08/2-3/2011                                                                                                 OSWG 2011-03-Agenda

 

FAA/Aviation Industry Agenda for
OpSpec Working Group (OSWG) 2011-3

August 2-3, 2011

Tuesday Aug 2nd: 1:00 PM - 5:00 PM *

Wednesday Aug 3rd: 9:00 AM - NOON

 

Hosted by FAA

Navy Memorial

701 Pennsylvania Ave

Washington , D.C.

 

* Tuesday, Aug 2nd, 2011 - 9:00 am - noon Industry Pre-meeting

 

 

 

Meeting Schedule:

Domestic Sessions

January 19-20, 2011

OSWG 2011-01

Dallas

Joint, Domestic and International Sessions

April 19-20, 2011

OSWG 2011-02

Washington , D.C.

Cancelled

Domestic Sessions

August 2-3, 2011

OSWG 2011-03

Washington D.C

Joint, Domestic and International Sessions

November 1-2, 2011

OSWG 2011-04

Washington , D.C.

 

Chairpersons:   U.S. Domestic (Part 121, and 135)

                              Steve Bush, Horizon Air, Industry Chair

                              Casey Seabright, Delta Airlines, Industry Vice Chair

                              Bob Davis, AFS-260, FAA Chair

 

AFS Air Transportation Division, AFS-200, Manager: John Duncan

 

 


 

 

 

Table of Contents

 

August 2, 2011

August 3, 2011

1.  WebOPSS Update

16.  A029:  Aircraft Interchange

2.  C050: Special PIC Airports

17.  C055: Alternate IFR Wx Minimums

3.  S400: Safety Enhancements

18.  C060 CAT III Ops – (Cascading Authorization)

4.  A010: Aviation Weather

19.  C060: CAT III Ops. – (15% Rwy Length)

5.  C081: Special Inst. Procedures

20.  C060 CAT III Ops. – (RO RVR)

6.  C073: Appr Procedures / VNAV

21.  B055: Comm Equip, Polar Ops.

7.  C353: ADS-B

22.  A012: Flag Operations

8.  A025: Electronic Record Keeping

23.  C300: Navaid Substitution

9.  B343: Fuel reserves

24.  C384.  Public RNP

10.  C054: Special Limitations / Provisions IFR Landing Minimums

25.  C355.  Exemption to 121.619 for Domestic Alternate Airport Requirements

11.  C063: IFR RNAV SIDs / STARs

26.  B317: Acceptance of FRMP

12.  B035: Class I Nav.

27.  D485: Aging Airplane Insp. and Records Review

13.  A027: Land & Hold short Ops

28.  B036/B054.  Class II Nav.

14.  C051: Terminal Inst. Procedures

29.  New Business

15.  Stake Holders Survey

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Convene .

Opening remarks .

 

Roll call—

Roster and Roll Call/Introductions:  Please initial to the left of your name when the roster comes to you and provide any corrections to the information.  A copy of this meeting’s Roster will be sent in a separate electronic file to all those on the OSWG email distribution list.

 

Chairperson’s discussion.

Goals for 2011

 

Re-format agenda and meeting minutes.

 

Agenda:

·                Update format

·                Ensure there is an Industry and FAA lead for each topic

 

Minutes

·                Clean up format

·                Move away from the extensive discussion within the body of the minutes

·                Create separate documents for agenda and minutes

 

Update OSWG Procedures Guide

 

Clean up Roster

 

 

Bob Davis to discuss two new AFS-200 branches:

·                AFS-240; New Program Implementation and International Branch

·                AFS-270; Policy Integration

______________________________________________________________________

1.  WebOPSS Update:

Standing Agenda Item:

FAA Lead :  Bob Davis – AFDS-260

 

Brief:

·                Current status

·                Near term developments

·                Far term developments

 

Items carried forward from 2011-1 meeting:

·                Is there a way to sort exemptions by expiration date?

­              Will be looked at to see if the interface can be changed.

 

·                Is it possible for WebOPSS to generate a message when a expiration date is approaching?

