Department of Defense Commercial Air Transportation Quality and Safety Review Program, 17042-17047 [2022-05715]
Download as PDF
17042
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
Paragraph 6010(a)
Airways.
*
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
■
*
*
Domestic VOR Federal
*
*
V–26 [Amended]
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,
40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,
1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
effective September 15, 2021, is
amended as follows:
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 10, 2021, and
■
From Blue Mesa, CO; Montrose, CO; 13
miles 112 MSL, 131 MSL, Grand Junction,
CO; Meeker, CO; Cherokee, WY; Muddy
Mountain, WY; 14 miles, 37 miles 75 MSL,
84 miles 90 MSL, Rapid City, SD; Philip, SD;
to Pierre, SD. From Redwood Falls, MN;
Farmington, MN; to Eau Claire, WI. From
Green Bay, WI; INT Green Bay 116° and
White Cloud, MI, 302° radials; to White
Cloud.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Domestic Low Altitude
*
*
*
*
*
Wausau, WI [Removed]
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 22,
2022.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022–06312 Filed 3–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
32 CFR Part 861
[Docket No. USAF–2019–HQ–0010]
RIN 0701–AA88
Department of Defense Commercial Air
Transportation Quality and Safety
Review Program
Department of the Air Force,
Department of Defense.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of the Air
Force (DAF) proposes to amend portions
of its regulations in order to update and
clarify references and terminology
relating to the Department of Defense
(DOD) Commercial Air Transportation
Quality and Safety Review Program. It
also extends to DOD contracts for
charter air transportation services the
existing DOD policy prohibiting the use
of foreign air carriers who are not in
compliance with International Civil
Aviation Organization standards.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Comments must be received by
May 24, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and or
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) and
title, by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: DOD cannot receive written
comments at this time due to the
COVID–19 pandemic. Comments should
be sent electronically to the docket
listed above.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this Federal
Register document. The general policy
for comments and other submissions
from members of the public is to make
these submissions available for public
viewing at https://www.regulations.gov
as they are received without change,
including any personal identifiers or
contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Matthew Berry, DOD Commercial Airlift
Division, AMC/A3B, 402 Scott Drive,
Unit 3A1, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois
62225–5302, (618) 229–2082,
matthew.berry@us.af.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Jkt 256001
I. Background
The Department of Defense
Commercial Air Transportation Quality
and Safety Review Program establishes
the safety requirements and criteria for
evaluating civil air carriers, to include
foreign air carriers, providing air
transportation to the DOD. As stated in
32 CFR 861.6, foreign air carriers
providing or seeking to provide services
to DOD are subject to review and, if
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 6011 United States Area
Navigation Routes.
*
DATES:
Paragraph 7001
Report Points.
*
V–63 [Amended]
From Razorback, AR; Springfield, MO;
Hallsville, MO; Quincy, IL; Burlington, IA;
Moline, IL; to Davenport, IA. From Janesville,
WI; Badger, WI; to Oshkosh, WI. From
Rhinelander, WI; to Houghton, MI. Excluding
that airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL
from 5 NM north to 46 NM north of Quincy,
IL, when the Howard West MOA is active.
T–464 CUSAY, WI to CHURP, WI [New]
CUSAY, WI
WP
(Lat. 46°01′07.84″ N, long. 091°26′47.14″
TONOC, WI
WP
(Lat. 45°03′47.56″ N, long. 091°38′11.87″
EDGRR, WI
WP
(Lat. 44°51′31.83″ N, long. 089°56′43.06″
HEVAV, WI
WP
(Lat. 44°50′48.43″ N, long. 089°35′12.51″
CHURP, WI
FIX
(Lat. 44°42′54.82″ N, long. 088°56′48.69″
*
*
*
*
*
*
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
appropriate, approval by DOD.
Application of the criteria and
requirements of this rule and the degree
of oversight to be exercised by DOD over
a foreign air carrier depends upon the
type of services performed and, in some
instances, by the quality of oversight
exercised by the foreign air carrier’s
Civilian Aviation Authority (CAA). The
scope and frequency of review of any
given foreign air carrier under this rule
will be at the discretion of the
Commercial Airlift Review Board
(CARB) or higher authority. This rule
was last revised on October 28, 2002 (67
FR 65698), to add § 861.7 relating to the
disclosure of voluntarily provided
safety-related information and to make
minor administrative adjustments.
DOD’s internal instruction associated
with this rule was last updated on May
7, 2021, as DOD Instruction (DODI)
4500.53, ‘‘DoD Commercial Air
Transportation Quality and Safety
Review Program’’ (available at https://
www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/
Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/
450053p.pdf?ver=2019-02-26-144429747).
II. Authority for This Regulatory Action
This action is authorized by 10 U.S.C.
113, 2640 and 9013. Sections 113 and
9013 contain the authority of the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary
of the Air Force, respectively, to publish
regulations necessary for the
functioning of the Department of
Defense and the Department of the Air
Force. Section 2640 requires the
Secretary of Defense to establish the
Department of Defense Commercial
Airlift Review Board; specifies
minimum requirements which must be
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
met by air carriers in order to be eligible
for contracts to provide charter
passenger air transportation services to
the Department of Defense; and sets
minimum requirements for an
inspection regime. Further, section 2640
requires the Secretary of Defense to
prescribe regulations to implement the
requirements of section 2640.
Additionally, section 2640 prescribes
requirements relating to the provision,
protection, and dissemination of safetyrelated information.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
III. Summary of Proposed Changes to
the Rule
The proposed revisions clarify
aircrew flying a charter mission on
behalf of the Department of Defense
must, without exception, have a
minimum of 250 hours flying time in
the type of aircraft being operated. The
rule also proposes to elaborate and
revise several aspects of the oversight
program to more closely resemble
Federal Aviation Administration
processes, thus reducing complexity
and the need to maintain duplicative
and potentially conflicting processes.
Every country has a National Aviation
Authority, also known as a Civil
Aviation Authority, which governs and
regulates civil aviation. Each aviation
authority oversees aircraft
airworthiness, the licensing of pilots, air
traffic controllers, flight dispatchers,
and maintenance engineers, licensing of
airports, and other aviation standards.
The ultimate goal of these aviation
authorities is aviation safety through
regulation and oversight. All pilots must
meet the standards of their respective
countries where they fly. The
regulations at 32 CFR 861.*(d) prohibit
DOD personnel on official business,
except for the first leg into and the last
leg out of the U.S., from using foreign
air carriers from countries in which the
Civil Aviation Authority is not in
compliance with International Civil
Aviation Organization standards as
determined by the International Civil
Aviation Organization, or Federal
Aviation Administration, or other
aviation safety oversight body. This rule
would extend that policy to any DOD
contract for charter air transportation
services with an air carrier.
Major provisions include:
(1) Amend § 861.3, ‘‘Definitions.’’ The
term ‘‘Operational support services’’ in
paragraph (l) is proposed to be replaced
with ‘‘Other commercial air services’’ in
order to be consistent with the statutory
definition used by the Federal Aviation
Administration in title 49, U.S. Code,
section 40102(a)(41)(E). The substance
of the definition is otherwise
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
unchanged. This change in terminology
will be made throughout part 861.
