Safety Recommendation A-98-082

We recently reviewed FAA Order 7210.37G, “En Route Minimum Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Altitude (MIA) Sector Charts,” which became effective on July 16, 2012. Our review found procedures and guidance in the order that address this recommendation. We also reviewed a sample of MIA Sector Charts, and we found all charts reviewed to be in compliance with these provisions. Consequently, Safety Recommendation A-98-82 is classified CLOSED—ACCEPTABLE ACTION.

The FAA reviewed its guidance pertaining to the establishment, depiction, and use of MIA information and, on June 5, 2010, published FAA Order JO 7210.37D, “En Route Minimum Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Altitude (MIA) Sector Charts.” The FAA’s November 22, 2010, letter stated that all en route and oceanic services ATC facilities were in compliance with applicable FAA guidance pertaining to MIA requirements. On December 28, 2010, the FAA advised the NTSB via e-mail that an FAA internal audit had revealed two areas of noncompliance and that the agency was implementing a corrective action plan.

The NTSB commends the FAA for initiating the internal audit and for pursuing corrective action where needed. We have reviewed the copy of Order JO 7210.37D, which was included in the FAA’s letter, and have concerns about the order’s treatment of some of the technical details related to MIA charts. In addition, we are curious to learn the results of the audit and how the FAA is responding. A meeting between FAA and NTSB staff to review the technical details of the order, the audit, and the resulting actions is needed before we can fully evaluate the FAA’s response and update the classification of Safety Recommendation A-98-82.

We are currently making arrangements for this meeting and will update the classification after it takes place.

MC# 201000420: - From J. Randolph Babbitt, Administrator: In the Federal Aviation Administration's letter dated November 17, 2000, we stated that a review was initiated of all guidance materials pertaining to the establishment, depiction, and use of Minimum Instrument Flight Rules Altitude (MIA) information. The result of this review was the publishing of FAA Order JO 721O.37D, En Route Minimum Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Altitude (MIA) Sector Charts (enclosed), effective June 15,2010.

This order requires the rounding up of resultant MIAs to ensure minimum required obstacle clearance, which harmonizes with guidance contained in FAA Order 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures. All En Route and Oceanic Services Air Route Traffic Control facilities are now in compliance with applicable FAA guidance pertaining to MIA requirements. FAA Order 7210.3, Facility Operation and Administration, and 8260.19, Flight Procedures and Airspace, were not addressed because they do not explicitly provide technical requirements associated with MIA charts. I believe the FAA has effectively addressed this safety recommendation, and I consider our actions complete.

The Safety Board notes that the last correspondence on this recommendation from the FAA was dated November 17, 2000. At that time, the FAA indicated that it agreed with the concerns in the recommendation and that it was reviewing all guidance material pertaining to the establishment, depiction, and use of MIA information. At that time the FAA anticipated completing this review in January 2001. Staff from the Board met with staff from the FAA's Flight Standards and Air Traffic Procedures offices in August 2002 to discuss this recommendation. At that time, there was no specific information available on the MIA guidance material review.

On June 13, 2003, the Board sent the FAA a formal request for an update on its activities in response to this recommendation; no update was received.

During 2003 and 2004, Safety Board staff attempted on several occasions to include these recommendations on the agenda for a safety with a team (SWAT) meeting. In each case, the FAA indicated that it was not prepared to talk about the recommendation at a SWAT meeting. In addition, on several occasions during 2004 and 2005, Board staff attempted to informally learn whether the FAA had any activities planned, completed or in progress in response to the recommendation. In each case, we were unable to learn of any such activities.

The Safety Board notes that this recommendation is now 7 years old, and it has been 5 years since the FAA has provided any response. As discussed earlier, during Safety Board investigations of other accidents and incidents, we continue to find MIA charts that violate Orders 7210.3, 7210.37, 8260.3, and 8260.19, and result in ATC instructions to pilots that do not comply with Part 91.177. We have found several cases of minimum altitudes of 1,500 feet on MIA charts in mountainous terrain, rather than the required 2,000 feet at other centers in addition to the Atlanta ARTCC.

