[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 179 (Monday, September 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53044-53077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4473]



[[Page 53043]]

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

Part V





Department of Transportation





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



Federal Aviation Administration



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



Proposed Advisory Circular No. 120-42B, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and 
Polar Operations; Notice Proposed Advisory Circular No. 135-42, 
Extended Operations (ETOPS) and Operations in the North Polar Area; 
Notice

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

[[Page 53044]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket Number FAA-2002-6717]


Proposed Advisory Circular No. 120-42B, Extended Operations 
(ETOPS) and Polar Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability of a proposed advisory circular and 
request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of and requests 
comments on a proposed Advisory Circular (AC): AC No. 120-42B, Extended 
Operations (ETOPS) and Polar Operations. Also in this Federal Register, 
the FAA publishes draft AC No. 135-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and 
Operations in the North Polar Area, for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the proposed AC to Docket Number FAA-
2002-6717, using any of the following methods:
    <bullet> DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
    <bullet> Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at 
202-493-2251.
    <bullet> 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 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#99d3f0f4b7cbe0f8f7d9fff8f8b7fef6ef"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e0aa898dceb299818ea0868181ce878f96">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44703.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to submit comments on the proposed 
AC. Commenters must identify AC No. 120-42B and submit comments to the 
address specified under ADDRESSES. All communications received on or 
before the closing date for comments will be considered by the FAA 
before issuing the final AC.
    An electronic copy of the proposed AC, which are published in full 
here, may be obtained by accessing the FAA's web page at--http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/.
    The Extended Operations (ETOPS) final rule was published in the 
Federal Register on January 16, 2007. This final rule applies to air 
carrier (part 121), commuter, and on-demand (part 135) turbine powered 
multi-engine airplanes used in extended-range operations. All-cargo 
operations in airplanes with more than two engines were exempted from 
most of the rule. It established regulations governing the design, 
operation and maintenance of certain airplanes operated on flights that 
fly long distances from an adequate airport. This advisory circular 
provides further guidance for these extended operations to those 
conducting operations under 14 CFR part 121. It also further clarifies 
the rule's requirements for Polar operations.

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 27, 2007.
James J. Ballough,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Draft Advisory Circular 120-42B, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and Polar 
Operations

Contents

Paragraph

Chapter 1. General
    100. Applicability
    101. Cancellations
    102. Related Regulations
Chapter 2. Background on ETOPS
    200. ETOPS Regulatory Requirements
    201. Evolution of ETOPS
    202. ETOPS Applicability to All Passenger-Carrying Airplanes 
Flown in Long-Range Operations
    203. ``Extended Operations''
    204. Preclude and Protect
    205. ETOPS Areas of Operation
    206. ETOPS Alternate Requirements
    207. ETOPS In-Service Experience Requirements
    208. Operational Reliability and Systems Suitability 
Requirements
Chapter 3. Requirements for ETOPS Authorization
    300. ETOPS Requirements
    301. Maintenance Requirements for Two-Engine ETOPS Authorization
    302. ETOPS Maintenance Training Requirements
    303. ETOPS Flight Operations Requirements
    304. Flight Operations Training Requirements
Chapter 4. Applications To Conduct ETOPS
    400. ETOPS Qualifications
    401. Application for ETOPS Authorization
    402. ETOPS Authorities
    403. ETOPS Authorization Requirements
    404. Validation Flight(s)
    405. Required Demonstration on a Validation Flight
Chapter 5. FAA ETOPS Approval
    500. Final ETOPS Operating Authority
    501. ETOPS OpSpecs
    502. Changes to Approved ETOPS Operations, Maintenance and 
Training Procedures
    503. Processes after Receiving ETOPS Authority
Chapter 6. Polar Operations
    600. Background
    601. Definition
    602. Applicability
    603. Polar Requirements
    604. Validation before Approval
    605. FAA Polar Area Approval
Appendix 1. Definitions
Appendix 2. ETOPS Approvals
Appendix 3. ETOPS Approval Methods

Chapter 1. General

    100. Applicability. This AC concerns those certificate holders 
applying for approval to conduct ETOPS under Sec.  121.161, as well as 
those certificate holders applying for approval to conduct flights 
where a portion of which traverse either the North or South Polar 
Areas, as defined in part 121, Sec.  121.7. This AC also provides 
guidance in resolving operational issues to certificate holders 
currently conducting such operations.
    101. Cancellations. The following AC's and policy letters are 
cancelled:
    <bullet> AC 120-42A, Extended Range Operation with Two-Engine 
Airplanes, dated December 30, 1988;
    <bullet> ETOPS Policy Letter (EPL) 95-1, 138-Minute ETOPS 
Operational Approval Criteria, dated December 19, 1994;
    <bullet> EPL 20-1, 207-Minute ETOPS Operational Approval Criteria, 
dated March 21, 2000; and
    <bullet> FAA Policy Letter, Guidance for Polar Operations, dated 
March 5, 2001.
    102. Related Regulations. 14 CFR part 21, Sec.  21.4; part 25, 
Sec.  25.1535; part 121, Sec. Sec.  121.7, 121.97, 121.99, 121.106, 
121.135, 121.161, 121.162, 121.191, 121.197, 121.374, 121.410, 121.415, 
121.565, 121.624, 121.625, 121.631, 121.633, 121.646, 121.687, 121.689, 
121.703, 121.704, and 121.705; and part 121, appendix P (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr).

Chapter 2. Background on ETOPS

    200. ETOPS Regulatory Requirements.
    a. All two-engine airplanes and three- and four-engine passenger-
carrying airplanes operated under part 121 are required to comply with 
Sec.  121.161. This regulation imposes special requirements

[[Page 53045]]

for extended operations (ETOPS) for these airplanes. These operations 
are defined as:
    (1) Two-Engine Airplanes. These are flights whose planned routing 
contains a point farther than 60 minutes flying time from an adequate 
airport at an approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed in still 
air.
    (2) Passenger-Carrying Airplanes with More Than Two Engines. These 
are flights whose planned routing contains a point farther than 180 
minutes flying time from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed in still air.
    b. To conduct ETOPS, the specified airplane-engine combination must 
be certificated to the airworthiness standards of transport-category 
airplanes and be approved for ETOPS. (Airplane certification guidance 
for ETOPS can be found in Sec.  121.162 and Sec.  25.1535, as well as 
AC 25.1535-1. As with all other operations, a certificate holder 
requesting any route approval must first show that it is able to 
satisfactorily conduct operations between each required airport as 
defined for that route or route segment, and any required en route 
alternate airport. Certificate holders must show that the facilities 
and services specified in Sec. Sec.  121.97 through 121.107 (domestic 
and flag operations) and Sec. Sec.  121.113 through 121.127 
(supplemental and commercial operations) are available and adequate for 
the proposed operation. In addition, the certificate holder must be 
approved for ETOPS under part 121. This AC provides the additional 
guidance for certificate holder approval for ETOPS.
    201. Evolution of ETOPS.
    a. Section 121.161 has an extensive historical basis, which began 
as early as 1936. Before obtaining approval for operation in 1936, an 
applicant operating an airplane with two piston engines was required to 
show that intermediate fields available for safe takeoffs and landings 
were located at least at 100-mile intervals along the proposed route. 
Previously, the rule imposed restrictions only on two-engine airplanes 
based on the lack of satisfactory engine reliability in the operation. 
In response to improvements in engine design and reliability, and 
responding to the needs of industry, the FAA has provided guidance for 
deviations from the rule that have allowed two-engine operations to 
expand incrementally beyond the initial 60-minute restriction. 
Currently, engine reliability has improved to a level where the safety 
of the operations is not impacted so much by the number of engines, but 
by other factors that affect operations of all airplanes whose routings 
take them great distances from adequate airports. Throughout the 
evolution of the current Sec.  121.161, the following factors have 
remained constant:
    (1) The rule has always applied to all areas of operation, and has 
not been limited to overwater operations.
    (2) Any additional restrictions imposed or, alternatively, any 
deviations granted to operate in excess of the basic requirements, were 
based on a finding by the Administrator that adequate safety would be 
provided in the proposed operation and current levels of safety would 
be maintained when all factors were considered. This finding was never 
limited to engine reliability alone.
    (3) The airports used in meeting the provisions of the rule must be 
adequate for the airplane used (that is, available for safe landings 
and takeoff with the weights authorized).
    (4) Adequate levels of safety within the operation are to be 
maintained. Operations over increasingly remote areas and the 
possibility of increased diversion lengths have a potentially negative 
impact on the safety of the diversion, and thus the operation as a 
whole. Additional regulatory requirements are intended to ensure that 
this potential increase in risk is mitigated and that adequate levels 
of safety within operations are retained.
    (5) When considering the impact of operating at greater distances 
from airports, the certificate holder must show that the operation can 
be conducted at a level of reliability that maintains an acceptable 
level of risk.
    b. In June of 1985, responding to the industry's desire to take 
advantage of the increased reliability and capabilities of two-engine 
airplanes, the FAA issued AC 120-42. This AC provided guidance on one 
means of obtaining deviation authority from Sec.  121.161 to allow two 
engine airplanes to operate on routes up to 120 minutes from an 
adequate airport after demonstration of specific levels of in-service 
experience and systems reliability. The FAA amended this AC in 1988 (AC 
120-42A) to permit two-engine airplanes to operate up to 180 minutes 
from an adequate airport. These ACs introduced the term ``ETOPS'' for 
those specific extended operations and addressed airplane and engine 
design aspects, maintenance programs, and operations. Both of these ACs 
encompassed the following precepts:
    (1) Reliance on a two-step approval that included type design of 
the airplane-engine combination and approval of the certificate 
holder's operation.
    (2) Risk, as measured by diversion length, is mitigated by 
application of regulations and guidance reflecting current best 
practices that address the type certification of the ETOPS airplane and 
its systems as well as the operational environment of such operations.
    (3) ETOPS can be managed successfully, and the level of safety can 
be maintained, by up-to-date regulations and guidance that articulate 
quantifiable standards of reliability and experience.
    c. The original guidance for extended-range operations with two-
engine airplanes in AC 120-42 allowed an increase of up to 15 percent 
to the maximum diversion time of 120 minutes. This provision was 
eliminated with the release of the guidance in AC 120-42A, providing 
for operations up to 180 minutes. Recognizing a need for ETOPS 
diversion authority between 120 and 180 minutes, the FAA reinstated the 
138-minute provision by issuing EPL 95 1 in 1994. In March of 2000, at 
the request of the industry, the FAA issued ETOPS Policy Letter (EPL) 
20-1, 207 Minute ETOPS Operation Approval Criteria. This document 
provided a similar 15 percent increase in the 180-minute maximum 
diversion time and gave limited relief to ETOPS certificate holders in 
the specific case of North Pacific Operations.
    d. Since the advent of the original Sec.  121.161, extended two-
engine airplane operations have been governed by this rule, and the 
process of evolving and progressive guidance has reflected the 
successful and ever-increasing experience of the industry. As capable 
as this body of guidance has been in the past, it became increasingly 
clear that a need existed to codify all the disparate documents into a 
single body of rules, and to update the existing rules to reflect all 
the industry improvements such progress has used as its basis. 
Consequently Sec.  121.161 was revised to expand two-engine operational 
authority under successful ETOPS processes and require certain 
operations of all passenger-carrying part 121 airplanes to adopt ETOPS 
requirements. This AC reflects current Sec.  121.161 regulatory 
requirements.
    202. ETOPS Applicability to All Passenger-Carrying Airplanes Flown 
in Long-Range Operations.
    a. AC 120-42 in 1985, and AC 120-42A in 1988, recognized the 
increasing reliability of turbojet engines and helped to establish type 
design and operational practices for safe and reliable long-range 
operations with two-engine airplanes. As the technology and reliability 
of two-engine airplanes continued to improve, due in large

[[Page 53046]]

measure to the requirements of these documents, such operations became 
compatible with those long-range operations typically associated with 
three- and four-engine airplanes. At the same time this technology 
brought two-engine airplanes to the arena of long-range operations, the 
infrastructure to support such operations was changing. Political and 
funding priorities forced the closure or reduction in basic services of 
a number of airports, military and civilian, in remote areas that 
historically had been used as diversion airports for routes over 
oceanic and/or desolate land areas. The increasing use of polar 
flights, while creating economic benefits, has also brought new 
challenges to the operation. The risks associated with these areas' 
remoteness, harsh climate and terrain, and their unique operational 
issues, needed to be addressed to maintain an equivalent level of 
safety in the operation.
    b. These issues began to significantly impact the viability of all 
long-range two-engine airplane operations under current regulations, 
and likewise began to erode the basic safety net that long-range 
operations in three- and four-engine airplanes had relied on. Because 
of these pressures and the increasing commonality of all long-range 
operations, the data began to show that ETOPS requirements and 
processes are generally applicable to all long-range passenger-carrying 
operations, including those by three- and four-engine airplanes, and 
would improve the safety and viability of such operations. All long-
range passenger-carrying airplanes, regardless of the number of 
engines, needed a viable diversion airport in the case of onboard fire, 
medical emergency, or catastrophic decompression. Ensuring availability 
of en route alternate airports, adequate fire fighting coverage at 
these airports, and fuel planning to account for depressurization are 
sound operational practices for all airplanes, including three- and 
four-engine airplanes. Likewise, planning for the maximum allowable 
diversion and worst-case scenarios should account for all airplane 
time-critical systems.
    c. Unlike the ETOPS guidance provided for two-engine airplanes, 
there has been no regulatory framework governing the long-range 
operations of three- and four-engine airplanes.
    For example, in emergencies such as loss of cabin pressure, current 
regulations require adequate oxygen supplies but do not require the 
operator to consider the amount of extra fuel necessary to reach a 
diversion airport.
    (1) An analysis of operational data shows that between 1980 and 
2000, 33 of the 73 cruise depressurization events on one manufacturer's 
airplanes occurred on airplanes with more than two engines.
    (2) A study conducted by this manufacturer using a modern four-
engine aircraft carrying normal route planning fuel reserves raises 
issues about the adequacy of the current fuel planning requirements in 
the event of a diversion.
    d. Operational data shows that the diversion rate for all airplane-
related and non-airplane-related causes are comparable between two-
engine airplanes and airplanes with more than two engines. 
Consequently, the FAA has found that there is a need for all passenger 
carrying operations beyond 180 minutes from an adequate airport to 
adopt many of the ETOPS requirements that have been based on sound 
safety principles and successfully proven over many years of 
operations. Accordingly, the FAA revised Sec.  121.161 to include 
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines in these long-
range operations.
    203. ``Extended Operations.''
    a. Since 1985, the acronym, ETOPS, has been defined as ``extended 
twin-engine operations'' and has been limited to part 121 airplanes 
with only two engines. Current regulations have extended these 
applications to all passenger-carrying airplanes operating in both 14 
CFR parts 121 and 135, and the acronym has now been redefined to mean 
``extended operations.'' This is to acknowledge the similarity of 
certain long-range passenger-carrying operations of all airplanes 
operating today, and the common issues that impact such operations.
    b. Since 1988, the ETOPS limit for two-engine airplanes has been 
180 minutes from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air 
(excluding the limited authority in the North Pacific given under EPL 
20-1, 207-Minute ETOPS Operational Approval Criteria, dated March 21, 
2000). Service experience has shown that although limited, this 
authority has satisfactorily supported the vast majority of the world's 
current aviation routes.
    c. Those areas not supported within 180-minute diversion authority 
tend to be routes over remote areas of the world that are uniquely 
challenging to the operation. These areas include the South Polar 
Region, a small section in the South Pacific, the southern South 
Atlantic Ocean between South America and Africa, the southern Indian 
Ocean and the North Polar area under certain winter weather conditions. 
The additional operational challenges of these routes are equally 
demanding of all airplanes, regardless of the number of engines, and 
include such issues as extremes in terrain and meteorology, as well as 
limited navigation and communications infrastructure. Support of a 
necessary diversion and subsequent recovery in such areas demands added 
training, expertise, and dedication from all certificate holders. The 
development of ETOPS requirements is intended to address all these 
issues.
    d. Even though for continuity with current two-engine ETOPS the 
existing acronym ETOPS is retained, the ETOPS acronym has been re-
defined. ETOPS has been expanded to include all passenger-carrying 
airplane operations where a proposed flight plan includes any point 
that is greater than 180 minutes from an adequate airport (at an 
approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions 
in still air).
    204. Preclude and Protect.
    a. The whole premise of ETOPS has been to preclude a diversion and, 
if it were to occur, to have programs in place to protect the 
diversion. Under this concept, propulsion systems are designed and 
tested to ensure an acceptable level of in-flight shutdowns (IFSD), and 
other airplane systems are designed and tested to ensure their 
reliability. Two-engine airplane maintenance practices are enhanced to 
better maintain and monitor the condition of the engines and systems 
significant to ETOPS. The design of these enhanced practices has been a 
major factor in the joint development of the FAA's and industry's 
aggressive steps to develop a foundation to resolve problems with 
airplane systems and engines in order to minimize the potential for 
procedural and human errors, thereby precluding a diversion.
    b. However, despite the best design, testing, and maintenance 
practices, situations occur that may require an airplane to divert. 
Regardless of whether the diversion is for technical (airplane system- 
or engine-related) or non-technical reasons, the certificate holder 
must have a flight operations plan to protect that diversion. For 
example, such a plan must include ensuring that pilots are 
knowledgeable about diversion airport alternates and weather conditions 
(Sec.  121.631), have the ability to communicate with the certificate 
holder's dispatch office and air traffic control (Sec. Sec.  121.99 and 
121.122), and have sufficient fuel to divert to the alternate (Sec.  
121.646). Under the ``preclude and protect'' concept, various failure 
scenarios need to be considered. For example, during the design of the

