Vol. 136, No. 21 — October 9, 2002

Registration
SOR/2002-345 24 September, 2002

AERONAUTICS ACT

Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I and VI)

P.C. 2002-1576 24 September, 2002

Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, pursuant to section 4.9 (see footnote a)  of the Aeronautics Act, hereby makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I and VI).

REGULATIONS AMENDING THE CANADIAN AVIATION REGULATIONS (PARTS I AND VI)

AMENDMENTS

1. Subsection 101.01(1) of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (see footnote 1)  is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

"ELT" means an emergency locator transmitter; (ELT)

2. (1) Paragraph 605.38(3)(b) of the Regulations is repealed.

(2) Subsection 605.38(3) of the Regulations is amended by striking out the word "or" at the end of paragraph (f) and by replacing paragraph (g) with the following:

(g) operated for the purpose of permitting a person to conduct a parachute descent within 25 nautical miles of the aerodrome of departure; or

(h) operated in accordance with section 605.39.

(3) Section 605.38 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following after subsection (3):

(4) If an aircraft is equipped with one or more ELTs capable of broadcasting on the frequency of 406 MHz, each ELT shall be registered with

(a) the Canadian Beacon Registry of the National Search and Rescue Secretariat; or

(b) the appropriate authority of the country identified in the coded message transmitted by the ELT.

3. Section 605.39 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

605.39 (1) An aircraft that is required to be equipped with one or more ELTs under section 605.38 may be operated without a serviceable ELT if the operator

(a) repairs the ELT or removes it from the aircraft at the first aerodrome at which repairs or removal can be accomplished;

(b) on removal of the ELT, sends the ELT to a maintenance facility; and

(c) displays on a readily visible placard within the aircraft cockpit, until the ELT is replaced, a notice stating that the ELT has been removed and setting out the date of its removal.

(2) If an aircraft is required to have one ELT under section 605.38, the operator shall re-equip the aircraft with a serviceable ELT within

(a) 10 days after the date of removal, if the aircraft is operated under Subpart 4 or 5 of Part VII; or

(b) 30 days after the date of removal in the case of any other aircraft.

(3) If an aircraft is required to have two ELTs under section 605.38, the operator shall

(a) if one of the ELTs is unserviceable, repair or replace it within 10 days after the date of removal; and

(b) if both ELTs are unserviceable, repair or replace (i) one ELT at the first aerodrome at which a repair or replacement can be accomplished, and
(ii) the second ELT within 10 days after the date of removal.

4. Subsection 605.40(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(2) A person may activate an ELT during the first five minutes of any hour UTC for a duration of not more than five seconds for the purpose of testing it.

COMING INTO FORCE

5. (1) These Regulations, except subsection 2(1), come into force on the day on which they are registered.

(2) Subsection 2(1) comes into force on September 1, 2004.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Description

General

These Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I and VI) are primarily comprised of amendments in Part VI (General Operating and Flight Rules): to the requirements for Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs) on multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes and during sport parachuting descents; to the conditions under which aircraft may be operated with an unserviceable ELT; to the activation of an ELT for test purposes, and to registration of ELTs. As well, an amendment to Part I (General Provisions) adds a definition for the acronym "ELT" to the Canadian Aviation Regulations.

Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs) transmit a modulated distinctive siren-like sound on assigned radio transmission frequencies. These signals can be readily identified by orbiting satellites or by aircraft monitoring the assigned radio frequencies. The signals transmitted by ELTs assist search crews in locating downed aircraft and in rescuing survivors. The time for location and rescue can be significantly reduced when an ELT signal is available to guide the search for the downed aircraft. Swift action often reduces the severity of the consequences of injuries from aircraft accidents and saves lives that would otherwise be lost.

These amendments were pre-published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on January 27, 2001. The four comments which were received are discussed further in the section titled Consultation in this Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement. A two-year implementation period for the introduction of the requirement for ELTs on multi-engined turbo-jet aeroplanes was added to section 605.38 (ELT) to address one of the comments. No other changes were made to these amendments as a result of the comments which were received.

