[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 14 (Friday, January 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3520-3527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1505]



[[Page 3520]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-99-6717]


207-Minute Extended Range Operations With Two-Engine Aircraft 
(ETOPS)

AGENCY:  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:  Disposition of comments; policy statement for 207-minute 
ETOPS; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY:  This notice responds to comments received in response to a 
request for public comments that was published on April 27, 1999 in the 
Federal Register (64 FR 22667) pertaining to a proposed policy for 207-
minute ETOPS operation approval criteria for the Boeing 777 airplane, 
informs the public of the FAA decision to establish the conditions for 
a limited authorization for up to 207-minute ETOPS operation, and 
informs the public of FAA intent to task the Aviation Rulemaking 
Advisory Committee (ARAC) in the near future to recommend safety 
standards and procedures for extended range operation of airplanes, 
regardless of the number of engines.

DATES:  This policy is effective on March 21, 2000. Comments must be 
received on or before March 6, 2000.

ADDRESSES:  Comments on this document should be mailed or delivered, in 
duplicate, to: U.S. Department of Transportation Dockets, Docket No. 
FAA-99-6717, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room Plaza 401, Washington, DC 
20590. Comments may be filed and examined in Room Plaza 401 between 10 
a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays, except Federal holidays. Comments also may be 
sent electronically and examined via the Docket Management System (DMS) 
at the following Internet address: http://dms.dot.gov/ at anytime. 
Commenters who wish to file comments electronically, should follow the 
instructions on the DMS web site.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Eric A. van Opstal, Air 
Transportation Division (AFS-200), Flight Standards Service, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20591, telephone (202) 267-8166.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In a letter dated February 26, 1999, the Air Transport Association 
(ATA) requested the FAA to issue a policy letter establishing 207-
minute ETOPS authority (See the ATA proposal that was published in the 
April 27, 1999 Federal Register). That letter stated that ATA member 
airlines determined that a need exists for expanded ETOPS authority 
beyond 180 minutes. The ETOPS Subcommittee of ATA established a process 
where associated airlines, the Pilots associations, Boeing, and other 
parties worked together to determine the criteria to support the 
establishment of a proposed 15 percent operational extension of 180 
minutes ETOPS. That subcommittee prepared an ETOPS Policy Letter draft 
proposal dated February 4, 1999.
    The FAA responded to the ATA letter by publishing the Federal 
Register a copy of the ATA letter and draft proposal, and requested 
public comment (64 FR 22667). This Notice responds to the comments 
received, provides notice of the FAA decision to allow an extension of 
ETOPS to 207 minutes, describes the criteria for a limited 
authorization for 207-minute ETOPS for the Boeing 777, and provides 
notice of the FAA's intent to task the ARAC to recommend safety 
standards and procedures for extended range operation of airplanes, 
regardless of the number of engines.

Additional Comment Period for Policy Decision

    Very extensive comments were received on all the issues embodied in 
the ATA proposal. After careful review of the ATA proposal and those 
comments, the FAA is adopting, with some modification, the ATA 
proposal. Given the minor differences from the original ATA proposal, 
the FAA believes it is reasonable to proceed forward with a final 
decision.
    However, because two commenters have expressed concerns about the 
FAA making a final decision on the ATA proposal without allowing 
additional public comment on the FAA final action and disposition of 
comments, the FAA is allowing an additional 45 days for interested 
persons to comment further on the 207-minute dispatch authorization 
described in this policy. This authorization is automatically effective 
on March 21, 2000 unless, after review of any new comments received, 
the FAA believes modification or additional action is required. The FAA 
will publish in the Federal Register a full disposition of all new 
comments received and, if required, any additional steps to stay or 
modify the limited 207-minute authorization.
    Interested persons are invited to comment on this policy statement 
by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may 
desire. Comments that provide factual basis supporting the views and 
suggestions presented are particularly helpful. Comments must identify 
the regulatory docket or notice number and be submitted in duplicate to 
the address specified above.
    Any person may obtain a copy of this document by submitting a 
request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 
ARM-1, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling 
(202) 267-9680. Communications must identify the notice number or 
docket number of this notice.

Discussion of Comments From Previous Notice

    The FAA received 44 comments in response to the notice published on 
April 27, 1999 (64 FR 22667), including comments from individual 
members of the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) ETOPS Work Group. All 
commenters but 12 supported the ATA proposal for 207-minute ETOPS. The 
issues and concerns raised by the 12 commenters who opposed the 
proposed extension of ETOPS are discussed below.

1. No Justification for Change

    The Allied Pilots Association (APA) and Airbus Industries (Airbus) 
expressed concern that the proposal is an attempt to generally extend 
ETOPS when no justification for changing the diversion limits has been 
shown. APA stated that only the South America-New Zealand market cannot 
be operated with the current three hour standards. They also pointed 
out that Boeing and operators have stated that there are only a few 
days a year when alternate routings would have to be considered for 
twin engine aircraft operating on the North pacific routes due to 
unsuitable weather at the preferred alternates. Airbus commented that 
there is no precedent for a 15 percent extension. APA suggested that 
the intent of the proposal appears to be to provide support for 
marketing the B-777 as a replacement for older, three and four engine 
aircraft. APA argued that economic desirability does not constitute 
need.
FAA Response
    Most commenters (32 of 44) supported a 15 percent extension of the 
diversion limits for ETOPS. United Airlines stated that 207-minute 
ETOPS is a logical extension from 180-minute ETOPS that will serve the 
interests of the traveling public, the environment and the industry. 
The Air Line Pilots Association, International stated that

