OSWG logo

 

Hyperlinked Table of Contents in order of presentation

      (select Ctrl Home to return to this page)

      Meeting Information

      Directory

      Welcome

      Technical Programs Branch, AFS-260 Update

   1  D097 Aging Aircraft Programs

   2  D485 Aging Airplane Inspection and Records Review

   3  E096 Weight and Balance Control Procedures

   7  A3xx Ops Spec for Special Cargo

   4  A097, A098, A099 Passenger and Baggage Weight Programs

14  B342 Extended Operations (ETOPS) with Two Engine Airplanes Under part 121

15  C070 Airports Authorized for Scheduled Operations

16  A025 Electronic Record Keeping Systems

17  A353 ADS-B Operations Outside of U.S. Designated Airspace

   5  B343 Performance Based Fuel

18  B450 Sensitive International Areas

   6  B045  Extended Overwater Operations

                 Using a Single LongRange Communication System

   8  A061 Use of Electronic Flight Bag

   9  C059 Category II Instrument Approach and Landing Operations—U.S. Airports

11  C056 / C057 IFR Takeoff Minimums, part 121/135 Operations—All Airports

10  C055 Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums

12  C300  part 97 NDB, NDB/DME, VOR, and VOR/DME

                 Instrument Approach Procedures Using Substitute Means of Navigation

19  B055 North Polar Operations

13  B036 Class II Navigation Using Multiple Long-Range Navigation Systems (M-LRNS)

      Hyperlinked References


 

Domestic Meeting

Morning Session 0900–1200, Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Domestic Industry PreMeeting, Airlines for America, Washington DC

FAA Pre-Meeting, FAA Headquarters, Washington DC

 

Afternoon Session 1300–1600, Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Airlines for America, Washington DC (link for directions: this is a public site, cancel any request for ID/Password)

Telephone Conference Dial In Access:  Participant Passcode 3 6 8 9 9 2

USA Only    888-924-3230           Alternate USA Only      888-335-6670

Direct Dial   609-916-1975           Alternative Direct Dial  405-225-2375

 

Morning Session 0900–1200, Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Airlines for America, Washington DC (link for directions: this is a public site, cancel any request for ID/Password)

Telephone Conference Dial In Access:  Participant Passcode 5 1 8 5 4 1

USA Only    888-924-3230           Alternate USA Only      888-335-6670

Direct Dial   609-916-1975           Alternative Direct Dial  405-225-2375

 

Telephone conference dial in access instructions:

Call an access number. When prompted, enter the Passcode followed by the # key.

 

 

 

 

 

 

·   Review the OSWG Procedures Guide.

·   Subscribe to the AFS Draft Documents Open for Comment web site, http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/opspecs/index.cfm.

·   Read the current agenda, previous agendas, and meeting summaries on the OSWG Publications web site: http://fsims.faa.gov/PICResults.aspx?mode=Publication&doctype=OSWG.

·   Forward OSWG agenda submissions to respective industry and/or FAA co-chairman a month prior to the quarterly meeting.


 

Directory

Domestic Industry            Andy Newcomer, United Parcel Service

Chairman:                          502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Domestic Industry            Jim “Wink” Winkelman, Alaska Airlines

Vice-Chairman:                 206 392-6347, jim.winkelman@alaskaair.com

International Industry       Mike Barfoot, Air Canada

Chairman:                          905-676-2176, michael.barfoot@aircanada.ca

International Industry       TBD

Vice-Chairman:                

Domestic FAA                  Steve Kane, AFS-260

Chairman:                          202 604-5564, steve.kane@faa.gov

International FAA            Danuta Pronczuk, AFS-52

Chairwoman:                     202 385-6186, danuta.pronczuk@faa.gov

International FAA            Bryant Welch, AFS-410

Vice-Chairman:                 202 267-8981, bryant.welch@faa.gov

FAA Coordinator             John Bollin, AFS-260

                                          916 202-3608, john.bollin@faa.gov

 


 

Welcome (1st day afternoon session sign-in sheet)

Introductions:

Remarks: Industry Chair Andy Newcomer / FAA Chair Steve Kane

Discussion:

·   [John Bollin] John assisted those experiencing problems navigating the new digital agenda.

·   [John Bollin] The latest (October 2011) OSWG Procedures Guide has been uploaded to FSIMS. John is working on a revision incorporating current policies and procedures.

·   [John Bollin] AFS-260 is exploring the use of the AFS Draft Documents Open for Comment web site for public comment to upcoming and ongoing OSWG issues.

·   [Steve Kane] Steve recommended combining the two half-day domestic only sessions into a single, one-day meeting…: All AFS divisions would be represented, facilitating greater participation and interaction with FAA SMEs during the session. Industry agreed to a joint meeting on Wednesday, October 8, 2014, in the A4A conference room. The industry only and FAA only pre-meetings will be held Tuesday afternoon.

·   [Andy Newcomer] No change will be made to the joint international/domestic OSWG calendar—Meetings will continue to be scheduled for three sessions spanning two days. After coordinating calendar dates with international chair persons Danuta Pronczuk and Mike Barfoot, and confirming location with Steve Kane, the next joint international/domestic meeting will be held on Tuesday/Wednesday, March 17/18, 2015, at the Navy Memorial Heritage Center, Washington DC.

·   [Steve Kane] No fee, WebOPSS training will be scheduled for the March, 2015 joint international/domestic meeting. Two one-day, 6-hour sessions will be offered. Detailed information and a registration process will be provided at a later date.