Specific

Part I (General Provisions)

CAR 101.01 (Interpretation)

Prior to this amendment, no definition existed in the regulations for "ELT". This oversight is being corrected by the addition of the definition of ELT as "emergency locator transmitter".

Part VI (General Operating and Flight Rules)

CAR 605.38 (ELT)

Aircraft which must be operated with one or more functioning ELTs on board are identified in CAR 605.38. The types of ELT required for different types of operation are specified in the table which accompanies this regulation. Those aircraft which may be operated without an ELT on board are also identified in this regulation.

Requirement for ELTs on Multi-Engine Turbo-Jet Aeroplanes

The amendments to Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 605.38 (ELT) include introduction of a new requirement for multi-engined turbo-jet aeroplanes of more than 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs) maximum certificated take-off weight (MCTOW), when operated in IFR flight, within controlled airspace, over land, and south of latitude 66 degrees 30 minutes north, to be equipped with an armed ELT. Such aeroplanes have been exempt from the requirement to be equipped with an armed ELT. A two-year implementation period will be allowed for operators of these aeroplanes to install the required ELTs.

Requirement for ELTs during Sport Parachuting Descents

As well, an amendment to this regulation permits the conduct of parachute descents within 25 NM of the aerodrome of departure without requiring an ELT to be on board the aircraft.

Canadian Beacon Registry Requirement

An additional amendment to CAR 605.38 requires that, when an aircraft is equipped with any ELT capable of broadcasting on 406 MHz, each such ELT must be registered with the Canadian Beacon Registry or with the appropriate authority in the country identified in the coded message from the ELT.

CAR 605.39 (Use of ELTs)

CAR 605.39 sets forth the conditions under which an aircraft, required to be operated with an ELT under CAR 605.38, may be operated, if the ELT becomes unserviceable. The previous version of CAR 605.39 distinguished between aircraft being operated in accordance with a minimum equipment list (MEL) which had been approved by the Minister and those aircraft which were not operated with an approved MEL. An MEL specifies the conditions under which an operator is authorized to operate an aircraft with equipment that is inoperative. An MEL may specify certain equipment must be operative at all times. An MEL is developed, taking the specific type of operation into account, from the master minimum equipment list (MMEL) which is developed for the aircraft type during manufacture. Operators of aircraft with an approved MEL were referred to the MEL for the conditions under which their aircraft might be operated with an unserviceable ELT. Those operators without an approved MEL were required:

(1) to repair or remove the ELT at the first aerodrome at which this can be accomplished;

(2) on removal, to send the ELT to a maintenance facility;

(3) to display a readily visible notice within the aircraft cockpit to the effect that the ELT has been removed giving the date of its removal, and

(4) to re-equip their aircraft with a serviceable ELT within 90 days after the date at which the ELT was removed.

The amendment to CAR 605.39 (Use of ELTs) reduces the period for which an aircraft may be operated without a serviceable ELT and simplifies the regulation by removing the references to the MEL. As a result of this revision, the operator of an aircraft will no longer need to refer to a second document if an ELT becomes unserviceable.

The amendment will allow aircraft required to be equipped with one ELT to be operated without a serviceable ELT:

(1) if the ELT is repaired or removed at the first aerodrome at which this can be done;

(2) if the ELT is sent to a maintenance facility upon its removal from the aircraft;

(3) if a readily visible placard is displayed within the aircraft cockpit stating that the ELT has been removed and giving the date at which it was removed, and

(4) if the aircraft is re-equipped with a serviceable ELT within 10 days after the date of removal for aircraft operated under Subpart 704 (Commuter Operations) or Subpart 705 (Airline Operations) or within 30 days after the date of removal for all other aircraft.

