[Federal Register: December 27, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 247)]
[Notices]
[Page 77311-77313]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27de04-107]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. FAA-2003-16171]
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Mobile Live Fire
Training Simulators
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA issues regulations and prescribes standards for the
training of aircraft rescue and fire fighters (ARFF) on United States
airports certificated under 14 Code of Federal Regulations part 139.
One of the requirements of part 139 is for all ARFF personnel to
participate in at least one live-fire drill every 12 months. As
guidance for airport operators in providing this training, the FAA
issued standards for different size fire training facilities based on
the largest air carrier aircraft serving the airport. With the
introduction of new technologies, ARFF personnel have had the option to
train on both mobile as well as fixed training facilities. The FAA
published a Notice of Proposed Policy: Request for Comments in the
Federal Register on September 18, 2003 at 68 FR 54772, seeking public
comment on whether we should allow firefighters at Index C, D, and E
airports to meet the Sec. 139.319 requirements using the mobile
trainers every year. As a result of the comments received, FAA's policy
is being modified to accept mobile simulators for 2 years for Index C,
D, and E airports holding a Class I airport operating certificate.
Every third year, these airport fire departments will be required to
attend a large fixed facility to learn about new technologies and
procedures and to gain experience fighting a larger pit fire than the
mobile simulators can duplicate. Class I airports that are Index A and
B and Class II, III, and IV airports may continue to use the mobile
trainer every year to meet the 14 CFR part 139 requirements.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Gilliam, Senior Fire Fighting
Specialist, Airport Safety and Operations Division, AAS-300, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC
20591, telephone (407) 812-6331, ext 34.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 1988 revision of 14 Code of Federal
Regulations part 139, Certification and Operations: Land Airports
Serving Certain Air Carriers, section 139.319(j)(3) requires ``All
rescue and fire fighting personnel participate in at least one live
fire drill every 12 months.'' 52 FR 44276 (Nov. 18, 1997) (effective
Jan. 1, 1988). At the time this rule was promulgated, hydrocarbon
fuels, such as diesel or jet-A, fueled the training facilities. In the
early 1990s, Federal and State environmental protection agencies began
banning such facilities because of ground contamination from the fuel.
As a result, the FAA assisted in developing Liquid Propane Gas (LPG)
fired facilities. The FAA funded these facilities throughout the
country. The FAA refers to them as regional training facilities
because, mostly, they were intended to serve an area of more than one
state. The aim was for a fire fighter to travel to the nearest training
facility and receive both classroom and live fire training. FAA's
position has been that all ARFF personnel should be exposed to live
[[Page 77312]]
ground rule fire fighting, either at their home airport or at a
regional training facility. The size of the fire at a training facility
was to be commensurate with the type of air carrier service that could
be expected to serve the airport of the ARFF personnel.
In the mid-1990's, industry, with the assistance of FAA, developed
a mobile fire training simulator that could be transported from airport
to airport on trucks. The simulations allowed for engine fires,
interior fires, wheel well fires, and cargo hold fires. However, one of
the drawbacks of the first models of the mobile simulator was that they
did not provide for a ground fire. In the late 1990's industry was able
to develop a grid system ancillary to the simulator that provided a
ground fire of limited size.
The FAA published a Notice of Proposed Policy: Request for Comments
in the Federal Register on September 18, 2003, at 54772, seeking public
comment on whether we should allow firefighters at Index C, D, and E
airports to meet the section 139.319 requirements using the mobile
trainers every year. The advantages and disadvantages of using Mobile
Aircraft Fire Trainers for annual training by all airports were
outlined in the Notice of Proposed Policy. Twenty-six comments were
entered on Docket number 16171. Sixteen comments were in favor of using
mobile trainers for index C, D, and E airports and ten were against.
Two of the sixteen in favor included stipulations.