·   [Steve Kane] Responding to a question regarding ICAO changing the age 60 pairing requirements, Danuta Pronczuk did a little great deal of research and forwarded her findings to Steve Kane. Steve spoke with FAA rulemaking (ARM)—They are aware of the changes taking place. Direct to final rule making is possible and there is a good chance the domestic rule can be amended in time to coincide with the effective date of the ICAO changes. AFS-200 will be the POC for any rulemaking effort.

·   [Kel Christianson] Responding to a question regarding a MITRE study on cold weather altimetry, AFS-470 is drafting text and guidance for cold weather altimeter procedures at airports identified in the MITRE study. Airports will be listed as a Notice to Airman “Digital Product”. Industry recommended that the FAA develop policy and train controllers.

·   [Andy Newcomer] …will chair the OSWG one last time in October. Jim Winkelman will start his 2-year tour next year. The 2015/16 Vice-Chairman position remains open.


Technical Programs Branch, AFS-260 Update (2nd day morning session sign-in sheet)

·   [Monica Grusche] Digital Certificate Service updated: Subscribers will now receive prompts to renew 30, 15, 5 and 1 day before expiration with the new signature provider.

·   [Monica Grusche] The Maintain Operator Data–Aircraft menu has been expanded to allow more than 10 aircraft.

·   [Monica Grusche] If a menu is left blank, it will default to NA (not applicable).

·   [Monica Grusche] The 8900.1 guidance for Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) Safety Enhancement (SE) Surveys under new Part S has been released. A total of 24 CAST SE surveys are expected to be released in groups of 6 with the first 6 and an InFO published on June 4, 2014. Survey response is voluntary.

·   [Monica Grusche] AFS-260 is developing a “work around” for batch processing and eliminating dropped signatures when you batch process.

·   [Paul Lepine] Working with several contractors, AFS-260 will establish a web-based operations approval entry portal and a web-based work package to accommodate the needs of multiple FAA Lines of Business. Expected release date: September 2015. Reference Paul’s NavLean Recommendation 21 presentation.

·   [Steve Kane] §121.445 Pilot in command airport qualification: Special areas and airports update: New Quito, Ecuador International Airport (Tababela) was added.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fill out your Stakeholder Survey!

Next Meetings:

Domestic: Tuesday/Wednesday October 7/8, 2014, Airlines for America, Washington DC

Domestic/International: March 17/18, 2015, Navy Memorial Heritage Center, Washington DC


 

1           D097 Aging Aircraft Programs

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Frank Wiederman, AFS330, 202 385-6443, frank.wiederman@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Mike Keller, American Airlines, 918 292-2416, mike.keller@aa.com

Issue Statement: Create a standard for industry and field offices. Provide updated guidance.

Background:

Intended Outcome:

Notes:

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] FAA is willing to strengthen the guidance.

·   [5/15/2014 Wiederman] Draft revisions to D097 have been entered into the system for processing; estimated time to completion 6–12 months.

·   [6/10/2014 Wiederman] Revision to specification is in process…. Doing away with free text. Guidance to be revised.

 


2        D485 Aging Airplane Inspection and Records Review

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Frank Wiederman, AFS330, 202 385-6443, frank.wiederman@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Mike Keller, American Airlines, 918 292-2416, mike.keller@aa.com

Issue Statement: Can we decommission?

Background: 14 CFR part 129 applies only to airplanes, not helicopters. If we cannot decommission D485, the part 129 Op Spec should be made into an optional template (airplanes only) and the last four columns should have dropdowns (same as the part 121 template minus the part 135 on-demand template). The 121 template refers to part 129 and has directions within the template.

Intended Outcome: Should there be a job aid for both the part 121 and part 129 templates, and should the directions and references to part 129 in the part 121 templates be deleted?

Notes:

·   [9/7/2013 Schramek] The AA CMO insists that new aircraft be listed in D485 on delivery. Tabled for A4A Mark Lopez and Mike Keller.

·   [xx/xx/2013 Schramek] AFS300 reviewing possible decommission as the collected data has not been used for the last 7 years. For the interim Mark reviewed the amendment to the part 129 templates which has been initiated. A helicopter is not an airplane and since the rule is for aging airplanes the D485 requirement is being removed for helicopter only operators. Inspector guidance has been drafted to reflect the change. If a policy decision is made to remove D485 for all CFR parts before the draft Op Spec, Notice and inspector guidance are complete, all documents will be amended to reflect decommission.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Domestic and international industry operators have requested that the FAA decommission D485. Nick Petty from executive Jet Management also commented that they are required to have D485, yet D485 says it does not apply to part 135 on-demand operators. International FAA OSWG Chairwoman, Danuta Pronczuk, briefed that for now the FAA will be continuing to process the previously briefed change to D485 for part 129 foreign air carriers. If it is agreed by upper management that the FAA can decommission D485 then instead of making the change, the FAA will decommission D485 for foreign carriers as well.

·   [5/15/2014 Wiederman] Request to archive B485 submitted; estimated time to decommission 6–12 months.

·   [6/10/2014 Wiederman] No change.


3        E096 Weight and Balance Control Procedures (new business)

Initial Agenda Date: June 10, 2014                          Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Frank Wiederman, AFS330, 202 385-6443, frank.wiederman@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Mike Keller, American Airlines, 918 292-2416, mike.keller@aa.com

Issue Statement: 8900.1 Volume 3, Chapter 47, Section 1 guidance only speaks to weight and CG and has omitted or failed to fully emphasize the requirement in part 25 §25.1583(c) Weight and Loading Distribution.

Background:

Intended Outcome: Add a new table to Ops Spec paragraph E-096 titled Load and Control. The table would be authorized for issuance once the CFT has given concurrence to the CMO. The CMO would enter the section/chapter manual where that specific instructions and guidance exist.

