SFAR No. 60 to Part 91

"To be or not to be."

Oh, wrong quote.

The whole blasted SFAR...something about National Air Traffic Reduced Compliment Operations Plan...and how "each person" be familiar with all avaialble information.

A side note: "each person" may not be limited to required flight crew, yes?
 
As I read it this says:

"If we declare an emergency via NOTAM, what we say goes, never mind any other regs."
 
Happy now?​










NO. 60—AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM EMERGENCY OPERATION

​
​
1. Each person shall, before conducting any
operation under the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR chapter I), be familiar with
all available information concerning that operation,
including Notices to Airmen issued
under § 91.139 and, when activated, the provisions
of the National Air Traffic Reduced
Complement Operations Plan available for
inspection at operating air traffic facilities
and Regional air traffic division offices, and
the General Aviation Reservation Program.
No operator may change the designated airport
of intended operation for any flight contained
in the October 1, 1990, OAG.
2. Notwithstanding any provision of the
Federal Aviation Regulations to the contrary,
no person may operate an aircraft in
the Air Traffic Control System:
a. Contrary to any restriction, prohibition,
procedure or other action taken by the Director
of the Office of Air Traffic Systems
Management (Director) pursuant to paragraph
3 of this regulation and announced in
a Notice to Airmen pursuant to § 91.139 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations.
b. When the National Air Traffic Reduced
Complement Operations Plan is activated
pursuant to paragraph 4 of this regulation,
except in accordance with the pertinent provisions
of the National Air Traffic Reduced
Complement Operations Plan.
3. Prior to or in connection with the implementation
of the RCOP, and as conditions
warrant, the Director is authorized to:
a. Restrict, prohibit, or permit VFR and/or
IFR operations at any airport, Class B airspace
area, Class C airspace area, or other
class of controlled airspace.
b. Give priority at any airport to flights
that are of military necessity, or are medical
emergency flights, Presidential flights, and
flights transporting critical Government employees.
c. Implement, at any airport, traffic management
procedures, that may include reduction
of flight operations. Reduction of flight
operations will be accomplished, to the extent
practical, on a pro rata basis among and
between air carrier, commercial operator,
and general aviation operations. Flights cancelled
under this SFAR at a high density
traffic airport will be considered to have
been operated for purposes of part 93 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations.
4. The Director may activate the National
Air Traffic Reduced Complement Operations
Plan at any time he finds that it is necessary
for the safety and efficiency of the National
Airspace System. Upon activation of the
RCOP and notwithstanding any provision of
the FAR to the contrary, the Director is authorized
to suspend or modify any airspace
designation.
5. Notice of restrictions, prohibitions, procedures
and other actions taken by the Director
under this regulation with respect to
the operation of the Air Traffic Control system
will be announced in Notices to Airmen
issued pursuant to § 91.139 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations.
6. The Director may delegate his authority
under this regulation to the extent he considers
necessary for the safe and efficient operation
of the National Air Traffic Control
System.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 1301(7), 1303, 1344,
1348, 1352 through 1355, 1401, 1421 through
1431, 1471, 1472, 1502, 1510, 1522, and 2121
through 2125; articles 12, 29, 31, and 32(a) of
the Convention on International Civil Aviation
(61 stat. 1180); 42 U.S.C. 4321 ​

​

et seq.; E.O.
11514, 35 FR 4247, 3 CFR, 1966–1970 Comp., p.
902; 49 U.S.C. 106(g).
[Doc. No. 26351, 55 FR 40760, Oct. 4, 1990, as
amended by Amdt. 91–227, 56 FR 65652, Dec.​
17, 1991]
​
​
​
​

​
 
TMetzinger said:
As I read it this says:

"If we declare an emergency via NOTAM, what we say goes, never mind any other regs."
Click to expand...
That's basically what I got too. Yet do we really need a Special federal regulation to say we must comply with an ATC clearance let alone an emergency request/demand?
 
Richard said:
That's basically what I got too. Yet do we really need a Special federal regulation to say we must comply with an ATC clearance let alone an emergency request/demand?
Click to expand...

Remember that federal regulation does more than just restrict behavior, it implements policy and announces when an agency may itself ignore its own previously-promulgated regulation.
 
Ok, back to the OP: How does "each person" become familiar with RCOP? Or should we even care since we wouldn't care until it is activiated and that would be through NOTAM or ATC?
 
Richard said:
That's basically what I got too. Yet do we really need a Special federal regulation to say we must comply with an ATC clearance let alone an emergency request/demand?
Click to expand...

This adds the fact that VFR will need to follow ATC clearance...now, unless you're in the right airspace, VFR can blunder about oblivious to ATC.
 
Richard said:
Ok, back to the OP: How does "each person" become familiar with RCOP? Or should we even care since we wouldn't care until it is activiated and that would be through NOTAM or ATC?
Click to expand...
Seemed like it worked OK last time. Is that where this question is going?
 
The more rules they make, the more things they can pile on when they bust someone. That's what this is all about.
 
Richard said:
That's basically what I got too. Yet do we really need a Special federal regulation to say we must comply with an ATC clearance let alone an emergency request/demand?
Click to expand...

Tell ya what, there's a story behind every SFAR that points to why "YES, it needs to be there because these people died".
 
Obviously at some point in time there was a situation where a pilot couldn't do what ATC needed them to do in an emergency because doing so would violate an FAR (not directly concerning safety of flight, but safety of license). What this does is gives the pilot absolution on an FAR violation under the stated conditions.
 