­              Awaiting response from IT – Paul Lepine to brief

 

·                Data entry

­              labor intensive

­              Can WebOPSS be updated to automate this?

 

·                Abu Dhabi , United Arab Emirates ; OMAA Rwy 31L is on the AFS 400 approved list of Foreign Facilities Approved for CATIII.

­              Airport runway identifier is not recognized in the pull list in WebOPSS C060 table #2.

 

Status:

Continuing

 

______________________________________________________________________

 

2.  C050:   Special Pilot-in-Command Qualification Airports.

Standing Agenda Item:

 

Status:

Continuing.

______________________________________________________________________

 

3.  Safety Enhancement S400:   CAST Safety Enhancements.

FAA Lead:  Keeton Zachary, Greg Michael

Industry Lead:  Steve Bush

Standing Agenda Item:

 

Issue statement:

S400 is a data collection tool intended to gather critical information about the voluntary implementation of Safety Enhancements.

 

Background:

These Safety Enhancements were developed by the joint government and industry Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) over the last several years.

The intent of this paragraph is to gather information on Safety Enhancement implementations only.  

Principal Inspectors should not make safety determinations from the information provided on S400.

 

Intended Outcome:

  1. Educate Safety Inspectors that completing S400 is voluntary and that no compliance determinations should be made as a result of S400.
  2. Modify WebOPSS so that information in S400 is de-identified upon entry.
  3. Ensure information in S400 is FOIA protected
  4. Eliminate the need for participation by the Principal Inspector (signature)

 

Note:  Discuss beta test program and June 20th letter to AFS-260.

 

Status:

Monitor

______________________________________________________________________

 

4.  A010:  Aviation Weather

FAA Lead :  Theo Kessaris, AFS-260 – Leo Hollis, AFS-220

Industry Lead :

 

Issue Statement:

This paragraph to be revised will add a table for Adverse Weather Systems.  The revision will be applicable to part 121 only.  Also, the 8900.1 guidance will be re-written to match the paragraph.

 

Background:

 

Status:

On Hold

The Draft template has been removed from the draft documents website due to the group’s request to submit the template and guidance together. Therefore, the FAA will post A010 when the final changes to the template are made and the guidance is completed.  The group will be given the standard amount of time to comment on the changes at that time.

A010 will not be discussed until at least the 2011-3 meeting.

 

 

5.  C081:   Special Non 14 CFR Part 97 Instrument Approach or Departure Procedures

FAA Lead :

Industry Lead :

 

Issue Statement:

Who is responsible for maintenance, upkeep and the costs associated with Special flight Procedures (sometimes referred to as “Public Specials”).

 

Background:

A public instrument flight procedure (IFP) is one that has been promulgated under 14 CFR Part 97.    Often times Special instrument flight procedures that have been authorized for multiple users have been referred to as "Public Specials".   In actuality, these are not "public" procedures although some continue to refer to them as such. 

The majority of those “Special” IFPs that have been authorized for multiple users are maintained by the Aeronautical Products Division of Mission Support Services, formerly known as AeroNav Services or the National Flight Procedures Office.

The Aeronautical Products Division enters into a reimbursable agreement to develop/maintain those Special IFPs used by a single operator.  The issue concerning the appropriateness of seeking reimbursement (from operators) for Special IFPs that have been authorized for multiple users has been referred to Legal.

 

Intended Outcome:

Determine who is responsible for “Specials” or move them to the public domain.

Status:

AFS-470 is waiting for an interpretation from Legal.

______________________________________________________________________________

 

6.  C073:  IFR Approach Procedures Using Vertical Navigation

FAA Lead :  Kel Christianson AFS-470

Industry Lead :  Joe Devito

 

Issue Statement:

The certificate holder is authorized to conduct the instrument approach procedures other than ILS, MLS, or GPS landing system (GLS) utilizing a visibility and a decision altitude/(height) [DA(H)] equal to the published visibility and minimum descent altitude (MDA) using the following aircraft and procedures as specified in this operations specification.