[[Page 3521]]

current requirements have an excellent safety record and the approval 
process has lead to safety enhancements for twin engine aircraft. The 
Rolls-Royce Airworthiness Department suggested that the proposed policy 
statement and reissue of Advisory Circular AC120-42A should be 
considered a first step towards a general tidying up to the ETOPS 
regulations. Continental Airlines supports the proposal because it 
would benefit the traveling public by reducing enroute times across the 
North Pacific with no degradation in safety. It would also positively 
impact the economics of the route, which will ultimately benefit the 
traveling public. The equipment and dispatch specifications detailed in 
the proposal are more conservative that those required by 180-minute 
diversion authority. Boeing suggested that the current proposal 
reflects the ``safe, conservative, evolutionary nature of ETOPS, which 
is a fact-based industry program dependent on the gathering and 
analysis of operational data.''
    ETOPS conducted in the North Pacific (NOPAC) meets all of the 
conditions in AC 120-42A that define a ``demanding area of operation''. 
Today, 180-minute ETOPS in NOPAC is routinely conducted by several 
North American and Asian air carriers on a daily basis. There are 
sufficient adequate alternate airports available in the area of 
operation that allow for year round operations. The introduction of a 
207-minute authorization would provide an air carrier with additional 
flexibility with the dispatch of an ETOPS flight, which may in fact 
position the flight closer to more enroute alternate airports. This 
would be both an operational and safety benefit.
    ETOPS operations in a `demanding area of operation' began with a 
limited 75-minute authority for North Atlantic crossings. As service 
experience was gained and the safety of the operations validated, the 
FAA granted an increase to 120-minute diversion limit. This allowed 
ETOPS flights access to some of the established North Atlantic 
navigational tracks. The original ETOPS Advisory Circular, AC 120-42 
dated 1985, included a provision that the FAA would allow an operator 
on a `case-by-case' basis up to a 15 percent increase to the 120-minute 
maximum diversion time. The extension granted a 138-minute diversion 
limit which ideally suited North Atlantic ETOPS, as it now allows use 
of all available NAT navigational tracks. The extension provision was 
removed when the Advisory Circular was revised as AC 120-42A in 1988. 
AC 120-42A introduced the means by which the FAA would approve 180-
minute ETOPS, and the conventional wisdom at that time considered the 
allowable extension to 138-minutes as no longer necessary. However as 
Airbus and other commenters have noted, the FAA reinstated the 138-
minute diversion limit by policy letter EPL 95-1 in 1994, designating 
its use only for North Atlantic ETOPS operations.
    In response to the comment by APA that ETOPS requirements would be 
eased so that Boeing could more effectively market the B-777 in place 
of older 3- and 4-engine airplanes, the FAA rejects the notion that the 
safety decisions to be made for 207-minute ETOPS operations are related 
to the marketing of airplanes. The FAA considers operations meeting the 
ETOPS standards of reliability and the operational requirements to have 
proven themselves well over the years. The increased safety standards 
for ETOPS airplanes and associated maintenance practices have found 
their way into other airplanes routinely used in non-ETOPS commercial 
air transport. Thus, ETOPS principles have ``raised the safety bar'' 
for all types of operations.
    The ATA 207-minute proposal specifies particular airplane systems 
design as well as additional equipment requirements. The ATA ad-hoc 
work group that drafted the 207-minute proposal considered the proposed 
area of operation and operating environment with the additional 
diversion time, and considered the additional requirements to be 
necessary to maintain existing safety standards, which is based on a 
conservative approach. It was a collective recommendation that was made 
with a diverse group comprised of representatives from operators, 
manufacturers, and pilot associations. This was agreed upon with full 
knowledge that the added requirements would not be met by some other 
airplanes that already hold ETOPS type design approval, and have 
provided the remarkable safe ETOPS operating experience to date.
    The FAA agrees with APA that a review should be conducted on the 
requirements for all long range operations, including 3- and 4-engine 
airplanes, and that there should be a more uniform application of those 
requirements. The FAA therefore proposes the formation of an ARAC group 
appropriately tasked to provide the FAA with recommendations concerning 
all long range operations. See the statement of intent at the end of 
this notice.

2. Some Diversion Airports May Become Redundant and Risk Closure

    APA and Airbus expressed concern that the proposed extension of 
ETOPS authority may cause some diversion airports that are currently 
relied on to become redundant. They may then risk closure.
FAA Response
    The FAA agrees that North Pacific alternate airports play an 
important role in the safety of all commercial aviation in the region. 
Any airplane may have to divert due to reasons such as passenger 
illness, system failures, decompression, or fuel leaks. In fact, 3- and 
4-engine airplanes have a higher rate of diversion, for all causes, 
than ETOPS airplanes. Boeing has provided data that shows that less 
than 10 percent of diversions with their two-engine ETOPS airplanes 
were due to an inflight engine shutdown (IFSD). The remaining diversion 
of twin engine ETOPS airplanes were due to other causes that may affect 
any airplane. The issue of sufficient alternate airports is much 
broader than just related to the conduct of ETOPS.
    The FAA does not believe that a 207-minute diversion authority in 
the North Pacific would result in the closure of airports designated as 
enroute alternates for 180-minutes ETOPS operations. Some of the same 
airports that are available for 207-minute ETOPS are also used with 
180-minute ETOPS. The ATA proposal also limited the use of the 207-
minute ETOPS extension so much of the time the airlines would be using 
the normal diversion airports for 180-minute ETOPS operations. A United 
Airlines Dispatch Office study showed that 10 percent of the flights 
would benefit from a 207-minute dispatch, while the remaining 90 
percent would still be dispatched at 180-minutes.
    The FAA also agrees with APA that solutions are needed to ensure 
the continued availability of airports for use as enroute alternates 
for the benefit of the entire industry. It is an international problem 
that needs attention and long term solutions. The issue is related to 
far more issues that just the ETOPS diversion time and requires broader 
solutions involving other countries.

