[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 16, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42764-42766]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-20406]
[[Page 42763]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VI
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Aviation Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
14 CFR Part 61, et al.
Advanced Qualification Program; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 16, 1995 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 42764]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 61, 63, 65, 108, 121, and 135
[Docket No. 25804, Notice No. 95-13]
RIN 2120-AF00
Advanced Qualification Program
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to establish a new termination date for
Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. 58 (55 FR 40275; Oct. 2,
1990), which provides for the approval of an alternate method (known as
``Advanced Qualification Program'' or ``AQP'') for qualifying, training
and certifying, and otherwise ensuring the competency of crewmembers,
aircraft dispatchers, other operations personnel, instructors, and
evaluators who are required to be trained or qualified under parts 121
and 135 of the FAR. This proposed extension is necessary to establish a
new termination date for SFAR 58 to allow time for the FAA to complete
the rulemaking process that will incorporate SFAR 58 into the Federal
Aviation Regulations (FAR). The current termination date for SFAR 58 is
October 2, 1995.
DATE: Comments must be received on or before September 5, 1995.
ADDRESS: Send or deliver comments on this notice in duplicate to:
Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel,
Attention: Rules Docket (AGC-10), Room 915G, Docket No. 25804, 800
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. Comments must be marked
Docket No. 25804. Comments may be examined in the Rules Docket between
8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. John Allen, Advanced Qualification Program Branch (AFS-230), Air
Transportation Division, Office of Flight Standards, Federal Aviation
Administration, P.O. Box 20027, Dulles International Airport,
Washington, DC 20041-2027; telephone (703) 661-0260.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In 1975, the FAA began to address two issues in part 121 pilot
training and checking. One issue was the hardware requirements needed
for total simulation. The other issue was the redesign of training
programs to deal with increasingly complex human factors problems and
to increase the safety benefits derived from the simulation. At the
urging of the air transportation industry, the FAA addressed the
hardware issue first. This effort culminated in 1980 in the development
of the Advanced Simulation Program, set forth in part 121, Appendix H.
Since then, the FAA has continued to pursue approaches for the
redesign of training programs to increase the benefits of Advanced
Simulation and to deal with the increasing complexity of cockpit human
factors.
On August 27, 1987, FAA Administrator McArtor addressed the chief
pilots and certain executives of many air carriers at a meeting held in
Kansas City. One of the issues discussed at the meeting focused on
flight crewmember performance issues. This meeting led to the creation
of a Joint Government-Industry Task Force on flight crew performance.
It was comprised of representatives from major air carriers and air
carrier associations, flight crewmember associations, commuter air
carriers and regional airline associations, and government
organizations. On September 10, 1987, the task force met at the Air
Transport Association's headquarters to identify and discuss flight
crewmember performance issues. Working groups in three major areas were
formed: (1) man/machine interface, (2) flight crewmember training, and
(3) operating environment. Each working group submitted a report and
recommendations to the Joint Task Force. On June 8, 1988, the
recommendations of the Joint Task Force were presented to Administrator
McArtor.
The major substantive recommendations to the Administrator from the
flight crewmember training working group were the following: (1)
Require part 135 commuters whose airplane operations require two pilots
to comply with part 121 training, checking, qualification and record
keeping requirements. (2) Provide for a Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR) and Advisory Circular to permit development of
innovative training programs. (3) Establish a National Air Carrier
Training Program Office which provides training program oversight at
the national level. (4) Require seconds-in-command to satisfactorily
perform their duties under the supervision of check airmen during
operating experience. (5) Require all training to be accomplished
through a certificate holder's training program. (6) Provide for
approval of training programs based on course content and training aids
rather than using specific programmed hours. (7) Require Cockpit
Resource Management Training and encourage greater use of Line-Oriented
Flight Training. Specific recommendations were listed regarding
regulatory changes and were separated into those changes which should
be incorporated into the SFAR and those in an accompanying Advisory
Circular.
In June of 1988, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
issued a Safety Recommendation (A-88-71) on the subject of CRM
training. The recommendation stemmed from an NTSB accident
investigation of a Northwest Airline crash on August 16, 1987, in which
148 passengers, 6 crewmembers, and 2 people on the ground were killed.
The NTSB noted that both crewmembers had received single-crewmember
training during their last simulator training and proficiency checks.
In addition, the last CRM training they had received was 3.5 hours of
ground school (general) CRM training in 1983. As a result of its
investigation, the NTSB recommended that all part 121 carriers:
Review initial and recurrent flightcrew training programs to
ensure that they include simulator or aircraft training exercises
which involve cockpit resource management and active coordination of
all crewmember trainees and which will permit evaluation of crew
performance and adherence to those crew coordination procedures.
In response to the recommendations from the Joint Task Force and
from the NTSB, the FAA, in October 1991, published SFAR 58, Advanced
Qualification Program (AQP), which addresses all of the above
recommendations. The FAA also published an Advisory Circular on AQP
which describes an acceptable methodology by which the provisions of
the SFAR are achieved. Under SFAR 58 certificated air carriers, as well
as training centers they employ, are provided with a regulatory
alternative for training, checking, qualifying, and certifying aircrew
personnel subject to the provisions of FAR parts 121 and 135.