 

Background:

Based on near-term safety benefits of using a continuously defined vertical path to the runway, and a long-term goal of simplifying approach training and qualification standards, users have indicated their intent to begin additional use of VNAV capability for instrument approaches.

 

Intended Outcome:

Request update from Industry Lead

 

Status:

Open.

______________________________________________________________________

 

7.  A353:   Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B)

FAA Lead:   Dennis Mills AFS-220

Industry Lead: 

 

Issue Statement :

Development of an authorization for operations through the Hudson Bay area.

 

Background :

This paragraph was created in response to the request from the Canadian authorities.

 

Intended Outcome :

 

Status :

Open

AC for ADS-B operations is in final coordination.

Need Industry Lead.

______________________________________________________________________

 

8.  A025 :  Electronic Record Keeping Systems.

FAA Lead:  Theo Kessaris AFS-260

Industry Lead:  Casey Seabright, Jim Winkelman

 

Issue Statement :

A025 has become a dumping ground for many authorizations that may not be appropriate for this paragraph.

 

Background :

An audit of operator’s A025 show significant variability in the items placed in this paragraph.

 

Intended Outcome :

Transform A025 from being a dumping ground and keep it only as a depository for primarily electronic record keeping plus 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 other electronic/software applications.

 

Status :

Open.  On hold.

Note: When work on this is ready to begin again, Industry would like to form a subgroup to help write the new OpSpec.

 

 

9.  B343:  Fuel Reserves for Flag and Supplemental Operations.

FAA Lead: Gordy Rother, MSP-FSDO, Leo Hollis, AFS-220, Dave Burnham, UAL CMO

Industry Lead(s):  Steve Kuhar

 

Issue Statement:

A short statement summarizing the core issue is requested from the Industry lead.

 

Background:

OpSpec B343 is a nonstandard authorization that has been granted to only a few international air carriers.  This is a performance-based authorization using fuel burn data and statistical analysis within certain criteria as justification. Although the airlines are not experiencing any problems or concerns, a single (minor) low fuel event caused the FAA some concern. Hence, for now the FAA will not consider allowing less than a 5% fuel reserve and, until recently, was not granting any new approvals.

 

Intended Outcome:

Summary of goals requested from the Industry Lead.

 

Status:

On Hold.

 

10.  C054:  Special Limitations and Provisions for Instrument Approach Procedures and IFR Landing Minimums

FAA Lead:   POC from AFS-410 TBD

Industry Lead :  John Cowan

 

Issue Statement:

C054 needs to be more specific in its reference to “the landing field length specified for the destination airport by the appropriate Sections of the CFR”.

 

Background:

Many readers are unsure of what specific section of the CFR is being referred to, which leads to confusion.

 

Intended Outcome:

Adding an appropriate reference (121.195b) as shown below.

 

(2) A pilot-in-command of a turbojet airplane shall not begin an instrument approach procedure when the visibility conditions are reported to be less than ¾ statute mile or RVR 4000, unless the following conditions exist:

(a) Fifteen percent additional runway length is available over the landing field length specified for the destination airport by (14 CFR) § 121.195(b). the appropriate Sections of the CFR.

 

Status: 

New agenda item

______________________________________________________________________

 

11.  C063:   IFR RNAV 1 Departure Procedures (DP) and Standard Terminal Arrivals (STAR)

FAA Lead: Suzette Rash, AFS-470

Industry Lead(s): Rich Yuknatvich

 

Issue statement:

Request summary of core issue from Industry Lead.

 

Background:

Request relevant background information from industry Lead.

 

Intended Outcome:

Request summary of intended outcome from Industry Lead.

 

Status:

New agenda Item.

 


12.  B035: Class I Navigation in the U.S. Class A Airspace Using Area or Long-Range Navigation Systems

FAA Lead:   Suzette Rash, AFS-470

Industry Lead:

 

Issue Statement:

Develop Q-Routes for Alaska and GOMEX.

 

Background:

Request summary of relevant background.  Anyone??