3. The Proposal Is Too Broad

    APA and Airbus pointed out that the proposal is too broad in that 
it does not establish requirements such as limited routes and specific 
conditions that would justify 207-minutes ETOPS as the safest available 
alternative.

[[Page 3522]]

FAA Response
    The FAA agrees that the ATA proposal might be too broad in that it 
could be viewed as having a wider application than intended. For the 
proposal at hand, the 207-minute ETOPS operations are intended to apply 
only to the North Pacific area of operation, and then, only when 
conditions prevent a 180-minute dispatch. A general 207-minute policy 
would give the illusion that a higher ETOPS threshold has been accepted 
that could be applied to all geographical areas of operation and all 
airplanes that have ETOPS type design approval. The FAA believes that 
much further discussion would be needed to develop general standards 
for ETOPS beyond 180-minutes, and that it is important to have 
international participation so that global standards are achieved. To 
this end, the FAA intends to solicit recommendations through the ARAC 
for the development of general ETOPS standards for operations beyond 
the 180-minute limit. This is discussed in more detail at the last 
section of this notice.
    The FAA recognizes the benefit of a route of flight that positions 
an airplane closer to airports that meet the criteria of ``adequate'' 
for the purpose of ETOPS enroute alternates. This is understood to be 
the basis for the ATA proposal. The FAA recognizes that an ARAC 
approach that deals with all airplanes and all routes will be years 
away from regulatory adoption, and thus should be viewed as a long-term 
solution. In the interim, the FAA believes that with the conditions and 
limitations specified in this document, 207-minute ETOPS authorizations 
can be issued for use in the North Pacific area of operation for 
airlines that have previous 180-minute ETOPS experience, and be limited 
to airplanes like the B-777. Such authorizations can be issued without 
any decrease in safety. In addition, other limitations will specify the 
conditions and frequency that will apply to the use of the 207-minute 
dispatch. The reason for limiting the approval to airplanes like the B-
777 will be discussed further.

4. The Proposal Reduces Weather Standards for Diversion Airports

    APA stated that the real, though indirect, result of the proposed 
207-minute ETOPS is to reduce weather standards for diversion airports. 
Airbus comments that the longer the flight the more unlikely the 
weather at a designated alternate corresponds to that forecast at the 
beginning of the flight. Airbus also suggests that climatological data 
for the area should be analyzed to determine the frequency with which 
flexibility will be increased.
FAA Response
    There is not relaxation of weather criteria of any difference in 
required weather standards to determine the ``suitability'' of a 
adequate enroute alternates for a 207-minute dispatch compared to any 
other ETOPS diversion limit. Airlines are required to apply the 
standard or otherwise approved alternate airport weather minima 
criteria that are contained in their operations specifications.
    The FAA has reviewed a study prepared by United Airlines Dispatch 
Center that collected and analyzed meteorological forecast and actual 
weather data at airports that meet ``adequate'' criteria as enroute 
alternates in the North Pacific. The purpose of the study was to 
determine if and when a 207-minute dispatch would be beneficial when 
the forecast at ``adequate'' alternate airports within 180-minutes 
distance were below the dispatch alternate minima requirements. The 
study looked at more than a years worth of data and shows that a 207-
minute ETOPS dispatch would mostly benefit Eastbound operations from 
Japan to the United States because those departures generally occur at 
night. The weather forecasts during night hours tend to be worse than 
during daylight. The study also showed that those ``adequate'' 
alternate airports within the 180-minute distance that did not meet the 
pre-departure alternate weather criteria, did in fact stay at or above 
the operational approach minima for the expected times of arrival of 
the flight (if the flight had to divert to the alternate airport). 
Operational approach minima is the weather minima needed to execute an 
approach and landing. After flight departure and while enroute, those 
``adequate'' airports that meet operational approach minima are re-
classified as ``suitable'' enroute alternates. The study also showed 
that the frequency of a 207-minute dispatch in lieu of a 180-minute 
dispatch would be in the area of 10 percent to 15 percent of the total 
departures. Finally, the 207-minute dispatch allowed a routing 
consistent with ATC preferred routes. The conclusions drawn from the 
study are: The use of a 207-minute dispatch would be infrequent; the 
flight could be dispatched on preferred ATC routes; and, the resulting 
route would place the airplane closer to more enroute alternates that 
after flight departure would meet ``suitable'' criteria. This offers 
the possibility that the flight crew, when faced with the need to 
initiate an in-flight diversion, could be closer to a suitable 
alternate airport than compared on an off-track route that was based on 
a 180-minute dispatch. This would clearly provide for enhanced safety.
    The FAA acknowledges the difficulty in establishing accurate 
forecasts for alternate airports that may be 12 or more hours away. 
This difficulty is faced by all crews regardless of the airplanes they 
are flying on extended range flights. It is also obvious that the 
further out the forecast period is, the more likely that lower TEMPO 
(temporary) and PROB (probability) conditions will be included in the 
forecast that the dispatcher and flight crew must take into account. 
This is where the ATA's proposed requirement for SATCOM and SATCOM 
datalink capability gives greater assurance that once airborne and 
enroute, the flight crew will receive continuing updates on the 
forecast weather for all of the available enroute alternates, and will 
allow closer monitoring of weather trends. The enhanced communication 
capability that SATCOM provides aids in the transmission of relevant 
data to the flight crew.