Pilot already was able to bust every FAR in the book if that's what it took to handle an emergency.
 
Richard said:
Pilot already was able to bust every FAR in the book if that's what it took to handle an emergency.
Click to expand...

Not really, that's the problem, it only handles the PICs emergency on the flight he is commanding. That's why they had to put in the SFAR to cover the Controller's emergency which might not be with that flight at all. It probably had to do with getting someone to fly through Prohibited Airspace. Can ATC issue a clearance through Prohibited?
 
Perhaps the procedures they put together during Irene which may have clashed a bit with the ObamaTFR?
 
Never question a written rule just because it's stupid that it would have to be there. Between people always looking for a loophole and a whole mess of stupid people, there's likely cause.
 
TMetzinger said:
Perhaps the procedures they put together during Irene which may have clashed a bit with the ObamaTFR?
Click to expand...

How recent is the SFAR? Is it new? It would address this, people afraid to take off....

No, I'm reading 91 on it. But it addresses that very issue so.... there was guidance available.
 
Henning said:
Tell ya what, there's a story behind every SFAR that points to why "YES, it needs to be there because these people died".
Click to expand...

At what point does that get out of hand, though?
Here is one that tells us what lever/switch to move, and when.
I believe it is called the "Thurman Munson f.a.r.". Look at (c).

the ntsb report

Granted, this was a knee-jerk regulation but is there no limit to what the regulatorians will impose upon us??!
 
The provisions of the SFAR was last executed on 9-11-2001.
All aircraft were grounded. Nothing moved, and when they started to move it was airlines only, the GA IFR then finally GA VFR. Class B was "to the ground" at the outer ring, no inverted wedding cake with higher floors.

There were no discussions, it was Marshall law and dictated, no NPRM.
We had to fight to get our GA VFR flight privileges back. Current Presidential, VIP, and "stadium" TFRs were dictated on us. No opportunity to discuss. This is the new rule, live with it.

Nuff said?
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Not really, that's the problem, it only handles the PICs emergency on the flight he is commanding. That's why they had to put in the SFAR to cover the Controller's emergency which might not be with that flight at all.
Click to expand...
That is pretty much what I was thinking. Yet if that is the case then why isn't this in the Terps? And even though the SFAR makes a vague reference to "each person (as opposed to "pilot", "air crew", etc) it does mention "operator" in the context of operating an aircraft. So is ATC now an operator of an aircraft? After all, it appears this SFAR is directed to persons other than the flight crew.

With the above in mind, FAR 1.1 Definitions and Abbreviations, the definition of "Operate" and "Operational Control" now appears a bit fuzzy.
 
Last edited:
Let'sgoflying! said:
At what point does that get out of hand, though?
Here is one that tells us what lever/switch to move, and when.
I believe it is called the "Thurman Munson f.a.r.". Look at (c).

the ntsb report

Granted, this was a knee-jerk regulation but is there no limit to what the regulatorians will impose upon us??!
Click to expand...
OMG! For years I had wondered why flap settings for turbojet-powered aircraft was included in 91.126.

I had asked various pilot groups, I had asked AOPA, I had asked the FAA. No one knew. And now here is the apparent answer! Thank you, Dave. Now I can sleep at night.
 
BillTIZ said:
The provisions of the SFAR was last executed on 9-11-2001.
All aircraft were grounded. Nothing moved, and when they started to move it was airlines only, the GA IFR then finally GA VFR. Class B was "to the ground" at the outer ring, no inverted wedding cake with higher floors.

There were no discussions, it was Marshall law and dictated, no NPRM.
We had to fight to get our GA VFR flight privileges back. Current Presidential, VIP, and "stadium" TFRs were dictated on us. No opportunity to discuss. This is the new rule, live with it.

Nuff said?
Click to expand...
The post 9/11 restrictions were based on Part 99, Security Control of Air Traffic.

SFAR 60 allows the FAA to restrict operations in the event of a significant degradation of the ATC system.

I consider this to be a good provision:
c. Implement, at any airport, traffic management procedures, that may include reduction of flight operations. Reduction of flight operations will be accomplished, to the extent practical, on a pro rata basis among and between air carrier, commercial operator, and general aviation operations. Flights cancelled under this SFAR at a high density traffic airport will be considered to have been operated for purposes of part 93 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.
Click to expand...
 
You have to read the rest of the SFAR to get the reasoning. That SFAR was put into place in 1990 because of congressional budget acts which would have forced serious spending cuts within ATC, so as to warn everyone what could/would happen.

As Kent pointed out, its existence has remained and has been used since.

Basically, some people will fight you over "it's not in the regulations, so forget you evil FAA!" Basically, this SFAR gives ATC Emergency powers over the NAS in much the same way that FAR 91.3(b) gives emergency powers to pilots over their specific flight.


SUMMARY: The Administrator of the FAA has determined that, if the sequestration provisions of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act take effect on October 1, 1990, an emergency will exist requiring that immediate measures be taken in order to maintain air safety. All FAA employees, including air traffic controllers, may expect to be furloughed for a specified number of days within each pay period of work. If the furlough is implemented, such action will result in a reduction in the number of air traffic controllers available on the job and will significantly affect the FAA's ability to operate the Air Traffic Control (ATC) system and provide full ATC services. This Special Federal Aviation Regulation authorizes special provisions for the operation of the ATC system during the period that the emergency conditions exist in order to provide for the safe and orderly movement of air Ttraffic.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top