 

Intended Outcome:

Request short statement of what Industry would like to see as the outcome.  Anyone??

 

Status:

Open.

OpSpec, Guidance, and Notice published in June.

Any outstanding issues??

If not, will move to close

Need an Industry Lead.

 

13.  A027:   Land and Hold Short Operations

FAA Lead:  

Industry Lead:  

 

Issue Statement:

A027 states: “LAHSO on wet runways is prohibited.”

 

 

 

ATC Order states: “6. Land and Hold Short runways must be free of any contamination as described in the current LAHSO directive, with no reports that braking action is less than good.”

 

KDFW airport operations information states: “LAHSO wet RWY operations are authorized provided pilot reported braking action is not less than good, the RWY is not classified as contaminated by AD operator and hold-short PSN lights are operational.”

 

Background:

Request that Industry proponent provide relevant background info.

 

Intended Outcome:

Could FAA to clarify which is correct, the OpSpec or the ATC Order.

 

Status:

New agenda item.


 

Date Introduced: 

14.  C051:  Terminal Instrument Procedures

FAA Lead:  

Industry Lead:  

 

Issue Statement:

Update language in C051 due to JAR-OPS has been replaced with EU-OPS effective July 16, 2011

 

Background:

As per Commission Regulation (EC) No 859/2008 of August 20, 2008.  See Official Journal of the European Union, September 9, 2008.

 

 

Intended Outcome:

Replace reference of JAR-OPS with that of EU-OPS.

 

 

Status:  

New agenda item

 

 


 

15.  Stakeholder Survey

The FAA has asked each meeting participant to fill out an OSWG Customer Survey.  Results of previous survey will be available at the next OSWG meeting.

 

AVS

Quality Management System

QPM #

 

AFS-002-206-F1

 

 

Revision

 

0

 

Title:  OpSpec Template Feedback Survey

Date: 1/20/2011

Page 1 of 27

1.  What is your overall satisfaction with your interaction with FAA personnel related to OpSpec template and guidance development?

__1   __ 2  __ 3  __N/A

2.  What is your overall satisfaction with the template and guidance development process?

__1             __2             __3            __N/A

3.  What is your overall satisfaction with the structure of the OSWG?

__1             __2             __3             __N/A

4.  What is your overall satisfaction with the quarterly OSWG meetings?

__1             __2             __3             __N/A

1=Low                 2=Average                   3=High

Please provide comments for any question you marked 1 (low).


 



 

Day 2 Session

Wed Aug 03

9:00 – 12:00

 

 

 

Convene.  Introductions:

 

 

16.  A029:  Aircraft Interchange Agreement for Part 121

FAA Lead:   AFS-220

Industry Lead :  Rich carpenter

 

Issue Statement:

Definition of Primary operator is not correct.

 

Background:

Authorizes part 121 certificate holders to use aircraft interchange agreements with other operators.

 

Intended Outcome:

Correct language regarding who has operational control of a given operation.

 

Status:

Open. 

Documents have been forwarded to AFS-140 for FAA coordination.

 

17.  C055:  Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums.

FAA Lead :  Suzette Rash AFS-470

Industry Lead:

 

Issue Statement:

Unmonitored navaids are becoming an emerging problem, especially for longer haul operations.

 

Background:

Historically navaids have been monitored by FAA or entities designated by the FAA.  As more responsibilities are being contracted to third parties, the ability to monitor essential navaids is no longer possible under certain circumstances.  The increase in the number of unmonitored navaids is beginning to have a negative effect on providing reliable air transportation.

 

Intended out come:

Develop a solution that meets the needs of both Industry and FAA.

Status:

AFS-410 is still looking at possibility of using RNAV approaches for alternates.

Waiting for Mitre to complete study.

New agenda Item.  Need an Industry Lead.

______________________________________________________________________


 

18.  C060:   Category III Instrument Approach and Landing Operations, (Cascading Authorization)

FAA Lead:   Bryant Welch, AFS-410

Industry Lead:   Steve Kuhar

 

Issue Statement:

Template does not follow a logical flow for cascading authorization based on equipment status.