For those aircraft which are required to have two ELTs, where one ELT becomes unserviceable, the aircraft may be operated with only one serviceable ELT if the initial three conditions listed above are met and the aircraft is re-equipped with a second serviceable ELT within 10 days after the date of removal. For aircraft required to have two ELTs, where both ELTs become unserviceable, the operator will be required to repair or replace one ELT at the first aerodrome at which this can be accomplished and to repair or replace the second ELT within 10 days after the date of removal.

CAR 605.40 (ELT Activation)

CAR 605.40 allows activation of an ELT to signal an emergency and for the purpose of testing the ELT. It sets forth the actions to be taken when an ELT has been unintentionally activated. An editorial change to CAR 605.40 (ELT Activation) clarifies that the period during which an ELT may be activated for test purposes is the first five minutes of any hour in the Universal Time Coordinate (UTC) system.

Alternatives

No alternatives to regulatory action were available to attaint he desired results for these amendments to CAR 101.01 (Interpretation), CAR 605.38 (ELT), CAR 605.39 (Use of ELTs) or CAR 605.40 (ELT Activation).

Benefits and Costs

Throughout the development of the aviation regulations and standards Transport Canada applies risk management concepts. Where there are risk implications the analysis of these Regulations has concluded that the imputed risk is acceptable in light of the expected benefits.

Part I (General Provisions)

CAR 101.01 (Interpretation)

There are no benefit-cost implications to the inclusion of the definition for ELT in the Canadian Aviation Regulations.

Part VI (General Operating and Flight Rules)

CAR 605.38 (ELT)

Requirement for ELTs on Multi-Engine Turbo-Jet Aeroplanes

The elimination of the relief from the need to carry an armed ELT, which was granted to multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes with a MCTOW over 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs), when operating in IFR flight, within controlled airspace, over land, and south of latitude 66 degrees 30 minutes north, will place such operations on the same footing with respect to the location surveillance potentially afforded by ELT carriage as the same category of aeroplane in other types of operation. While it must be acknowledged that such aircraft, when operated under the described conditions, are already well protected, the expected long term costs for this amendment are at a level that does not justify continuing the special treatment of these types of aeroplanes in these operations.

Estimated costs for this amendment are one-time capital costs which consist of equipment purchase and installation costs, and on-going maintenance costs. The following total estimated equipment purchase, installation and maintenance costs for this regulatory amendment are based on 601 turbo-jet and turbo-fan commercial and private aircraft with MCTOW over 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs) on the Canadian Civil Aircraft Register. Both commercial aircraft and private corporate aircraft which satisfy these criteria will be affected by the amendment.

The major component of the capital cost will be installation costs. The following estimates for these costs depend on aircraft age, size and manufacturer.

For models of older aircraft, that have not previously been required to carry ELTs, the extensive re-wiring required may also necessitate development of manufacturer's approved design data for this modification. Installation costs (wiring and development of approved design data) have been estimated as ranging from $12,000 to $15,000 for the larger, older aircraft models. Installation costs for private corporate jet aircraft are expected to be approximately one-half of those for the larger, commercially operated aircraft.

Not all of the 601 aircraft identified will incur such costs as a result of the changed requirement. For newer aircraft, installation costs are significantly less than for the older models. For example, currently, Canadian manufactured aircraft (such as the Bombardier Regional Jet/Canadair CRJ) are delivered to the purchaser with a factory installed fixed ELT. As well, both Airbus and Boeing consider a fixed ELT to be optional equipment. For Airbus and recent Boeing models, because of the offer of an optional installation, the approved data have been developed for ELT installation and the aircraft have been configured to permit such an installation. Thus, the wiring and approved data are in place for these newer aircraft and their cost is part of the current purchase price. Also, aircraft operating over land north of the designated latitude are already required to carry an ELT and will incur no additional costs.

The cost for the ELT itself is relatively small, being, on average, $1,000 per unit. The average capital cost for ELT purchase and installation, based on the estimates outlined above, has been calculated as approximately $6,200 to $7,100 per aircraft.

Maintenance costs are estimated as approximately $50 annually with battery replacement every three years at $200. For the purposes of calculating the total cost estimates, an annual maintenance cost of $100 per ELT has been used.