(2) Amend § 861.3, ‘‘Definitions.’’ The
term ‘‘paratroop drops’’ is proposed to
be deleted from the list of examples in
the definition of ‘‘Air transportation’’ in
paragraph (b), and inserted in the list of
examples of ‘‘Other commercial air
services’’ in paragraph (l). In addition,
the terms ‘‘target towing’’, ‘‘chaff
dispensing’’, and ‘‘electronic
countermeasures target flights’’ have
been deleted from the list of examples.
Both changes are intended to more
closely align with the statutory
definitions of ‘‘air transportation’’ and
‘‘other commercial air services’’ used by
the Federal Aviation Administration in
title 49, U.S. Code, sections 40102(a)(5)
and 40102(a)(41)(E), respectively.
(3) Amend § 861.4(e)(3)(vi), ‘‘Aircrew
scheduling.’’ Paragraph (e)(3)(vi)
currently requires the Captain and first
officer flying Department of Defense
charter passenger missions have at least
250 hours of combined experience in
the type of aircraft being operated.
However, an exception to this
requirement is provided for aircraft new
to the air carrier. This rule proposes to
delete this exception in order to ensure
aircrew flying Department of Defense
charter missions have adequate
experience in the type of aircraft being
flown.
(4) Amend § 861.4(e)(3)(ix), ‘‘DOD
charter procedures.’’ Paragraph (e)(3)(ix)
requires an air carrier have procedures
reflecting that weights and balance
information are used in computing
aircraft weight and balance. A sentence
is proposed to be added requiring that
personnel loading an aircraft be
adequately trained on aircraft loading
and restraint, special cargo, weight and
balance, and hazardous/dangerous
goods procedures. This revision would
align the qualifications required for
personnel loading an aircraft with
recent Federal Aviation Administration
cargo loading regulations and guidance
in 14 CFR 121.665, 14 CFR 121.1001,
Advisory Circular 120.85A and Flight
Standards Information Manual System
8900.1 Volume 3, with which air
carriers are already in compliance.
(5) Amend § 861.4(e)(4)(iii), ‘‘Quality
assurance.’’ Paragraph (e)(4)(iii)
addresses the requirement that an air
carrier have a quality assurance program
that analyzes the performance and
effectiveness of maintenance activities
and inspections. This requirement is
alluded to in § 861.4(e)(2). This change
proposes to add language making clear
that the Department of Defense will
expect the air carrier to audit results of
the program to determine the root cause
of discrepancies.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17043
(6) Amend § 861.4(e)(4)(vi),
‘‘Maintenance control,’’ is proposed to
be revised to require that air carriers
have programs in place to adequately
plan for all maintenance requirements.
While planning for maintenance is
inherent in maintenance control and is
implied in the words ‘‘method to
control maintenance activities’’, this
revision clarifies that formal programs
are necessary and mirrors Federal
Aviation Administration requirements.
(7) Amend § 861.5, ‘‘DOD Commercial
Airlift Review Board procedures,’’ is
proposed to be revised to replace
‘‘CINCTRANS’’ with
‘‘CDRUSTRANSCOM’’ wherever
‘‘CINCTRANS’’ appears. This reflects a
change in the acronym used to refer to
the Commander of the United States
Transportation Command.
(8) Amend § 861.6(d), ‘‘DOD review of
foreign air carriers,’’ is proposed to be
revised to add a sentence reflecting an
established, longstanding Department of
Defense policy in Department of
Defense Instruction 4500.53, of not
contracting with foreign air carriers
from countries whose Civil Aviation
Authority has been determined to not
meet International Civil Aviation
Organization standards.
IV. Expected Impact of This Proposed
Rule
Affected Population
Providers of air transportation and
other commercial air services to the
Department of Defense consist of
approximately 100 U.S. air carriers and
operators offering services under parts
105, 121, 125, 133, and 135 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) of
title 14 CFR, and foreign air carriers and
operators offering services under the
equivalent Civil Aviation Authority
regulations applicable to their
operations. Both U.S. and foreign air
carriers and operators range from large
corporations with hundreds of aircraft,
to small entities operating a handful of
aircraft. Whether domestic or foreign,
and regardless of size, air carriers and
operators offering air transportation or
other commercial air services to the
Department of Defense must meet the
requirements specified by law and this
rule to be eligible for Department
business, and must comply with the
oversight requirements of the law and
this rule to remain eligible for
Department business. Changes proposed
in this rule should not prompt air
carriers or operators to either leave or
join the air carrier survey and analysis
program. Additionally, the proposed
changes will not expand or contract
carrier eligibility to participate in the
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
17044
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
program. Furthermore, the proposed
changes will not impact the overall
economics for carriers in the aviation
industry marketplace. This proposed
rule is not expected to impact on the
public or state, local, or tribal
governments.
Costs
This rule has been was first
promulgated in 1987 (see 52 FR 37609
(October 8, 1987)). The proposed
revisions are not expected to increase
costs compliance. Although several
revisions alter minor aspects of the
existing oversight program, they are
intended to streamline oversight
processes by more closely aligning them
with current Federal Aviation
Administration guidance. This
harmonization may decrease costs for
U.S. carriers although these savings may
not be appreciable. Operators of
paratroop drop services may realize
slightly more appreciable savings as a
result of being considered a provider of
‘‘other commercial air services’’ rather
than of ‘‘air transportation services,’’
since the latter results in an increased
level of oversight. Conversely, the
failure to enact the proposed changes
may result in increased costs to U.S. air
carriers and operators as specific
requirements and procedures of this
program increasingly diverge from those
required by the FAA, requiring that
separate compliance processes be
maintained that cover the same
substantive area.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Benefits
The affected air carriers and operators
will benefit from the clarifications,
updated information, and alignment of
processes with those of the Federal
Aviation Administration resulting from
this proposed revision. This, in turn,
should lead to a more effective safety
oversight program, benefitting them, the
Department of Defense, members of the
armed forces transported on the
contracted aircraft, and the public at
large.
Alternatives
The basic parameters of the program
described in this Part are specified in
section 2640 of title 10, U.S. Code, and
serve to limit the scope of alternatives
available.
• No action: This alternative would
leave the existing rule in place without
change. Parts of this rule are obsolete as
a result of changes in terminology,
responsible offices, and the evolution of
technology since 2002. No action would
also result in the loss of an opportunity
to incorporate lessons learned since the
last revision in 2002. The rule would
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
consequently continue to become less
effective over time, as the FAA adopts
updated, more stringent standards and
practices that are not reflected in the
DOD standards and practices reflected
in this rule. This course of action is
therefore not preferred.
• Expansion of the scope of the
oversight program. Expansion of the
scope of the oversight program would go
beyond that which is necessary to
ensure the safe transportation of
members of the armed forces as well as
beyond the scope of what the law
requires. This course of action is
therefore not preferred, as it would
impose increased costs on the
Department of Defense and all affected
parties to no discernable end.
• Contracting the scope of the
oversight program. Contracting the
scope of the oversight program would
result in a failure to do as the law
requires, although it would be less
burdensome and expensive for the
affected parties. Consequently, this
course of action is not preferred.
Regulatory Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distribute impacts, and equity).
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been
designated as a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ but not economically significant
under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq. generally provides
before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a
rule report, which includes a copy of
the rule, to each House of the Congress
and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The DAF will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
National Environmental Policy Act
The DAF has determined the
proposed amendments of the
Department of Defense Commercial Air
Transportation Quality and Safety
Review Program is not a major federal
action within the meaning of the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The
proposed amendments do not result in
any impacts to human health or the
environment.