These charts are required to be annually reviewed and recertified as being compliant with obstruction clearance requirements. The FAA's November 17, 2000, letter acknowledged that they are not in compliance, yet the needed corrections have not been made. The Safety Board is concerned that the review and recertification process appears to be ineffective, and that the FAA is not responding to the recommendation in any way. Accordingly, Safety Recommendation A-98 82 is classified OPEN -- UNACCEPTABLE RESPONSE.

NMC# 102186: The Safety Board notes that in its November 17, 2001, letter, the FAA agreed with the concerns expressed by the Board in these recommendations and stated that it was reviewing all guidance material pertaining to the establishment, depiction, and use of minimum instrument altitudes (MIA). The FAA added that it anticipated completing this review in January 2001.

Safety Board staff met with representatives of the FAA's Flight Standards and Air Traffic Procedures offices in August 2002. At that time, there was no specific information available on the MIA guidance material review, and the two offices were still in coordination. No additional information has been received from the FAA since this meeting. The Board remains concerned that the present guidelines have resulted in inadequate evaluation of deviations in altitude margins set forth on MIA charts and in the requirements of 14 CFR Part 91.177, which establishes minimum altitudes for instrument flight within the United States.

The Board would appreciate receiving an update on the results of the MIA guidance material review and the FAA's proposed corrective actions.

The FAA indicates that it has reviewed the concern expressed by the Board in these recommendations and in previous correspondence that once a minimum instrument altitude (MIA) chart is made available to air traffic controllers, they are free to assign depicted altitudes to any instrument flight rules (IFR) aircraft under their control. The FAA states that it concludes that a pilot operating off-airway in designated mountainous terrain on an IFR clearance, and issued an ATC-assigned altitude that is below the published MIA, would be in violation of 14 CFR Part 91.177.

As a result, the FAA will review all guidance material pertaining to the establishment, depiction, and use of MIA’s, especially as they relate to use in designated mountainous terrain. The FAA will initiate appropriate changes to training and publications based on the results of its review. The Safety Board is pleased that the FAA will review guidance material relating to MIAs and initiate appropriate changes to training and publications. Pending the FAA’s review and resulting changes, Safety Recommendations A-98-81 and A-98-82 are classified OPEN -- ACCEPTABLE RESPONSEL.

Letter Mail Controlled 11/24/2000 9:00:11 AM MC# 2001721 - From Jane F. Garvey, Administrator: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has reviewed the Board's concern that once a minimum IFR altitude (MIA) chart is made available to air traffic controllers, they are free to assign depicted altitudes to any instrument flight rules (IFR) aircraft under their control. The Board believes that this can lead to situations in which en route aircraft that are not engaged in takeoff or landing are instructed to operate with terrain clearance of 1,500 feet in mountainous areas.

The Board believes that this represents an unnecessary reduction in operational safety margins, reduces the effectiveness of the minimum safe altitude warning system, and places pilots in apparent noncompliance with 14 CFR 91.177. The FAA has reviewed the Board's concerns and concludes that a pilot operating off-airway in designated mountainous terrain on an IFR clearance and issued an ATC-assigned altitude that is below the published MIA would be in violation of 14 CFR Part 91.177. As a result, the FAA will review all guidance material pertaining to the establishment, depiction, and use of MIA's, especially as they relate to use in designated mountainous terrain.

Included in this review will be the procedures outlined in FAA Orders 7210.3, Facility Operation and Administration; 7210.37, En Route Minimum IFR Altitude (MIA) Sector Charts; 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS); and 8260.19, Flight Procedures and Airspace. The FAA anticipates completing its review by January 2001. The FAA will initiate appropriate changes to training and publications based on the results of its review.

The Safety Board is unable to reconcile the FAA's response to these recommendations with FAA Order 7210.3 paragraph 8-4-2 and the plain language of 14 CFR 91.177. FAA Order 7210.3, paragraph 8-4-2, directs air traffic facilities to determine minimum IFR altitudes for each control sector and to display them at the sector and states that off-airway minimum IFR altitude information shall be included to "..assist controllers in applying FAR Part 91.177 for off-airway vectors and direct route operations."