[[Page 53047]]

airplane, time-limited systems such as cargo compartment fire 
suppression/containment capability are considered. Fuel planning must 
account for the possibility of decompression or the failure of an 
engine with considerations for in-flight icing conditions. Best options 
under these scenarios should be provided to the pilot before and during 
the flight.
    c. This philosophy has been critical to the success of two-engine 
ETOPS in the past and has been applied to these airplanes in operations 
beyond 60 minutes from an adequate airport. This application is based 
on the requirements of Sec.  121.161 and the engine inoperative 
diversion requirements of Sec.  121.565. In-service data shows that all 
airplanes, regardless of the number of engines, divert from time to 
time for various causes. All passenger-carrying operations conducted 
where there are a limited number of en route airports, where the 
support infrastructure is marginal, or where there are challenging 
weather conditions should adopt many of the same elements of the same 
preclude and protect concept. If certificate holders plan to operate 
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines in areas where 
en route airports are farther away than 180 minutes, these operations 
are also required to meet certain the standards defined under ETOPS to 
ensure that all efforts are made to preclude a diversion, and if a 
diversion does occur, that procedures are in place to protect that 
diversion.
    205. ETOPS Areas of Operation.
    a. ETOPS areas of operation are defined by Sec.  121.7 to be areas 
beyond a certain distance from adequate airports measured by an 
airplanes one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions 
in still air. Because of the impact such distances might have on the 
diversion time of an airplane, regulatory guidance has been established 
for the planning, operational, and equipage requirements for such 
operations. A certificate holder must apply to the FAA for approval to 
operate in an ETOPS area using the methodologies in this AC and is 
granted ETOPS authority for a specific ETOPS area of operations in 
their operations specifications.
    b. Most ETOPS authorities for two-engine ETOPS beyond 180 minutes 
are limited to a specific geographical region. Historically, ETOPS 
authorities for two-engine airplanes up to 180 minutes were developed 
based on a specific need in a particular operating area. Limiting 
expanded ETOPS authority beyond 180 minutes (for two-engine airplanes) 
has been extended and serves several purposes.
    (1) The primary importance is the preclusion of an arbitrary use of 
diversion authority beyond that necessary to complete the operation 
safely and efficiently. Because it is accepted that increased diversion 
times potentially increase the risk of the operation a certificate 
holder must make every effort to plan ETOPS with a maximum diversion 
distance of 180 minutes or less, if possible.
    (2) It should be a goal of all two-engine airplane flight planning 
to operate to the shortest diversion time that provides the widest 
range of options in the event of a diversion while recognizing the 
economic benefits of a more direct route and the safety benefits of 
diverting to an airport that is well equipped. Tying increased 
diversion authority to specific areas of operation accomplishes this 
goal while sufficiently addressing the operational needs of the 
industry.
    (3) Likewise, this focus on specific needs and areas of operation 
does not add impetus to any perceived rationale for further degradation 
in the availability or capabilities of en route alternates in remote 
areas of the world. Although the industry has no direct authority to 
affect the actions of sovereign nations, it is reasonable to base 
operations on the value of en route alternate availability at 
reasonable diversion distances.
    (4) In consideration of the successful history of three- and four-
engine airplane operations and the reliability and redundancy of 
current engines used in this operation, ETOPS for these airplanes does 
not have similar restrictions and ETOPS authorities are not limited to 
geographic areas. However, like twin-engine operators, the three- and 
four-engine operator is required to designate the nearest available 
ETOPS alternate along the planned route of flight and must remain 
within a 240 minute diversion time if possible.
    c. In its application for ETOPS authority, the certificate holder 
will typically request a specific ETOPS area of operation based on an 
analysis of proposed routings and the availability of airports 
sufficient to support the operational requirements of the ETOPS 
regulations. Because the operating rules distinguish between ETOPS up 
to 180 minutes, and ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, the requested level of 
ETOPS authority in a certificate holder's application will necessarily 
have to be assessed differently for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes.
    (1) Two-Engine Airplanes Up to 180-Minute ETOPS and 207-Minute 
ETOPS Authority in the North Pacific Area of Operations. The ETOPS area 
of operation is the area bounded by distance circles representing the 
approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions 
in still air chosen by the applicant. The actual flight plan must 
comply with the fuel supply requirements in Sec.  121.646(b) and must 
therefore account for wind. However, the flight planning limitations of 
Sec.  121.633(a) for airplane systems do not require the operator to 
account for wind in such calculations for flight planning and for 
determining the ETOPS area of operations in these cases. This allows 
the applicant to choose an operating authority in his or her 
application that is based on the ``ETOPS area of operation'' 
determination. In other words, the distance from alternates in a 
certificate holder's route planning exercise will be the same value 
used to determine the type design criteria for the airplane-engine 
combination used in the operation, and the ETOPS approval necessary to 
fly the route under all flight planning conditions.
    (2) ETOPS Beyond 180 Minutes (Two-Engine Airplanes and All 
Passenger-Carrying Airplanes With More Than 2 Engines). As required by 
Sec.  121.633(b), for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes for all airplanes, the 
ETOPS operation must account for the effects of wind and temperature on 
the calculated distances. Consequently the planning for an ETOPS flight 
beyond 180 minutes is more complex.
    (a) The certificate holder should first conduct a route planning 
exercise for each planned city pairing to determine the diversion 
authority needed in still air conditions. If the route or segments of 
the route exceed 180 minutes based on one engine inoperative speed and 
still air, then a secondary planning exercise (that may be required 
seasonally) should be conducted that factors in expected winds and 
temperatures on that route. The distance between adequate alternate 
airports on the route is converted into time (minutes) computed for all 
engine cruise speed, as well as engine inoperative speed. The number of 
minutes cannot exceed the time-limited system certified capability 
(cargo fire suppression and the other most limiting system) that is 
identified in the aircraft flight manual less the 15-minute pad. The 
operator needs to determine how much system capability is required for 
the planned route and equip its airplane to have sufficient margins. 
Finally, for the actual flight, the operator's flight

[[Page 53048]]

planning must be within the airplane systems capability for the 
selected ETOPS alternate airports on the planned route based on 
diversion times that are calculated using known or forecast winds and 
temperature conditions.
    (b) As a minimum, the certificate holder must ensure that the time-
limited systems requirements of Sec.  121.633(b) are met at the equal-
time points between ETOPS alternates determined by the most limiting en 
route fuel supply requirements of Sec.  121.646(b), commonly referred 
to as the ETOPS critical fuel scenario. Certificate holders flying 
three- and four-engine airplanes, prior to the established installation 
time and certification time requirements of the regulation for these 
systems and their airplanes, are exempt from these flight planning 
limitations.
    (c) Once the required fire suppression systems are installed (no 
later than February 15, 2013) the certificate holder must follow the 
flight planning limitations of Sec.  121.633(b)(1). As required by 
Sec.  121.162(d), for airplanes with more than 2 engines manufactured 
on or after February 17, 2015, the Configuration, Maintenance and 
Procedures (CMP) document for that model will list the airplane's most 
limiting ETOPS Significant System time issued in accordance with Sec.  
25.3(c). The Certificate holder operating an airplane-engine 
combination with more than two engines is required to comply with Sec.  
121.633(b)(2) if the CMP lists the most limiting ETOPS Significant 
System time.
    d. Credit for the Driftdown. For the purposes of computing 
distances for ETOPS Area of Operation, credit for driftdown may be 
taken.
    e. Actual Diversion Time. Actual diversion time may exceed the 
authorized diversion time as long as the flight is conducted within the 
authorized ETOPS Area of Operation, and complies with the requirements 
of Sec.  121.633.
    206. ETOPS Alternate Requirements.
    a. One of the distinguishing features of ETOPS operations is the 
concept of an en route alternate airport being available where an 
airplane can divert following a single failure or a combination of 
failures that require a diversion. Most airplanes operate in an 
environment where there usually is a choice of diversion airports 
available within a close proximity to the route of flight. However, a 
certificate holder conducting ETOPS may only have one alternate airport 
within a range dictated by the endurance of a particular airframe 
system (for example, the cargo fire suppressant system), and that 
system or system failure may dictate the approved maximum diversion 
time for that route. Therefore, it is important that any airport 
designated as an ETOPS alternate have the capabilities, services, and 
facilities to safely support the operation. The weather conditions at 
the time of arrival should provide assurance that adequate visual 
references will be available upon arrival at decision height (DH) or 
minimum descent altitude (MDA), and that the surface wind conditions 
and corresponding runway surface conditions will be acceptable to 
permit the approach and landing to be safely completed with an engine 
and/or systems inoperative.
    b. At dispatch, an en route alternate must meet ETOPS alternate 
weather requirements in Sec.  121.625 and as specified in Chapter 3, 
paragraph 303c(5) of this AC and in the certificate holder's operations 
specifications (OpSpecs). Because of the natural variability of weather 
conditions with time, as well as the need to determine the suitability 
of a particular en route alternate before departure, such requirements 
are higher than the weather minimums required to initiate an instrument 
approach. This is necessary prior to the time that the instrument 
approach would be conducted, to provide for some deterioration in 
weather conditions after planning. This increases the probability that 
the flight will land safely after a diversion to an alternate airport. 
The airport of departure (takeoff) and the destination airport (unless 
used concurrently as an ETOPS alternate) are not required to meet the 
weather minima for ETOPS alternates, as these airports are subject to 
other regulations (e.g., Sec. Sec.  121.617, 121.621, and 121.623).
    c. While en route, the forecast weather for designated ETOPS 
alternates must remain at or above operating minima. This provides 
ETOPS flights with the ability to resolve all diversion decisions 
successfully throughout the flight. The suitability of an en route 
alternate airport for an airplane that encounters an in-flight 
situation that necessitates a diversion during ETOPS operations is 
based on a determination that the airport still is suitable for the 
circumstances, and the weather and field conditions at that airport 
permit an instrument approach to be initiated and a landing completed.
    207. ETOPS In-Service Experience Requirements.
    a. When AC 120-42 was first released in 1985, two-engine ETOPS was 
a new concept and ETOPS approvals were sought on airframe-engine 
combinations that were already in service. Hence, it was logical to 
establish criteria for approvals based on in-service experience. At 
that same time, the FAA recognized the possibility that other approval 
methods could be developed without in-service experience, and 
accordingly, provided statements that recognized those options. The 
original two-engine ETOPS requirements for engine reliability were 
based on a world fleet in-service experience of 250,000 hours. For 120-
minute ETOPS, the FAA additionally required the certificate holder to 
have 12 consecutive months of operational in-service experience with 
the airplane-engine combination (AEC). For 180-minute ETOPS, the FAA 
required the certificate holder to have previously gained 12 
consecutive months of operational in-service experience with the 
specified AEC conducting 120-minute ETOPS. These basic, two-engine in-
service requirements have been retained and are discussed in Appendix 
3. Achieving these levels of experience, combined with the required 
levels of engine reliability, is an acceptable means of attaining ETOPS 
approval for operators of two-engine airplanes.
    b. At the time AC 120-42A was drafted, the FAA recognized that a 
reduction of two-engine in-service experience requirements or 
substitution of in-service experience on another airplane would be 
possible. Any reduction was to be based on an evaluation of the 
certificate holder's ability and competence to achieve the necessary 
reliability for the particular AEC in ETOPS. For example, a reduction 
in in-service experience would be considered for a certificate holder 
who could show extensive in-service experience with a related engine on 
another airplane that had achieved acceptable reliability. The FAA also 
allowed certificate holders unable to initially fly ETOPS routes at the 
lesser thresholds to make use of ETOPS simulation or demonstration 
programs in their application for 180-minute ETOPS. Eventually specific 
guidance material (AC 120-42A, appendix 7, Accelerated ETOPS 
Operational Approval) was developed by the FAA permitting ETOPS without 
accumulating in-service experience in the airplane-engine combination. 
Most subsequent ETOPS approvals have been granted under these 
guidelines and this method is retained in Appendix 3.
    208. Operational Reliability and Systems Suitability Requirements.
    a. The safety of long-range operations such as ETOPS depends on the 
reliability of all airplane systems including the propulsion systems. 
Time-limited systems such as cargo compartment fire suppression/
containment capability must be

[[Page 53049]]

considered (Sec.  121.633). The certificate holder must also have an 
established program that monitors the reliability of systems 
significant to ETOPS (Sec.  121.374).
    b. In order to achieve and maintain the required engine reliability 
standards, the certificate holder operating a two-engine airplane in 
ETOPS should assess the proposed maintenance and reliability program's 
ability to maintain a satisfactory level of airplane systems 
reliability for the particular airplane-engine combination. All 
certificate holders must design the flight operations and, if 
applicable, the maintenance programs for ETOPS with an objective to 
preclude diversions and, if a diversion does occur, to protect that 
diversion. Required ETOPS maintenance practices also must minimize the 
potential for procedural and human errors that could be detrimental to 
the safety of the operation. Fuel planning must account for the 
possibility of a depressurization and/or failure of an engine with 
considerations for in-flight icing conditions (Sec.  121.646).
    c. The type design requirements for ETOPS certification consider 
the probability of occurrence of conditions that would reduce the 
capability of the airplane or the ability of the flight crewmember to 
cope with an adverse operating condition. System failures or 
malfunctions occurring during extended range operations could affect 
flight crewmember workload and procedures. Although the demands on the 
flight crewmember may increase, a manufacturer applying for ETOPS type 
design approval must consider crew workload, operational implications, 
and the crew's and passengers' physiological needs during continued 
operation with failure effects for the longest diversion time for which 
it seeks approval. The manufacturer must also conduct flight tests to 
validate the adequacy of the airplane's flying qualities and 
performance, and the flightcrew's ability to safely conduct an ETOPS 
diversion with expected system failures and malfunctions. An ETOPS 
operator should carefully consider the possible adverse effects that 
changes in airplane equipment or operating procedures may have on the 
original evaluations conducted when the airplane was approved for ETOPS 
before implementing such changes.
    d. Following a determination that the airframe systems and 
propulsion systems are ETOPS type design approved as per part 25, an 
in-depth review of the applicant's required ETOPS programs will be 
accomplished to show the ability to achieve and maintain an acceptable 
level of systems reliability, and to safely conduct these operations.