Notes:

·   [5/15/2014 Wiederman] The FAA intends to only change the title of E096 to reflect its purpose, weighing aircraft. It was determined that the current title—Weight and Balance Control Programs, could mislead a person to think it applies to “operational aspects” of weight and balance.

·   [6/11/2014 Newcomer] Industry recommends that we make E096 a Part D specification.


·    

4        A097, A098, A099 Passenger and Baggage Weight Programs

Initial Agenda Date: February, 2013                        Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Adam Giraldes, AFS220, 817 3504564, adam.giraldes@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Roy Maxwell, Delta Airlines, 404 715-7231, roy.maxwell@delta.com

                           Chuck Schramek, Delta Air Lines, 424 715-1536, chuck.schramek@delta.com

Issue Statement: Feedback requested: passenger survey weights.

Background: Updates are coming to the weight and balance figures used in AC 12027E Aircraft Weight and Balance Control. Adam and Roy request feedback.

Intended Outcome: Update AC 12027 Aircraft Weight and Balance Control

Notes:

·   [2/6/2013 Schramek] Industry believes it should be a group presentation and not on an airline-by-airline presentation.

·   [2/6/2013 Schramek] Request to Deke Abbott, AFS-220 to make draft AC available for review. Deke indicated the document should be available by the end of March.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Posted draft AC 120-27F on November 7, 2013, with a comment period closing December 7, 2013. Industry requested an extension of the comment period to 120 days. FAA extended to comment period to January 31, 2014. Comments received by the FAA will take approximately two months to review and up to six months to incorporate.

·   [5/12/2014 Winkelman] Revised AC pending.

·   [6/10/2014 Giraldes] Draft AC 120-27F is in revision. FAA is going back to standard weights, adding SMS principles. 4-5 months to make changes.

·   [6/10/2014 Giraldes] The weights published will be updated using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) conducted by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which is based on a 4 year cycle.


 

5        B343 Performance Based Fuel

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead:  Gordy Rother, AFS-240, 612 253-4409, gordon.rother@faa.gov

                     Adam Giraldes, AFS220, 817 3504564, adam.giraldes@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Rich Yuknavich, American Airlines, 817 967-5767, rich.yuknavich@aa.com

               Andy Newcomer, UPS, 502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Issue Statement: Numerous carriers want to be issued this Ops Spec, allowing en-route reserves as low as 5% for that percentage of the total time required to fly from the airport of departure to, and land at, the airport to which it was released. Currently only two part 121 operators, American and United have this Op Spec.

Background: Many international carriers are required to plan for less fuel reserves percentages than U.S. carriers. Many foreign carriers are allowed to use 3% reserves. This has put U.S. carriers at an operating cost disadvantage, even though the FAA-required 10% reserves is only computed on those en-route flight segments that are in Class II airspace. Long flights over Class II airspace experience the largest reserve fuel advantage. A little over ten years ago, the FAA began to level the playing field by granting use of 5% fuel reserves to carriers that could prove their flight planning and weather prediction capabilities provided adequate safety margins. American, United and Continental [merged with United] were issued B343.

Authorization for additional carriers was halted following Congressional interest in one or two widely publicized minimum fuel declarations. However, the long term record of both American and United Airlines is very positive. For example, since May, 2004, American Airlines has flown 767,257 flights using B343 5% planning parameters and has had only 104 of those flights burn into en-route fuel reserves. Most of these “burn-ins” were only a few minutes of fuel, but are reported none the less. Further approvals were also denied based on a planning reliability standard formulated by MITRE that counted fuel percentage of under-burn in the same category as over-burn. In the case of FedEx, over-burns were due to contingency added fuel to account for frequent MD-11 tail-fuel-transfer failures. When normal transfers occurred, fuel consumption was much less than planned.

More recently, further approvals are being delayed in anticipation of ICAO publication of international fuel reserve guidelines. There is a desire to ensure that U.S. policies harmonize with ICAO standards. FAA is working toward a Performance Based fuel reserves model similar to the draft ICAO Annex 6. FAA has requested that carriers review and comment on Annex 6 (draft) through IATA or ATA. Once the new Annex 6 is settles/issued, the theory is that B343 should be resurrected. A new FAA Advisory Circular is being drafted by the FAA.


 

5        B343 Performance Based Fuel (continued)

Intended Outcome: Provide for performance based fuel reserves for U.S. air carriers sooner than later.

Notes:

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Drafting guidance for new Op Spec, will provide OSWG with copy.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Performance based fuel will align with SARPs and ICAO on fuel (10% reserve to as low as 5% reserve). Not just computing, but a “system” including time of day, route, where you fly, your aircraft, airport arrival rate, etc.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Provide data collection criteria and how to share with CMO.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Parallels ICAO Annex 6, part 1 (SARP, known fuel vs. unplanned).

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Harmonization effort.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Approvals at CMO and not at headquarters.

·   [5/30/2014 Rother] The FAA is slowly working with the proof-of-concept carrier (UAL). We may have something more substantial this fall.

·   [6/11/2014 Newcomer] Proof of concept data collection continues. Industry would like to have requirements in place as soon as possible in order to analyze IT requirements.

·   [6/10/2014 Giraldes] FAA wants to make sure the proof of concept is successful before releasing any potential criteria needed to apply for the specification. As of date, reserve fuel requirements will be fleet specific, city pair and arrival time driven. Initial application will require AFS-200 authorization. Management and oversight of the criteria will reside with the CMO.


 

6        B045 Extended Overwater Operations

            Using a Single LongRange Communication System

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Gordy Rother, AFS-240, 612 253-4409, gordon.rother@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Grant LeClaire, Southwest Airlines, 404 559-3645, grant.leclaire@airtran.com

Issue Statement: Create a standard for industry and field offices. Provide updated guidance.

