The EASA System for Flight Crew Licensing

1
The EASA Systemfor Flight Crew Licensing

• EATS
• Vienna, 11-12 November 2008

2
AGENDA

• I. The structure and scope of the EASA
  implementing rules
• II. NPA 2008-17
• III. NPA 2008-22
• IV. The next steps

3

• II. The structure and scope of theEASA
  Implementing Rules

4
EASA IR Structure

• The structure is different
• from that of the JARs
• WHY?

5
EASA IR Structure

• Why was the JAR structure changed
• scope of the BR is wider than that of the JARs
  JARs did not cover all necessary elements and
  presumed existence of appropriate set of national
  rules
• Legal considerations principle of Community
  legislation is not to repeat requirements
• structure based on a tool-box approach,
  designed to allow stakeholders to identify the
  Parts that apply to their specific activity

6
EASA IR Structure

• Why was the JAR structure changed (contd.)
• JAA Consistency of Organisation Approvals (COrA)
  approach
• ICAO SMS and State safety programme
• Total system approach

7
EASA IR Structure

• Why was the JAR structure changed (contd.)
• performance based rulemaking
• essential safety elements rule
• non-essential implementation aspects AMC, which
  have an important role to play in providing for a
  uniform implementation of common requirements
  with sufficient flexibility

8
EASA IR Structure

• Integrated system of Regulations
• Technical requirements
• contained in the Personnel and the Air Operations
  Regulation
• Organisation requirements and management system
  of organisations
• Authority requirements

9
EASA IR structure
10
EASA IR Structure

• Benefits
• streamlines the activity of organisations and
  competent authorities, avoiding, as much as
  possible, the duplication of processes
• establish with MS a comprehensive management
  system at Community level encompassing Community
  and MS responsibilities for safety management

11
EASA IR Structure

• Benefits for
• Organisations which perform more than one
  activity harmonised provisions
• NAA approvals and oversight -multiple activities
  meant multiple management systems and multiple
  audit/oversight processes

12

• II. NPA 2008-17

13
NPA 2008-17

• The FCL NPA is divided into 3 separate documents
• Explanatory note
• Draft opinion and decision Part FCL
• Draft opinion and decision Part Medical

14
NPA 2008-17

• Part FCL and the Appendices contain requirements
  for
• training and testing of pilots for all categories
  of licences
• instrument, type and class ratings and additional
  ratings
• instructor certificates
• examiner certificates

15
NPA 2008-17

• Part Medical contains
• General Requirements
• Class 1 and Class 2 general medical requirements
• Requirements for the medical certificate for the
  LPL
• Requirements for Aeromedical Examiners and GMPs

16

• III. NPA 2008-22

17
NPA 2008-22

• Contains
• Explanatory Note NPA 2008-22a
• Requirements for competent authorities NPA
  2008-22b
• Requirements for organisations NPA 2008-22c
• CS for FSTDs NPA 2008-22d and e
• and the RIA for FCL

18
Organisation requirements

• Structure
• Subpart GEN General Requirements
• Subpart MS Management systems
• Subpart ATO Approved Training Organisation
• Including Qualification requirements for Flight
  Simulation Training Devices.
• Subpart AeMC Aeromedical Centres
• Subpart OPS Air Operations

19
Organisation requirements

• Subpart GEN is applicable to all organisations
• Requirements of integrated management system
  consisting of
• Safety Management System
• Compliance Monitoring System
• Objective to enable the organisation to fit all
  its different management systems into one (EASA
  only regulates safety)
• Management system appropriate to the size, nature
  and complexity of the activities, and the hazards
  and associated risks inherent in these activities

20
Organisation requirements

• Other generic organisation requirements such as
• Contracting or purchasing of services or products
  responsibility of the contracting organisation
• Personnel requirements, e.g. accountable manager
• Facility requirements, e.g. appropriate for the
  tasks to be carried out
• Record-keeping
• Several AMCs catering for organisations of a
  different size

21
Organisation requirements

• Subpart ATO Approved Training organisations
• Section 1 - General
• Section 2 - Additional requirements for ATOs
  providing training for licences and ratings other
  than the LPL, PPL, SPL and BPL.
• Section 3 - Additional requirements for ATOs
  providing training in FSTDs and the Qualification
  of FSTDs
• Section 4 - Additional requirements for ATOs
  providing specific types of training
• Chapter 1 - Distance learning courses
• Chapter 2 - Zero Flight Time Training
• Chapter 3 MPL courses
• Chapter 4 Flight testing qualification courses

22
Authority Requirements

• Structure
• Subpart GEN General Requirements
• Subpart ATO Specific requirements approved
  training organisations
• Subpart FCL Specific requirements for flight
  crew licensing
• Subpart AeMC - Specific requirements for
  aeromedical centres
• Subpart MED - Specific requirements for
  aeromedical medical certification
• Subpart OPS Specific requirements for air
  operations

