stratostar 5 #1 October 15, 2011 In the interest of removing thread drift on an important fatal, I wanted start this thread here and talk about this topic. I have pasted and copied good info here... Tom Buchanan said: QuoteI'm replying to this post as a generic response to the ongoing debate about who can pack a main parachute. This thread is in the incidents forum, and we do not know if the packing was a cause or contributing cause of the fatality. However, the discussion has identified significant misunderstanding of this topic. While packing supervision should probably be discussed in the rigging forum, the nature of the discussion here, the level of misunderstanding, and the potential for educational benefit following this incident makes it reasonable to offer specific regulatory based guidance. It is important from a safety standpoint that a main parachute be properly packed, and that is especially so with a tandem rig. Likewise, it is important that drop zones, certificated riggers, and non-certificated packers have a well establish plan of supervision that will satisfy the FAA following an accident, and that will help establish a reputation of adhering to regulations before an accident. I covered the regulatory requirements of main parachute packing in an article in Parachutist Magazine in June, 2002, following the publication of an update to part 105 and other regulatory changes. That article is reprinted below. The important take-away is that federal regulations require an agreement between a specific rigger and packer. The rigger should provide some kind of training/assessment, ongoing direct supervision, physical presence, and must take responsibility for the work of the packer. Who Can Pack a Main Parachute? (Reprinted from Parachutist, June 2002) By Tom Buchanan Regulations are often boring. Most of us would rather be skydiving than sitting in a library studying a mountain high stack of federal regulations. While we don’t need to know all the legal detail about regulation, we should know at least enough to comply with the basic rules governing parachute operations. In July of 2001 the FAA updated Part 105 and part 65 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR’s), and established a new standard that outlined specifically who can pack main parachutes. The key regulation (105.43) requires that “...The main parachute must have been packed within 120 days before the date of it’s use by a certificated parachute rigger, the person making the next jump with that parachute, or a non-certificated person under the direct supervision of a certificated parachute rigger.” Further, part 105.43 prescribes that both the person making the jump, and the pilot in command of the aircraft, hold responsibility for complying with parachute packing requirements. Those of us who have our main parachutes packed by non-riggers, and the folks who are packing main parachutes for others, should be aware of FAA supervision requirements. Since the pilot and jumper hold responsibility for compliance under Part 105, both can be held in violation if an FAA inspector determines that a parachute packer is not a certificated rigger, and not under the direct supervision of a certificated rigger. It is also possible that an inspector could find a commercial packer in violation of the regulation, although that option is not clearly detailed in the regulation. Direct Supervision The term “Direct Supervision” is defined under part 105.3 to mean “That a certificated rigger personally observes a non-certificated person packing a main parachute to the extent necessary to ensure that it is being done properly, and takes responsibility for that packing.” Under this regulation it is not enough that a rigger is in the area. Rather, the regulation requires that a relationship of responsibility must be established between a non-certificated parachute packer and a certificated rigger, and the rigger must be involved in actually supervising the specific work, to some degree. The extent of the relationship between a packer and rigger, and the specific nature of the supervision required is not defined under part 105, however it was addressed as the rule was developed by the FAA. The changes to Part 105 were originally released as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in April, 1999. In that NPRM the FAA modified the packing requirements to allow a rigger to supervise the packing of main parachutes by non-riggers, a matter that was addressed inconsistently under the old regulation. When the FAA released the NPRM they wrote: “The FAA proposes to clarify the meaning of the term “supervision,” since there has been some industry confusion as to what constitutes appropriate supervision...In the proposed regulation a certificated rigger must personally observe the entire packing process of the main parachute to ensure that it is being done properly by a non-certificated person who is not the holder of a parachute rigging certificate. The certificated parachute rigger should be available for immediate consultation while the non-certificated parachute rigger is packing the main parachute. The certificated parachute rigger also should inspect the main parachute being packed, as necessary, through, and upon completion of the packing process. In comments attached to the original NPRM the FAA also defined the word supervision to include “...The scope of supervision of a non-certificated person would be similar to the supervision requirements stated in 14 CFR Sec. 43.3(d) which states that “...a supervisor personally observes the work being done to the extent necessary to ensure that it is being done properly, and if the supervisor is readily available, in person, for consultation.” That regulation, 43.3, addresses “Persons authorized to perform maintenance, preventative maintenance, rebuilding, and alteration” associated with aircraft. Following publication of the proposed rule the public was invited to offer their comments. The FAA reviewed the comments received and issued a revised rule, along with an analysis of relevant public comments. The original NPRM used the word “supervision”, while the final rule used “direct supervision.” The FAA addressed that language change as follows “...Although the term “direct supervision” was not used in the NPRM, the FAA believes that adding the word “direct” clarifies the FAA’s intent that a certificated rigger must be on the premises during the parachute packing process. The certificated riggers presence ensures that he/she is readily available in person for consultation.” Both the final rule, and the intent presented in the NPRM and response to comments, indicate that the FAA expects a high degree of supervision from a certificated parachute rigger. Blanket Approval and Unattended Supervision Since the publication of the NPRM, some packers have suggested that