Just got this on email. It is here.
I think the NPA is here local copy
The AMC/GM button (right-click, it seems) delivers the same PDF.
74 pages – who will be the first to produce an Executive Summary? 
There is one on page 1 but what’s needed is a list of what actually matters to GA.
Basically introduction of rules for electric engine planes for aeroplanes (not helicopters). Will be covered by the SEP (now stands for single-engine single-pilot, but does not include single engine single pilot turbine, only piston and electric) class rating, but with:
The minimum of 1h for the biennial SEP refresher training (for revalidation) is abolished.
Going from LAPL to PPL now requires 45h total time (was 15h).
Training for LAPL counts towards PPL, as does a theory pass (even if no LAPL has been issued).
TMG rating training does not anymore require engine shutdown and restart training.
It also says that a student pilot must be competent to safely operate solo before being authorised to fly solo. Duh. If that addition in the law changes the behaviour of any instructor or ATO, they should have their instructor certificate, or ATO approval, revoked.
… and you will be able to do night rating at the same time as PPL and it will count towards 45 hours, just as it was possible under JAA, but not EASA.
lionel wrote:
The minimum of 1h for the biennial SEP refresher training (for revalidation) is abolished.
lionel wrote:
To keep both engine types current, the requirement to have two biennial “SEP training” flights (one if in each of the two engine types)
????
Thanks @lionel
I guess the introduction of a way to handle electric airplanes was due now. Making it a new item for difference training seems reasonable, but the rules ended up being quite complicated as suggested. It it really halfway to a class rating; e.g. with specific requirements for the instructor hours (and why 10 hours? when the requirement is 15 hours for all the “real” class ratings.) And yes, the requirement for two biennial SEP training flights to maintain both electric and piston currency (@skydriller) and the specific requirement for theoretical knowledge for “electric training” are also elements resembling class rating requirements.
Presumably there is so little “electrical” operational experience out there that is difficult to make the usual risk-based approach to the rules. And new technologies do tend to grow too many rules (just as we see with all the PBN stuff for GPS IFR ops).
Also, the NPA further specifies the contents of the “12th hour” biennial training for SEP rating revalidation.
I see that some schools and instructors have missed it so far, but earlier this year the requirement for briefing on specific subjects before the SEP biennial was introduced. Instructors now have to think of a meaningful way of explaining the popular concept of Threat-and-Error-Management (“know your emergency procedures and use the checklist” could be the ultrashort version). Discussions on weather issues and navigation are also mandatory before the flight for the biennial.
And the flight exercises themselves should be chosen from the skill test form as decided by the instructor. That can be a good thing; although most pilots welcome the training flight as an opportunity to practice seldom performed maneuvers, a very small number of pilots would greet the instructor with the words “we only have to log one hour and there are no requirements so you cannot make me do anything I don’t want to”. Now the instructor can point to a rule.
The NPA 2020-14 specifies further, focusing on stalls and stall avoidance. As I read it, with this NPA it will not be possible to complete a biennial without performing actual stall exercises anymore. It will mean no more biennial in marginal VMC if low cloud base means that you cannot get to a safe altitude for stalls.
Note that the schedule is for this to take effect in two (!) years from now. And we all have until March 31st next year to comment.
lionel wrote:
Going from LAPL to PPL now requires 45h total time (was 15h).
What BS 
That can be a good thing; although most pilots welcome the training flight as an opportunity to practice seldom performed maneuvers, a very small number of pilots would greet the instructor with the words “we only have to log one hour and there are no requirements so you cannot make me do anything I don’t want to”. Now the instructor can point to a rule.
That’s not a bad thing, although the list should include things like getting weather and notams
Currently, if the instructor survives the flight, he has to sign you off.
Jujupilote wrote:
What BS
It just says that although all LAPL training is credited for the PPL, the minimum total hours for completing the PPL is still 45 hours. It must be read in context.
Jujupilote wrote:
lionel wrote:Going from LAPL to PPL now requires 45h total time (was 15h).
What BS
Isn’t that just closing a gap that theoretically you could get a PPL with less than the PPL minimum hrs by going via the “LAPL-upgrade-route”?
P.S.: huv was faster – same point…
huv wrote:
Presumably there is so little “electrical” operational experience out there that is difficult to make the usual risk-based approach to the rules.
One only has to look across the Atlantic. There, your BFR can be done in anything you’re rated in, and counts for everything. Given that light GA flying is slightly safer in the USA than it is in Europe, they could take the risk-based approach that the FAA method is good enough, and adopt that, rather than a much more complex set of rules that won’t make anything actually safer.
