FAA/Aviation Industry Agenda for


OpSpec Working Group (OSWG) 2013-03



August 6th   and 7 th , 2013


Tuesday, August 6 th : 1:00 PM – 5:00 PM (Domestic Session)


Wednesday, August 7 th : 9:00 AM - NOON (Joint Session)


Wednesday, August 7 th : 1:00 PM – 5:00 PM (International Session)


Hosted by FAA

Heritage Center (Navy Memorial) 701

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 2004 (Phone: 202-737-2300)




U.S. Domestic (Part 121, and 135) Chuck Schramek, Delta Airlines, Chair

Andy Newcomer, UPS, Vice Chair

Steve Kane, AFS-260, FAA Chair


International (Part 129) Brian Miles, Emirates, Industry Chair David Oliver, Qantas Airways Limited,

Industry Vice Chair Danuta Pronczuk, AFS-52, FAA Chair Mike Frank, AFS-52, FAA Vice Chair


AFS Air Transportation Division Manager

Mr. Les Smith


AFS International Programs and

Policy Division Manager

Mr. John Barbagallo


IFO/IFU/SEA FSDO Representatives to the Part 129 OSWG : David Krueger (DFW IFO), Dave Henthorn (LAX IFO), Rolfe Dinwoodie and Bob Bianco (ROC and ALB IFU), Herbert H. Herzog III, W. Scott Schweizer and Patrick Crowley (ANC IFU), J.J. (MIA IFO), Nicholas Tsokris (NY IFO), and David May (SEA FSDO)


IATA Representative

Jeffrey T. Miller




Draft OSWG Agenda


        U.S. Domestic Session                              Joint Session                                             International Session

            Part 121, 135, etc.                                                      Part 121, 129, 135 etc.                                                                   Part 129

          (Operators for whom the U.S. is                     (Foreign air carriers, persons,                                 (Foreign air carriers and persons)

          The State of the Operator )                            & Operators for whom the U.S. is

                                                                                      The State of the Operator )


1.   Convene Domestic Session

1.   Convene Joint Session

1.   Convene International Session  

  2.   Chairman’s Discussion

  2. Stakeholder Survey & Future meetings

2. OpSpecs B034, B035,

  3.   OpSpec B342/C070

  3. WebOPSS Update                

  3. OpSpec B039 and B046            

  4.   OpSpec A303                                  

  4. ICAO Format                                  

  4. OpSpec C060                                          

  5.   OpSpec A353

  5. OpSpec C050                                

  5. OpSpec A003                                          

  6.     OpSpec A097/098/099

  6. EASA Third Country            

  6. OpSpec A001                                        

  7.   OpSpec D097

  7. OpSpec C054                                

  7. Data Link Communications    

  8.   OpSpec D485

  8. OpSpecs C059/060              

  8. OpSpec C054 and C051          

  9.   AC 120-78

9. OpSpec C091

  9. OpSpecs C073 (use of MDA as DA)                                                                                        

10. OpSpec A025

10. OpSpec C055                              

10. Part 129 Rulemaking                        

11. OpSpec A010

11. New Charting format for Cat III

11. OpSpec C050 and C067          

12. OpSpec B045

12. Closing Remarks                          

12. OpSpecs C056 & C057            

13. OpSpec C300


13. OpSpec C083                                            

14. OpSpec A061


14. OpSpec D092                                                    

15. OpSpec B036/B054


15. OpSpec B031                                          

16. New items


16. OpSpec A028                                          

17. Closing


17. Closing








Day 1 - Afternoon Session - 6 Aug 2013


1                Convening


2                Chairperson’s Remarks

Roster and Roll Call/Introductions:

3                B342/C070


              FAA Lead:     Bob Davis/ Theodora Kessaris, AFS-240

Industry Lead:

Issue Statement: The FAA is proposing to revise OpSpec B342 to remove the requirement to list airplane registration numbers and ETOPS alternate airports. Airplane registration numbers are already listed in D086. 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: 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. Therefore the FAA believes that listing those airports in a HQ approval OpSpec serves no purpose to the FAA or industry.