5. ETOPS Should Be Formalized in Regulations Rather Than Administered 
Through Advisory Circulars and Policy Letters

    Airbus and APA said that ETOPS should be formalized through the 
rulemaking process rather than by policy and Advisory Circulars. 
Additional comments suggested that it was time for the FAA to bring the 
FARs up to date. These commenters are well as AECMA, ALPA, Federal 
Express Pilots, and DGAC France all stated that major policies such as 
those that govern ETOPS should be in regulatory form. ALPA commented 
that ``there is a need to develop a new set of regulations which would 
apply to all long-range operations regardless of the number of 
engines''.
FAA Response
    Extended range, twin-engine operations are authorized by the FAA 
under 14 CFR Sec. 121.161(a), ``based on the character of the terrain, 
the kind of operation, or the performance of the airplane to be used * 
* *.'' The FAA issued Advisory Circular 120-42, and has revised it 
several times, to incorporate the standards for ETOPS up to and 
including 180-minute dispatch authorizations. The FAA publishes in the 
Federal Register a notice of availability of each proposed revision, 
solicits comments, and then issues a revision to AC 120-42 only after

[[Page 3523]]

consideration of all the public comments. Thus, the public has always 
participated fully in the development of ETOPS standards. Furthermore, 
the FAA has ensured that ETOPS operators comply with those standards by 
applying them through operations specifications. The result has been 
that ETOPS authorizations have been established as they would have been 
established through a more structured codification.
    Because of the limited scope of the 207-minute dispatch described 
in this document, the FAA is not proposing a corresponding revision to 
AC 120-42.
    The FAA agrees that ultimately more defined criteria for ETOPS 
should be placed in Part 121 through the rulemkaing process. ETOPS over 
the years has been well served with the standards and requirements of 
AC 120-42A, but formal regulatory objectives should be developed for 
the extended range operation of any airplane. As more fully outlined 
later, the FAA will initiate tasking of an ARAC Working Group to start 
with the codification of the existing ETOPS requirements, and to make 
recommendations for standards for ETOPS beyond 180-minutes. The ARAC 
Working Group will also be tasked to look at the requirements for all 
long-range operations in order to recommend airplane safety 
requirements for all airplanes.

6. ETOPS Regulations Should Be Driven by Safety

    For the type design approval criteria, the UK CAA suggests that 
``The ETOPS significant systems should be re-assessed to ensure their 
suitability for the extended diversion time (207 minutes). Systems 
Safety Analyses (SSA) should be carried out based on the extended 
diversion time and longest flight time. The re-analysis required (SSA) 
is to ensure that overall safety objectives are still achieved with the 
extended diversion time and flight times.'' They also suggest 
alternative wording for the type design approval criteria to state that 
``any one of the engine or APU driven generator sources shall be 
capable of powering all main essential and standby (emergency) AC and 
DC buses.'' This, in effect, would require a ``non-time limited 
emergency power source capable of continuously supplying essential 
functions''. They suggested that the list of services that need to be 
supplied should be re-assessed for 207 minute diversion times, and 
listed fifteen services that should be re-assessed as a minimum.
FAA Response
    The FAA agrees that all ETOPS approvals should be granted only on 
the basis of safety. Industry need and operational desirability are 
important issues to those wanting to make a business case for certain 
operations, but they are not the key drivers for the FAA. The FAA must 
make its decisions based upon safety.
    The FAA does not agree that a 15 percent extension for this limited 
special authorization warrants a re-assessment in a Systems Safety 
Assessment of all ETOPS significant systems. The original assessment 
conducted for original compliance with the B-777 ETOPS special 
conditions and for basic type certification is adequate. However, it is 
appropriate to update original numerical probability analyses, as the 
ATA proposed in Item 7-1, to ensure that the safety objectives are 
still met with the longer diversion times. Also, this update will allow 
the FAA to review these numerical probability analyses with actual in-
service component reliabilities considered in the analyses, which were 
not available at the time of the original submittals.
    For the CAA comment on Item 7-9 in the ATA proposal, the FAA agrees 
that the item could be better stated, and will incorporate the 
recommended wording change. The FAA also agrees that this item 
effectively requires a non-time limited emergency power source This is 
the FAA's intent for this requirement. The FAA does not agree that the 
recommended list of services should be included. This list is the same 
list of services that are included in the Joint Aviation Authorities 
(JAA) Information Leaflet IL-20 paragraph 8.b.(7), which is a non-
harmonized equipment with the corresponding paragraph of the FAA ETOPS 
Advisory Circular (AC) 120-42A. This issue can be addressed, as 
appropriate, by the ARAC working group, along with other items that 
will bring harmonization to the FAA and the JAA regulations. The FAA 
does not believe that the lack of harmonization with the JAA 
regulations is a reason to not proceed with this action.
Comment
    Airbus states ``type certificate limits are regulatory'', and 
asserts that the ETOPS maximum diversion time is a limit on the Type 
Certificate Data Sheet for the B-777.
FAA Response
    The ETOPS approval statement in the Type Certificate Data Sheet is 
a finding of suitability based on a review of the type design and 
reliability of the airframe/engine combination. The statement is the 
reflection of what was approved as a part of the type certification 
process and does not prohibit additional FAA approvals. The 
certification of the B-777 for initial ETOPS operation was on the basis 
of special conditions that constitute part of the certification basis 
of the airplane. There was no intention that the special conditions, 
being issued for 180-minute operational considerations, would limit the 
B-777 to that operation for the life of the airplane. It is further 
important to recognize that the type design approval finding does not 
constitute approval to conduct ETOPS operations. Limits on ETOPS 
operational diversion time are contained within an individual 
operator's operations specification. As an example, an operator may be 
limited to 120 minute ETOPS in its operations specification even though 
the airplane it is operating has been approved for 180 minute ETOPS and 
those operations are being successfully conducted by other operators. 
In addition, current ETOPS operating requirements contained in AC 120-
42A already recognize that deviations from the approved diversion time 
may occur based on unforeseen conditions during a given diversion. The 
Configuration, Maintenance, and Procedures (CMP) standard is a FAA 
approved document and is a required type design incorporation that 
establishes the suitability of an airplane for extended range 
operations, and is considered a limitation.
Comment
    Airbus states in its comments titled ``Increased risk of additional 
hardware failure'' that risk assumptions and models used in ETOPS risk 
management need public review.
FAA Response
    Technical matters, like risk assumptions and analyses, considered 
by the FAA during the type certification process are normally not 
public information because they contain information of a proprietary 
nature. The FAA agrees, though, that there is some merit to better 
defining the type of risk analyses that should be conducted for 
extended range operations in order to ensure a uniform application 
world-wide. For that reason it will task the ARAC to evaluate the 
current risk assumptions and models and make recommendations to the 
FAA. In the mean time, the FAA is confident that the risk assumptions 
and analyses conducted in past ETOPS approvals are sufficient to 
proceed with an extension to 207 minutes for the B-777.