To equip those aeroplanes, at present on the Canadian Civil Aircraft Register, which do not already carry ELTs, with ELTs, will entail an estimated one-time total capital cost for equipment purchase and aircraft installation between 3.8 and 4.3 million dollars.

Estimated annual maintenance costs for this additional fleet coverage will be approximately $50,500 total with the present value of such maintenance costs, over ten years, between $400,000 and $330,000 total.

If the necessary installation cannot be completed during scheduled maintenance, there will also be a cost incurred from lost revenue due to the withdrawal of aircraft from service during the installation. The Air Transport Association of Canada (ATAC) has provided an estimate that this loss would increase the cost of the amendment to the industry by 50%. That is, total capital cost would become 5.7 to 6.5 million dollars.

While the risk, if an aircraft in the type of operation at which this amendment is directed were to encounter difficulties, of a delay in locating the aircraft is low, the potential consequences, in loss of life and increased suffering for survivors, of such a possible delay, when balanced against the cost of the requirement for an ELT, justify the imposition of this new requirement.

Requirement for ELTs during Sport Parachuting Descents

The amendment to remove the requirement for an ELT to be carried during flights for parachute descents within 25 NM of the aerodrome of departure will relieve sport parachute operations of an unnecessary expenditure of resources without reducing the safety of the participants.

At present, regulatory requirements (CARs Subpart 603 Special Flight Operations) call for the presence of ground observers exercising positive supervision and in constant communication with the drop aircraft when parachute descents are conducted in controlled airspace or for display (air show) purposes. Industry custom, as represented by the requirements of the parachuting associations (Canadian Sport Parachuting Association and United States Parachute Association), also requires ground observers to be present and in constant communication with the drop aircraft. Even where the parachute operations are such that the sport parachuting associations' requirements are not rigorously implemented, the practical aspects of sport parachute operations are such that there will normally be ground observers and, probably, an organized loading structure with a loadmaster on the ground in visual contact with the aircraft. In practice, because of limitations imposed by the effects of wind during the descent, sport parachute operations are restricted to remaining within gliding distance of the intended drop zone (usually the departure aerodrome). In addition, such operations must be conducted under visual weather conditions.

Because of the delays inherent in the operation of ELTs, which require confirmation of the validity of the signal prior to initiating a search operation, as compared to the nearly instantaneous initiation of rescue activity possible when a visual observer spots the aircraft in trouble, the carriage of an ELT adds little to the safety of parachute descents conducted under the conditions outlined above. On the other hand, the requirement for carriage of an ELT imposes an expenditure of resources on operators conducting sport parachuting descents because of the need for maintenance of existing ELTs, repair of non-serviceable ELTs and for purchase of new or replacement units. Consequently, the amendment to CAR 605.38 to remove the ELT requirement for flights for parachute descents within 25 NM of the aerodrome of departure will not significantly affect the safety of participants in these operations and will reduce costs for this segment of the aviation industry.

Canadian Beacon Registry Requirement

The amendment to require the registration, with the Canadian Beacon Registry, or with the appropriate foreign authority, of an ELT, which is capable of broadcasting on 406 MHz, will entail no additional costs for the industry. Such an ELT will not be required to be installed but merely, if installed, to be registered. Such registration is not subject to a charge. The benefit of the requirement for registration lies in the faster, more positive and more precise identification of the location of a downed aircraft permitted by the technology embodied in an ELT broadcasting on 406 MHz. These advantages can only be attained through the registration of the ELT. On balance, this amendment is expected to increase registration of those ELTs which are capable of broadcasting on 406 MHz and to provide a net benefit.

CAR 605.39 (Use of ELTs)

The amended CAR 605.39 (Use of ELTs) will clarify for all aircraft which are required to carry one or more ELTs the conditions under which such aircraft may be operated after either or both ELTs malfunction. The removal of the reference to a second document (the minimum equipment list or MEL) will assist operators to more easily determine the conditions which apply to their aircraft and type of operation and will improve their ability to comply with these conditions.

