The future of DOA

1 EASA Workshop November, 7 th , 2006 Dassault Aviation Saint Cloud - France Jean-Pierre Fournier ASD Coordinator for DOA

The future of DOA

Current EASA DOA concept is overall satisfactory

.

 The level of safety of the products remained very high.

 A large number of approvals are made under DOA privileges.

 Foreign Authorities recognize these approvals.

 Design Assurance principles are well established, …at least within the companies that hold a DOA.

 There is trust between the DOA holders and the Agency.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 2

The future of DOA

There are a few holes with Part 21 DOA related rules :



Some are being addressed currently

: - role of DOA as regards Permits to Fly : NPA No 09/2006  - compliance documents acceptance : Task Nr 21.024.

Some are being considered at an early stage

- build up and approval of Documents having some relation with TC : e.g. MMEL, MRBR, … : 

Others are not

: - acceptance by D.O. of Production Non Conformities - for TC holders, privilege to approve certain major changes - repairs to engine or propeller : interface with Aircraft TC holder.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 3

The future of DOA

There is another big hole in Part 21 DOA :

 Item from Article 3 in (EC) 1702/2003 :

“by way of derogation (…) an organisation whose principal place of business is in a non-member State may demonstrate its capability by holding a certificate issued by that State for the product, part or appliance for which is applies …”

is not taken into account precisely within Part 21 rules, even if such “foreign” organisation interfaces with a Part 21 DOA, except by the few words :

“In the event that a Partner/Sub-contractor holds a DOA, then … the applicant may take this into account in demonstrating the effectiveness of this integrated system.” (GM 21A.239(c)).



Practically, Part 21 DOA seems mainly an Europe only activity.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 4

The future of DOA

Partnership and compliance findings :

 As an example, an aircraft designer generally does not have in-house

the intimate expertise

that legitimates ultimately the design of all the structural aspects of a landing gear, its changes, or repairs.

 This is because of complexity, knowledge protection, and industrially efficient work-sharing.  This applies throughout most of the technical domains of a product: materials, electronics, …  Aircraft design engineers’ compliance statements rely for a part on assessments from this kind of sub-contractors.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 5

The future of DOA

Partnership are changing :

 Partners are more and more made industrially (and thus contractually) fully responsible of their share of a product.

This may sometimes materialize into consortia.

This includes all aspects, including design, compliance to airworthiness requirements, continued airworthiness aspects, and design assurance.

 Sub-contracting relationship, or partnership, are less and less limited to intra-European-Community links.

 Some of the involved countries do not have the historical background of relationship with Europe, that other countries (e.g. : USA) have. EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 6

The future of DOA

One thing does not change : the overall responsibility of the aircraft TC holder

 The TC holder bears the overall responsibility of the full aircraft, including its engines, systems and aero-structure components.

 The aircraft TC holder may always be exposed to criticism from the public opinion in case of an accident, whatever the partnership arrangements are.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 7

The future of DOA

Supervision of organisations by the Agency and National Authorities is not consistent :

 Production and Maintenance Organisations are (almost) all closely investigated, approved and monitored.

 For Design, only “the top of the iceberg” : mainly TC holders, are.

Is this on purpose ?

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 8

The future of DOA

Not a priority solution : the modular approach to certification

  

Should some aircraft systems get a TC in their own right ?

It could work, because it works already with Engines and Propellers … It would need

a huge worldwide effort

to develop Specifications, this would technically be all the more difficult as the specific system has several interfaces with other systems. E.g. : cockpit displays - this would not necessarily prevent aircraft TC holders and systems TC holders not being happy one with each other position from time to time (e.g. undesired design change …)  This may lead to overall control and responsibility issues.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 9

The future of DOA

Not a path to explore : third party certification

 Establishing EASA has been, and for a part of it, is remaining still, a formidable task.

 This is currently being achieved while keeping the safety records and the international credibility of European airworthiness system.

 Replacing this system by another one, with a third party that is not existing at all, would be even more demanding !

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 10

The future of DOA

Not a path to explore : self certification (1/2)

 ASD supports the concept that some compliance findings are made by the applicant with no Agency witnessing or reviewing, under an established DOA, including a privilege, and under specific certification programmes, as per the concept developed by Working Group 21.024.

 This keeps on the level of safety that is expected by the public, by European and foreign Authorities, and by OACI.

 This does not burden unduly the Industry.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 11

The future of DOA

Not a path to explore : self certification (1/2)

 There would be very high risks to go to complete self-certification :  Airworthiness departments would no more feel “backed” by the Agency, in case of unethical business pressure  The system may not be acceptable to other continents officials, and to OACI  The system may be subject of high criticism from the public opinion in case of accident  It would lead to the loss of expertise for the personnel of the Agency.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 12

The future of DOA

What we would like : DOA access for sub-contractors (1/3)

This would benefit to sub-contractors volunteering, because :  Part 21 Subpart J would come to help harmonize the requirements from their varied Contractors (i.e. the different TC applicants they work for)  They would get an official proof of the recognition of their specific competence, which can be a commercial bonus.

This would benefit to contractors (TC / STC holders ..), because :  Resources associated to specific compliance findings set-up, and related DOA privileges, can be placed at the best place in the overall system.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 13

The future of DOA

What we would like : DOA access for sub-contractors (2/3)

 All the privileges currently granted to a TC or STC holder, and related airworthiness tasks, can in principle be envisaged to be granted to, or shared with, a sub-contractor supporting this TC or STC holder,

if, and only if,

their extent, and procedures to use them, are agreed beforehand by the TC / STC holder, its sub-contractor, and their respective Authorities.

 Trivial example of such privilege : to issue information or instructions with a statement of approval, into a Component Maintenance Manual.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 14

The future of DOA

What we would like : DOA access for sub-contractors (3/3)

 The rule would have to be changed so that the Design Assurance Systems of two organisations working together for a product are required to be consistent, as far as this product is concerned.

 The Agency (the Agencies …) should put in place the resources and arrangements to allow them to warrant this consistency.

EASA’s “single European position” makes this feasible.

 Budget aspects for support these additional Agencies’ / Authorities’ resources to be studied.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 15

The future of DOA

What we would like : an European DOA that is interfaced with the Globe (1/2)

 European DOA should be explicitly tailored, or adaptable enough, to the different foreign regulatory systems (e.g. US ODAs / DERs …) applying locally to partner companies and / or sub-contractors to companies having already an European DOA, based upon the experience of the European Agency with these systems.

EN9100 certification may be one element to take into account.

 European DOA may be accessible, on a voluntary basis, to other companies, or for new scopes :  European sub-contractors to non European TC / STC holders  Non-European sub-contractors, when local rules do not provide for an equivalent DOA.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 16

The future of DOA

What we would like : an European DOA that is interfaced with the Globe (2/2)

 Europe shall set up or update arrangements with foreign countries, so that  European DOA,  and resulting test witnessing activities, compliance finding activities, and approvals are formally recognized.

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 17

The future of DOA

These views were agreed upon at the level of the Airworthiness Committee of the ASD, and written in our March, 31st, 2006 answers to EASA questionnaire.

Some ASD Member Companies also expressed separate opinions, that deserve to be discussed today …

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 18

The future of DOA

EAWT_PR0610540 Slide 19