Meeting Agenda FAA/Aviation Industry OpSpec Working

Group (OSWG) 2003-04

October 21 (Tuesday, 1 pm-5 pm)/22 (Wednesday, 8:30-noon), 2003

FAA host (Washington, DC)

AMTI HQ, Floor 11

1515 Wilson Blvd ,

Arlington , VA

The list of hotels and their locations is available on the website under the POLICY heading.


I.              Meeting Schedule/Location

January 20-21, 2004

American Airlines - Dallas

April 27-28, 2004

ATA - Washington, DC

July 20-21, 2004

Comair - CVG

October 19-20, 2004

Washington, DC—


Day 1






1.  OpSpec A013

Discussion:     An FAA CMO determined that there was a need for a ditching demonstration (121.291) for its cert holder, even though it would be greatly abbreviated due to no life raft installed to demo.  Current guidance does not make this connection and apparently some carriers that have this deviation have not done a ditching demo.  That CMO requests that the ditching demo be added to the requirement for this deviation.

Perhaps the IOPPS A013 paragraph drop down menu guidance could include a note something to the effect that "ISSUANCE OF THIS PARAGRAPH AND PARAGRAPH A005 DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE NEED FOR AT LEAST AN ABBREVIATED DITCHING DEMONSTRATION."



2.  OpSpec C050/C67, Special PIC Qualification Airports—14 CFR Section 121.445

Discussion:  The new paragraphs C50/C67 have been available on for comment.  Status of the proposed paragraphs and comment will be reviewed.





3.  OpSpec C058, Special Restrictions for Foreign Terminal Instrument Procedures

Discussion:  OSWG representatives have been participating in conference calls with the Terminal Area Operations Aviation Rulemaking Committee (TAOARC) and FAA to resolve issues with the draft Order 8260.31.  OSWG comments were presented to the FAA through the TAOARC for review and recommended action.  The FAA has requested further comments with suggestions of specific language.  A report of the progress will be provided to the group.



4.  OpSpec C059/C359, CAT II Approach Authorization

Discussion:          Jackson Seltzer to provide update/report on questions raised regarding the question of lighting equivalents, i.e. allowing a CAT II using MALSR.  The final draft of updates to 8400.10 for CAT II all weather operations, the revision to paragraph C059, and the new OpSpec C359 available on and will be reviewed and discussed.



5.  E096, Weight and Balance/ E001, Wt. & Balance Control Procedures for All Cargo Operations.

Discussion:     Darcy Reed, AFS-300 to address the possibility of E096 being spilt into 3 separate paragraphs. Review any change to the status or available drafts of E096.  HBAW 03-06, Operations Specification E001 Weight and Balance Control Procedures for All Cargo Operations.  This bulletin introduces a new Operations Specification (OpSpec) Part E, paragraph E001 Weight and Balance Control Procedures For All Cargo Operations, to authorize weight and balance control programs for all cargo operators. The FAA introduces this OpSpec paragraph under 14 CFR part 119, sections 119.49(a)(9), (a)(13), (b)(9), and (b)(13); section 119.51; and part 121, sections 121.133(a), 121.135(b)(20), and 121.153(b).  Both the bulletin and the updated index are posted at


6.  OpSpec B055, Polar Operations

Discussion:  Chuck Guy (UAL) to discuss amendment to B055 to allow dispatch  without polar suits when temperature at en route alternates is forecasted to be at or above 20 degrees F. 

Eric Van Opstal from the FAA will address the issue.




7.  OpSpec B042 a. (4) (ETOPS alternates) .  Bruce Montiguey proposes revising the OpSpec as follows: 

If a carrier is authorized ETOPS of 120 minutes or more, I don't see any reason to issue b. (Special Provisions for Western Atlantic and Caribbean Sea ER-OPS if authorized).  I believe this section should be issued to a carrier  who only conducts ER-OPS with a maximum diversion time of 75 minutes in this area.  All other ETOPS operators would be covered by referencing in B050, paragraph B042 for the Western Atlantic, Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico.  I believe b. should be a selectable.  (Alternate airports listed in C070 [as a blanket statement] may not meet all of the requirements for an ER-OPS alternate.)