Intended Outcome: Update OpSpec B342 table 1 and remove the column for Airplane Registration No and remove Table 2 altogether. Update OpSpec C070 by allowing the selection of “E” airports and making the OpSpec applicable for part 121 supplemental and part 135 certificate holders.

Status: On-going discussions.


Concern of the alphabet soup – Per Theo no it won’t. Language of regular, provisional, or fueling will transfer from B342 to C070. Will not have to designate an airport as an E when it is already an R. Waiting on legal interp of request made by United.



4                A303 Generic OpSpec for authorization into hostile areas


FAA Lead: Deke Abbott/Will Gonzalez AFS-220

Industry Lead: TBD

Issue Statement: AFS-220 is proposing a new OpSpec for a generic authorization to fly into hostile areas.



5                A353 ADB-B Operations Outside of U.S. Designated Airspace


FAA Lead : Dennis Mills, AFS-220

Industry Lead: Andy Newcomer / UPS

Issue Statement: Have authorized countries listed in paragraph B050 instead of 4th column in table 1


6                A097, A098, A099 Passenger and Baggage Weight Programs

Update to AC 120-27 Weight and Balance

FAA Lead: AFS-220 Adam Giraldes

Industry Lead:  
Issue Statement: Updates are coming to the weight and balance figures used in AC 120-27 Aircraft weight and balance controls.


Adam Giraldes – requesting for PAX carriers for feedback for the update of the passenger survey weights – Contact is 817-350-4564 / email adam.giraldes@faa.gov / Industry believes it should be a group presentation and not on an airline by airline presentation. Requesting contact as soon as possible – Adam wanting AC update within the year



7                D097, Aging Aircraft Programs


FAA Lead: Mark Lopez, AFS-330

Industry Lead: Mike Keller, American Airlines

Issue Statement: Create a standard for industry and field offices with guidance


AA CMO insisting that new aircraft be listed in D485 on delivery – tabled for Lopez and Keller next meeting


8                D485, Aging Airplane Inspection and Records Review


FAA Lead: Mark Lopez, AFS-330

Industry Lead: Mike Keller, American Airlines

Issue statement: Clarification of issuance of D458 with Field Offices and carriers


AA CMO insisting that new aircraft be listed in D485 on delivery – tabled for Lopez and Keller next meeting



9                AC 120-78 Elect Sigs, Elect Record Sys, and Elect Manuals


FAA Lead: Mark Lopez, AFS-330

Industry Lead: TBD

Issue Statement: Advisory Circular is being revised, will be out for public comment.



10        A025: Electronic Record Keeping Systems


FAA Lead: Theo Kessaris AFS-240

Industry Lead: Casey Seabright, Jim Winkelman

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

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

Intended Outcome: Potentially transform A025 from and keep it only as a depository for primarily electronic record keeping plus an optional storehouse for electronic signatures and electronic manuals.

Possibly amend A025 to include tables for specific approvals such as flight planning systems, training records repositories, and categories of electronic/digital manuals.

Discussion The impetus for more specific guidance is increasing with the expanding adoption of cockpit Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs) with increasing 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. The opportunity for a between OSWG meeting conference did not materialize.

Status: Ongoing

Volunteer participants still solicited.


Nothing new to add. If there are interested parties within industry who want to submit a proposal, FAA would take that into account. For now A025 re-write is on hold do to other FAA priorities.


11        A010 Aviation Weather Information


FAA Lead :  

Industry Lead:   Theo Kessaris AFS-240

Issue Statement: Field Industry questions


12        B045, Extended Overwater Operations Using a Single Long-Range Communication System


FAA Lead : Gordy Rother

Industry Lead: Eric McCarty

Issue Statement: Under review and request for carrier participation




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


FAA Lead: Kel Christianson, AFS-470

Industry Lead: Jim Winkleman, Rich Yuknavich

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 procedure for approach operations. The current template does not necessarily meet the needs of all operators or provide the latitude necessary for certain circumstances.