[[Page 3524]]

    Another reason the FAA is confident in proceeding with the 207-
minute approval is the basic manner in which the B-777 was type 
certificated. It is the only airplane that was designed from the start 
for ETOPS operation on its first day of service. This required Boeing 
to address all possible failure modes of past airplanes and engines and 
demonstrate that the B-777 was designed to preclude those failures. 
This extensive safety analysis has produced an airplane that exceeds 
the dispatch reliability of any previous airplane, which is as measure 
of the reliability of the airplane design and air carrier maintenance 
programs. The FAA believes the operational history of the airplane has 
proven the validity of this approach and the uniqueness of the B-777 
for consideration of 207-minute ETOPS operations. Should other 
airplanes be presented for approval to operate to 207 minutes, the FAA 
would assess their design and operational experience in the same way as 
it has for the B-777.
Comment
    AECMA states that the proposed IFSD of .019/1000 is not sufficient 
to comply with FAR 25.1309.
FAA Response
    For this special limited authorization to operate at 207 minute 
ETOPS, the FAA does not agree that it is necessary to specify a 
different in-flight shutdown rate requirement than the .02/1000 engine 
hours, defined in AC 120-42A. Since the ATA proposal for .019/1000 is a 
conservative value relative to the .02/1000 requirement, the FAA is 
accepting this coordinated industry position as one of the factors that 
establishes the Agency finding of equivalent safety. This reliability 
evaluation tool in the ETOPS criteria was not intended to compensate 
for ``non-compliance'' with FAR 25.1309. The ETOPS IFSD rate 
requirement is not related to FAR 25.1309 compliance as implied in the 
AECMA comment, but is derived from the baseline engine IFSD rate used 
in the development of the 180-minute ETOPS approval criteria as a 
measure of an acceptable ETOPS engine reliability. However, the FAA 
agrees that the reliability of state of the art engines is much better 
than the current .02/1000 standard, and supports a review of the ETOPS 
inflight shutdown rate requirement as part the overall ARAC rulemaking 
activity. The B-777 has clearly established an in-flight shut down rate 
far better than the .02/1000 standard and is one of the reasons the FAA 
is confident in proceeding with the 207-minute ETOPS approval.
Comment
    Airbus encouraged the FAA to reconsider the ``still air'' 
provisions. Airbus proposes that oil, fire suppression, and other time 
limited systems should be capable for the entire length of maximum 
anticipated diversion time based on actual winds, not ``still air.''
FAA Response
    The FAA does not intend to change basic premises used with ETOPS in 
calculating distances using ``still air''. The operational regulatory 
reference in the FAR addresses the distance in ``still air'' and the 
FAA sees no reason to change this basic assumption merely because of 
the 15 percent extension in allowable diversion time. The global 
application of ETOPS is also based on ``still air'' criteria. The FAA 
will consider any recommendations by the ARAC ETOPS Working Group if 
they determine that time limited components should be based on forecast 
and actual winds as Airbus proposes. What must be applied to every 
EROPS departure, is the fuel load that meets or exceeds the critical 
fuel scenario analysis, which is based on forecast and actual winds.

7. ETOPS Rules Should Be Harmonized With International Rules

    Some commenters suggested that the ETOPS rules should be harmonized 
with international rules and should not discriminate against non-U.S. 
manufacturers and operators.
FAA Response
    The FAA has been and remains committed to harmonization of 
regulatory requirements to the extent possible with international 
rules. That will always be a goal of the FAA but that goal must be 
balanced with other issues the FAA must respond to. In this case, there 
has been a proposal to extend the ETOPS approved operations for the B-
777 up to 207 minutes. It is not appropriate for the FAA to delay 
action on the proposal in order to harmonize its position with other 
regulations, when appropriate regulatory action has been determined. 
Again, the FAA places a high priority on harmonization of standards 
world-wide, but not at the cost of reasonable action in response to any 
request by those it directly regulates.
    A lot of effort has gone into the harmonization of ETOPS 
requirements and standards, and although there are specific areas of 
difference, its general application is uniformly applied worldwide. The 
207-minute ETOPS is being accepted because it adds a safety benefit to 
the ETOPS conducted in the North Pacific, and U.S. airlines presently 
operating ETOPS in that area can benefit from this. The FAA will 
further pursue harmonization through intended tasking of an ARCA ETOPS 
Working Group that will provide recommendations for codifying ETOPS 
standards and requirements. The FAA welcomes participation by foreign 
regulatory authorities, manufacturers, and operators in this 
development to harmonize requirements, and to develop international 
standards. Interested persons should review the intended ARAC tasking 
published elsewhere in this edition of the Federal Register.