Chapter 3. Requirements for ETOPS Authorization

    300. ETOPS Requirements. The FAA may approve ETOPS for various 
areas of operation in accordance with the requirements and limitations 
specified in part 121, Appendix P. ETOPS must be authorized in the 
certificate holder's operations specifications and conducted in 
compliance with those sections of part 121 applicable to ETOPS.
    a. As of February 15, 2008, certificate holders operating 
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines, having the 
authority to operate on specific ETOPS routes should not need to re-
apply for their specific route authority. However, the certificate 
holder is required to comply with all the applicable ETOPS flight 
operational regulations described in this AC, and must have their ETOPS 
programs and processes approved by their CHDO with the concurrence of 
the Director, Flight Standards Service.
    b. The certificate holder's ETOPS requirements must be specified in 
their maintenance and operations programs. Maintenance requirements 
necessary to support ETOPS are explained in paragraphs 301 and 302. 
Flight operations requirements necessary to support ETOPS are described 
in paragraphs 303 and 304.
    c. The requirements for the various levels of ETOPS authorities are 
listed in tabular form in Appendix 2.
    301. Maintenance Requirements for Two-Engine ETOPS Authorization. 
The certificate holder conducting ETOPS with two-engine airplanes must 
comply with the ETOPS maintenance requirements as specified in Sec.  
121.374. These requirements are discussed in paragraphs a through o as 
follows:
    a. Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP). The basic 
maintenance program for the airplane being considered for ETOPS is a 
CAMP that may currently be approved for a non-ETOPS certificate holder 
for a particular make and model airplane-engine combination. The basic 
CAMP must be a maintenance and inspection program that contains the 
instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) based on the 
manufacturer's maintenance program, or those contained in a certificate 
holder's maintenance manual approved in its operations specifications. 
The certificate holder and its certificate holding district office 
(CHDO) must review the CAMP to ensure it provides an adequate basis for 
development of a ETOPS maintenance program. The certificate holder's 
ETOPS CAMP must include specific ETOPS requirements, which will be 
incorporated as supplemental requirements to the basic CAMP. These 
supplemental requirements include the enhanced maintenance and training 
processes that will ensure ETOPS airplanes achieve and maintain the 
level of performance and reliability necessary for ETOPS operations. 
These supplemental requirements, referred to in the industry as ETOPS 
processes or ETOPS process elements, currently should be in place for 
existing ETOPS operations. Prospective ETOPS certificate holders must 
supplement their basic CAMP with those program elements defined in 
paragraphs b through o below.
    b. ETOPS Maintenance Document. The certificate holder must develop 
a document for use by personnel involved in ETOPS. This document need 
not be inclusive but should, at least, reference the maintenance 
program and other pertinent requirements clearly indicating where all 
facets of the ETOPS maintenance program are located in the certificate 
holder's document system. All ETOPS requirements, including supportive 
programs, procedures, duties, and responsibilities, must be identified. 
The ETOPS document(s) must reflect the actual policies and procedures 
the certificate holder expects their ETOPS maintenance personnel to 
adhere to. The document(s) should be user friendly, and be accessible 
to all affected personnel. The initial document must be submitted to 
the CHDO and be approved before being adopted.
    c. ETOPS Predeparture Service Check (PDSC).
    (1) The certificate holder must develop an ETOPS PDSC to verify 
that the airplane and certain significant items are airworthy and ETOPS 
capable. Each certificate holder's PDSC may vary in form and content. 
One certificate holder may have a one page PDSC while other certificate 
holders, using the same airplane-engine combination, may have six or 
more pages of items in their PDSCs. The prerequisites for an acceptable 
PDSC are content and suitability for the specific certificate holder's 
needs.
    (2) All certificate holders must address ETOPS significant system 
airworthiness in their ETOPS maintenance program, including the PDSC. 
For example, proper servicing of fluids, such as engine, APU, generator 
systems, and hydraulic systems is a vital ingredient to successful 
ETOPS operations. Current ETOPS operations have had incidents resulting 
from

[[Page 53050]]

improper fluid servicing that have resulted in IFSDs and diversions. 
Certificate holders should consider this area very seriously when 
developing their maintenance checks, including the PDSC.
    (3) Some certificate holders may elect to include tasks in the PDSC 
that are driven by their reliability programs and are not related to 
ETOPS significant systems. However, the certificate holder clearly must 
identify the ETOPS related tasks on their PDSC, because non-ETOPS 
qualified maintenance personnel may accomplish the non-ETOPS tasks. An 
ETOPS-qualified maintenance individual must complete all ETOPS-related 
tasks and an ETOPS-qualified maintenance individual, with an airframe 
and powerplant rating, must certify the entire check. When outside the 
United States, if an individual with an airframe and powerplant rating 
is not available, then a trained individual employed by an FAA 
certificated repair station, contracted by the certificate holder must 
certify the entire check. This PDSC must be certified complete 
immediately before each scheduled ETOPS flight. The term 
``immediately'' has historically meant to be no more than 2 to 4 hours 
before the flight. However, the FAA may grant some relief from this 
time period under certain conditions. The certificate holder should 
explain any rational for such deviations in its ETOPS maintenance 
document, which is approved by its CHDO.
    (4) A PDSC may not be required before all ETOPS flights. The FAA 
may grant relief following irregular operations because of non-
mechanical issues, such as weather or medical emergency diversions, or 
when operating ETOPS into specific areas of operation. For example, if 
an airplane scheduled for an ETOPS flight receives a PDSC before 
departure and subsequently must divert or turn back for reasons other 
than mechanical, the certificate holder must identify in its ETOPS 
maintenance document what procedures its flight operations and 
maintenance personnel would follow to preclude performing another PDSC. 
If a mechanical discrepancy develops as a result of the diversion or 
turn back, the certificate holder may have to perform another PDSC. For 
example, when an overweight landing inspection reveals a discrepancy 
that requires maintenance intervention, another PDSC is required.
    (5) In areas where prevailing weather conditions are stable and 
generally do not approach extremes in temperature, wind, ceiling, and 
visibility, such as in the Caribbean/Western Atlantic (75-minute ETOPS) 
and Micronesia routes (90-minute ETOPS), the service check may not be 
required for the return leg of an ETOPS flight. This check is not 
precluded by any other maintenance check.
    d. Dual Maintenance.
    (1) ETOPS dual maintenance, otherwise referred to as identical 
maintenance, multiple maintenance, and simultaneous maintenance, 
requires special consideration by the certificate holder. This is to 
recognize and preclude common cause human failure modes. Proper 
verification processes or operational tests, prior to ETOPS, are 
required when dual maintenance on significant systems occurs.
    (2) Dual maintenance on the ``same'' ETOPS Significant System can 
be described as actions performed on the same element of identical, but 
separate ETOPS Significant Systems during the same routine or non-
routine visit. Examples of maintenance on the ``same'' ETOPS 
Significant System are: maintenance of both Satellite Communication 
(SATCOM) systems during a turnaround flight; removal of either both 
engine oil filters, or both chip detectors; and replacement of both 
chip detectors.
    (3) Dual maintenance on ``substantially similar'' ETOPS Significant 
Systems specifically addresses maintenance actions on engine-driven 
components on both engines. An example of dual maintenance on 
``substantially similar'' ETOPS Significant Systems could include: 
replacement of the no. 1 Integrated Drive Generator (IDG) and the no. 2 
Engine Driven Pump (EDP).
    (4) The certificate holder must establish procedures that minimize 
identical maintenance actions from being scheduled or applied to 
multiple similar elements in any ETOPS Significant System during the 
same routine or non-routine maintenance visit. In order to manage this 
requirement the certificate holder must develop a list of fleet-
specific ETOPS Significant Systems and include them in their ETOPS 
maintenance document(s).
    (5) The FAA recognizes that sometimes ETOPS dual maintenance 
actions cannot be avoided or precluded because of unforeseen 
circumstances that occur during ETOPS operations. In the line 
maintenance arena, one example would be when an ETOPS airplane has 
inbound discrepancies on both engines' oil systems, or there is a 
generator replacement on one engine, and an oil system discrepancy on 
the other engine. Another example is if both of the SATCOM systems 
require maintenance at the same time during a turnaround flight. 
Additionally, staggering maintenance on ETOPS Significant Systems in 
the heavy maintenance arena is not always possible or feasible. 
However, to minimize human factor common cause risk, the certificate 
holder should attempt to minimize dual maintenance on ETOPS Significant 
Systems wherever/whenever possible.
    (6) In any event, when dual maintenance is performed on a ETOPS 
Significant System, the certificate holder must have written procedures 
in its ETOPS maintenance document that addresses this situation. At a 
minimum, the certificate holder must ensure:
    (a) Separate ETOPS-qualified maintenance persons perform the tasks, 
or
    (b) The maintenance action on each of the elements in the ETOPS 
Significant System is performed by the same technician under the direct 
supervision of a second ETOPS qualified individual, and
    (c) It verifies the effectiveness of the corrective actions to 
those ETOPS Significant Systems before the airplane enters the ETOPS 
area of operation. This verification action must be performed using 
ground verification methods, and in some instances, in-flight 
verification methods described in the next section of this AC. On an 
exception basis, the same ETOPS-qualified technician, under the 
supervision of an ETOPS-qualified Centralized Maintenance Control 
person, may perform the dual maintenance and the ground verification 
methods only if in-flight verification action is performed.
    (7) The FAA acknowledges that the servicing of fluids and gases is 
not considered maintenance; however, these tasks, when done improperly 
have adversely affected ETOPS operations. The certificate holder should 
recognize the hazard associated with improper servicing and do all 
possible to mitigate the associated risk. Specifically, servicing tasks 
such as engine, APU, and generator system oil servicing are tasks that 
require high levels of attention. The FAA encourages the certificate 
holder to ensure that its programs have separate individuals perform 
such servicing. However, the FAA recognizes that many certificate 
holder's route and organizational structures may not lend themselves to 
these procedures. The certificate holder's program should include 
detailed servicing instructions, or make readily available servicing 
instructions, and provide related OJT, regardless of whether one 
individual or multiple individuals perform the tasks.
    e. Verification Program.

[[Page 53051]]

    (1) The certificate holder must develop a verification program for 
resolution of airplane discrepancies (corrective actions) on ETOPS 
significant systems. This program must include corrective action 
confirmation in specific areas such as engine shutdown, significant 
system failure, adverse trends, or any prescribed event that could 
effect an ETOPS operation. The program must ensure corrective action is 
taken and confirmed successful before the airplane enters an ETOPS area 
of operation. The certificate holder must verify the effectiveness of 
the corrective actions following the maintenance action and prior to an 
ETOPS flight or prior to passing the ETOPS entry point. The ground 
verification method is accomplished by following the Instructions for 
Continued Airworthiness (ICA) contained in the airplane maintenance 
manuals (AMM) or the certificate holder's maintenance manuals. These 
ICAs include built-in test equipment (BITE) and functional/operational 
checks that often include leak checks after ground runs.
    (2) Normally ground verification is acceptable to ensure corrective 
action. Under certain conditions ground verification beyond that 
recommended in the ICA or in-flight verification may be required. An 
example of a condition that would require an in-flight verification is 
the replacement of an APU component that could affect the APU's ability 
to start at the ETOPS cruise altitude after cold soak. In-flight 
verification may be conducted on revenue flights, provided the action 
is completed before the ETOPS entry point. Ground maintenance personnel 
must coordinate with flight operations personnel whenever an in-flight 
verification is required. Each certificate holder must identify its 
ETOPS significant systems, ground verification requirements, and in-
flight verification requirements in its ETOPS maintenance document.
    (3) The certificate holder must establish a means to ensure any 
required verification action is accomplished. The certificate holder 
must include a clear description of who initiates verification actions 
and who is responsible for completing the actions in its ETOPS 
maintenance document.
    f. Task Identification.
    (1) The certificate holder must identify all tasks that must be 
accomplished or certified as complete by ETOPS qualified personnel. The 
intent is to have ETOPS trained maintenance personnel accomplish these 
identified tasks because they are related to ETOPS. ETOPS specific 
tasks should be:
    (a) Identified on the certificate holder's work forms and related 
instructions, or
    (b) Parceled together and identified as an ETOPS package.
    (2) If a certificate holder does not identify ETOPS-related task in 
their current maintenance program, then all task must be accomplished 
by ETOPS-qualified personnel.
    (3) In the event that maintenance is performed on an ETOPS airplane 
by personnel who are not ETOPS trained, then the actions must be 
verified per the certificate holder's ETOPS verification program.
    g. Centralized Maintenance Control Procedures. An ETOPS certificate 
holder, regardless of the size of its ETOPS fleet, must have a 
centralized entity responsible for oversight of the ETOPS maintenance 
operation. The certificate holder must develop and clearly define in 
its ETOPS maintenance document specific procedures, duties, and 
responsibilities for involvement of their centralized maintenance 
control personnel in the ETOPS operation. These established procedures 
and centralized control processes would preclude an airplane from being 
dispatched for ETOPS flights after an engine IFSD, ETOPS significant 
system failure, or discovery of significant adverse trends in system 
performance without appropriate corrective action having been taken.
    h. ETOPS Parts Control. The certificate holder must develop a parts 
control program to ensure the proper parts and configurations are 
maintained for ETOPS. The program must include procedures to verify 
that the parts installed on ETOPS airplanes during parts borrowing or 
pooling arrangements, as well as those parts used after repair or 
overhaul, maintain the required ETOPS configuration.
    i. Reliability Program.
    (1) The certificate holder must develop an ETOPS reliability 
program or enhance its existing reliability program to incorporate the 
ETOPS supplemental requirements. This program must be designed with 
early identification and prevention of ETOPS-related problems as the 
primary goal. The program must be event-oriented, and incorporate 
reporting procedures for critical events detrimental to ETOPS flights. 
For those certificate holders that do not have an FAA-approved 
reliability program, their continuing analysis and surveillance system 
(CASS) must be enhanced to achieve ETOPS reliability goals. The 
certificate holder should submit a monthly ETOPS reliability report to 
its CHDO.
    (2) In keeping with the reporting requirements in Sec.  121.703, 
the certificate holder must report the following items within 96 hours 
to its CHDO:
    (a) IFSDs, except planned IFSDs performed for flight training.
    (b) Diversions and turnbacks for failures, malfunctions, or defects 
associated with any airplane or engine system.
    (c) Uncommanded power or thrust changes or surges.
    (d) Inability to control the engine or obtain desired power or 
thrust.
    (e) Inadvertent fuel loss or unavailability, or uncorrectable fuel 
imbalance in flight.
    (f) Failures, malfunctions or defects associated with ETOPS 
Significant Systems.
    (g) Any event that would jeopardize the safe flight and landing of 
the airplane on an ETOPS flight.
    (3) The reporting of any of the above items must include the 
information specified in Sec.  121.703(e).
    (4) The certificate holder must conduct an investigation into the 
cause of the occurrence of any event listed in Sec.  121.703 and Sec.  
121.374(h)(1) in conjunction with manufacturers and submit its findings 
to its CHDO. If the CHDO determines additional corrective action is 
necessary, the certificate holder must further investigate and 
implement appropriate corrective action acceptable to the CHDO.
    j. Propulsion System Monitoring.
    (1) The certificate holder must monitor its fleet average IFSD rate 
for the specified airplane-engine combination. It should establish firm 
criteria regarding the actions it will take when it detects adverse 
trends in propulsion system conditions. If the IFSD rate, computed on a 
12-month rolling average, exceeds the values in the following table, 
the certificate holder, in conjunction with its CHDO, must investigate 
common cause effects or systemic errors and submit the findings to its 
CHDO within 30 days.

[[Page 53052]]



                                            In Flight Shut Down Rates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Number of engines               Engine hours ETOPS                   ETOPS authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2....................................  .05/1000...............  Up to and including 120 minutes.
2....................................  .03/1000...............  Beyond 120 minutes up to and including 180
                                                                 minutes and 207 minutes in North Pacific.
2....................................  .02/1000...............  Greater than 180 minutes (Except for 207 minutes
                                                                 in North Pacific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) With respect to maintenance, the purpose of monitoring IFSD 
rates is to provide FAA and operators with a tool for measuring the 
health of a fleet of ETOPS-approved airplanes in service. Causes of 
IFSDs or other engine and propulsion system problems may be associated 
with type design problems and/or maintenance and operational procedures 
applied to the airplane. It is very important that the certificate 
holder identify the root cause of events so that an indication of 
corrective action is available, such as a fundamental design problem 
that requires an effective hardware (or software) final fix. Repetitive 
inspections may be satisfactory as interim solutions, but longer-term 
design solutions, such as terminating actions, may be required if 
possible. Design problems can affect the whole fleet. The FAA will not 
revoke an existing ETOPS operational approval solely because of a high 
IFSD rate. A certificate holder who experiences a type design related 
event need not be operationally penalized for a problem that is design-
related and may not be of their own making. However, maintenance or 
operational problems may be wholly, or partially, the responsibility of 
the certificate holder. If a certificate holder has an unacceptable 
IFSD rate risk attributed to common cause or a systemic problem in 
operational practices or the maintenance program, then action carefully 
tailored to that certificate holder may be required, and may include a 
reduction of the certificate holder's diversion limit.
    (3) The certificate holder must investigate an IFSD rate higher 
than the 12-month rolling average standard that occurs for a mature 
fleet after the commencement of ETOPS (Refer to the IFSD Rates table 
above.). The certificate holder also must investigate any indication of 
a high IFSD rate; however, it must consider that in the case of the 
smaller fleet, the high IFSD rate may be because of the limited number 
of engine operating hours used as the denominator for the rate 
calculation. This can cause an IFSD jump well above the standard rate 
because of a single IFSD event. The underlying causes for such a jump 
in the rate will have to be considered by the Administrator's 
representative. On occasion, a particular event may also warrant 
implementation of corrective action even though the overall IFSD rate 
is not being exceeded.
    (4) The 30-day reporting criteria of paragraph 301j (1) is intended 
to ensure that the certificate holder provides the FAA timely 
notification of the status of an event investigation. The certificate 
holder may or may not have root cause or terminating action at the end 
of the 30-day period, and further discussions with the FAA may be 
required after this period.
    (5) The certificate holder may designate a sub-fleet engine/
airframe combination for the purposes of the IFSD monitoring/rate 
program. The operator may include the IFSD statistics of all engines 
that are ETOPS configured and are maintained in accordance with the 
operators ETOPS program even if used on non-ETOPS airplanes.
    k. Engine Condition Monitoring. The certificate holder must develop 
a program for its ETOPS engines that describes the parameters to be 
monitored, method of data collection, and corrective action processes. 
The program should reflect the manufacturer's instructions and industry 
practices, or the certificate holder should establish a program that 
demonstrates an equivalent level of monitoring and data analysis. The 
goal of this monitoring program is to detect deterioration at an early 
stage, and to allow for corrective action before safe operation is 
affected. Engine limit margins should be maintained so that prolonged 
engine inoperative diversions may be conducted without exceeding 
approved engine limits (for example, rotor speeds and exhaust gas 
temperature) at all approved power levels and expected environmental 
conditions. Engine margins preserved through this program should 
account for the effects of additional engine loading demands (for 
example anti-ice and electrical), which may be required during IFSD 
flight phase associated with the diversion. If oil analysis monitoring, 
such as the Spectrographic Oil Analysis Program (SOAP), is meaningful 
and recommended by the manufacturer, the certificate holder should 
include it in their program.
    l. Oil Consumption Monitoring. The certificate holder must develop 
an engine oil consumption monitoring program to ascertain that there is 
enough oil to complete the scheduled ETOPS flight. The certificate 
holder's consumption limit must not exceed the manufacturer's 
recommendations, and it must trend oil consumption. The certificate 
holders trending program may be done manually or by electronic means. 
The program must consider the amount of oil added at the departing 
ETOPS station with reference to the running average consumption, as 
well as monitor for sudden increases in consumption. The monitoring 
must be continuous including non-ETOPS flights and the oil added at the 
ETOPS departure station. For example, after servicing, the oil 
consumption may be determined by maintenance personnel as part of the 
pre-departure check. The amount of oil added also could be reported to 
a centralized maintenance control for calculation before the ETOPS 
flight. If the APU is required for ETOPS, it must be included in the 
oil consumption monitoring program. Any corrective actions taken 
regarding oil consumption must be verified before ETOPS departure.
    m. APU In-Flight Start Program.
    (1) If the airplane type certificate requires an APU but does not 
normally require the APU to operate during the ETOPS portion of the 
flight, the certificate holder must develop an in flight start and run 
reliability program to ensure that the APU will continue to provide the 
performance and reliability established by the manufacturer. This 
monitoring program must include periodic sampling of each airplane's 
APU in-flight starting capabilities. Specifically, the certificate 
holder must ensure that each airplane's APU periodically is sampled 
rather than repeatedly sampling the same APUs. The certificate holder 
may adjust sampling intervals according to system performance and fleet 
maturity. The certificate holder and its CHDO should periodically 
review the certificate holder's APU in-flight start program data to 
ensure that the in-flight start reliability is maintained. Should the 
rolling 12-month APU in-flight start rate drop below 95 percent, the 
certificate holder should initiate an investigation into any common 
cause effects or systemic errors in procedures.