Background: Removes the time limit that is in the current paragraph and the required letters of agreement from KZNY, KZJX, KZMA and KZHO. Proposed is a 30-day look back of HF radio reliability. If there are two failures within the 30 days, aircraft would be limited to one leg in the WATRS airspace unless the aircraft has an operational Sat voice system. The paragraph is in coordination at Headquarters. Anticipated release date is fall of 2014.

Intended Outcome: Under review and request for carrier participation.

Notes:

·   [9/7/2013 Schramek] Question of 90-day may be excessive. Industry working on a compromise. Goal is for policy within a month.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] “We are close”—next 2/3 week complete internal coordination. Will post for comments soon.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] 30-day look-back.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] SAT Voice is a mitigation.

·  [2/5/2014 Newcomer] New language addresses difference between the MRSAT and Iridium.

·  [5/30/2014 Rother] B045 is currently at AFS-140. The ETA is mid-July then it goes to formal coordination. If all goes well the group can expect it on the street by September.

·  [5/30/2014 Winkelman] No discussion, FAA participation unavailable.


 

7        A3xx Ops Spec for Special Cargo (new business)

Initial Agenda Date: June 10, 2014                          Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Steve Moates, AFS-220, 202 267-4147, stephen.moates@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Steve Kuhar, Federal Express, 901 224-5339, sjkuhar@fedex.com

                           Andy Newcomer, UPS, 502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Issue Statement: Resolve the issue of “special cargo”.

Background: As part of the aftermath of the April 2013 National Air Cargo B747 accident in Bagram, Afghanistan, the FAA formed a team tasked to address the issue of special cargo. The team’s original tasking was to review the weight and balance manuals of every operator. The next step is a concurrence to carry “Special Cargo” authorized by issuance of an A3xx OpSpec.

Intended Outcome: Create a 300-level Op Spec addressing the carriage of “Special Cargo”.

Notes:

·   [5/15/2014 Kane] Notice 8900.262—Review of Weight and Balance Control Programs Including Special Cargo Operations was issued on May 6, 2014.

·   [6/10/2014 Moates] Advisory Circular (AC 120-85) revision anticipated in late 2014.

·   [6/10/2014 Moates] Special cargo authority will most likely be incorporated into an existing authorization and not be developed as a new specification.

·   [6/10/2014 Moates] The authorization will differentiate special cargo vs. special handling. Special cargo does not involve the use of a certified pallet/net or certified ULD secured via a floor lock system (the airplane’s Cargo Loading System). Special cargo does not include bulk loaded baggage or cargo in an airplane’s lower hold.

 


 

8        A061 Use of Electronic Flight Bag

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Brian Hint, AFS430, 202 267-8415, brian.hint@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Jim Winkelman, Alaska Airlines, 206 392-6347, jim.winkelman@alaskaair.com

Issue Statement: Request updated guidance.

Background: Reference AC 120-76C Guidelines for the Certification, Airworthiness, and Operational Use of Electronic Flight Bags.

Intended Outcome:

Notes:

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] On ship position, moving map is now Type B (FAA Order and Advisory Circular)

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Ops Spec will add language to reduce AC120-76C to harmonize with EASA.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Install or portable with Type A or Type B; eliminate classes. Cancel Type C EFB user forum in Memphis in May.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Eliminate all the software versions in the table as long as the POI validates the revision method.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Table will be in drop down format.

·   [5/8/2014 Hint] An interim change will be developed for the OpSpec language to:

(1)  Clarify when an OpSpec for EFB functions are required.

(2)  Make it clear that AMMD with own-ship is a Type B Software application.

(3)  Allow for an easier transition for the next version (which will eliminate Type C software applications and require OpSpecs only for Type B EFB Software applications).

·   [5/8/2014 Hint] Tables for Operator/POI entry will be updated to include a drop-down menu (based upon FAR Part) to standardize table input.

·   [5/8/2014 Hint] Eliminate all the software versions in the table as long as the POI validates the revision method.

·   [5/8/2014 Hint] Discuss long term vision for EFB OpSpec requirements.

·   [6/11/2014 Newcomer] No discussion, FAA representation unavailable.


9        C059 Category II Instrument Approach and Landing Operations—

            U.S. Airports

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Bryant Welch, AFS-410, 202 267-8981, bryant.welch@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Andy Newcomer, UPS, 502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Issue Statement: Controlling RVR needs to be clarified: Mid RVR 0 or rollout RVR 0 was never acceptable.

Background: In the amended Op Spec it will specify that all RVRs are controlling vs. just touchdown. Also specified minimum values for mid RVR 600 and rollout RVR 300 for CAT II (1200/600/300). The Op Spec was also rearranged, first step toward combining with C060. For CAT II currently touchdown zone is controlling, and mid and rollout is advisory. Changing to all available RVRs are controlling. Specifying minimum values for rollout so you cannot land with RVR 200 in rollout. Result of looking at several company manuals that rollout RVR 0 is OK.

Intended Outcome:

Notes:

·   [mm/dd/2013 Schramek] Vetted through the DCB, out for formal coordination. Following this change AFS-400 plans on combining C059 with C060.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Bryant reported that inspector guidance required for the issuance of a foreign air carrier’s OpSpec is delayed and expected to be out in the next few months. The template has been developed and issued. The compliance date will be 120 days from the date of the international inspector guidance being published. Bryant emphasized that if all three RVRs are available, they are controlling. Industry commented that the “N/A” for mid and roll out in the table adjacent to the touchdown RVR 1600 row was confusing. Several members requested an amendment to the OpSpec. Bryant confirmed that the way N/A in the mid and rollout RVR row was supposed to be interpreted was “…if reported, then RVR 1600 or above; if not reported, then RVR 1600 touchdown is all that is required.” Bryant took the IOU to make the requested editorial change for both the foreign air carrier and U.S. domestic templates.

