Originally Posted by
goldeneaglepilot
...
The FAA at the 6th June Meeting did make public a draft trust agreement that they would feel happy with.
The issue the FAA seem to have with trustor's not being quickly identifiable extends to all US Trusts. ...
Being particularly sad, I had a read of the
FAA Comments and it is quite interesting. There seems to be a strong support for the Trust Ownership structure and no desire to treat Trust Owners different than other types of owners. However, the FAA are clearly concerned to clarify that the Trust Owner needs to be a more active owner and keep track of who is operating the aircraft, where important records are based and clearly direct the Operator (i.e. the one who decides if the airplane flys are not) to enforce/enact emergency airworthiness directives, cease and desist orders, and to provide all information as to the nature of the operation and identities of pilots in the event of enforcement action (i.e. act like an owner). The FAA is also clearly concerned about 'side letters' that change the nataure of the trust relationship (which is filed with the registration).
Overall, I think it is positive. An affirmation from the FAA of the support of the principles of Non-Citizen Trust Ownership supported by a tidying up of the administrative details. It may be a PITA for some Trustees, in that they will probably have to change some agreements to impose additional restrictions and file (potentially redrafted) operating agreements, but overall it does seem quite reasonable for the FAA to be able to enforce its obligations equally on all of the ownership structures.
In reading, it also further confuses me in the 'Operator' discussion. Between EASA, the local country and USA it appears there are range of different entities who could simultaneous be operator for any given flight based on the differing perspectives offered (the pilot, the entity that keeps maintenance records and authorises flights, An entity registered as an operator, the Trustor Owner, the entity HMRC have in mind with their “Operator (not Pilot)” question on the GAR, etc.)