[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 141 (Monday, July 22, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37953-37958]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18533]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[AC 120-XX]


Proposed Advisory Circular (AC) 120-XX, Air Transportation 
Partnership for Safety Programs

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Advisory Circular (AC) 120-XX, and request 
for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces the publication of, and requests 
comments on, a proposed AC that provides guidance for establishing air 
transportation partnership for safety programs. These programs, which 
are entered into by the FAA and entities within the air transportation 
industry, are intended to generate safety information that may not 
otherwise be obtainable. The FAA is implementing a 2-year demonstration 
program for the use of these programs under which information can be 
collected and analyzed to measure the programs' effect on safety.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 21, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the proposed AC to: Federal Aviation 
Administration, Air Transportation Division, AFS-200, 800 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kent Stephens, AFS-230, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 
20034, Dulles International Airport, Washington, DC 20041, or telephone 
(703) 661-0333 x5131.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed AC may be downloaded from the 
FedWorld BBS by dialing (703) 321-8020, ANSI, 8, 1, N, 9600 baud, or 
through the Internet at the following Uniform Resource Location (URL): 
flp://fwux.fedworld.gov/pub/faa/faa.htm. The file name is ``AC XX-
XX.TXT.''

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed AC by 
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. 
Commenters should identify the AC, and submit comments, in duplicate, 
to the address specified above. All comments received on or before the 
closing date for comments will be considered by the Air Transportation 
Division, AFS-200, before issuing the final AC. Comments may be 
inspected at Federal Aviation Administration, Air Transportation 
Division, AFS-200, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591 
between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. weekdays, except Federal 
holidays.

Background

    In recent years, the FAA and the air transportation industry have 
sought alternative means for addressing safety problems and identifying 
potential safety hazards. To this end, the FAA, in cooperation with 
industry, established several demonstration partnerships for safety 
programs in an effort to increase the flow of safety information to 
both the air carrier and FAA. Among these programs were the USAir 
Altitude Awareness Program, the American Airlines Safety Action Program 
(ASAP), and the Alaska Airlines Altitude Awareness Program. As an 
outcome of the Safety Conference held on January 9-10, 1995, the 
Secretary of Transportation and the Administrator of the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) announced that standardized policy and 
procedures would be provided for the use of these programs. Following 
publication of a final AC, the FAA will amend appropriate agency orders 
to provide internal guidance for the development of partnership for 
safety programs.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 17, 1996.
Thomas C. Accardi,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

    The text of the proposed AC reads as follows:
    1. Purpose. This advisory circular (AC) provides guidance for 
establishing air transportation partnership for safety programs 
(partnership for safety programs). As an outcome of the Safety 
Conference held on January 9-10, 1995, the Secretary of Transportation 
and the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
announced that standardized policy and procedures would be provided for 
the use of these programs.
    2. Background. In recent years, the FAA and the air transportation 
industry have sought alternative means for addressing safety problems 
and identifying potential safety hazards. To this end, the FAA, in 
cooperation with industry, established several demonstration 
partnership for safety programs in an effort to increase the flow of 
safety information to both the air carrier and FAA. Among these 
programs were the USAir Altitude Awareness Program, the American 
Airlines Safety Action Program (ASAP), and the Alaska Airlines Altitude 
Awareness Program. These programs included incentives to encourage 
employees of certificate holders participating in the programs to 
disclose information and identify possible violations of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations without fear of punitive legal enforcement 
sanctions. Events reported under a program that involved an alleged 
violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations by the certificate holder 
were handled under the voluntary disclosure policy, provided the 
elements of that policy

[[Page 37954]]

