STREAMLINING THE RVSM AUTHORIZATION … THE RVSM AUTHORIZATION PROCESS Education Track: Aircraft and...
Transcript of STREAMLINING THE RVSM AUTHORIZATION … THE RVSM AUTHORIZATION PROCESS Education Track: Aircraft and...
STREAMLINING THE
RVSM AUTHORIZATION
PROCESS
Education Track:
Aircraft and Flight Operations
Presented By:
Mark Larsen, NBAA
David Norton, Shackelford, Melton & McKinley, LLP
Madison Walton, FAA
Timothy Shaver, FAA
Tuesday, October 22, 2013, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Las Vegas Convention Center, Room N235
The Fundamentals: What are we talking about?
In 1940‘s, standard vertical separation was 1000 feet
By 1950‘s – separation of 2000 feet above FL 290 adopted due to technology of the day
By 1970‘s – efforts begin to reduce this separation back down to 1000 feet above FL 290 based on improved technology
The Fundamentals (cont.)
Through FAA‘s own work, as well as through ICAO /
international aviation agreements, standards were created
so that by 2005, full implementation of
Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM)
Airspace
became a reality.
The Fundamentals (cont.)
RVSM Airspace:
Created significant efficiencies in use of airspace
But, only works if every aircraft in the airspace
can meet the technical requirements
So – by definition – each individual operator /
airplane must be able to demonstrate compliance
in order to get authorization into the airspace
The Problem
Uncertainty (and resulting inconsistency) regarding
basic application of the regulatory requirements; and
Amount of time required to process RVSM Letters of
Authorization (LOA‘s)
The NBAA’s and FAA’s Efforts
Ongoing dialogue over several years between NBAA
and various individuals within the FAA
Key turning point from NBAA perspective:
Implementation of Web-based Operations Safety
System (WebOPSS)
The issue of multiple operators arises!
The NBAA’s and FAA’s Efforts (cont.)
Culminates in meeting with AFS-1 (John Allen), Spring, 2012
After meeting, at direction of AFS-1, the standing Performance-Based Operations Advisory Rulemaking Committee (the ―PARC,‖ an official FAA-industry working group under direction of Associate Administrator-Aviation Safety (AVS-1 – Peggy Gilligan)) created the:
―RVSM LOA Process Enhancement Team‖
(a/k/a the ―Action Team‖)
The NBAA’s and FAA’s Efforts (cont.)
Action Team:
Initially composed of 18 members:
½ FAA and ½ Industry
FAA representatives: HQ personnel plus FL, KS and MN FSDO‘s, among others
Industry representatives – operators, management companies and manufacturers, among others
The NBAA’s and FAA’s Efforts (cont.)
Action Team given three basic charges by PARC:
Review existing regulations and related guidance;
―Evaluate various options to improve the RVSM authorization process and develop recommended enhancements to the RVSM authorization process‖
Create a ―summary report providing rationale and reasons behind the Action Team‘s recommendations‖
The NBAA’s and FAA’s Efforts
Progress of the Action Team:
Initial conference call meeting – June 27, 2012
Initial in-person – July 26, 2013 – Washington, DC
Monthly meetings after that – mostly telecom, at least two more in-person, plus ―tiger team‖ calls in between
Significant Consensus Achieved
The NBAA’s and FAA’s Efforts
Culminated in Official Report and
Recommendations to the PARC
Presented on May 16, 2013
Adopted without change by PARC
PARC recommended to AVS-1 to adopt and
process through normal FAA channels
FAA team members have worked to push it
through the system – final approval delayed
by government shutdown
Initial Process Followed
Recognition of good things
Program works – high level of safety
FAA recognition of inefficiencies in process
Initial Process Followed (cont.)
Recognition of bad things
Lack of efficiency
Lack of clarity – what should be submitted and how should it be processed?
It takes too long to process – for both sides!
Initial Process Followed (cont.)
Recognition of bad things (cont.)
Core Issue: Current guidance treats each request for authorization as if it were a new operator flying a new
airplane with a new maintenance program using untrained pilots, with the predisposition built into the
current guidance that everything must be reviewed in its entirety as if it‘s the very first authorization ever being given, even if the only thing triggering the request is a
change of the aircraft tail number!
Initial Process Followed (cont.)
Suggestions for Improvement:
Craft better / clearer guidance
Recognize that not all requests for authorization are the same and that sometimes one or more of the key elements have already been looked at by the FAA
Based on commonality of key elements, shift the predisposition to being able to accept those pre-existing elements, absent evidence to the contrary, so they don‘t require another full-blown review
Educate, educate, educate!!!!!
Initial Process Followed (cont.)
