The “CB” might vanish on the next revaliation, but it might not…
Revalidation goes on the revalidation page (the one with the hand writing) so the page noteing CB-IR isn’t touched. I think you mean a renewal of the licence ( five yearly swap of the whole booklet). But under EASA there is no five yearly renewal anymore. The booklet is valid for life, so this wont change unless something else triggers it.
I think its intended to be a restriction not a remark.
It can only be a restriction if it restricts something!
The smiley has a direct connection to the irony in my statement and it actually refers exactly to the scenario you describe: I assume the CAA really wants to stamp this “easier” IR somehow.
It’s only fair to have some evidence that I worked harder for my IR than you
And there’s an example of the philosophy that has held back IR conversions for decades, kept the riff raft out of the IR elite, and maintained the ATPL TK in it’s current form.
It’s only fair to have some evidence that I worked harder for my IR than you 
I think its intended to be a restriction not a remark. But I’m not stressed about it just curious if other EASA countries do it
What’s bad about the remark? It says you have an instrument rating and they only attached a remark to it. Doesn’t change anything, does it?
And the licence is for life so unless its reprinted for another reason the remark is there for good
Do we have others who have done conversions looking in? What is on their licence?
Yes that is really terrible and could cause a problem later on. I would get it corrected immediately. It’s clearly a cockup.
The “CB” might vanish on the next revaliation, but it might not…
One might think that they might be using the “CB” to denote that you didn’t sit a proper subset of the ATPL exams, but e.g. a UK based JAA IR holder, post-2000 or so, didn’t sit a subset of the ATPL exams either (the 7 IR exams had “big jet” etc questions removed).