For aircraft which are required by regulation to be operated in accordance with an approved MEL, the MEL currently requires that the ELT be repaired or replaced within ten days. Operation of aircraft required to carry more than one ELT is governed by an approved MEL. The revision to CAR 605.39 leaves the conditions under which these aircraft may be operated after one or both ELTs malfunction unchanged. There will be no benefit-cost impact upon the operators of these aircrafts from the revision to CAR 605.39.

For aircraft being operated under CAR 704 (Commuter Operations) without an approved MEL, the amendment requires that they be re-equipped with a serviceable ELT within ten days after the date of removal rather than allowing 90 days as at present. For all other aircraft which are required to carry an ELT, the revised regulation reduces the period during which such an aircraft may be operated without an ELT, after removal of the ELT for repairs, from 90 days to 30 days. Since shipping and repair of ELTs can now be accomplished more expeditiously than when they were introduced, this change is not expected to cause operators of the affected aircraft to incur significant costs. At worst, purchase of an additional ELT unit at an average price of $1,000 may be necessary. The reduction of the period during which an aircraft may be operated without an ELT will increase the likelihood of a successful outcome if the aircraft is downed and a search becomes necessary. There is expected to be a positive net benefit-cost impact from this amendment.

CAR 605.40 (ELT Activation)

The change to this regulation corrects an inadvertent omission from the CARs. The previous version of the regulation provided for the activation of an ELT for test purposes during the first five minutes of any hour for no longer than five seconds. Where there is a half hour time zone (as in Newfoundland), the possibility existed for listeners to mistakenly perceive that a test transmission from an ELT was, in fact, an actual emergency. The amendment eliminates that potential for confusion by specifying that an ELT may be activated for test purposes during the first five minutes of any hour under the Universal Time Coordinate (UTC) system. There are no costs associated with this change and there will be a benefit from the clarification of the conditions governing the testing of ELTs.

Benefit-Cost Summary

In aggregate, the impact from the amendments to these Regulations is expected to improve aviation safety and, hence, benefit the industry and the traveling public. The additional costs attributed to the requirement for multi-engined turbo-jet aeroplanes of more than 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs) MCTOW, when operated in IFR flight, within controlled airspace, over land, and south of latitude 66 degrees 30 minutes north, to carry an ELT are expected to be justified by the concomitant improvement in safety.

Consultation

These amendments were pre-published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on January 27, 2001. Four comments were received each of which addressed a different aspect of the amendments.

One of these comments requested that a delayed effective date be added to the requirement for the installation of ELTs on multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes. The two-year implementation period, which will be provided to allow air operators to equip their fleets is believed by Departmental officials to allow sufficient delay for installation.

The second commenter addressed the requirement for ELTs on multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes. This commenter reiterated arguments which had previously been made to both the Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council Technical Committee and the Civil Aviation Regulatory Committee and, in addition, requested that, if Canadian operators were to be required to carry ELTs on these aeroplanes, foreign operators of the same aeroplanes in Canada also be required to do so. The comment repeating previously made arguments advanced no new information leading to the reversal of the decision to introduce the requirement for ELT carriage for these operations. Foreign and domestic air operators of multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes in Canada are both currently excluded from the requirement to carry a functioning ELT under the same provision of the CARs. The amendment to the CARs by removing the exclusion for both foreign and domestic air operators of multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes will require both to carry a functioning ELT.

A third comment objected to the removal of the requirement for sport parachuting operations within 25 NM of the aerodrome of departure to carry a functioning ELT. Departmental officials deem existing regulatory provisions covering sport parachuting to supply satisfactory conditions to minimize risk while allowing the removal of the requirement.

The fourth commenter expressed the opinion that carriage of ELTs broadcasting on 406 MHz should be mandated in Canada. The introduction of this technology has been considered through the CARAC process. At present, Canada has no plan to mandate this technology for operations in Canadian airspace.

