Transcript EGU Presentation

Status of the Harmonisation of
the European Regulations in
Light Aviation
Roland STUCK
EGU President
Norwegian Gliding Days
Elverum 28 October 2006
European Gliding Union
Founded in 1993
20 members
70,000 pilots 22,000 gliders
Deals only with regulation
European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)







In July 2002 the EU has decided to apply common
rules to aviation and to establish EASA
Objectives: ensure a high and uniform level of
protection of the European citizen and facilitate
free movement of goods persons and services
EASA regulations are not converted into national
laws and apply directly
EASA is operational since September 2003
EASA is located in Cologne
Staff increases rapidly (300 persons)
Website: www.easa.eu.int
The Basic Regulation 1592




The Scope of power of EASA is defined by the
Basic Regulation (EC) 1592/2002:
Principles (scope, objectives, definitions)
Substantive requirements (basic principles,
applicability, airworthiness, environmental
protection, operations and licensing, recognition of
certificates, etc…)
Organisation of EASA (tasks, internal structure,
working methods, financial requirements, final
provisions)
Tasks of EASA
(Chronological order)






Certification (initial airworthiness)
Maintenance (continuing airworthiness)
Licensing (pilot proficiency) and medical
Operations
Short term: Airport Operations
Long term: Air Traffic Services
Annex II of Regulation 1592

Aircraft excluded from the European regulations
(remain under national jurisdiction)

Attempt to have gliders excluded failed


Gliders with structural (maximum empty) mass of
less than 80 kg when single seater or 100 kg when
two seater, including those who are foot launched
An EGU request to have light gliders exempted like
ultralights aeroplanes i.e with MTOM <300Kg for a
single seater or 450 kg for a two seater (+ 5% with
rescue system), has been declined by EASA
Rulemaking

Rulemaking Directorate (Dir. C.Probst)

3 Levels of regulation:



Scope of powers (Basic Regulation 1592) and
Essential Requirements (ER), adopted by the
Parliament (Hard Law)
Implementing Rules (IR), adopted by the
Commission
Certification Specifications (CS), Acceptable means
of compliance (AMC) and Guidance Material (GM)
adopted by EASA (Soft Law)
Rulemaking Procedure

For any change in the regulation, EASA must issue a
Notice Per Amendment (NPA) with a Regulatory
Impact Assessment (RIA) on their website
Consultation of stakeholders
Evaluation of the answers EASA issues a Comment
Response Document (CRD)
Stakeholders may comment again
EASA issues an Opinion (with a draft of the new
regulation) which is submitted to the Commission
If the Commission agrees they issue a Communication
and the amendment is submitted to the Council and to
the Parliament
If adopted the new regulation is published in the OJ

Process is democratic but time consuming!






Existing Regulation Structure
Certification







Regulation (EC) 1702/2003 (already in force)
Benefit: an aircraft certified in one country is
certified de facto in all other EU countries
The approval regulations for gliders has been copied
directly (JAR 22 = CS 22)
Problems for the manufacturers with Part 21 (DOA
and POA not adapted to small companies)
EASA is trying to fix this in working group MDM 032
All instruments installed in a glider must have an
EASA form 1 (Problem with e-vario and GPS !)
Action of EGU: these instruments will be considered
as standard parts (NPA 20/ 2005)
Maintenance





Maintenance is regulated by Regulation (EC)
2042/2003, which is already in force for
commercial aviation
In most countries the application to light aviation
has been postponed to 28 September 2008
Annex 1, called Part M describes the technical
requirements for all aircraft below 5.7 tonnes
Based on the concept of continuing airworthiness
The owner is responsible that the aircraft is
maintained in airworthy condition. He may also
delegate this responsibility to a Continuing
Airworthiness Management Organisation (CAMO)
Maintenance
Principles of Part M






Maintenance work done in Subpart F organisation
Paperwork done in Subpart G organisations
A Pilot-Owner is allowed to perform limited
maintenance tasks and to issue a release to service
(CRS) for these tasks
The Certificate of Airworthiness is not time limited
if associated with a valid Airworthiness Review
Certificate (ARC)
ARC valid for 3 years if the aircraft is maintained in
a controlled environment
Repairs shall be carried out using data approved by
the EASA or by an approved design organisation
(DOA)
Maintenance
The problems