·   [6/10/2014 Welch] The Table 2 RVR 1600 row will be changed to mid/rollout RVR 600/300 and will state they are required if available.

·   [6/11/2014 Newcomer] Industry restated their desire to combine C059 with C060.


 

10                                                                            C055 Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums

Initial Agenda Date: February 4, 2014                     Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Cathy Graham, AFS-470, 202 267-8842, catherine.majauskas@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Jim Winkelman, Alaska Airlines, 206 392-6347, jim.winkelman@alaskaair.com

Issue Statement: Confirmation that this applies to all alternates or limited to destination alternates.

Background: Some carriers interpret AC 120-42B Extended Operations (ETOPS and Polar Operations) paragraph 303.C.(5) to mean that Ops Spec C052 authorization for RNAV/GPS approaches constitutes authorization for use of the provision in that paragraph for use of GPS based en-route alternate minimums:

303.C.(5) ETOPS Alternate Minima. A particular airport may be considered to be an ETOPS alternate for flight planning and dispatch purposes, if the latest available forecast weather conditions from the earliest time of landing to the latest time of landing at that airport, equals or exceeds the criteria detailed in the following table. Because OpSpecs alternate weather minima standards apply to all alternates, the following criteria is recommended for a typical certificate holder’s OpSpecs. An individual certificate holder’s OpSpecs must reflect current requirements (§121.625). Although no consideration for the use of GPS/RNAV approaches is presented here, operators may request to receive this authorization through the FAA. This authorization would be reflected in the operator’s OpSpecs. Appropriate ETOPS alternate minima for such operations will be determined by the Director, Flight Standards Service. The airport of departure (takeoff) and the destination airport (unless used concurrently as an ETOPS alternate) are not required to meet the weather minima for ETOPS alternates as these airports are subject to other regulations (e.g., §§ 121.617, 121.621, and 121.623).

OpSpec/MSpec/LOA C055, Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums was published to authorize certificate holders/program managers/operators to derive alternate airport instrument flight rules (IFR) weather minimums in those cases that require an alternate airport. N8900.218 Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums (5/30/13) describes changes that allow operators with unaugmented Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation systems to plan for use of GPS-based instrument approach procedures (IAP) at destination or alternate airports (but not both locations) in the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS).


 

10                                                                            C055 Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums (continued)

Background (continued): Currently, selectable text is being added to C055 in order to allow part 121 and 135 operators to file for GPS based IAP at an ETOPS alternate, under certain conditions.  Until publication of this change, operators may request the use of GPS-based IAP minima at ETOPS alternate airports through non-standard text. Applications for this temporary non-standard text should be made to AFS-200 through the guidance contained in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 18, Section 2, paragraphs 3-712 and 3-713.

Intended Outcome: Allowance for use of RNAV/GPS approach minima at en-route alternate airports.

Notes:

·   [8/7/2013 Schramek] Steve Moates, AFS 220, and John Swigart, AFS-470 stated that those carriers who interpreted AC 120-42B as allowing Ops Spec C052 issuance as blanket authorization to use RNAV/GPS approach minimums for ETOPS en-route alternate suitability is wrong—Special, specific HQ FAA approval, is required. Such approval will likely not be entertained until the larger issues which are subject to the ongoing MITRE Corporation study, are resolved.

John related that there are GPS satellite coverage issues in various parts of the world such as the Pacific and South America that make a blanket allowance for worldwide RNAV/GPS approach minimums utilization without limitations and special provisions an imprudent course of action.

John further stated, if a carrier could make a case for a special allowance, such as Continental did for its Micronesian Island operations, then some relief may be possible. In such cases, RAIM predictions and close monitoring of inflight performance would be expected.

·   [8/7/2013 Schramek] RNAV GPS approaches are not to be used for an ETOPS alternate unless non-standard language is added to C055. A Notice will be published for the procedures to obtain the non-standard language. This will be used until the template can be revised.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Should have received a memo from AFS-400 for ETOPS alternates.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] 700 meters may be used in lieu of 800 meters.

·   [6/11/2014 Graham] Specification is being revised to include procedures for use of GPS-based instrument approach procedures at ETOPS alternate airports. Until complete, non-standard text language is available.


 

11    C056 IFR Takeoff Minimums, part 121 Operations—All Airports

                 C057 IFR Takeoff Minimums, part 135 Operations—All Airports

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead:  Bryant Welch, AFS-410, 202 267-8981, bryant.welch@faa.gov

                     Chris Hope AFS-410, 202 267-8976, chris.hope@faa.gov

                     Danuta Pronczuk AFS-52, 202 385-6186, danuta.pronczuk@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Chuck Schramek, Delta Airlines, 404 715-1536, chuck.schramek@delta.com

Issue Statement:

Background: OpSpec changes were reviewed: new minima, terminology. 300/300/300 with HUD (same limitations as those imposed on US domestic air carriers) has been added. Inspector guidance has been pre-coordinated between AFS50 and AFS400.

Intended Outcome:

Notes:

·   [mm/dd/2012 Schramek] John Conlon, United Airlines added that he reviewed the revised draft and it looked good from the industry perspective. Look for the updated draft to be posted for comment in the next couple of weeks.

·   [mm/dd/2012 Schramek] Notice 8900.224 published. Added 500/500/500 and 300/300/300 tables with glance view of lowest authorized by type.