were satisfied. The FAA is expanding the use of partnership for safety 
programs through the implementation of a 2-year demonstration program 
under which information and data can be collected and analyzed to 
measure their effect on aviation safety.
    3. Key Terms. The following key terms and phrases are defined to 
ensure a standard interpretation of the guidance in this AC:
    a. Administration Act. Administrative action is a means for 
disposing of violations or alleged violations that do not warrant the 
use of legal enforcement sanctions. The two types of administrative 
action are a warning notice and a letter of correction:
    b. Air Carrier. An air carrier is a person who undertakes directly 
by lease, or other arrangement, to engage in air transportation.
    c. Certificate Holder. For purposes of partnership for safety 
programs, a certificate holder refers to a person authorized to operate 
under part 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations or who holds a 
certificate issued under part 145 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.
    d. Certificate Holding District Office (CHDO). The CHDO is the 
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) having responsibility for the 
geographic area in which a certificate holder's principal base of 
operations is located.
    e. Enforcement-Related Incentive. For purposes of partnership for 
safety programs, an enforcement-related incentive refers to an 
assurance that lesser enforcement action will be used to address 
certain alleged violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations to 
encourage participation by certificate holder employees.
    f. Major Domestic Repair Station. For purposes of partnership for 
safety programs, a major domestic repair station refers to a part 145 
repair station located in the United States certificated to perform 
airframe and/or engine work on transport category aircraft having a 
maximum takeoff gross weight of 75,000 lbs. or greater.
    g. Memorandum of Understanding. For purposes of partnership for 
safety programs, memorandum of understanding (MOU) refers to the 
written agreement between two or more parties setting forth the 
purposes for, and terms of, a partnership for safety program.
    h. Party/Parties. For purposes of partnership for safety programs, 
the terms ``party/parties'' refers to the certificate holder, the FAA, 
and any other person or entity (e.g., labor union or other industry or 
Government entity) that is a signatory to the MOU.
    i. Safety-Related Report. A safety-related report refers to a 
written account of an event that involves an operational or maintenance 
issue related to safety of flight, reported through a partnership for 
safety program.
    j. Voluntary Disclosure Policy. The voluntary disclosure policy is 
a policy under which part 121, 135, and 145 certificate holders may 
voluntarily report alleged violations of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations and develop corrective action satisfactory to the FAA to 
preclude their recurrence. Certificate holders who satisfy the elements 
of the voluntary disclosure policy, receive a letter of correction in 
lieu of civil penalty action. Voluntary disclosure reporting procedures 
are outlined in AC 120-56.
    4. Applicability. Partnership for safety programs are intended for 
air carriers that operate under part 121 of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations. They are also intended for major domestic repair stations 
certificated under part 145 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 
Partnership for safety programs are entered into voluntarily by the 
FAA, a certificate holder, and if appropriate, other parties.
    5. Development. Certificate holders may develop programs and submit 
them to the FAA for review and acceptance in accordance with the 
guidance in this AC. The FAA will determine whether a program is 
accepted. The FAA may suggest that a certificate holder develop a 
partnership for safety program to resolve an identified safety problem.
    6. Resources. A partnership for safety program can result in a 
significant commitment of resources by the parties to the program. 
During the development of a program, it is important that each party is 
willing to commit the necessary personnel, time, and monetary resources 
to support the program.
    7. Enforcement Policy.
    a. Enforcement-Related Incentive. Partnership for safety programs 
may include an enforcement-related incentive to encourage participation 
by certificate holder employees. Any enforcement-related incentive 
should be limited to that needed to achieve the desired goal and 
results of the program. Alleged violations of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations by certificate holder employees disclosed through safety-
related reports will ordinarily be addressed with administrative action 
provided the alleged violations do not involve deliberate misconduct; a 
serious and substantial deviation from required conduct; criminal 
conduct; an accident; or conduct that demonstrates, or raises a 
question of, a lack of qualification. Alleged violations that involve 
deliberate misconduct; a serious and substantial deviation from 
required conduct; criminal conduct; an accident; and conduct that 
demonstrates, or raises a question of, a lack of qualification are 
excluded from a partnership for safety program. Any enforcement-related 
incentive will not apply to these violations. Failure of any individual 
to complete any corrective action in a manner acceptable to the FAA may 
result in the reopening of the case and referral of the alleged 
violation for legal enforcement action.
    b. Repeated Instances of Misconduct. Notwithstanding the guidance 
in paragraph 205 of FAA Order 2150.3A, Compliance and Enforcement 
Program, repeated instances involving the same or similar type of 
misconduct previously addressed with administrative action under the 
program, may also be covered under the program. The determination 
whether a repeated violation will be covered under a program will be 
made by the FAA on a case-by-case basis, upon consideration of the 
facts and circumstances surrounding the violation.
    c. Use of Safety-Related Reports. All safety-related reports should 
be fully evaluated and, to the extent appropriate, investigated by the 
FAA. Any safety-related report that concerns an alleged violation(s) 
that is excluded from partnership for safety programs, i.e., alleged 
violations involving deliberate misconduct; a serious and substantial 
deviation from required conduct; criminal conduct; an accident; or 
conduct that demonstrates, or raises a question of, a lack of 
qualification, will be referred to an appropriate office within the FAA 
for any additional investigation and reexamination and/or legal 
enforcement action, as appropriate. A closed case involving a violation 
addressed with the enforcement-related incentive, or for which no 
action is taken, may be reopened and appropriate legal enforcement 
action taken if evidence later is discovered that establishes that the 
violation should have been excluded from the program. For alleged 
violations not excluded under a partnership for safety program, neither 
administrative action nor punitive legal enforcement action will be 
taken against an individual for an alleged violation reported under the 
program unless there is sufficient evidence of the violation, other 
than the individual's safety-related report. ``Sufficient evidence'' 
means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise 
predicated on, the individual's safety-related report.
    d. Violations of Certificate Holder. Alleged violations of 
certificate holders