Add standard language to the template for authorizing S.E. CAT III operations.

RVR values in tables do not correctly reflect authorizations.

Drop-down lists do not always contain the latest available airports or approaches.

Background:

AFS-410 plans a revision in 2010.  FedEx has submitted initial comments indicating that the paragraphs stating the requirements for different RVR values (c1 – c4) should all indicate that an operator is issued the lowest authorization and all higher RVR authorizations are also authorized based on operational equipment for that approach.

 

Intended Outcome:

Edit affected paragraphs to allow lowest RVR based on equipment status.

Create selectable language for authorization of S.E. CAT III operations.

Correct RVR values.

Add needed airports or approaches to the drop-down lists.

 

Status:

Open.

______________________________________________________________________

 

19.  C060:  Category III Instrument Approach and Landing

Operations, (15% Additional Runway Length)

FAA Lead:  Bryant Welch, AFS-410

Industry Lead:  John Cowan

 

Issue Statement:

1. OpSpec C-060 unnecessarily repeats the C054 requirement for “fifteen percent additional runway length is available over the landing field length specified for the destination airport by (14 CFR) § 121.195(b)”.

 

2. The reference to 1.3 factor for when RVR is less than 600’ “depending on the operational procedures and/or additional equipment used by the operator” is unclear and includes poor assumptions and should also be considered for removal.

 

Background:

1. As this additional 15% is required anytime the RVR is less than 4000’ there is no need to address it here. C059 had also “repeated” this requirement, and was recently cleaned up (removed) in a recent revision.

 

2. The reference to 1.3 factor for when RVR is less than 600’ “depending on the operational procedures and/or additional equipment used by the operator” is unclear with incomplete and poor guidance assumptions and should also be removed. Only two guidance references to the 1.3 reference can be found:

 

a). AC 120-28D, 4.3.9, which states:

 

“a factor of 1.3 is to be applied to the field length required by 121.195b if anti-skid systems are inoperative or if the braking action is expected to be less than “fair” (or equivalent Mu reading).”

 

The additional landing distance required when anti-skid systems are inoperative are adequately covered by required AFM Irregular procedures and/or MEL required adjustments for anti-skid deferrals.

 

As for braking action less than “fair”, less than 600 RVR has nothing to do with snow or ice braking action issues. Operations on slick runways are already adequately addressed by other guidance material regardless of visibility (e.g., SAFO 06012 and Manufacture recommendations).    

 

b). 8400.10 (Vol 4) [Ch 2, Sec 6, paragraph 637 b (7) (b) (i)] states:

 

“The runways used must provide an effective runway field length of at least 1.15 (1.3 for certain CAT IIIb operations) times the landing field length required by FAR 121.195(b) or FAR 135.385(b) for the aircraft being used. These field lengths are necessary to account for the tendency to "land long" due to the characteristics of CAT III landing systems, and also to the pilot's increased difficulty in determining vertical height and in precisely assessing the flare and touchdown point in the reduced seeing conditions associated with CAT III operations.”

 

The concept that CAT III landing systems “land long” is misguided. Manufactures such as Boeing and Airbus provide conservative autoland touchdown points (air distance) with their landing distance performance data. These air distances typically vary from 1800’ to 2200’ based on make and model. These distances are well within the touchdown zone as defined by the AIM (first 3000’) and mirrors typical pilot performance. As for the concern over “the pilot's increased difficulty in determining vertical height and in precisely assessing the flare and touchdown point in the reduced seeing conditions associated with CAT III operations”: this is precisely why a predicable autoland is so valuable, the aircraft handles this concern in a repeatable manner and the “pilot” is not controlling the flare or touchdown point.

 

C060 is not the appropriate location for either of these concerns.

 

Intended Outcome:

Below is a recommendation for how C060 could be cleaned up:

 

 

Regulation

OPSPEC C060  Category III Instrument Approach and Landing Operations

 

Revise as follows:

 

a.   The certificate holder is authorized to conduct Category III (CAT III) operations using the landing minimums, authorized aircraft, with equipment installed and operational as required by the AFM, 14 CFR, and this operations specification.