[[Page 53053]]

    (2) The certificate holder should include the criteria below in 
their APU in-flight start program. The certificate holder should make 
APU in-flight starts subject to the following conditions:
    (a) In-flight APU starts do not need to be performed on ETOPS 
flights; however, the APU must be in the ETOPS configuration in 
accordance with the appropriate CMP document, if applicable, for credit 
to be allowed.
    (b) If in-flight APU start is performed on an ETOPS flight, the 
start may be attempted on the return leg.
    (c) The start attempt should be initiated before top of descent, or 
at such time that will ensure a 2-hour cold soak at altitude before the 
start attempt.
    (d) Within route or track constraints, the objective would be met 
by attempting a start near the highest altitude assigned the route or 
track, and the final attempt near the lower altitude limits of the 
route or track, as defined by ATC. These altitudes must be 
representative of the ETOPS routes flown.
    (e) If the APU fails to start on the first attempt, subsequent 
start attempts may be made within the limits of the airframe and APU 
manufacturer design specifications stated in the applicable Aircraft 
Flight Manual (AFM) and AMM.
    (3) The certificate holder must report any operationally required 
APU in-flight start failures occurring during actual ETOPS operations 
to its CHDO within 96 hours. The certificate holder also must report 
any occurrences of an ETOPS configured APU in-flight unsuccessful start 
attempt occurring during routine sampling (which exceed the airframe 
and APU manufacturer design specifications) to its CHDO. The final 
report should include corrective actions taken as well as the status of 
corrective action programs and fleet upgrades.
    n. Configuration Maintenance and Procedures (CMP).
    (1) The CMP Standard specifies any additional configuration, 
maintenance or operational requirement that is uniquely applicable to 
ETOPS. The requirements in the CMP are established by the FAA at the 
time of initial ETOPS type design approval of the airplane-engine 
combination. The CMP document typically is published and maintained by 
the airplane manufacturer and includes identified CMP requirements. 
Airplane manufacturers may continue to release CMP revisions beyond the 
basic revision level required for ETOPS. The CMP revision levels 
required for specific airplane-engine combinations are typically listed 
in the front of the CMP or may be controlled through issuance of 
customized CMP documents. The certificate holder must implement the 
basic configuration, maintenance, and operating procedures standard, 
identified in the CMP, before beginning ETOPS operations. If a CMP 
document exists for an ETOPS certificate holder's airplane, the 
certificate holder must ensure that all of the following apply:
    (a) Configuration features are installed in the airplanes and 
engines;
    (b) Maintenance procedures are incorporated into the maintenance 
program;
    (c) Demonstrated capabilities are incorporated into the flight 
operations manual and the minimum equipment list, as required; and
    (d) Operators must coordinate any deviation from the manufacturer's 
CMP requirements with the CHDO or ACO, as required by the CMP document.
    (2) Each certificate holder must develop a system to ensure all CMP 
requirements remain incorporated in its airplanes, programs, and 
manuals throughout the operational life of each airplane, for as long 
as they operate in ETOPS.
    (3) The FAA will mandate any subsequent CMP changes necessary for 
continued safe ETOPS operations through the airworthiness directive 
(AD) process. The certificate holder should review and consider 
voluntarily incorporating any revised CMP standard that enhances 
airplane reliability and/or performance.
    (4) The certificate holder should provide its CHDO a matrix 
detailing the CMP standard for its proposed ETOPS fleet. The matrix 
should specifically include each CMP item number, revision level, item 
description, and reference documentation describing the incorporation 
method, date, and place.
    o. Procedural Changes. Refer to Chapter 5, paragraph 502 for ETOPS 
maintenance and training program changes.
    302. ETOPS Maintenance Training Requirements.
    a. The certificate holder is responsible for ensuring that all 
maintenance personnel who perform maintenance on its ETOPS airplanes, 
including repair stations, vendors, and contract maintenance, have 
received adequate technical training for the specific airplane-engine 
combination it intends to operate in ETOPS. The certificate holder 
should review the existing airplane-engine combination maintenance 
training program with its CHDO to ensure that it adequately provides 
the necessary training.
    b. Additionally, the certificate holder must develop ETOPS specific 
training that focuses on the special nature of ETOPS and take measures 
to insure that this training is given to all personnel involved in 
ETOPS. ETOPS specific training is in addition to the certificate 
holder's accepted maintenance training program used to qualify 
individuals for specific airplanes and engines and may be included in 
the accepted maintenance training curricula. It thus, becomes the 
certificate holder's ETOPS training program. The goal of this training 
is to ensure that all personnel involved in ETOPS properly accomplish 
ETOPS maintenance requirements. The certificate holder is responsible 
with acceptance from the CHDO to determine which personnel are involved 
in ETOPS, and ensure that each person's level of ETOPS training is 
commensurate with their level of involvement with ETOPS airplanes. For 
example, a mechanic who is performing pre-departure service checks may 
be required to have a higher level of ETOPS training and certification 
than a mechanic performing routine tasks on non ETOPS significant 
systems during a heavy maintenance check. A technician working ETOPS 
significant systems in an HMV (Heavy Maintenance Visit) environment 
must be appropriately trained for ETOPS, but need not be ETOPS 
certificated. Recurrent training in all maintenance areas should be 
established and used to inform personnel involved in ETOPS about new 
equipment, requirements, operator programs, etc. Experience has shown 
recurrent training is a valuable instrument in ``lessons learned'' for 
ETOPS operations.
    c. In the line maintenance environment, ETOPS-qualified maintenance 
personnel are those who have successfully completed the certificate 
holder's ETOPS training program, and who have satisfactorily performed 
extended range tasks under the direct supervision of an FAA-
certificated maintenance person. The person giving the direct 
supervision must have had previous experience with maintaining the 
particular make and model airplane being used by the certificate 
holder. For new airplanes, it is understood the certificate holder may 
not have an FAA certified maintenance person available who has previous 
experience with the newly introduced make and model airplane. In this 
instance, the training received from the manufacturer's maintenance 
training program, or a comparable program would be acceptable.
    303. ETOPS Flight Operations Requirements
    a. Airplane Performance Data. The certificate holder may not 
dispatch an

[[Page 53054]]

airplane on an ETOPS flight unless it makes performance data available 
to its flight crewmembers and dispatchers. This performance data will 
contain the following information:
    (1) Detailed one-engine-inoperative performance data including fuel 
flow for standard and nonstandard atmospheric conditions, which should 
be demonstrated as a function of airspeed and power setting, where 
appropriate. This data will cover:
    (a) Driftdown (includes net performance);
    (b) Cruise altitude coverage including 10,000 feet;
    (c) Holding; and
    (d) Altitude capability (includes net performance).
    (2) Detailed all-engine-operating performance data, including 
nominal fuel flow data, for standard and nonstandard atmospheric 
conditions, which should be demonstrated as a function of airspeed and 
power setting, where appropriate. This data will cover:
    (a) Cruise altitude coverage including 10,000 feet; and
    (b) Holding.
    (3) Details of any other conditions relevant to ETOPS that can 
cause significant deterioration of performance, such as ice 
accumulation on the unprotected surfaces of the airplane, RAM Air 
Turbine (RAT) deployment, and thrust reverser deployment.
    b. En Route Airport Information.
    (1) In accordance with Sec.  121.97, the certificate holder must 
maintain current status information on the operational capabilities of 
the airports designated for use as ETOPS alternates. ``Public 
protection'' has been a historic requirement for all domestic and flag 
operations. For ETOPS greater than 180 minutes and for operations 
traversing the North and South Polar Areas, this requirement has been 
expanded to include the listing of facilities at each airport, or in 
the immediate area, sufficient to protect the passengers and crew from 
the elements and to see to their welfare. Such a requirement can be 
interpreted to encompass the time from landing until satisfactory 
recovery of passengers and crew based on the certificate holder's 
passenger recovery plan required by Sec.  121.135 and discussed in 
Chapter 4, paragraph 403c(5) of this AC.
    (2) The certificate holder's program should provide flight 
crewmembers with current weather and information on a set of adequate 
airports in the ETOPS portion of the flight that are within the maximum 
diversion capability of the airplane on the planned route of flight as 
an aid to the flight crew in contingency planning. Any appropriate 
facility information and other data concerning these airports should be 
provided to flight crewmembers in a clear, concise, user-friendly 
format for use when planning a diversion.
    (3) Section 121.135 requires that any certificate holder conducting 
passenger flag operations must include in their Flight Operations 
Manuals or equivalent documentation available to the flight crews:
    (a) For ETOPS greater than 180 minutes, a specific passenger 
recovery plan for each ETOPS Alternate Airport used in those 
operations; and
    (b) For operations in the North Polar Area and South Polar Area, a 
specific passenger recovery plan for designated diversion airports.
    c. Dispatch.
    (1) Alternates. A certificate holder may not dispatch an airplane 
in ETOPS unless the required takeoff, destination and alternate 
airports, including ETOPS alternate airports are listed in the cockpit 
documentation (e.g., computerized flight plan) and are identified and 
listed in the dispatch release. Because ETOPS alternates serve a 
purpose different from that of a destination alternate, and may be used 
in the event of a diversion with an engine failure or loss of a primary 
airplane system, a certificate holder should not list an airport on the 
dispatch/flight release as an ETOPS alternate unless that airport's 
services and facilities are adequate for such a diversion. A 
certificate holder of a two-engine airplane should exercise ETOPS 
beyond 180 minutes authority only if there are no ETOPS alternates that 
are within a 180-minute diversion distance from the planned route of 
flight. In addition, those adequate airports closest to the planned 
route of flight should be those first considered as ETOPS alternates.
    (2) Flight Planning Limitation. The certificate holder's ETOPS 
flight planning program must ensure that the planned route of flight 
remains within the authorized ETOPS area of operation in accordance 
with Sec.  121.633 as follows:
    (a) For ETOPS up to and including 180 minutes and 207 minutes in 
the North Pacific Area of Operation, the time required to fly the 
distance to the planned ETOPS alternate, at the approved one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed in still air and standard conditions, may not 
exceed the time specified for the airplane's most time limited ETOPS 
significant system (including cargo fire suppression) minus 15 minutes.
    (b) For ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, the time required to fly the 
distance to the planned ETOPS alternate, at the all-engines-operating 
cruise speed at the normal all-engine-cruise altitude, correcting for 
wind and temperature, may not exceed the certified capability for the 
airplane's most limiting fire suppression system minus 15 minutes. 
Three- and four-engine turbine engine-powered airplanes not meeting 
these requirements as of the effective date of Sec.  121.633 may 
continue ETOPS operations until February 15, 2013.
    (c) Further, for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, the time required to fly 
the distance to the planned ETOPS alternate, at the approved one-
engine-inoperative cruise speed at the normal one engine inoperative 
level off altitude, correcting for wind and temperature, may not exceed 
the certified capability for the airplane's most time limited ETOPS 
significant system (except for the most limiting fire suppression 
system) minus 15 minutes.

    Note: Certificate holders flying three- and four-engine 
airplanes prior to the established installation time and 
certification time requirements of the regulation for these systems 
and their airplanes are exempt from these flight planning 
limitations. Once such required fire suppression systems are 
installed (no later than February 15, 2013) and once the ETOPS 
significant system time limits are established and placed in the CMP 
as required by 121.162(d) (no later than February 17, 2015), the 
operator must follow the flight planning limitations in 
121.633(b)(1) and 121.633(b)(2).

    (3) Landing Distance. For the runway expected to be used, the 
landing distance available, as specified by the airport authority, must 
be sufficient based on airplane flight manual landing performance data 
to meet the landing distance limitations specified in Sec.  121.197. 
The altitude of the airport, wind conditions, runway surface 
conditions, and airplane handling characteristics should be taken into 
account.
    (4) Airport Rescue and Fire-Fighting Service (RFFS).
    (a) The following minimum International Civil Aviation Organization 
(ICAO) rescue and fire-fighting service (RFFS) categories must be 
available at each airport listed as an ETOPS Alternate Airport in a 
dispatch or flight release:
    1. ETOPS Up to 180 Minutes. ETOPS alternates with ICAO Category 4.
    2. ETOPS Greater than 180 Minutes. ETOPS alternates with Category 
4. In addition, the airplane must remain within the ETOPS authorized 
diversion time from an Adequate Airport that has RFFS equivalent to 
that specified by ICAO Category 7, or higher. The availability of 
Adequate Category 7

[[Page 53055]]

RFFS airports must be considered for the entire ETOPS segment of the 
planned route.
    (b) If the necessary equipment and personnel are not immediately 
available at the airport, additional fire fighting support may be 
brought in from a nearby town or other location. The certificate holder 
must ensure that the nearby facility is capable of responding to a 
request for firefighting assistance within a reasonable time. A 30-
minute response time is deemed adequate if the initial notification to 
respond can be initiated while the diverting airplane is en route. A 
30-minute response time does not imply that the firefighting equipment 
has to be at the airport within 30 minutes of the initial notification 
under all conditions. It does mean that such equipment must be 
available on arrival of the diverting airplane and remain on station as 
long as the services are needed.
    (5) ETOPS Alternate Minima. A particular airport may be considered 
to be an ETOPS alternate for flight planning and dispatch purposes, if 
the latest available forecast weather conditions from the earliest time 
of landing to the latest time of landing at that airport, equals or 
exceeds the criteria detailed in the following table. Because OpSpecs 
alternate weather minima standards apply to all alternates, the 
following criteria is recommended for a typical certificate holder's 
OpSpecs. An individual certificate holder's OpSpecs must reflect 
current requirements (Sec.  121.625). Although no consideration for the 
use of GPS/RNAV approaches is presented here, operators may request to 
receive this authorization through the FAA. This authorization would be 
reflected in the operator's OpSpecs. Appropriate ETOPS alternate minima 
for such operations will be determined by the Director, Flight 
Standards Service. The airport of departure (takeoff) and the 
destination airport (unless used concurrently as an ETOPS alternate) 
are not required to meet the weather minima for ETOPS alternates as 
these airports are subject to other regulations (e.g., Sec. Sec.  
121.617, 121.621, and 121.623).
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 53056]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.008

    (6) Fuel Supply. The certificate holder must comply with the ETOPS 
en-route fuel supply as specified in Sec.  121.646(b) as follows:
    (a) No person may dispatch or release for flight or takeoff a 
turbine engine-powered airplane in ETOPS unless,