Paperwork Reduction Act
It has been determined this regulatory
action does not impose reporting or
recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The DAF has certified this regulatory
action is not subject to the relevant
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The
Secretary of the Air Force has certified
that this rule is exempt from the
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 to 612,
because this rule does not have a
significant economic impact on small
entities as defined by the Act, and does
not impose any obligatory information
requirements beyond internal DAF use.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(2 U.S.C. 1532) requires agencies to
assess anticipated costs and benefits
before issuing any rule whose mandates
require spending in any one year of
$100 million in 1995 dollars, updated
annually for inflation. This regulatory
action does not contain any unfunded
mandate as described in UMRA, and
does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action only
addresses the Department of Defense
Commercial Air Transportation Quality
and Safety Review Program.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 establishes
certain requirements an agency must
meet when it promulgates a proposed
rule (and subsequent final rule) that
imposes substantial direct requirement
costs on State and local governments,
preempts State law, or otherwise has
federalism implications. The DAF has
determined this regulatory action does
not contain policies with federalism as
that term is defined in E.O. 13132.
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 861
Administrative practice and
procedure, Air carriers, Aviation safety,
Military air transportation.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 861 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 861—DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE COMMERCIAL AIR
TRANSPORTATION QUALITY AND
SAFETY REVIEW PROGRAM
1. The authority citation for part 861
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 10 U.S.C. 113, 2640, 9013.
§ 861.1
[Amended]
2. Amend § 861.1(b) by removing the
word ‘‘Directive’’ and adding in its
place the word ‘‘Instruction’’.
■
§ 861.2
[Amended]
3. Amend § 861.2 by:
a. Removing the word ‘‘Directive’’ and
adding in its place the word
‘‘Instruction’’.
■ b. Removing the words ‘‘Commanderin-Chief (CINC)’’ and adding in their
place ‘‘Commander’’.
■ c. Removing the word
‘‘USTRANSCOM’’ and adding in its
place the word ‘‘CDRUSTRANSCOM’’.
■ d. Removing the words ‘‘the CINC’’
and adding in their place the words ‘‘the
CDRUSTRANSCOM’’.
■ 4. Amend § 861.3 by:
■ a. In paragraph (b), removing the
words ‘‘paratrooper drops’’.
■ b. In paragraph (f)(3), removing the
words ‘‘Commander-in-Chief’’ and
adding ‘‘Commander’’ in their place and
removing ‘‘, or USCINCTRANS’’.
■ c. Revising paragraphs (f)(4) and (l).
The revisions read as follows:
■
■
§ 861.3
Definitions.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(4) Secretary of Defense.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) Other commercial air services.
Flights performed by air carriers that
use fixed or rotary-winged aircraft to
provide services other than air
transportation services as defined in
paragraph (b) of this section. Examples
include, but are not limited to,
paratroop drops, range instrumentation
and services, and sling loads. Air
carriers providing only other
commercial air services do not require
advance DOD approval and are not
subject to the initial or periodic on-site
survey requirements under this part,
unless specified in paragraph (b) or
directed by the CARB or higher
authority. All air carriers providing
other commercial air services to DOD
must have a FAA or CAA certificate and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
are required to maintain applicable FAA
or CAA standards absent deviation
authority obtained pursuant to 14 CFR
119.55 or similar CAA rules.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Amend § 861.4 by:
■ a. In paragraph (b)(3), adding the
words ‘‘as specified in the reference in
§ 861.1(b) or’’ after the words ‘‘this part
may,’’.
■ b. In paragraph (c)(2), removing the
letters ‘‘DOB’’ and adding in their place
‘‘A3B’’.
■ c. In paragraph (e)(1)(ii), removing
‘‘FAA part 121, 125, 127, or 135 (14 CFR
121, 125, 127, or 135)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘FAA part 121 or 135 (14 CFR
part 121 or 135)’’.
■ d. In paragraph (e)(1)(iii):
■ i. In Example 1, removing ‘‘DC–10’’
wherever it appears and adding in its
place ‘‘B–767’’.
■ ii. In Example 2:
■ A. Removing ‘‘MD–11’’ wherever it
appears and adding in its place ‘‘B–
767’’; and
■ B. Removing ‘‘B–757’’ wherever it
appears and adding in its place ‘‘A–
330’’.
■ e. Revising the final sentence of
paragraph (e)(3)(iv).
■ f. Revising paragraph (e)(3)(vi).
■ g. In paragraph (e)(3)(viii), adding a
sentence at the end of the paragraph.
■ h. In paragraph (e)(3)(ix), adding a
sentence at the end of the paragraph.
■ i. Revising paragraph (e)(4).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 861.4 DOD air transportation quality and
safety requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) * * * Training received is
documented, and established processes
ensure that documentation is
maintained in a current status.
*
*
*
*
*
(vi) Aircrew scheduling. A closely
monitored system that evaluates
operational risks, experience levels of
crewmembers, and ensures the proper
pairing and qualification of aircrews on
all flights is required. New captains are
scheduled with highly experienced first
officers, and new or low-time first
officers are scheduled with experienced
captains. Captains and first officers
assigned to DOD charter passenger
missions possess at least 250 hours
combined experience in the type aircraft
being operated. The scheduling system
involves an established flight duty time
program for aircrews, including flight
attendants, carefully managed so as to
ensure proper crew rest and considers
quality-of-life factors. Attention is given
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17045
to the stress on aircrews during strikes,
mergers, or periods of labormanagement difficulties.
*
*
*
*
*
(viii) * * * Personnel assigned these
duties are properly trained and
certificated if required.
(ix) * * * Personnel responsible for
the loading of aircraft receive
appropriate initial and recurrent
training on aircraft loading and
restraint, special cargo, weight and
balance, and hazardous/dangerous
goods procedures.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Quality and safety requirements—
maintenance—(i) Management.
Maintenance supervisors ensure all
personnel understand that in spite of
scheduling pressure, peer pressure,
supervisory pressure, or other factors,
the airplane must be airworthy prior to
flight. Passenger and employee safety is
a paramount management concern.
Quality, completeness, and integrity of
work are trademarks of the maintenance
manager and maintenance department.
Nonconformance to established
maintenance practices is not tolerated.
Management ensures contracted
maintenance, including repair and
overhaul facilities, is performed by
maintenance organizations acceptable to
the CAA.
(ii) Maintenance personnel. Air
carriers are expected to hire and train
the number of employees required to
safely maintain the company aircraft
and support the scope of the
maintenance operations both at home
station (the company’s primary facility)
and at en route locations. These
personnel ensure that all maintenance
tasks, including required inspections
and airworthiness directives, are
performed; that maintenance actions are
properly documented, and that the
discrepancies identified between
inspections are corrected. Mechanics are
fit for duty, properly certificated, the
company verifies certification, and these
personnel possess the knowledge and
the necessary aircraft-specific
experience to accomplish the
maintenance tasks. Noncertified and
inexperienced personnel received
proper supervision. Freedom from
alcohol abuse and illegal drugs is
required.
