[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 179 (Monday, September 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53044-53077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4473]
[[Page 53043]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part V
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Aviation Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Advisory Circular No. 120-42B, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and
Polar Operations; Notice Proposed Advisory Circular No. 135-42,
Extended Operations (ETOPS) and Operations in the North Polar Area;
Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 /
Notices
[[Page 53044]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket Number FAA-2002-6717]
Proposed Advisory Circular No. 120-42B, Extended Operations
(ETOPS) and Polar Operations
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of availability of a proposed advisory circular and
request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of and requests
comments on a proposed Advisory Circular (AC): AC No. 120-42B, Extended
Operations (ETOPS) and Polar Operations. Also in this Federal Register,
the FAA publishes draft AC No. 135-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and
Operations in the North Polar Area, for public comment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the proposed AC to Docket Number FAA-
2002-6717, using any of the following methods:
DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Ryan, Air Transportation Division
(AFS-220), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-7493, e-mail
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44703.
Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to submit comments on the proposed
AC. Commenters must identify AC No. 120-42B and submit comments to the
address specified under ADDRESSES. All communications received on or
before the closing date for comments will be considered by the FAA
before issuing the final AC.
An electronic copy of the proposed AC, which are published in full
here, may be obtained by accessing the FAA's web page at--http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/.
The Extended Operations (ETOPS) final rule was published in the
Federal Register on January 16, 2007. This final rule applies to air
carrier (part 121), commuter, and on-demand (part 135) turbine powered
multi-engine airplanes used in extended-range operations. All-cargo
operations in airplanes with more than two engines were exempted from
most of the rule. It established regulations governing the design,
operation and maintenance of certain airplanes operated on flights that
fly long distances from an adequate airport. This advisory circular
provides further guidance for these extended operations to those
conducting operations under 14 CFR part 121. It also further clarifies
the rule's requirements for Polar operations.
Issued in Washington, DC on August 27, 2007.
James J. Ballough,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
Draft Advisory Circular 120-42B, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and Polar
Operations
Contents
Paragraph
Chapter 1. General
100. Applicability
101. Cancellations
102. Related Regulations
Chapter 2. Background on ETOPS
200. ETOPS Regulatory Requirements
201. Evolution of ETOPS
202. ETOPS Applicability to All Passenger-Carrying Airplanes
Flown in Long-Range Operations
203. ``Extended Operations''
204. Preclude and Protect
205. ETOPS Areas of Operation
206. ETOPS Alternate Requirements
207. ETOPS In-Service Experience Requirements
208. Operational Reliability and Systems Suitability
Requirements
Chapter 3. Requirements for ETOPS Authorization
300. ETOPS Requirements
301. Maintenance Requirements for Two-Engine ETOPS Authorization
302. ETOPS Maintenance Training Requirements
303. ETOPS Flight Operations Requirements
304. Flight Operations Training Requirements
Chapter 4. Applications To Conduct ETOPS
400. ETOPS Qualifications
401. Application for ETOPS Authorization
402. ETOPS Authorities
403. ETOPS Authorization Requirements
404. Validation Flight(s)
405. Required Demonstration on a Validation Flight
Chapter 5. FAA ETOPS Approval
500. Final ETOPS Operating Authority
501. ETOPS OpSpecs
502. Changes to Approved ETOPS Operations, Maintenance and
Training Procedures
503. Processes after Receiving ETOPS Authority
Chapter 6. Polar Operations
600. Background
601. Definition
602. Applicability
603. Polar Requirements
604. Validation before Approval
605. FAA Polar Area Approval
Appendix 1. Definitions
Appendix 2. ETOPS Approvals
Appendix 3. ETOPS Approval Methods
Chapter 1. General
100. Applicability. This AC concerns those certificate holders
applying for approval to conduct ETOPS under Sec. 121.161, as well as
those certificate holders applying for approval to conduct flights
where a portion of which traverse either the North or South Polar
Areas, as defined in part 121, Sec. 121.7. This AC also provides
guidance in resolving operational issues to certificate holders
currently conducting such operations.
101. Cancellations. The following AC's and policy letters are
cancelled:
AC 120-42A, Extended Range Operation with Two-Engine
Airplanes, dated December 30, 1988;
ETOPS Policy Letter (EPL) 95-1, 138-Minute ETOPS
Operational Approval Criteria, dated December 19, 1994;
EPL 20-1, 207-Minute ETOPS Operational Approval Criteria,
dated March 21, 2000; and
FAA Policy Letter, Guidance for Polar Operations, dated
March 5, 2001.
102. Related Regulations. 14 CFR part 21, Sec. 21.4; part 25,
Sec. 25.1535; part 121, Sec. Sec. 121.7, 121.97, 121.99, 121.106,
121.135, 121.161, 121.162, 121.191, 121.197, 121.374, 121.410, 121.415,
121.565, 121.624, 121.625, 121.631, 121.633, 121.646, 121.687, 121.689,
121.703, 121.704, and 121.705; and part 121, appendix P (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr).
Chapter 2. Background on ETOPS
200. ETOPS Regulatory Requirements.
a. All two-engine airplanes and three- and four-engine passenger-
carrying airplanes operated under part 121 are required to comply with
Sec. 121.161. This regulation imposes special requirements
[[Page 53045]]
for extended operations (ETOPS) for these airplanes. These operations
are defined as:
(1) Two-Engine Airplanes. These are flights whose planned routing
contains a point farther than 60 minutes flying time from an adequate
airport at an approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed in still
air.
(2) Passenger-Carrying Airplanes with More Than Two Engines. These
are flights whose planned routing contains a point farther than 180
minutes flying time from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed in still air.
b. To conduct ETOPS, the specified airplane-engine combination must
be certificated to the airworthiness standards of transport-category
airplanes and be approved for ETOPS. (Airplane certification guidance
for ETOPS can be found in Sec. 121.162 and Sec. 25.1535, as well as
AC 25.1535-1. As with all other operations, a certificate holder
requesting any route approval must first show that it is able to
satisfactorily conduct operations between each required airport as
defined for that route or route segment, and any required en route
alternate airport. Certificate holders must show that the facilities
and services specified in Sec. Sec. 121.97 through 121.107 (domestic
and flag operations) and Sec. Sec. 121.113 through 121.127
(supplemental and commercial operations) are available and adequate for
the proposed operation. In addition, the certificate holder must be
approved for ETOPS under part 121. This AC provides the additional
guidance for certificate holder approval for ETOPS.
201. Evolution of ETOPS.
a. Section 121.161 has an extensive historical basis, which began
as early as 1936. Before obtaining approval for operation in 1936, an
applicant operating an airplane with two piston engines was required to
show that intermediate fields available for safe takeoffs and landings
were located at least at 100-mile intervals along the proposed route.
Previously, the rule imposed restrictions only on two-engine airplanes
based on the lack of satisfactory engine reliability in the operation.
In response to improvements in engine design and reliability, and
responding to the needs of industry, the FAA has provided guidance for
deviations from the rule that have allowed two-engine operations to
expand incrementally beyond the initial 60-minute restriction.
Currently, engine reliability has improved to a level where the safety
of the operations is not impacted so much by the number of engines, but
by other factors that affect operations of all airplanes whose routings
take them great distances from adequate airports. Throughout the
evolution of the current Sec. 121.161, the following factors have
remained constant:
(1) The rule has always applied to all areas of operation, and has
not been limited to overwater operations.
(2) Any additional restrictions imposed or, alternatively, any
deviations granted to operate in excess of the basic requirements, were
based on a finding by the Administrator that adequate safety would be
provided in the proposed operation and current levels of safety would
be maintained when all factors were considered. This finding was never
limited to engine reliability alone.
(3) The airports used in meeting the provisions of the rule must be
adequate for the airplane used (that is, available for safe landings
and takeoff with the weights authorized).
(4) Adequate levels of safety within the operation are to be
maintained. Operations over increasingly remote areas and the
possibility of increased diversion lengths have a potentially negative
impact on the safety of the diversion, and thus the operation as a
whole. Additional regulatory requirements are intended to ensure that
this potential increase in risk is mitigated and that adequate levels
of safety within operations are retained.
(5) When considering the impact of operating at greater distances
from airports, the certificate holder must show that the operation can
be conducted at a level of reliability that maintains an acceptable
level of risk.
b. In June of 1985, responding to the industry's desire to take
advantage of the increased reliability and capabilities of two-engine
airplanes, the FAA issued AC 120-42. This AC provided guidance on one
means of obtaining deviation authority from Sec. 121.161 to allow two
engine airplanes to operate on routes up to 120 minutes from an
adequate airport after demonstration of specific levels of in-service
experience and systems reliability. The FAA amended this AC in 1988 (AC
120-42A) to permit two-engine airplanes to operate up to 180 minutes
from an adequate airport. These ACs introduced the term ``ETOPS'' for
those specific extended operations and addressed airplane and engine
design aspects, maintenance programs, and operations. Both of these ACs
encompassed the following precepts:
(1) Reliance on a two-step approval that included type design of
the airplane-engine combination and approval of the certificate
holder's operation.
(2) Risk, as measured by diversion length, is mitigated by
application of regulations and guidance reflecting current best
practices that address the type certification of the ETOPS airplane and
its systems as well as the operational environment of such operations.
(3) ETOPS can be managed successfully, and the level of safety can
be maintained, by up-to-date regulations and guidance that articulate
quantifiable standards of reliability and experience.
c. The original guidance for extended-range operations with two-
engine airplanes in AC 120-42 allowed an increase of up to 15 percent
to the maximum diversion time of 120 minutes. This provision was
eliminated with the release of the guidance in AC 120-42A, providing
for operations up to 180 minutes. Recognizing a need for ETOPS
diversion authority between 120 and 180 minutes, the FAA reinstated the
138-minute provision by issuing EPL 95 1 in 1994. In March of 2000, at
the request of the industry, the FAA issued ETOPS Policy Letter (EPL)
20-1, 207 Minute ETOPS Operation Approval Criteria. This document
provided a similar 15 percent increase in the 180-minute maximum
diversion time and gave limited relief to ETOPS certificate holders in
the specific case of North Pacific Operations.
d. Since the advent of the original Sec. 121.161, extended two-
engine airplane operations have been governed by this rule, and the
process of evolving and progressive guidance has reflected the
successful and ever-increasing experience of the industry. As capable
as this body of guidance has been in the past, it became increasingly
clear that a need existed to codify all the disparate documents into a
single body of rules, and to update the existing rules to reflect all
the industry improvements such progress has used as its basis.
Consequently Sec. 121.161 was revised to expand two-engine operational
authority under successful ETOPS processes and require certain
operations of all passenger-carrying part 121 airplanes to adopt ETOPS
requirements. This AC reflects current Sec. 121.161 regulatory
requirements.
202. ETOPS Applicability to All Passenger-Carrying Airplanes Flown
in Long-Range Operations.
a. AC 120-42 in 1985, and AC 120-42A in 1988, recognized the
increasing reliability of turbojet engines and helped to establish type
design and operational practices for safe and reliable long-range
operations with two-engine airplanes. As the technology and reliability
of two-engine airplanes continued to improve, due in large
[[Page 53046]]
measure to the requirements of these documents, such operations became
compatible with those long-range operations typically associated with
three- and four-engine airplanes. At the same time this technology
brought two-engine airplanes to the arena of long-range operations, the
infrastructure to support such operations was changing. Political and
funding priorities forced the closure or reduction in basic services of
a number of airports, military and civilian, in remote areas that
historically had been used as diversion airports for routes over
oceanic and/or desolate land areas. The increasing use of polar
flights, while creating economic benefits, has also brought new
challenges to the operation. The risks associated with these areas'
remoteness, harsh climate and terrain, and their unique operational
issues, needed to be addressed to maintain an equivalent level of
safety in the operation.
b. These issues began to significantly impact the viability of all
long-range two-engine airplane operations under current regulations,
and likewise began to erode the basic safety net that long-range
operations in three- and four-engine airplanes had relied on. Because
of these pressures and the increasing commonality of all long-range
operations, the data began to show that ETOPS requirements and
processes are generally applicable to all long-range passenger-carrying
operations, including those by three- and four-engine airplanes, and
would improve the safety and viability of such operations. All long-
range passenger-carrying airplanes, regardless of the number of
engines, needed a viable diversion airport in the case of onboard fire,
medical emergency, or catastrophic decompression. Ensuring availability
of en route alternate airports, adequate fire fighting coverage at
these airports, and fuel planning to account for depressurization are
sound operational practices for all airplanes, including three- and
four-engine airplanes. Likewise, planning for the maximum allowable
diversion and worst-case scenarios should account for all airplane
time-critical systems.
c. Unlike the ETOPS guidance provided for two-engine airplanes,
there has been no regulatory framework governing the long-range
operations of three- and four-engine airplanes.
For example, in emergencies such as loss of cabin pressure, current
regulations require adequate oxygen supplies but do not require the
operator to consider the amount of extra fuel necessary to reach a
diversion airport.
(1) An analysis of operational data shows that between 1980 and
2000, 33 of the 73 cruise depressurization events on one manufacturer's
airplanes occurred on airplanes with more than two engines.
(2) A study conducted by this manufacturer using a modern four-
engine aircraft carrying normal route planning fuel reserves raises
issues about the adequacy of the current fuel planning requirements in
the event of a diversion.
d. Operational data shows that the diversion rate for all airplane-
related and non-airplane-related causes are comparable between two-
engine airplanes and airplanes with more than two engines.
Consequently, the FAA has found that there is a need for all passenger
carrying operations beyond 180 minutes from an adequate airport to
adopt many of the ETOPS requirements that have been based on sound
safety principles and successfully proven over many years of
operations. Accordingly, the FAA revised Sec. 121.161 to include
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines in these long-
range operations.
203. ``Extended Operations.''
a. Since 1985, the acronym, ETOPS, has been defined as ``extended
twin-engine operations'' and has been limited to part 121 airplanes
with only two engines. Current regulations have extended these
applications to all passenger-carrying airplanes operating in both 14
CFR parts 121 and 135, and the acronym has now been redefined to mean
``extended operations.'' This is to acknowledge the similarity of
certain long-range passenger-carrying operations of all airplanes
operating today, and the common issues that impact such operations.
b. Since 1988, the ETOPS limit for two-engine airplanes has been
180 minutes from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air
(excluding the limited authority in the North Pacific given under EPL
20-1, 207-Minute ETOPS Operational Approval Criteria, dated March 21,
2000). Service experience has shown that although limited, this
authority has satisfactorily supported the vast majority of the world's
current aviation routes.
c. Those areas not supported within 180-minute diversion authority
tend to be routes over remote areas of the world that are uniquely
challenging to the operation. These areas include the South Polar
Region, a small section in the South Pacific, the southern South
Atlantic Ocean between South America and Africa, the southern Indian
Ocean and the North Polar area under certain winter weather conditions.
The additional operational challenges of these routes are equally
demanding of all airplanes, regardless of the number of engines, and
include such issues as extremes in terrain and meteorology, as well as
limited navigation and communications infrastructure. Support of a
necessary diversion and subsequent recovery in such areas demands added
training, expertise, and dedication from all certificate holders. The
development of ETOPS requirements is intended to address all these
issues.
d. Even though for continuity with current two-engine ETOPS the
existing acronym ETOPS is retained, the ETOPS acronym has been re-
defined. ETOPS has been expanded to include all passenger-carrying
airplane operations where a proposed flight plan includes any point
that is greater than 180 minutes from an adequate airport (at an
approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions
in still air).
204. Preclude and Protect.
a. The whole premise of ETOPS has been to preclude a diversion and,
if it were to occur, to have programs in place to protect the
diversion. Under this concept, propulsion systems are designed and
tested to ensure an acceptable level of in-flight shutdowns (IFSD), and
other airplane systems are designed and tested to ensure their
reliability. Two-engine airplane maintenance practices are enhanced to
better maintain and monitor the condition of the engines and systems
significant to ETOPS. The design of these enhanced practices has been a
major factor in the joint development of the FAA's and industry's
aggressive steps to develop a foundation to resolve problems with
airplane systems and engines in order to minimize the potential for
procedural and human errors, thereby precluding a diversion.
b. However, despite the best design, testing, and maintenance
practices, situations occur that may require an airplane to divert.
