207-Minute ETOPS --Docket No. FAA–2002–6717; Notice
No. 03–11
The General Aviation
Manufacturers Association (GAMA) filed a response to the FAA's
ETOPS NPRM as the comment period came to a close. Their response
shows an intriguing study of an issue that is sure to remain
somewhat contentious as the FAA finally considers the comments to
this proposed rule.
Herein, their comments:
General
GAMA is pleased that the FAA published the subject Notice in
close compliance with the recommendations of the ETOPS ARAC.
However, FAA’s failure to also publish the advisory
material drafted by the ARAC makes it difficult for
operators and manufacturers to fully understand and assess the
impact of the proposed rule on existing operations.
GAMA notes that the ARAC was tasked with developing new
regulations for long-range operations conducted in accordance with
14 CFR Part 121 and for 14 CFR Part 135 (et. al.). Part 121
long-range operations have been governed by FAA advisory circulars
for many years and are widely understood. On the other hand, FAA
has never provided guidance or regulations for on-demand,
long-range operations flown in accordance with Part 135. These two
very different communities have a very different
“awareness” of long-range operating procedures.
GAMA recommends that FAA begin influencing long-range flights
conducted in accordance with 14 CFR Part 135 with advisory material
only. When FAA field inspectors and airplane operators gain
experience, the applicable advisory material could be converted to
regulations. This is exactly what was done with Part 121 operators
and manufacturers.
Long-Range Threshold
GAMA agrees that the appropriate threshold for new guidance and
rules governing long range operations of flights conducted in
accordance with 14 CFR Part 135 should be 180 minutes. GAMA also
agrees that any flight that takes-off and lands at an airport
located within the continental U.S. should be excluded from the
proposed ETOPS regulations. The richness of the U.S. airport and
air traffic infrastructure ensures that these flights will be
within 180-minutes of an acceptable airport, thereby easing the
burden of compliance on Part 135 operators that do not have FAA
approval or airplanes that are capable of operating on
international routes.
Safety Justification
After reviewing
world-wide accident data for turbojets seating fewer than 20
passengers involved in on-demand, commercial operations, GAMA notes
that these airplanes have never experienced a fatal accident.
We note, however, that there have been some fatal accidents
involving these same types of airplanes while involved in private
use, all involving human error in decision making, flight planning
or pre-flight inspection/servicing.
Unless there is adequate safety justification, new standards or
rules promulgated by the FAA should not unduly impact existing
operations. And if safety justification exists, the adverse impact
of new guidance, rules or regulations should be the minimum needed
to achieve the desired level of safety, especially for current
operations.
For non-scheduled, long-range operations currently allowed under
CFR 14 Part 135, GAMA has concluded that adequate safety
justification for new long-range standards exists. (As noted above,
publishing guidance material only, at least initially, would
adequately resolve potential safety problems while minimizing
economic burdens.)
GAMA is aware of reports of certain flights that were operated
over isolated areas, lost a critical system enroute, but safely
arrived at their destination, albeit with marginal fuel reserves.
If these flights had encountered an unlikely, but still possible
failure of a second critical system, or unpredicted weather
conditions at the destination, an accident might have occurred.
While these reports center around a single failure, and the
aircraft was therefore able to safely land, GAMA agrees with the
FAA that for commercial operations, a single failure should not
degrade the margin of safety.
Phase-In
GAMA also agrees with
the FAA that international standards, expressed in the Standards
and Recommended Practices (SARPS) published by the International
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) require the FAA to establish the
maximum distance a commercially-operated aircraft can fly from an
airport. However, ICAO specifically allows a “phase-in”
period for such regulations. The FAA should adopt such a
“phase-in” by first adopting advisory
materials and then moving to regulations for Part 135
long-range operations.
GAMA also agrees with the FAA that the best method of
implementing long-range procedures on Part 135 operators is to
allow them to continue to operate aircraft for long-range
operations in their existing fleet for 8 years, but during this
period, comply with the proposed operating guidance. After that
date, these airplanes would be limited to a maximum of 180
minutes.
Due to the fact that Part 135 operators are unfamiliar with many
of the concepts and procedures outlined in the NPRM, FAA must not
implement this material for a minimum of two years. This will allow
time to train FAA inspectors and for Part 135 operators to develop
appropriate procedures. Only after this “training” time
should the eight-year period begin.
Nomenclature
GAMA also agrees with the FAA that on-demand operations in
aircraft less than 20 seats, conducted under CFR 14 Part 135, are
significantly different than those conducted under 14 CFR Part 121
or 129. Accordingly, proposed regulations governing long-range
operations must be specifically tailored for on-demand operation of
turbofan airplanes seating fewer than 20 passengers. Generally, FAA
has proposed such a rule. However, to avoid confusion among
operators and inappropriate comparison with other FAA regulations,
the rules for on-demand, long-range operations flown in
accordance with Part 135 warrants a different title. GAMA suggests
that 14 CFR Part 135 operations beyond the 180-minute threshold be
entitled “Long Range Operations” (LROPS) instead of
ETOPS, as proposed.