(iii) Quality assurance. A system
which continuously analyzes the
performance and effectiveness of
maintenance activities and maintenance
inspection programs is required. This
system evaluates such functions as
reliability reports, audits, component
tear-down reports, inspection
procedures and results, tool calibration
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
17046
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
program, real-time aircraft maintenance
actions, warranty programs, and other
maintenance functions. The extent of
this program is directly related to the air
carrier’s size and scope of operation.
Audit results are analyzed in order to
determine the root cause of
discrepancies. The cause of any
recurring discrepancy or negative trend
is researched and eliminated. Action is
taken to prevent recurrence of these
discrepancies and preventive actions are
monitored to ensure effectiveness. The
results of preventive actions are
provided to appropriate maintenance
technicians. Also required is a system to
evaluate contract vendors, suppliers,
and their products.
(iv) Maintenance inspection activity.
A process to ensure required aircraft
inspections are completed and the
results properly documented is
required. Inspection personnel are
identified, trained (initial and
recurrent), and provided guidance
regarding inspector responsibility and
authority. The inspection activity is
normally a separate entity within the
maintenance department.
(v) Maintenance training. Training is
conducted commensurate with the size
and type of maintenance functions
being performed. Continuing education
and progressive experience are provided
for all maintenance personnel.
Orientation, familiarization, on-the-job,
and appropriate recurrent training for
all full and part-time personnel are
expected. The use of such training aids
as mockups, simulators, and computerbased training enhances maintenance
training efforts and is desired. Training
documentation is required; it is current,
complete, well maintained, and
correctly identifies any special
authorization such as inspection and
airworthiness release. Trainers are fully
qualified in the subject manner.
(vi) Maintenance control/planning. A
method to control maintenance
activities, track program requirements,
and track aircraft status is required.
Qualified personnel monitor
maintenance preplanning, ensure
completion of maintenance actions, and
track deferred discrepancies. Deferred
maintenance actions are identified to
supervisory personnel and corrected in
accordance with the criteria provided by
the manufacturer or regulatory agency.
Constant and effective communications
between maintenance and flight
operations ensure an exchange of
critical information. In addition,
programs are in place that adequately
plan for all maintenance requirements.
(vii) Aircraft maintenance program.
Aircraft are properly certified and
maintained in a manner that ensures
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
they are airworthy and safe. The
program includes the use of
manufacturer’s and CAA information, as
well as company policies and
procedures. Airworthiness directives are
complied with in the prescribed time
frame, and service bulletins are
evaluated for applicable action.
Approved reliability programs are
proactive, providing management with
visibly on the effectiveness of the
maintenance program; attention is given
to initial component and older aircraft
inspection intervals and to deferred
maintenance actions.
(viii) Maintenance records.
Maintenance actions are well
documented and provide a complete
record of maintenance accomplished
and maintenance required. Such records
as aircraft log books and maintenance
documentation are legible, dated, clean,
readily identifiable, and maintained in
an orderly fashion. Inspection
compliance, airworthiness release, and
maintenance release records, etc., are
completed and signed by approved
personnel.
(ix) Aircraft appearance. Aircraft
exteriors, including all visible surfaces
and components, are clean and well
maintained. Interiors are also clean and
orderly. Required safety equipment and
systems are available and operable.
(x) Fueling and servicing. Aircraft fuel
is free from contamination, and
company fuel facilities (farms) are
inspected and results documented.
Procedures and instructions pertaining
to servicing, handling, and storing fuel
and oil meet established safety
standards. Procedures for monitoring
and verifying vendor servicing practices
are included in this program.
(xi) Maintenance manuals. Company
policy manuals and manufacturer’s
maintenance manuals are current,
available, clear, complete, and adhered
to by maintenance personnel. These
manuals provide maintenance
personnel with standardized procedures
for maintaining company aircraft.
Management policies, lines of authority,
and company maintenance procedures
are documented in company manuals
and kept in a current status.
(xii) Maintenance facilities/stores.
Well maintained, clean maintenance
facilities, adequate for the level of
aircraft repair authorized in the
company’s CAA certificate are expected.
Safety equipment is available in
hangars, shops, etc., and is serviceable.
Special tools and equipment are
properly calibrated and managed.
Shipping, receiving, and stores areas are
likewise clean and orderly. Parts are
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
correctly packaged, tagged, segregated,
and shelf life properly monitored.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 861.5
[Amended]
6. Amend § 861.5 by:
b. In paragraph (b), adding the words
‘‘as specified in the reference in
§ 861.1(b) or’’ after the words ‘‘services
to DOD which,’’.
■ b. In paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) and
(g)(4)(i), removing the word
‘‘USCINCTRANS’’ and adding in its
place the words ‘‘the
CDRUSTRANSCOM’’.
■ c. In paragraph (g)(5), removing
‘‘USCINCTRANS’’ and ‘‘(Acquisition,
Technology and Logistics)
(USD(AT&L))’’ and adding ‘‘the
CDRUSTRANSCOM’’ and ‘‘(Acquisition
and Sustainment) (USD(A&S))’’ in their
places, respectively.
■ 7. Amend § 861.6 by revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
■
§ 861.6
DOD review of foreign air carriers.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Foreign air carriers from countries
in which the CAA is not in compliance
with ICAO standards. DOD will not
contract for charter air transportation
services with an air carrier from a
country in which the CAA is not in
compliance with ICAO standards.
Unless otherwise authorized, use of
foreign air carriers by DOD personnel on
official business from countries in
which the CAA is not in compliance
with ICAO standards is prohibited
except for the last leg into and the first
leg out of the U.S. on such carriers. This
includes foreign air carriers performing
any portion of a route awarded to a U.S.
air carrier under the GSA City Pair
Program pursuant to a code-sharing
agreement with that U.S. air carrier.
*
*
*
*
*
§ § 861.2, 861.3, 861.4, 861.5, and 861.6
[Amended]
8. In addition to the amendments set
forth above, in 32 CFR part 861, remove
the words ‘‘operational support’’ and
add in their place the words ‘‘other
commercial air’’ in the following places:
■ a. Section 861.2 (2 places);
■ b. Section 861.3(a), (e) and (l)–(2
places);
■ c. Section 861.4(a)–(2 places), (b)(3),
(c)(3), and (d);
■ d. Section 861.5(b), (e), (g)(2)(v) and
(g)(5); and
■ e. Section 861.6(f).
■
§ § 861.3, 861.4, and 861.5
[Amended]
9. In addition to the amendments set
forth above, in 32 CFR part 861, remove
the words ‘‘Air Carrier Survey and
Analysis Office’’ and add in their place
■
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Matthew Creelman, Waterways
Management Branch, Fifth Coast Guard
District, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
(757) 398–6225, email
Matthew.K.Creelman2@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
the words ‘‘Commercial Airlift
Division’’ in the following places:
■ a. Section 861.3(e), (f)(1), and (k);
■ b. Section 861.4(c)(2); and (e)
■ c. Section 861.5(e), (g)(2)(i),
(g)(2)(iii)(A), and (g)(4)(i).
■ d. Section 861.6(c)
Adriane S. Paris,
Department of the Air Force Federal Register
Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022–05715 Filed 3–24–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 110
[Docket Number USCG–2020–0216]
RIN 1625–AA01
Anchorage Grounds; Cape Fear River
Approach, North Carolina
Coast Guard, Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Coast Guard is proposing
to amend the anchorage regulations for
Lockwoods Folly Inlet, NC, and adjacent
navigable waters, by establishing a new
offshore anchorage, relocating the
existing explosives anchorage and
amending the anchorage regulations.
