Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We received a new release as we powered up for takeoff with a new ETOPS alternate. After departure Dispatch advised new alternate not legal due to 180 minute ETOPS. He claims South American ops require 120 minute ETOPS vs. the 180 he gave us. Eventually was able to give us another alternate to fill the void by his proclaimed 120 South American rule. We could not verify this restriction of 120 in any of our manuals. Also he gave us an alternate that was on the east side of the Andes requiring us to cross high terrain to get to the alternate without a prescribed TCP route. We questioned this logic and Dispatch eventually gave us another alternate in Chile that would not require crossing high terrain. Additionally the TCP given for our route of flight does not seem legal. On UA306 the MEA is 26;000 grid MORA 25;100 while the procedure requires us to descend to 20;000. There is not even a low airway available in that area due to high terrain also Dispatch has been giving us ETOPS alternates on east side of Andes that would require a crossing during an emergency!! There are numerous aerodromes on the Chile coast that should be used for these alternates. We have charts for SCSE and SCFA but need charts for Santiago (SCEL); Arica (SCAR); and Iquiqe (SCDA).


Second narrative: Due to the new OPS Bulletin for off shore routes coming out of South America we are now using ETOPS. In the past South America dispatchers hardly used ETOPS only when flying in east on in the Atlantic down to eastern Brazil. Now due to off shore route we are using ETOPS more and may have over looked the ETOPS alternates for these new routes.This flight was dispatched on an off shore route which required ETOPS. Saber used 180 min ETOPS (Altn SACO) which I did not catch until flight taxied out; I tried to manipulate the ETOPS alternate to meet the 120 minute rule but due to lack of ETOPS experience I was slow. By the time I was able to change the Altn to (VVI) the flight took off. I informed the crew about the new release with the 120 min ETOPS rule.Flight first acknowledged the release but then shortly responded that the ETOPS alternate was invalid as it was on the east side of the Andes mountains and that we had no decompression routes to get to the airport. After discussion on Satcom I concurred with Captain.Flight was in the air when we changed ETOPS alternates to SCSE and SPIM. We had to use SPIM based on landing minimums due to the forecast ceiling. This was safer then going over the mountains. The Captain concurred.Then the Captain questioned why we could not use 180 minutes ETOPS and asked why the first release had one? I told him that when I was trained in South America that 120 min rule was the max. He disagreed with this and asked why original release had 180 min ETOPS. I told him I missed it and caught it on taxi out.The Captain then advised that he was filing a safety report stating that he was dispatched illegally due to ETOPS alternates.He also questioned why we could not use Santiago; Chile (SCEL) as an ETOPS alternate after which I advised him it was due to no charts in the ship set. He advised we need these charts.


Synopsis: A verbal dustup resulted between dispatchers and the flight crew of a B767 conducting a newly developed and authorized ETOPS compliant flight departing from an east coast South American station and crossing over the Andes mountains enroute to its destination in the Continental United States. The debate addressed 180 vice 120 minute ETOPS and the selection of alternates appropriate for each. In addition they addressed the need to utilize enroute ETOPS alternates that do not require possible single engine flight across the Andes.