I would like to chime in on the question of owner produced parts. If a part is better than the original it is considered an alteration. Parts have to be equal NOT better than reference FAR 43.13(b). Below is some material I have gathered and please note FAR 21 keeps using the word “controlling”.
Owner Produced Parts
Question: Does the owner have to manufacture the part himself, in order for the part to be considered an "owner produced" part?
Answer: No. An owner would be considered a producer of a part if the owner participated in controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of the part. The FAA would look at many factors in determining whether a person participated in. Controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of a part. The following would tend to indicate that a person produced a part:
1. The owner provided the manufacturer with design or performance data from which to manufacture the part. {This may occur, for instance, where a person provided a part to the manufacturer and asked that the part be duplicated.)
2. The owner provided the manufacturer with materials from which to manufacture the part.
3. The owner provided the manufacturer with fabrication processes or assembly methods to be used in the manufacture of the part.
4. The owner provided the manufacturer with quality control procedures to be used in the manufacture of the part.
5. The owner supervised the manufacturer of the part.
As noted above, prior to Amendment 21-41, FAR 21.303(a) prohibited each person producing a replacement or modification part for sale for installation on a type certificated product from doing so without holding a PMA. In Amendment 21-41, the FAA amended FAR 21.303(a) to allow a PMA holder to contract with a subcontractor or supplier to manufacture a modification or replacement part under the holder's PMA. In that amendment, the FAA recognized that a modification or replacement part can conform to the approved design data and be 'safe for installation on a type certificated product, as long as the part is produced under an approved fabrication inspection system (FIS).
Amendment 21-41 did not specifically address who "should have held the PMA" where the part was produced in "the absence of a PMA. However, any interpretation of FAR 21.303(a) should be consistent with the focus .in that amendment on the establishment and maintenance of the PIS; therefore, the FAA dod submit that 21.303(a) creates liability for production of a modification or replacement part for sale for installation on a type certificated product for each person who:
1. Participates in controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of the part.
2. And does so with the intent that the part be sold for installation on a type certificated product.
The FAA would not construe the ordering of a part, standing alone, as participating in controlling the design, manufacture, or quality of a part.
If it was concluded that a person produced the part for the purpose of effectuating the repair, the question would remain whether a person would be in violation of 21.303(a). I would submit that the person would not be in violation of 21.303(a), because, the person did not produce the part for sale for installation on a type-certificated product.
Just one man’s opinion.
Stache
by Q-9 of the article... Bottom of page
