FAA Rejects Flight Attendants’ Union Request for New Cabin Air Quality Regulations

Share

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has declined a petition from the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA-CWA) seeking new rules to improve cabin air quality. The FAA indicated that, after a thorough review and consideration of its current priorities, the union’s request does not align with the criteria necessary for initiating rulemaking at this stage.

The FAA reassured that cabin air safety and quality remain important issues and will be further studied. Any findings from these studies might prompt future rulemaking. Meanwhile, the insights and recommendations from the AFA-CWA’s petition have been stored in a database for future reference when considering new regulations.

As directed by the latest Reauthorization Act, the FAA is mandated to develop a standardized approach for crew members to study and make recommendations regarding cabin air quality. This could lead to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which might propose new requirements for training flight crew on handling smoke or fume events, responding to such incidents, and installing onboard detectors for commercial airlines operating under Part 121 rules.

The backdrop to this development includes a bill recently introduced in Congress aimed at addressing toxic fumes in aircraft. Judith Anderson, an industrial hygienist from the AFA-CWA, highlighted the ongoing challenges in defining the frequency of fume events. Her research indicated that engine oil and hydraulic fluid leaks into the bleed air system were significant sources of onboard fume and smoke events over the last decade.

The AFA-CWA criticized the current regulatory language as vague, particularly in how it requires airlines to report smoke or fume events. The existing rules do not obligate carriers to report incidents that occur when the aircraft is not in flight, such as those at the gate or those that do not involve a clear mechanical failure.

This limitation, according to the union, excludes a significant number of Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) related incidents that occur post-pushback but may continue even after the APU is switched off. Additionally, the union pointed out that fume events caused by worn engine bearings or seals, which might not constitute a mechanical failure, should still be reported to enhance safety and awareness.

The AFA-CWA proposed modifying the reporting language to encompass all operational phases of the aircraft and standardizing the reporting format to include the source and confirmation status of each smoke or fume event. This, they argue, would improve the accuracy of the FAA’s Service Difficulty Reports (SDR) database and impose minimal compliance costs on U.S. airlines, which already report such events.

Sources: AirGuide Business airguide.infobing.comsimpleflying.com

Share