 

(1) The certificate holder must use the procedures, special limitations, and minimums specified in this paragraph and shall conduct no other CAT III operations.

 

(2) These minimums are the lowest authorized at any runway.

 

b.   Required Field Length and Special Operational Equipment and Limitations . The certificate holder shall not begin the final approach segment of a CAT III instrument approach unless the runway field length requirements, and the special operational equipment (installed and operational) and limitations listed or referenced in Table 1 are met.

 

(1) The required field length is established by multiplying these factors by the runway field length required by the provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) § 121.195(b).

 

(2)   For operations with a controlling runway visual range (RVR) at or above 600 feet the required field length is 1.15 times the field length.

 

(3) For operations with an RVR below 600 feet, the required field length is either 1.15 or 1.3 times the field length required by the regulations cited in b.(1) above, depending on the operational procedures and/or additional equipment used by the operator.

 

Additionally, remove all references to required field lengths from table 1.

 

 

Status:

New agenda item

 

20.  C060:  Category III Instrument Approach and Landing Operations, (Rollout RVR Requirements)

FAA Lead:   Bryant Welch, AFS-410

Industry Lead:  

 

Issue Statement:

Draft Template changes Rollout RVR requirements from advisory to Controlling.

 

Background:

CAT III operations are generally approved through use of AC 120-28D.  This AC generally supports that TDZ, MID and RO RVR are controlling; although, not in an entirely consistant manner.  There seems to be a disconnect when comparing RVR requirements of AC 120-28D Table 4.3.8-1 and that provided in Appendix 7)

 

Order 8900.1 appears to support Controlling/Controlling/Controlling for all systems.

 

Historical context:  Reference to HBAT 99-17 is inconclusive as both arguments can be supported depending on specific section of the HBAT being referenced.

 

Intended Outcome:

Understand historical context of the requirements of RO RVR (i.e. was it intended to be Controlling or Advisory)

 

Ultimately from a safety standpoint, determine what is “reasonable” for RO RVR requirements. 

Change the guidance materials or OpSpec to accurately and consistently reflect the agreed upon RO RVR requirement.

 

Status:

New Agenda Item.

 

21.  B055:   North Polar Operations

FAA Lead: 

Industry Lead:   John Cowan

 

Issue Statement:

B055 includes a reference to B042 in paragraph c (4), which is now B342.

 

Background:

Paragraph B042 was revised into B342 and this “pointer” reference in B055 was missed.

 

Intended Outcome:

Recommend revising B055 to correctly reference B342.

 

Status: 

New agenda item

______________________________________________________________________

 

22.  A012:   Part 121 Domestic Operations to Certain Airports Outside the 48 Contiguous States and Alaska

FAA Lead:   Theo Kessaris, AFS-260

Industry Lead:  

 

Issue Statement:

Update template for Domestic Ops.

Operations in the state of Alaska have additional Wx requirements for Oct 1 – May 1 which are no longer necessary.

 

Background:

 

Intended Outcome:

Clarify language regarding domestic ops.

Remove Wx requirements for State of Alaska.

 

Status:

Open

______________________________________________________________________


 

23.  C300:   Part 97 NDB, NDB/DME, VOR, and VOR/DME Instrument Approach Procedures Using Substitute Means of Navigation

FAA Lead:   AFS-470

Industry Lead:   Jackson Seltzer

 

Issue Statement:

Suitable Navaid substitution authorizations are needed in by operators in certain circumstances or areas of the world.

 

Background:

C300 was developed to provide standard methodology for authorizing navaid sub procedure for approach operations.  The current template does not necessarily meet the needs of all operators or provide the latitude necessary for certain circumstances.

 

Intended Outcome:

Provide a mechanism to authorize navaid sub procedures that meets the needs of both Industry and FAA.

 

Status:

Open

New guidance was published for this OpSpec. 

