UK licence and where I plan to visit to get my Plastic Certificate. I started that process after the initial AOPA warning earlier in the year - thanks

[derekf]

However that still leaves the problem of the required plastic certificate by March 2010. I assume that a 61.75 holders with a paper/card certificate will still have to schedule a face to face at a FSDO.

Or do it through European DPE such as http://www.faaeurope.us
However, if you have a paper certificate and go through the english proficient process you will then get a new plastic certificate so fix the potential paper issue at the same time.

[Beerdrinker]

There is a lettter in the latest, April, edition of Pilot Magazine from Tom Hughston confirming that he and Adam House do have authority from the FAA New York International Field Office, to issue the "stamps" for the English Proficiency on 61.75 FAA certificates. He gives the phone number,+1 718 995 5456, of his Principal Operations Officer in the FAA New York International Field Office, Mr Robert Lynch, who can be contacted to confirm the veracity of their qualification.

[Father Peter Geldard]

For those AOPA pilots who do not read Forums - and the miniscule number of 'hits' on this page illustrates that this must mean most of them - General Aviation must be one of their main reliable sources of aviation information.
After all the anxiety that was caused by the article FAA throws a spanner in the works in the previous January edition, I looked with hope for the arrival of the recent April edition which I eagerly read for further enlightenment.
It is clear from other correspendences - let alone from this posting here - that the original article (however unintentionally) had caused confusion and much unnecessary worry. My searching was in vain.
Apart from Martin Robinson in his Diary page saying:

. . . on February 4th, where the main issue was the problems facing FAA 61.75 certificates holders. The FAA is in all sorts of knots over this, and there are serious problems that remain to be resolved. More on this in the near future.

not one word of either apology/correction/clarification for any confusion or misunderstanding caused.
As someone who for many years has encouraged support for AOPA, often on the grounds that "it offers great help to GA pilots", the silence is deafening and disappointing.
Since the previous edition of General Aviation, no less than 24 FAA 61.75 certificate holders have contacted me for clarficiation and enlightenment - three within the last 24 hours who were worried about being ramp checked at Friedrichshafen this weekend!
How long can we go on encouraging GA pilots to look to AOPA for guidance and help when our plea to Head Office - and to others - for clarification, especially for non-forum reading members, is either ignored or, worse still, purposely rejected?

[Mike Cross]

Peter

You appear to be on something of a crusade. AOPA has not been making things up. We had a situation where the FAA Head Office stated that the only way to do it was via the FSDO route. AOPA quite rightly reported that. If you seek a retraction or clarification then they are the people to contact. AOPA reports what it is told by FAA spokesmen. It does not make it up.

Subsequent events appear to indicate confusion within the FAA, with Head Office saying one thing and the NY International Field Office saying another. It appears that the information given by Head Office was wrong.
This page on the FAA website indicates that the procedure is to make an appointment with a FSDO. It makes no mention of any possibility of doing it through an IFO. This is the main public facing page on the FAA website relating to this subject.

However this FAA Document says that to obtain the English Proficiency Endorsement:-

You will need to contact a Flight Standards District Office or an International Field Office in person, submitting a copy of your verification letter of authenticity, a completed FAA Form 8710-1 and positive identification. Airman certificates affected by the ICAO language proficiency requirements issued on and after February 11, 2008, will be issued with the “English Proficient” endorsement. This includes all new airman certificates that are issued on the basis of a foreign license/certificate after February 11, 2008.

This FAA document says:-

L. Foreign Pilot Examiner (FPE). An FPE may issue private pilot certificates and ratings at the private pilot certification level on the basis of an applicant’s foreign license qualifications. The FPE reviews applicants’ records, verifies computer test reports for the Foreign Pilot Instrument knowledge tests, and issues private pilot certificates to qualified foreign applicants IAW 14 CFR § 61.75. The eligibility and experience requirements for this examiner candidate are covered in chapter 18.
NOTE: Refer to chapter 21 for guidance information on the issuance of the U.S. pilot certificate based on a person holding a foreign pilot license.

Chapter 21 can be found here.

It appears that the FAA's web page only tells part of the story and is therefore misleading.

The Order also states:-

3. TYPES OF DESIGNATION. Pilot examiners are designated for specific testing functions. Examiners may perform only the functions authorized by their designations. Pilot examiner designations have been aligned to conform with 14 CFR part 61 certificates and ratings.

The NY IFO examiner list here does not indicate the designations of their DPE's, which is unhelpful.

It appears clear to me from the above that the NY IFO can issue 61.75 certificates with English Proficiency endorsements on them, however it is not clear to me that the reportage in General Aviation was incorrect. The issue you complain of appears to have arisen from a misunderstanding on the part of an FAA spokesperson, not as a result of any misreporting by General Aviation of what that person said.

I'll draw the attention of Pat Malone (editor of GA Magazine) to the above. It would of course have been helpful if any party with a view contrary to what is stated on the FAA Web page had been able to point at the FAA Orders referred to above rather than simply stating their contrary opinion. This would have provided much greater clarity and enabled the confusion to be cleared up much more quickly. In particular had the information above been provided prior to publication of the most recent issue of GA then it would have been possible for the clarification you sought to have been published.