53044 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 

Jim.Ryan@faa.gov. 

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. Allcargo 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 PassengerCarrying 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 TwoEngine 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 

§ 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, 

§ 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, § 21.4; part 25, § 25.1535; part 121, 

§§ 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 threeand four-engine passenger-carrying 

airplanes operated under part 121 are 

required to comply with § 121.161. This 

regulation imposes special requirements 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 § 121.162 and 

§ 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 §§ 121.97 through 121.107 (domestic 

and flag operations) and §§ 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 § 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 § 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 twoengine 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 extendedrange 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 

§ 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 § 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 § 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 twoengine airplanes. As the technology and 

reliability of two-engine airplanes 

continued to improve, due in large 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53046 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 twoengine airplanes to the arena of longrange 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 longrange operations in three- and fourengine 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 fourengine airplanes, and would improve 

the safety and viability of such 

operations. All long-range passengercarrying 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 fourengine 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 § 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 twinengine 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 nontechnical 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 (§ 121.631), have the ability 

to communicate with the certificate 

holder’s dispatch office and air traffic 

control (§§ 121.99 and 121.122), and 

have sufficient fuel to divert to the 

alternate (§ 121.646). Under the 

‘‘preclude and protect’’ concept, various 

failure scenarios need to be considered. 

For example, during the design of the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 § 121.161 and the engine inoperative 

diversion requirements of § 121.565. Inservice 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 § 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 twoengine ETOPS beyond 180 minutes are 

limited to a specific geographical region. 

Historically, ETOPS authorities for twoengine 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 twoengine 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 § 121.646(b) and 

must therefore account for wind. 

However, the flight planning limitations 

of § 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 (TwoEngine Airplanes and All PassengerCarrying Airplanes With More Than 2 

Engines). As required by § 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53048 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 § 121.633(b) are 

met at the equal-time points between 

ETOPS alternates determined by the 

most limiting en route fuel supply 

requirements of § 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 § 121.633(b)(1). As 

required by § 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 § 25.3(c). The 

Certificate holder operating an airplaneengine combination with more than two 

engines is required to comply with 

§ 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 

§ 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 § 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., §§ 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 inservice 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. Timelimited systems such as cargo 

compartment fire suppression/ 

containment capability must be 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53049 

considered (§ 121.633). The certificate 

holder must also have an established 

program that monitors the reliability of 

systems significant to ETOPS 

(§ 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 (§ 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 § 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 airplaneengine 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53050 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 nonETOPS qualified maintenance personnel 

may accomplish the non-ETOPS tasks. 

An ETOPS-qualified maintenance 

individual must complete all ETOPSrelated 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 ETOPSqualified 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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 ETOPSqualified 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 ETOPSrelated 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 § 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 § 121.703(e). 

(4) The certificate holder must 

conduct an investigation into the cause 

of the occurrence of any event listed in 

§ 121.703 and § 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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53052 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 airplaneengine 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 FAAcertificated 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53054 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 § 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 § 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, userfriendly 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 twoengine 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 § 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 allengines-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 enginepowered airplanes not meeting these 

requirements as of the effective date of 

§ 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-engineinoperative 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 

§ 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 firefighting 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 (§ 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., §§ 121.617, 121.621, and 121.623). 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53056 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

(6) Fuel Supply. The certificate holder 

must comply with the ETOPS en-route 

fuel supply as specified in § 121.646(b) 

as follows: 

(a) No person may dispatch or release 

for flight or takeoff a turbine enginepowered airplane in ETOPS unless, 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.008</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 

§ 121.333, or 

• At the approved one-engineinoperative 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 

§ 121.333, or 

• At the approved one-engineinoperative cruise speed assuming an 

engine failure at the most critical point 

followed by descent to the one-engineinoperative 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 

§ 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 § 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53058 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 (§ 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, § 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, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 § 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-incommand. 

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 (§ 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53060 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 airplaneengine 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 § 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 recertification under § 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 § 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 § 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 inservice 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 nonETOPS 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 § 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 §§ 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 

§§ 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 

(§ 121.646), and the time limited system 

requirements of § 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 § 121.97(ii). Current 

requirements are found in 

§ 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 timelimited 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 (§ 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53062 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 

§ 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 passengercarrying 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 FAAwitnessed 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 caseby-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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 airplaneengine 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 § 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 § 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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53064 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

(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 § 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 InFlight 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 airplaneengine 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 airplaneengine 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, § 121.197 and 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 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 enginedriven 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 turbineengine-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 oneengine 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 turbineengine-powered airplanes with two engines, 

and beyond 180 minutes for turbine-enginepowered passenger-carrying airplanes with 

more than two engines. This distance is 

determined using an approved one-engineinoperative 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 § 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-engineinoperative 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° 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° North latitude. 

b. South Polar Area. The entire area south 

of 60° 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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

53066 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.009</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53067 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.010</GPH>
53068 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53069 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.012</GPH>
53070 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.013</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53071 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.014</GPH>
53072 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.015</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53073 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.016</GPH>
53074 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.017</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53075 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2EN17SE07.018</GPH>
53076 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 

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 airplaneengine 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 inservice 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 inservice 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 caseby-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, § 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 designapproved (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 twoengine 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 manufacturervalidated 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 nonETOPS 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 179 / Monday, September 17, 2007 / Notices 53077 

determined by the certificate holder. Process 

validation may be done with the airframeengine 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 airplaneengine 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 airplaneengine 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES2