Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Final Assembly Of This Airplane Was Completed In .  
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9229 posts, RR: 76
Posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3334 times:

A question to the masses,

Anyone know why Part 121.571 was changed for passenger briefing cards to make airlines list "Final assembly of this airplane was completed in [INSERT NAME OF COUNTRY]"

I cannot see the sense in such a rule, anyone have the background as to how/why this rule came into place ?

Link to the ruling http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...t.access.gpo.gov/2004/04-14630.htm

P.S. This was discussed before, but the reason for the change did not come up "Final Assembly Of This Aircraft Was In..." (by SafetyDude Feb 1 2005 in Civil Aviation)


We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6826 posts, RR: 32
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3301 times:

Quoting Zeke (Thread starter):
Anyone know why Part 121.571 was changed for passenger briefing cards to make airlines list "Final assembly of this airplane was completed in [INSERT NAME OF COUNTRY]"

Read your own link:

Quote:
These changes are necessary to respond to an Act of Congress
requiring the notice or placard be available to passengers no later
than June 12, 2005.

...

Background

In Section 810 of the FAA Reauthorization Act (December 11, 2003),
the Congress directed the Secretary of Transportation to require that
each air carrier providing scheduled passenger air transportation
display, by June 12, 2005, a notice that informs passengers of the
country in which the aircraft they are aboard was finally assembled.
This information is to be provided on a notice or placard available to
each passenger on the aircraft.
The conference committee report accompanying the legislation
interprets the statutory requirement, explaining that it calls for the
information on country of final assembly to be available ''on the
placard in the seat back pocket'' on the aircraft. Therefore, this new
statement will be included on the seat-pocket cards that are already
required to provide information on emergency procedures for the type
and model of the aircraft.
Sections 121.571 and 135.117 require that each certificate holder
provide cards that supplement the oral briefing given to passengers
before takeoff. These cards contain diagrams and operating methods for
emergency exit of the aircraft. This rule requires that these cards
also inform each passenger of the country in which the aircraft was
finally assembled. Congressional guidance made clear that this is the
proper place to include the new information.

Congress told the FAA to require it.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12179 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3209 times:

The wisdom of the US Congress, and the FAA is truely amazing.  Yeah sure

User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9229 posts, RR: 76
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3182 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 1):
Read your own link:

I did, that did not say why Congress would require it .... I was looking for that background as to why it came into place

This would have had to compete with issues like global warming, US debt, the middle east etc etc, I was assuming (maybe incorrectly) that it was prompted by some important event that required political direction.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3111 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 1):
Congress told the FAA to require it

I can't find anything in the Congression Record of the House or Senate discussing this provision. It originated in H.R. 2115 "Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act" as submitted by Rep. Young of Alaska and was not amended at any point before being signed into law. In short, either Mr. Young or somebody on his staff inserted this into the legislation and it went through without any dispute.

If you want to know why it's there, perhaps you should contact the author directly. He has a website at: http://donyoung.house.gov/  airplane 



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineWestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2135 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
The wisdom of the US Congress, and the FAA is truely amazing

I think we can exonerate the FAA on this one because I remember that the proposed rule had some explanation like "Congress, which represents the will of the American people, has determined that this is in the national interest". To me that was the FAA stating - "this was not our idea".

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
that did not say why Congress would require it

Now Congress on the other hand were the bright folks who changed French fries to freedom fries in the Capitol cafeteria. Perhaps they wanted to educate the "American people" that the aircraft that they may be flying on was assembled in France, Germany, Canada and (gulp!) Brazil instead of the good ole USA.



The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
User currently offlinePhollingsworth From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 825 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3053 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
The wisdom of the US Congress, and the FAA is truely amazing.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
I did, that did not say why Congress would require it

With Congress there really doesn't have to be a reason. If falls under the commerce clause and that is all that is required. Once that enters the Federal law the FAA is required to implement it in a regulation.

I seem to remember that it was during the whole, 'we are mad at 'old' Europe" phase.


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6826 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3026 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
I did, that did not say why Congress would require it .... I was looking for that background as to why it came into place

You didn't ask why Congress required it; you asked why Part 121.571 was changed.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
This would have had to compete with issues like global warming, US debt, the middle east etc

Small items like this are rarely, if ever, debated by the entire Congress; it is more likely that a single Congressman inserted the language by him/herself. An issue like the Middle East is part of foreign policy, and that largely falls under the purview of the executive branch in the United States, not the Congress (although the Senate must approve treaties and nominations for Ambassadorships). Similarly, a treaty dealing with global warming would again have to be submitted to the Senate for approval by the President.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
"Final Assembly Of This Aircraft Was In..." posted Tue Feb 1 2005 22:34:34 by SafetyDude
Boeing Starts Final Assembly Of 1st 737-700ER posted Wed Dec 13 2006 21:19:05 by NYC777
How Much Of This Flight Would Be In Darkness? posted Fri Jul 7 2006 17:02:51 by Drinkstrolley
Final Assembly Of First A318 Started Today (Aug 9) posted Thu Aug 9 2001 19:47:31 by Airsicknessbag
Was KL In IND This Week? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 01:31:51 by Indy
All DL People Future In The Hands Of This Guy? posted Wed Nov 16 2005 02:47:39 by Gokmengs
Why Was This SQ Plane Registered In The US? posted Sun Jun 19 2005 21:02:49 by Newark777
New Airbus Final Assembly Line In Hamburg posted Mon Mar 21 2005 16:41:00 by Art
Anyone Know Why This A310 Was In LHR? posted Wed Jan 5 2005 04:59:32 by Leezyjet
Which Aircraft Is In Background Of This Photo posted Fri Oct 1 2004 14:27:58 by Saleem