Day 1 - Afternoon Session - 6 Aug 2013

1                Convening


2                Chairperson’s Remarks

Roster and Roll Call/Introductions:


Missing Agenda Items

·                B343 (Renamed as performance based fuel) – still list

·                A117, A318, AXXX – Fatigue OpSpecs – Dale Roberts

·                C071 and C073 – Awaiting final signature

·                D073 for part 135 – Under discussion with MBAA and Mark Lopez

·                C073 awaiting signature and then publication


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.


UAL will not contest alternates into C070. Reason for delay is due to other priorities. Supplemental Carriers will list ETOPS adequate airports in C070. Theo will have update on the next meeting



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.


Generic OpSpecs issued for operations into hostile areas/countries. One paragraph issued for under DOD contract and one for service other than DOD. Industry requests what is the criteria for determination of a hostile area (act of war, criminal activity, civil unrest…) Depending on the definition of hostile area, there could be a direct impact on air carrier insurance or coverage.  



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


Authorized listed countries will be moved to B050. Specific tail numbers will remain. New stream lined guidance will be coming out in the near future. Word has it that Viet Nam and Taiwan will be requiring ADS-B out soon.


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 / 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


The AC is with the tech writers. FAA requesting any input to contact Adam Giraldes or Roy Maxwell of Delta Air Lines at 404-715-7231. Request to Deke Abbott to make draft AC available for review. Deke Abbott indicated the document should be available by the end of this month.  


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 D97 on delivery – tabled for Lopez and Keller next meeting

Mark Lopez – Continue to review paragraph requirements and carrier’s entries

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


Per Mark Lopez, AA CMO hold paragraph until conformity. Data collection paragraph and not an authorization. FAA looking into retirement of the paragraph and wants industry input.


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.


Draft to be posted for comment in near future. Revised to address electronic signatures, records, and manuals



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.

On hold until AC120-78 published.

11        A010 Aviation Weather Information


FAA Lead :  

Industry Lead:   Theo Kessaris AFS-240

Issue Statement: Field Industry questions


Questions on policy in the 8900 go through the POI. Clarification questions can go directly to Theo. Item closed and to be removed from the agenda.


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


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 90 day look back of HF radio reliability. If there was a failure with the 90 days, aircraft would be limited to 200 nm off the east coast or SAT voice installed. Question of 90 day may be excessive. Industry working on a compromise. Goal is for policy within a month.


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.


Template will be changed due to the revision of C055. Will mirror paragraph C055.


14        A061, Use of Electronic Flight Bag


FAA Lead : Brian Hint, AFS-430

Industry Lead: Alaska Air

Issue Statement: Request Brian Hint update guidance


No brief given


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.

Delayed due to other changes in process. Should be out by the end of 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.


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


New FAA site for electronic signature – Pricing is the same as TeamAskins. Signatures obtained through TeamAskins is still valid for 1 year from when obtained.                    


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


Logo has been added to ICAO compliant OpSpes – Moved to remove from agenda.


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) – Removing from the list


No changes in airport status as listed. The list will appear in the FAA home page near the location of the AIP. Awaiting the FAA publication of the status changes to the airports noted above.


6.            EASA Third Country


EASA Brief – No fees for TCO. Possible entry into force date is January 2014. The AOC will be the pre-requisite for traffic rights. Will be based on ICAO standards and not of the EU. Be an online application. If US OpSpecs lists Europe, it is suggested that the airline apply for the EASA TCO. Application needs to apply within 6 months after entry into force. Presentation on FSIMs


ICAO Brief of ICAO AOC and OpSpecs. Question of who is responsible to load the information into the ICAO system.


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


C054, C059, and C060 has gone through coordination and is waiting for signature.


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


C054, C059, and C060 has gone through coordination and is waiting for signature.


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.

Moved to formal coordination and then final signature

10.    C055 Alternate Airport IFR Minimums


FAA Lead :  

Industry Lead:  

Issue Statement: Confirmation that this applies to all alternates


Question if this applies to any alternates or just destination. RNAV GPS approaches are not to be used for an ETOPS alternate unless non-standard language added into C055. Notice will be published for the procedures to obtain the non standard language. This will be used until the template can be revised.


11.    New Charting Format for CAT III


CAT III a, b, and c going away and will only publish the lowest minimums. Possible combine of CATII and III charts. Starting early next year. Will take 2 years to complete.


12.    Closing remarks


Question came of the meeting schedule – Offline discussion with the chairs.