8. 207-Minute Proposal Specifies Equipment Requirement

    The ATA 207-minute proposal contained specific system 
configurations. It specifies that at least one fuel crossfeed valve and 
one fuel boost pump in each main tank must be able to be powered by a 
backup electrical power source. It specifies time related cargo fire 
limitations, and all other time limited systems to be not less than 222 
minutes. For the electrical system, any one of the engine of APU driven 
generator sources must be capable of powering the main AC and main DC 
electrical buses. To enhance pilot communications, the airplane must 
have SATCOM voice and/or SATCOM datalink installed, and for pilot work 
load consideration, the airplane must have single-engine autoland 
capability. The ATA proposal also specified MEL restrictions that would 
apply to the 207-minute dispatch. It proposes the operability of 
autoland capability, SATCOM voice and/or SATCOM datalink, autothrottle 
system, the fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS), and the APU (that 
includes the electrical and pneumatic supply to its designed 
capability) at time of dispatch.
    Continental Airlines states that the equipment and dispatch 
specifications detailed in the proposal are more conservative than 
those required by 180-minute diversion authority, and that the 
specifications detailed in the proposal define a level of 
sophistication in the aircraft design that goes far beyond the aircraft 
that were originally approved for 180-minute diversion authority. In 
their opinion extending the diversion authority beyond 180-minutes with 
the added conservatism and narrow scope presents benefits to the 
traveling public with no degradation in safety. Another commentator, 
although in favor of 207-minute ETOPS, argues against the additional 
equipment requirements in the ATA proposal because it would eliminate 
most of the world ETOPS fleet

[[Page 3525]]

from 207-minutes ETOPS consideration. DGAC France and the United 
Kingdom CAA both expressed the view that if SATCOM was a requirement 
for communication capability, then it must be capable of being powered 
through a back-up source.
FAA Response
    The FAA has considered the additional systems capability, 
equipment, and serviceability requirements in the ATA proposal. The FAA 
does not consider these airplane requirements as the final 
determination of generally applicable `standards' for ETOPS beyond 180-
minutes, but does consider the added ATA criteria are in line with the 
basic conservation embodied in present ETOPS operations. The added 
requirements were developed through a coordinated effort between 
airlines, manufacturers and pilot associations and the result 
represents an agreement among those parties. The FAA therefore accepts 
all the proposed added requirements as an integral part of a ``special 
207-minute authorization'' except the monthly reporting requirements. 
As such, the FAA has information that the B-777 would qualify for 207-
minute ETOPS. The FAA wants to make it clear that by its acceptance of 
the ATA proposal that an equivalent level of safety is found. The FAA 
has not made a determination that the proposal by the ATA is the only 
proposal that would allow all 207 minute ETOPS operations, or is the 
minimum level of safety for all operations. The FAA intends to task the 
proposed ARAC ETOPS Working Group to make recommendations on standards 
and requirements for ETOPS beyond 180-minutes. This may lead to 
standards of system configuration and requirements that would enable 
other existing airframe/engine combinations to be used. The FAA will be 
looking for ARAC to set forth recommendations that define minimum 
standards and develop the proper technical justification for those 
being the minimum standards. Once those minimum standards are proposed 
by ARAC, the FAA will review all ETOPS approvals to decide if the ARAC 
proposed standards should be applied to all ETOPS operations. In making 
that decision it will rely to a great extent on the service history of 
the fleet operating under today's standards, which so far has been 
excellent.
    The FAA considers the proposal for SATCOM and/or SATCOM datalink to 
be an additional communication requirement beyond that which is 
presently required. It is therefore not to be considered as a 
replacement communication system. The value of SATCOM is recognized and 
its importance as an aid to rapid and efficient communication for the 
flight crew is supported by the requirement for the SATCOM to be 
operative for a 207-minute dispatch. The development of standards and 
requirements for ETOPS beyond 180-minutes that will be addressed by the 
ARAC Work Group may define other communication requirements and 
standards of operability for future approvals.

9. An Industry/Government ETOPS Working Group Should Be Formed to 
Review 207-Minute Operations

    ALPA suggests that an Industry/Government ETOPS group be formed for 
the purpose of ensuring that airlines comply with the intent of the ATA 
207-minute ETOPS proposal. They suggest that the group should meet on a 
regular basis to review operational information regarding all ETOPS 
operations, particularly those operations where 207-minute authority 
was exercised. Airbus expresses concern with the current state of FAA 
monitoring of ETOPS operations, citing that the FAA relies on the 
industry to be alerted to trends that threaten the safety of ETOPS 
operations. Airbus suggests that the review of 207-minute data 
contained in the ATA 207-minute proposal should be more specific in 
delineating precisely what will be reviewed and the control limits for 
each review item.
FAA Response
    The FAA intends to monitor the frequency of use of a 207-minute 
dispatch and the terms of its application by airlines that have been 
granted the authority to exercise the 15 percent extension. Airlines 
will be required to record and document necessary information that 
substantiates the use of the 207-minute dispatch for each flight that 
it is applied. The airline will retain copies of these records for at 
least three months, and make them available to the FAA upon request 
(OMB control No. 2120-0008). The data will be reviewed and collected by 
the airline's FAA Certificate Holding District Office (CHDO). The CHDO 
will provide usage reports for their assigned airlines on a monthly 
basis to the FAA Flight Standards Air Transportation Division, AFS-200, 
so that a comparative review and analysis can be conducted. Results of 
the review can then be made available to the public, with all 
proprietary data removed or de-identified. Operators should note that 
the regular monthly reports specified in the ATA proposal are not being 
required by the FAA at this time.
    The FAA disagrees with the Airbus comment that there is 
insufficient ongoing surveillance by the Flight Standards organization 
on monitoring compliance with ETOPS operations and maintenance 
requirements. The FAA constantly monitors the application of ETOPS 
requirements, and the airlines performance to maintain acceptable 
standards. Other FAA organizations are tasked specifically to track and 
respond to trends that may indicate areas of concern of a specific 
ETOPS operator, or global trends that may affect the entire industry. 
The FAA does rely on the collation and reporting of ETOPS related data 
by industry sources. The FAA maintains oversight of the data, and 
conducts continuous analysis to detect any adverse trends.

