EASA Getting Established

1
EASA Getting Established An airline perspective
of the 1st year
Jorge Leite TAP Maintenance Engineering Director
of Quality
Aviation Weeks MRO Europe 2004 Copenhagen,
Denmark September 16
2
Summary
Outline
EASA
EU

• History of EASA
• EASA vs. JAA
• EASA vs. Industry
• TAP Air Portugal in a snapshot
• Expectations
• Concerns

JAA
NAAs
FAA
Industry
3
EASA History
Mission
Mission
Objectives
Milestones

• EASA mission
• Assistance to the EU in the form of technical
  expertise
• Adoption of Certification Specifications (CS),
  Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and Guidance
  Material (GM)
• Certification (airworthiness and environmental
  protection) of aeronautical products, design,
  production and maintenance organizations
• Note EASA mission does not cover aviation
  security (prevention of acts of unlawful
  interference against civil aviation)

EASA - European Aviation Safety Agency
4
EASA History
Mission
Main Objectives
Objectives
Milestones

• EASA main objective
• To establish and maintain a high uniform level of
  civil aviation safety in Europe for passengers,
  crews and third parties
• EASA additional objectives
• To ensure a high uniform level of environmental
  protection
• To facilitate the free movement of goods, persons
  and services
• To promote cost-efficiency in the regulatory and
  certification processes
• To avoid duplication at National and European
  level

5
EASA History
Mission
Other Objectives
Objectives
Milestones

• EASA other objectives
• To assist Member States in fulfilling their
  obligations under the Chicago Convention
• To promote Community views regarding civil
  aviation standards thoughout the world
• EASA future objectives
• To extend its scope of competencies to cover air
  operations (OPS) and flight crew licensing (FCL)
• Ultimately it could also cover the safety
  regulation of airport operations and air traffic
  control services

6
EASA History
Mission
Dates
Objectives
Milestones

• 15/07/2002
• 17/06/2003
• 28/09/2003
• 25/11/2003
• 28/11/2003

Creation of EASA Commission Regulation (EC)
1592/2002 (Basic Regulation) Adoption of EASAs
rulemaking procedures EASA becomes operational
and is responsible for certification of aircraft,
engines, parts and appliances Commission
Regulation (EC) 1702/2003 (Implementing
Rule) EASA signs the Cyprus Arrangement and
becomes a JAA Member EASA is responsible for
continuing airworthiness Comission Regulation
(EC) 2042/2003 (Implementing Rule)
7
EASA History
Mission
Regulations
Objectives
Milestones
Annex I Essential Requirements for
Airworthiness Annex II Excluded Aircraft
Basic Regulation Regulation (EC) 1592/2002 of 15
July 2002
EASA Opinion
Regulation (EC) 2042/2003 on Continuing
Airworthiness
Regulation (EC) 1702/2003 on Airworthiness and
Environmental Certification
EASA Opinion
Section A Technical Requirements
Annex (Part 21)
Annex I (Part-M) Continuing Airworthiness
Requirements
Section A Application Requirements
Section B Administrative Procedures
Section B Administrative Procedures
Annex II (Part-145) Maintenance Organisation
Approvals
Appendices EASA forms
Appendices EASA forms
Annex III (Part-66) Certifying Staff
Annex IV (Part-147) Training Organisation
Requirements
EASA CS, AMC GM
Guidance Material Part 21
AMC Guidance Material Part M, 145, 66, 147
Certification Specifications
AMC 20 AMC 21 CS 25 CS 34 CS 36 CS E CS P CS APU
CS 22 CS 23 CS 27 CS 29 CS VLA CS VLR
CS AWO CS ETSO CS Definitions
Parliament and Council
European Commission
EASA
8
EASA History
Mission
Member States
Objectives
JAA Candidate Members
Milestones
Albania Bulgaria Croatia Macedonia Moldova
Monaco Romania Turkey Ukraine Yugoslavia

Norway Switzerland Iceland
Austria Italy Belgium Luxembourg Cyprus
Malta Czech Republic Netherlands Denmark
Portugal Finland Slovakia France
Slovenia Germany Spain Greece Sweden Hungary
United Kingdom Ireland Estonia Lithuania Latvia
Poland
JAA (38)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
EUROCONTROL (33)
Azerbaijan Serbia Montenegro
Armenia
ECAC (41)
EFTA (3)
EASA - EU (25)
9
EASA History
Mission
Member States
Objectives
Milestones
10
EASA / JAA
Differences
What Changed ?
Next Moves
Cooperation

• JAA could not enforce compliance
• The JAA is a system of technical standards
• The JAA does not have legal authority over the
  NAAs
• By signing the Cyprus Arrangements, the JAA
  Members voluntarily implement those harmonized
  technical standards
• EASA is a real aviation authority in Europe
• EASA is an Agency empowered by the European
  Commission with legal authority to implement its
  regulations
• All EU Member States have to comply with EASA
  regulations

11
EASA / JAA
Differences
JAAs Future
Next Moves
Cooperation

• JAA will exist while
• EASA is not responsible for OPS and FCL
• European non EU Members have not established
  Association Agreements with EASA
• Central JAA can be financed by the JAA Members
• JAA will exist for at least 2 additional years,
  but
• By the end of 2004, JAA will be 50 smaller than
  before
• Central JAA will eventually be closed
• EASA will run a JAA Secretariat