Regardless of whether the diversion is for technical (airplane system-
or engine-related) or non-technical reasons, the certificate holder
must have a flight operations plan to protect that diversion. For
example, such a plan must include ensuring that pilots are
knowledgeable about diversion airport alternates and weather conditions
(Sec. 121.631), have the ability to communicate with the certificate
holder's dispatch office and air traffic control (Sec. Sec. 121.99 and
121.122), and have sufficient fuel to divert to the alternate (Sec.
121.646). Under the ``preclude and protect'' concept, various failure
scenarios need to be considered. For example, during the design of the
[[Page 53047]]
airplane, time-limited systems such as cargo compartment fire
suppression/containment capability are considered. Fuel planning must
account for the possibility of decompression or the failure of an
engine with considerations for in-flight icing conditions. Best options
under these scenarios should be provided to the pilot before and during
the flight.
c. This philosophy has been critical to the success of two-engine
ETOPS in the past and has been applied to these airplanes in operations
beyond 60 minutes from an adequate airport. This application is based
on the requirements of Sec. 121.161 and the engine inoperative
diversion requirements of Sec. 121.565. In-service data shows that all
airplanes, regardless of the number of engines, divert from time to
time for various causes. All passenger-carrying operations conducted
where there are a limited number of en route airports, where the
support infrastructure is marginal, or where there are challenging
weather conditions should adopt many of the same elements of the same
preclude and protect concept. If certificate holders plan to operate
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines in areas where
en route airports are farther away than 180 minutes, these operations
are also required to meet certain the standards defined under ETOPS to
ensure that all efforts are made to preclude a diversion, and if a
diversion does occur, that procedures are in place to protect that
diversion.
205. ETOPS Areas of Operation.
a. ETOPS areas of operation are defined by Sec. 121.7 to be areas
beyond a certain distance from adequate airports measured by an
airplanes one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions
in still air. Because of the impact such distances might have on the
diversion time of an airplane, regulatory guidance has been established
for the planning, operational, and equipage requirements for such
operations. A certificate holder must apply to the FAA for approval to
operate in an ETOPS area using the methodologies in this AC and is
granted ETOPS authority for a specific ETOPS area of operations in
their operations specifications.
b. Most ETOPS authorities for two-engine ETOPS beyond 180 minutes
are limited to a specific geographical region. Historically, ETOPS
authorities for two-engine airplanes up to 180 minutes were developed
based on a specific need in a particular operating area. Limiting
expanded ETOPS authority beyond 180 minutes (for two-engine airplanes)
has been extended and serves several purposes.
(1) The primary importance is the preclusion of an arbitrary use of
diversion authority beyond that necessary to complete the operation
safely and efficiently. Because it is accepted that increased diversion
times potentially increase the risk of the operation a certificate
holder must make every effort to plan ETOPS with a maximum diversion
distance of 180 minutes or less, if possible.
(2) It should be a goal of all two-engine airplane flight planning
to operate to the shortest diversion time that provides the widest
range of options in the event of a diversion while recognizing the
economic benefits of a more direct route and the safety benefits of
diverting to an airport that is well equipped. Tying increased
diversion authority to specific areas of operation accomplishes this
goal while sufficiently addressing the operational needs of the
industry.
(3) Likewise, this focus on specific needs and areas of operation
does not add impetus to any perceived rationale for further degradation
in the availability or capabilities of en route alternates in remote
areas of the world. Although the industry has no direct authority to
affect the actions of sovereign nations, it is reasonable to base
operations on the value of en route alternate availability at
reasonable diversion distances.
(4) In consideration of the successful history of three- and four-
engine airplane operations and the reliability and redundancy of
current engines used in this operation, ETOPS for these airplanes does
not have similar restrictions and ETOPS authorities are not limited to
geographic areas. However, like twin-engine operators, the three- and
four-engine operator is required to designate the nearest available
ETOPS alternate along the planned route of flight and must remain
within a 240 minute diversion time if possible.
c. In its application for ETOPS authority, the certificate holder
will typically request a specific ETOPS area of operation based on an
analysis of proposed routings and the availability of airports
sufficient to support the operational requirements of the ETOPS
regulations. Because the operating rules distinguish between ETOPS up
to 180 minutes, and ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, the requested level of
ETOPS authority in a certificate holder's application will necessarily
have to be assessed differently for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes.
(1) Two-Engine Airplanes Up to 180-Minute ETOPS and 207-Minute
ETOPS Authority in the North Pacific Area of Operations. The ETOPS area
of operation is the area bounded by distance circles representing the
approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions
in still air chosen by the applicant. The actual flight plan must
comply with the fuel supply requirements in Sec. 121.646(b) and must
therefore account for wind. However, the flight planning limitations of
Sec. 121.633(a) for airplane systems do not require the operator to
account for wind in such calculations for flight planning and for
determining the ETOPS area of operations in these cases. This allows
the applicant to choose an operating authority in his or her
application that is based on the ``ETOPS area of operation''
determination. In other words, the distance from alternates in a
certificate holder's route planning exercise will be the same value
used to determine the type design criteria for the airplane-engine
combination used in the operation, and the ETOPS approval necessary to
fly the route under all flight planning conditions.
(2) ETOPS Beyond 180 Minutes (Two-Engine Airplanes and All
Passenger-Carrying Airplanes With More Than 2 Engines). As required by
Sec. 121.633(b), for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes for all airplanes, the
ETOPS operation must account for the effects of wind and temperature on
the calculated distances. Consequently the planning for an ETOPS flight
beyond 180 minutes is more complex.
(a) The certificate holder should first conduct a route planning
exercise for each planned city pairing to determine the diversion
authority needed in still air conditions. If the route or segments of
the route exceed 180 minutes based on one engine inoperative speed and
still air, then a secondary planning exercise (that may be required
seasonally) should be conducted that factors in expected winds and
temperatures on that route. The distance between adequate alternate
airports on the route is converted into time (minutes) computed for all
engine cruise speed, as well as engine inoperative speed. The number of
minutes cannot exceed the time-limited system certified capability
(cargo fire suppression and the other most limiting system) that is
identified in the aircraft flight manual less the 15-minute pad. The
operator needs to determine how much system capability is required for
the planned route and equip its airplane to have sufficient margins.
Finally, for the actual flight, the operator's flight
[[Page 53048]]
planning must be within the airplane systems capability for the
selected ETOPS alternate airports on the planned route based on
diversion times that are calculated using known or forecast winds and
temperature conditions.
(b) As a minimum, the certificate holder must ensure that the time-
limited systems requirements of Sec. 121.633(b) are met at the equal-
time points between ETOPS alternates determined by the most limiting en
route fuel supply requirements of Sec. 121.646(b), commonly referred
to as the ETOPS critical fuel scenario. Certificate holders flying
three- and four-engine airplanes, prior to the established installation
time and certification time requirements of the regulation for these
systems and their airplanes, are exempt from these flight planning
limitations.
(c) Once the required fire suppression systems are installed (no
later than February 15, 2013) the certificate holder must follow the
flight planning limitations of Sec. 121.633(b)(1). As required by
Sec. 121.162(d), for airplanes with more than 2 engines manufactured
on or after February 17, 2015, the Configuration, Maintenance and
Procedures (CMP) document for that model will list the airplane's most
limiting ETOPS Significant System time issued in accordance with Sec.
25.3(c). The Certificate holder operating an airplane-engine
combination with more than two engines is required to comply with Sec.
121.633(b)(2) if the CMP lists the most limiting ETOPS Significant
System time.
d. Credit for the Driftdown. For the purposes of computing
distances for ETOPS Area of Operation, credit for driftdown may be
taken.
e. Actual Diversion Time. Actual diversion time may exceed the
authorized diversion time as long as the flight is conducted within the
authorized ETOPS Area of Operation, and complies with the requirements
of Sec. 121.633.
206. ETOPS Alternate Requirements.
a. One of the distinguishing features of ETOPS operations is the
concept of an en route alternate airport being available where an
airplane can divert following a single failure or a combination of
failures that require a diversion. Most airplanes operate in an
environment where there usually is a choice of diversion airports
available within a close proximity to the route of flight. However, a
certificate holder conducting ETOPS may only have one alternate airport
within a range dictated by the endurance of a particular airframe
system (for example, the cargo fire suppressant system), and that
system or system failure may dictate the approved maximum diversion
time for that route. Therefore, it is important that any airport
designated as an ETOPS alternate have the capabilities, services, and
facilities to safely support the operation. The weather conditions at
the time of arrival should provide assurance that adequate visual
references will be available upon arrival at decision height (DH) or
minimum descent altitude (MDA), and that the surface wind conditions
and corresponding runway surface conditions will be acceptable to
permit the approach and landing to be safely completed with an engine
and/or systems inoperative.
b. At dispatch, an en route alternate must meet ETOPS alternate
weather requirements in Sec. 121.625 and as specified in Chapter 3,
paragraph 303c(5) of this AC and in the certificate holder's operations
specifications (OpSpecs). Because of the natural variability of weather
conditions with time, as well as the need to determine the suitability
of a particular en route alternate before departure, such requirements
are higher than the weather minimums required to initiate an instrument
approach. This is necessary prior to the time that the instrument
approach would be conducted, to provide for some deterioration in
weather conditions after planning. This increases the probability that
the flight will land safely after a diversion to an alternate airport.
The airport of departure (takeoff) and the destination airport (unless
used concurrently as an ETOPS alternate) are not required to meet the
weather minima for ETOPS alternates, as these airports are subject to
other regulations (e.g., Sec. Sec. 121.617, 121.621, and 121.623).
c. While en route, the forecast weather for designated ETOPS
alternates must remain at or above operating minima. This provides
ETOPS flights with the ability to resolve all diversion decisions
successfully throughout the flight. The suitability of an en route
alternate airport for an airplane that encounters an in-flight
situation that necessitates a diversion during ETOPS operations is
based on a determination that the airport still is suitable for the
circumstances, and the weather and field conditions at that airport
permit an instrument approach to be initiated and a landing completed.
207. ETOPS In-Service Experience Requirements.
a. When AC 120-42 was first released in 1985, two-engine ETOPS was
a new concept and ETOPS approvals were sought on airframe-engine
combinations that were already in service. Hence, it was logical to
establish criteria for approvals based on in-service experience. At
that same time, the FAA recognized the possibility that other approval
methods could be developed without in-service experience, and
accordingly, provided statements that recognized those options. The
original two-engine ETOPS requirements for engine reliability were
based on a world fleet in-service experience of 250,000 hours. For 120-
minute ETOPS, the FAA additionally required the certificate holder to
have 12 consecutive months of operational in-service experience with
the airplane-engine combination (AEC). For 180-minute ETOPS, the FAA
required the certificate holder to have previously gained 12
consecutive months of operational in-service experience with the
specified AEC conducting 120-minute ETOPS. These basic, two-engine in-
service requirements have been retained and are discussed in Appendix
3. Achieving these levels of experience, combined with the required
levels of engine reliability, is an acceptable means of attaining ETOPS
approval for operators of two-engine airplanes.
b. At the time AC 120-42A was drafted, the FAA recognized that a
reduction of two-engine in-service experience requirements or
substitution of in-service experience on another airplane would be
possible. Any reduction was to be based on an evaluation of the
certificate holder's ability and competence to achieve the necessary
reliability for the particular AEC in ETOPS. For example, a reduction
in in-service experience would be considered for a certificate holder
who could show extensive in-service experience with a related engine on
another airplane that had achieved acceptable reliability. The FAA also
allowed certificate holders unable to initially fly ETOPS routes at the
lesser thresholds to make use of ETOPS simulation or demonstration
programs in their application for 180-minute ETOPS. Eventually specific
guidance material (AC 120-42A, appendix 7, Accelerated ETOPS
Operational Approval) was developed by the FAA permitting ETOPS without
accumulating in-service experience in the airplane-engine combination.
Most subsequent ETOPS approvals have been granted under these
guidelines and this method is retained in Appendix 3.
208. Operational Reliability and Systems Suitability Requirements.
a. The safety of long-range operations such as ETOPS depends on the
reliability of all airplane systems including the propulsion systems.
Time-limited systems such as cargo compartment fire suppression/
containment capability must be
[[Page 53049]]
considered (Sec. 121.633). The certificate holder must also have an
established program that monitors the reliability of systems
significant to ETOPS (Sec. 121.374).
b. In order to achieve and maintain the required engine reliability
standards, the certificate holder operating a two-engine airplane in
ETOPS should assess the proposed maintenance and reliability program's
ability to maintain a satisfactory level of airplane systems
reliability for the particular airplane-engine combination. All
certificate holders must design the flight operations and, if
applicable, the maintenance programs for ETOPS with an objective to
preclude diversions and, if a diversion does occur, to protect that
diversion. Required ETOPS maintenance practices also must minimize the
potential for procedural and human errors that could be detrimental to
the safety of the operation. Fuel planning must account for the
possibility of a depressurization and/or failure of an engine with
considerations for in-flight icing conditions (Sec. 121.646).
c. The type design requirements for ETOPS certification consider
the probability of occurrence of conditions that would reduce the
capability of the airplane or the ability of the flight crewmember to
cope with an adverse operating condition. System failures or
malfunctions occurring during extended range operations could affect
flight crewmember workload and procedures. Although the demands on the
flight crewmember may increase, a manufacturer applying for ETOPS type
design approval must consider crew workload, operational implications,
and the crew's and passengers' physiological needs during continued
operation with failure effects for the longest diversion time for which
it seeks approval. The manufacturer must also conduct flight tests to
validate the adequacy of the airplane's flying qualities and
performance, and the flightcrew's ability to safely conduct an ETOPS
diversion with expected system failures and malfunctions. An ETOPS
operator should carefully consider the possible adverse effects that
changes in airplane equipment or operating procedures may have on the
original evaluations conducted when the airplane was approved for ETOPS
before implementing such changes.
d. Following a determination that the airframe systems and
propulsion systems are ETOPS type design approved as per part 25, an
in-depth review of the applicant's required ETOPS programs will be
accomplished to show the ability to achieve and maintain an acceptable
level of systems reliability, and to safely conduct these operations.
Chapter 3. Requirements for ETOPS Authorization
300. ETOPS Requirements. The FAA may approve ETOPS for various
areas of operation in accordance with the requirements and limitations
specified in part 121, Appendix P. ETOPS must be authorized in the
certificate holder's operations specifications and conducted in
compliance with those sections of part 121 applicable to ETOPS.
a. As of February 15, 2008, certificate holders operating
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines, having the
authority to operate on specific ETOPS routes should not need to re-
apply for their specific route authority. However, the certificate
holder is required to comply with all the applicable ETOPS flight
operational regulations described in this AC, and must have their ETOPS
programs and processes approved by their CHDO with the concurrence of
the Director, Flight Standards Service.
b. The certificate holder's ETOPS requirements must be specified in
their maintenance and operations programs. Maintenance requirements
necessary to support ETOPS are explained in paragraphs 301 and 302.
Flight operations requirements necessary to support ETOPS are described
in paragraphs 303 and 304.
c. The requirements for the various levels of ETOPS authorities are
listed in tabular form in Appendix 2.
301. Maintenance Requirements for Two-Engine ETOPS Authorization.
The certificate holder conducting ETOPS with two-engine airplanes must
comply with the ETOPS maintenance requirements as specified in Sec.
121.374. These requirements are discussed in paragraphs a through o as
follows:
a. Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP). The basic
maintenance program for the airplane being considered for ETOPS is a
CAMP that may currently be approved for a non-ETOPS certificate holder
for a particular make and model airplane-engine combination. The basic
CAMP must be a maintenance and inspection program that contains the
instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) based on the
manufacturer's maintenance program, or those contained in a certificate
holder's maintenance manual approved in its operations specifications.
The certificate holder and its certificate holding district office
(CHDO) must review the CAMP to ensure it provides an adequate basis for
development of a ETOPS maintenance program. The certificate holder's
ETOPS CAMP must include specific ETOPS requirements, which will be
incorporated as supplemental requirements to the basic CAMP. These
supplemental requirements include the enhanced maintenance and training
processes that will ensure ETOPS airplanes achieve and maintain the
level of performance and reliability necessary for ETOPS operations.