10. Extended Range Operations for ``All Cargo'' Airplanes Are Not Safe 
and Should Not Be Allowed

    The Independent Pilots Association (IPA) opposes the ATA 207-minute 
proposal because cargo aircraft are not equipped with fire suppression 
systems. IPA states that ``extended range operations for all-cargo 
aircraft are not safe and should not be allowed by FAA''.
FAA Response
    Class E cargo compartments apply only to airplanes used solely for 
the carriage of cargo and are not restricted or pertinent to the number 
of engines installed on the airplane. Class E requirements are 
contained in 14 CFR Part 25, and those requirements do not specify a 
fire suppression system. The issue is therefore not related to ETOPS, 
or to an extension to 207-minutes that may apply to the B-777 airplane. 
Three and 4 engine all-cargo airplanes with Class E cargo compartments 
are not limited to routes based on time or distance limits from 
alternate airports. Two-engine airplanes are restricted to a maximum 
diversion time, including all-cargo airplanes that are operating with 
an ETOPS approval. AC 120-42A, paragraph 8(c)(6) requires that the 
design of the cargo compartment fire protection system integrity and 
reliability should be suitable for the intended operation considering 
fire detection sensors, liner material, etc. It also addresses fire 
protection system capability, if necessary by the certification 
standards. As already stated, the Class E requirements do not require a 
fire suppression system. For additional information regarding the 
distinction between cargo compartments in all-cargo airplanes and those 
in passenger-carrying airplanes, see the publication of the FAA's final 
rule on

[[Page 3526]]

Revised Standards for Cargo or Baggage Compartments in Transport 
Category Airplanes (63 FR 8040-41; February 17, 1998).
    An appropriate forum for further discussion of Class E cargo 
compartments would be with the proposed ARAC Working Group that will be 
tasked to review the requirements for all extended range operations, 
regardless of the type of operation.

Announcement of FAA Decision

    The FAA has determined that it would be premature to extend the 
ETOPS threshold to 207 minutes without specifying limits on its 
application and use. The FAA agrees that measurable standards must be 
developed and harmonized, in order to adopt an extended diversion 
threshold across the board. One of the tasks the FAA intends to 
includes in the ARAC ETOPS initiative is for the ARAC to develop the 
standards for airplane ETOPS type design approval as well as 
operational requirements and procedures for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes. 
The FAA also agrees that these standards should be developed jointly 
for global application, and adopted as an ICAO standard and recommended 
practice.
    As mentioned previously, the FAA has reviewed a study prepared by 
United Airlines Dispatch Center that looked at meteorological forecast 
and actual weather data at airports that meet ``adequate'' criteria for 
enroute alternates in the North Pacific. The study shows that a 207-
minute ETOPS dispatch would mostly benefit Eastbound operations from 
Japan to the United States because those departures generally occur at 
night. The conclusions drawn from the study are: The use of a 207-
minute dispatch would be infrequent; the flight could be dispatched on 
preferred ATC routes; and, the resulting route would place the airplane 
closer to more enroute alternates that after flight departure would 
meet ``suitable'' criteria. The FAA recognizes the merits and potential 
safety benefit of such conditions.
    The FAA also recognizes that ETOPS operations in the North Pacific 
(NOPAC) present certain operational difficulties that are minimized 
with airplanes that incorporate the latest technology and systems 
design to specifically meet ETOPS needs. An airplane such as the B-777 
fits this category.
    The B-777 was designed from the beginning as a 180-minute ETOPS 
capable airplane. Instead of meeting the minimum service experience 
requirements defined by FAA Advisory Circular 120-42A, the B-777 ETOPS 
type design suitability was based on Early ETOPS special condition 
requirements for proof of reliability. This was the main reason for 
Boeing to develop an improved design. The B-777 design has systems 
redundancy to meet reliability goals with consideration of Minimum 
Equipment List (MEL) restrictions for 180-minute ETOPS. For example, 
the electrical system has a main and back-up generator on each engine, 
an APU generator, a Ram Air Turbine (RAT) generator, a main battery, 
and an APU battery. The fuel system design provides for a fuel boost 
pump in each main tank to be powered by a back-up electrical source, 
making the need for fuel suction feed an unlikely event. Boeing 
conducted a B-777 systems reliability analysis and Numerical 
Probability Analysis to assess the suitability of the B-777 airplane to 
a higher diversion limit The analysis indicates the B-777 airplane 
design and reliability capability is well in excess of the proposed 
extension to 207-minutes. Today there are over 200 B-777's in service 
around the world. The fleet has accumulated more than two million 
engine hours with a combined rolling average in-flight shutdown rate of 
.007/1000 engine hours. That is almost one third of the maximum allowed 
shutdown rate for 180 minutes ETOPS operation.
    The ATA 207-minute proposal contained nine items to be applied to 
the review of the proposed airframe-engine combination to determine if 
there were any factors that would affect safe conduct of 207-minute 
operations. The B-777 has been proposed as satisfactorily meeting the 
condition of all the listed items in the Approval Basis section. The 
FAA considers these additional type design and systems' operational 
requirements to provide conservatism in reliability performance and 
diversion capability for 207 minute ETOPS operation. In addition to MEL 
restrictions for 180-minute operations, the ATA proposal also included 
four additional system and equipment requirements that must be 
operational prior to dispatch for 207-minute ETOPS. The items are: Fuel 
Quantity Indicating System (FQIS), Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) that 
included the electrical and pneumatic supply to its design capability, 
the Autothrottle system, and SATCOM voice and/or SATCOM datalink.
    The FAA has accepted the ATA proposal as providing an equivalent 
level of safety for ETOPS operations up to 207 minutes in the North 
Pacific. The FAA may approve a special ETOPS operational authorization 
that will allow limited application of a diversion limit of 207-minutes 
flying time at the approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed (under 
standard conditions in still air). This will be a narrow focused 
authorization based on specific eligibility and qualification criteria, 
fixed geographical area of operation, specific equipment, limited 
application, and recording requirements and the additional criteria 
contained in the ATA proposal. Presently, the FAA has enough 
information on the B-777 series with all engine configurations as 
listed on the Type Certification Data Sheet T00001SE, to tentatively 
find that it is the only model that currently meets the additional 
criteria contained in the ATA proposal and that the FAA has adopted. A 
final finding may be issued after the Boeing Company submits 
substantiation data for each of the type design criteria items listed 
in paragraph 7 of the proposal's ``Approval Basis'' section and the 
updated Numerical Probability Analysis (NPA) to the FAA Transport 
Airplane Directorate for evaluation. If the FAA's evaluation is 
favorable the ``finding of suitability'' to the additional criteria for 
207-minute ETOPS can be made. The FAA will task the Flight Operations 
Evaluation Board (FOEB) to begin the process to amend the B-777 MMEL to 
require operational status for dispatch of the airplane for operations 
beyond 180-minutes to the four items mentioned above (FQIS, APU, 
Autothrottle system, and SATCOM). Air carriers approved to use the 
special 207-minute authorization must amend their MEL and receive FAA 
approval of the amendment, prior to exercising the special 
authorization.
    Application for the special authorization will only be considered 
from air carriers that currently hold 180-minute ETOPS operational 
approval. The authorization will only apply and be valid for use in the 
North Pacific area of operation. The special authorization can only be 
applied to a route where adequate enroute alternate airports exist and 
are available that, if defined as `suitable' for dispatch as per 
paragraph 10(d)(5) of AC 120-42A, the route would be flown at 180-
minute ETOPS authority. When applying the 207-minute dispatch, 
consideration must also be given to those ``adequate'' airports within 
180-minutes of the proposed airplane routing to have a weather forecast 
that gives probability of having operational approach minima (minima 
necessary to execute an instrument approach) during the expected times 
of arrival. The window of arrival to be considered for these 
``adequate'' airports is that period from

