ScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6358 posts, RR: 34 Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2056 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.
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.
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
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/
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.
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.
ScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6358 posts, RR: 34 Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1781 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.