The purpose of this supplemental
proposed rule is to improve navigation
and public safety by accommodating
recent and anticipated future growth in
cargo vessel traffic and vessel size that
call on Military Ocean Terminal Sunny
Point and the Port of Wilmington, North
Carolina. We invite your comments on
this supplemental proposed rulemaking.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before April 25, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2020–0216 using the Federal Decision
Making Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
If
you have questions about this proposed
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant
Gregory Kennerley, Sector North
Carolina, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
(910) 772–2230, email
Gregory.M.Kennerley@uscg.mil; or Mr.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Mar 24, 2022
Jkt 256001
I. Table of Abbreviations
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking
§ Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Background, Purpose, and Legal
Basis
On May 8, 2020, the Coast Guard
published a notification of inquiry in
the Federal Register (85 FR 27343) to
solicit public comments on whether we
should initiate a rulemaking to establish
an anchorage ground offshore in the
approaches to the Cape Fear River,
North Carolina, and to increase the size
and relocate the existing Lockwood’s
Folly Inlet explosives anchorage. After
receiving favorable comments, the Coast
Guard decided to propose the
rulemaking. On August 17, 2021, the
Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in
Federal Register (86 FR 45936), stating
why we issued the NPRM, and invited
comments on our proposed anchorage.
During the comment period that ended
on October 18, 2021, we received five
comment letters in response. The Coast
Guard is now issuing this supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to solicit comments on changes made to
the NPRM.
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to accommodate recent and anticipated
future growth in cargo vessel traffic and
vessel size that call on Military Ocean
Terminal Sunny Point and the Port of
Wilmington, improve navigation and
public safety, and to preserve areas
traditionally used for anchoring.
The legal basis and authorities for this
notice of proposed rulemaking are
found in 46 U.S.C.70006, 33 CFR 1.05–
1, DHS Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard
to propose, establish, and define
regulatory anchorage grounds.
III. Discussion Comments, Changes, and
Proposed Rule
As noted above, we received five
comments on our NPRM published
August 17, 2021. One was in full
support of the proposed rule, one had
concerns over possible area use conflicts
with offshore wind energy development,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17047
and three were regarding potential
conflict with the anchorage and an
artificial reef. The following sections
detail the concerns raised by these
comments. As a result, the Coast Guard
has issued this SNPRM with proposed
changes to the regulatory text of the
rule. Specifically, we propose the
western boundary and coordinates of
the proposed Explosives Anchorage B
be moved 1000 yards eastward to avoid
a conflict with a North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries Artificial
Reef (AR–455). The remainder of the
proposed rule remains unchanged.
A. Offshore Wind Development
One commenter raised concerns that
the proposed anchorage would take up
an area that could be utilized for
offshore wind energy development, and
by doing so, would deprive the local
economy of investment and energy
resulting from the development. The
Coast Guard finds this comment to be
not applicable to this particular
rulemaking as the proposed anchorage
area does not overlap or limit any
known wind energy lease area as
published by the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management (BOEM), the lead
agency in the U.S. offshore wind
development. The Coast Guard works
closely with BOEM in the planning of
these offshore lease areas and has
confirmed the area proposed for this
rule is not under consideration for wind
development.
B. Artificial Reef
There were three comments received
by the Coast Guard with concerns that
the westernmost boundary of the
proposed Explosives Anchorage B
overlapped the location of an artificial
reef, North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries’ Reef (AR–455). This overlap
reveals potential hazards as anchoring
vessels could damage the reef or
possibly foul their anchors on the
underwater structures. The Coast Guard
agreed with these concerns and reached
out to the North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries to discuss a new
agreeable boundary for the anchorage
that would not conflict with AR–455.
After reviewing the location of each of
the underwater features within AR–455,
the Coast Guard proposes to move the
western boundary of Anchorage B 1000
yards to the east of AR–455. This
distance would prevent any vessel
anchored within Anchorage B from
damaging the reef or interfering with
other vessels visiting the reef. This
would reduce the overall size of
anchorage area initially proposed, but
the Coast Guard believes there is still
E:\FR\FM\25MRP1.SGM
25MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17042-17047]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05715]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
32 CFR Part 861
[Docket No. USAF-2019-HQ-0010]
RIN 0701-AA88
Department of Defense Commercial Air Transportation Quality and
Safety Review Program
AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of the Air Force (DAF) proposes to amend
portions of its regulations in order to update and clarify references
and terminology relating to the Department of Defense (DOD) Commercial
Air Transportation Quality and Safety Review Program. It also extends
to DOD contracts for charter air transportation services the existing
DOD policy prohibiting the use of foreign air carriers who are not in
compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization standards.
DATES: Comments must be received by May 24, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and or
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) and title, by any of the following
methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: DOD cannot receive written comments at this time due
to the COVID-19 pandemic. Comments should be sent electronically to the
docket listed above.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN for this Federal Register document. The
general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the
public is to make these submissions available for public viewing at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change,
including any personal identifiers or contact information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Berry, DOD Commercial Airlift
Division, AMC/A3B, 402 Scott Drive, Unit 3A1, Scott Air Force Base,
Illinois 62225-5302, (618) 229-2082, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Department of Defense Commercial Air Transportation Quality and
Safety Review Program establishes the safety requirements and criteria
for evaluating civil air carriers, to include foreign air carriers,
providing air transportation to the DOD. As stated in 32 CFR 861.6,
foreign air carriers providing or seeking to provide services to DOD
are subject to review and, if appropriate, approval by DOD. Application
of the criteria and requirements of this rule and the degree of
oversight to be exercised by DOD over a foreign air carrier depends
upon the type of services performed and, in some instances, by the
quality of oversight exercised by the foreign air carrier's Civilian
Aviation Authority (CAA). The scope and frequency of review of any
given foreign air carrier under this rule will be at the discretion of
the Commercial Airlift Review Board (CARB) or higher authority. This
rule was last revised on October 28, 2002 (67 FR 65698), to add Sec.
861.7 relating to the disclosure of voluntarily provided safety-related
information and to make minor administrative adjustments. DOD's
internal instruction associated with this rule was last updated on May
7, 2021, as DOD Instruction (DODI) 4500.53, ``DoD Commercial Air
Transportation Quality and Safety Review Program'' (available at
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/450053p.pdf?ver=2019-02-26-144429-747).
II. Authority for This Regulatory Action
This action is authorized by 10 U.S.C. 113, 2640 and 9013. Sections
113 and 9013 contain the authority of the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of the Air Force, respectively, to publish regulations
necessary for the functioning of the Department of Defense and the
Department of the Air Force. Section 2640 requires the Secretary of
Defense to establish the Department of Defense Commercial Airlift
Review Board; specifies minimum requirements which must be
[[Page 17043]]
met by air carriers in order to be eligible for contracts to provide
charter passenger air transportation services to the Department of
Defense; and sets minimum requirements for an inspection regime.
Further, section 2640 requires the Secretary of Defense to prescribe
regulations to implement the requirements of section 2640.
Additionally, section 2640 prescribes requirements relating to the
provision, protection, and dissemination of safety-related information.