[[Page 37955]]

disclosed through a safety-related report under a partnership for 
safety program will be handled under the voluntary disclosure policy, 
provided the certificate holder voluntarily reports the alleged 
violations to the FAA and the other elements of that policy are met. 
(See AC 120-56 and FAA Order 2150.3A, Compliance and Enforcement 
Program, Compliance/Enforcement Bulletin No. 90-6).
    e. Examples. The following are examples of events that might be 
reported under a partnership for safety program and the probable action 
that would be taken by the FAA for an alleged violation disclosed by 
the safety-related report.
    (1) Examples of events where an alleged violation ordinarily would 
be addressed by the enforcement-related incentive.
    (i) A pilot reports an altitude deviation where the aircraft was 
assigned by ATC to climb to an altitude of 10,000 ft. MSL, but actually 
levels off at 11,000 ft. MSL. Evidence of the violation, other than the 
safety-related report, (e.g., air traffic control tape, air traffic 
controller's statements) is gathered by an investigation not caused by, 
or otherwise predicated on, the filing of the safety-related report. 
The pilot's alleged violation does not involve conduct that is excluded 
from the partnership for safety program. The alleged violation 
therefore would be addressed by the enforcement-related incentive.
    (ii) A repair station technician reports that he/she was assigned 
to accomplish a required inspection (RII); however, he/she 
inadvertently neglected to sign the check sheet that the inspection was 
completed. Evidence of the alleged violation, other than the 
technician's safety-related report, reveals that the inspection was 
accomplished and the check sheet was not signed. This evidence was 
gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, 
the filing of the safety-related report. The alleged violation does not 
involve conduct that is excluded from the partnership for safety 
program. The technician's alleged violation therefore would be 
addressed by the enforcement-related incentive.
    (2) Examples of events involving an alleged violation that is 
excluded from the partnership for safety program and to which the 
enforcement-related incentive would not apply.
    (i) A pilot submits a report indicating that after takeoff he/she 
operated an aircraft below an altitude of 1,000 ft. AGL over a 
congested area. Investigation of this event revealed that the aircraft 
was deliberately flown at an altitude of 500 ft. AGL over a city ten 
miles from the airport. Due to the deliberate nature of the pilot's 
conduct, it would not be covered under the partnership for safety 
program and the alleged violation would not be addressed by the 
enforcement-related incentive. The safety-related report would be 
referred for legal enforcement action.
    (ii) A technician submits a report stating that he/she had used a 
lubricant other than what was stated in the maintenance manual for an 
engine valve installation. No authorized substitute lubricants were 
available. The investigation revealed that the technician intentionally 
used a substitute non-approved lubricant. These actions were not in 
accordance with the maintenance manual or company procedures. Because 
these actions were a substantial deviation from required conduct, and 
intentional, the technician's conduct would not be covered under the 
partnership for safety program and the alleged violation would not be 
addressed by the enforcement-related incentive. The safety-related 
report would be referred for reexamination and/or legal enforcement 
action.
    (3) Example of an event where no action would be taken for an 
alleged violation disclosed through a safety-related report.
    (i) A pilot reports an altitude deviation where the aircraft was 
assigned by ATC to climb to an altitude of 10,000 ft. MSL, but actually 
levels off at 11,000 ft. MSL. The only evidence of the deviation is the 
pilot's safety-related report filed under the partnership for safety 
program. Since the pilot's safety-related report will not be used as 
evidence to support taking punitive legal enforcement action or 
administrative action against the pilot, and no other evidence of the 
alleged violation is available, there is insufficient evidence to 
support a violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations. Therefore, the 
case would be closed with no action.
    8. Corrective Action. The FAA will work with a certificate holder 
to develop acceptable corrective action that should be taken based on 
information obtained under a partnership for safety program. The 
decision to accept the corrective action implemented under a 
partnership for safety program in lieu of legal enforcement action 
remains solely with the FAA.
    9. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The provisions of a 
partnership for safety program that is acceptable to the FAA should be 
set forth in a MOU signed by each party. A program will be implemented 
in accordance with the provisions of its MOU. A sample is provided in 
the appendix of this document. Each MOU will be based on the parties' 
different needs and purposes for a partnership for safety program.
    a. The MOU should set forth the elements of the partnership for 
safety program, including at least the following:
    (1) A statement of the essential safety information that is 
reasonably expected to be obtained through the program and the safety 
problem(s) that is reasonably expected to be addressed through the 
program.
    (2) The benefits to be gained by the program.
    (3) The duration of the program, which should be limited to the 
period of time needed to achieve the desired goals and benefits 
articulated in the program. Programs initially should have a duration 
of no longer than 1 year and should be reviewed prior to renewal.
    (4) A process for timely reporting to the FAA all events disclosed 
under the program; procedures for the resolution of those events that 
are safety-related; and procedures for continuous tracking and analysis 
of safety-related events.
    (5) Any enforcement-related incentive that is needed to achieve the 
desired goal and results of the program.
    (6) The frequency of periodic reviews by the parties to determine 
whether the program is achieving the desired results. These reviews are 
in addition to any other review conducted by the FAA.
    (7) A point of contact within each party who is responsible for 
oversight of the program.
    (8) A process for training and distributing information about the 
program to certificate holder employees and procedures for providing 
feedback to individuals who make safety-related reports under the 
program.
    b. The MOU also should address the following elements that will 
pertain to any partnership for safety program.
    (1) The program can be terminated at any time by any party.
    (2) Failure of any party to follow the terms of the agreement 
ordinarily will result in termination of the program.
    (3) Failure of a certificate holder to follow through with 
corrective action acceptable to the FAA to resolve any safety 
deficiencies ordinarily will result in termination of the program.
    (4) Modifications of the MOU must be approved by all parties.
    (5) Termination or modification of a program will not adversely 
affect anyone who acted in reliance on the terms of a program in effect 
at the time of that action, i.e., when a program is