[[Page 53057]]

considering wind and other weather conditions expected, it has the fuel 
required by normal Flag requirements and enough fuel to satisfy 
paragraphs 1 through 4 below:
    1. The greater amount of fuel sufficient to fly to an ETOPS 
alternate under the following three scenarios:
    <bullet> Assuming a rapid decompression at the most critical point 
followed by descent to a safe altitude in compliance with the oxygen 
supply requirements of Sec.  121.333, or
    <bullet> At the approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed 
assuming a rapid decompression and a simultaneous engine failure at the 
most critical point followed by descent to a safe altitude in 
compliance with the oxygen supply requirements of Sec.  121.333, or
    <bullet> At the approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed 
assuming an engine failure at the most critical point followed by 
descent to the one-engine-inoperative cruise altitude.
    2. Upon reaching the alternate, hold at 1,500 ft above field 
elevation for 15 minutes and then conduct an instrument approach and 
land.
    3. Add a 5 percent wind speed factor (that is, an increment to 
headwind or a decrement to tailwind) on to the actual forecast wind 
used to calculate fuel in paragraph 1 above to account for any 
potential errors in wind forecasting. If a certificate holder is not 
using the actual forecast wind based on a wind model acceptable to the 
FAA, the airplane must carry 5 percent of the fuel required for 
paragraph 1 above, as reserve fuel to allow for errors in wind data. A 
wind aloft forecast distributed worldwide by the World Area Forecast 
System (WAFS) is an example of a wind model acceptable to the FAA.
    4. After completing the calculation in paragraph 3, compensate in 
paragraph 1 above with additional fuel for the greater of the following 
scenarios:
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Fuel for engine anti-ice, and if appropriate wing anti-
ice, for the entire time during which icing is forecast.
    (b) Unless the certificate holder has a program established to 
monitor airplane in-service deterioration in cruise fuel burn 
performance, and includes in fuel supply calculations fuel sufficient 
to compensate for any such deterioration, increase the final calculated 
fuel supply by 5 percent to account for deterioration in cruise fuel 
burn performance.
    (c) If the APU is a required power source, then its fuel 
consumption must be accounted for during the appropriate phases of 
flight.
    (d) In computing the ETOPS alternate fuel supply, advantage may be 
taken of driftdown computed at the approved one-engine-inoperative 
cruise speed. Accounting of wing anti-ice as in paragraph (6)(a)4 above 
may apply to some models of airplane based on their characteristics and 
the manufacturer's recommended procedures.
    (7) Communications. The FAA has determined that the best way to 
assure clear and timely communication in general, is via voice 
communication. Likewise the FAA has determined that there is a 
significant safety benefit associated with an ETOPS flight having the 
ability to communicate via a satellite based voice system, especially 
for those situations that occur while on long, remote ETOPS routes. The 
need for safety is best served through information and technical 
assistance that is clearly and rapidly transmitted to the flight crew 
in a way that requires the least amount of distraction to piloting 
duties. Other than the area north of 82 degrees latitude, satellite 
communications provides the best means to provide that capability 
because it is not limited by distance. The FAA recognizes the 
limitations of satellite communications (SATCOM) in the North Polar 
Area above this latitude, and in such an area an alternate 
communication system such as HF voice or data link is to be used. The 
relatively short period of time that the flight is above latitude 82 
degrees North in relation to the total planned flight time is a small 
fraction of the total flight. The ability to use SATCOM for all other 
portions of the flight, which for some routes could be longer than 15 
hours duration, is advantageous to the flight. For flights above 82 
degrees North latitude, the operator must also ensure that 
communications requirements can be met by the most reliable means 
available, taking into account the potential communication disruption 
due to solar flare activity. The same philosophy and commensurate 
requirements apply for ETOPS in the South Polar Area.
    (a) Section 121.99(a) includes a requirement for communications 
facilities that enable rapid and reliable communications on routes and 
altitudes that may be used. For all ETOPS each certificate holder 
conducting flag or supplemental operations in ETOPS must provide voice 
communications over routes where voice communications facilities are 
available. Where voice communication facilities are not available, and 
voice communication is not possible or is of poor quality, 
communications using alternative systems must be substituted.
    (b) In addition to the communication requirement above, flag and 
supplemental certificate holders operating ETOPS beyond 180 minutes 
from an alternate must have a second communications system that is 
capable of providing immediate satellite-based voice communications of 
landline telephone fidelity such as SATCOM. This system must be capable 
of providing clear voice communications between the flight crewmember 
and air traffic control, and the flight crewmember and operations 
(dispatch). Where clear satellite-based voice communications are not 
available, alternative communications systems must be substituted. If 
an operator has provided a satellite communication system for the crew 
to satisfy Sec.  121.99(a), it is not necessary that the second 
communication system required for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes be satellite 
based.
    (c) In determining whether such communications requirements 
discussed in paragraphs (a) and (b) above are available, the 
certificate holder must consider potential routes and altitudes needed 
for possible diversions to ETOPS alternates as well as the original 
planned routing.
    (8) Dispatch/Flight Release.
    (a) The following items must be listed in the dispatch or flight 
release for all ETOPS in accordance with Sec.  121.687:
    1. ETOPS alternates, and
    2. The authorized ETOPS diversion time under which the flight is 
dispatched or released.
    (b) The pilot in command (PIC) must have access to the weather and 
status of services and facilities at all adequate airports with weather 
greater than approach minimums other than the designated ETOPS 
alternates along the planned route that could be used for diversion 
before accepting the flight release.
    (c) If a flight is dispatched on a route that is greater than 180 
minutes from an ETOPS alternate, the certificate holder must inform the 
flight crew and give them the reason for the routes selection.
    (9) Dispatch on a ``Flight-by-Flight Exception'' Basis. For two-
engine

[[Page 53058]]

airplane ETOPS approvals under the provisions of 207-minute ETOPS in 
the North Pacific Area of Operation, and 240-minute ETOPS in the North 
Polar Area, in the area north of the NOPAC area, and the Pacific Ocean 
area north of the equator, regulations limit the operator's use of this 
authority in these areas to an ``exception'' basis. This exception may 
only be used when an ETOPS alternate is not available within 180 
minutes and is based on certain criteria.
    (a) For 207-Minute ETOPS, exception criteria includes political or 
military concerns, volcanic activity, temporary airport conditions, and 
airport weather below dispatch requirements, or other weather related 
events.
    (b) For 240-Minute ETOPS in the North Polar Area and in the Area 
North of NOPAC, exception criteria includes extreme conditions 
particular to these areas such as volcanic activity, extreme cold 
weather at en-route airports airport, weather below dispatch 
requirements, temporary airport conditions and other weather related 
events. The certificate holder must establish the criteria to be used 
to decide what extreme weather precludes using an airport.
    (c) For 240-Minute ETOPS in the Pacific Ocean Area north of the 
Equator, exception criteria includes political or military concern, 
volcanic activity, airport weather below dispatch requirements, 
temporary airport conditions and other weather related events.

    Note: Certificate holders are required to maintain a record of 
their use of that authority for tracking purposes. When an operator 
is granted such authority, they may exercise this authority based on 
the conditions above without limit. There is currently no 
requirement for any specific format for reporting 207- and 240-
minute track usage.

    d. En Route.
    (1) Pilot-in-Command Authority. No part of this AC is to be 
interpreted as reducing the PIC's joint responsibility for determining 
that the flight can be safely conducted as planned before release. None 
of the guidance in this AC may be interpreted in any way to prejudice 
or limit the final authority and responsibility of the PIC for the safe 
operation of the airplane.
    (2) Potential Diversion Airports after Departure.
    (a) After departure, designated ETOPS alternates must continue to 
meet the requirements of original dispatch, except that the weather 
must remain at, or above, operating minima (Sec.  121 .631(c)). The 
pilot and dispatcher should monitor the airports within the ETOPS area 
of operation that could be used for diversion for deterioration in the 
weather and limitations in the availability of facilities and services 
that would render an airport unsuitable for landing in the event of a 
diversion. During the course of the flight, the flight crewmembers 
should be informed of significant changes in conditions at the 
designated ETOPS alternates, particularly those conditions that would 
render an airport unsuitable for landing and improvement in airport 
weather to conditions above operating minima.
    (b) In most ETOPS operations, the ETOPS entry point is a 
significant distance from the point of dispatch. To ensure the 
capability and availability of an en route alternate to support any en 
route contingencies, before an ETOPS flight proceeds beyond the ETOPS 
entry point, the certificate holder must evaluate the weather from the 
earliest to latest time of arrival at the designated ETOPS alternates, 
as well as the landing distances, airport services, and facilities. If 
any conditions, such as weather below landing minima, are identified 
that would preclude a safe approach and landing, the PIC should be 
notified and an additional ETOPS alternate selected where a safe 
approach and landing can be made. A revised flight plan should include 
information on the newly designated ETOPS alternates within the 
authorized area of operation. Information on the weather and 
capabilities (that is, emergency response, approach aids, navigation 
facilities, and airport infrastructure) of potential ETOPS alternates 
in the authorized area of operations should be available to the PIC. 
The maximum diversion time, determined by the newly selected ETOPS 
alternate, must not exceed the authorized ETOPS maximum diversion time 
listed in the certificate holder's OpSpec for that airplane and 
operating area that could have been applied at original dispatch.
    (c) An operator is not required to turn back once the flight has 
gone beyond the ETOPS entry point if an unexpected worsening of the 
weather at the designated ETOPS alternate airport drops the airport 
below operating landing minima (or any other event occurs that makes 
the runway at that airport unusable). The FAA requires that the pilot-
in-command, in coordination with the dispatcher if appropriate, will 
exercise judgment in evaluating the situation and make a decision as to 
the safest course of action. This may be a turn back, re-routing to 
another ETOPS alternate airport, or continuing on the planned route. 
Should the operator become aware of a potential weather problem prior 
to the airplane entering the ETOPS stage of the flight, the rule allows 
the operator to designate a different alternate airport at the ETOPS 
entry point in order to continue the flight.
    (3) Engine Failure.
    (a) Section 121.565 requires the PIC of a two-engine airplane with 
one engine inoperative to land at the nearest suitable airport where, 
in the PIC's judgment after considering all relevant factors, a safe 
landing can be made. This determination is especially critical for 
ETOPS where the availability of suitable airports may be limited and 
the diversion decision is therefore more critical. The following is a 
list of some, but not all, factors that may be relevant in determining 
whether or not an airport is suitable, and are consistent with the 
ETOPS principle of protecting the diversion once it occurs:
    <bullet> Airplane configuration, weight, systems status, and fuel 
remaining
    <bullet> Wind and weather conditions en route at the diversion 
altitude
    <bullet> Minimum altitudes en route to the diversion airport
    <bullet> Fuel burn to the diversion airport
    <bullet> Airport's nearby terrain, weather, and wind
    <bullet> Availability and surface condition of runway
    <bullet> Approach navigation aids and lighting available
    <bullet> Rescue and fire fighting services (RFFS) at the diversion 
airport
    <bullet> Facilities for passenger and crewmember disembarkation, 
and accommodations
    <bullet> PIC's familiarity with the airport
    <bullet> 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:
    <bullet> The fuel supply is sufficient to fly beyond the nearest 
suitable airport;
    <bullet> Passenger accommodation other than passenger safety;
    <bullet> Availability of maintenance and/or repair resources.
    (c) If no more than one engine is shut down on an airplane that has 
three or more engines, Sec.  121.565 permits the PIC to fly beyond the 
nearest suitable airport in point of time if the PIC determines that 
doing so is as safe as landing at the nearest suitable airport. In 
making a decision to fly beyond the nearest suitable airport, the PIC 
should consider all relevant factors and, in addition, consider the 
possible difficulties that may occur if the flight is continued beyond 
the nearest suitable airport. When an airplane with more than two 
engines bypasses a suitable alternate,

[[Page 53059]]

the PIC must carefully weigh the risk associated with the next possible 
failure, which could complicate or compound the current engine 
inoperative condition. The next possible failure could be a system 
failure or another engine failure, which in either case, would affect 
crew workload and their possible success in completing the associated 
abnormal approach and landing procedures. It is even possible that a 
contingency outside of the realm of a system failure, such as a 
passenger illness, could compound the crew's workload normally 
associated with the current failure condition.
    (4) System Failure/Partial Failure.
    (a) During ETOPS, the limited availability of diversion airports 
and extended diversion distances require that the impact of a system 
failure or partial failure be carefully evaluated. This should include 
a careful assessment of remaining systems and overall operational 
capability. Time permitting, full use should be made of the information 
available through the certificate holder's dispatch facility and a 
determination made by the PIC as to the plan for the safe continuation 
of the flight, that is whether it is safer to divert and land or to 
continue as planned under the circumstances.
    (b) If, as a result of reevaluating airplane systems, a change in 
flight plan is required, the PIC should be provided revised flight plan 
information and an update of conditions, including weather conditions 
at designated ETOPS alternates. Dispatch should advise the flight 
crewmembers of additional airports on the planned route of flight that 
could be used for diversion. In no case may the maximum approved 
diversion authority of the operation be exceeded.
    (5) Other Diversion Scenarios. During ETOPS an airplane may divert 
for reasons other than engine or systems failure such as medical 
emergencies, onboard fire, or decompression. When considering the 
nature of the emergency and the possible consequences to the airplane, 
passengers and crew will dictate the best course of action suitable to 
the specific en route contingency. The flight crew must decide on the 
best course of action based on all available information. The ETOPS 
Alternate Airports required by Sec.  121.624 and designated for a 
particular flight provide one option to the PIC. However, these ETOPS 
alternates may not be the only airports available for the diversion and 
nothing in this guidance in any way limits the authority of the pilot-
in-command.
    e. ETOPS Procedures Documentation.
    (1) The certificate holder should develop unique ETOPS flight crew 
procedures for each of the flight operations requirements discussed in 
this section. These procedures should be contained in the applicable 
pilot flight manual. The pilot flight manual should also contain 
procedural information necessary to interface with ETOPS maintenance 
requirements such as;
    <bullet> Fuel crossfeed valve operational check (if applicable)
    <bullet> Special ETOPS MEL requirements
    <bullet> APU in-flight start procedures (if applicable)
    <bullet> Engine Condition Monitoring (ECM) data recording 
procedures
    <bullet> In-flight verification of ETOPS significant systems
    (2) The initial pilot flight manual ETOPS section and each revision 
must be submitted to the CHDO and approved before being adopted.
    304. Flight Operations Training Requirements.
    a. ETOPS Unique Requirements. The certificate holder's approved 
training program for ETOPS should include training that describes the 
unique aspects of ETOPS. That training should include, but not be 
limited to:
    (1) Diversion Decision Making. The certificate holder's training 
program should prepare flight crewmembers to evaluate probable 
propulsion and airframe systems malfunctions and failures. The goal of 
this training should be to establish flight crewmember competency in 
dealing with the most probable operating contingencies.
    (2) Specific ETOPS Requirements. The certificate holder's ETOPS 
training program should provide and integrate training for flight 
crewmembers and dispatchers (if applicable), as listed below. The FAA 
will periodically evaluate a cross-section of these items.
    (a) Flight planning, including contingency data, that is engine 
failure, decompression, and diversion equal time point.
    (b) Flight progress monitoring and fuel tracking.
    (c) Operational restrictions associated with dispatch under the 
minimum equipment list (MEL).
    (d) Non-normal procedures including:
    1. Abnormal and emergency procedures.
    2. Systems failures and remaining airplane capability as it relates 
to the decision to divert or to continue.
    3. Diversion.
    4. Crewmember incapacitation.
    5. A simulated approach and missed approach with only an alternate 
power source available, if the loss of two main alternating current 
electrical power sources with no APU electrical source available 
results in significant degradation of instrumentation to either pilot.
    (e) Use of emergency equipment associated with ETOPS operations, 
including cold weather gear and SATCOM.
    (f) Procedures to be followed in the event that there is a change 
in conditions at an ETOPS alternate listed on the dispatch/flight 
release that would preclude a safe approach and landing.
    (g) Procedures to be followed in the event that there is a change 
in conditions at other potential en route diversion airports that would 
preclude a safe approach and landing.
    (h) Understanding and effective use of approved additional or 
modified equipment required for ETOPS.
    (i) Fuel quantity comparison: The certificate holder's training 
program should identify fuel management procedures to be followed 
during the en route portion of the flight. These procedures should 
provide for an independent crosscheck of fuel quantity indicators, for 
example, fuel used, subtracted from the total fuel load, compared to 
the indicated fuel remaining.
    (j) Fuel management: Accounting for discrepancies between planned 
fuel remaining and actual fuel remaining for example estimated time of 
arrival ahead of or behind plan, gross weight, and/or altitude 
differences.
    (k) Flight crew procedures unique to ETOPS as listed above in the 
paragraph 303(e).
    (3) Passenger Recovery Plan. The certificate holder must provide 
training to the flight crewmembers and dispatchers relative to their 
perspective roles in the certificate holder's passenger recovery plan 
(Sec.  121.415).
    b. Check Airman Used in ETOPS. The certificate holder must 
designate check airmen specifically for ETOPS. The objective of the 
ETOPS check airman program should be to ensure standardized flight 
crewmember practices and procedures and also to emphasize the special 
nature of ETOPS. Only airmen with a demonstrated understanding of the 
unique requirements of ETOPS should be designated as a check airman.
    c. Review of Training Programs and Operating Manuals.
    (1) The purpose of the review is to verify the adequacy of 
information provided to training programs and operating manuals. The 
FAA will use the information resulting from these reviews as the basis 
for modification or updating flight crewmember training

[[Page 53060]]

programs, operating manuals, and checklists, as necessary.
    (2) The FAA will also continually review in-service experience of 
systems significant to ETOPS. The review includes system reliability 
levels and individual event circumstances, including crewmember actions 
taken in response to equipment failures or loss of capabilities.

