On Monday, July 16, 2018 at 7:52:04 AM UTC-6, Tom (TK) wrote:
The form changed with 2130.2G revision.

Here is a copy for word:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0k...ew?usp=sharing

My FSDO issued an example that basically matches that. It should have been named 8130.2(now J) as FAA Order 8130.2 is the defining document, which no longer discusses the pre-/post- moratorium issues. You'll need to refer to earlier versions for that discussion.

See appendix C-2 here https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...er_8130.2J.pdf

and
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-20...-sec21-193.xml

As a result of some engagement of SSA volunteers with the Type Club Coalition, there were some efforts to seek permanent program letters for gliders a few years ago, but nothing materialized as a specific request. It was to be based on operating at known soaring venues. Deviations, like soarfaris from unlisted sites, would have required notice to the base FSDO, but as long as the pilot operated from a defined national list of soaring sites, it would have been fine.

As far as the FSDO having a copy on file. It's the type of thing that probably only comes to the attention of the FAA is the aircraft comes to the attention of the FAA for some reason. Some of you may recall, that several years ago, the FAA wanted the FSDO's to perform a 100% hands on check of all experimental aircraft. Of course, the FAA does not have that sort of manpower, nor would such an effort have been a positive. However, it is clear that some glider owner/operators over the years were not in compliance nor did they understand the process. Neither of the two prior owners of one of my gliders ever complete Phase I or enter Phase II, nor did they file program letters with their FSDO's. As a result I had to hire a DAR to complete new operating limitations and fly off Phase I, just like it was a new import and air worthy.

I suspect more than one buyer has discovered the same thing.

Frank Whiteley