[[Page 37956]]

terminated all reports and investigations that were in progress will be 
handled under the provisions of the program until they are completed.
    (6) Any enforcement-related incentive will not apply to alleged 
violations involving deliberate misconduct; a serious and substantial 
deviation from required conduct; criminal conduct; an accident; or 
conduct that demonstrates, or raises a question of, a lack of 
qualification.
    c. The MOU must be signed by an authorized representative of each 
party. The MOU will be signed by the CHDO manager on behalf of the FAA 
after coordination with the Director, Flight Standards Service, AFS-1, 
and the Associate Administrator for Regulation and Certification, AVR-
1.
    10. Acceptance/Renewal Procedures.
    a. The certificate holder should initially develop and present a 
program to the CHDO for review. The CHDO and the certificate holder 
will review it to ensure that it satisfies the guidance provided in 
this AC, FAA Order 2150.3A, Compliance and Enforcement Program, and 
Flight Standards handbooks for establishing a partnership for safety 
program. Prior to acceptance, a program will be reviewed to ensure that 
FAA resources are available to administer the program effectively. When 
the FAA determines that a program proposal requires excessive agency 
resources, a matter within the sole discretion of the FAA, it will 
suggest modifications to the program proposal or disapprove the 
proposal.
    b. When the CHDO is satisfied that a program satisfies the guidance 
in this AC, FAA Order 2150.3A, Compliance and Enforcement Program, and 
Flight Standards handbook guidance, the CHDO manager will forward two 
copies of the MOU through the Flight Standards Division regional office 
to the appropriate headquarters program office(s), i.e., AFS-200 for 
operations programs and AFS-300 for airworthiness programs and repair 
station programs and to both offices for programs that encompass both 
operations and airworthiness. The program offices will review and 
forward the MOU to the Office of the Chief Counsel for appropriate 
legal review. All programs must receive final approval of the Director, 
Flight Standards Service, AFS-1, and Associate Administrator for 
Regulation and Certification, AVR-1. AFS-1 will indicate approval of 
the MOU by FAA memorandum to the CHDO Manager. Following approval by 
AFS-1 and AVR-1, the CHDO manager will sign the MOU on behalf of the 
FAA.
    c. Program renewal will be handled in accordance with the guidance 
for the review and renewal of programs, provided in FAA Order 2150.3A, 
Compliance and Enforcement Program. The CHDO will forward its 
recommendation whether a program should be renewed, along with 
supporting information, in accordance with the procedures outlined in 
Flight Standards handbooks.
    11. Recordkeeping. The parties should maintain those records 
necessary for a program's administration and evaluation.
Appendix 1. Sample Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
    This is a sample of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for an air 
transportation partnership for safety program. It is for illustrative 
purposes; an actual MOU developed by a certificate holder may be 
different from this sample. An MOU should address the elements of a 
partnership for safety programs that are set forth in FAA guidance 
material.

Memorandum of Understanding

General

    ABC Airlines, Inc. is a Federal Aviation Regulation part 121 
domestic air carrier engaged in scheduled passenger operations within 
the United States, Mexico, and Canada. It also conducts passenger 
charter and cargo operations. ABC Airlines operates 100 turbojet 
aircraft and has over 3500 employees including 1100 flight crewmembers 
(pilots and flight engineers) represented by ABC pilot union.

Purpose

    Over the past six months ABC Airlines has experienced an increase 
in certain types of incidents that have resulted in problems relating 
to safety of flight, including violations of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations by the company and its flight crewmembers. Such incidents 
have occurred during all phases of flight and have involved the 
following: noncompliance with air traffic control (ATC) clearances, 
e.g., routing, heading, and altitude deviations; runway and taxiway 
incursions; and departure without proper flight plan fuel onboard. To 
obtain valuable safety information that may lead to correcting these 
and other safety of flight problems, ABC Airlines is entering into a 
partnership for safety program with its flight crewmembers, represented 
by ABC pilot union, and the FAA. This memorandum of understanding (MOU) 
describes the provisions of the program. The objective of the program 
will be to gather safety information from the flight crewmembers that 
will focus on the incidents described above and to obtain information 
concerning any additional safety of flight item that a flight 
crewmember believes should be reported. The information will be 
analyzed in order to develop and implement solutions to safety problems 
identified under the program.

Benefits

    The program will provide a voluntary, cooperative, non-punitive 
environment for the open reporting of safety of flight concerns. 
Through such reporting all parties will have access to valuable 
information that may not otherwise be obtainable. This information will 
be analyzed in order to develop corrective action to solve safety 
problems and minimize deviations from the Federal Aviation Regulations.

Applicability

    The ABC Airlines Pilot Partnership Program (APPP) applies to all 
flight crewmember employees of ABC Airlines. Alleged violations of the 
Federal Aviation Regulations that involve deliberate misconduct; a 
serious and substantial deviation from required conduct; criminal 
conduct; an accident; or conduct that demonstrates, or raises a 
question of, a lack of qualification are excluded from the program. 
Repeated instances involving the same or similar type of misconduct 
previously addressed by the enforcement-related incentive may be 
covered under the program. The determination whether a repeated 
instance will be covered under the program will be made by the FAA on a 
case-by-case basis.
    Apparent violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations by ABC 
Airlines that are discovered under this program will be handled under 
the voluntary disclosure policy, provided ABC Airlines voluntarily 
reported the alleged violations to the FAA and the other elements of 
that policy are met. (See AC 120-56 and FAA Order 2150.3A, Compliance 
and Enforcement Program, Compliance/Enforcement Bulletin No. 90-6). Any 
modifications of this MOU must be approved by all parties to the 
agreement.

Program Duration

    The APPP is designed to identify and correct specific problems 
related to flight safety at ABC Airlines. The duration of the program 
will be 1 year, beginning the date it is implemented by the parties to 
this MOU. The program may be terminated at any time for any

[[Page 37957]]

reason by ABC Airlines, the FAA, or any other party. If the program is 
terminated, all safety-related reports that have been submitted will 
continue to be processed under the MOU in effect at the time of the 
program's termination. If necessary, the program may be renewed at the 
end of 1 year provided that a final review and analysis supports 
renewal of the program and all parties agree to renewal of the program. 
Failure of any party to follow the terms of the program ordinarily will 
result in termination of the program. Failure of ABC Airlines to follow 
through with corrective action to resolve any safety deficiencies 
ordinarily will result in termination of the program.