Chapter 4. Applications to Conduct ETOPS

    400. ETOPS Qualifications. The unique nature of ETOPS necessitates 
an evaluation of these operations to ensure that the certificate 
holder's proposed programs are effective. The FAA will review the 
certificate holder's documentation and training programs to validate 
that they are appropriate for ETOPS. To receive approval to conduct 
ETOPS the certificate holder must satisfy the following conditions:
    a. Airplane. The specified airplane-engine combination listed in 
the certificate holder's application must have been certificated to the 
airworthiness standards of transport category airplanes and must be 
approved for ETOPS. Guidance for airplane ETOPS type design can be 
found in AC 25.1535-1 and Sec.  121.162.
    (1) Two-Engine. Airplane-engine combinations already approved for 
ETOPS under previous FAA guidance can continue to be used in ETOPS 
operations under part 121. No re-certification under Sec.  25.1535 is 
required. Two-engine airplanes with existing type certificates on 
February 15, 2007, may be approved for up to 180-minutes ETOPS without 
meeting requirements for fuel system pressure and flow, low fuel 
alerting, and engine oil tank design contained in Sec.  25.1535.
    (2) More than Two Engines. Airplanes with more than two engines 
that are to be used in ETOPS and are manufactured prior to February 17, 
2015, may operate in ETOPS without type design approval under the 
revised Sec.  25.1535. Airplanes with more than two engines 
manufactured on or after February 17, 2015, must meet the requirements 
of ETOPS type design.
    b. Flight Operations and Maintenance Requirements. The certificate 
holder must show compliance with the flight operations requirements 
discussed in paragraph 303 and the maintenance requirements discussed 
in paragraph 301.
    c. Training Requirements. The certificate holder must show that it 
has trained its personnel to achieve competency in ETOPS and should 
show compliance with the flight operations and maintenance training 
requirements discussed in paragraphs 302 and 304.
    d. Before the FAA grants ETOPS operational approval to an applicant 
for two-engine ETOPS, the certificate holder must be able to 
demonstrate the ability to achieve and maintain the level of propulsion 
system reliability that is required for the ETOPS-approved airplane-
engine combination to be used (Appendix P to Part 121, section I. 
Paragraph (a)). The certificate holder must also demonstrate that it 
can operate the particular airframe and other airplane systems at 
levels of reliability appropriate for the intended operation. This can 
be achieved directly by a successful in-service operational history or 
by successfully validating all the required ETOPS processes according 
to the Accelerated ETOPS Application Method in Appendix 3 of this AC.
    e. An applicant for an initial operating certificate who is 
applying for ETOPS authority at entry into service under the 
Accelerated ETOPS Application method must comply with the same 
requirements for certificate holders outlined in this AC. It should be 
understood that validation of an applicant with no previous operational 
experience should be more robust than would be necessary for a 
certificate holder with operational experience. As is the case for all 
Accelerated ETOPS approvals, the Director, Flight Standards Service 
must be satisfied that the applicant can operate to the standards 
expected of an experienced ETOPS operator from the first day of 
service.
    401. Application for ETOPS Authorization.
    a. Any certificate holder wishing to obtain an ETOPS authorization 
must submit an application with all supporting data to their local CHDO 
office. This application will be for a specific airplane-engine 
combination and should address all the regulatory requirements for 
ETOPS. The certificate holder may follow the guidance found in this AC 
to complete the application. The application should be submitted at 
least 60 days prior (6 months for the Accelerated ETOPS method of 
application) to the proposed start of extended range operation with the 
specific airplane-engine combination.
    b. Two-Engine Airplanes.
    (1) Up to 180-Minute ETOPS. An applicant requesting ETOPS up to 180 
minutes for two-engine operations may select one of the following two 
application methods best suited to their proposed operation (See 
Appendix 3):
    (a) In-service experience method, or
    (b) Accelerated ETOPS method.
    (2) ETOPS beyond 180 Minutes, Up to and Including 240 Minutes. The 
FAA grants approval for ETOPS beyond 180 minutes only to certificate 
holders with existing 180-minute ETOPS operating authority for the 
airplane-engine combination to be operated in the application. There is 
no minimum in-service time requirement for the 180-minute ETOPS 
operator requesting ETOPS approval beyond 180 minutes. The 
determination by the Director, Flight Standards Service to grant ETOPS 
approval is the same as for all ETOPS authorities.
    (3) ETOPS beyond 240 Minutes. This authority is only granted to 
operators of two-engine airplanes between specific city pairs. The 
certificate holder must have been operating at 180 minute or greater 
ETOPS authority for at least 24 consecutive months, of which at least 
12 consecutive months must be at 240-minute ETOPS authority with the 
airplane-engine combination in the application.
    c. Passenger-Carrying Airplanes with More than Two Engines. There 
are no minimum in-service experience criteria for certificate holders 
requesting ETOPS beyond 180 minutes for operations with more than two 
engines. Those applicants will request approval under the accelerated 
ETOPS method.
    402. ETOPS Authorities.
    a. ETOPS with Two-Engine Airplanes. An applicant for two-engine 
ETOPS may seek approval for extended operations by seeking one of the 
following ETOPS approvals best suited to their proposed operations (see 
Appendix 2):
    (1) 75-Minute ETOPS in the Caribbean/Western Atlantic Area or in 
other areas.
    (2) 90-Minute ETOPS in Micronesia.
    (3) 120-Minute ETOPS.
    (4) 138-Minute ETOPS. Such approvals are granted to current 180-
minute ETOPS operators, or as an extension of authority to operators 
with only 120-minute ETOPS approval.
    (5) 180-Minute ETOPS.
    (6) 207-Minute ETOPS in the North Pacific Area of Operation.
    (7) 240-Minute ETOPS. Approvals are granted at this level based on 
the particular geographic area applied for with criteria delineated for 
particular applications.
    (8) Beyond 240-Minute ETOPS. Approvals are granted at this level 
based on particular city pairs.
    b. ETOPS with Passenger-Carrying Airplanes having More than Two 
Engines. Certificate holders applying for ETOPS with passenger-carrying 
airplanes that have more than two engines will receive ETOPS authority 
based on the FAA approved maximum time limited airplane system 
restriction

[[Page 53061]]

of the airplane-engine combination listed in their application and the 
maximum authority requested.
    403. ETOPS Authorization Requirements.
    a. All certificate holders of airplanes with two engines, and all 
certificate holders of passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two 
engines, operating on ETOPS routes must comply with all the operational 
and process requirements specified in the ETOPS regulations in part 121 
and as discussed in this AC.
    b. Those certificate holders operating airplanes with more than two 
engines who choose to follow the recommendations in this AC as a means 
of compliance with the operating rules, and who, on February 15, 2008, 
have the authority to operate on specific non-ETOPS routes that under 
the new definition are classified as ETOPS routes, are not required to 
re-apply for their specific route authority. However, from February 15, 
2008, the certificate holder is required to comply with all the ETOPS 
flight operational requirements that are described in this AC and must 
have their ETOPS program and all ETOPS processes approved by their CHDO 
with concurrence of the Director, Flight Standards Service. The CHDO 
will amend the certificate holder's OpSpecs when the Director, Flight 
Standards Service grants a certificate holder approval to conduct 
operations under Sec.  121.161.
    c. All ETOPS certificate holders applying for approvals under this 
section must provide sufficient information with their application to 
the Manager, Air Transportation Division, AFS 200, through its CHDO and 
regional FAA office on the following areas of concern in ETOPS:
    (1) ETOPS Area of Operations/Airplane Performance. The altitudes 
and airspeeds used in establishing the ETOPS area of operations for 
each airplane-engine combination must be shown to permit compliance 
with the terrain and obstruction clearance requirements of Sec. Sec.  
121.191 and 121.193, as applicable. A speed other than the approved 
single engine speed may be used as the basis for compliance to 
Sec. Sec.  121.191 and 121.193, provided fuel consumption is shown not 
to exceed the critical fuel scenario associated with the applicable 
ETOPS equal-time point (Sec.  121.646), and the time limited system 
requirements of Sec.  121.633 are not exceeded.
    (2) Weather Information System. A certificate holder should 
substantiate that the weather information system that it uses can be 
relied on to forecast terminal and en route weather with a reasonable 
degree of accuracy and reliability in the proposed areas of operation. 
Such factors as staffing, dispatcher, training, sources of weather 
reports and forecasts, and when possible, a record of forecast 
reliability, should be evaluated.
    (3) Minimum Equipment List. The certificate holder is required to 
submit its MEL, designed in accordance with the master minimum 
equipment list (MMEL), appropriate to the requested level of ETOPS. A 
certificate holder's MEL may be more restrictive than the MMEL, 
considering the kind of ETOPS proposed and the equipment and service 
problems unique to the certificate holder. System redundancy levels 
appropriate to ETOPS should be reflected in the MMEL. Systems 
considered to have a fundamental influence on flight safety may 
include, but are not limited to the following:
    <bullet> Electrical, including battery
    <bullet> Hydraulic
    <bullet> Pneumatic
    <bullet> Flight instrumentation
    <bullet> Fuel
    <bullet> Flight control
    <bullet> Ice protection
    <bullet> Engine start and ignition
    <bullet> Propulsion system instruments
    <bullet> Navigation and communications
    <bullet> Auxiliary power units
    <bullet> Air conditioning and pressurization
    <bullet> Cargo fire suppression
    <bullet> Emergency equipment
    <bullet> Any other equipment necessary for ETOPS.
    (4) Public Protection. The provisions for public protection have 
historically been embedded in Sec.  121.97(ii). Current requirements 
are found in Sec.  121.97(b)(1)(ii). The definition of ``public 
protection'' has been expanded for certificate holders operating ETOPS 
beyond 180 minutes, and for operations in the North Polar Area and 
South Polar Area to include facilities at each airport, or in the 
immediate area, sufficient to protect the passengers and crew from the 
elements and to see to their welfare. Due to the nature of these 
operations and the climatic issues involved during the majority of the 
year, certificate holders undertaking these operations must ascertain 
that facilities at an airport, or in the immediate area, are 
sufficiently robust to protect the passengers and crew from the 
elements, and to see to their welfare during the time required to 
transport them towards their destination under the passenger recovery 
plan discussed in paragraph (5) below.
    (5) Passenger Recovery Plan.
    (a) A specific passenger recovery plan is required for each ETOPS 
Alternate Airport used by a certificate holder in ETOPS greater than 
180 minutes (OpSpec paragraph B042 (4), ER-OPS En Route Alternate 
Airports). For operations in the North Polar Area and the South Polar 
Area a specific passenger recovery plan is required for each designated 
diversion airport taken from those listed in an operator's operations 
specifications for this operation (North and South Polar Areas, OpSpec 
paragraph B055, North Polar Operations [Sic], Polar Operations). For 
further guidance on passenger recovery plans for these polar diversion 
airports see paragraph 603(2).
    (b) The certificate holder's formal passenger recovery plan should 
provide a means to validate acceptable levels of infrastructure to 
provide for an orderly process for the care and well being of the 
passengers and crewmembers. This infrastructure should include 
facilities that provide for the physiological needs of the passengers 
and crewmembers such as continuing safety, food, and shelter. Any list 
of considerations for the passengers and crewmembers need not be 
exhaustive. However, in certain cases involving operations in demanding 
environments, plans may need to be detailed enough to provide for 
medical care, communications, methods for securing alternative 
expedited travel, extraction, and other continued travel provisions for 
the crewmembers and passengers. If the certificate holder proposes to 
use the airplane capabilities and services as a means to satisfy all or 
part of the requirements for such a plan, the time-limited capability 
of appropriate systems should be evaluated and taken into account.
    (c) It is generally accepted that any plan that is designed to 
fully recover the passengers within 48 hours may be viewed as meeting 
the overall requirement to provide for the care and safety of the 
passengers and crewmembers. The greatest concern relative to passenger 
recovery plans is when diversions occur to an airport that is 
geographically located within an area not normally served by the 
certificate holder and, more specifically, when the diversion occurs to 
an en route alternate airport located in a harsh operating environment. 
A certificate holder with a route system extending over remote areas of 
the world has a responsibility under the regulations (Sec.  121.135), 
to develop a passenger recovery plan in anticipation of the possibility 
of a diversion to an approved en route alternate airport lying within 
those remote regions. In these instances, the certificate holder 
operating on those routes should devise a plan of substance that will 
outline how it will recover the

[[Page 53062]]

passengers, crewmembers, and airplane in the event of such a diversion. 
This plan should be of sufficient detail to demonstrate that the 
recovery operation can be readily effected, and that the basic needs of 
the diverted passengers and crewmembers can be provided for in the 
interim. The plan should address all of the concerns previously listed 
with specific emphasis on any issues unique to that particular 
environment. In some environments provisions for shade from the direct 
sunlight and cooling may be a concern; while in other environments such 
as polar and sub polar areas, plans should provide for immediate 
provisions for shelter from the elements, heating, and clothing. After 
these immediate concerns are addressed, the plan should address 
provisions for initiating extraction procedures immediately. In all 
cases a particular alternate airport environment should drive the 
requirements of the passenger recovery plan and the prioritization of 
concerns needing to be addressed.
    (6) Navigation. The applicant must show the availability of 
navigation facilities adequate for the operation, taking into account 
the navigation equipment installed on the airplane, the navigation 
accuracy required for the planned route and altitude of flight, and the 
routes and altitudes to the airports designated as ETOPS alternates. 
Navigation facilities required to ensure a safe approach and landing 
must be available.

    Note: Non-terrestrial approaches, e.g., GPS/RNAV, may be 
utilized if approved in a certificate holder's operating 
specifications at airports where terrestrial navigation aids, such 
as NDB or VOR, are not available or operational.

    (7) Communications. The certificate holder must show the 
availability of communications services and facilities for 
communication with ATC and the dispatch office. Certificate holders 
operating ETOPS routes must use the most reliable voice-based 
communications technology available for communications between the 
flight crew and air traffic services, and the flight crew and the 
certificate holder per Sec.  121.99. For ETOPS routes further than 180 
minutes from adequate airports, a second communication system is 
required and must be able to provide immediate satellite-based voice 
communications of landline-telephone fidelity. Rapid and reliable ATC 
communications are determined by the facilities operated by ATC units 
in the areas of operations.
    404. Validation Flight(s).
    Prior to granting ETOPS approval to a certificate holder for 
operation of a specific airplane-engine combination in an authorized 
area of operation, the FAA will require actual validation flights on 
proposed routes that the certificate holder intends to operate within 
the ETOPS area of operations, designated in the operator's approval 
request. This is to ensure that the ETOPS flight operations and 
maintenance programs described in Chapter 3 are capable of supporting 
those operations. Depending on the certificate holder's level of 
experience in conducting ETOPS and the routes intended to be used in 
operations, the FAA will determine the number of validation flights 
required, the manner in which validation flights may be conducted 
(revenue with passengers, non-revenue, or cargo only), and any other 
items requiring validation. If approval is granted to fly the 
validation flight in revenue service, the operator should be granted 
appropriate, though temporary or restricted, OpSpecs covering the 
necessary flight(s). At the successful conclusion of the validation, 
the CHDO should coordinate with the Director, Flight Standards, 
amendment and issuance of unrestricted OpSpecs. Certificate holders 
operating passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines who, 
on the effective date of this AC, have the authority to operate on 
specific non-ETOPS routes that under the new definition are classified 
as ETOPS routes, may not be required to conduct an actual validation 
flight. If the certificate holder can adequately validate that the 
necessary additional ETOPS processes and procedures are in place, and 
that they can function appropriately, may be validated by another means 
satisfactory to the CHDO with concurrence of Director, Flight Standards 
Service.
    405. Required Demonstration on a Validation Flight.
    a. The certificate holder should demonstrate, by means of an FAA-
witnessed validation flight or flights using the specified airplane-
engine combination in its application, that it has the competence and 
capability to safely conduct and adequately support the intended 
operation. The CHDO, with the concurrence of the Director, Flight 
Standards Service, will determine the conditions for each certificate 
holder's validation flights. This determination will be made on a case-
by-case basis following a review of the certificate holder's experience 
and the proposed operation. This process may require the certificate 
holder to conduct an actual diversion during the validation flights.
    b. The following emergency conditions should be demonstrated during 
the ETOPS validation flights, unless successful demonstration of these 
conditions has been approved and subsequently witnessed by the FAA in 
an acceptable simulation prior to the validation flight:
    (1) Total loss of thrust of one engine and total loss of engine-
generated electrical power, or
    (2) Any other condition considered more critical in terms of 
airworthiness, crewmember workload, or performance risk.
    c. This simulator demonstration does not alter the certificate 
holder's requirement to demonstrate the competence and the capability 
to adequately support the intended operation during the ETOPS 
validation flight.