Resulting approach:
Substantial Rewrite of:
FAA Order 8900.1,
Volume 4 (Aircraft Equipment and Operational
Authorizations),
Chapter 10 (Evaluate Operator‘s Application to
Conduct Flight in Reduced Vertical Separation
Minimum Airspace)
New Guidance: What is Not Changing
Basic Regulatory Requirements
Operator – must have authorization to operate in RVSM Airspace (see 14 C.F.R. Part 91, Appendix G, Section 4)
Airplane – must comply with 14 C.F.R. Part 91, Appendix G, Section 2
Maintenance program – must comply with 14 C.F.R. Part 91, Appendix G, Section 3
Pilot knowledge – must comply with 14 C.F.R. Part 91, Appendix G, Section 3
Existing LOA‘s! (new guidance will apply only to new or amended authorizations)
New Guidance: What is Changing
Clarification and ―Streamlining‖
New Paragraph 4-1233(C)(3): ―The core of these guidelines are the recognition of the three key elements of any RVSM authorization—an RVSM-Compliant Aircraft . . ., an RVSM-Approved Maintenance Program . . ., and properly trained aircrew who have met applicable RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots requirements . . . —and a ―decision matrix‖ . . . that will allow the FAA to more efficiently direct attention to only those elements that require initial review. An RVSM-Compliant Aircraft, an RVSM-Approved Maintenance Program, and RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots . . . are also referred to in this guidance individually or together as an ‗RVSM Authorization Element‘ or the ‗RVSM Authorization Elements.‘‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key
RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Compliant Aircraft
Two basic ways:
Manufactured compliant under TC—confirmed
through review of AFM or TCDS with
appropriate action by the MIDO
Brought into compliance under SB, SL or
STC—confirmed though review of applicable
documentation
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key
RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Compliant Aircraft
Note: Review and determination can be
accomplished through document review – does
not necessarily require physical inspection of
aircraft
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key
RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Compliant Aircraft
Note: ―An aircraft retains its status as an RVSM-
Compliant Aircraft only so long [as] that aircraft
continues to conform to its RVSM approved
design, and continues to meet all applicable
maintenance requirements.‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key
RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Approved Maintenance Program
Aircraft RVSM design holder‘s ICA
(instructions for continued airworthiness)
provides basis for programs
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key
RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Approved Maintenance Program
Program not required to include unrelated
elements, but must include all required
elements
AAIP‘s / manufacture‘s programs often
insufficient here because often do not include
all required elements
Operators can use CAMP if all elements
included
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key
RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots
―For an applicant that is operating only under part 91,
demonstrating that it has RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots
will consist of providing sufficient evidence that each pilot
has an adequate knowledge of RVSM requirements,
policies and procedures as required in 14 C.F.R. part 91,
Appendix G, Section 3(c)(2).‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 1: Recognize and better define the three key RVSM Authorization Elements:
RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots
―For an applicant who operates under 14 CFR part 91K, 121, 125 or 135, in addition to meeting the adequate knowledge requirements for part 91 operators, that applicant will need to provide sufficient evidence of initial and recurring pilot training requirements as well as policies and procedures that will allow the operator to conduct RVSM operations safely as required in 14 C.F.R. part 91, Appendix G, Section 3(b)(2) and (3) in order to demonstrate that they are using RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots.‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
Who is the operator?
First Note: It is the applicant‘s obligation to
list or ―propose‖ the correct operator – not the
FSDO‘s!
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
Who is the operator?
For parts 91K, 125 (non-LODA) and 135:
applicant and operator is program manager
or certificate holder
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
Who is the operator?
For part 91 and 125 LODA holders:
Generally is: registered owner or a ―dry‖ lessee, but only so long as they are ―legal‖ Part 91 operators
Should not be: owner trustees, part 91 management companies, or holding companies – beware the ―flight department company‖ trap!
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
Who is the operator?
Note: ―It is both possible and common to have multiple operators for part 91, 91K and/or 125/135 aircraft over a short period of time and on a non-exclusive basis (for example, multiple dry leases for the use of any one aircraft can be in place at one time). In such instances each individual operator is required to have an appropriate RVSM authorization issued in its own name in order for that operator to have access to RVSM airspace.‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
“Responsible Person”
Has adequate knowledge of RVSM
requirements, policies and procedures plus on-
going knowledge of operations of the aircraft
under RVSM authorization
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
“Responsible Person” (cont.)