These supplemental requirements, referred to in the industry as ETOPS
processes or ETOPS process elements, currently should be in place for
existing ETOPS operations. Prospective ETOPS certificate holders must
supplement their basic CAMP with those program elements defined in
paragraphs b through o below.
b. ETOPS Maintenance Document. The certificate holder must develop
a document for use by personnel involved in ETOPS. This document need
not be inclusive but should, at least, reference the maintenance
program and other pertinent requirements clearly indicating where all
facets of the ETOPS maintenance program are located in the certificate
holder's document system. All ETOPS requirements, including supportive
programs, procedures, duties, and responsibilities, must be identified.
The ETOPS document(s) must reflect the actual policies and procedures
the certificate holder expects their ETOPS maintenance personnel to
adhere to. The document(s) should be user friendly, and be accessible
to all affected personnel. The initial document must be submitted to
the CHDO and be approved before being adopted.
c. ETOPS Predeparture Service Check (PDSC).
(1) The certificate holder must develop an ETOPS PDSC to verify
that the airplane and certain significant items are airworthy and ETOPS
capable. Each certificate holder's PDSC may vary in form and content.
One certificate holder may have a one page PDSC while other certificate
holders, using the same airplane-engine combination, may have six or
more pages of items in their PDSCs. The prerequisites for an acceptable
PDSC are content and suitability for the specific certificate holder's
needs.
(2) All certificate holders must address ETOPS significant system
airworthiness in their ETOPS maintenance program, including the PDSC.
For example, proper servicing of fluids, such as engine, APU, generator
systems, and hydraulic systems is a vital ingredient to successful
ETOPS operations. Current ETOPS operations have had incidents resulting
from
[[Page 53050]]
improper fluid servicing that have resulted in IFSDs and diversions.
Certificate holders should consider this area very seriously when
developing their maintenance checks, including the PDSC.
(3) Some certificate holders may elect to include tasks in the PDSC
that are driven by their reliability programs and are not related to
ETOPS significant systems. However, the certificate holder clearly must
identify the ETOPS related tasks on their PDSC, because non-ETOPS
qualified maintenance personnel may accomplish the non-ETOPS tasks. An
ETOPS-qualified maintenance individual must complete all ETOPS-related
tasks and an ETOPS-qualified maintenance individual, with an airframe
and powerplant rating, must certify the entire check. When outside the
United States, if an individual with an airframe and powerplant rating
is not available, then a trained individual employed by an FAA
certificated repair station, contracted by the certificate holder must
certify the entire check. This PDSC must be certified complete
immediately before each scheduled ETOPS flight. The term
``immediately'' has historically meant to be no more than 2 to 4 hours
before the flight. However, the FAA may grant some relief from this
time period under certain conditions. The certificate holder should
explain any rational for such deviations in its ETOPS maintenance
document, which is approved by its CHDO.
(4) A PDSC may not be required before all ETOPS flights. The FAA
may grant relief following irregular operations because of non-
mechanical issues, such as weather or medical emergency diversions, or
when operating ETOPS into specific areas of operation. For example, if
an airplane scheduled for an ETOPS flight receives a PDSC before
departure and subsequently must divert or turn back for reasons other
than mechanical, the certificate holder must identify in its ETOPS
maintenance document what procedures its flight operations and
maintenance personnel would follow to preclude performing another PDSC.
If a mechanical discrepancy develops as a result of the diversion or
turn back, the certificate holder may have to perform another PDSC. For
example, when an overweight landing inspection reveals a discrepancy
that requires maintenance intervention, another PDSC is required.
(5) In areas where prevailing weather conditions are stable and
generally do not approach extremes in temperature, wind, ceiling, and
visibility, such as in the Caribbean/Western Atlantic (75-minute ETOPS)
and Micronesia routes (90-minute ETOPS), the service check may not be
required for the return leg of an ETOPS flight. This check is not
precluded by any other maintenance check.
d. Dual Maintenance.
(1) ETOPS dual maintenance, otherwise referred to as identical
maintenance, multiple maintenance, and simultaneous maintenance,
requires special consideration by the certificate holder. This is to
recognize and preclude common cause human failure modes. Proper
verification processes or operational tests, prior to ETOPS, are
required when dual maintenance on significant systems occurs.
(2) Dual maintenance on the ``same'' ETOPS Significant System can
be described as actions performed on the same element of identical, but
separate ETOPS Significant Systems during the same routine or non-
routine visit. Examples of maintenance on the ``same'' ETOPS
Significant System are: maintenance of both Satellite Communication
(SATCOM) systems during a turnaround flight; removal of either both
engine oil filters, or both chip detectors; and replacement of both
chip detectors.
(3) Dual maintenance on ``substantially similar'' ETOPS Significant
Systems specifically addresses maintenance actions on engine-driven
components on both engines. An example of dual maintenance on
``substantially similar'' ETOPS Significant Systems could include:
replacement of the no. 1 Integrated Drive Generator (IDG) and the no. 2
Engine Driven Pump (EDP).
(4) The certificate holder must establish procedures that minimize
identical maintenance actions from being scheduled or applied to
multiple similar elements in any ETOPS Significant System during the
same routine or non-routine maintenance visit. In order to manage this
requirement the certificate holder must develop a list of fleet-
specific ETOPS Significant Systems and include them in their ETOPS
maintenance document(s).
(5) The FAA recognizes that sometimes ETOPS dual maintenance
actions cannot be avoided or precluded because of unforeseen
circumstances that occur during ETOPS operations. In the line
maintenance arena, one example would be when an ETOPS airplane has
inbound discrepancies on both engines' oil systems, or there is a
generator replacement on one engine, and an oil system discrepancy on
the other engine. Another example is if both of the SATCOM systems
require maintenance at the same time during a turnaround flight.
Additionally, staggering maintenance on ETOPS Significant Systems in
the heavy maintenance arena is not always possible or feasible.
However, to minimize human factor common cause risk, the certificate
holder should attempt to minimize dual maintenance on ETOPS Significant
Systems wherever/whenever possible.
(6) In any event, when dual maintenance is performed on a ETOPS
Significant System, the certificate holder must have written procedures
in its ETOPS maintenance document that addresses this situation. At a
minimum, the certificate holder must ensure:
(a) Separate ETOPS-qualified maintenance persons perform the tasks,
or
(b) The maintenance action on each of the elements in the ETOPS
Significant System is performed by the same technician under the direct
supervision of a second ETOPS qualified individual, and
(c) It verifies the effectiveness of the corrective actions to
those ETOPS Significant Systems before the airplane enters the ETOPS
area of operation. This verification action must be performed using
ground verification methods, and in some instances, in-flight
verification methods described in the next section of this AC. On an
exception basis, the same ETOPS-qualified technician, under the
supervision of an ETOPS-qualified Centralized Maintenance Control
person, may perform the dual maintenance and the ground verification
methods only if in-flight verification action is performed.
(7) The FAA acknowledges that the servicing of fluids and gases is
not considered maintenance; however, these tasks, when done improperly
have adversely affected ETOPS operations. The certificate holder should
recognize the hazard associated with improper servicing and do all
possible to mitigate the associated risk. Specifically, servicing tasks
such as engine, APU, and generator system oil servicing are tasks that
require high levels of attention. The FAA encourages the certificate
holder to ensure that its programs have separate individuals perform
such servicing. However, the FAA recognizes that many certificate
holder's route and organizational structures may not lend themselves to
these procedures. The certificate holder's program should include
detailed servicing instructions, or make readily available servicing
instructions, and provide related OJT, regardless of whether one
individual or multiple individuals perform the tasks.
e. Verification Program.
[[Page 53051]]
(1) The certificate holder must develop a verification program for
resolution of airplane discrepancies (corrective actions) on ETOPS
significant systems. This program must include corrective action
confirmation in specific areas such as engine shutdown, significant
system failure, adverse trends, or any prescribed event that could
effect an ETOPS operation. The program must ensure corrective action is
taken and confirmed successful before the airplane enters an ETOPS area
of operation. The certificate holder must verify the effectiveness of
the corrective actions following the maintenance action and prior to an
ETOPS flight or prior to passing the ETOPS entry point. The ground
verification method is accomplished by following the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICA) contained in the airplane maintenance
manuals (AMM) or the certificate holder's maintenance manuals. These
ICAs include built-in test equipment (BITE) and functional/operational
checks that often include leak checks after ground runs.
(2) Normally ground verification is acceptable to ensure corrective
action. Under certain conditions ground verification beyond that
recommended in the ICA or in-flight verification may be required. An
example of a condition that would require an in-flight verification is
the replacement of an APU component that could affect the APU's ability
to start at the ETOPS cruise altitude after cold soak. In-flight
verification may be conducted on revenue flights, provided the action
is completed before the ETOPS entry point. Ground maintenance personnel
must coordinate with flight operations personnel whenever an in-flight
verification is required. Each certificate holder must identify its
ETOPS significant systems, ground verification requirements, and in-
flight verification requirements in its ETOPS maintenance document.
(3) The certificate holder must establish a means to ensure any
required verification action is accomplished. The certificate holder
must include a clear description of who initiates verification actions
and who is responsible for completing the actions in its ETOPS
maintenance document.
f. Task Identification.
(1) The certificate holder must identify all tasks that must be
accomplished or certified as complete by ETOPS qualified personnel. The
intent is to have ETOPS trained maintenance personnel accomplish these
identified tasks because they are related to ETOPS. ETOPS specific
tasks should be:
(a) Identified on the certificate holder's work forms and related
instructions, or
(b) Parceled together and identified as an ETOPS package.
(2) If a certificate holder does not identify ETOPS-related task in
their current maintenance program, then all task must be accomplished
by ETOPS-qualified personnel.
(3) In the event that maintenance is performed on an ETOPS airplane
by personnel who are not ETOPS trained, then the actions must be
verified per the certificate holder's ETOPS verification program.
g. Centralized Maintenance Control Procedures. An ETOPS certificate
holder, regardless of the size of its ETOPS fleet, must have a
centralized entity responsible for oversight of the ETOPS maintenance
operation. The certificate holder must develop and clearly define in
its ETOPS maintenance document specific procedures, duties, and
responsibilities for involvement of their centralized maintenance
control personnel in the ETOPS operation. These established procedures
and centralized control processes would preclude an airplane from being
dispatched for ETOPS flights after an engine IFSD, ETOPS significant
system failure, or discovery of significant adverse trends in system
performance without appropriate corrective action having been taken.
h. ETOPS Parts Control. The certificate holder must develop a parts
control program to ensure the proper parts and configurations are
maintained for ETOPS. The program must include procedures to verify
that the parts installed on ETOPS airplanes during parts borrowing or
pooling arrangements, as well as those parts used after repair or
overhaul, maintain the required ETOPS configuration.
i. Reliability Program.
(1) The certificate holder must develop an ETOPS reliability
program or enhance its existing reliability program to incorporate the
ETOPS supplemental requirements. This program must be designed with
early identification and prevention of ETOPS-related problems as the
primary goal. The program must be event-oriented, and incorporate
reporting procedures for critical events detrimental to ETOPS flights.
For those certificate holders that do not have an FAA-approved
reliability program, their continuing analysis and surveillance system
(CASS) must be enhanced to achieve ETOPS reliability goals. The
certificate holder should submit a monthly ETOPS reliability report to
its CHDO.
(2) In keeping with the reporting requirements in Sec. 121.703,
the certificate holder must report the following items within 96 hours
to its CHDO:
(a) IFSDs, except planned IFSDs performed for flight training.
(b) Diversions and turnbacks for failures, malfunctions, or defects
associated with any airplane or engine system.
(c) Uncommanded power or thrust changes or surges.
(d) Inability to control the engine or obtain desired power or
thrust.
(e) Inadvertent fuel loss or unavailability, or uncorrectable fuel
imbalance in flight.
(f) Failures, malfunctions or defects associated with ETOPS
Significant Systems.
(g) Any event that would jeopardize the safe flight and landing of
the airplane on an ETOPS flight.
(3) The reporting of any of the above items must include the
information specified in Sec. 121.703(e).
(4) The certificate holder must conduct an investigation into the
cause of the occurrence of any event listed in Sec. 121.703 and Sec.
121.374(h)(1) in conjunction with manufacturers and submit its findings
to its CHDO. If the CHDO determines additional corrective action is
necessary, the certificate holder must further investigate and
implement appropriate corrective action acceptable to the CHDO.
j. Propulsion System Monitoring.
(1) The certificate holder must monitor its fleet average IFSD rate
for the specified airplane-engine combination. It should establish firm
criteria regarding the actions it will take when it detects adverse
trends in propulsion system conditions. If the IFSD rate, computed on a
12-month rolling average, exceeds the values in the following table,
the certificate holder, in conjunction with its CHDO, must investigate
common cause effects or systemic errors and submit the findings to its
CHDO within 30 days.
[[Page 53052]]
In Flight Shut Down Rates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of engines Engine hours ETOPS ETOPS authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.................................... .05/1000............... Up to and including 120 minutes.
2.................................... .03/1000............... Beyond 120 minutes up to and including 180
minutes and 207 minutes in North Pacific.
2.................................... .02/1000............... Greater than 180 minutes (Except for 207 minutes
in North Pacific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) With respect to maintenance, the purpose of monitoring IFSD
rates is to provide FAA and operators with a tool for measuring the
health of a fleet of ETOPS-approved airplanes in service. Causes of
IFSDs or other engine and propulsion system problems may be associated
with type design problems and/or maintenance and operational procedures
applied to the airplane. It is very important that the certificate
holder identify the root cause of events so that an indication of
corrective action is available, such as a fundamental design problem
that requires an effective hardware (or software) final fix. Repetitive
inspections may be satisfactory as interim solutions, but longer-term
design solutions, such as terminating actions, may be required if
possible. Design problems can affect the whole fleet. The FAA will not
revoke an existing ETOPS operational approval solely because of a high
IFSD rate. A certificate holder who experiences a type design related
event need not be operationally penalized for a problem that is design-
related and may not be of their own making. However, maintenance or
operational problems may be wholly, or partially, the responsibility of
the certificate holder. If a certificate holder has an unacceptable
IFSD rate risk attributed to common cause or a systemic problem in
operational practices or the maintenance program, then action carefully
tailored to that certificate holder may be required, and may include a
reduction of the certificate holder's diversion limit.
(3) The certificate holder must investigate an IFSD rate higher
than the 12-month rolling average standard that occurs for a mature
fleet after the commencement of ETOPS (Refer to the IFSD Rates table
above.). The certificate holder also must investigate any indication of
a high IFSD rate; however, it must consider that in the case of the
smaller fleet, the high IFSD rate may be because of the limited number
of engine operating hours used as the denominator for the rate
calculation. This can cause an IFSD jump well above the standard rate
because of a single IFSD event. The underlying causes for such a jump
in the rate will have to be considered by the Administrator's
representative. On occasion, a particular event may also warrant
implementation of corrective action even though the overall IFSD rate
is not being exceeded.
(4) The 30-day reporting criteria of paragraph 301j (1) is intended
to ensure that the certificate holder provides the FAA timely
notification of the status of an event investigation. The certificate
holder may or may not have root cause or terminating action at the end
of the 30-day period, and further discussions with the FAA may be
required after this period.
(5) The certificate holder may designate a sub-fleet engine/
airframe combination for the purposes of the IFSD monitoring/rate
program. The operator may include the IFSD statistics of all engines
that are ETOPS configured and are maintained in accordance with the
operators ETOPS program even if used on non-ETOPS airplanes.
k. Engine Condition Monitoring. The certificate holder must develop
a program for its ETOPS engines that describes the parameters to be
monitored, method of data collection, and corrective action processes.
The program should reflect the manufacturer's instructions and industry
practices, or the certificate holder should establish a program that
demonstrates an equivalent level of monitoring and data analysis. The
goal of this monitoring program is to detect deterioration at an early
stage, and to allow for corrective action before safe operation is
affected. Engine limit margins should be maintained so that prolonged
engine inoperative diversions may be conducted without exceeding
approved engine limits (for example, rotor speeds and exhaust gas
temperature) at all approved power levels and expected environmental
conditions. Engine margins preserved through this program should
account for the effects of additional engine loading demands (for
example anti-ice and electrical), which may be required during IFSD
flight phase associated with the diversion. If oil analysis monitoring,
such as the Spectrographic Oil Analysis Program (SOAP), is meaningful
and recommended by the manufacturer, the certificate holder should
include it in their program.
l. Oil Consumption Monitoring. The certificate holder must develop
an engine oil consumption monitoring program to ascertain that there is
enough oil to complete the scheduled ETOPS flight. The certificate
holder's consumption limit must not exceed the manufacturer's
recommendations, and it must trend oil consumption. The certificate
holders trending program may be done manually or by electronic means.
