CIVIL AIR REGULATIONS
Part 40
Scheduled Interstate Air Carrier Certification and Operation Rules
Effective October 1, 1953
| For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25. D.C | Price 15 cents |
[Reprinted from FEDERAL REGISTER of April 21, 1953]
CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD
WASHINGTON D. C.
TITLE 14—CIVIL AVIATION
Chapter I—Civil Aeronautics Board
Subchapter A—Civil Air Regulations
PART 40—Scheduled Interstate Air Carrier Certification and Operation Rules
Adopted by the Civil Aeronautics Board at its office in Washington, D. C., on the 13th day of April 1953.
Presently effective Parts 40 and 61 of the Civil Air Regulations prescribe the standards for scheduled interstate air carrier certification and operation respectively. Subsequent to the promulgation of present Parts 40 and 61, the scheduled air carrier industry has undergone rapid growth and development. This growth and development necessitated the devisement of new procedures and techniques many of which are not compatible with the standards presently applicable to these operations. It has also become apparent that these regulations are in need of clarification and simplification in order to facilitate their administration by the air carriers to whom they apply and by the Administrator of Civil Aeronautics. In view of the foregoing, it became evident that the standards for certification and operation of scheduled air carriers should be revised.
The first proposed revision contemplated the consolidation of Parts 40, 41, and 61 into a single Part 40. A draft of this proposal was published in the Federal Register as a notice of proposed rule making (15 F. R. 6700) and circulated as Draft Release No. 50–8, dated October 2, 1950. In response to that notice, the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) and the Air Transport Association (ATA) opposed the combining of domestic and international operating rules in a single part with the reasoning that to do so would substantially increase their administrative complexity. The Board recognized this comment to be of sufficient validity and importance as to dictate against an attempt at that time to consolidate the rules pertaining to domestic and international operations and decided, therefore, that the proposed Part 40 should be further amended so as to incorporate only the rules applicable to domestic scheduled air carrier certification and operation.
Numerous conferences and discussions were held with interested persons as a consequence of which a new proposal to combine present Parts 40 and 61 into a single Part 40 was drafted and published in the Federal Register as a notice of proposed rule making (16 F. R. 8923) and circulated as Draft Release No. 51–6 dated August 27, 1951. In response to this notice, extensive comments were received from the various representative groups in the scheduled air carrier industry. These comments were consolidated and on May 8, 1952, conferences were commenced with these groups to discuss in detail the comment received. These conferences disclosed, among other matters, that certain issues were present concerning which interested persons desired an opportunity to present oral argument before the Board.
On July 30, 1952, the Board published in the Feederal Register as a notice of proposed rule making (17 F. R. 6971) a revised draft of the proposed Part 40. This notice not only reflected changes made as a result of the comment received on Draft Release No. 51—6 and the conferences held subsequent thereto, but also invited additional comment with respect to those matters pertaining to the proposed part concerning which opportunity for oral argument was desired.
As a result of comment received in response to the July 30, 1952, notice, a notice of proposed rule making and oral argument was published in the Federal Register (17 F. R. 11124) and circulated as Draft Release NO. 52—33 setting down for oral argument before the Board certain, but not all, of the requested issues. On January 8, 1953, the Board heard oral argument on the designated issues and gave permission to interested persons to submit additional written comment on those issues concerning which oral argument was requested, but which were not set down to be heard by the Board.
The revision of Part 40 brought to issue certain matters which are either highly controversial in nature or which involve further detailed study of their various technical aspects or both. As these issues arise, it was decided to separate certain of them from the revision of Part 40 to preclude further unwarranted delay in the promulgation of the proposed revision. These controversial items are being processed as separate rule-making proceedings.
Among the items designated for separate rule-making proceedings were four issues pertaining to flight time and duty time limitations. By notice of proposed rule making and oral argument (17 F. R. 11883) circulated as Draft Release No. 52—34 the Board set down these issues for oral argument on February 26, 1953. Upon request of the ATA and the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) this oral argument was postponed indefinitely by notice published in the Federal Register (18 F. R. 1120) and circulated as Draft Release No. 53—3.
With regard to the other controversial items being considered separately, the issues pertaining to emergency and survival equipment and propeller reverse pitch indicating lights were published in the Federal Register as notices of proposed rule making (17 F. R. 8022 and 17 F. R. 9827) and circulated as Draft Releases Nos. 52—26 and 52—28, respectively. Consideration by the Board of rules pertaining to these two items is contemplated within the immediate future. Another item being considered separately concerns the mandatory application of certain transport category requirements to airplanes operated under the revised part. This item is presently under study and provisions pertaining thereto have been removed from revised Part 40.
Considerable comment has been received concerning the reference in § 40.181 (a) concerning the designation of a second alternate when the weather conditions forecast for the destination and first alternate are "marginal". This comment indicated that the word "marginal" is not sufficiently definitive and that the language contained in this section does not establish an unambiguous standard for air carrier operations. The Board recognizes that this comment may have merit but is of the opinion that some provision should be contained in Part 40 in recognition of marginal weather conditions. It is intended, therefore, that additional consideration be given this matter and an appropriate alternative proposal be circulated in the near future.
(1)