a rigger can easily approve a non-certificated person to pack main parachutes once, and perhaps even issue a short note to that effect, alleviating the requirement for further supervision. The FAA refuted this theory in their comments attached to the final rule. In fact, one commenter to the NPRM (Skydive Delmarva) did suggest that a certificated rigger should be allowed to give written authorization to a non-rigger allowing him to pack main parachutes without supervision. The FAA responded as follows “...The FAA disagrees, for safety reasons, with Skydive Delmarva’s request to allow persons authorized in writing by a certificated parachute rigger to pack main parachutes without supervision.” The comments by the FAA made it very clear they expect a non-certificated packer to receive ongoing supervision from a rigger, and that the rigger must be on the premises. The FAA did not say the rigger must watch every step of each pack job, but rather that a rigger must supervise “to the extent necessary to ensure it is being done properly.” It is incumbent upon each certificated rigger providing supervision, and upon each non-certificated packer, to make sure a level of supervision is being provided that will satisfy an FAA inspection. As each rigger defines that supervision it would be wise to review the initial language of intent in both the original NPRM, and the final rule with comments. A failure to provide an adequate level of supervision could generate an administrative response against the dropzone, pilot or the jumper using the rig packed by a non-certificated packer. The FAA might also find violations on the part of the supervising rigger, or the non-certificated packer. So, that is a brief discussion of main parachute packing requirements covered by parts 105 and 65. If you are interested in the specific regulations, most of the relevant FAR’s are included in the USPA SIM, and all Federal Aviation Regulations are available at http://www.faa.gov. The FAA comments regarding the NPRM were included in the Federal Register on April 13, 1999 and May 9, 2001. Your Role In The Packing Process Now let’s quickly review how this effects each of us on the dropzone: • If you are using the services of a packer, it would be a great idea to ask if he/she is a rigger, and if not, ask how supervision is being provided, and by whom. Remember, the FAR’s make the jumper and pilot responsible for compliance with part 105.43. • If you are a packer and do not have a rigger certificate, you should establish a supervisory relationship with a rigger and make sure he/she is willing to take legal responsibility for your packing. You must also make sure the rigger is available at all times when you are packing main parachutes to be used by others, and that you agree about the level of supervision required. • If you are a rigger and are providing supervision for a packer, you should think clearly about that responsibility, and the level of supervision you are providing. It may not be enough to say you watched the packer a few times and determined that no further supervision was required. If asked by an FAA inspector you should be able to detail how and when you have supervised each packer under your certificate. The language of the final rule provides a great deal of latitude regarding supervision, but the written intent of the regulation establishes a very high standard of supervision. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy captain1976 said: QuoteI thank you too Tom for a great post and clarification. Until the FAA actually busts a Pilot with certificate action which will probably happen at some point where a fatality is concerned, I don't think the skydiving community will comply. Under the Regs, a Rigger has not only to supervise all the packers, they have to take on the responsibility associated with any fatality that may result from something as simple as a tension knot. That liability may result in a terrible price to pay if it ever got to trail and a Plaintiffs Attorney uses the FAR's to win their case. I have seen a number of clueless people in our sport these days thinking they can do what ever the fuck they want to in regards to packing. I've even had a student with a fresh A license try to tell me what tandem rig to jump after "they" packed it.... it was the "club gear" packed without a TI or rigger doing the work or supervising. This same club operates like this regularly and has no riggers on the mat supervising or taking on the compliance with 105.43 They think they are cover because they only have the students pack the mains for their jumps, yet it's under supervision of non rigger ticket holders! You can't teach students to pack by having students doing the teaching or "supervising" the work... or packing your tandems without complying with 105.43 or your risking it all if someone goes in or you get ramp checked/dz inspection.... clearly the morons I'm talking about are not smart enough to talk to FAA field inspectors and would hang the club/ DZ when they open their mouths.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 143 #2 October 15, 2011 QuoteThey think they are cover because they only have the students pack the mains for their jumps, yet it's under supervision of non rigger ticket holders! You can't teach students to pack by having students doing the teaching or "supervising" the work... Do you mind clarifying this? I believe that currently under the FAA regs anybody can teach anyone to pack and therefore it is fine providedthe student jumps their own pack job. I can obviously see that the students teaching students is not the best way to learn. BTW I have no argument that a rigger or properly supervised packer should pack 'commercial' rigs.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #3 October 15, 2011 My point was a student who knows nothing, or hardly the basics has no business teaching or offering advice, training of, supervision of anyone else who is not a rigger as a means of "keeping rental" rigs in the air or to help other students learn to pack.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrumpot 1 #4 October 25, 2011 Anyone can pack for themselves, regardless of who they were "taught" by - just so long as they are the ones (and the ONLY ones) who are jumping their own pack-jobs. No "rigger supervision" even needed for any of that. However, a freshly minted/A-Licensed (or A-Licensed candidate STUDENT - as you have mentioned as well) packing unsupervised for either a tandem, or a rental rig? -Clear violation. coitus non circum - Moab Stone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #5 October 25, 2011 My poll was in regards to packers for hire only and not those making the jump. Also I was unaware of another thread addressing this same issue at the same time I posted.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