[[Page 3527]]

the earliest planned arrival time to the latest planned arrival time, 
for the anticipated airplane routing. This increases the possibility on 
a 207-minute ETOPS dispatch that the flight crew when faced with the 
need to initiate an in-flight diversion, could be closer to a suitable 
alternate airport in Russia, the Aleutians, or elsewhere in Alaska than 
compared to an off-track route (more Southerly route) that was based on 
a 180-minute ETOPS dispatch. All other ETOPS planning requirements 
specified in AC 120-42A continue to apply to the 207-minute ETOPS 
dispatch.
    The air carrier will record the dispatch considerations when 
applying this special authorization for each use, and retain such 
records for review by the FAA for at least three months.
    In the April 27, 1999 Federal Register notice, the FAA stated that 
it did not endorse the ATA proposal, per se. The April 27 notice 
outlined, in great detail, the issues involved in determining whether 
an appropriate level of safety could be established for 207-minute 
dispatch ETOPS. Public comments were also in great detail, and 
reflected that the commenters appreciated all of the issues. After 
careful review of the proposal and comments received, the FAA has 
decided to proceed with a policy to allow the limited 207-minute 
dispatch authorization described in this notice.

Summary

    The FAA supports a collaborative effort to produce policy and rules 
that incorporate the best information available from operators, 
manufacturers, and others who may be affected. The FAA also supports 
the rulemaking process that assures that the issues are thoroughly 
examined in a public forum. The FAA does not believe, though, that 
approval of a limited 207-minute North Pacific ETOPS operation must 
await further ETOPS rulemaking.
    The FAA recognizes the potential safety benefit that is provided 
with an extension to 180-minute ETOPS as it applies to operations in 
the North Pacific. The equipment and dispatch requirements that are 
specified in this limited 207-minute diversion authority are more 
conservative than those required for 180-minutes. The B-777 systems 
design and demonstrated service reliability indicate that the airplane 
can meet these requirements, and the FAA will evaluate Boeing's data 
and the updated Numerical Probability Analysis to make its finding of 
suitability for 207-minute ETOPS. In order for airlines to exercise the 
207-minute ETOPS authority, additional Minimum Equipment List (MEL) 
requirements will apply, as well as dispatch planning to consider the 
availability of other enroute airports along the proposed route that do 
not meet alternate weather criteria at time of dispatch. This is 
intended to limit the frequency of a 207-minute use, and to provide an 
equivalent level of safety for those flights that are dispatched with a 
207-minute diversion limit. The FAA will closely monitor the 
application of these requirements by airlines that have received 
approval to use the limited 207-minute ETOPS.

Intent To Task ARAC

    The FAA intends to initiate ETOPS rulemaking through the ARAC 
process by separate notice in the near future. The ARAC ETOPS Working 
Group would be tasked to provide their recommendation to the FAA for:
     Codification of existing ETOPS standards and requirements 
in the appropriate certification and operational regulations
     Development of objective standards and requirements for 
ETOPS beyond 180-minutes, for codification in appropriate certification 
and operational regulations, and
     Review the requirements for ETOPS and all other extended 
range operations for all airplanes regardless of the number of engines, 
and provide recommendations to standardize the requirements for such 
operations.
    The FAA will draw from the working group recommendations to 
subsequently issue ETOPS and for long range operations regulations 
through the rulemaking process. It is desirable to have international 
regulatory, manufacturer, and operator participation in the ARAC ETOPS 
Working Group to provide harmonized positions that may be a basis for 
international ETOPS standards.

    Issued in Washington, DC on January 18, 2000.
Thomas E. McSweeny,
Associate Administrator for Regulations and Certification.
[FR Doc. 00-1505 Filed 1-18-00 3:17 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M