The program must consider the amount of oil added at the departing
ETOPS station with reference to the running average consumption, as
well as monitor for sudden increases in consumption. The monitoring
must be continuous including non-ETOPS flights and the oil added at the
ETOPS departure station. For example, after servicing, the oil
consumption may be determined by maintenance personnel as part of the
pre-departure check. The amount of oil added also could be reported to
a centralized maintenance control for calculation before the ETOPS
flight. If the APU is required for ETOPS, it must be included in the
oil consumption monitoring program. Any corrective actions taken
regarding oil consumption must be verified before ETOPS departure.
m. APU In-Flight Start Program.
(1) If the airplane type certificate requires an APU but does not
normally require the APU to operate during the ETOPS portion of the
flight, the certificate holder must develop an in flight start and run
reliability program to ensure that the APU will continue to provide the
performance and reliability established by the manufacturer. This
monitoring program must include periodic sampling of each airplane's
APU in-flight starting capabilities. Specifically, the certificate
holder must ensure that each airplane's APU periodically is sampled
rather than repeatedly sampling the same APUs. The certificate holder
may adjust sampling intervals according to system performance and fleet
maturity. The certificate holder and its CHDO should periodically
review the certificate holder's APU in-flight start program data to
ensure that the in-flight start reliability is maintained. Should the
rolling 12-month APU in-flight start rate drop below 95 percent, the
certificate holder should initiate an investigation into any common
cause effects or systemic errors in procedures.
[[Page 53053]]
(2) The certificate holder should include the criteria below in
their APU in-flight start program. The certificate holder should make
APU in-flight starts subject to the following conditions:
(a) In-flight APU starts do not need to be performed on ETOPS
flights; however, the APU must be in the ETOPS configuration in
accordance with the appropriate CMP document, if applicable, for credit
to be allowed.
(b) If in-flight APU start is performed on an ETOPS flight, the
start may be attempted on the return leg.
(c) The start attempt should be initiated before top of descent, or
at such time that will ensure a 2-hour cold soak at altitude before the
start attempt.
(d) Within route or track constraints, the objective would be met
by attempting a start near the highest altitude assigned the route or
track, and the final attempt near the lower altitude limits of the
route or track, as defined by ATC. These altitudes must be
representative of the ETOPS routes flown.
(e) If the APU fails to start on the first attempt, subsequent
start attempts may be made within the limits of the airframe and APU
manufacturer design specifications stated in the applicable Aircraft
Flight Manual (AFM) and AMM.
(3) The certificate holder must report any operationally required
APU in-flight start failures occurring during actual ETOPS operations
to its CHDO within 96 hours. The certificate holder also must report
any occurrences of an ETOPS configured APU in-flight unsuccessful start
attempt occurring during routine sampling (which exceed the airframe
and APU manufacturer design specifications) to its CHDO. The final
report should include corrective actions taken as well as the status of
corrective action programs and fleet upgrades.
n. Configuration Maintenance and Procedures (CMP).
(1) The CMP Standard specifies any additional configuration,
maintenance or operational requirement that is uniquely applicable to
ETOPS. The requirements in the CMP are established by the FAA at the
time of initial ETOPS type design approval of the airplane-engine
combination. The CMP document typically is published and maintained by
the airplane manufacturer and includes identified CMP requirements.
Airplane manufacturers may continue to release CMP revisions beyond the
basic revision level required for ETOPS. The CMP revision levels
required for specific airplane-engine combinations are typically listed
in the front of the CMP or may be controlled through issuance of
customized CMP documents. The certificate holder must implement the
basic configuration, maintenance, and operating procedures standard,
identified in the CMP, before beginning ETOPS operations. If a CMP
document exists for an ETOPS certificate holder's airplane, the
certificate holder must ensure that all of the following apply:
(a) Configuration features are installed in the airplanes and
engines;
(b) Maintenance procedures are incorporated into the maintenance
program;
(c) Demonstrated capabilities are incorporated into the flight
operations manual and the minimum equipment list, as required; and
(d) Operators must coordinate any deviation from the manufacturer's
CMP requirements with the CHDO or ACO, as required by the CMP document.
(2) Each certificate holder must develop a system to ensure all CMP
requirements remain incorporated in its airplanes, programs, and
manuals throughout the operational life of each airplane, for as long
as they operate in ETOPS.
(3) The FAA will mandate any subsequent CMP changes necessary for
continued safe ETOPS operations through the airworthiness directive
(AD) process. The certificate holder should review and consider
voluntarily incorporating any revised CMP standard that enhances
airplane reliability and/or performance.
(4) The certificate holder should provide its CHDO a matrix
detailing the CMP standard for its proposed ETOPS fleet. The matrix
should specifically include each CMP item number, revision level, item
description, and reference documentation describing the incorporation
method, date, and place.
o. Procedural Changes. Refer to Chapter 5, paragraph 502 for ETOPS
maintenance and training program changes.
302. ETOPS Maintenance Training Requirements.
a. The certificate holder is responsible for ensuring that all
maintenance personnel who perform maintenance on its ETOPS airplanes,
including repair stations, vendors, and contract maintenance, have
received adequate technical training for the specific airplane-engine
combination it intends to operate in ETOPS. The certificate holder
should review the existing airplane-engine combination maintenance
training program with its CHDO to ensure that it adequately provides
the necessary training.
b. Additionally, the certificate holder must develop ETOPS specific
training that focuses on the special nature of ETOPS and take measures
to insure that this training is given to all personnel involved in
ETOPS. ETOPS specific training is in addition to the certificate
holder's accepted maintenance training program used to qualify
individuals for specific airplanes and engines and may be included in
the accepted maintenance training curricula. It thus, becomes the
certificate holder's ETOPS training program. The goal of this training
is to ensure that all personnel involved in ETOPS properly accomplish
ETOPS maintenance requirements. The certificate holder is responsible
with acceptance from the CHDO to determine which personnel are involved
in ETOPS, and ensure that each person's level of ETOPS training is
commensurate with their level of involvement with ETOPS airplanes. For
example, a mechanic who is performing pre-departure service checks may
be required to have a higher level of ETOPS training and certification
than a mechanic performing routine tasks on non ETOPS significant
systems during a heavy maintenance check. A technician working ETOPS
significant systems in an HMV (Heavy Maintenance Visit) environment
must be appropriately trained for ETOPS, but need not be ETOPS
certificated. Recurrent training in all maintenance areas should be
established and used to inform personnel involved in ETOPS about new
equipment, requirements, operator programs, etc. Experience has shown
recurrent training is a valuable instrument in ``lessons learned'' for
ETOPS operations.
c. In the line maintenance environment, ETOPS-qualified maintenance
personnel are those who have successfully completed the certificate
holder's ETOPS training program, and who have satisfactorily performed
extended range tasks under the direct supervision of an FAA-
certificated maintenance person. The person giving the direct
supervision must have had previous experience with maintaining the
particular make and model airplane being used by the certificate
holder. For new airplanes, it is understood the certificate holder may
not have an FAA certified maintenance person available who has previous
experience with the newly introduced make and model airplane. In this
instance, the training received from the manufacturer's maintenance
training program, or a comparable program would be acceptable.
303. ETOPS Flight Operations Requirements
a. Airplane Performance Data. The certificate holder may not
dispatch an
[[Page 53054]]
airplane on an ETOPS flight unless it makes performance data available
to its flight crewmembers and dispatchers. This performance data will
contain the following information:
(1) Detailed one-engine-inoperative performance data including fuel
flow for standard and nonstandard atmospheric conditions, which should
be demonstrated as a function of airspeed and power setting, where
appropriate. This data will cover:
(a) Driftdown (includes net performance);
(b) Cruise altitude coverage including 10,000 feet;
(c) Holding; and
(d) Altitude capability (includes net performance).
(2) Detailed all-engine-operating performance data, including
nominal fuel flow data, for standard and nonstandard atmospheric
conditions, which should be demonstrated as a function of airspeed and
power setting, where appropriate. This data will cover:
(a) Cruise altitude coverage including 10,000 feet; and
(b) Holding.
(3) Details of any other conditions relevant to ETOPS that can
cause significant deterioration of performance, such as ice
accumulation on the unprotected surfaces of the airplane, RAM Air
Turbine (RAT) deployment, and thrust reverser deployment.
b. En Route Airport Information.
(1) In accordance with Sec. 121.97, the certificate holder must
maintain current status information on the operational capabilities of
the airports designated for use as ETOPS alternates. ``Public
protection'' has been a historic requirement for all domestic and flag
operations. For ETOPS greater than 180 minutes and for operations
traversing the North and South Polar Areas, this requirement has been
expanded to include the listing of facilities at each airport, or in
the immediate area, sufficient to protect the passengers and crew from
the elements and to see to their welfare. Such a requirement can be
interpreted to encompass the time from landing until satisfactory
recovery of passengers and crew based on the certificate holder's
passenger recovery plan required by Sec. 121.135 and discussed in
Chapter 4, paragraph 403c(5) of this AC.
(2) The certificate holder's program should provide flight
crewmembers with current weather and information on a set of adequate
airports in the ETOPS portion of the flight that are within the maximum
diversion capability of the airplane on the planned route of flight as
an aid to the flight crew in contingency planning. Any appropriate
facility information and other data concerning these airports should be
provided to flight crewmembers in a clear, concise, user-friendly
format for use when planning a diversion.
(3) Section 121.135 requires that any certificate holder conducting
passenger flag operations must include in their Flight Operations
Manuals or equivalent documentation available to the flight crews:
(a) For ETOPS greater than 180 minutes, a specific passenger
recovery plan for each ETOPS Alternate Airport used in those
operations; and
(b) For operations in the North Polar Area and South Polar Area, a
specific passenger recovery plan for designated diversion airports.
c. Dispatch.
(1) Alternates. A certificate holder may not dispatch an airplane
in ETOPS unless the required takeoff, destination and alternate
airports, including ETOPS alternate airports are listed in the cockpit
documentation (e.g., computerized flight plan) and are identified and
listed in the dispatch release. Because ETOPS alternates serve a
purpose different from that of a destination alternate, and may be used
in the event of a diversion with an engine failure or loss of a primary
airplane system, a certificate holder should not list an airport on the
dispatch/flight release as an ETOPS alternate unless that airport's
services and facilities are adequate for such a diversion. A
certificate holder of a two-engine airplane should exercise ETOPS
beyond 180 minutes authority only if there are no ETOPS alternates that
are within a 180-minute diversion distance from the planned route of
flight. In addition, those adequate airports closest to the planned
route of flight should be those first considered as ETOPS alternates.
(2) Flight Planning Limitation. The certificate holder's ETOPS
flight planning program must ensure that the planned route of flight
remains within the authorized ETOPS area of operation in accordance
with Sec. 121.633 as follows:
(a) For ETOPS up to and including 180 minutes and 207 minutes in
the North Pacific Area of Operation, the time required to fly the
distance to the planned ETOPS alternate, at the approved one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed in still air and standard conditions, may not
exceed the time specified for the airplane's most time limited ETOPS
significant system (including cargo fire suppression) minus 15 minutes.
(b) For ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, the time required to fly the
distance to the planned ETOPS alternate, at the all-engines-operating
cruise speed at the normal all-engine-cruise altitude, correcting for
wind and temperature, may not exceed the certified capability for the
airplane's most limiting fire suppression system minus 15 minutes.
Three- and four-engine turbine engine-powered airplanes not meeting
these requirements as of the effective date of Sec. 121.633 may
continue ETOPS operations until February 15, 2013.
(c) Further, for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, the time required to fly
the distance to the planned ETOPS alternate, at the approved one-
engine-inoperative cruise speed at the normal one engine inoperative
level off altitude, correcting for wind and temperature, may not exceed
the certified capability for the airplane's most time limited ETOPS
significant system (except for the most limiting fire suppression
system) minus 15 minutes.
Note: Certificate holders flying three- and four-engine
airplanes prior to the established installation time and
certification time requirements of the regulation for these systems
and their airplanes are exempt from these flight planning
limitations. Once such required fire suppression systems are
installed (no later than February 15, 2013) and once the ETOPS
significant system time limits are established and placed in the CMP
as required by 121.162(d) (no later than February 17, 2015), the
operator must follow the flight planning limitations in
121.633(b)(1) and 121.633(b)(2).
(3) Landing Distance. For the runway expected to be used, the
landing distance available, as specified by the airport authority, must
be sufficient based on airplane flight manual landing performance data
to meet the landing distance limitations specified in Sec. 121.197.
The altitude of the airport, wind conditions, runway surface
conditions, and airplane handling characteristics should be taken into
account.
(4) Airport Rescue and Fire-Fighting Service (RFFS).
(a) The following minimum International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) rescue and fire-fighting service (RFFS) categories must be
available at each airport listed as an ETOPS Alternate Airport in a
dispatch or flight release:
1. ETOPS Up to 180 Minutes. ETOPS alternates with ICAO Category 4.
2. ETOPS Greater than 180 Minutes. ETOPS alternates with Category
4. In addition, the airplane must remain within the ETOPS authorized
diversion time from an Adequate Airport that has RFFS equivalent to
that specified by ICAO Category 7, or higher. The availability of
Adequate Category 7
[[Page 53055]]
RFFS airports must be considered for the entire ETOPS segment of the
planned route.
(b) If the necessary equipment and personnel are not immediately
available at the airport, additional fire fighting support may be
brought in from a nearby town or other location. The certificate holder
must ensure that the nearby facility is capable of responding to a
request for firefighting assistance within a reasonable time. A 30-
minute response time is deemed adequate if the initial notification to
respond can be initiated while the diverting airplane is en route. A
30-minute response time does not imply that the firefighting equipment
has to be at the airport within 30 minutes of the initial notification
under all conditions. It does mean that such equipment must be
available on arrival of the diverting airplane and remain on station as
long as the services are needed.
(5) ETOPS Alternate Minima. A particular airport may be considered
to be an ETOPS alternate for flight planning and dispatch purposes, if
the latest available forecast weather conditions from the earliest time
of landing to the latest time of landing at that airport, equals or
exceeds the criteria detailed in the following table. Because OpSpecs
alternate weather minima standards apply to all alternates, the
following criteria is recommended for a typical certificate holder's
OpSpecs. An individual certificate holder's OpSpecs must reflect
current requirements (Sec. 121.625). Although no consideration for the
use of GPS/RNAV approaches is presented here, operators may request to
receive this authorization through the FAA. This authorization would be
reflected in the operator's OpSpecs. Appropriate ETOPS alternate minima
for such operations will be determined by the Director, Flight
Standards Service. The airport of departure (takeoff) and the
destination airport (unless used concurrently as an ETOPS alternate)
are not required to meet the weather minima for ETOPS alternates as
these airports are subject to other regulations (e.g., Sec. Sec.
121.617, 121.621, and 121.623).
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[[Page 53056]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.008
(6) Fuel Supply. The certificate holder must comply with the ETOPS
en-route fuel supply as specified in Sec. 121.646(b) as follows:
(a) No person may dispatch or release for flight or takeoff a
turbine engine-powered airplane in ETOPS unless,
[[Page 53057]]
considering wind and other weather conditions expected, it has the fuel
required by normal Flag requirements and enough fuel to satisfy
paragraphs 1 through 4 below:
1. The greater amount of fuel sufficient to fly to an ETOPS
alternate under the following three scenarios:
Assuming a rapid decompression at the most critical point
followed by descent to a safe altitude in compliance with the oxygen
supply requirements of Sec. 121.333, or
At the approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed
assuming a rapid decompression and a simultaneous engine failure at the
most critical point followed by descent to a safe altitude in
compliance with the oxygen supply requirements of Sec. 121.333, or
At the approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed
assuming an engine failure at the most critical point followed by
descent to the one-engine-inoperative cruise altitude.