A two-year implementation period for the introduction of the requirement for ELTs on multi-engined turbo-jet aeroplanes was added to section 605.38 (ELT) to address one of the comments. No other changes were made to these amendments as a result of the comments, which were received. Deidentified comments received following pre-publication and the Departmental response to each comment are available from the CARAC Secretariat in the Disposition of Comments.

The members of the General Operating and Flight Rules (GO&FR) Technical Committee of the Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council (CARAC) have been consulted with respect to these amendments to the regulations. The actively participating members of the General Operating and Flight Rules (GO&FR) Technical Committee include the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada, Air Canada, Air Canada Pilots Association, Air Line Pilots Association, Air Operations Group Association, Air Transport Association of Canada, Association québécoise des transporteurs aériens Inc., Canadian Association of Professional Radio Operators, Canadian Auto Workers, Canadian Balloon Association, Canadian Business Aircraft Association, Canadian Labour Congress, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Canadian Air Traffic Controllers Association, Experimental Aircraft Association — Canadian Council, Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association of Canada, International Council of Air Shows, Recreational Aircraft Association of Canada, Soaring Association of Canada and Teamsters Canada. These amendments were recommended for approval, subject to the following dissents, by the members of the General Operating and Flight Rules Technical Committee on June 26, 1998.

The amendment to CAR 605.38 requiring multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes, operating IFR, over land, in controlled airspace, south of 66 degrees 30 minutes N, and with a MCTOW of over 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs), to carry an armed ELT was the subject of opposition by the Air Transport Association of Canada (ATAC) at both the Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council Technical Committee and the Civil Aviation Regulatory Committee (CARC). ATAC's counter proposal was to continue the status quo, in which such aeroplanes are not required to carry an ELT. Their arguments were based on the absence of direct evidence that such a regulatory change will provide a safety dividend; cost of installation and maintenance of the equipment, and the technological environment within which such aircraft operate which obviates the need for the additional locational surveillance provided by an ELT. The amendment to require ELTs on these aeroplanes will fulfill a Ministerial commitment made following an accident involving an Air Canada operated Regional Jet at Fredericton, N.B. in December 1997. Also, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada recommended, after investigating the circumstances surrounding the accident, that these multi-engine turbo-jet aeroplanes no longer be allowed to operate without a functioning ELT. The Department has decided it will be in the public interest, as reflected in the above benefit-cost analysis, to proceed with the amendment.

The amendment to CAR 605.38 to allow parachute descents to take place within 25 nm of the aerodrome of departure without requiring the aircraft concerned to carry an ELT was the subject of a verbal dissent during the CARAC Technical Committee discussion by the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE). The CUPE representative objected to the presentation and accompanying justification of the proposal. The content and intention of the proposal were not the direct subject of the comments. Departmental officials have decided the change is justified and approved the amendment.

These amendments along with the related dissents were presented at the Civil Aviation Regulatory Committee (CARC), which is composed of senior managers in the Civil Aviation Directorate of the Department of Transport, on December 11, 1998. After consideration, the members of CARC approved the amendments.

Compliance and Enforcement

These Regulations will generally be enforced through the assessment of monetary penalties imposed under sections 7.6 to 8.2 of the Aeronautics Act, through suspension or cancellation of a Canadian aviation document or through judicial action introduced by way of summary conviction as per section 7.3 of the Aeronautics Act.

Contact

The Chief
Regulatory Affairs, AARBH
Transport Canada
Safety and Security
Place de Ville, Tower "C"
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N8
Telephone: (613) 993-7284 or 1-800-305-2059
FAX: (613) 990-1198
Internet address: www.tc.gc.ca

Footnote a 

S.C. 1992, c. 4, s. 7

Footnote 1 

SOR/96-433

NOTICE:
The format of the electronic version of this issue of the Canada Gazette was modified in order to be compatible with extensible hypertext markup language (XHTML 1.0 Strict).