8.  OpSpec C089/C090, RNP RNAV Instrument Approaches

Discussion:  Review and discuss the proposal from Jackson Seltzer and Jim Enias to incorporate RNAV RNP authorization as a selectable item in paragraph C052.



Day 2


9.  OSWG Spec

Discussion:  Connie Streeter, Casey Seabright, and Jim Johnson to report on the following items of discussion which were brought up during the OSWG Spec review at the OSWG 2003-03 meeting:


Annual Progress Report – Members suggested the OSWG Industry Chairman submit an annual progress report to AFS-1 outlining the accomplishments of the OSWG as well as any impediments to progress on significant issues.


OSWG Industry/FAA Lead Assignment – Several members felt the ops spec lead assignments have become irrelevant.  This list changes frequently and becomes outdated as new issues on specific paragraphs occur.  It was suggested that a database be created and updated after each meeting to track the status and lead of each paragraph.


10.  OpSpec D485, Aging Airplane Inspection and Review

Discussion:  FAA focal: Rusty Jones, AFS-300.  This new paragraph is put into place for data collection and verification of required inspections for certain airplanes operated in Part 121, 129, and 135 operations. 



11. OpSpec A010,  Aeronautical Weather Information

 Discussion:  Jim Johnson to report on follow-up with Met Committee on past discussions regarding this paragraph.




12.  OpSpec C066, Turbojet Airplane Takeoff Operations in Tailwind Conditions Not to Exceed 15 Knots

Discussion:  Chuck Schramek to report on follow-up with FAA performance specialists on the reasons for additional restrictions for 15 kt tailwind takeoff authorization.  AFM performance penalties are already restrictive.



13.   OpSpec B032, En Route Limitations and Provisions (Industry proposed revision)

Discussion:  John Cowan of UAL submitted a proposed revision to B032.  AFS-220 stated that the paragraph contains restrictions that are only eased by other paragraphs and that there will be no significant revision to this paragraph at the current time. John Cowen provided a copy of his proposed change to Tom Penland. Connie will provide a status update. 


14.  B039/B059, MNPS-Santa Maria FIR, ICAO Annex 6

Discussion:  Connie Streeter reported that OpSpec authorization for Canadian MNPS would probably be made a separate authorization in the part 135 DB and maybe a selectable option in B059.  This is because there are part 135 operators that need only the Canadian MNPS authorization and not the NAT/MNPS.

AFS-800 and AFS-400 are now actively engaged in getting the Part 91 regulation changed to show the correct boundaries of the NAT/MNPS with the addition of the Santa Maria FIR. The proposal would not change existing requirements. Connie Streeter will provide a status update.


     15.  CRAF Deviations

Discussion: Connie Streeter to provide a brief statement/update on these deviations.



16.  C078.  Lower Than Standard Take-Off Minimums. (Re-rolled because of typo in the 600 RVR selection)

Discussion:   Chuck Schramek request to discuss the issue for operations at Las Vegas.

Question also about SLC:  Runway 17/35 at KSLC is not included in their SMGCS Plan so no operations below 1200 RVR are authorized on that runway.  I therefore asked Jepp to change the takeoff minimums at SLC rwy 17/35 to 1200 RVR since the runway infrastructure supports takeoffs down to at least 1200 RVR.  OpSpecs and SMGCS do not agree.  OpSpecs addresses 1600, 1000, 500 and below 500.  NO SMGCS limits to 1200 or above.  SMGCS cutoffs are below 1200 to 600, then below 600 to 300.  Allowable take off minimums are the maximum of any limits, OpSpecs, SMGCS, etc.


SLC rwy 17/35 is soon to be included in their SMGCS plan down to 600 RVR.  Once that happens I will ask Jepp to change the SLC rwy 17/35 takeoff minimums to 600 RVR. Norm Lefevre, (425) 227-1737


17.  C073.  Revised and re-rolled for clarification and expansion.