Has legal authority to sign RVSM
authorization on behalf of operator
Individual (natural person) operator
Officer, etc., of business entity operator
Someone under contract (such as
management company) given specific
authority to sign on behalf of operator
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
“Point of Contact” – optional additional designation
Has adequate knowledge of RVSM requirements, policies and procedures plus on-going knowledge of operations of the aircraft under RVSM authorization
If separate from Responsible Person, does not have legal authority to sign RVSM authorization on behalf of operator, but is the person who has day-to-day knowledge of RVSM aircraft operations and maintenance status
If separate POC designated, that is who FAA should start with regarding operations and maintenance status questions
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 2: Clarify Issues regarding ―Operator‖:
Additional Requirements / Monitoring
Appropriate use of MEL
Crew notification of RVSM status
Monitoring plan:
Every 2 years / 1000 hour (whichever longer)
Can establish 6-months post authorization
Successful monitoring transfers to new owners / operators
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 3: Basic responsibilities and actions regarding operator, aircraft, maintenance programs and pilots:
Regarding the applicant: New Paragraph 4-1233(C)(6): ―[T]he applicant will obtain and submit all documents that establish the eligibility of its aircraft as an RVSM-Compliant Aircraft. Operators are encouraged to use the Job Aid in subparagraph 4-1237C. Operators should contact the PAI/PMI to discuss early in the applications process what documents may be needed to establish eligibility of an aircraft. The applicant will submit to the FAA evidence that it is capable of operating and maintaining each aircraft or aircraft group for which it applies, and an RVSM maintenance program for acceptance as an RVSM-Approved Maintenance Program. The applicant will establish that each pilot has adequate knowledge of RVSM requirements and procedures through submission and acceptance of RVSM-Knowledgeable Pilots.‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 3: Basic responsibilities and actions regarding operator, aircraft, maintenance programs and pilots:
Regarding the FAA: For example – new Paragraph 4-1234(C): ―If (1) a subsequent applicant seeks a new authorization for the operation of an aircraft that has been previously determined by the FAA to be an RVSM-Compliant Aircraft, (2) the new RVSM authorization applicant provides a written statement of compliance documenting that no modifications have been made to the aircraft that would changes its status as an RVSM-Compliant Aircraft [with, for example, affirmative statements that aircraft does have required equipment and has met all maintenance requirements], and (3) no other information is provided or comes to light that calls into question the status of the aircraft as an RVSM-Compliant Aircraft, then the PAI/PMI should designate that aircraft as an RVSM-Compliant Aircraft with respect to the new applicant.‖
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 3: Basic responsibilities and actions regarding
operator, aircraft, maintenance programs and pilots:
Similar treatment for RVSM-Approved
Maintenance Programs
Note: May also be able to use Aircraft
Manufactures Recommended Maintenance
Procedures (ICAs) for newly manufactured aircraft
Similar treatment for RVSM-Knowledgeable
Pilots
But beware – 2 categories of pilots!
New Guidance (cont.)
Step 4: Acknowledge there are really three kinds of
authorizations requests:
Administrative changes
Authorizations involving at lease one previously
reviewed and approved RVSM Authorization
Element; and
―Brand new‖ authorizations not relying on any
previously reviewed RVSM Authorization
Elements
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group I: RVSM Authorization
Amendments
Examples:
Changes in primary business
Change in RP and/or POC
Change in aircraft registration number
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group I: RVSM Authorization
Amendments
Actions:
From applicant: Written submission noting
nature of change and that no RVSM
Authorization Elements are changing and
requesting amended LOA
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group I: RVSM Authorization
Amendments
Actions:
From FAA: Review submission, and if
applicable, issue amended authorization
identical to original except for amended
data
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group I: RVSM Authorization
Amendments
Actions:
From FAA: (cont.)
―If an existing RVSM authorization holder has made a written
affirmation that none of the underlying previously accepted RVSM
Authorization Elements has changed or will change, and there is no
other information provided to the FSDO raising any questions or
concerns with respect to the on-going validity or applicability of
those RVSM Authorization Elements, then, subject to subparagraph
4-1237A(3), the CHDO should issue the requested amendment
without further inspections being required.‖
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group II: Authorization Based on
One or More Existing Approve RVSM
Authorization Elements
Examples:
Change in entity status
New applicant using one or more existing
RVSM Authorization Elements with respect to
new authorization
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group II: Authorization Based on One or More Existing Approve RVSM Authorization Elements
Actions:
From applicant: Written submission with full documentation of existing RVSM Authorization Elements plus full documentation of new RVSM Authorization Elements, with request for new authorization
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group II: Authorization Based on
One or More Existing Approve RVSM
Authorization Elements
Actions:
From FAA: Review submission, and if
applicable, issue amended authorization
identical to original except for amended data
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group II: Authorization Based on One or More Existing Approve RVSM Authorization Elements
Actions:
From FAA: (cont.)
―To the extent the RVSM applicant has provided written documentation evidencing that the operator will be using a previously accepted RVSM Authorization Element, and accept that RVSM Authorization Element as a valid basis for the issuance of the new RVSM authorization, and to the extent the applicant has presented a proposed RVSM Authorization Element that has not been previously reviewed and accepted, conduct such additional review and research with respect to that RVSM Authorization Element only as is required to issue the new RVSM authorization.‖
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group II: Authorization Based on One or More Existing Approve RVSM Authorization Elements
Actions:
From FAA: (cont.)
―If an RVSM applicant has made a written affirmation that one or more of the underlying previously accepted RVSM Authorization Elements have not changed or will not change, there is no other information provided to the CHDO raising any questions or concerns with respect to the on-going validity or applicability of those RVSM Authorization Elements, and the applicant has otherwise presented sufficient evidence of compliance with the requirements of the remaining RVSM Authorization Elements, then, subject to subparagraph 4-1237A(3), the CHDO should issue the requested amendment without further inspections being required.‖
The “Matrix”
Authorization Group III: RVSM Authorization
Not Based on One or More Existing RVSM
Authorization Elements
Totally new application means full review!
Special Emphasis Notes
Emphasis and pre-disposition is now on ―giving
credit‖ for previously approved elements, but
Safety Inspectors always retain the right to conduct
more thorough review if documents, etc., presented
indicate the requirements are not being met