499 N.W. 70th AVE.–STE.110–PLANTATION,FL 33317-7572–(954) 581-6022 – FAX: (954) 584-8980 –

www.sheffield.com

1 of 2

Re: Docket No. FAA-2011-1149

Request for Extension of Public Comment Period and Request for Clarification

November 18, 2011

Sheffield School of Aeronautics hereby requests an extension to the comment period regarding

the proposed change to policy regarding Designated Aircraft Dispatcher Examiners (DADEs).

We believe there is good cause for additional time for the public to review and comment on the

proposed changes.

This publication of the proposed policy change was in many ways a result of multiple petitions

from Sheffield School through the Office of the Administrator and also the Office of the

Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety, AVS-1. Sheffield School strongly objected to 

many provisions in the original Order 8900.1 policy. As part of the investigation, the current

Associate Administrator, Peggy Gilligan, mandated that AFS-200 and subordinate offices reply 

to our hotline complaint and provide full answers to all questions we asked by May 20, 2011. To 

this day, AFS-200 has not complied and therefore it is difficult for us to put the changes into an

appropriate context, or understand why many of the same provisions are still in the proposed 

changes with even further restrictions.

Additionally, our initial analysis of the proposed changes published on November 8 suggest that

new, further restrictions to DADE policy will likely severely restrict the availability of DADES

to graduates of many Part 65 aircraft dispatcher courses, and may ultimately cause individuals to 

avoid seeking Part 65 certification if the FAA can no longer guarantee timely certification. It is

also apparent that individual Dispatch Aviation Safety Inspector workload in the various

FSDO/CMOs will be impacted by additional requirements and especially by their increased 

requirement to provide certification exams in the absence of DADEs who would be removed 

under this policy. However, since the FAA has not mentioned any analysis of the economic

impact to stakeholders or any internal study on ASI workload, we believe that additional time for

both internal and external evaluation of this is in the public interest.

Also, the docket entry stated that while public comment on policy is not normally provided, “the

agency has established a docket for public comments regarding this guidance for inspectors in 

recognition of the interest of current DADEs and applicants for an aircraft dispatcher certificate

under Part 65.” Applicants for the certificate who have not studied this matter prior to the

publication of the request for comments must have sufficient time to not only consider the merits

of the proposal, but also to be able to research the effects this proposal would have on them if the

policy is adopted. This alone suggests that there is sufficient cause for extension, and that an 

extension is once again in the public interest.

The proposed changes would also severely and directly affect Part 65 course operators, although 

the FAA stated only that their concern was for current DADEs and applicants for the certificate.

This omits a sizeable class of individuals who will be directly impacted, who absolutely require
499 N.W. 70th AVE.–STE.110–PLANTATION,FL 33317-7572–(954) 581-6022 – FAX: (954) 584-8980 –

www.sheffield.com

2 of 2

sufficient time to analyze and comment. Sheffield School of Aeronautics, like the majority of

Part 65 dispatcher certification course operators, is a federally-protected small business entity.

Small business, unlike larger corporations, do not have additional “regulatory affairs” staff who 

can fully research and analyze the effects of such changes and prepare public comments on their

behalf. The time we take to prepare comments is time taken away from our core business

functions. Given that the majority of the Part 65 schools that would be impacted by this change

are also small businesses that would require additional time to fully analyze the impact these

changes may have, we believe this is further cause for an extension.

Beyond that, although we appreciate that policy changes are not subject to the same requirements

as rulemaking, we note that the minimum time allowed for public comment even for petitions for

rulemaking – not even actual rulemaking itself – is normally 60 days per Order 8900.1,

Volume1, Chapter 2, section 3, paragraph 1-144. Given that the effects of this policy change

will be as far reaching on small business as rulemaking, we believe that offering a shorter

comment period than the norm in this case cannot be justified.

We therefore believe that there is good cause for an extension of the public comment period, and 

that such an extension would be in the public interest. We recommend an increase

commensurate with the amount of additional time that the FAA has taken so far to work on the

responses mandated by AVS-1 that we have not received, which is six months – or a further

extension of several months beyond AFS-200’s reply as ordered by AVS-1 to allow us to have

suitable access to relevant material that has not yet been made available. We suspect the

authors are trying to push this policy through much faster, but not allowing stakeholder access to 

relevant information promised by AVS-1 and not allowing sufficient time to review that once

received, would appear to defeat the very purpose of public comment.

Additionally, Sheffield School requests clarification on the following statement that was also 

quoted above: “While the FAA generally does not request comment on internal orders, the

agency has established a docket for public comments regarding this guidance for inspectors in 

recognition of the interest of current DADEs and applicants for an aircraft dispatcher certificate

under Part 65.” It appears from this statement that the FAA’s motivation for seeking public

comment is to allow input from everyone except the businesses who would be most severely 

affected, the Part 65 schools. We request clarification and FAA confirmation that comments

from Part 65 course operators shall also be given full consideration and will also be publicly

answered in the Federal Register after the evaluation period.

We thank the FAA for creating this docket, and we look forward to providing full comment and 

analysis.

Eric Morris

President

Sheffield School of Aeronautics (est. 1948)