Group Requests Comment Period Extension
In comments submitted
this week to the FAA, the National Air Transportation Association
(NATA) called on the agency to postpone further action on proposed
restrictions on long-range aircraft operations until the industry
is able to fully evaluate the proposal. In a separate letter, NATA
also requested that the FAA reopen the comment period for an
additional 90 days. The FAA proposal seeks to impose Extended
Operations (ETOPS) regulations on Part 135 flights, requiring
operators to remain within 180 minutes of an "adequate airport" on
all flights outside the continental United States. If an
operator meets additional ETOPS operational and equipment
requirements, flights up to a maximum limitation of 240 minutes
would be possible.
NATA director of government and industry affairs Eric Byer
explained, "Although there were several components of the rule
which we commented on, it was impossible to comment on the central
issues - what exactly does 180 minutes mean and how will it impact
existing operations?"
Equating the 180-minute standard to a distance is necessary to
plan the flight so as to remain within single-engine range of
alternate airports. The equation requires a range of speeds
determined by airplane manufacturers for this purpose.
Unfortunately, these speed tables are not yet available.
Byer continued, "It is impossible to conduct a meaningful
evaluation of the regulations when we have no real idea how the
180-minute limit changes the existing environment. In our
opinion, it also puts the entire economic analysis in serious
trouble. If data essential to analyzing the rule does not
exist, how could the FAA have reasonably determined the
impact?"
Particularly troubling to the association is the FAA's assertion
that a range limitation exists today and that creating ETOPS rules
permitting flight beyond 180 minutes would therefore result in
industry costs savings. NATA's comments refuted the FAA's claims
that Part 135 operations are restricted to 180-minute limitations
today, stating, "Despite numerous requests for what the agency has
described as a "de facto" policy, to date the FAA has not produced
a single regulation, handbook bulletin, policy memorandum or other
document enforceable upon an operator stating any such
restriction."
Also troubling to the association is the apparent failure to
recognize that a 180-minute limitation imposes a regulatory burden
on all Part 135 operations outside the continental United States,
not just those operations conducted beyond the 180-minute
standard.
The comments state, "As
most regulated entities will attest, there is no presumption of
compliance with a regulation. The operator must at all times
be able to demonstrate compliance with regulations. In the
case of an ETOPS limitation, this would include demonstration that
a given flight was below the 180-minute threshold and, therefore,
was not an unauthorized ETOPS operation."
"We hope the FAA's review of comments will open their eyes to the
many shortcomings of this proposal and that they will not attempt
to proceed to a final rule until these issues are resolved," Byer
concluded.