III. Summary of Proposed Changes to the Rule
The proposed revisions clarify aircrew flying a charter mission on
behalf of the Department of Defense must, without exception, have a
minimum of 250 hours flying time in the type of aircraft being
operated. The rule also proposes to elaborate and revise several
aspects of the oversight program to more closely resemble Federal
Aviation Administration processes, thus reducing complexity and the
need to maintain duplicative and potentially conflicting processes.
Every country has a National Aviation Authority, also known as a
Civil Aviation Authority, which governs and regulates civil aviation.
Each aviation authority oversees aircraft airworthiness, the licensing
of pilots, air traffic controllers, flight dispatchers, and maintenance
engineers, licensing of airports, and other aviation standards. The
ultimate goal of these aviation authorities is aviation safety through
regulation and oversight. All pilots must meet the standards of their
respective countries where they fly. The regulations at 32 CFR 861.*(d)
prohibit DOD personnel on official business, except for the first leg
into and the last leg out of the U.S., from using foreign air carriers
from countries in which the Civil Aviation Authority is not in
compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization standards as
determined by the International Civil Aviation Organization, or Federal
Aviation Administration, or other aviation safety oversight body. This
rule would extend that policy to any DOD contract for charter air
transportation services with an air carrier.
Major provisions include:
(1) Amend Sec. 861.3, ``Definitions.'' The term ``Operational
support services'' in paragraph (l) is proposed to be replaced with
``Other commercial air services'' in order to be consistent with the
statutory definition used by the Federal Aviation Administration in
title 49, U.S. Code, section 40102(a)(41)(E). The substance of the
definition is otherwise unchanged. This change in terminology will be
made throughout part 861.
(2) Amend Sec. 861.3, ``Definitions.'' The term ``paratroop
drops'' is proposed to be deleted from the list of examples in the
definition of ``Air transportation'' in paragraph (b), and inserted in
the list of examples of ``Other commercial air services'' in paragraph
(l). In addition, the terms ``target towing'', ``chaff dispensing'',
and ``electronic countermeasures target flights'' have been deleted
from the list of examples. Both changes are intended to more closely
align with the statutory definitions of ``air transportation'' and
``other commercial air services'' used by the Federal Aviation
Administration in title 49, U.S. Code, sections 40102(a)(5) and
40102(a)(41)(E), respectively.
(3) Amend Sec. 861.4(e)(3)(vi), ``Aircrew scheduling.'' Paragraph
(e)(3)(vi) currently requires the Captain and first officer flying
Department of Defense charter passenger missions have at least 250
hours of combined experience in the type of aircraft being operated.
However, an exception to this requirement is provided for aircraft new
to the air carrier. This rule proposes to delete this exception in
order to ensure aircrew flying Department of Defense charter missions
have adequate experience in the type of aircraft being flown.
(4) Amend Sec. 861.4(e)(3)(ix), ``DOD charter procedures.''
Paragraph (e)(3)(ix) requires an air carrier have procedures reflecting
that weights and balance information are used in computing aircraft
weight and balance. A sentence is proposed to be added requiring that
personnel loading an aircraft be adequately trained on aircraft loading
and restraint, special cargo, weight and balance, and hazardous/
dangerous goods procedures. This revision would align the
qualifications required for personnel loading an aircraft with recent
Federal Aviation Administration cargo loading regulations and guidance
in 14 CFR 121.665, 14 CFR 121.1001, Advisory Circular 120.85A and
Flight Standards Information Manual System 8900.1 Volume 3, with which
air carriers are already in compliance.
(5) Amend Sec. 861.4(e)(4)(iii), ``Quality assurance.'' Paragraph
(e)(4)(iii) addresses the requirement that an air carrier have a
quality assurance program that analyzes the performance and
effectiveness of maintenance activities and inspections. This
requirement is alluded to in Sec. 861.4(e)(2). This change proposes to
add language making clear that the Department of Defense will expect
the air carrier to audit results of the program to determine the root
cause of discrepancies.
(6) Amend Sec. 861.4(e)(4)(vi), ``Maintenance control,'' is
proposed to be revised to require that air carriers have programs in
place to adequately plan for all maintenance requirements. While
planning for maintenance is inherent in maintenance control and is
implied in the words ``method to control maintenance activities'', this
revision clarifies that formal programs are necessary and mirrors
Federal Aviation Administration requirements.
(7) Amend Sec. 861.5, ``DOD Commercial Airlift Review Board
procedures,'' is proposed to be revised to replace ``CINCTRANS'' with
``CDRUSTRANSCOM'' wherever ``CINCTRANS'' appears. This reflects a
change in the acronym used to refer to the Commander of the United
States Transportation Command.
(8) Amend Sec. 861.6(d), ``DOD review of foreign air carriers,''
is proposed to be revised to add a sentence reflecting an established,
longstanding Department of Defense policy in Department of Defense
Instruction 4500.53, of not contracting with foreign air carriers from
countries whose Civil Aviation Authority has been determined to not
meet International Civil Aviation Organization standards.
IV. Expected Impact of This Proposed Rule
Affected Population
Providers of air transportation and other commercial air services
to the Department of Defense consist of approximately 100 U.S. air
carriers and operators offering services under parts 105, 121, 125,
133, and 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) of title 14
CFR, and foreign air carriers and operators offering services under the
equivalent Civil Aviation Authority regulations applicable to their
operations. Both U.S. and foreign air carriers and operators range from
large corporations with hundreds of aircraft, to small entities
operating a handful of aircraft. Whether domestic or foreign, and
regardless of size, air carriers and operators offering air
transportation or other commercial air services to the Department of
Defense must meet the requirements specified by law and this rule to be
eligible for Department business, and must comply with the oversight
requirements of the law and this rule to remain eligible for Department
business. Changes proposed in this rule should not prompt air carriers
or operators to either leave or join the air carrier survey and
analysis program. Additionally, the proposed changes will not expand or
contract carrier eligibility to participate in the
[[Page 17044]]
program. Furthermore, the proposed changes will not impact the overall
economics for carriers in the aviation industry marketplace. This
proposed rule is not expected to impact on the public or state, local,
or tribal governments.
Costs
This rule has been was first promulgated in 1987 (see 52 FR 37609
(October 8, 1987)). The proposed revisions are not expected to increase
costs compliance. Although several revisions alter minor aspects of the
existing oversight program, they are intended to streamline oversight
processes by more closely aligning them with current Federal Aviation
Administration guidance. This harmonization may decrease costs for U.S.
carriers although these savings may not be appreciable. Operators of
paratroop drop services may realize slightly more appreciable savings
as a result of being considered a provider of ``other commercial air
services'' rather than of ``air transportation services,'' since the
latter results in an increased level of oversight. Conversely, the
failure to enact the proposed changes may result in increased costs to
U.S. air carriers and operators as specific requirements and procedures
of this program increasingly diverge from those required by the FAA,
requiring that separate compliance processes be maintained that cover
the same substantive area.
Benefits
The affected air carriers and operators will benefit from the
clarifications, updated information, and alignment of processes with
those of the Federal Aviation Administration resulting from this
proposed revision. This, in turn, should lead to a more effective
safety oversight program, benefitting them, the Department of Defense,
members of the armed forces transported on the contracted aircraft, and
the public at large.