2. Upon reaching the alternate, hold at 1,500 ft above field
elevation for 15 minutes and then conduct an instrument approach and
land.
3. Add a 5 percent wind speed factor (that is, an increment to
headwind or a decrement to tailwind) on to the actual forecast wind
used to calculate fuel in paragraph 1 above to account for any
potential errors in wind forecasting. If a certificate holder is not
using the actual forecast wind based on a wind model acceptable to the
FAA, the airplane must carry 5 percent of the fuel required for
paragraph 1 above, as reserve fuel to allow for errors in wind data. A
wind aloft forecast distributed worldwide by the World Area Forecast
System (WAFS) is an example of a wind model acceptable to the FAA.
4. After completing the calculation in paragraph 3, compensate in
paragraph 1 above with additional fuel for the greater of the following
scenarios:
The effect of airframe icing during 10 percent of the time
during which icing is forecast (including ice accumulation on
unprotected surfaces, and the fuel used by engine and wing anti-ice
during this period). Unless a reliable icing forecast is available,
icing may be presumed to occur when the total air temperature at the
approved one-engine cruise speed is less than +10 degrees Celsius, or
if the outside air temperature is between 0 degrees Celsius and -20
degrees Celsius with a relative humidity of 55 percent or greater.
Fuel for engine anti-ice, and if appropriate wing anti-
ice, for the entire time during which icing is forecast.
(b) Unless the certificate holder has a program established to
monitor airplane in-service deterioration in cruise fuel burn
performance, and includes in fuel supply calculations fuel sufficient
to compensate for any such deterioration, increase the final calculated
fuel supply by 5 percent to account for deterioration in cruise fuel
burn performance.
(c) If the APU is a required power source, then its fuel
consumption must be accounted for during the appropriate phases of
flight.
(d) In computing the ETOPS alternate fuel supply, advantage may be
taken of driftdown computed at the approved one-engine-inoperative
cruise speed. Accounting of wing anti-ice as in paragraph (6)(a)4 above
may apply to some models of airplane based on their characteristics and
the manufacturer's recommended procedures.
(7) Communications. The FAA has determined that the best way to
assure clear and timely communication in general, is via voice
communication. Likewise the FAA has determined that there is a
significant safety benefit associated with an ETOPS flight having the
ability to communicate via a satellite based voice system, especially
for those situations that occur while on long, remote ETOPS routes. The
need for safety is best served through information and technical
assistance that is clearly and rapidly transmitted to the flight crew
in a way that requires the least amount of distraction to piloting
duties. Other than the area north of 82 degrees latitude, satellite
communications provides the best means to provide that capability
because it is not limited by distance. The FAA recognizes the
limitations of satellite communications (SATCOM) in the North Polar
Area above this latitude, and in such an area an alternate
communication system such as HF voice or data link is to be used. The
relatively short period of time that the flight is above latitude 82
degrees North in relation to the total planned flight time is a small
fraction of the total flight. The ability to use SATCOM for all other
portions of the flight, which for some routes could be longer than 15
hours duration, is advantageous to the flight. For flights above 82
degrees North latitude, the operator must also ensure that
communications requirements can be met by the most reliable means
available, taking into account the potential communication disruption
due to solar flare activity. The same philosophy and commensurate
requirements apply for ETOPS in the South Polar Area.
(a) Section 121.99(a) includes a requirement for communications
facilities that enable rapid and reliable communications on routes and
altitudes that may be used. For all ETOPS each certificate holder
conducting flag or supplemental operations in ETOPS must provide voice
communications over routes where voice communications facilities are
available. Where voice communication facilities are not available, and
voice communication is not possible or is of poor quality,
communications using alternative systems must be substituted.
(b) In addition to the communication requirement above, flag and
supplemental certificate holders operating ETOPS beyond 180 minutes
from an alternate must have a second communications system that is
capable of providing immediate satellite-based voice communications of
landline telephone fidelity such as SATCOM. This system must be capable
of providing clear voice communications between the flight crewmember
and air traffic control, and the flight crewmember and operations
(dispatch). Where clear satellite-based voice communications are not
available, alternative communications systems must be substituted. If
an operator has provided a satellite communication system for the crew
to satisfy Sec. 121.99(a), it is not necessary that the second
communication system required for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes be satellite
based.
(c) In determining whether such communications requirements
discussed in paragraphs (a) and (b) above are available, the
certificate holder must consider potential routes and altitudes needed
for possible diversions to ETOPS alternates as well as the original
planned routing.
(8) Dispatch/Flight Release.
(a) The following items must be listed in the dispatch or flight
release for all ETOPS in accordance with Sec. 121.687:
1. ETOPS alternates, and
2. The authorized ETOPS diversion time under which the flight is
dispatched or released.
(b) The pilot in command (PIC) must have access to the weather and
status of services and facilities at all adequate airports with weather
greater than approach minimums other than the designated ETOPS
alternates along the planned route that could be used for diversion
before accepting the flight release.
(c) If a flight is dispatched on a route that is greater than 180
minutes from an ETOPS alternate, the certificate holder must inform the
flight crew and give them the reason for the routes selection.
(9) Dispatch on a ``Flight-by-Flight Exception'' Basis. For two-
engine
[[Page 53058]]
airplane ETOPS approvals under the provisions of 207-minute ETOPS in
the North Pacific Area of Operation, and 240-minute ETOPS in the North
Polar Area, in the area north of the NOPAC area, and the Pacific Ocean
area north of the equator, regulations limit the operator's use of this
authority in these areas to an ``exception'' basis. This exception may
only be used when an ETOPS alternate is not available within 180
minutes and is based on certain criteria.
(a) For 207-Minute ETOPS, exception criteria includes political or
military concerns, volcanic activity, temporary airport conditions, and
airport weather below dispatch requirements, or other weather related
events.
(b) For 240-Minute ETOPS in the North Polar Area and in the Area
North of NOPAC, exception criteria includes extreme conditions
particular to these areas such as volcanic activity, extreme cold
weather at en-route airports airport, weather below dispatch
requirements, temporary airport conditions and other weather related
events. The certificate holder must establish the criteria to be used
to decide what extreme weather precludes using an airport.
(c) For 240-Minute ETOPS in the Pacific Ocean Area north of the
Equator, exception criteria includes political or military concern,
volcanic activity, airport weather below dispatch requirements,
temporary airport conditions and other weather related events.
Note: Certificate holders are required to maintain a record of
their use of that authority for tracking purposes. When an operator
is granted such authority, they may exercise this authority based on
the conditions above without limit. There is currently no
requirement for any specific format for reporting 207- and 240-
minute track usage.
d. En Route.
(1) Pilot-in-Command Authority. No part of this AC is to be
interpreted as reducing the PIC's joint responsibility for determining
that the flight can be safely conducted as planned before release. None
of the guidance in this AC may be interpreted in any way to prejudice
or limit the final authority and responsibility of the PIC for the safe
operation of the airplane.
(2) Potential Diversion Airports after Departure.
(a) After departure, designated ETOPS alternates must continue to
meet the requirements of original dispatch, except that the weather
must remain at, or above, operating minima (Sec. 121 .631(c)). The
pilot and dispatcher should monitor the airports within the ETOPS area
of operation that could be used for diversion for deterioration in the
weather and limitations in the availability of facilities and services
that would render an airport unsuitable for landing in the event of a
diversion. During the course of the flight, the flight crewmembers
should be informed of significant changes in conditions at the
designated ETOPS alternates, particularly those conditions that would
render an airport unsuitable for landing and improvement in airport
weather to conditions above operating minima.
(b) In most ETOPS operations, the ETOPS entry point is a
significant distance from the point of dispatch. To ensure the
capability and availability of an en route alternate to support any en
route contingencies, before an ETOPS flight proceeds beyond the ETOPS
entry point, the certificate holder must evaluate the weather from the
earliest to latest time of arrival at the designated ETOPS alternates,
as well as the landing distances, airport services, and facilities. If
any conditions, such as weather below landing minima, are identified
that would preclude a safe approach and landing, the PIC should be
notified and an additional ETOPS alternate selected where a safe
approach and landing can be made. A revised flight plan should include
information on the newly designated ETOPS alternates within the
authorized area of operation. Information on the weather and
capabilities (that is, emergency response, approach aids, navigation
facilities, and airport infrastructure) of potential ETOPS alternates
in the authorized area of operations should be available to the PIC.
The maximum diversion time, determined by the newly selected ETOPS
alternate, must not exceed the authorized ETOPS maximum diversion time
listed in the certificate holder's OpSpec for that airplane and
operating area that could have been applied at original dispatch.
(c) An operator is not required to turn back once the flight has
gone beyond the ETOPS entry point if an unexpected worsening of the
weather at the designated ETOPS alternate airport drops the airport
below operating landing minima (or any other event occurs that makes
the runway at that airport unusable). The FAA requires that the pilot-
in-command, in coordination with the dispatcher if appropriate, will
exercise judgment in evaluating the situation and make a decision as to
the safest course of action. This may be a turn back, re-routing to
another ETOPS alternate airport, or continuing on the planned route.
Should the operator become aware of a potential weather problem prior
to the airplane entering the ETOPS stage of the flight, the rule allows
the operator to designate a different alternate airport at the ETOPS
entry point in order to continue the flight.
(3) Engine Failure.
(a) Section 121.565 requires the PIC of a two-engine airplane with
one engine inoperative to land at the nearest suitable airport where,
in the PIC's judgment after considering all relevant factors, a safe
landing can be made. This determination is especially critical for
ETOPS where the availability of suitable airports may be limited and
the diversion decision is therefore more critical. The following is a
list of some, but not all, factors that may be relevant in determining
whether or not an airport is suitable, and are consistent with the
ETOPS principle of protecting the diversion once it occurs:
Airplane configuration, weight, systems status, and fuel
remaining
Wind and weather conditions en route at the diversion
altitude
Minimum altitudes en route to the diversion airport
Fuel burn to the diversion airport
Airport's nearby terrain, weather, and wind
Availability and surface condition of runway
Approach navigation aids and lighting available
Rescue and fire fighting services (RFFS) at the diversion
airport
Facilities for passenger and crewmember disembarkation,
and accommodations
PIC's familiarity with the airport
Information about the airport provided to the PIC by the
certificate holder.
(b) When operating a two-engine airplane with one engine
inoperative, none of the following factors should be considered
sufficient justification to fly beyond the nearest suitable airport:
The fuel supply is sufficient to fly beyond the nearest
suitable airport;
Passenger accommodation other than passenger safety;
Availability of maintenance and/or repair resources.
(c) If no more than one engine is shut down on an airplane that has
three or more engines, Sec. 121.565 permits the PIC to fly beyond the
nearest suitable airport in point of time if the PIC determines that
doing so is as safe as landing at the nearest suitable airport. In
making a decision to fly beyond the nearest suitable airport, the PIC
should consider all relevant factors and, in addition, consider the
possible difficulties that may occur if the flight is continued beyond
the nearest suitable airport. When an airplane with more than two
engines bypasses a suitable alternate,
[[Page 53059]]
the PIC must carefully weigh the risk associated with the next possible
failure, which could complicate or compound the current engine
inoperative condition. The next possible failure could be a system
failure or another engine failure, which in either case, would affect
crew workload and their possible success in completing the associated
abnormal approach and landing procedures. It is even possible that a
contingency outside of the realm of a system failure, such as a
passenger illness, could compound the crew's workload normally
associated with the current failure condition.
(4) System Failure/Partial Failure.
(a) During ETOPS, the limited availability of diversion airports
and extended diversion distances require that the impact of a system
failure or partial failure be carefully evaluated. This should include
a careful assessment of remaining systems and overall operational
capability. Time permitting, full use should be made of the information
available through the certificate holder's dispatch facility and a
determination made by the PIC as to the plan for the safe continuation
of the flight, that is whether it is safer to divert and land or to
continue as planned under the circumstances.
(b) If, as a result of reevaluating airplane systems, a change in
flight plan is required, the PIC should be provided revised flight plan
information and an update of conditions, including weather conditions
at designated ETOPS alternates. Dispatch should advise the flight
crewmembers of additional airports on the planned route of flight that
could be used for diversion. In no case may the maximum approved
diversion authority of the operation be exceeded.
(5) Other Diversion Scenarios. During ETOPS an airplane may divert
for reasons other than engine or systems failure such as medical
emergencies, onboard fire, or decompression. When considering the
nature of the emergency and the possible consequences to the airplane,
passengers and crew will dictate the best course of action suitable to
the specific en route contingency. The flight crew must decide on the
best course of action based on all available information. The ETOPS
Alternate Airports required by Sec. 121.624 and designated for a
particular flight provide one option to the PIC. However, these ETOPS
alternates may not be the only airports available for the diversion and
nothing in this guidance in any way limits the authority of the pilot-
in-command.
e. ETOPS Procedures Documentation.
(1) The certificate holder should develop unique ETOPS flight crew
procedures for each of the flight operations requirements discussed in
this section. These procedures should be contained in the applicable
pilot flight manual. The pilot flight manual should also contain
procedural information necessary to interface with ETOPS maintenance
requirements such as;
Fuel crossfeed valve operational check (if applicable)
Special ETOPS MEL requirements
APU in-flight start procedures (if applicable)
Engine Condition Monitoring (ECM) data recording
procedures
In-flight verification of ETOPS significant systems
(2) The initial pilot flight manual ETOPS section and each revision
must be submitted to the CHDO and approved before being adopted.
304. Flight Operations Training Requirements.
a. ETOPS Unique Requirements. The certificate holder's approved
training program for ETOPS should include training that describes the
unique aspects of ETOPS. That training should include, but not be
limited to:
(1) Diversion Decision Making. The certificate holder's training
program should prepare flight crewmembers to evaluate probable
propulsion and airframe systems malfunctions and failures. The goal of
this training should be to establish flight crewmember competency in
dealing with the most probable operating contingencies.
(2) Specific ETOPS Requirements. The certificate holder's ETOPS
training program should provide and integrate training for flight
crewmembers and dispatchers (if applicable), as listed below. The FAA
will periodically evaluate a cross-section of these items.
(a) Flight planning, including contingency data, that is engine
failure, decompression, and diversion equal time point.
(b) Flight progress monitoring and fuel tracking.
(c) Operational restrictions associated with dispatch under the
minimum equipment list (MEL).
(d) Non-normal procedures including:
1. Abnormal and emergency procedures.
2. Systems failures and remaining airplane capability as it relates
to the decision to divert or to continue.
3. Diversion.
4. Crewmember incapacitation.
5. A simulated approach and missed approach with only an alternate
power source available, if the loss of two main alternating current
electrical power sources with no APU electrical source available
results in significant degradation of instrumentation to either pilot.
(e) Use of emergency equipment associated with ETOPS operations,
including cold weather gear and SATCOM.
(f) Procedures to be followed in the event that there is a change
in conditions at an ETOPS alternate listed on the dispatch/flight
release that would preclude a safe approach and landing.
(g) Procedures to be followed in the event that there is a change
in conditions at other potential en route diversion airports that would
preclude a safe approach and landing.
(h) Understanding and effective use of approved additional or
modified equipment required for ETOPS.
(i) Fuel quantity comparison: The certificate holder's training
program should identify fuel management procedures to be followed
during the en route portion of the flight. These procedures should
provide for an independent crosscheck of fuel quantity indicators, for
example, fuel used, subtracted from the total fuel load, compared to
the indicated fuel remaining.
(j) Fuel management: Accounting for discrepancies between planned
fuel remaining and actual fuel remaining for example estimated time of
arrival ahead of or behind plan, gross weight, and/or altitude
differences.
(k) Flight crew procedures unique to ETOPS as listed above in the
paragraph 303(e).
(3) Passenger Recovery Plan. The certificate holder must provide
training to the flight crewmembers and dispatchers relative to their
perspective roles in the certificate holder's passenger recovery plan
(Sec. 121.415).
b. Check Airman Used in ETOPS. The certificate holder must
designate check airmen specifically for ETOPS. The objective of the
ETOPS check airman program should be to ensure standardized flight
crewmember practices and procedures and also to emphasize the special
nature of ETOPS. Only airmen with a demonstrated understanding of the
unique requirements of ETOPS should be designated as a check airman.
c. Review of Training Programs and Operating Manuals.
