Discovering the Regulatory Considerations of the Federal Aviation Administration: Interviewing the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee

Maintenance Resource Management (MRM) training for aviation mechanics has become mandatory in many industrialized countries since 1998. Yet, to date, MRM training remains optional in the U.S. Interestingly, a similar safety discipline, namely Crew/Cockpit Resource Management (CRM), is mandatory for pilots, flight engineers, flight attendants, and dispatchers and is regulated in the Federal Aviation Administration s (FAA) Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs). If MRM training is important to enhance aviation technicians working behavior, the rationale to not regulate it opens a window for study. This research aims to inductively investigate the FAA s regulatory rationale concerning MRM training based on direct inputs from the FAA s Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) members. Delphi methodology associated with purposive sampling technique was adopted. The result revealed that the FAA cannot regulate MRM because the aviation industry is strongly opposed to it due to the lack of training budgets, the need of a quantifiable cost-effect analysis, concern over the FAA s inspection workforce, an ongoing voluntary alternative called the Air Transportation Surveillance System (ATOS), the government s lower priority on maintenance after 9/11, and the airlines tight embracement of operational flexibility without regulation.