·   [mm/dd/2012 Schramek] Since last meeting one additional selectable was added within the table: 700/700/700. (200 meters = 700 feet). Brian Miles, international OSWG industry chair, questioned the HUD limitation below 500/500/500; stated that EASA and ICAO both have provisions for 400/400/400 takeoff without a HUD. (125 meters = 400 feet). Bryant took the IOU to review the issue.

·   [mm/dd/2012 Schramek] Industry asked if the FAA permits foreign air carriers to takeoff with 400/400/400 without a HUD, will the domestic industry be permitted as well. Bryant confirmed yes. More details expected at the next OSWG.

·   [mm/dd/2012 Schramek] Post 2013 OSWG update: The 2009 job aid that no longer applies has been removed and the new job aid and help text in subparagraph d (the references within it) has been corrected.


 

11    C056 IFR Takeoff Minimums, part 121 Operations—All Airports (continued)

                 C057 IFR Takeoff Minimums, part 135 Operations—All Airports (continued)

Notes:

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] EASA confirmed that establishment of lower take-off minima was based on a simulator study performed on a KLM B747. Bryant advised that the FAA has requested a copy of the study and is still waiting. Without a copy of the study the only way the FAA would consider the proposal would be to conduct its own simulator study. For the FAA to consider conducting its own study there would have to be proof of a need. U.S. and foreign air carriers who feel that there is such a need are requested to track to which airports and how many takeoffs at those airports they could not do because the weather was less than RVR 500. This analysis should be completed prior to the next joint session (scheduled for March, 2015). Brian Miles, international industry chair, commented that EASA only authorized Category A, B, C, for RVR 400 takeoff without HUD. Bryant commented that this will be easier to review once we have a copy of the study. Post meeting addendum: Takeoff visibility is limited to 1sm for 2-engine aircraft (regulatory reference §91.175(f)). Question to FAA: Can the visibility restriction be reduced to ½sm if the foreign CAA authorizes? Question to industry: How many commercial operators operate with one engine? Is there a need? What are the mitigations? (New technology/more reliable engines….)

·   [5/7/2014 Welch] Should say “400 without HUD for everybody”, but only if EASA test is found and accepted by the FAA. So far we have nothing from EASA. This should probably be closed and only reopened if test data found.

·   [6/11/2014 Welch] Update: FAA has heard nothing from EASA. Mike Barfoot, International Industry Chairman, will contact KLM for a copy of the study.


12    C300 part 97 NDB, NDB/DME, VOR, and VOR/DME

            Instrument Approach Procedures Using Substitute Means of Navigation

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed: June 11, 2014

FAA Lead: Kel Christianson, AFS-470, 202 267-8838, kel.christianson@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Jim Winkelman, Alaska Airlines, 206 392-6347, jim.winkelman@alaskaair.com

                           Rich Yuknavich, American Airlines, 817 967-5767, rich.yuknavich@aa.com

Issue Statement: Suitable NAVAID substitution authorizations are needed by operators in certain circumstances or areas of the world.

Background: C300 was developed to provide standard methodology for authorizing NAVAID sub-procedures for approach operations. The current template does not meet the needs of all operators or provide the latitude necessary for certain circumstances. There are no plans to make any immediate changes to the Ops Spec; however, 470 would entertain submission of nonstandard language for special cases. Carriers, especially those without Ops Spec C300, should make maximum use of the provisions outlined in AC 90107 for RNAV substitution. Depending on the final analysis of a MITRE study, AFS-470 may first allow use of C300 for alternate approaches.

Intended Outcome:

Notes:

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Take away WASS requirement?

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] At AFS-1 for signature—will publish soon.

·   [6/11/2014 Newcomer] Recommend closure.


 

13    B036 Class II Navigation Using Multiple Long-Range Navigation Systems

            (M-LRNS) (new business)

Initial Agenda Date: June 10, 2014                          Date Closed: June 10, 2014

FAA Lead: Madison Walton, AFS-470, 202-267-8850, madison.walton@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Ellen Birmingham, UAL, 872 825-5193, ellen.birmingham@united.com

                           Steve Kuhar, Federal Express, 901 224-5339, sjkuhar@fedex.com

Issue Statement: Industry request for an update of B036 guidance material development. Using guidance material for rulemaking, ie only plotting is in guidance material and not a regulatory requirement.

Background:

Intended Outcome: FAA brief B036 guidance material development.

Notes:

·   United, supported by FedEx, has asked for a legal interpretation from FAA Counsel.

·   Recommend closure.

14    B342 Extended Operations (ETOPS) with Two Engine Airplanes Under part 121

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead:  Theo Kessaris, AFS240, 202 267-4561, theodora.kessaris@faa.gov

                     Steve Moates, AFS-220, 202 267-4147, stephen.moates@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Andy Newcomer, UPS, 502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Issue Statement: The FAA is proposing to revise Op Spec B342 to remove the requirement to list airplane registration numbers and ETOPS alternate airports. Airplane registration numbers are already listed in D086.

Background: AFS-220/260 is reevaluating the need to list aircraft registration numbers in B342. D086 already contains this information and discrepancies exist between the aircraft numbers listed in D086 and those listed in B342. With respect to ETOPS Alternate Airports, the FAA has realized that the B342 OpSpec is somewhat inaccurate by listing ETOPS Alternate Airports. The FAA believes that listing those airports in a HQ approval OpSpec serves no purpose to the FAA or industry.

Intended Outcome: Update Op Spec B342 Table 1: Remove the column for Airplane Registration Number and delete Table 2.

