I think we could consider the possibility that the FAA evaluator is MISTAKEN in his perception. He may be wrong in asserting that the holes found are improper.
Perhaps, for example, an ALON style spar got back-fitted as a replacement into an ERCO airframe. As a result, it would have approved holes that are not shown in the ERCO plans. In short, he may be well informed, and he may know what he is talking about, but in this case he MAY be mistaken. Especially since the FAA did not include graphics in their notice, with the information we have, at this point, the credibility of the FAA assertions are not well defended nor the specifics of their contentions well defined. We can't make good responses without better information, I think. With the information provided, thus far, I cannot even check out the condition of my own airplane. David Winters