Commenters in favor (16) provided the following reasons:
1. Flexibility (5)--more training variables available
2. Economic (10)--lower individual student and operational cost
3. Training with local procedures and equipment (10)--students can
train on the same equipment they use every day, rather than the
equipment maintained at a regional facility
4. Frequency of training (4)--can increase with mobile trainers
5. Cross training with structural and mutual aid companies (7)--
local training can include the local government municipal firefighters
and emergency services that would back up the airport ARFF department
6. Use with tri-annual exercises (7)
7. FAA inspector use (1)--able to observe
8. Train while maintaining index (1)--crews remain in service on
site
9. Mobility (4)
10. Used in search and rescue training (2)
11. Uses modern and high technology (2)
12. Reduces pollution from large pit fires (1)
13. Increases fire fighter proficiency (1)
14. All associated agencies can participate (1)--non fire
15. Train at different locations on the airport (1)
16. Experience in past use is favorable (1)
Commenters opposed (10) provided the following reasons:
1. Size--a mobile trainer does not provide the perception of a
large incident (10)
2. Cost should not be a factor--there should not be a price on
safety (3)
3. Mobile trainers should not replace fixed facilities (2)
4. Increased use of mobile trainers will have an adverse impact on
fixed facilities (4)
5. New Large aircraft coming will further the problems of training
(1)--(Although we note that any aircraft in the new large aircraft
category would require Index E ARFF capability, and could not operate
at the Index A, B, or C airports).
6. Not environmentally friendly because of the water run off (1)
7. Larger facilities are better and provide greater quality (1)
8. Lowers standards (3)
Some specific comments made by various organizations individuals
were:
The American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE)
opposed the increased use of the mobile trainer for index C, D, and E
stating the FAA should:
1. Stay with the current policy
2. Conduct further study
3. Develop a policy that provides flexibility and also maintains
the present policy
Eight members of AAE and Airports Council International--
North America commented, some for and some against the proposal.
The Air Line Pilots Association opposed the use of mobile
trainers, citing the elimination of fixed facilities and the smaller
size of the mobile trainers.
Two international commenters, Transport Canada and Concord
Express Limited, opposed the use of the mobile trainer, citing the size
of the pool fire and the size of the mock-up as the reason.
One commenter in favor of the use of mobile trainers each
year at all airports made the point that while fighting a large fire is
important, it is only a part of ARFF. He goes on the say ``The tactics
used on a 10,000 gallon ground fuel spill fire and a 5,000 gallon
ground spill fire using an ARFF truck are going to be the same. The
mandate is that a fire of a certain size be fought; it does not go on
to specify how it is to be fought. The tactics will vary by airport,
because the equipment will vary. Since the airport decides on the type
of equipment it buys, and on the tactics it will use, it should also
decide on the best training options available.''
The FAA received a letter from a tenant fire-fighting
department on an airport extolling the virtues of the mobile simulator.
According to the letter, the mobile simulator was found to be a helpful
and realistic trainer. It went on to say that the simulator allows fire
crews to use both hand lines and ARFF truck turrets, and easily
simulates interior and exterior aircraft fires.
Recognizing the virtues and shortcomings of both systems and the
diversity of opinions in the airport community as well as in the ARFF
community, the FAA will adopt this policy for the following reasons:
the use of the mobile trainer will allow more flexibility with the fire
fighters training on their own equipment at local facilities with local
procedures and equipment, allow for greater frequency of training,
training with structural and mutual aid companies, provide training of
crews without the need to travel and in some cases without crews being
out of service, training at different locations on a local airport,
provides many variable scenarios placing emphasis on incidents
responded to on a daily bases as opposed to the pool fire encountered
infrequently, and allows for more frequent training therefore lowering
individual student and operational cost. The reduction in pool size is
offset in that the mobile trainer provides fire evolutions similar to
what is actually being offered by the larger facilities today. Many
burn only one fourth the size of the pit due to economic reasons.
In finding that an airport has met the requirement of 14 CFR
139.319(i)(3), the FAA will accept the use of mobile training
simulators for 2 years for Class I Index C, D, and E airports. Every
third year, these airport fire departments will be required to attend a
large fixed facilities as referenced in the Advisory Circular AC150/
5220-17A to learn about new technologies and procedures and to gain
experience fighting a larger pit fire than the mobile simulators can
duplicate. For Class I airports that are Index A and B, and for Class
II, III, and IV airports, they may continue to use the mobile trainer
every year to meet the 14 CFR part 139 requirements.
[[Page 77313]]
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 30, 2004.
David L. Bennet,
Director, Office of Airport Safety and Standards.
[FR Doc. 04-28235 Filed 12-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M