Notes:

·   [mm/dd/yyyy Schramek] Ongoing discussion…; concern of the alphabet soup. Per Theo, no it won’t—Language of regular, provisional, or fueling will transfer from B342 to C070. Operators will not have to designate an airport as an “E” when it is already an “R”.

·   [mm/dd/yyyy Schramek] Industry is waiting on a legal interp. Reason for delay is due to other priorities.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Theo will go to AFS-220 to see if they can take action on the aircraft table.

·  [5/13/2014 Kessaris] AFS-220 will remove the column for Airplane Registration Number. The Op Spec template and guidance will be revised.

·  [6/10/2014 Kessaris] Update: Notice has been written, OpSpec language has been drafted.

15    C070 Airports Authorized for Scheduled Operations

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Theo Kessaris, AFS240, 202 267-4561, theodora.kessaris@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Doug Snow, Federal Express, 901-397-8228, douglas.snow@fedex.com

Issue Statement: Adequate Airports for ETOPS would be entered in C070 under a new category of “E” for “Adequate Airport for ETOPS”. C070 would then be revised for the addition of the new “E” category airport.

Background: The B342 OpSpec is somewhat inaccurate by listing ETOPS Alternate Airports. The FAA believes that listing those airports in a HQ approval OpSpec serves no purpose to the FAA or industry.

Intended Outcome: Update OpSpec C070: Allow the selection of “E” airports and make the OpSpec applicable for part 121 supplemental and part 135 certificate holders.

Notes:

·   [mm/dd/yyyy Schramek] Ongoing discussion…; concern of the alphabet soup. Per Theo, no it won’t—Language of regular, provisional, or fueling will transfer from B342 to C070. Operators will not have to designate an airport as an “E” when it is already an “R”.

·   [mm/dd/yyyy Schramek] Industry is waiting on a legal interp. Reason for delay is due to other priorities.

·   [mm/dd/yyyy Schramek] Supplemental Carriers will list ETOPS adequate airports in C070.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Theo will go to AFS-220 to see if they can take on the aircraft table.

·   [5/16/2014 Newcomer] American Airlines has issues with listing multiple aircraft types authorized into a regular airport. They are requesting a possible concept of provisional aircraft.

·   [6/10/2014 Newcomer] American As of date, the “E” for ETOPS adequate alternate airports is a selectable in the aircraft data base and will auto-populate in C070 as an “E” if selected. However, there is no explanation of this designation or instructions for selecting the “E” currently in guidance. Some carriers maintain both C070 and B342.

·   [6/10/2014 Kessaris] Efforts to remove ETOPS adequate alternates (table 2) and use C070 is possible next year.


 

16    A025 Electronic Record Keeping Systems

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead: Theo Kessaris, AFS240, 202 267-4561, theodora.kessaris@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Casey Seabright, Delta Air Lines, 402 715-1536, charles.seabright@delta.com

                           Jim Winkelman, Alaska Airlines, 206 392-6347, jim.winkelman@alaskaair.com

Issue Statement: FAA & Industry are using A025 as a catchall for authorizations that may not be appropriate for this paragraph or may be appropriate but are listed individually versus categorically.

Background: An audit of A025 shows significant variability in the items placed in this paragraph. The impetus for more specific guidance is increasing with the expanding adoption of cockpit Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs) and the corresponding transition from paper manuals to purely digital format manuals. The direction of some POIs and PMIs to list every digital document individually versus by class of documents is becoming more burdensome as the number of digital document continues to multiply.

Intended Outcome: Maintain A025 as a repository for electronic record keeping and an optional storehouse for electronic signatures and electronic manuals. Amend A025 to include tables for specific approvals such as flight planning systems, training records repositories, and categories of electronic/digital manuals.


 

16    A025 Electronic Record Keeping Systems (continued)

Notes:

·   [9/7/2013 Schramek] The issue is ongoing. If there are interested parties within industry who desire to submit a proposal, FAA would take that into account. For now an A025 rewrite is on hold due to other FAA priorities. The opportunity for an FAA/OSWG conference did not materialize.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Current Status: On hold until AC120-78 is published.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Theo will post changes for us to comment on sometime in the future. No draft or template yet.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Focus on Manuals, signatures and records.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Build a template similar to the 145 template.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] AC120-78 will be updated. Comments have not been incorporated.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Wants to explore each system per system regulations, what constitutes an acceptable electronic signature, what is an acceptable electronic manual.

·   [6/10/2014 Kessaris] AC 120-76C Guidelines for the Certification, Airworthiness, and Operational Use of Electronic Flight Bags, has been posted with new policy/definition on manuals, records and electronic signatures.

·   [6/10/2014 Kessaris] No more “free text”, but will have a drop down for manuals, type of records and electronic signature.


·    

17    A353 ADS-B Operations Outside of U.S. Designated Airspace

Initial Agenda Date:                                                  Date Closed:

FAA Lead:  Dennis Mills, AFS220, 202 267-4552, dennis.mills@faa.gov

                     Roger Sultan, AFS-430, 202-267-8922, roger.sultan@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Andy Newcomer, UPS, 502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Issue Statement:

Background:

Intended Outcome: List authorized countries in paragraph B050 instead of A353, Table 1,

4th column. Specific aircraft tail numbers will remain in A353.

Notes:

·   [mm/dd/yyyy Schramek] New streamlined guidance will be coming out in the near future. Word has it that Viet Nam and Taiwan will be requiring ADSB Out soon.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Remove the table/authorization if your equipment is appropriate.

·   [2/5/2014 Newcomer] Will check with AFS-400 to see if they can move it to local vs. headquarters approval.