Alternatives
The basic parameters of the program described in this Part are
specified in section 2640 of title 10, U.S. Code, and serve to limit
the scope of alternatives available.
No action: This alternative would leave the existing rule
in place without change. Parts of this rule are obsolete as a result of
changes in terminology, responsible offices, and the evolution of
technology since 2002. No action would also result in the loss of an
opportunity to incorporate lessons learned since the last revision in
2002. The rule would consequently continue to become less effective
over time, as the FAA adopts updated, more stringent standards and
practices that are not reflected in the DOD standards and practices
reflected in this rule. This course of action is therefore not
preferred.
Expansion of the scope of the oversight program. Expansion
of the scope of the oversight program would go beyond that which is
necessary to ensure the safe transportation of members of the armed
forces as well as beyond the scope of what the law requires. This
course of action is therefore not preferred, as it would impose
increased costs on the Department of Defense and all affected parties
to no discernable end.
Contracting the scope of the oversight program.
Contracting the scope of the oversight program would result in a
failure to do as the law requires, although it would be less burdensome
and expensive for the affected parties. Consequently, this course of
action is not preferred.
Regulatory Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been designated as a ``significant
regulatory action'' but not economically significant under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866.
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. generally
provides before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. The DAF will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States.
National Environmental Policy Act
The DAF has determined the proposed amendments of the Department of
Defense Commercial Air Transportation Quality and Safety Review Program
is not a major federal action within the meaning of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The proposed
amendments do not result in any impacts to human health or the
environment.
Paperwork Reduction Act
It has been determined this regulatory action does not impose
reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The DAF has certified this regulatory action is not subject to the
relevant provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C.
605(b)). The Secretary of the Air Force has certified that this rule is
exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601 to 612, because this rule does not have a significant
economic impact on small entities as defined by the Act, and does not
impose any obligatory information requirements beyond internal DAF use.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2
U.S.C. 1532) requires agencies to assess anticipated costs and benefits
before issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any one year
of $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. This
regulatory action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
This action only addresses the Department of Defense Commercial Air
Transportation Quality and Safety Review Program.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements an agency
must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent final
rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State and
local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has federalism
implications. The DAF has determined this regulatory action does not
contain policies with federalism as that term is defined in E.O. 13132.
[[Page 17045]]
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 861
Administrative practice and procedure, Air carriers, Aviation
safety, Military air transportation.
Accordingly, 32 CFR part 861 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 861--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORTATION
QUALITY AND SAFETY REVIEW PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 861 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 10 U.S.C. 113, 2640, 9013.
Sec. 861.1 [Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 861.1(b) by removing the word ``Directive'' and adding
in its place the word ``Instruction''.
Sec. 861.2 [Amended]
0
3. Amend Sec. 861.2 by:
0
a. Removing the word ``Directive'' and adding in its place the word
``Instruction''.
0
b. Removing the words ``Commander-in-Chief (CINC)'' and adding in their
place ``Commander''.
0
c. Removing the word ``USTRANSCOM'' and adding in its place the word
``CDRUSTRANSCOM''.
0
d. Removing the words ``the CINC'' and adding in their place the words
``the CDRUSTRANSCOM''.
0
4. Amend Sec. 861.3 by:
0
a. In paragraph (b), removing the words ``paratrooper drops''.
0
b. In paragraph (f)(3), removing the words ``Commander-in-Chief'' and
adding ``Commander'' in their place and removing ``, or USCINCTRANS''.
0
c. Revising paragraphs (f)(4) and (l).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 861.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(4) Secretary of Defense.
* * * * *
(l) Other commercial air services. Flights performed by air
carriers that use fixed or rotary-winged aircraft to provide services
other than air transportation services as defined in paragraph (b) of
this section. Examples include, but are not limited to, paratroop
drops, range instrumentation and services, and sling loads. Air
carriers providing only other commercial air services do not require
advance DOD approval and are not subject to the initial or periodic on-
site survey requirements under this part, unless specified in paragraph
(b) or directed by the CARB or higher authority. All air carriers
providing other commercial air services to DOD must have a FAA or CAA
certificate and are required to maintain applicable FAA or CAA
standards absent deviation authority obtained pursuant to 14 CFR 119.55
or similar CAA rules.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 861.4 by:
0
a. In paragraph (b)(3), adding the words ``as specified in the
reference in Sec. 861.1(b) or'' after the words ``this part may,''.
0
b. In paragraph (c)(2), removing the letters ``DOB'' and adding in
their place ``A3B''.
0
c. In paragraph (e)(1)(ii), removing ``FAA part 121, 125, 127, or 135
(14 CFR 121, 125, 127, or 135)'' and adding in its place ``FAA part 121
or 135 (14 CFR part 121 or 135)''.
0
d. In paragraph (e)(1)(iii):
0
i. In Example 1, removing ``DC-10'' wherever it appears and adding in
its place ``B-767''.
0
ii. In Example 2:
0
A. Removing ``MD-11'' wherever it appears and adding in its place ``B-
767''; and
0
B. Removing ``B-757'' wherever it appears and adding in its place ``A-
330''.
0
e. Revising the final sentence of paragraph (e)(3)(iv).
0
f. Revising paragraph (e)(3)(vi).
0
g. In paragraph (e)(3)(viii), adding a sentence at the end of the
paragraph.
0
h. In paragraph (e)(3)(ix), adding a sentence at the end of the
paragraph.
0
i. Revising paragraph (e)(4).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 861.4 DOD air transportation quality and safety requirements.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) * * * Training received is documented, and established
processes ensure that documentation is maintained in a current status.
* * * * *
(vi) Aircrew scheduling. A closely monitored system that evaluates
operational risks, experience levels of crewmembers, and ensures the
proper pairing and qualification of aircrews on all flights is
required. New captains are scheduled with highly experienced first
officers, and new or low-time first officers are scheduled with
experienced captains. Captains and first officers assigned to DOD
charter passenger missions possess at least 250 hours combined
experience in the type aircraft being operated. The scheduling system
involves an established flight duty time program for aircrews,
including flight attendants, carefully managed so as to ensure proper
crew rest and considers quality-of-life factors. Attention is given to
the stress on aircrews during strikes, mergers, or periods of labor-
management difficulties.
* * * * *
(viii) * * * Personnel assigned these duties are properly trained
and certificated if required.
(ix) * * * Personnel responsible for the loading of aircraft
receive appropriate initial and recurrent training on aircraft loading
and restraint, special cargo, weight and balance, and hazardous/
dangerous goods procedures.
* * * * *
(4) Quality and safety requirements--maintenance--(i) Management.
Maintenance supervisors ensure all personnel understand that in spite
of scheduling pressure, peer pressure, supervisory pressure, or other
factors, the airplane must be airworthy prior to flight. Passenger and
employee safety is a paramount management concern. Quality,
completeness, and integrity of work are trademarks of the maintenance
manager and maintenance department. Nonconformance to established
maintenance practices is not tolerated. Management ensures contracted
maintenance, including repair and overhaul facilities, is performed by
maintenance organizations acceptable to the CAA.