Chapter 5. FAA ETOPS Approval

    500. Final ETOPS Operating Authority.
    Following completion of the ETOPS application requirements and 
before the issuance of operations specifications, the certificate 
holder's application with supporting data, together with the CHDO's 
recommendations, should be forwarded through the certificate holder's 
regional FAA office, to AFS-200 (Washington Headquarters) for review 
and concurrence. The CHDO's recommendations should include any specific 
recommendations made by the principal maintenance inspector (PMI), 
principal avionics inspector (PAI), and principal operations inspector 
(POI), as appropriate. Following review and concurrence by AFS-200, the 
validation flights should be conducted in accordance with any 
additional guidance or recommendations specified in the review and 
concurrence process. Following the successful completion of the 
validation flights, the Director, Flight Standards Service, will 
authorize the CHDO to issue the certificate holder OpSpecs for ETOPS 
operations.
    501. ETOPS OpSpecs.
    Those OpSpecs for ETOPS provide authorizations and limitations 
covering at least the following:
    a. Approved airplane-engine combinations,
    b. Current approved CMP standard required for ETOPS, if 
appropriate,
    c. Authorized geographic area(s) of operation,
    d. ETOPS area of operation,
    e. Airports authorized for use, including alternates and associated 
instrument approaches and operating minima,
    f. Approved maintenance and reliability program for ETOPS including 
those items specified in the type design

[[Page 53063]]

approved CMP standard, if appropriate, and
    g. Identification of the airplanes authorized for ETOPS by make, 
model, serial, and registration number.
    502. Changes to Approved ETOPS Operations, Maintenance and Training 
Procedures.
    Following final ETOPS approval, if a certificate holder determines 
a need to make substantial changes to its ETOPS operations, maintenance 
and training procedures, it should submit such changes in a timely 
manner to the CHDO for review and acceptance before incorporation. The 
certificate holder and its CHDO should negotiate what constitutes a 
substantial change to allow flexibility and take into consideration a 
certificate holder's ETOPS experience. What is considered substantial 
for a new entrant ETOPS certificate holder may be considerably 
different than for a certificate holder with many years of ETOPS 
experience.
    503. Processes After Receiving ETOPS Authority.
    a. The FAA continuously monitors the world fleet average IFSD rate 
for two-engine ETOPS authorized airplane-engine combinations to ensure 
that the levels of reliability achieved in ETOPS remain at the required 
levels. If an acceptable level of reliability in fleet average IFSD is 
not maintained, or if significant deficiencies or adverse trends are 
detected in type design (i.e., basic design of the airplane-engine) or 
in the operation, the FAA may require the airframe and engine 
manufacturers to develop a plan acceptable to the FAA to address the 
deficiencies.
    b. As with all other operations, the CHDO will monitor all aspects 
of the ETOPS operations it has authorized to the certificate holder to 
ensure that the levels of reliability achieved in ETOPS operations 
remain at acceptable levels, and that the operation continues to be 
conducted safely.
    c. In the event that an acceptable level of reliability is not 
maintained, if significant adverse trends exist, or critical 
deficiencies are detected in the type design or in the conduct of ETOPS 
operations, the CHDO will:
    (1) Alert the appropriate airplane certification office and the 
airplane evaluation group, when problems associated with airplane 
design or operations are identified; and
    (2) Initiate a special evaluation, impose operational restrictions 
(if necessary), and ensure that the certificate holder adopts 
corrective actions to resolve the problems in a timely manner.

Chapter 6. Polar Operations

    600. Background.
    a. In February 2001, in response to several U.S. carriers' plans to 
conduct north polar operations, the FAA developed a ``Polar Policy 
Letter.'' This policy letter documented the requirement for airlines to 
develop necessary plans in preparation for north polar flights and 
identified the necessary equipment and airplane configuration 
requirements for all airplanes regardless of the number of engines. The 
FAA's intent in issuing the policy letter was to ``establish a process 
that can be applied uniformly to all applicants for polar route 
authority.'' This policy was applied to all operators, and although not 
ETOPS per se, it required ETOPS-like planning, equipage and operational 
requirements in these areas.
    b. During the development of the expanded ETOPS regulations the 
ARAC recommended that the guidance contained in the Polar Policy letter 
be incorporated in the ETOPS regulations. It also recommended that 
these requirements be expanded to the South Polar Region. Although no 
U.S. certificate holders were operating in the South Polar Area at the 
time, it was felt that due to similar extremes in remoteness, weather, 
and terrain, this area should be included in anticipation of future 
industry growth.
    c. The FAA agreed with the recommendations of the ARAC and has 
determined that operating in the polar areas presents operational 
issues similar to typical ETOPS flights, and as such, the risks 
associated with this operation can be mitigated by applying planning, 
operational, and equipage requirements similar to ETOPS and specific 
procedures applicable to the risks associated with this type of flying.
    601. Definition.
    The North Polar Area is defined as the entire area north of 
latitude 78 degrees North, and the South Polar Area is defined as the 
entire area south of latitude 60 degrees South.
    602. Applicability.
    Any certificate holder operating an airplane whose route contains 
any point within the North Polar area or South Polar area as defined in 
paragraph 601 above, must comply with the requirements of part 121, 
appendix P, section III. The certificate holder must first determine 
during the route planning stage if the operation will be ETOPS as 
defined in Sec.  121.161 and as further discussed in Chapter 2, 
paragraph 201 of this AC. If the operation is ETOPS the polar 
requirements of part 121, appendix P and the guidance in this chapter 
are in addition to any of the applicable ETOPS requirements discussed 
in Chapter 3, paragraphs 300-304 of this AC.
    603. Polar Requirements.
    a. The certificate holder applying for authority to fly in the 
Polar Areas must develop plans in preparation for all polar flights in 
the North and South Polar Areas. This section documents the added 
requirements and identifies equipment and airplane configuration 
requirements in addition to the requirements discussed in Chapter 3, 
paragraphs 300-304.
    b. The certificate holder's plan for conducting operations within 
these areas must include the following elements:
    (1) Requirements for Designating Alternates. Certificate holders 
should designate a set of alternate airports regardless of their 
distance from the planned route, such that one or more can reasonably 
be expected to be available in a variety of weather conditions to 
support a necessary diversion. The flight must have sufficient fuel as 
required by Sec.  121.646, if applicable, and should be able to make a 
safe landing and the airplane maneuvered off of the runway at the 
selected diversion airport. In the event of a disabled airplane 
following landing, the capability to move the disabled airplane should 
exist at that airport, so as not to block the operation of any recovery 
airplane. In addition, those airports designated for use should be 
capable of protecting the safety of all personnel by being able to:
    (a) Offload the passengers and crewmember in a safe manner during 
adverse weather conditions;
    (b) Provide for the physiological needs of the passengers and 
crewmembers for the duration of the stay at the diversion airport until 
safe evacuation; and
    (c) Safely extract passengers and crewmembers as soon as possible 
(execution and completion of the passenger recovery is expected as soon 
as possible within 48 hours following diversion).
    (2) Passenger Recovery Plan. Except for supplemental all-cargo 
operations, each certificate holder conducting operations in the polar 
areas must have a passenger recovery plan at designated diversion 
airports as discussed in paragraph (1) above and in Chapter 4, 
paragraph 403c(5). The passenger recovery plan in these Polar Regions 
should also include special consideration for the possibility of 
extreme cold weather, limited passenger facilities, and the need to 
initiate passenger recovery without delay.

[[Page 53064]]

    (3) Fuel Freeze Strategy and Monitoring. The certificate holder 
must have a fuel-freeze strategy and procedures for monitoring fuel 
freezing. The certificate holder may wish to develop a fuel freeze 
strategy and monitoring program (e.g., alternate fuel freeze point 
temperature determination based on actual measurements of uploaded 
fuel), in lieu of using the standard minimum fuel freeze temperatures 
for specific types of fuel used. In such cases, the certificate 
holder's fuel freeze analysis and monitoring program for the airplane 
fuel load is subject to FAA approval. The certificate holder should 
have procedures established that require coordination between 
maintenance, dispatch, and assigned flight crewmembers to convey the 
determined fuel freeze temperature of the fuel load on board the 
airplane.
    (4) Communication Capability. The certificate holder must have 
effective voice communications and/or data link capability for all 
portions of the flight route. The requirements of Sec.  121.99 apply to 
all ETOPS operations in these areas. For all other operations, company 
communications may be accomplished using HF voice, HF data link, 
satellite communication (SATCOM) voice or SATCOM data link. Because of 
the limitations of VHF and satellite-based voice communications, ATC 
communications will probably require high frequency (HF) voice over 
portions of these routes. The FAA recognizes that SATCOM may not be 
available for short periods during flight over the Poles. Communication 
capability with HF radios also may be affected during periods of solar 
flare activity. The certificate holder should consider predicted solar 
flare activity and its effect on communications for each flight that is 
dispatched for operations into these areas.
    (5) MEL Considerations. The certificate holder must amend its MEL 
to reflect the items that must be operational for these operations. For 
ETOPS flights, all MEL restrictions for the applicable ETOPS operations 
apply. Before receiving FAA authority to conduct these operations, all 
certificate holders should review its MEL for consideration of the 
dispatch availability of the following systems/equipment:
    (a) Fuel quantity indicating system (FQIS), including the fuel tank 
temperature indicating system;
    (b) APU (when the APU is necessary for an airplane to comply with 
ETOPS requirements), including electrical and pneumatic supply to its 
designed capability,
    (c) Autothrottle system;
    (d) Communication systems relied on by the flight crewmember to 
satisfy the requirement for communication capability; and
    (e) Except for all-cargo operations, an expanded medical kit to 
include automated external defibrillators (AED).
    (6) Training. The certificate holder should address the following 
training requirements in its approved training programs:
    (a) QFE/QNH and meter/feet conversions (required for flight 
crewmember and dispatcher training);
    (b) Training requirements for fuel freeze, to include maintenance, 
dispatch, and flight crewmember training (special curriculum segments);
    (c) General route-specific training on weather patterns;
    (d) Relevant airplane system limitations (for example fuel 
temperature limits);
    (e) Role of maintenance role in providing airplane systems 
capability information to dispatch and flight crewmember to aid the PIC 
in diversion decision making;
    (f) Crewmember training in the use of the cold weather anti-
exposure suit,
    (g) For dispatch and crewmember considerations during solar flare 
activity, the certificate holder must be aware of the content of AC 
120-52, Radiation Exposure of Certificate Holder Crewmembers, and 
provide crewmember training as stated in AC 120-61, Crewmember Training 
on In-Flight Radiation Exposure; and
    (h) Training for flight crewmembers and dispatcher roles in the 
certificate holder's passenger recovery plan.
    (7) Crew Exposure to Radiation during Solar Flare Activity. The 
certificate holder must provide a plan for mitigating crew exposure to 
the effects of solar flare activity at the altitudes and latitudes 
expected in such operations.
    (8) Special Equipment for Polar Operations. A minimum of two cold 
weather anti-exposure suits must be on board each airplane, so that 
outside coordination at a diversion airport with extreme climatic 
conditions can be accomplished safely. A short term MEL relief for this 
item may be granted provided the certificate holder has arranged ground 
support provisions for providing such protective clothing at alternate 
airports. The FAA may also relieve the certificate holder from this 
requirement during those periods of the year when the seasonal 
temperature makes the equipment unnecessary.
    604. Validation before Approval.
    a. Prior to receiving an authorization to conduct polar operations 
a certificate holder must conduct an FAA observed validation flight. As 
part of polar area validation, the certificate holder must exercise its 
passenger recovery plan. Adequate and timely notification must be made 
to the FAA before the validation flight so that any necessary 
coordination between the FAA inspector and personnel at the selected 
diversion airport can be completed. The inspector will witness the 
effectiveness and adequacy of the following areas of operation:
    (1) Communications,
    (2) Coordination,
    (3) Facilities,
    (4) Accuracy of Notices to Airman and weather information, and
    (5) Operability of ground equipment during the simulated diversion.
    b. The exercise of the certificate holder's passenger recovery plan 
may be completed before the validation flight. The FAA will not 
consider a request by a certificate holder to conduct the validation 
flight in a passenger revenue status if the certificate holder's 
passenger recovery plan has not been previously and satisfactorily 
demonstrated to the FAA. If the certificate holder elects to 
demonstrate its passenger recovery plan as part of and during its 
validation flight, the flight may not be conducted in a passenger 
revenue status. However, the carriage of cargo revenue is permissible 
in this case and is encouraged for airplane weight and balance 
purposes.
    605. FAA Polar Area Approval.
    Certificate holders must obtain FAA approval to conduct these 
operations and to operate in any area of magnetic unreliability. The 
FAA will grant such authority based on a specific airplane-engine 
combination. Any certificate holder wishing to obtain Polar 
authorization must submit an application with all supporting data to 
their local CHDO office. This application must address all the 
regulatory requirements for Polar operations and may follow the 
guidance as found in this AC. The application should be submitted at 
least 60 days prior to the proposed start of polar operations with the 
specific airplane-engine combination. FAA approval is granted by an 
amendment to the certificate holder's OpSpecs.

Appendix 1. Definitions

    The following definitions are applicable to ETOPS. They include 
definitions from Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 
CFR) parts 1 and 121, as well as terms that are used within the 
context of this AC with respect to ETOPS:
    1. Adequate Airport. An airport that an airplane operator may 
list with approval from the FAA because that airport meets the 
landing limitations of part 121, Sec.  121.197 and

[[Page 53065]]

is either, an airport that meets the requirements of 14 CFR part 
139, subpart D, excluding those that apply to aircraft rescue and 
firefighting service, or a military airport that is active and 
operational. Airports without specific part 139 approval (i.e., 
outside FAA jurisdiction), may be considered adequate provided that 
they are determined to meet the equivalent standards and intent of 
part 139 subpart D.
    2. Configuration, Maintenance, and Procedures (CMP) Document. A 
document approved by the FAA that contains minimum configuration, 
operating, and maintenance requirements, hardware life-limits, and 
Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) constraints necessary for an 
airplane-engine combination to meet ETOPS type design approval 
requirements.
    3. Dual Maintenance. Dual maintenance means maintenance on the 
``same'' ETOPS significant system. Dual maintenance is maintenance 
action performed on the same element of identical, but separate 
ETOPS Significant Systems during a scheduled or unscheduled 
maintenance visit. Dual maintenance on ``substantially similar'' 
ETOPS significant systems means maintenance actions performed on 
engine-driven components on both engines during the same maintenance 
visit.
    4. Equal-Time Point (ETP). A point on the route of flight where 
the flight time, considering wind, to each of two selected airports 
is equal.
    5. ER. An abbreviation used in the MMEL and in the minimum 
equipment list (MEL) of some certificate holders to indicate ETOPS. 
As used in this AC, any ETOPS MMEL/MEL restrictions applicable to 
ETOPS.
    6. ETOPS Alternate Airport. An adequate airport listed in the 
certificate holder's operations specifications (OpSpecs) that is 
designated in a dispatch or flight release for use in the event of a 
diversion during ETOPS. This definition applies to flight planning 
and does not in any way limit the authority of the pilot in command 
during flight.
    7. ETOPS Area of Operation. For turbine-engine-powered airplanes 
with two engines an area beyond 60 minutes from an adequate airport, 
or with more than two engines in passenger-carrying operations, an 
area beyond 180 minutes from an adequate airport, and within the 
authorized ETOPS maximum diversion time approved for the operation 
being conducted. An ETOPS area of operation is calculated at an 
approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard 
conditions in still air.
    8. ETOPS Entry Point. The first point on the route of an ETOPS 
flight; determined using a one-engine-inoperative cruise speed under 
standard conditions in still air that is more than 60 minutes from 
an adequate airport for airplanes with two engines, and more than 
180 minutes from an adequate airport for passenger-carrying 
airplanes with more than two engines.
    9. ETOPS Significant System. An airplane system, including the 
propulsion system, the failure or malfunctioning of which could 
adversely affect the safety of an ETOPS flight, or the continued 
safe flight and landing of an airplane during an ETOPS diversion. 
Each ETOPS significant system is either an ETOPS group 1 significant 
system or an ETOPS group 2 significant system.
    a. An ETOPS group 1 Significant System:
    (1) Has fail-safe characteristics directly linked to the degree 
of redundancy provided by the number of engines on the airplane;
    (2) Is a system, the failure or malfunction of which could 
result in an in-flight shutdown (IFSD), loss of thrust control, or 
other power loss;
    (3) Contributes significantly to the safety of an ETOPS 
diversion by providing additional redundancy for any system power 
source lost as a result of an inoperative engine; and
    (4) Is essential for prolonged operation of an airplane at 
engine inoperative altitudes.
    b. An ETOPS group 2 significant system is an ETOPS significant 
system that is not an ETOPS group 1 significant system.
    10. ETOPS-Qualified Personnel. A person performing maintenance 
for the certificate holder, who has satisfactorily completed the 
certificate holder's ETOPS training program.
    11. Extended Operations (ETOPS). An airplane flight operation 
during which a portion of the flight is conducted beyond 60 minutes 
from an adequate airport for turbine-engine-powered airplanes with 
two engines, and beyond 180 minutes for turbine-engine-powered 
passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines. This 
distance is determined using an approved one-engine-inoperative 
cruise speed under standard atmospheric conditions in still air.
    12. Flight-by-Flight Exception. The application of a greater 
ETOPS maximum diversion authority under specific, limited 
circumstances, as defined in this AC, when a flight cannot be 
planned on the preferred route within an authorized lesser diversion 
time.
    13. In-Flight Shutdown (IFSD). For ETOPS only, when an engine 
ceases to function (when the airplane is airborne) and is shut down, 
whether self induced, flight crew initiated or caused by an external 
influence. The FAA considers IFSD for all causes, such as flameout, 
internal failure, flight crew initiated shutdown, foreign object 
ingestion, icing, inability to obtain or control desired thrust or 
power, and cycling of the start control; however briefly, even if 
the engine operates normally for the remainder of the flight. This 
definition excludes the airborne cessation of the functioning of an 
engine when immediately followed by an automatic engine relight and 
when an engine does not achieve desired thrust or power but is not 
shut down.
    14. Maximum Diversion Time. For the purposes of ETOPS in Sec.  
121.161 and related ETOPS regulations, maximum diversion time (for 
example 120 minutes, 180 minutes, 240 minutes, and, beyond 240 
minutes) is the longest diversion time authorized for a flight under 
the operator's ETOPS authority. It is calculated under standard 
conditions in still air at a one-engine-inoperative cruise speed.
    15. One-Engine-Inoperative Cruise Speed. For the purposes of 
those sections of part 121 applicable to ETOPS, the one-engine-
inoperative cruise speed is a speed within the certified operating 
limits of the airplane that is specified by the certificate holder 
and approved by the FAA for calculating required fuel reserves 
needed to account for an inoperative engine, or determining whether 
an ETOPS alternate is within the maximum diversion time authorized 
for an ETOPS flight.

