Final Mechanic ACS Recommendation Nears Submission
The ATEC ACS Working Group is preparing to submit its final recommendations for revising the Aviation Mechanic Airman Certification Standards (ACS) to the FAA next week.
Thank you to everyone who reviewed the previous draft and provided thoughtful feedback. Your comments have been instrumental in refining the recommendation and ensuring it reflects the needs of the aviation maintenance community. A summary of the feedback received and the working group’s responses appears below.
Stakeholders are asked to review the final draft and submit any additional feedback before Monday, September 21.
Although this deadline will allow the working group to finalize its initial submission, it represents only the beginning of the process. Stakeholders will have additional opportunities to provide input as the FAA evaluates the recommendations and begins the formal process of revising the Mechanic ACS.
ATEC’s next phase of work will focus on reviewing and revising the associated handbooks to align with the recommended ACS Revision 01. Those interested in contributing to this effort are encouraged to contact Working Group Lead Rhonda Cooper.
Summary of Stakeholder Feedback and Working Group Responses
The working group received comments on the draft revision published May 12, 2026. The principal comments and responses are summarized below.
- Airframe inspection: Stakeholders expressed concern that removing Airframe Inspection as a standalone subject could diminish the emphasis on inspection proficiency. The working group agrees that inspection must remain a core competency. The revision retains the applicable knowledge and skills but integrates them into the Airframe subjects in which they are applied, reducing duplication and assessing inspection proficiency in context. Schools may continue to teach inspection as a standalone course or capstone module.
- Aircraft instrumentation: Stakeholders recommended retaining instrumentation within Airframe and Powerplant because of the subject’s complexity. The working group retained foundational concepts in General while leaving advanced, system-specific content within Airframe and Powerplant. Because the ACS establishes certification standards rather than prescribing curriculum sequence, schools remain free to introduce the material in the order that best supports their students.
- Powerplant subject consolidation: Stakeholders raised concerns that incorporating Engine Inspection, Fuel Metering, and Turbine Air Systems into broader engine subjects could create dense content areas and affect access to training equipment. The associated competencies—including exhaust system inspections, borescope inspections, and general visual inspection techniques—remain in the ACS and are now organized by engine type and aligned with ATA codes. Schools may continue to address these areas through separate instructional or laboratory modules.
- Aircraft painting and finishing: Stakeholders recommended moving Aircraft Painting and Finishing to General to align it with corrosion-related content. The working group retained Painting and Finishing in Airframe because those tasks are airframe-specific. Cleaning and Corrosion Control remain in General because they apply to both Airframe and Powerplant. Schools may still group these topics together for instructional purposes.
- Alignment with FAA handbooks: Stakeholders expressed concern that the proposed ACS structure will not align with the current FAA 8083 handbooks. The working group agrees that the handbooks must be updated and has begun developing recommendations for their revision. The goal is for the ACS and supporting handbooks to align upon publication, improving consistency across instruction and written, oral, and practical testing.