Those aircraft owners who are involved (as much as is permitted) in the maintenance of their own aircraft might be interested in a case (O-4346-41) that came before the Transport Appeal Tribunal of Canada (TATC) in June 2018.

In the case Académie de Pilotage Internationale Inc.v. Canada (Minister of Transport), 2018 TATCE 19 (Review) – Transport Canada had taken enforcement action against a flight school in Quebec because a member of staff at the flight school had removed and then replaced the ELT from an aircraft (in this case a Cessna 172M) without signing a maintenance release for the action.

Owners of Canadian aircraft will know that every maintenance action on an aircraft requires a “release” to be incorporated into the technical records before the next flight. The release is a sentence along the lines of “The described maintenance has been carried out in accordance with the applicable airworthiness standards” and is signed by a licenced AME or approved AMO (Aviation Maintenance Organization). Until a release is issued, the aircraft isn’t allowed to fly.

Owners will also know that CAR625 Appendix A gives a list of actions that are “elementary work” and not considered to be “maintenance”, which can be carried out by aircraft owners, and which don’t need a release.

On that list is item (18): removal and replacement of avionics components that are rack mounted or otherwise designed for rapid removal and replacement, where the work does not require testing other than an operational check;

In this case the ELT was an ARTEX ME406 which was secured in its tray with a velcro strap and took approximately 45 seconds to remove from the aircraft, without the use of any special tools. The tribunal member felt that met the test of “designed for rapid removal”. Every ELT I have seen is also similarly straightforward to remove from its mount and replace so the tasks of removing and replacing it would likely be similarly construed.

Because the flight school was operating under an Operating Certificate, they had certain formalities to comply with to carry out elementary work, but in this case they had complied with those formalities. The tribunal concluded that a maintenance release was not one of those requirements and the penalty of $5,000 that Transport Canada had imposed was quashed.

What this means for aircraft owners is that they can be confident that they themselves are permitted to remove their ELT (perhaps to send away for annual recertification) and to reinstall it in the aircraft on its return.

If you are the owner of a privately operated aircraft, and you do remove or replace the ELT on this basis don’t forget that you’re still required to make a logbook entry to that effect, and also you should carry out any operational checks that are required by the ELT manufacturer at that time.

ADDENDUM: Transport Canada acknowledged this interpretation of the regulations in March 2020 by issuing Advisory Circular 571-025 that goes into some detail about ELT checks, and which parts of it can be conducted as elementary work.