Are there still any outstanding issues??

If not, will move to close.

______________________________________________________________________

 

24.  C384:   Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Procedures With Special Aircraft and Aircrew Authorization Required (SAAAR)

FAA Lead:   AFS-470

Industry Lead:   OJ Treadway

 

Issue Statement:

The RNP AR monitoring program required by AC 90-101A, Appendix 6 is burdensome to industry in that there is no ending mechanism provided.

 

Background:

When issuing a new RNP AR authorization through OpSpec C384, Appendix 6 requires that the Operator monitor and thus validate the success of the program.  However, for 14 CFR Part 97 U.S. Domestic RNP AR, which is designed, built, approved and authorized through standard public criteria; it would be expected that once the operator’s new RNP AR program has been proven to be successful that the requirement to continuously monitor the program and provide data and reports would eventually phase out.

An operator should not be expected to fulfill these requirements with no end.

 

Intended Outcome:

Provide authorizing documentation that establishes an ending mechanism for the requirements of AC 90-101A, Appendix 6.

 

Status:

New agenda item.

______________________________________________________________________

 


 

25.  C355.   Exemption to §121.619 for Domestic Destination Alternate Airport Requirements

FAA Lead:   TBD

Industry Lead:   John Cowan

 

Issue Statement:

C355 contains the following provision:

  “The intended destination airport must have at least one operational CAT I ILS approach with minima of at least 200 feet and RVR 2000 that is available for use if needed.”

1. It appears the intent is that the minima for the approach should be no greater than 200 feet. In other words, an ILS with a 200 foot decision altitude. As it is currently written, an approach with a DA of 400 feet AFE would qualify the airport/approach to be used for the 1-1-3 exemption.

Background:

The statement above is causing confusion.

 

Intended Outcome:

Revise the provision to read:

“The intended destination airport must have at least one operational CAT I ILS approach available for use that has minimums no greater than 200’ DA(H) and 2000 RVR visibility.”

Status:

New Agenda Item

 

26.   A317.  Acceptance of a Fatigue Risk Management Plan

FAA Lead:  

Industry Lead:  

 

Issue Statement:

A Fatigue Risk Management Plan (FRMP) and subsequently OpsSpec A317 are required for all air carriers conducting operations under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), part 121.

 

Background:

Congress has passed the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010. Section 212(b) of the Act requires that each air carrier conducting operations under part 121 to submit a FRMP no later than October 31, 2010.

A FRMP is an air carrier’s plan outlining policies and procedures for reducing the risks of flightcrew member fatigue and improving flightcrew member alertness.

 

AFS-200 will review the air carrier’s draft FRMP to ensure that it addresses each element required, as outlined in InFO 10017.

 

The draft FRMP should be accompanied by the completed FRMP Content Checklist (InFO 10017SUP) which provides the inspector reviewing the document with the location of the applicable policies and procedures within the air carrier’s FRMP.

The FAA will complete a review and either accept or reject the air carrier’s FRMP no later than August 2, 2011.

 

Related reference material useful in preparing the FRMP:

 

·                Advisory Circular (AC) 120-100 (as amended), Basics of Aviation Fatigue

·                Advisory Circular (AC) 120-103, Fatigue Risk Management Systems for Aviation Safety

·                Advisory Circular (AC) 120-92 (as amended), Introduction to Safety Management Systems for Air Operators

·                Advisory Circular (AC) 120-59a (as amended), Air Carrier Internal Evaluation Programs

·                Advisory Circular (AC) 120-66 (as amended), Aviation Safety Action Programs (ASAP)

·                Advisory Circular (AC) 120-82 (as amended), Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA)

·                Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) 09014, Concepts for Fatigue Countermeasures in Part 121 and 135 Short-Haul Operations.

 

Continental Airlines FRMP was submitted to AFS-220 per the submission guidelines and received acknowledgement on October 27, 2010 from Dale Roberts.