John Swigart AFS-470 briefed that there are no plans to make any immediate changes to the Ops Spec, but AFS-470 would entertain submission of non-standard language for special cases. John suggested that carriers, especially those without Ops Spec C300 make maximum use of the provisions outlined in AC90-107 for RNAV substitution. Depending on the final analysis of the MITRE study AFS-470 may first allow use of C300 for alternate approaches

Previous Meeting Discussions: Awaiting results of Mitre study. John Swigart to brief Industry representatives raised the possibility of harmonizing U.S. alternate minimums policy with Canadian CARs:

Doug Snow, FEDEX Dispatch proposed allowing use of VFR weather minimums for alternate airports that only have GPS/GNSS approaches if there is an anticipated delay in final resolution of GPS use at alternate airports.

Intended Outcome: Provide a mechanism to authorize use of NAVAID substitution or mitigation procedures that meet the needs of both Industry and FAA, especially for alternate airport minimums.


C300 non standard language will have to be requested by each carrier, until C300 revised. FAA said they will grant non-standard to C300 once C055 is published.



14        A061, Use of Electronic Flight Bag


FAA Lead : Brian Hint, AFS-430

Industry Lead: Alaska Air

Issue Statement: Request Brian Hint update guidance



15        B036/B054: Class II Navigation


FAA Lead : Madison Walton AFS-470

Industry Lead: John Cowan

Issue Statement: Both of these Ops Specs include the same provision in paragraph b. (4)b. Special Limitations and Provisions. The certificate holder shall conduct all operations using multiple LRNS in accordance with the following limitations and provisions:(4) Prior to entering any airspace requiring the use of a 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.

Guidance and templates to be published/available mid August.

Day 2 - Morning Session – 7th August 2013


1.            Convene.


2.            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.



Quality Management System










Title: OpSpec Template Feedback Survey

Date: 1/18/2011

Page 1 of 1

1=Low                               2=Average                               3=High

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

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







3.            WebOPSS Update: Electronic Signatures


FAA Lead: Monica Grushe Ehrett AFS-260

Industry Lead:
Issue Statement: As of May 1 new contractor for system and digital signatures. Details coming soon. Industry should not see any significant change. The previous personnel are still the ones normally interfacing with the industry




4.            WebOPSS Update: Ops Spec Synopsis Reports in ICAO Format


FAA Lead: Monica Grushe Ehrett AFS-260

Industry Lead: Rich Yuknavich
Issue Statement: Report content is great but header needs to look more official to ensure foreign cockpit inspector acceptance of authenticity.

Intended Outcome: Afix the FAA crest onto the first page header

Discussion: This was discussed at the meeting and Rich Yuknavich sent Monica a draft sample of the suggested header.

Monica agreed that the format could be changed but it may take a little time because the graphics work would need to be done by another office.

Status: Update by Monica Grusche


5.            C050: Special Pilot-in-command Qualification Airports


FAA Lead: Dan Ronneberg , AFS-220

Industry Lead:

Issue Statement: Background:

Action Items:

·                SEQM (new Quito) – Adding to list

·                Seward AK – Updated due to new report

·                Xian (ZLXY) – under review for removal – need more data


6.            EASA Third Country


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


FAA Lead: Bryant Welch AFS-410

Industry Lead: Monty Montgomery

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. Jackson Seltzer (United) recommended standardization between C054 and other Ops Specs governing approach criteria, such as C060. Coby Johnson pledged support for harmonization guidance among Ops Specs C054, C059, and C060

Intended Outcome: (1) Industry proposed draft language for Ops Spec Paragraphs and applicable guidance 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).

UPS believes the language in b (2) (a) is still a problem for when the landing data as required by 14 CFR 121.195(b) should be applied. UPS interprets the language, as it is currently written in section b, Limitation on the Use of Landing Minimums for Turbojet Airplanes, sub-section (2), line (a), that prior to approach, the PIC must apply the 115 percent of the runway field length as defined by 14 CFR part 121.195(b).   UPS recommends that the language that is currently in the draft of C060 be used as a model for this paragraph.