The Safety Board therefore expects that minimum IFR altitudes established by the FAA for use by controllers will comply with 14 CFR 91.177, which states, in part: (a) operation of aircraft at minimum altitudes. Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft under IFR below-- (1) the applicable minimum altitudes prescribed in parts 95 and 97 of this chapter; or (2) if no applicable minimum altitude is prescribed in those parts-- (i) in the case of operations over an area designated as a mountainous area in part 95, at altitude of 2,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of 4 nautical miles from the course to be flown.

To the Safety Board's knowledge, pilot compliance with 14 CFR 91.177

Letter Mail Controlled 03/08/2000 1:24:18 PM MC# 2000360 - From Jane F. Garvey, Administrator: The FAA reviews and certifies all minimum instrument altitude charts as part of its annual review in accordance with Order 7210.3, facility operation and administration, holding pattern criteria, and Order 7210.37, en route minimum IFR altitude (MIA) sector charts. The review ensures that minimum altitude charts are in compliance with Order 8260.3, United States standard for terminal instrument procedures (TERPS), and Order 8260.19, flight procedures and airspace, and that written documentation is prepared if reduced obstacle clearance is authorized.

To reinforce these procedures, the FAA's Office of Air Traffic Planning and Procedures has initiated several actions to ensure that air traffic control facilities comply with the agency orders. These actions include: (1) on 11/9/99, a teleconference with all regional air traffic division representatives was held to remind them of the requirements contained in Order 7210.3, Facility Operation and Administration, Order 7210.37, En Route Minimum IFR Altitude (MIA) Sector Charts, Order 8260.3, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS), and Order 8260.19, Flight Procedures and Airspace.

These Orders address the annual review and certification of MIA charts; and (2) as required by these orders, air traffic facilities will include supporting documentation to justify all required obstacle clearance requests for all required obstacle clearance altitudes. This justification must be provided during the annual MIA chart review. I believe that the FAA has addressed the full intent of this recommendation, and I plan no further action.

This issue was also discussed at the 6/23/99, meeting between Safety Board staff and FAA staff. It was agreed that any action taken in response to this recommendation is dependent on the outcome of the FAA's MIA chart approval procedures review, which is being done to meet the intent of A-98-81. Therefore, pending further response, A-98-82 is classified OPEN -- ACCEPTABLE RESPONSE.

Letter Mail Controlled 5/13/99 4:02:06 PM MC# 990509 - From Jane F. Garvey, Administrator: The FAA reviews and certifies all minimum instrument altitude charts as part of its annual review in accordance with Order 7210.3, holding pattern criteria, and Order 7210.37, en route minimum IFR altitude (MIA) sector charts. The review ensures that minimum altitude charts are in compliance with Order 8260.3, United States standard for terminal instrument procedures (TERPS), and Order 8260.19, flight procedures and airspace, and that written documentation is prepared if reduced obstacle clearance is authorized. I consider the FAA's action to be completed in response to this recommendation.

A-98-82 asked the FAA to review all en route minimum instrument altitude charts and associated national airspace system adaptation to ensure that air traffic control (ATC) facilities comply with FAA Orders 7210.3, 7210.37, 8260.3, and 8260.19 and that pilots comply with 14 CFR Section 91.177 when operating at ATC-assigned altitudes. Pending more detailed information on how the FAA intends to meet the intent of A-98-81 and -82, they are classified OPEN – ACCEPTABLE RESPONSE.

Letter Mail Controlled 1/25/99 4:25:01 PM MC# 990044 - From Jane F. Garvey, Administrator: The FAA is reviewing existing procedures for approval of a minimum instrument altitude that uses the "exception rule" and does not comply with 14 CFR 91.177 to determine if the process may need to be revised. The FAA will initiate appropriate action to address these recommendations based on the results of the review.