    Note: The following areas (16-18) are defined for the purposes 
of those sections of part 121 applicable to ETOPS:

    16. North Pacific (NOPAC). The North Pacific Air Traffic Service 
(ATS) routes and adjacent airspace between Anchorage and Tokyo 
Flight Information Regions (FIR).
    17. North Pacific Area of Operations. Pacific Ocean areas north 
of 40[deg] North latitudes including NOPAC ATS routes, and published 
Pacific Organized Track System (PACOTS) tracks between Japan and 
North America. (For the purposes of this definition, ``North 
America'' includes the countries of Canada, the United States, and 
Mexico.)
    18. Polar Areas.
    a. North Polar Area. The entire area north of 78[deg] North 
latitude.
    b. South Polar Area. The entire area south of 60[deg] South 
latitude.
    19. Process. A series of steps or activities that are 
accomplished in a consistent manner to ensure a desired result is 
attained on an ongoing basis.
    20. Proven Process. A process is considered to be proven when 
the following elements are developed and implemented:
    a. Definition and documentation of process elements.
    b. Definition of process related roles and responsibilities.
    c. Procedures for validation of process or process elements to 
include:
    <bullet> Indications of process stability/reliability.
    <bullet> Parameters to validate process and monitor (measure) 
success.
    <bullet> Duration of necessary evaluation to validate process.
    d. Procedure for follow-up in-service monitoring to assure the 
process remains reliable and stable.

[[Page 53066]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.009


[[Page 53067]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.010


[[Page 53068]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.011


[[Page 53069]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.012


[[Page 53070]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.013


[[Page 53071]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.014


[[Page 53072]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.015


[[Page 53073]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.016


[[Page 53074]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.017


[[Page 53075]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17SE07.018

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 53076]]

Appendix 3. ETOPS Approval Methods

    The two different approval methods available for a certificate 
holder's use are described in this appendix.
    1. IN-SERVICE EXPERIENCE METHOD (TWO-ENGINE ETOPS FOR UP TO 180-
MINUTE ETOPS).
    a. General.
    (1) An in-service experience program is one way of gaining ETOPS 
operational approval. As a prerequisite to obtaining any operational 
approval, the certificate holder should show that an acceptable 
level of propulsion system reliability has been achieved in service 
by the world fleet for that particular airplane-engine combination. 
The candidate certificate holder also should obtain sufficient 
maintenance and operation familiarity with the particular airplane-
engine combination. Each certificate holder requesting approval to 
conduct ETOPS by the in-service method should have operational 
experience appropriate to the operation proposed.
    (2) This appendix contains guidelines for requisite in-service 
experience. These guidelines may be reduced or increased following 
review and concurrence on a case by case basis by the Director, 
Flight Standards Service. Any reduction or increase in in-service 
experience guidelines will be based on an evaluation of the 
certificate holder's ability and competence to achieve the necessary 
reliability for the particular airplane-engine combination in ETOPS. 
For example, a reduction in in-service experience may be considered 
for a certificate holder who can show extensive in-service 
experience with a related engine on another airplane that has 
achieved acceptable reliability. In contrast, an increase in in-
service experience may be considered for those cases where heavy 
maintenance has yet to occur and/or abnormally low number of 
takeoffs has occurred.
    b. Specific Approvals.
    (1) 75- and 90-Minute Operation. Consideration may be given to 
the approval of 75-minute and 90-minute ETOPS for certificate 
holders with minimal or no in-service experience with the airplane-
engine combination. This determination considers such factors as the 
proposed area of operations, the certificate holder's demonstrated 
ability to successfully introduce airplanes into operations, and the 
quality of the proposed maintenance and operations programs.
    (2) 120-Minute Operation. Each certificate holder requesting 
approval to conduct ETOPS with a maximum diversion time (in still 
air) of 120 minutes should have 12 consecutive months of operational 
in-service experience with the specified airplane-engine 
combination. In-service experience guidelines may be increased or 
decreased by the Director, Flight Standards Service.
    (3) 180-Minute Operation.
    (a) Each certificate holder requesting approval to conduct ETOPS 
with a maximum diversion time (in still air) of 180 minutes should 
have previously gained 12 consecutive months of operational in 
service experience with the specified airplane-engine combination in 
conducting 120-minute ETOPS. In-service experience guidelines may be 
reduced or increased by the Director, Flight Standards Service. 
Likewise, the substitution of in-service experience, which is 
equivalent to the actual conduct of 120-minute ETOPS operations, 
also will be established by the Director, Flight Standards Service, 
on a case by-case basis.
    (b) Before approval, the certificate holder's capability to 
conduct operations and implement effective ETOPS programs in 
accordance with the criteria detailed in this AC will be examined. 
Only certificate holders who have demonstrated capability to 
successfully conduct a 120-minute program will be considered for 
approval beyond 120 minutes. Approval will be given on a case-by-
case basis for an increase to their area of operation beyond 120 
minutes. The dispatch limitation will be a maximum diversion time of 
180 minutes to an ETOPS alternate at an approved one-engine-
inoperative speed (under standard conditions in still air).
    c. Requesting Approval. A certificate holder requesting approval 
under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, 
Sec.  121.161 for ETOPS under this method should submit the request 
with the required supporting data to its CHDO at least 60 days 
before the proposed start of ETOPS operation with the specific 
airplane-engine combination. In considering an application from a 
certificate holder to conduct ETOPS, the CHDO should assess the 
certificate holder's overall safety record, past performance, flight 
crewmember training, and maintenance programs. The data provided 
with the request should substantiate the certificate holder's 
ability and competence to safely conduct and support these 
operations and should include the means used to satisfy the 
considerations outlined in this paragraph.
    2. ACCELERATED ETOPS METHOD (UP TO 180-MINUTE ETOPS FOR TWO-
ENGINE AIRPLANES AND FOR ALL ETOPS FOR PASSENGER-CARRYING AIRPLANES 
WITH MORE THAN TWO ENGINES). This section describes the means by 
which a certificate holder may initiate ETOPS operations when the 
certificate holder establishes the processes necessary for 
successful and reliable ETOPS operations and proves to the FAA that 
such processes can be successfully applied throughout the 
applicant's ETOPS operations. This may be achieved by thorough 
documentation and analysis of processes and process validation, or 
demonstration on another airplane/validation (as described under 
process validation in this appendix, below) or a combination of 
these processes.
    a. ETOPS Processes. The airplane-engine combination for which 
the certificate holder is seeking accelerated ETOPS operational 
approval must be ETOPS type design-approved (except for two-engine 
ETOPS at 75- and 90-minute authorizations and for passenger-carrying 
airplanes with more than two engines manufactured prior to March 17, 
2015) and determined to be operating at a satisfactory level of 
reliability before commencing ETOPS. The certificate holder seeking 
accelerated ETOPS operational approval must demonstrate to the FAA 
that it has an ETOPS program in place that consists of all the 
following applicable ETOPS process elements:
    (1) The process elements defined as the ETOPS maintenance and 
operations requirements of Chapter 3, paragraphs 301-304.
    (2) Documentation of the following elements as appropriate:
    (a) Technology new to the certificate holder and significant 
difference in primary and secondary power (engines, electrical, 
hydraulic, and pneumatic) systems between the airplanes currently 
operated and the two-engine airplane for which the certificate 
holder is seeking ETOPS operational approval.
    (b) The plan to train flight and maintenance personnel to the 
differences identified in the maintenance subparagraph above.
    (c) The plan to use proven manufacturer-validated training and 
maintenance and operations manual procedures relevant to ETOPS for 
the two-engine airplane for which the certificate holder is seeking 
accelerated ETOPS operational approval.
    (d) Changes to any previously proven validated training, 
maintenance or operations manual procedures used in previous non-
ETOPS operations or in previous ETOPS with a different airplane-
engine combination and/or geographic area of operations. Depending 
on the nature and extent of any changes, the certificate holder may 
be required to provide a plan for validating such changes.
    (e) The validation plan for any additional certificate holder 
unique training and procedures relevant to ETOPS.
    (f) Details of any ETOPS program support from the airframe 
manufacturer, engine manufacturer, other certificate holders or any 
other outside person.
    (g) The control procedures when maintenance or flight dispatch 
support is provided by an outside person as described above.
    b. Process Validation Methodology.
    (1) Paragraph (a) identifies those process elements that should 
be proven before ETOPS authority is granted by the FAA under the 
accelerated ETOPS approval program. For a process to be considered 
proven the process should first be defined. Typically, this will 
include a flow chart showing the various elements of the process. 
Roles and responsibilities of the personnel who will be managing 
this process should be defined including any training requirement. 
The certificate holder should demonstrate that the process is in 
place and functions as intended. The certificate holder may 
accomplish this by thorough documentation and analysis, or by 
demonstrating on an airplane, that the process works and 
consistently provides the intended results. The certificate holder 
should define the necessary evaluation duration to validate the 
process and also show that a feedback loop exists to illustrate need 
for revision of the process, if required, based on in-service 
experience.
    (2) Normally the choice to use or not to use demonstration on an 
airplane as a means of validating individual processes should be

[[Page 53077]]

determined by the certificate holder. Process validation may be done 
with the airframe-engine combination that will be used in ETOPS. It 
can also be done with a different airplane type from that for which 
ETOPS approval is being sought, including an airplane with more than 
two engines, if it can be shown that the particular airplane-engine 
combination in the certificate holder's ETOPS program is not 
necessary to validate a process. With sufficient preparation and 
dedication of resources, such validation may not be necessary to 
assure processes that produce acceptable results. However, if the 
plan proposed by the certificate holder to prove processes is 
determined by the FAA to be inadequate or the plan does not produce 
acceptable results, validation of the processes with an airplane 
will be required.
    (3) If a certificate holder currently is conducting ETOPS with a 
different airplane-engine combination, it may be able to document 
that it has proven ETOPS processes in place with only minimal 
further validation required. If the certificate holder has similar 
non-ETOPS operations and can simulate or demonstrate proven ETOPS 
processes in such operations, credit can be given for such 
successful evaluations. In either case, the certificate holder 
should demonstrate that the means are in place to assure equivalent 
results with the airplane-engine combination being proposed for 
ETOPS operational approval. The following elements may aid in 
justifying a reduction in the validation requirement of ETOPS 
processes:
    (a) Experience with other airframes and/or engines,
    (b) Previous ETOPS experience,
    (c) Experience with long range, overwater operations with two-, 
three-, or four-engine airplanes, and
    (d) Experience gained by flight crewmembers and maintenance and 
flight dispatch personnel while working with other ETOPS-approved 
certificate holders.
    c. Application for Accelerated ETOPS Program. The certificate 
holder seeking accelerated ETOPS operational approval should submit 
an Accelerated ETOPS operational approval plan to the FAA six months 
before the proposed start of ETOPS. This will provide sufficient 
time for the certificate holder and the FAA to validate the 
effectiveness of all ETOPS process elements (``proven process''). 
The certificate holder's application for ETOPS should--
    (1) State the ETOPS authority requested. Define proposed routes 
and the ETOPS diversion time necessary to support these routes and 
the airplane-engine combination to be flown.
    (2) Define processes and related resources being allocated to 
initiate and sustain ETOPS operations in a manner that demonstrates 
commitment by management and all personnel involved in ETOPS 
maintenance and operational support.
    (3) Provide a documented plan for compliance with requirements 
listed in this section for Accelerated ETOPS.
    (4) Define Review Gates. A review gate is a milestone-tracking 
plan to allow for the orderly tracking and documentation of specific 
provisions of this Appendix. Each review gate should be defined in 
terms of the process elements to be validated. Normally, the review 
gate process will start six months before the proposed start of 
ETOPS and should continue until at least six months after the start 
of ETOPS. The review gate process will help ensure that the proven 
processes comply with the provisions of this AC and are capable of 
continued ETOPS operations.
    d. Validation of Process Elements. When the certificate holders 
accelerated ETOPS plan receives approval by the CHDO and final 
concurrence by AFS-200, a validation of the process elements of the 
accelerated ETOPS plan should begin. Close coordination between the 
certificate holder and the FAA is necessary for a successful 
validation of the ETOPS plan. All process elements required in 
paragraph (a) should be validated.
    (1) Before the start of the validation of the process elements, 
the following information should be part of the Accelerated ETOPS 
plan submitted to the FAA:
    (a) Validation periods, including start dates and proposed 
completion dates.
    (b) Definition of airplane(s) to be used in the validation. List 
should include registration numbers, manufacturer and serial number 
and model of the airframes and engines.
    (c) Description of the areas of operation (if relevant to 
validation objectives) proposed for validation and actual ETOPS.
    (d) Definition of designated ETOPS validation routes. The routes 
should be of duration necessary to ensure process validation occurs.
    (2) Process validation reporting. The certificate holder should 
compile results of ETOPS process validation. The certificate holder 
should:
    (a) Document how each element of the ETOPS process was utilized 
during the validation.
    (b) Document any shortcomings with the process elements and 
measures in place to correct such shortcomings.
    (c) Document any changes to ETOPS processes that were required 
after an IFSD, unscheduled engine removals, or any other significant 
operational events.
    (d) When there is concurrence between the certificate holder and 
the CHDO that a process element has been successfully proven, the 
review gate should be closed and confirmation documented.
    (e) Provide periodic process validation reports to the FAA. This 
should be addressed during the review gates.
    (3) The certificate holder should include a final review gate 
prior to final ETOPS approval that is the validation flights 
described in Chapter 4, paragraphs 404 and 405 of this AC. This 
review gate should ensure that all ETOPS processes have been proven.
    (4) Any validation program should address the following:
    (a) The certificate holder should show that it has considered 
the impact of the ETOPS validation program with regard to safety of 
flight operations. The certificate holder should state in its 
application any policy guidance to personnel involved in the ETOPS 
process validation program. Such guidance should clearly state that 
ETOPS process validation exercises should not be allowed to 
adversely impact the safety of operations especially during periods 
of abnormal, emergency, or high cockpit workload operations. It 
should emphasize that during periods of abnormal or emergency 
operation or high cockpit workload ETOPS process validation 
exercises may be terminated.
    (b) The validation scenario(s) should be of sufficient frequency 
and operational exposure to validate maintenance and operational 
support systems not validated by other means.
    (c) A means must be established to monitor and report 
performance with respect to accomplishment of tasks associated with 
ETOPS process elements. Any recommended changes to ETOPS maintenance 
and operational process elements should be defined.
    e. Final Approval for Accelerated ETOPS Authority. At the 
successful completion of the certificate holder's accelerated ETOPS 
validation program all process elements should have been validated 
and appropriate review gates closed. Report of a successful 
completion of review gates will be forwarded by the CHDO to AFS-200. 
Upon final concurrence and approval, the applicant should forward to 
the FAA a plan for final validation flights to be conducted over 
proposed routes in the ETOPS area of operation and in the airframe-
engine combination listed in the certificate holder's application. 
This FAA witnessed ETOPS validation flight or flights will be 
conducted in accordance with Chapter 4, paragraphs 404 and 405 of 
this AC. The purpose of these flights is for the certificate holder 
to demonstrate to the FAA that it has the competence and capability 
to safely conduct and adequately support the intended ETOPS 
operation.

[FR Doc. 07-4473 Filed 9-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>