NATA News

In its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), the FAA states that “part 135 operations are very similar to those conducted under part 121. . .” and that the Part 135 operator should “expect to see an NPRM addressing its operations that looks very similar to, if not exactly like, the final rule the agency anticipates issuing as part of this rulemaking initiative.”

NATA has prepared a Regulatory Report that provides additional information on the NPRM as well as a link to download the full NPRM. Click here to read the Regulatory Report.

NATA, other aviation trade organizations, numerous aircraft operators and FAA staff invested substantial time and effort to provide the agency with a comprehensive proposal creating a new regulatory system for on-demand operators that addresses concerns about pilot fatigue.

This comprehensive rulemaking proposal was created through the Part 125/135 Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) several years ago. To date, the FAA has not provided any feedback on the proposal, nor has the agency moved to provide an NPRM based upon the ARC recommendations.

The association will continue to advocate for the FAA to give proper weight to the ARC proposal if rulemaking is initiated and will continue to work to ensure the FAA gives appropriate consideration to the implications of mandates on the continued viability of the industry.

The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure’s Subcommittee on Aviation met last Thursday to discuss the issue of pilot flight and duty time for Part 121 commercial air carriers and the recently issued notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which was released by the FAA on September 10. The NPRM proposes significant changes to pilot hours of service by defining and limiting duty periods and increasing the amount of rest given to pilots. 

Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, applauded the FAA for taking the next step to create safer flight, duty and rest conditions for today’s pilots but reiterated that the administration must remain on task in resolving these pressing issues and that any further delay in moving toward a final rule would be unacceptable to Members of Congress. Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Costello (D-IL) agreed, stating that fatigue science and studies on situational awareness are key in understanding what is needed to maintain safety behind the controls.

NATA is concerned with language contained in the proposed rule regarding the agency's plan for future Part 135 rulemaking. The NPRM stated that “part 135 operations are very similar to those conducted under part 121” and that a comparable, if not identical, notice will be issued to the Part 135 community.

Cargo Airline Association President Stephen Alterman testified before the subcommittee, stating that an understanding of the differences between segments of the aviation industry is important because “…the United States air transportation industry is not a unified whole, but rather consists of separate segments with different operational needs requiring different regulatory approaches.” National Air Carrier Association President A. Oakley Brooks and Air Transport Association Vice President of Operations and Safety Thomas Hendricks agreed, saying that this one-size-fits-all approach is inappropriate for the demands required in other parts of the industry. FAA Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety Margaret Gilligan, Air Line Pilots Association President John Prater, and Washington State University Research Professor and Director of Sleep Performance Gregory Belenky also testified.

NATA will continue to work with other aviation trade organizations, the FAA and Capitol Hill to build on the revised pilot flight, duty and rest regulations to ensure appropriate regulations for on-demand operators.

To read the complete witness testimony, please click here.

Last Friday, NATA issued an action call asking California members and other interested parties to contact Governor Schwarzenegger in support of Assembly Bill 1889 (AB 1889). AB 1889, if signed, would provide a delay in compliance for flight training providers with the rules issued by the California Bureau of Postsecondary Education. This delay is necessary to provide an opportunity for the California Legislature to review the effects of the rules on the flight training industry.

NATA has received strong indications that the governor intends to veto AB 1889 due to provisions in the bill unrelated to the delay for flight training. Because of this, NATA has already begun working on additional strategies to have a compliance delay put into law, but the association still believes that it is important for flight training providers to express their support of AB 1889 to the governor in the event that a last minute deal is reached.

The full action call can be read on www.nata.aero or by clicking here.

NATA President James K. Coyne will testify on Wednesday, September 22, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation on residential through-the-fence (RTTF) agreements at public airports. The FAA recently issued a proposed policy related to RTTF agreements at federally funded airports. This policy would subject existing RTTF agreements to closer oversight and scrutiny and prohibit federally obligated airports from entering into any new RTTF agreements. 

NATA supports the FAA’s proposed policy and believes the FAA proposal is in accordance with existing federal grant assurance requirements and applicable case law with regard to prohibiting new RTTF agreements, while providing a reasonable accommodation for existing agreements to continue.

A copy of NATA’s complete testimony will be posted to www.nata.aero on Wednesday, September 22. 

To view the committee hearing page and access the live webcast, please click here.

Last week, the U.S. Senate passed H.R. 5297, the Small Business Lending Fund Act of 2010, which contained a provision to allow bonus depreciation on equipment purchases in 2010, including general aviation aircraft.