12
EASA / JAA
Differences
Cooperation
Next Moves
Cooperation

• JAA services to EASA
• Contracts with NAAs to keep experts in
  certification teams
• Contract in place with Central JAA to assist EASA
  in
• Rulemaking for certification and maintenance
• Certification of projects
• Interface with JAR-OPS, JAR-FCL, JAR-MMEL, etc.
• Development of OPS and FCL rules
• Standardisation
• Development of EASA procedures
• Relationship with foreign countries
• EASA services to JAA
• Services to be defined based on remaining JAA
  tasks
• All certification and maintenance projects have
  been transferred to EASA

13
EASA / Industry
General Goals
General Goals
Implementation

• Creation of EASA has to prove positive for
  Industry
• To consolidate civil aviation safety in Europe
• To improve cost-efficiency in maintenance and
  operations
• To adopt common regulations and acceptance of
  licenses and certifications among EU Member
  States
• To expedite approvals and certifications
• To act as central partner to support Industry in
  Europe
• To exercise a centralized regulatory power
  mandate by the European Commission
• To defend the EU interests in globalization and
  harmonization with other countries and
  authorities such as the FAA

14
EASA / Industry
General Goals
Implementation
Implementation

• Implementation of EASA has been generally smooth
• Publication of Basic Regulation, Implementing
  Rules and other documents within an acceptable
  time frame (less than 2 years)
• Transition from JAA to EASA originated some
  concerns
• Provision of services continued with minor
  disruptions
• Anyway, some indefinitions created difficulties
  to Industry
• Communication has been satisfactory
• Regular meetings / workshops between EASA and the
  industry
• Good website www.easa.eu.int, regularly updated,
  downloadable documentation at no-charge
• Inputs for improvement from Industry should be
  considered

15
TAP Snapshot
Achievements
Achievements
Obstacles

• TAP Air Portugal conversion to EASA
• Conversion from JAR-145 to EASA Part-145 (31 May
  2004)
• EASA Part-147 submitted to Portuguese NAA
  (waiting approval)
• EASA Part-66 waiting implementation by Portuguese
  NAA
• Working on AMC 145.30 (e) 4 (NDT National
  Aerospace Board)
• Working on EASA Part-21 Subpart J (DOA approval)
• Working on EASA Part-M Subpart G (CAMO approval)
• Etc. Etc. Etc.

16
TAP Snapshot
Achievements
Early Burdens
Obstacles

• Early problems with EASA Certification
  Directorate
• Lockheed L1011 Reinforced Cockpit Door STC
  Approval
• 25/09/2003 TAP-ME submitted STC data package to
  INAC (NAA-PT)
• 28/09/2003 EASA becomes operational for
  certification
• 24/10/2003 STC data package delivered by FAA ACO
  (Chicago) to EASA
• 01/11/2003 Limit date for modif. incorporation
  in Europe i.a.w. ICAO/JAA
• 11/05/2004 Date of STC approval by I V W
  (CAA-NL) on behalf of EASA
• I V W (CAA-NL) is EASAs designated NAA for L1011
  subjects
• The L1011 has never been operated by any Dutch
  fleet
• CAA-UK has arguably more experience on L1011 than
  CAA-NL
• But Portugal has the largest commercial L1011
  fleet in the EU
• However, INAC (NAA-PT) was not designated to
  approve the STC
• Result unacceptable burden for Portuguese L1011
  fleets

17
Expectations
Efficiency
Efficiency
Industry Needs

• EASA to maintain internal cost efficiency
• Build up expertise quickly, but avoid becoming
  over-staffed and over-charging (Fees and Charges
  system)
• Get technical support from the right national
  experts
• EASA to adopt KISS principle
• Fulfill the role in a simple but efficient way
• Avoid un-necessary bureaucracy
• Benefit from JAA, FAA and NAAs past experience
• Make the most of a start from scratch
  opportunity
• Effectively co-operate with Industry
• KISS Keep It Simple and Smart !!

18
Expectations
Efficiency
Support
Industry Needs

• EASA to listen to the Industry needs through
• ABIP (Advisory Body of Interested Parties) ? (to
  change name)
• Consultative group assisting EASAs Management
  Board, however representing several non-technical
  organizations
• SSCC (Safety Standards Consultative Commitee) ?
• Represents the Industry, Manufacturers and
  Airlines and provides valuable direct expertise
  from the final Customers of EASA
• AGNA (Advisory Group of National Authorities) ?
• Represents the NAAs and conveys each Member State
  concerns, although from the regulatory stand
  point
• EASA must be available for direct contacts from ?
  other parties such as the AEA, Airlines, MROs,
  etc.

19
Concerns
NAAs Future
NAAs Future
Interfaces

• The future role of the NAAs in EU is not clear
  yet
• Will an NAA eventually become a mere EASAs
  regional office ?
• Will EASA mandate directly on NAAs over own
  governments ?
• In which extent will an NAA be allowed to
  legislate on its own ?
• Will an NAA continue to audit on behalf of EASA ?
• Will the Industry have to pay two times to
  financiate both EASA and the respective NAA ?
• If an Airline is not happy with its NAA, can it
  go next door and get an approval from another NAA
  ?
• How can an Airline beneficiate from Bilateral
  Agreements already established by other NAAs ?

20
Concerns
NAAs Future
Interfaces
Interfaces

• The harmonization role of EASA is very important
• When will the EU Member States dispose of a
  unique Bilateral Agreement with the U.S. for
  mutual acceptance ?
• Meanwhile, will EASA extend the existing
  Bilateral Agreements to be valid for all its
  Member States ?
• Given the limited resources, how will EASA manage
  priorities ?
• Will every EU Member State be treated by EASA
  really with the same level of importance ?

EASA is important for Industry in Europe to
increase safety, operation cost-efficiency and
competitiveness
21
Concerns
Thank You ! Visit us at www.tapme.pt dleite_at_
tap.pt