Reporting Procedures

    When a pilot observes a safety problem or experiences an incident 
during flight, he/she should note the problem or incident and be able 
to describe it in enough detail so that it can be evaluated by a third 
party. For example, if the safety incident involves a deviation from an 
ATC clearance the pilot should note the date, time, place, altitude, 
flight number, and ATC frequency along with enough other information 
describing the incident and any perceived safety problem. After the 
trip sequence has ended for that day the pilot should complete ABC 
Airlines APPP form number 123 for each safety problem or incident 
(hereinafter referred to as ``report'') and submit it by company mail 
to the Director of Flight Operations, Attn: APPP Manager. This should 
be accomplished in a timely manner. In order for the flight crewmember 
who submitted the report to be covered under the partnership for safety 
program and eligible for any FAA enforcement-related incentive, the 
report must be mailed within 24 hours after the end of the flight 
sequence for the day of occurrence, absent extraordinary circumstances. 
For example, if the incident occurred at 14:00 Hrs. on Monday and the 
pilot completes his/her flight sequence for that day at 19:00 Hrs., the 
report should be mailed no later than 19:00 Hrs. the following day 
(Tuesday). In order for all flight crewmembers to be covered under the 
APPP for any regulatory violations resulting from an incident, they 
must all sign the same report or submit separate individual reports for 
the same incident. If the company mail system is not available to the 
flight crewmember at the time he/she needs to file a report, the 
crewmember may contact the APPP manager's office and file a report via 
fax or telephone.

Point of Contact

    The Event Review Committee (ERC) will be comprised of the APPP 
manager, representing ABC Airlines Flight Department management; the 
APPP coordinator for ABC Pilot Union; and an FAA inspector from the FAA 
Certificate Holding Flight Standards District Office (CHDO) for ABC 
Airlines, or designees in their absence.

APPP Manager

    When the report is received by the APPP manager, he/she will record 
the date and time of any incident described in the report and the date 
and time that the report was submitted through the company mail system. 
The APPP manager will enter the report, along with all of the 
supporting data, on the agenda for the next ERC meeting. Untimely 
reports may still be considered by the ERC if extraordinary 
circumstances precluded timely submission of the report, e.g., a flight 
crewmember became ill requiring hospitalization at the termination of 
the flight. In those cases, the report should be mailed via company 
mail as soon as is reasonably possible. The FAA representative to the 
ERC will determine whether a report is submitted in a timely manner. To 
confirm that a report has been received, the APPP manager will send a 
written receipt (ABC Airlines APPP form number 234) through the company 
mail system to each flight crewmember who submits a report. The receipt 
will confirm whether or not the report was determined to be timely. The 
APPP manager will serve as the focal point for information about, and 
inquiries concerning the status of, APPP reports, and for the 
coordination and tracking of recommendations.

Event Review Committee (ERC)

    The ERC will review and analyze reports submitted by flight 
crewmembers under the program, identify actual or potential safety 
problems from the information contained in the reports, and propose 
solutions for those problems. The ERC is responsible for tracking the 
status of each APPP report and for providing feedback to the individual 
who submitted the report. It will also conduct a review of the program 
six months after its inception. This review is in addition to any other 
reviews conducted by the FAA. The ERC also will be responsible for 
preparing a final report on the program at its conclusion. If renewal 
of the program is anticipated, the ERC will prepare and submit that 
report to the FAA 60 days in advance of the termination date for the 
initial program.

ERC Process

    The ERC will meet as necessary to review and analyze reports that 
will be listed on an agenda submitted by the APPP manager. The ERC will 
determine the time and place of the meeting. The ERC will meet at least 
twice a month; the frequency of meetings will be determined by the 
number of reports that have accumulated. It is anticipated that three 
types of reports will be submitted to the ERC: safety-related reports 
that appear to involve a violation(s) of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations; reports that are of a general safety concern but do not 
appear to involve a violation(s) of the Federal Aviation Regulations; 
and any other reports, e.g., reports involving catering and passenger 
ticketing issues. The ERC will forward non-safety reports to the 
appropriate ABC Airlines department head for his/her information and if 
possible, internal (ABC Airlines) resolution. For reports related to 
flight safety, including reports involving possible violations of the 
Federal Aviation Regulations, the ERC will analyze the report; conduct 
interviews of reporting crewmembers; and gather additional information 
concerning the matter described in the report, as necessary.
    The ERC should also make recommendations to ABC Airlines for 
appropriate comprehensive fixes. Such comprehensive fixes might include 
changes to ABC Airlines procedures, aircraft equipment modifications, 
or additional training for a crewmember. Any recommended changes that 
affect ABC Airlines will be forwarded through the APPP manager to the 
appropriate department head for consideration and comment, and, if 
appropriate, implementation. The FAA will work with ABC Airlines to 
develop acceptable comprehensive fixes. The APPP manager will track the 
implementation of the recommended comprehensive fixes and report on the 
progress of the fixes to the ERC as part of the regular ERC meetings. 
Any recommended comprehensive fix that is not implemented should be 
recorded along with the reason it was not implemented.