Air carrier participation in AQP is entirely voluntary. Carriers
electing not to participate may continue to operate under the
traditional FAA provisions for training and checking. The long range
advantages to participation, however, are numerous. The regulatory
provisions of AQP offer the flexibility to tailor training and
certification activities to a carrier's particular needs and
operational circumstances. They encourage innovation in the development
of training strategies. They
[[Page 42765]]
include wide latitude in choice of training methods and media. They
permit the use of flight training devices for training and checking on
many tasks which historically have been accomplished in airplane
simulators. They provide an approved means for the applicant to replace
FAA mandated uniform qualification standards with carrier proposed
alternatives tailored to specific aircraft. They permit carriers, whose
operations include a mixture of parts 135 and 121, to operate under a
single regulatory set of requirements for training and checking. They
permit the applicant to establish an annual training and checking
schedule for all personnel, including pilots-in-command (PIC), and
provide a basis for extending that interval under certain
circumstances.
From an FAA perspective, the overriding advantage of AQP is quality
of training. AQP provides a systematic basis for matching technology to
training requirements and for approving training program content based
on relevance to operational performance. The FAA's goal for this new
program is to improve safety through improved training.
The initial goal of the SFAR was to improve flight crew performance
by providing alternative means of complying with certain current
provisions in the Federal Aviation Regulations which may inhibit
innovative use of some modern technology that could facilitate the
training of flight crewmembers. The SFAR has encouraged carriers to
become innovative in their approach to training. Based on the aviation
industry participation and enthusiasm in AQP, the extension of SFAR 58
is necessary until the rulemaking process codifies AQP as a permanent
regulation.
Benefit/Cost Analysis
AQP is not mandatory. Consequently, those operators who choose to
participate in the program would do so only if it was in their best
interest. Enough operators have found it in their best interest that
AQP has become an important means for meeting the requirements for air
carrier training programs. As of March 1995, 18 carriers and 2
manufacturers have either applied to participate or are already
participating in the program. AQP gives air carriers flexibility in
meeting the safety goals of the training programs in parts 121 and 135
without sacrificing any of the safety benefits derived from those
programs. Thus, extending AQP for another 5 years would not impose any
additional costs nor decrease the present level of safety. Because this
proposal--1) is extending an existing program; 2) is voluntary; and 3)
has become an important means for some operators to comply with the
training requirements, the FAA finds that a full detailed regulatory
evaluation is not necessary.
International Trade Impact Analysis
The proposed rule would not constitute a barrier to international
trade, including the export of American goods and services to foreign
countries and the import of foreign goods and services into the United
States. Since air carriers will not participate in AQP unless it was in
their best interest, they likewise will not participate if it would
impose a competitive disadvantage on them. Also, the concept of AQP is
being embraced by foreign operators as well.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and
disproportionately burdened by Federal regulations. The RFA requires a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a rule will have ``significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' FAA Order
2100.14A outlines the FAA's procedures and criteria for implementing
the RFA. Since this proposal would extend what has become an important
means for some air carriers to comply with training requirements, the
extension will not impose costs above those that air carriers are
already incurring, and certainly not above what they would incur from
adopting a part 121 or part 135 training program. Thus, the rule if
issued, will not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Federalism Implications
The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct
effects on the states, on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Thus, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that such a
regulation does not have federalism implications warranting preparation
of a Federalism Assessment.
Conclusion
The FAA has determined that this document involves a proposal that
imposes no additional burden on any person. Accordingly, it has been
determined that the action does not involve a major rule under
Executive Order 12291; however, it is significant under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11304; February 26, 1979).
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 61
Air safety, Air transportation, Aviation Safety, Safety.
14 CFR Part 63
Air Safety, Air Transportation, Airmen, Aviation safety, Safety,
Transportation.
14 CFR Part 65
Airman, Aviation safety, Air transportation, Aircraft.
14 CFR Part 108
Airplane operator security, Aviation safety, Air transportation,
Air carriers, Airlines, Security measures, Transportation, Weapons.
14 CFR Part 121
Aircraft pilots, Airmen, Aviation safety, Pilots, Safety.
14 CFR Part 135
Air carriers, Air transportation, Airmen, Aviation safety, Safety,
Pilots.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, SFAR 58 (14 CFR parts 65, 108,
121, and 135) of the Federal Aviation Regulations is amended as
follows:
1. The authority citation for part 61 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40113, 44701-44703, 44707, 44710,
44712, 44714, 44716, 44717, 44722, 45303.
2. The authority citation for part 63 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40108, 40113, 40114, 44701-44703,
44710, 44712, 44714, 44716, 44717, 44722, 45302, 46104.
3. The authority citation for part 65 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40113, 44701-44703, 44710, 44712,
44714, 44716, 44717, 447222, 45303.
4. The authority citation for part 108 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40108, 40113, 40114, 40119, 44701,
44702, 44705, 44712, 44714, 44716, 44717, 44722, 44901-44903, 44906,
44912, 44935-44938, 45302, 46104, 48107.
5. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40105, 40113, 44701-44702,
44704-44705.
6. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 40105, 44113, 44701-
44705, 44707-44717, 44722, 45303.
[[Page 42766]]
7. SFAR 58 is amended by revising the expiration date in paragraph
13.
* * * * *
13. Expiration. This Special Federal Aviation Regulation
terminates on October 2, 2000 unless sooner terminated.
Issued in Washington, D.C. on Friday, August 11, 1995.
Thomas C. Accardi,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
[FR Doc. 95-20406 Filed 8-14-95; 12:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M