23
NPA 2008-22

• Establishes
• The basis for collective and continuous oversight
  and enforcement
• Member States are responsible for overseeing all
  activities in their territory
• Streamlined approval / certification processes
• Clear process for dealing with alternative AMCs

24
NPA 2008-22

• Acceptable means of compliance
• Instead of the AMCs published by EASA,
  alternative means may be used to establish
  compliance with the IRs

Step 3 Competent Authority notifies
organisation and Agency
Step 2 Competent Authority evaluates alternat
ive AMC
Step 1 Organisation provides the competent
authority with alternative means of compliance
25
NPA 2008-22

• Acceptable means of compliance

Compliant Rulemaking process
EASA evaluates alternative AMC
Not compliant Competent Authority is
notified
26

• IV. The next steps

27
The next steps

• NPAs are published on the Agencys website
• NPA 2008-17 public consultation until 15
  December 2008
• NPA 2008-22 public consultation until 31
  January 2009
• www.easa.europa.eu
• Anyone can comment!
• please send your comments using the Comment
  Response Tool (CRT)
• http//hub.easa.europa.eu/crt/

28
The next steps

• 3 months for the revision of comments
• Every individual comment is considered and
  answered by the Agency with the help of a review
  group
• CRD is published on the website for 2 months
• EASA sends opinions to Commission
• Comitology
• EASA adopts AMC / GM / CS after publication of EC
  Regulations
• Spring 2010?

29
The next steps

• Transitions measures - BR Art. 70 Applicability
  of the relevant articles as specified in their
  respective IRs, but not later than 8 April 2012
• In the meantime, EU OPS and the national rules
  that adopted JARs into national systems continue
  to apply
• EASA proposals for transition measures can be
  found n the explanatory notes

30
The next steps

• Transition measures
• Differentiated introduction of the requirements
• JAR requirements vs new requirements
• any licences / certificates / approvals issued in
  accordance with JAR requirements and associated
  procedures are considered as having been issued
  in accordance with the Implementing Rules
• Sufficient time will be given to allow for the
  change of manuals and correction of other minor
  findings

31
The next steps

• Transition measures (contd.)
• licences / certificates / approvals issued in
  accordance with national requirements can be
  converted on the basis of a report from the NAA,
  supervised by EASA
• Sufficient time needs to be given probably
  until April 2012

32
The next steps

• EASA is also preparing for the transition
• A roadmap group has been set up to ensure that
  all necessary resources will be in place
• The creation of panel of experts in close
  relation with Standardisation and Rulemaking is
  being considered
• To provide technical advice on harmonisation
  issues, namely the evaluation of alternative AMCs

33
The next steps

• e-tool
• EASA initiated work on an electronic tool to help
  stakeholders in their day-to-day activity and to
  facilitate the use of the new structure and
  requirements
• e-tool provides for easy identification of the
  requirements applicable to each activity
• stakeholders are asked for their input through a
  short survey on the EASA website
• http//www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/doc/Survey_e-T
  ool.doc

34

• Thank you
• for your attention

35

• The total system approach

36
The past
JAA
ICAO
EUROCONTROL
27
20
15
10
5
Member State 1
4
3
27 different legal procedures for transposition
37
Shortcomings

• Insufficient regulation of safety oversight
  (e.g. requirements for NAA)
• No common transposition dates
• Different legal texts
• Different interpretations and different choices
  about recommended practices
• In practice non uniformity across EU Member
  States non uniform safety distortion of fair
  market competition
• . Plus cost for taxpayers for 27 parallel
  processes!

38
Total system approach

• Aviation system components products, operators,
  crews, aerodromes, ATM, ANS, on the ground or in
  the air - are part of a single network
• BR main objective establish and maintain a high
  uniform level of civil aviation safety and
  environmental compatibility

39
Total system approach

• The EASA system gives legal certainty one single
  set of requirements is adopted at the same date
  by all 31 EASA Member States (27 EU Norway,
  Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein)
• These requirements and the implementing rules are
  directly applicable and replace national law
  without creating an additional layer of
  legislation

40
Total system approach

• A total system approach eliminates the risks of
  safety gaps or overlaps, of conflicting
  requirements and of confused responsibilities
• Regulations are interpreted and applied in one
  single way and best practices are recommended
• The EASA system is in line with better
  regulation. Its possibility to combine hard
  and soft law provides a good answer to the
  needs for subsidiarity and proportionality

41
Total system approach

• Uniformity is better achieved through common
  implementing rules adopted by the Commission.
• Uniformity protecting citizens and providing a
  level playing field for internal market
• A total system approach streamlines the
  certification processes and reduces the burden on
  regulated persons
• Return