(1) The purpose of the review is to verify the adequacy of
information provided to training programs and operating manuals. The
FAA will use the information resulting from these reviews as the basis
for modification or updating flight crewmember training
[[Page 53060]]
programs, operating manuals, and checklists, as necessary.
(2) The FAA will also continually review in-service experience of
systems significant to ETOPS. The review includes system reliability
levels and individual event circumstances, including crewmember actions
taken in response to equipment failures or loss of capabilities.
Chapter 4. Applications to Conduct ETOPS
400. ETOPS Qualifications. The unique nature of ETOPS necessitates
an evaluation of these operations to ensure that the certificate
holder's proposed programs are effective. The FAA will review the
certificate holder's documentation and training programs to validate
that they are appropriate for ETOPS. To receive approval to conduct
ETOPS the certificate holder must satisfy the following conditions:
a. Airplane. The specified airplane-engine combination listed in
the certificate holder's application must have been certificated to the
airworthiness standards of transport category airplanes and must be
approved for ETOPS. Guidance for airplane ETOPS type design can be
found in AC 25.1535-1 and Sec. 121.162.
(1) Two-Engine. Airplane-engine combinations already approved for
ETOPS under previous FAA guidance can continue to be used in ETOPS
operations under part 121. No re-certification under Sec. 25.1535 is
required. Two-engine airplanes with existing type certificates on
February 15, 2007, may be approved for up to 180-minutes ETOPS without
meeting requirements for fuel system pressure and flow, low fuel
alerting, and engine oil tank design contained in Sec. 25.1535.
(2) More than Two Engines. Airplanes with more than two engines
that are to be used in ETOPS and are manufactured prior to February 17,
2015, may operate in ETOPS without type design approval under the
revised Sec. 25.1535. Airplanes with more than two engines
manufactured on or after February 17, 2015, must meet the requirements
of ETOPS type design.
b. Flight Operations and Maintenance Requirements. The certificate
holder must show compliance with the flight operations requirements
discussed in paragraph 303 and the maintenance requirements discussed
in paragraph 301.
c. Training Requirements. The certificate holder must show that it
has trained its personnel to achieve competency in ETOPS and should
show compliance with the flight operations and maintenance training
requirements discussed in paragraphs 302 and 304.
d. Before the FAA grants ETOPS operational approval to an applicant
for two-engine ETOPS, the certificate holder must be able to
demonstrate the ability to achieve and maintain the level of propulsion
system reliability that is required for the ETOPS-approved airplane-
engine combination to be used (Appendix P to Part 121, section I.
Paragraph (a)). The certificate holder must also demonstrate that it
can operate the particular airframe and other airplane systems at
levels of reliability appropriate for the intended operation. This can
be achieved directly by a successful in-service operational history or
by successfully validating all the required ETOPS processes according
to the Accelerated ETOPS Application Method in Appendix 3 of this AC.
e. An applicant for an initial operating certificate who is
applying for ETOPS authority at entry into service under the
Accelerated ETOPS Application method must comply with the same
requirements for certificate holders outlined in this AC. It should be
understood that validation of an applicant with no previous operational
experience should be more robust than would be necessary for a
certificate holder with operational experience. As is the case for all
Accelerated ETOPS approvals, the Director, Flight Standards Service
must be satisfied that the applicant can operate to the standards
expected of an experienced ETOPS operator from the first day of
service.
401. Application for ETOPS Authorization.
a. Any certificate holder wishing to obtain an ETOPS authorization
must submit an application with all supporting data to their local CHDO
office. This application will be for a specific airplane-engine
combination and should address all the regulatory requirements for
ETOPS. The certificate holder may follow the guidance found in this AC
to complete the application. The application should be submitted at
least 60 days prior (6 months for the Accelerated ETOPS method of
application) to the proposed start of extended range operation with the
specific airplane-engine combination.
b. Two-Engine Airplanes.
(1) Up to 180-Minute ETOPS. An applicant requesting ETOPS up to 180
minutes for two-engine operations may select one of the following two
application methods best suited to their proposed operation (See
Appendix 3):
(a) In-service experience method, or
(b) Accelerated ETOPS method.
(2) ETOPS beyond 180 Minutes, Up to and Including 240 Minutes. The
FAA grants approval for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes only to certificate
holders with existing 180-minute ETOPS operating authority for the
airplane-engine combination to be operated in the application. There is
no minimum in-service time requirement for the 180-minute ETOPS
operator requesting ETOPS approval beyond 180 minutes. The
determination by the Director, Flight Standards Service to grant ETOPS
approval is the same as for all ETOPS authorities.
(3) ETOPS beyond 240 Minutes. This authority is only granted to
operators of two-engine airplanes between specific city pairs. The
certificate holder must have been operating at 180 minute or greater
ETOPS authority for at least 24 consecutive months, of which at least
12 consecutive months must be at 240-minute ETOPS authority with the
airplane-engine combination in the application.
c. Passenger-Carrying Airplanes with More than Two Engines. There
are no minimum in-service experience criteria for certificate holders
requesting ETOPS beyond 180 minutes for operations with more than two
engines. Those applicants will request approval under the accelerated
ETOPS method.
402. ETOPS Authorities.
a. ETOPS with Two-Engine Airplanes. An applicant for two-engine
ETOPS may seek approval for extended operations by seeking one of the
following ETOPS approvals best suited to their proposed operations (see
Appendix 2):
(1) 75-Minute ETOPS in the Caribbean/Western Atlantic Area or in
other areas.
(2) 90-Minute ETOPS in Micronesia.
(3) 120-Minute ETOPS.
(4) 138-Minute ETOPS. Such approvals are granted to current 180-
minute ETOPS operators, or as an extension of authority to operators
with only 120-minute ETOPS approval.
(5) 180-Minute ETOPS.
(6) 207-Minute ETOPS in the North Pacific Area of Operation.
(7) 240-Minute ETOPS. Approvals are granted at this level based on
the particular geographic area applied for with criteria delineated for
particular applications.
(8) Beyond 240-Minute ETOPS. Approvals are granted at this level
based on particular city pairs.
b. ETOPS with Passenger-Carrying Airplanes having More than Two
Engines. Certificate holders applying for ETOPS with passenger-carrying
airplanes that have more than two engines will receive ETOPS authority
based on the FAA approved maximum time limited airplane system
restriction
[[Page 53061]]
of the airplane-engine combination listed in their application and the
maximum authority requested.
403. ETOPS Authorization Requirements.
a. All certificate holders of airplanes with two engines, and all
certificate holders of passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two
engines, operating on ETOPS routes must comply with all the operational
and process requirements specified in the ETOPS regulations in part 121
and as discussed in this AC.
b. Those certificate holders operating airplanes with more than two
engines who choose to follow the recommendations in this AC as a means
of compliance with the operating rules, and who, on February 15, 2008,
have the authority to operate on specific non-ETOPS routes that under
the new definition are classified as ETOPS routes, are not required to
re-apply for their specific route authority. However, from February 15,
2008, the certificate holder is required to comply with all the ETOPS
flight operational requirements that are described in this AC and must
have their ETOPS program and all ETOPS processes approved by their CHDO
with concurrence of the Director, Flight Standards Service. The CHDO
will amend the certificate holder's OpSpecs when the Director, Flight
Standards Service grants a certificate holder approval to conduct
operations under Sec. 121.161.
c. All ETOPS certificate holders applying for approvals under this
section must provide sufficient information with their application to
the Manager, Air Transportation Division, AFS 200, through its CHDO and
regional FAA office on the following areas of concern in ETOPS:
(1) ETOPS Area of Operations/Airplane Performance. The altitudes
and airspeeds used in establishing the ETOPS area of operations for
each airplane-engine combination must be shown to permit compliance
with the terrain and obstruction clearance requirements of Sec. Sec.
121.191 and 121.193, as applicable. A speed other than the approved
single engine speed may be used as the basis for compliance to
Sec. Sec. 121.191 and 121.193, provided fuel consumption is shown not
to exceed the critical fuel scenario associated with the applicable
ETOPS equal-time point (Sec. 121.646), and the time limited system
requirements of Sec. 121.633 are not exceeded.
(2) Weather Information System. A certificate holder should
substantiate that the weather information system that it uses can be
relied on to forecast terminal and en route weather with a reasonable
degree of accuracy and reliability in the proposed areas of operation.
Such factors as staffing, dispatcher, training, sources of weather
reports and forecasts, and when possible, a record of forecast
reliability, should be evaluated.
(3) Minimum Equipment List. The certificate holder is required to
submit its MEL, designed in accordance with the master minimum
equipment list (MMEL), appropriate to the requested level of ETOPS. A
certificate holder's MEL may be more restrictive than the MMEL,
considering the kind of ETOPS proposed and the equipment and service
problems unique to the certificate holder. System redundancy levels
appropriate to ETOPS should be reflected in the MMEL. Systems
considered to have a fundamental influence on flight safety may
include, but are not limited to the following:
Electrical, including battery
Hydraulic
Pneumatic
Flight instrumentation
Fuel
Flight control
Ice protection
Engine start and ignition
Propulsion system instruments
Navigation and communications
Auxiliary power units
Air conditioning and pressurization
Cargo fire suppression
Emergency equipment
Any other equipment necessary for ETOPS.
(4) Public Protection. The provisions for public protection have
historically been embedded in Sec. 121.97(ii). Current requirements
are found in Sec. 121.97(b)(1)(ii). The definition of ``public
protection'' has been expanded for certificate holders operating ETOPS
beyond 180 minutes, and for operations in the North Polar Area and
South Polar Area to include facilities at each airport, or in the
immediate area, sufficient to protect the passengers and crew from the
elements and to see to their welfare. Due to the nature of these
operations and the climatic issues involved during the majority of the
year, certificate holders undertaking these operations must ascertain
that facilities at an airport, or in the immediate area, are
sufficiently robust to protect the passengers and crew from the
elements, and to see to their welfare during the time required to
transport them towards their destination under the passenger recovery
plan discussed in paragraph (5) below.
(5) Passenger Recovery Plan.
(a) A specific passenger recovery plan is required for each ETOPS
Alternate Airport used by a certificate holder in ETOPS greater than
180 minutes (OpSpec paragraph B042 (4), ER-OPS En Route Alternate
Airports). For operations in the North Polar Area and the South Polar
Area a specific passenger recovery plan is required for each designated
diversion airport taken from those listed in an operator's operations
specifications for this operation (North and South Polar Areas, OpSpec
paragraph B055, North Polar Operations [Sic], Polar Operations). For
further guidance on passenger recovery plans for these polar diversion
airports see paragraph 603(2).
(b) The certificate holder's formal passenger recovery plan should
provide a means to validate acceptable levels of infrastructure to
provide for an orderly process for the care and well being of the
passengers and crewmembers. This infrastructure should include
facilities that provide for the physiological needs of the passengers
and crewmembers such as continuing safety, food, and shelter. Any list
of considerations for the passengers and crewmembers need not be
exhaustive. However, in certain cases involving operations in demanding
environments, plans may need to be detailed enough to provide for
medical care, communications, methods for securing alternative
expedited travel, extraction, and other continued travel provisions for
the crewmembers and passengers. If the certificate holder proposes to
use the airplane capabilities and services as a means to satisfy all or
part of the requirements for such a plan, the time-limited capability
of appropriate systems should be evaluated and taken into account.
(c) It is generally accepted that any plan that is designed to
fully recover the passengers within 48 hours may be viewed as meeting
the overall requirement to provide for the care and safety of the
passengers and crewmembers. The greatest concern relative to passenger
recovery plans is when diversions occur to an airport that is
geographically located within an area not normally served by the
certificate holder and, more specifically, when the diversion occurs to
an en route alternate airport located in a harsh operating environment.
A certificate holder with a route system extending over remote areas of
the world has a responsibility under the regulations (Sec. 121.135),
to develop a passenger recovery plan in anticipation of the possibility
of a diversion to an approved en route alternate airport lying within
those remote regions. In these instances, the certificate holder
operating on those routes should devise a plan of substance that will
outline how it will recover the
[[Page 53062]]
passengers, crewmembers, and airplane in the event of such a diversion.
This plan should be of sufficient detail to demonstrate that the
recovery operation can be readily effected, and that the basic needs of
the diverted passengers and crewmembers can be provided for in the
interim. The plan should address all of the concerns previously listed
with specific emphasis on any issues unique to that particular
environment. In some environments provisions for shade from the direct
sunlight and cooling may be a concern; while in other environments such
as polar and sub polar areas, plans should provide for immediate
provisions for shelter from the elements, heating, and clothing. After
these immediate concerns are addressed, the plan should address
provisions for initiating extraction procedures immediately. In all
cases a particular alternate airport environment should drive the
requirements of the passenger recovery plan and the prioritization of
concerns needing to be addressed.
(6) Navigation. The applicant must show the availability of
navigation facilities adequate for the operation, taking into account
the navigation equipment installed on the airplane, the navigation
accuracy required for the planned route and altitude of flight, and the
routes and altitudes to the airports designated as ETOPS alternates.
Navigation facilities required to ensure a safe approach and landing
must be available.
Note: Non-terrestrial approaches, e.g., GPS/RNAV, may be
utilized if approved in a certificate holder's operating
specifications at airports where terrestrial navigation aids, such
as NDB or VOR, are not available or operational.
(7) Communications. The certificate holder must show the
availability of communications services and facilities for
communication with ATC and the dispatch office. Certificate holders
operating ETOPS routes must use the most reliable voice-based
communications technology available for communications between the
flight crew and air traffic services, and the flight crew and the
certificate holder per Sec. 121.99. For ETOPS routes further than 180
minutes from adequate airports, a second communication system is
required and must be able to provide immediate satellite-based voice
communications of landline-telephone fidelity. Rapid and reliable ATC
communications are determined by the facilities operated by ATC units
in the areas of operations.
404. Validation Flight(s).
Prior to granting ETOPS approval to a certificate holder for
operation of a specific airplane-engine combination in an authorized
area of operation, the FAA will require actual validation flights on
proposed routes that the certificate holder intends to operate within
the ETOPS area of operations, designated in the operator's approval
request. This is to ensure that the ETOPS flight operations and
maintenance programs described in Chapter 3 are capable of supporting
those operations. Depending on the certificate holder's level of
experience in conducting ETOPS and the routes intended to be used in
operations, the FAA will determine the number of validation flights
required, the manner in which validation flights may be conducted
(revenue with passengers, non-revenue, or cargo only), and any other
items requiring validation. If approval is granted to fly the
validation flight in revenue service, the operator should be granted
appropriate, though temporary or restricted, OpSpecs covering the
necessary flight(s). At the successful conclusion of the validation,
the CHDO should coordinate with the Director, Flight Standards,
amendment and issuance of unrestricted OpSpecs. Certificate holders
operating passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines who,
on the effective date of this AC, have the authority to operate on
specific non-ETOPS routes that under the new definition are classified
as ETOPS routes, may not be required to conduct an actual validation
flight. If the certificate holder can adequately validate that the
necessary additional ETOPS processes and procedures are in place, and
that they can function appropriately, may be validated by another means
satisfactory to the CHDO with concurrence of Director, Flight Standards
Service.
405. Required Demonstration on a Validation Flight.
a. The certificate holder should demonstrate, by means of an FAA-
witnessed validation flight or flights using the specified airplane-
engine combination in its application, that it has the competence and
capability to safely conduct and adequately support the intended
operation. The CHDO, with the concurrence of the Director, Flight
Standards Service, will determine the conditions for each certificate
holder's validation flights. This determination will be made on a case-
by-case basis following a review of the certificate holder's experience
and the proposed operation. This process may require the certificate
holder to conduct an actual diversion during the validation flights.
b. The following emergency conditions should be demonstrated during
the ETOPS validation flights, unless successful demonstration of these
conditions has been approved and subsequently witnessed by the FAA in
an acceptable simulation prior to the validation flight:
(1) Total loss of thrust of one engine and total loss of engine-
generated electrical power, or
(2) Any other condition considered more critical in terms of
airworthiness, crewmember workload, or performance risk.
c. This simulator demonstration does not alter the certificate
holder's requirement to demonstrate the competence and the capability
to adequately support the intended operation during the ETOPS
validation flight.