Bonus depreciation allows a business to accelerate 50 percent of the depreciable value of a capital investment in the first year instead of spreading it out over five years and is a proven tool for increasing aircraft sales. Aircraft purchased before the end of 2010 must be placed into service by the end of 2011 to receive bonus depreciation.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed similar legislation, H.R. 5297, on June 17, 2010. The two bills will now be reconciled and sent to the president for his signature.

To view the advertisement, please click here.

The aviation industry letter supports the agreement to improve aviation safety and enable the more efficient flow of trade to bolster the struggling U.S. aerospace industry. The agreement would also “permit a planned modification in the fees and charges assigned to U.S. aerospace manufacturers for EASA validation of products certificated by the FAA and will protect U.S. repair stations from redundant and costly safety inspections by European regulators.”

To read a copy of the complete industry letter to DOT Secretary LaHood, please click here.

In a recent Notice, the FAA has provided information on the status of Safety Management Systems (SMS) requirements, the inspector’s action when SMS programs are referenced in FAA-approved manuals, and the impact of international enforcement of flight data analysis program requirements on air carriers.

In Notice 8900.133, the FAA explains that International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards call on nations to require SMS programs, approved by the aviation authority, for commercial operators. The FAA has not yet promulgated an SMS requirement for U.S. commercial air carriers. ICAO also calls on nations to require noncommercial operators to have SMS programs; however, these programs would not necessarily be required to be approved by the FAA. 

Because the FAA has not initiated rulemaking to require SMS, it has filed a “difference” with ICAO. The Notice states that the FAA has received assurance from other ICAO member states that they will not deny U.S. operators entry to their country if an SMS program is not in place.

However, there is another ICAO requirement that has resulted in some operators being denied entry by a foreign nation. ICAO has adopted a standard that calls for nations to require commercially operated aircraft over 27,000 kg (59,525 lb) to establish a flight data analysis program. 

In the U.S., this type of program is known as a flight operational quality assurance (FOQA) program. The FAA explains that it is aware of at least four instances where U.S. commercial aircraft were denied entry to a nation for not having a program.

The FAA does not require FOQA programs; however, most Part 121 and some Part 135 operators do have them voluntarily. According to reports received by NATA, France is the nation primarily responsible for denial of entry when a FOQA program is not in place. NATA’s magazine, Aviation Business Journal, published an article related to this and other international issues last year. That article, “Guidance for International Operations,” may be read by clicking here.

NATA strongly encourages operators conducting international operations, to make themselves aware of the flight data analysis program requirements being enforced by some nations to ensure that unexpected denials for entry are not encountered.

Last week, NATA Director of Regulatory Affairs Michael France along with General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) Vice President of Engineering and Maintenance Walter Desrosier and National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) Senior Vice President, Operations & Administration Steve Brown provided to attendees at the National Association of State Aviation Officials annual conference in Wichita, Kansas, an update on the industry’s efforts regarding the future of aviation gasoline. The briefing focused on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) actions on lead in aviation gasoline as well as the role state aviation officials could play in responding to the EPA’s actions.

NATA, GAMA and NBAA as well as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), the Experimental Aircraft Association, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Petrochemical Refiners Association are the core members of the General Aviation Avgas Coalition. The coalition is working to respond to the EPA’s actions regarding lead emissions from general aviation aircraft. The coalition is in the process of developing a plan that will provide a path to a lead-free future for general aviation.

As part of its role within the coalition, the AOPA has begun publishing a newsletter providing important updates and information on the industry’s efforts. This newsletter is also being made available to NATA’s membership. This week’s newsletter covers topics including:

• Latest News on lead and avgas
• Facts on aviation fuel
• Questions and answers on lead in avgas

The latest edition of AOPA’s Avgas Newsletter is available to NATA Members here.

Last week, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) issued a legal interpretation regarding recurrent training and the Alien Flight Student Program (AFSP). The interpretation specifically laid out what types of activities do not qualify as recurrent training under the AFSP and include:

• Instrument Proficiency Check
• Heads Up Display (HUD) Training
• Enhanced Vision System (EVS) Qualification
• Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT)
• Operator Specific Proficiency Checks
• Landing Currency
• Special Airport Qualifications
• Examiner Training
• Differences Training

In addition to clarifying the definition of recurrent training, the interpretation also changed the security threat assessment (STA) process for Category 4 submissions to permit recurrent training. This new process would allow alien flight students who have successfully completed an STA within the previous year to begin training without waiting for a new STA to be performed, once the TSA has received all required paperwork. The interpretation issued by the TSA, available for download here, provides additional details on the procedure.