·   [5/20/2014 Mills] A353 is undergoing a major rewrite. Suggestions made by industry are being incorporated; authorization by region and/or local level, areas of authorization stated in B050, and a simplified method of obtaining authorization.

·   [6/10/2014 Sultan] Reference A353/A153 Update—A353 will change to A153. Approval authority will be at the CHDO/FSDO/POI level. Documentation required:

ü Letter of Request.

ü Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), Airplane Flight Manual Supplement (AFMS), Flight Operations Manual (FOM), Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH), or equivalent must indicate the airplane’s ADS-B system complies with either 14 CFR §91.227, AC 20-165, or EASA AMC 20-24.

ü Make, model, and part number of the ADS-B transmitter and positioning source installed on each airplane.

ü A copy of OpSpec B050 annotating where A153 will be used (not applicable for part 91).

ü Part 91 operators will need to provide a statement indicating that their pilots have knowledge of current air traffic ADS-B directives for the intended areas of en route operations and will comply with §91.703.

ü A copy of the completed OpSpec/MSpec/LOA A153.

·   [6/10/2014 Sultan] Reference Roger’s PP presentation. Operators possessing A353 are not required to replace it with A153 at this time. New applicants must be issued A153.


18    B450 Sensitive International Areas (new business)

Initial Agenda Date: June 10, 2014                          Date Closed:

FAA Lead:  Deke Abbott, AFS-220, 202 267-8266, deke.abbott@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Andy Newcomer, UPS, 502 359-5713, anewcomer@ups.com

Issue Statement: Data required for entry into the paragraph is not listed in the DOT website

Background: Operators issued B050 for areas/countries registered in the FAA Air Traffic Prohibitions, Restrictions, and Notices website as having Travel Alerts, are required to be listed in B450. These countries are not found in The DOT Bureau of Consular Affairs Alerts and Warnings website. For example, Madagascar, Mozambique, Nepal, and Turkey are enumerated in the B450 pull downs with no travel alert recorded on the DOT site. It appears that the DOT website is not updated.

Intended Outcome: Update the DOT website. Unless there is a discussion to sunset B450, no change to the paragraph is requested.

Notes:

·   [6/10/2014 Newcomer] Industry advocates the elimination of this specification.

·   [6/10/2014 Abbott] FAA reviewing impact of this request (unintended consequences).

 

 


 

19    B055 North Polar Operations (new business)

Initial Agenda Date: June 10, 2014                          Date Closed:

FAA Lead:  Steve Kane, AFS-260, 202 604-5564, steve.kane@faa.gov

Industry Lead: Rich Yuknavich, American Airlines, 817 967-5767, rich.yuknavich@aa.com

Issue Statement: The template column for alternate airports is limited to a single aircraft entry.

Background: Unable to add more than one aircraft for each polar alternate, operators are adding a second alternate airport row as a workaround.

Intended Outcome: Revise the B055 alternate airports template column to allow more than one aircraft entry.

Notes:

·   [6/10/2014 Kane] The OSWG is not the appropriate forum to initiate specific OpSpec template revisions. Industry should pick a lead carrier to make the request to revise B055 via the carrier’s CMO and regional office.

·   [6/10/2014 Newcomer] Recommend removal from the active agenda.


 

Page 1 of 2 Hyperlinked References (select Ctrl End to return to page 2 of 2)

FAA Order 8900.1 Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS)

FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 3 Chapter 18 Operations Specifications

Section 1 Operations Specifications: Background Information

Section 2 Automated Operations Safety System

Section 3 Part A Operations Specifications—General

Section 4 Part B Operations Specifications—En route Authorizations and Limitations

Section 5 Part C Operations Specifications—Airplane Terminal Instrument Procedures and

                                                                        Airport Authorizations

Section 6 Parts D and E—Maintenance MSpecs/OpSpecs/LODAs

Section 7 Part H—Helicopter Terminal Instrument Procedures and

                              Airport Authorizations and Limitations

Section 11 Parts A, B, and D Operations Specifications for part 145 Repair Stations

FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 12 Chapter 2 Foreign Air Carriers Operating to the U.S. and Foreign Operators of U.S.-Registered Aircraft Engaged in Common Carriage Outside the U.S.

Section 2 Part 129 Operations Specifications Overview and Issuance

Section 3 Part 129 Part A Operations Specifications

Section 4 Part 129 Part B Operations Specifications—En route Authorizations and
                                                                                       Limitations

Section 5 Part 129 Part C Operations Specifications—Airplane Terminal Instrument
                                                                                       Procedures and
                                                                                       Airport Authorizations

Section 6 Part 129 Part D Operations Specifications—Aircraft Maintenance

Section 7 Part 129 Part H—Helicopter Terminal Instrument Procedures and

                                             Airport Authorizations and Limitations

 

 


 

Page 2 of 2 Hyperlinked References (select Ctrl End to return to this page)

Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Aeronautics and Space

part 91 General Operating Rules

part 91 §91K Fractional Ownership Operations

part 119  Certification: Air Carriers and Commercial Operators

part 121  Operating Requirements: Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental Operations

part 125  Certification and Operations: Airplanes Having a Seating Capacity of 20 or

               More Passengers or a Maximum Payload Capacity of 6,000 Pounds or

               More; and Rules Governing Persons on Board Such Aircraft

part 129  Operations: Foreign Air Carriers and Foreign Operators of

               U.S.-Registered Aircraft Engaged in Common Carriage

part 135  Operating Requirements: Commuter and On Demand Operations and

               Rules Governing Persons On Board Such Aircraft

FAA Employee Directory

AVS Draft Documents Open for Comment

Regulatory and Guidance Library

WebOPSS Field User Guide

WebOPSS