Chapter 5. FAA ETOPS Approval
500. Final ETOPS Operating Authority.
Following completion of the ETOPS application requirements and
before the issuance of operations specifications, the certificate
holder's application with supporting data, together with the CHDO's
recommendations, should be forwarded through the certificate holder's
regional FAA office, to AFS-200 (Washington Headquarters) for review
and concurrence. The CHDO's recommendations should include any specific
recommendations made by the principal maintenance inspector (PMI),
principal avionics inspector (PAI), and principal operations inspector
(POI), as appropriate. Following review and concurrence by AFS-200, the
validation flights should be conducted in accordance with any
additional guidance or recommendations specified in the review and
concurrence process. Following the successful completion of the
validation flights, the Director, Flight Standards Service, will
authorize the CHDO to issue the certificate holder OpSpecs for ETOPS
operations.
501. ETOPS OpSpecs.
Those OpSpecs for ETOPS provide authorizations and limitations
covering at least the following:
a. Approved airplane-engine combinations,
b. Current approved CMP standard required for ETOPS, if
appropriate,
c. Authorized geographic area(s) of operation,
d. ETOPS area of operation,
e. Airports authorized for use, including alternates and associated
instrument approaches and operating minima,
f. Approved maintenance and reliability program for ETOPS including
those items specified in the type design
[[Page 53063]]
approved CMP standard, if appropriate, and
g. Identification of the airplanes authorized for ETOPS by make,
model, serial, and registration number.
502. Changes to Approved ETOPS Operations, Maintenance and Training
Procedures.
Following final ETOPS approval, if a certificate holder determines
a need to make substantial changes to its ETOPS operations, maintenance
and training procedures, it should submit such changes in a timely
manner to the CHDO for review and acceptance before incorporation. The
certificate holder and its CHDO should negotiate what constitutes a
substantial change to allow flexibility and take into consideration a
certificate holder's ETOPS experience. What is considered substantial
for a new entrant ETOPS certificate holder may be considerably
different than for a certificate holder with many years of ETOPS
experience.
503. Processes After Receiving ETOPS Authority.
a. The FAA continuously monitors the world fleet average IFSD rate
for two-engine ETOPS authorized airplane-engine combinations to ensure
that the levels of reliability achieved in ETOPS remain at the required
levels. If an acceptable level of reliability in fleet average IFSD is
not maintained, or if significant deficiencies or adverse trends are
detected in type design (i.e., basic design of the airplane-engine) or
in the operation, the FAA may require the airframe and engine
manufacturers to develop a plan acceptable to the FAA to address the
deficiencies.
b. As with all other operations, the CHDO will monitor all aspects
of the ETOPS operations it has authorized to the certificate holder to
ensure that the levels of reliability achieved in ETOPS operations
remain at acceptable levels, and that the operation continues to be
conducted safely.
c. In the event that an acceptable level of reliability is not
maintained, if significant adverse trends exist, or critical
deficiencies are detected in the type design or in the conduct of ETOPS
operations, the CHDO will:
(1) Alert the appropriate airplane certification office and the
airplane evaluation group, when problems associated with airplane
design or operations are identified; and
(2) Initiate a special evaluation, impose operational restrictions
(if necessary), and ensure that the certificate holder adopts
corrective actions to resolve the problems in a timely manner.
Chapter 6. Polar Operations
600. Background.
a. In February 2001, in response to several U.S. carriers' plans to
conduct north polar operations, the FAA developed a ``Polar Policy
Letter.'' This policy letter documented the requirement for airlines to
develop necessary plans in preparation for north polar flights and
identified the necessary equipment and airplane configuration
requirements for all airplanes regardless of the number of engines. The
FAA's intent in issuing the policy letter was to ``establish a process
that can be applied uniformly to all applicants for polar route
authority.'' This policy was applied to all operators, and although not
ETOPS per se, it required ETOPS-like planning, equipage and operational
requirements in these areas.
b. During the development of the expanded ETOPS regulations the
ARAC recommended that the guidance contained in the Polar Policy letter
be incorporated in the ETOPS regulations. It also recommended that
these requirements be expanded to the South Polar Region. Although no
U.S. certificate holders were operating in the South Polar Area at the
time, it was felt that due to similar extremes in remoteness, weather,
and terrain, this area should be included in anticipation of future
industry growth.
c. The FAA agreed with the recommendations of the ARAC and has
determined that operating in the polar areas presents operational
issues similar to typical ETOPS flights, and as such, the risks
associated with this operation can be mitigated by applying planning,
operational, and equipage requirements similar to ETOPS and specific
procedures applicable to the risks associated with this type of flying.
601. Definition.
The North Polar Area is defined as the entire area north of
latitude 78 degrees North, and the South Polar Area is defined as the
entire area south of latitude 60 degrees South.
602. Applicability.
Any certificate holder operating an airplane whose route contains
any point within the North Polar area or South Polar area as defined in
paragraph 601 above, must comply with the requirements of part 121,
appendix P, section III. The certificate holder must first determine
during the route planning stage if the operation will be ETOPS as
defined in Sec. 121.161 and as further discussed in Chapter 2,
paragraph 201 of this AC. If the operation is ETOPS the polar
requirements of part 121, appendix P and the guidance in this chapter
are in addition to any of the applicable ETOPS requirements discussed
in Chapter 3, paragraphs 300-304 of this AC.
603. Polar Requirements.
a. The certificate holder applying for authority to fly in the
Polar Areas must develop plans in preparation for all polar flights in
the North and South Polar Areas. This section documents the added
requirements and identifies equipment and airplane configuration
requirements in addition to the requirements discussed in Chapter 3,
paragraphs 300-304.
b. The certificate holder's plan for conducting operations within
these areas must include the following elements:
(1) Requirements for Designating Alternates. Certificate holders
should designate a set of alternate airports regardless of their
distance from the planned route, such that one or more can reasonably
be expected to be available in a variety of weather conditions to
support a necessary diversion. The flight must have sufficient fuel as
required by Sec. 121.646, if applicable, and should be able to make a
safe landing and the airplane maneuvered off of the runway at the
selected diversion airport. In the event of a disabled airplane
following landing, the capability to move the disabled airplane should
exist at that airport, so as not to block the operation of any recovery
airplane. In addition, those airports designated for use should be
capable of protecting the safety of all personnel by being able to:
(a) Offload the passengers and crewmember in a safe manner during
adverse weather conditions;
(b) Provide for the physiological needs of the passengers and
crewmembers for the duration of the stay at the diversion airport until
safe evacuation; and
(c) Safely extract passengers and crewmembers as soon as possible
(execution and completion of the passenger recovery is expected as soon
as possible within 48 hours following diversion).
(2) Passenger Recovery Plan. Except for supplemental all-cargo
operations, each certificate holder conducting operations in the polar
areas must have a passenger recovery plan at designated diversion
airports as discussed in paragraph (1) above and in Chapter 4,
paragraph 403c(5). The passenger recovery plan in these Polar Regions
should also include special consideration for the possibility of
extreme cold weather, limited passenger facilities, and the need to
initiate passenger recovery without delay.
[[Page 53064]]
(3) Fuel Freeze Strategy and Monitoring. The certificate holder
must have a fuel-freeze strategy and procedures for monitoring fuel
freezing. The certificate holder may wish to develop a fuel freeze
strategy and monitoring program (e.g., alternate fuel freeze point
temperature determination based on actual measurements of uploaded
fuel), in lieu of using the standard minimum fuel freeze temperatures
for specific types of fuel used. In such cases, the certificate
holder's fuel freeze analysis and monitoring program for the airplane
fuel load is subject to FAA approval. The certificate holder should
have procedures established that require coordination between
maintenance, dispatch, and assigned flight crewmembers to convey the
determined fuel freeze temperature of the fuel load on board the
airplane.
(4) Communication Capability. The certificate holder must have
effective voice communications and/or data link capability for all
portions of the flight route. The requirements of Sec. 121.99 apply to
all ETOPS operations in these areas. For all other operations, company
communications may be accomplished using HF voice, HF data link,
satellite communication (SATCOM) voice or SATCOM data link. Because of
the limitations of VHF and satellite-based voice communications, ATC
communications will probably require high frequency (HF) voice over
portions of these routes. The FAA recognizes that SATCOM may not be
available for short periods during flight over the Poles. Communication
capability with HF radios also may be affected during periods of solar
flare activity. The certificate holder should consider predicted solar
flare activity and its effect on communications for each flight that is
dispatched for operations into these areas.
(5) MEL Considerations. The certificate holder must amend its MEL
to reflect the items that must be operational for these operations. For
ETOPS flights, all MEL restrictions for the applicable ETOPS operations
apply. Before receiving FAA authority to conduct these operations, all
certificate holders should review its MEL for consideration of the
dispatch availability of the following systems/equipment:
(a) Fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS), including the fuel tank
temperature indicating system;
(b) APU (when the APU is necessary for an airplane to comply with
ETOPS requirements), including electrical and pneumatic supply to its
designed capability,
(c) Autothrottle system;
(d) Communication systems relied on by the flight crewmember to
satisfy the requirement for communication capability; and
(e) Except for all-cargo operations, an expanded medical kit to
include automated external defibrillators (AED).
(6) Training. The certificate holder should address the following
training requirements in its approved training programs:
(a) QFE/QNH and meter/feet conversions (required for flight
crewmember and dispatcher training);
(b) Training requirements for fuel freeze, to include maintenance,
dispatch, and flight crewmember training (special curriculum segments);
(c) General route-specific training on weather patterns;
(d) Relevant airplane system limitations (for example fuel
temperature limits);
(e) Role of maintenance role in providing airplane systems
capability information to dispatch and flight crewmember to aid the PIC
in diversion decision making;
(f) Crewmember training in the use of the cold weather anti-
exposure suit,
(g) For dispatch and crewmember considerations during solar flare
activity, the certificate holder must be aware of the content of AC
120-52, Radiation Exposure of Certificate Holder Crewmembers, and
provide crewmember training as stated in AC 120-61, Crewmember Training
on In-Flight Radiation Exposure; and
(h) Training for flight crewmembers and dispatcher roles in the
certificate holder's passenger recovery plan.
(7) Crew Exposure to Radiation during Solar Flare Activity. The
certificate holder must provide a plan for mitigating crew exposure to
the effects of solar flare activity at the altitudes and latitudes
expected in such operations.
(8) Special Equipment for Polar Operations. A minimum of two cold
weather anti-exposure suits must be on board each airplane, so that
outside coordination at a diversion airport with extreme climatic
conditions can be accomplished safely. A short term MEL relief for this
item may be granted provided the certificate holder has arranged ground
support provisions for providing such protective clothing at alternate
airports. The FAA may also relieve the certificate holder from this
requirement during those periods of the year when the seasonal
temperature makes the equipment unnecessary.
604. Validation before Approval.
a. Prior to receiving an authorization to conduct polar operations
a certificate holder must conduct an FAA observed validation flight. As
part of polar area validation, the certificate holder must exercise its
passenger recovery plan. Adequate and timely notification must be made
to the FAA before the validation flight so that any necessary
coordination between the FAA inspector and personnel at the selected
diversion airport can be completed. The inspector will witness the
effectiveness and adequacy of the following areas of operation:
(1) Communications,
(2) Coordination,
(3) Facilities,
(4) Accuracy of Notices to Airman and weather information, and
(5) Operability of ground equipment during the simulated diversion.
b. The exercise of the certificate holder's passenger recovery plan
may be completed before the validation flight. The FAA will not
consider a request by a certificate holder to conduct the validation
flight in a passenger revenue status if the certificate holder's
passenger recovery plan has not been previously and satisfactorily
demonstrated to the FAA. If the certificate holder elects to
demonstrate its passenger recovery plan as part of and during its
validation flight, the flight may not be conducted in a passenger
revenue status. However, the carriage of cargo revenue is permissible
in this case and is encouraged for airplane weight and balance
purposes.
605. FAA Polar Area Approval.
Certificate holders must obtain FAA approval to conduct these
operations and to operate in any area of magnetic unreliability. The
FAA will grant such authority based on a specific airplane-engine
combination. Any certificate holder wishing to obtain Polar
authorization must submit an application with all supporting data to
their local CHDO office. This application must address all the
regulatory requirements for Polar operations and may follow the
guidance as found in this AC. The application should be submitted at
least 60 days prior to the proposed start of polar operations with the
specific airplane-engine combination. FAA approval is granted by an
amendment to the certificate holder's OpSpecs.
Appendix 1. Definitions
The following definitions are applicable to ETOPS. They include
definitions from Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) parts 1 and 121, as well as terms that are used within the
context of this AC with respect to ETOPS:
1. Adequate Airport. An airport that an airplane operator may
list with approval from the FAA because that airport meets the
landing limitations of part 121, Sec. 121.197 and
[[Page 53065]]
is either, an airport that meets the requirements of 14 CFR part
139, subpart D, excluding those that apply to aircraft rescue and
firefighting service, or a military airport that is active and
operational. Airports without specific part 139 approval (i.e.,
outside FAA jurisdiction), may be considered adequate provided that
they are determined to meet the equivalent standards and intent of
part 139 subpart D.
2. Configuration, Maintenance, and Procedures (CMP) Document. A
document approved by the FAA that contains minimum configuration,
operating, and maintenance requirements, hardware life-limits, and
Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) constraints necessary for an
airplane-engine combination to meet ETOPS type design approval
requirements.
3. Dual Maintenance. Dual maintenance means maintenance on the
``same'' ETOPS significant system. Dual maintenance is maintenance
action performed on the same element of identical, but separate
ETOPS Significant Systems during a scheduled or unscheduled
maintenance visit. Dual maintenance on ``substantially similar''
ETOPS significant systems means maintenance actions performed on
engine-driven components on both engines during the same maintenance
visit.
4. Equal-Time Point (ETP). A point on the route of flight where
the flight time, considering wind, to each of two selected airports
is equal.
5. ER. An abbreviation used in the MMEL and in the minimum
equipment list (MEL) of some certificate holders to indicate ETOPS.
As used in this AC, any ETOPS MMEL/MEL restrictions applicable to
ETOPS.
6. ETOPS Alternate Airport. An adequate airport listed in the
certificate holder's operations specifications (OpSpecs) that is
designated in a dispatch or flight release for use in the event of a
diversion during ETOPS. This definition applies to flight planning
and does not in any way limit the authority of the pilot in command
during flight.
7. ETOPS Area of Operation. For turbine-engine-powered airplanes
with two engines an area beyond 60 minutes from an adequate airport,
or with more than two engines in passenger-carrying operations, an
area beyond 180 minutes from an adequate airport, and within the
authorized ETOPS maximum diversion time approved for the operation
being conducted. An ETOPS area of operation is calculated at an
approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard
conditions in still air.
8. ETOPS Entry Point. The first point on the route of an ETOPS
flight; determined using a one-engine-inoperative cruise speed under
standard conditions in still air that is more than 60 minutes from
an adequate airport for airplanes with two engines, and more than
180 minutes from an adequate airport for passenger-carrying
airplanes with more than two engines.
9. ETOPS Significant System. An airplane system, including the
propulsion system, the failure or malfunctioning of which could
adversely affect the safety of an ETOPS flight, or the continued
safe flight and landing of an airplane during an ETOPS diversion.
Each ETOPS significant system is either an ETOPS group 1 significant
system or an ETOPS group 2 significant system.
a. An ETOPS group 1 Significant System:
(1) Has fail-safe characteristics directly linked to the degree
of redundancy provided by the number of engines on the airplane;
(2) Is a system, the failure or malfunction of which could
result in an in-flight shutdown (IFSD), loss of thrust control, or
other power loss;
(3) Contributes significantly to the safety of an ETOPS
diversion by providing additional redundancy for any system power
source lost as a result of an inoperative engine; and
(4) Is essential for prolonged operation of an airplane at
engine inoperative altitudes.
b. An ETOPS group 2 significant system is an ETOPS significant
system that is not an ETOPS group 1 significant system.
10. ETOPS-Qualified Personnel. A person performing maintenance
for the certificate holder, who has satisfactorily completed the
certificate holder's ETOPS training program.