(ii) Maintenance personnel. Air carriers are expected to hire and
train the number of employees required to safely maintain the company
aircraft and support the scope of the maintenance operations both at
home station (the company's primary facility) and at en route
locations. These personnel ensure that all maintenance tasks, including
required inspections and airworthiness directives, are performed; that
maintenance actions are properly documented, and that the discrepancies
identified between inspections are corrected. Mechanics are fit for
duty, properly certificated, the company verifies certification, and
these personnel possess the knowledge and the necessary aircraft-
specific experience to accomplish the maintenance tasks. Noncertified
and inexperienced personnel received proper supervision. Freedom from
alcohol abuse and illegal drugs is required.
(iii) Quality assurance. A system which continuously analyzes the
performance and effectiveness of maintenance activities and maintenance
inspection programs is required. This system evaluates such functions
as reliability reports, audits, component tear-down reports, inspection
procedures and results, tool calibration
[[Page 17046]]
program, real-time aircraft maintenance actions, warranty programs, and
other maintenance functions. The extent of this program is directly
related to the air carrier's size and scope of operation. Audit results
are analyzed in order to determine the root cause of discrepancies. The
cause of any recurring discrepancy or negative trend is researched and
eliminated. Action is taken to prevent recurrence of these
discrepancies and preventive actions are monitored to ensure
effectiveness. The results of preventive actions are provided to
appropriate maintenance technicians. Also required is a system to
evaluate contract vendors, suppliers, and their products.
(iv) Maintenance inspection activity. A process to ensure required
aircraft inspections are completed and the results properly documented
is required. Inspection personnel are identified, trained (initial and
recurrent), and provided guidance regarding inspector responsibility
and authority. The inspection activity is normally a separate entity
within the maintenance department.
(v) Maintenance training. Training is conducted commensurate with
the size and type of maintenance functions being performed. Continuing
education and progressive experience are provided for all maintenance
personnel. Orientation, familiarization, on-the-job, and appropriate
recurrent training for all full and part-time personnel are expected.
The use of such training aids as mockups, simulators, and computer-
based training enhances maintenance training efforts and is desired.
Training documentation is required; it is current, complete, well
maintained, and correctly identifies any special authorization such as
inspection and airworthiness release. Trainers are fully qualified in
the subject manner.
(vi) Maintenance control/planning. A method to control maintenance
activities, track program requirements, and track aircraft status is
required. Qualified personnel monitor maintenance preplanning, ensure
completion of maintenance actions, and track deferred discrepancies.
Deferred maintenance actions are identified to supervisory personnel
and corrected in accordance with the criteria provided by the
manufacturer or regulatory agency. Constant and effective
communications between maintenance and flight operations ensure an
exchange of critical information. In addition, programs are in place
that adequately plan for all maintenance requirements.
(vii) Aircraft maintenance program. Aircraft are properly certified
and maintained in a manner that ensures they are airworthy and safe.
The program includes the use of manufacturer's and CAA information, as
well as company policies and procedures. Airworthiness directives are
complied with in the prescribed time frame, and service bulletins are
evaluated for applicable action. Approved reliability programs are
proactive, providing management with visibly on the effectiveness of
the maintenance program; attention is given to initial component and
older aircraft inspection intervals and to deferred maintenance
actions.
(viii) Maintenance records. Maintenance actions are well documented
and provide a complete record of maintenance accomplished and
maintenance required. Such records as aircraft log books and
maintenance documentation are legible, dated, clean, readily
identifiable, and maintained in an orderly fashion. Inspection
compliance, airworthiness release, and maintenance release records,
etc., are completed and signed by approved personnel.
(ix) Aircraft appearance. Aircraft exteriors, including all visible
surfaces and components, are clean and well maintained. Interiors are
also clean and orderly. Required safety equipment and systems are
available and operable.
(x) Fueling and servicing. Aircraft fuel is free from
contamination, and company fuel facilities (farms) are inspected and
results documented. Procedures and instructions pertaining to
servicing, handling, and storing fuel and oil meet established safety
standards. Procedures for monitoring and verifying vendor servicing
practices are included in this program.
(xi) Maintenance manuals. Company policy manuals and manufacturer's
maintenance manuals are current, available, clear, complete, and
adhered to by maintenance personnel. These manuals provide maintenance
personnel with standardized procedures for maintaining company
aircraft. Management policies, lines of authority, and company
maintenance procedures are documented in company manuals and kept in a
current status.
(xii) Maintenance facilities/stores. Well maintained, clean
maintenance facilities, adequate for the level of aircraft repair
authorized in the company's CAA certificate are expected. Safety
equipment is available in hangars, shops, etc., and is serviceable.
Special tools and equipment are properly calibrated and managed.
Shipping, receiving, and stores areas are likewise clean and orderly.
Parts are correctly packaged, tagged, segregated, and shelf life
properly monitored.
* * * * *
Sec. 861.5 [Amended]
0
6. Amend Sec. 861.5 by:
0
b. In paragraph (b), adding the words ``as specified in the reference
in Sec. 861.1(b) or'' after the words ``services to DOD which,''.
0
b. In paragraphs (f)(1) and (3) and (g)(4)(i), removing the word
``USCINCTRANS'' and adding in its place the words ``the
CDRUSTRANSCOM''.
0
c. In paragraph (g)(5), removing ``USCINCTRANS'' and ``(Acquisition,
Technology and Logistics) (USD(AT&L))'' and adding ``the
CDRUSTRANSCOM'' and ``(Acquisition and Sustainment) (USD(A&S))'' in
their places, respectively.
0
7. Amend Sec. 861.6 by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 861.6 DOD review of foreign air carriers.
* * * * *
(d) Foreign air carriers from countries in which the CAA is not in
compliance with ICAO standards. DOD will not contract for charter air
transportation services with an air carrier from a country in which the
CAA is not in compliance with ICAO standards. Unless otherwise
authorized, use of foreign air carriers by DOD personnel on official
business from countries in which the CAA is not in compliance with ICAO
standards is prohibited except for the last leg into and the first leg
out of the U.S. on such carriers. This includes foreign air carriers
performing any portion of a route awarded to a U.S. air carrier under
the GSA City Pair Program pursuant to a code-sharing agreement with
that U.S. air carrier.
* * * * *
Sec. Sec. 861.2, 861.3, 861.4, 861.5, and 861.6 [Amended]
0
8. In addition to the amendments set forth above, in 32 CFR part 861,
remove the words ``operational support'' and add in their place the
words ``other commercial air'' in the following places:
0
a. Section 861.2 (2 places);
0
b. Section 861.3(a), (e) and (l)-(2 places);
0
c. Section 861.4(a)-(2 places), (b)(3), (c)(3), and (d);
0
d. Section 861.5(b), (e), (g)(2)(v) and (g)(5); and
0
e. Section 861.6(f).
Sec. Sec. 861.3, 861.4, and 861.5 [Amended]
0
9. In addition to the amendments set forth above, in 32 CFR part 861,
remove the words ``Air Carrier Survey and Analysis Office'' and add in
their place
[[Page 17047]]
the words ``Commercial Airlift Division'' in the following places:
0
a. Section 861.3(e), (f)(1), and (k);
0
b. Section 861.4(c)(2); and (e)
0
c. Section 861.5(e), (g)(2)(i), (g)(2)(iii)(A), and (g)(4)(i).
0
d. Section 861.6(c)
Adriane S. Paris,
Department of the Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022-05715 Filed 3-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-P