 

Intended Outcome:

AFS-200 will authorize the POI to issue operations specification (OpSpec) A317 to the air carrier, signifying acceptance of the FRMP. AFS-200 will issue the POI specific nonstandard text to be inserted into the OpSpec. The maximum duration of this OpSpec will be 24 calendar-months from the date of issuance.

 

FAA to provide status update

 

Status:   New Agenda Item

 

27.  D485  Aging Airplane Inspection and Records Review

FAA Lead:  

Industry Lead:  

 

Issue Statement:

There is no definition in the regulations nor in the FAA guidance that establishes what the Manufacture date is, however; Industry is required to track from the Manufacture date.

 

Background:

The Aging Aircraft Safety Act of 1991 requires inspections and review of maintenance and other records of each aircraft an air carrier uses to provide air transportation. The manufacture date must be determined in order to fulfill the requirements of this OpSpec.

 

Intended Outcome:

Define a reliable means for identifying the manufacture date of an aircraft.

 

Status:  

New agenda item.

 


28.  B036/B054:   Class II Navigation

FAA Lead:

Industry Lead:   John Cowan

 

Issue Statement:

Both of these OpSpecs include the same provision in paragraph b. (4) which refers to a required gross navigation error check using an “airways navigation facility”.  GPS is understood to be an accepted “airways navigation facility” and as such, a clarification is needed to prevent misunderstandings.

Additionally, while OpSpec B036 includes no reference to plotting or adherence to AC 90-79, the “job aid” inappropriately requires the Inspector to ensure that the procedures included in the AC are used, thus causing differing expectations.

 

Background:

Where the FAA does not desire the operator to consider GPS as an acceptable airway navigation facility, the clarifier “ground based” is used. Several readers have incorrectly interpreted this provision with the same “ground based” mind set which has led to confusion when GPS equipped aircraft are concerned.

Since a job aid for an OpSpec should not contain provisions, limitations or requirements that are not also contained in the OpSpec, the B036 job aid should be revised to match the OpSpec:

 

  1. The principal operations inspector (POI) must ensure the operator’s LRN program incorporates the practices and procedures recommended in the most recent version of Advisory Circular (AC) 90-79, Recommended Practices and Procedures for the Use of Electronic Long-Range Navigation, or the operator has approved procedures equivalent to or exceeding those in AC 90-79 or other applicable ACs.

 

Intended Outcome:

Clarify the provision to specify that it is referring to non GPS equipped aircraft as follows:

B-036:

b. (4) Prior to entering any airspace requiring the use of a non GPS based long-range navigation system, the aircraft position shall be accurately fixed using airways navigation facilities or ATC radar. After exiting this airspace, the aircraft position shall be accurately fixed and the long-range navigation system error shall be determined and logged in accordance with the operator's approved procedures.

 

Job aid:

The Principal Operations Inspector (POI) must ensure the operator’s LRN program incorporates practices and procedures that include crosschecking to identify potential navigational errors in sufficient time to prevent deviations.  Advisory Circular (AC) 90-79, Recommended Practices and Procedures for Use of Electronic Long-Range Navigation, provides examples of such procedures but does not represent the only means of compliance.

B-054:

b. (4) Prior to entering any airspace requiring the use of a non GPS based LRNS, the aircraft position shall be accurately fixed using airways navigation facilities or ATC radar. After exiting this airspace, the aircraft position shall be accurately fixed and the long-range navigation system error shall be determined and logged in accordance with the operator's approved procedures.

 

Status:

New agenda item

 

29:  New Business / Closing remarks

 

a.)          D301:   Aircraft Network Security System (ANSS)

Rochelle “Chelle” Brisco, AFS-310 will be on hand to address questions regarding ANSS and D301.

 

b.)          C063:   IFR RNAV 1 Departure Procedures (DP) and Standard Terminal Arrivals (STAR)

 

c.)          C067:   Dispatch Inspector Scott Stacy, Denali CMO, to provide discussion of C067

Issue:  there are two paragraphs (A&B) that deal with different specific airport issues but there is only one table.

Possible solution:  Provide a table for each paragraph.