Status: Open – See agenda item for C059/C060 harminization.


Comments back from region – will be signed by John Allen and published in the next couple months

8.            Harmonization of OpSpecs C059 and C060


C059, Category II Instrument Approach and Landing Operations

FAA Lead: Bryant Welch – AFS-410

Industry Lead: Andy Newcomer – UPS

Question of why C059 does not have a statement like that of C060, subparagraph f. (5) – “Once established on the final approach segment, all CATIII operations, except as specified in subparagraph g.(6) below, may continue if any RVR report decreases below the authorized minima.”

Update of paragraph re-write from Bryant


C060, Category III Instrument Approach and Landing Operations

FAA Lead: Bryant Welch – AFS-410

Industry Lead: Mindy Waham – Alaska / Andy Newcomer - UPS

Question on table 4 of the paragraph. Not up to date with current aircraft and airline authorizations as per on line AFS-400 list.

Update of upcoming paragraph revision


              This item is currently in Formal Coordination. New OpSpec to be published September 2013

9.            C091: Airplane Authorization/Operational Requirements Airplane Design Group VI (ADG-VI) Airplanes


FAA Lead : Jerry Ostronic (Part 121) Danuta Pronczuk and David Henthorn (Part 129)

Industry Lead : Andy Newcomer part 121, David Oliver part 129.

Issue Statement: It is necessary for carriers to analyze and coordinate with airports prior to operating Group VI aircraft into group V airports, specifically the B747-8 and the A-380.

Background: Ops Spec C091 is required for anyone operating an A380. To date, only foreign air carriers were operating the A380. Foreign air carriers are already operating the B-747-8, Bob added that although no U.S. operator has a need for it currently; AFS-200 expects that to change in the future and as such will be adding this template to the Part 121 data base of available Ops Specs.

In the last Joint OSWG meeting, Danuta briefly reviewed the background on C091/the study of the group VI aircraft, (A-380 and B-747-8), operating into group V airports, issues surrounding group VI aircraft operating into group V airports, specifically the B-747-8 and the A-380. The limitations language has been agreed upon by both AFS-050 and AFS-200. After many hours of review, both divisions have agreed to keep the limitations on group VI aircraft operations into group V airports in Ops Spec C091. The existing limitations for the A-380 have been rewritten into plain language, and the B-747-8 limitations language will be added. A revised draft Ops Spec C091 is expected to be posted in the next few weeks. Limitations are based on the results of a study that was conducted – can the A-380 and B-747-8 safety operate on group V airports and under what conditions.

Discussion: Danuta briefly reviewed the issues, goal, and updated the group on status of the change. Namely, the OpSpec, and the associated inspector guidance was drafted, and informal FAA coordination had been initiated. In the process of this informal coordination, the following issue was raised. The existing limitation in OpSpec C091 states in part:  

For runways with a threshold elevation greater than 4,000 ft. MSL the hold short lines or hold position must be expanded outward from the 280 ft. point by 1 ft. for every 100 ft. The runway threshold elevation is above sea level.

The issue with the above limitation is that the AC airport design criterion starts adding the 1 foot per 100 feet at 0 MSL. For example:   if using the AC criteria for runways with a threshold of 3000 ft MSL the hold short lines or hold position must be expanded outward to 310 feet = 280+ 30. If using the OpSpec criteria for that same scenario the hold short lines or hold position must be at 180 feet. For example:   if using the AC criteria for runways with a threshold of 3000 ft MSL the hold short lines or hold position must be expanded outward to 310 feet = 280+ 30. If using the OpSpec criteria for that same scenario the hold short lines or hold position must be at 180 feet. AFS-50 continues to meet and discuss with airports and subject matter experts in AFS-400, AFS-200… to settle the issue.

Status: Ongoing. Update to be provided.

In Formal Coordination…Comments being received.


10.    C055 Alternate Airport IFR Minimums


FAA Lead :  

Industry Lead:  

Issue Statement: Confirmation that this applies to all alternates



11.    New Charting Format for CAT III


12.    Closing remarks