11. Extended Operations (ETOPS). An airplane flight operation
during which a portion of the flight is conducted beyond 60 minutes
from an adequate airport for turbine-engine-powered airplanes with
two engines, and beyond 180 minutes for turbine-engine-powered
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines. This
distance is determined using an approved one-engine-inoperative
cruise speed under standard atmospheric conditions in still air.
12. Flight-by-Flight Exception. The application of a greater
ETOPS maximum diversion authority under specific, limited
circumstances, as defined in this AC, when a flight cannot be
planned on the preferred route within an authorized lesser diversion
time.
13. In-Flight Shutdown (IFSD). For ETOPS only, when an engine
ceases to function (when the airplane is airborne) and is shut down,
whether self induced, flight crew initiated or caused by an external
influence. The FAA considers IFSD for all causes, such as flameout,
internal failure, flight crew initiated shutdown, foreign object
ingestion, icing, inability to obtain or control desired thrust or
power, and cycling of the start control; however briefly, even if
the engine operates normally for the remainder of the flight. This
definition excludes the airborne cessation of the functioning of an
engine when immediately followed by an automatic engine relight and
when an engine does not achieve desired thrust or power but is not
shut down.
14. Maximum Diversion Time. For the purposes of ETOPS in Sec.
121.161 and related ETOPS regulations, maximum diversion time (for
example 120 minutes, 180 minutes, 240 minutes, and, beyond 240
minutes) is the longest diversion time authorized for a flight under
the operator's ETOPS authority. It is calculated under standard
conditions in still air at a one-engine-inoperative cruise speed.
15. One-Engine-Inoperative Cruise Speed. For the purposes of
those sections of part 121 applicable to ETOPS, the one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed is a speed within the certified operating
limits of the airplane that is specified by the certificate holder
and approved by the FAA for calculating required fuel reserves
needed to account for an inoperative engine, or determining whether
an ETOPS alternate is within the maximum diversion time authorized
for an ETOPS flight.
Note: The following areas (16-18) are defined for the purposes
of those sections of part 121 applicable to ETOPS:
16. North Pacific (NOPAC). The North Pacific Air Traffic Service
(ATS) routes and adjacent airspace between Anchorage and Tokyo
Flight Information Regions (FIR).
17. North Pacific Area of Operations. Pacific Ocean areas north
of 40[deg] North latitudes including NOPAC ATS routes, and published
Pacific Organized Track System (PACOTS) tracks between Japan and
North America. (For the purposes of this definition, ``North
America'' includes the countries of Canada, the United States, and
Mexico.)
18. Polar Areas.
a. North Polar Area. The entire area north of 78[deg] North
latitude.
b. South Polar Area. The entire area south of 60[deg] South
latitude.
19. Process. A series of steps or activities that are
accomplished in a consistent manner to ensure a desired result is
attained on an ongoing basis.
20. Proven Process. A process is considered to be proven when
the following elements are developed and implemented:
a. Definition and documentation of process elements.
b. Definition of process related roles and responsibilities.
c. Procedures for validation of process or process elements to
include:
Indications of process stability/reliability.
Parameters to validate process and monitor (measure)
success.
Duration of necessary evaluation to validate process.
d. Procedure for follow-up in-service monitoring to assure the
process remains reliable and stable.
[[Page 53066]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.009
[[Page 53067]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.010
[[Page 53068]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.011
[[Page 53069]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.012
[[Page 53070]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.013
[[Page 53071]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.014
[[Page 53072]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.015
[[Page 53073]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.016
[[Page 53074]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.017
[[Page 53075]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.018
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[[Page 53076]]
Appendix 3. ETOPS Approval Methods
The two different approval methods available for a certificate
holder's use are described in this appendix.
1. IN-SERVICE EXPERIENCE METHOD (TWO-ENGINE ETOPS FOR UP TO 180-
MINUTE ETOPS).
a. General.
(1) An in-service experience program is one way of gaining ETOPS
operational approval. As a prerequisite to obtaining any operational
approval, the certificate holder should show that an acceptable
level of propulsion system reliability has been achieved in service
by the world fleet for that particular airplane-engine combination.
The candidate certificate holder also should obtain sufficient
maintenance and operation familiarity with the particular airplane-
engine combination. Each certificate holder requesting approval to
conduct ETOPS by the in-service method should have operational
experience appropriate to the operation proposed.
(2) This appendix contains guidelines for requisite in-service
experience. These guidelines may be reduced or increased following
review and concurrence on a case by case basis by the Director,
Flight Standards Service. Any reduction or increase in in-service
experience guidelines will be based on an evaluation of the
certificate holder's ability and competence to achieve the necessary
reliability for the particular airplane-engine combination in ETOPS.
For example, a reduction in in-service experience may be considered
for a certificate holder who can show extensive in-service
experience with a related engine on another airplane that has
achieved acceptable reliability. In contrast, an increase in in-
service experience may be considered for those cases where heavy
maintenance has yet to occur and/or abnormally low number of
takeoffs has occurred.
b. Specific Approvals.
(1) 75- and 90-Minute Operation. Consideration may be given to
the approval of 75-minute and 90-minute ETOPS for certificate
holders with minimal or no in-service experience with the airplane-
engine combination. This determination considers such factors as the
proposed area of operations, the certificate holder's demonstrated
ability to successfully introduce airplanes into operations, and the
quality of the proposed maintenance and operations programs.
(2) 120-Minute Operation. Each certificate holder requesting
approval to conduct ETOPS with a maximum diversion time (in still
air) of 120 minutes should have 12 consecutive months of operational
in-service experience with the specified airplane-engine
combination. In-service experience guidelines may be increased or
decreased by the Director, Flight Standards Service.
(3) 180-Minute Operation.
(a) Each certificate holder requesting approval to conduct ETOPS
with a maximum diversion time (in still air) of 180 minutes should
have previously gained 12 consecutive months of operational in
service experience with the specified airplane-engine combination in
conducting 120-minute ETOPS. In-service experience guidelines may be
reduced or increased by the Director, Flight Standards Service.
Likewise, the substitution of in-service experience, which is
equivalent to the actual conduct of 120-minute ETOPS operations,
also will be established by the Director, Flight Standards Service,
on a case by-case basis.
(b) Before approval, the certificate holder's capability to
conduct operations and implement effective ETOPS programs in
accordance with the criteria detailed in this AC will be examined.
Only certificate holders who have demonstrated capability to
successfully conduct a 120-minute program will be considered for
approval beyond 120 minutes. Approval will be given on a case-by-
case basis for an increase to their area of operation beyond 120
minutes. The dispatch limitation will be a maximum diversion time of
180 minutes to an ETOPS alternate at an approved one-engine-
inoperative speed (under standard conditions in still air).
c. Requesting Approval. A certificate holder requesting approval
under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121,
Sec. 121.161 for ETOPS under this method should submit the request
with the required supporting data to its CHDO at least 60 days
before the proposed start of ETOPS operation with the specific
airplane-engine combination. In considering an application from a
certificate holder to conduct ETOPS, the CHDO should assess the
certificate holder's overall safety record, past performance, flight
crewmember training, and maintenance programs. The data provided
with the request should substantiate the certificate holder's
ability and competence to safely conduct and support these
operations and should include the means used to satisfy the
considerations outlined in this paragraph.
2. ACCELERATED ETOPS METHOD (UP TO 180-MINUTE ETOPS FOR TWO-
ENGINE AIRPLANES AND FOR ALL ETOPS FOR PASSENGER-CARRYING AIRPLANES
WITH MORE THAN TWO ENGINES). This section describes the means by
which a certificate holder may initiate ETOPS operations when the
certificate holder establishes the processes necessary for
successful and reliable ETOPS operations and proves to the FAA that
such processes can be successfully applied throughout the
applicant's ETOPS operations. This may be achieved by thorough
documentation and analysis of processes and process validation, or
demonstration on another airplane/validation (as described under
process validation in this appendix, below) or a combination of
these processes.
a. ETOPS Processes. The airplane-engine combination for which
the certificate holder is seeking accelerated ETOPS operational
approval must be ETOPS type design-approved (except for two-engine
ETOPS at 75- and 90-minute authorizations and for passenger-carrying
airplanes with more than two engines manufactured prior to March 17,
2015) and determined to be operating at a satisfactory level of
reliability before commencing ETOPS. The certificate holder seeking
accelerated ETOPS operational approval must demonstrate to the FAA
that it has an ETOPS program in place that consists of all the
following applicable ETOPS process elements:
(1) The process elements defined as the ETOPS maintenance and
operations requirements of Chapter 3, paragraphs 301-304.
(2) Documentation of the following elements as appropriate:
(a) Technology new to the certificate holder and significant
difference in primary and secondary power (engines, electrical,
hydraulic, and pneumatic) systems between the airplanes currently
operated and the two-engine airplane for which the certificate
holder is seeking ETOPS operational approval.
(b) The plan to train flight and maintenance personnel to the
differences identified in the maintenance subparagraph above.
(c) The plan to use proven manufacturer-validated training and
maintenance and operations manual procedures relevant to ETOPS for
the two-engine airplane for which the certificate holder is seeking
accelerated ETOPS operational approval.
(d) Changes to any previously proven validated training,
maintenance or operations manual procedures used in previous non-
ETOPS operations or in previous ETOPS with a different airplane-
engine combination and/or geographic area of operations. Depending
on the nature and extent of any changes, the certificate holder may
be required to provide a plan for validating such changes.
(e) The validation plan for any additional certificate holder
unique training and procedures relevant to ETOPS.
(f) Details of any ETOPS program support from the airframe
manufacturer, engine manufacturer, other certificate holders or any
other outside person.
(g) The control procedures when maintenance or flight dispatch
support is provided by an outside person as described above.
b. Process Validation Methodology.
(1) Paragraph (a) identifies those process elements that should
be proven before ETOPS authority is granted by the FAA under the
accelerated ETOPS approval program. For a process to be considered
proven the process should first be defined. Typically, this will
include a flow chart showing the various elements of the process.
Roles and responsibilities of the personnel who will be managing
this process should be defined including any training requirement.
The certificate holder should demonstrate that the process is in
place and functions as intended. The certificate holder may
accomplish this by thorough documentation and analysis, or by
demonstrating on an airplane, that the process works and
consistently provides the intended results. The certificate holder
should define the necessary evaluation duration to validate the
process and also show that a feedback loop exists to illustrate need
for revision of the process, if required, based on in-service
experience.
(2) Normally the choice to use or not to use demonstration on an
airplane as a means of validating individual processes should be
[[Page 53077]]
determined by the certificate holder. Process validation may be done
with the airframe-engine combination that will be used in ETOPS. It
can also be done with a different airplane type from that for which
ETOPS approval is being sought, including an airplane with more than
two engines, if it can be shown that the particular airplane-engine
combination in the certificate holder's ETOPS program is not
necessary to validate a process. With sufficient preparation and
dedication of resources, such validation may not be necessary to
assure processes that produce acceptable results. However, if the
plan proposed by the certificate holder to prove processes is
determined by the FAA to be inadequate or the plan does not produce
acceptable results, validation of the processes with an airplane
will be required.
(3) If a certificate holder currently is conducting ETOPS with a
different airplane-engine combination, it may be able to document
that it has proven ETOPS processes in place with only minimal
further validation required. If the certificate holder has similar
non-ETOPS operations and can simulate or demonstrate proven ETOPS
processes in such operations, credit can be given for such
successful evaluations. In either case, the certificate holder
should demonstrate that the means are in place to assure equivalent
results with the airplane-engine combination being proposed for
ETOPS operational approval. The following elements may aid in
justifying a reduction in the validation requirement of ETOPS
processes:
(a) Experience with other airframes and/or engines,
(b) Previous ETOPS experience,
(c) Experience with long range, overwater operations with two-,
three-, or four-engine airplanes, and
(d) Experience gained by flight crewmembers and maintenance and
flight dispatch personnel while working with other ETOPS-approved
certificate holders.
c. Application for Accelerated ETOPS Program. The certificate
holder seeking accelerated ETOPS operational approval should submit
an Accelerated ETOPS operational approval plan to the FAA six months
before the proposed start of ETOPS. This will provide sufficient
time for the certificate holder and the FAA to validate the
effectiveness of all ETOPS process elements (``proven process'').
The certificate holder's application for ETOPS should--
(1) State the ETOPS authority requested. Define proposed routes
and the ETOPS diversion time necessary to support these routes and
the airplane-engine combination to be flown.
(2) Define processes and related resources being allocated to
initiate and sustain ETOPS operations in a manner that demonstrates
commitment by management and all personnel involved in ETOPS
maintenance and operational support.
(3) Provide a documented plan for compliance with requirements
listed in this section for Accelerated ETOPS.
(4) Define Review Gates. A review gate is a milestone-tracking
plan to allow for the orderly tracking and documentation of specific
provisions of this Appendix. Each review gate should be defined in
terms of the process elements to be validated. Normally, the review
gate process will start six months before the proposed start of
ETOPS and should continue until at least six months after the start
of ETOPS. The review gate process will help ensure that the proven
processes comply with the provisions of this AC and are capable of
continued ETOPS operations.
d. Validation of Process Elements. When the certificate holders
accelerated ETOPS plan receives approval by the CHDO and final
concurrence by AFS-200, a validation of the process elements of the
accelerated ETOPS plan should begin. Close coordination between the
certificate holder and the FAA is necessary for a successful
validation of the ETOPS plan. All process elements required in
paragraph (a) should be validated.
(1) Before the start of the validation of the process elements,
the following information should be part of the Accelerated ETOPS
plan submitted to the FAA:
(a) Validation periods, including start dates and proposed
completion dates.
(b) Definition of airplane(s) to be used in the validation. List
should include registration numbers, manufacturer and serial number
and model of the airframes and engines.
(c) Description of the areas of operation (if relevant to
validation objectives) proposed for validation and actual ETOPS.
(d) Definition of designated ETOPS validation routes. The routes
should be of duration necessary to ensure process validation occurs.
(2) Process validation reporting. The certificate holder should
compile results of ETOPS process validation. The certificate holder
should:
(a) Document how each element of the ETOPS process was utilized
during the validation.
(b) Document any shortcomings with the process elements and
measures in place to correct such shortcomings.
(c) Document any changes to ETOPS processes that were required
after an IFSD, unscheduled engine removals, or any other significant
operational events.
(d) When there is concurrence between the certificate holder and
the CHDO that a process element has been successfully proven, the
review gate should be closed and confirmation documented.
(e) Provide periodic process validation reports to the FAA. This
should be addressed during the review gates.
(3) The certificate holder should include a final review gate
prior to final ETOPS approval that is the validation flights
described in Chapter 4, paragraphs 404 and 405 of this AC. This
review gate should ensure that all ETOPS processes have been proven.
(4) Any validation program should address the following:
(a) The certificate holder should show that it has considered
the impact of the ETOPS validation program with regard to safety of
flight operations. The certificate holder should state in its
application any policy guidance to personnel involved in the ETOPS
process validation program. Such guidance should clearly state that
ETOPS process validation exercises should not be allowed to
adversely impact the safety of operations especially during periods
of abnormal, emergency, or high cockpit workload operations. It
should emphasize that during periods of abnormal or emergency
operation or high cockpit workload ETOPS process validation
exercises may be terminated.
(b) The validation scenario(s) should be of sufficient frequency
and operational exposure to validate maintenance and operational
support systems not validated by other means.
(c) A means must be established to monitor and report
performance with respect to accomplishment of tasks associated with
ETOPS process elements. Any recommended changes to ETOPS maintenance
and operational process elements should be defined.
e. Final Approval for Accelerated ETOPS Authority. At the
successful completion of the certificate holder's accelerated ETOPS
validation program all process elements should have been validated
and appropriate review gates closed. Report of a successful
completion of review gates will be forwarded by the CHDO to AFS-200.
Upon final concurrence and approval, the applicant should forward to
the FAA a plan for final validation flights to be conducted over
proposed routes in the ETOPS area of operation and in the airframe-
engine combination listed in the certificate holder's application.
This FAA witnessed ETOPS validation flight or flights will be
conducted in accordance with Chapter 4, paragraphs 404 and 405 of
this AC. The purpose of these flights is for the certificate holder
to demonstrate to the FAA that it has the competence and capability
to safely conduct and adequately support the intended ETOPS
operation.
[FR Doc. 07-4473 Filed 9-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P