FAA Enforcement

    All reports submitted under the APPP that involve potential 
violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations will be referred to the 
FAA representative of the ERC for evaluation and, to the extent 
appropriate, investigation. The FAA representative will review the 
report

[[Page 37958]]

and determine whether the alleged violation is supported by sufficient 
evidence, other than the individual's safety-related report. 
``Sufficient evidence'' means evidence gathered by an investigation not 
caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual's safety-related 
report. Alleged violations supported by such evidence will ordinarily 
be addressed with administrative action provided the alleged violations 
do not involve deliberate misconduct; a serious and substantial 
deviation from required conduct; criminal conduct; an accident; or 
conduct that demonstrates, or raises a question of, a lack of 
qualification. Administrative action has been determined to be a 
necessary enforcement-related incentive to achieve the desired results 
and goals of the program.
    Alleged violations that involve deliberate misconduct; a serious 
and substantial deviation from required conduct; criminal conduct; an 
accident; or conduct that demonstrates, or raises a question of, a lack 
of qualification are wholly excluded from the APPP. Such violations 
will not be addressed with the enforcement-related incentive, i.e., 
administrative action. Safety-related reports that concern such 
violations will be referred to an appropriate office within the FAA for 
any additional investigation and reexamination and/or legal enforcement 
action, as appropriate.
    In order for an alleged violation covered under the APPP to be 
addressed with administrative action, the elements of paragraph 205 of 
FAA Order 2150.3A must be satisfied, and the individual committing the 
alleged violation must agree to accomplish any corrective action 
determined appropriate by the FAA representative to the ERC. 
Notwithstanding the guidance in paragraph 205 of FAA Order 2150.3A, 
Compliance and Enforcement Program, however, repeated instances 
involving the same or similar type of misconduct previously addressed 
with administrative action under the APPP may also be covered under the 
program. The determination whether a repeated instance will be covered 
under the APPP will be made on a case-by-case basis by the FAA, upon 
consideration of the facts and circumstances surrounding the violation.
    The ERC may review and discuss the evidence available to support an 
alleged violation reported under the APPP. The FAA representative to 
the ERC will determine the enforcement action, if any, that should be 
initiated for the alleged violation. The FAA will work with a 
certificate holder to develop acceptable comprehensive fixes for safety 
problems identified from information obtained under the APPP. The 
decision to accept the corrective actions implemented under a 
partnership for safety program in lieu of legal enforcement action 
remains solely with the FAA.

Employee Feedback

    The APPP manager will publish a synopsis of the reports received 
from the flight crewmembers in the partnership for safety program 
section of the monthly ``ABC Airlines Employee Newsletter.'' The 
synopsis will include enough information so that reporting flight 
crewmembers can identify their reports. Employee names, however, will 
not be included in the synopsis. The outcome of each report will be 
published. Any employee who submitted a report may also contact the 
APPP manager to inquire about the status of his/her report.

Information and Training

    The details of the APPP will be made available to all flight 
crewmembers and their supervisors by publication in Section 5 of the 
ABC Airlines flight crew operating manual. Each flight crewmember will 
receive written guidance outlining the details of the program at least 
two weeks before the program begins. Each flight crewmember also will 
receive additional instruction concerning the program during the next 
regularly scheduled recurrent training class. All new hire pilot 
employees will receive training on the program during initial training.

Recordkeeping

    All official documents and records regarding this program will be 
kept by the APPP manager and made available to the parties to this 
agreement at their request. The ABC Airlines Pilot Union and FAA will 
maintain whatever records they deem necessary to meet their needs.

Signatories

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Director of Operations, ABC Airlines

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date

----------------------------------------------------------------------
President, ABC Airlines Pilot Union

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Manager, FAA CHDO

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date (End of draft AC)

[FR Doc. 96-18533 Filed 7-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M