Part M is complicated and difficult to read

Part M will increase the bureaucratic burden:
•
•
•
•
•

EASA approved Individual Maintenance program
required
Flight hours to be reported regularly if Subpart F
and G are separated
Written orders to be issued for maintenance work
Modifications and repairs more difficult
More paperwork for getting an ARC in the
uncontrolled environment (2 procedures)
Part M will probably increase costs
Maintenance
The consultation process







In November 2004 EASA has performed a
Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) of Part M.
EGU organised a meeting of their working group
maintenance with EASA in April 2005 in Frankfurt
In April 2005 in Friedrichshafen we told to P.
Goudou (Pdt of EASA) that we do not accept Part M
In June 2005 EASA has issued NPA 07-05 in June
Working Group M0017 is evaluating the answers
At an EAS workshop on 4 and 5 Nov 2005 in
Cologne, most delegates of the various air sports
clearly rejected Part M
As a result EASA accepted to re-discuss Part M in
MDM 032
Licensing
The consultation process


In May 2004 EASA published the NPA 2/2004,
with a draft of ER Licensing and some questions
to the ‘stakeholders‘
After consultation of their members EGU
proposed a dual system of licences:
•
A EU-licence that allows free movement across
Europe. Air sports organisations should be allowed
to issue this licence. Medical standard may be
different from the ICAO Class 2 Standard.
Assessment by General Practitioner
•
An ICAO-licence that allows flight outside the EU
and that is issued by the national authorities.
(requires a ICAO Class 2 Medical)
Licensing
The EASA answer






End of November 2004 EASA published the
Comment Response Document CRD 2/2004
They proposed to introduce a "Restricted PPL" for
air sports.
For this RPPL General Practitioners (GP) could be
suitable examiners via Implementing Rules.
However they wrote that " flight in airspace with a
high traffic density could be restricted ".
EGU has objected to such airspace restrictions
related to the RPPL and to the name „restricted“
EASA submitted their Opinion 3/2004 (draft of
modification of Reg 1592) to the EC
Licensing
The Commission answer





End of November 2005 the Commission published
their answer (COM 579)
They accepted to create a „recreational pilot
licence, tailored more closely to this category of
airspace users. This license would be issued by
assessment bodies approved by the Agency or by
the competent national authority. “
For the RPPL„the medical certificate may be issued
by a general medical practitioner“
The IRs for licensing will be drafted by the MDM
032 working group (EGU will make a proposal)
The amended Reg 1592 has been submitted to the
Council of Ministers and to the Parliament
Operations
The Consultation




In NPA 2/2004 EASA has also published Essential
Requirements on Operations
In their answer EGU has asked EASA to lay down no
Implementing Rules for gliding
In their Opinion EASA proposed to keep the IRs at
high level ( JAR Ops 0) for all air sports
In COM 579 the Commission has also accepted this
proposal which is included in the new version of Reg
1592 submitted to the council and to the EP
Operations




A working group has been set up to draft the IRs
(see MDM 032) The draft is due September 2007
The EGU will make a proposal for the IR’s
EGU still works on an harmonisation of the most
important gliding procedures (EGU-internal
recommendation)
EGU has also collected statistics on accident
(collaboration with OSTIV TSP)
MDM 032



•
•
•
•
•
In February 2006 EASA has issued TOR for the
Multi Disciplinary Measure (MDM) 032
Working group in charge of developing a concept for
the regulation of aircraft other than complex motor
powered aircraft, used in non commercial activities
The mission:
Develop the concept of a regulation for these
aircraft (similar to LSA ?)
Develop IR’s for the recreational PPL
Develop IR’s for the operations
Rethink the implementation means today applied in
airworthiness. Adjustment to ER and development
of different IR for airworthiness
If needed propose a modification of Annex II of
Reg 1592
MDM 032
List of Experts
Leroy Alain EASA Certification ( Chairman)
Altmann Jürgen EASA
Akerstedt Hans EAS
Fridrich Jan EMF/ EAS
Newby Graham PPF/ EAS
Roberts David EGU/EAS
Stuck Roland EGU/EAS
Schuegraf Rudi EAS
Taddei Bertrand EMF/EAS
Konrad Jo IAOPA
Pedersen Jacob IAOPA
Wilson Mark ECOGAS
Daney Claude Alain ECOGAS
Barratt Reinert Christie CAA Norway
Le Cardinal Hugues DGAC France
Forbes Graham CAA UK
Morier Yves EASA Rulemaking
Sivel Eric EASA Rulemaking
MDM 032
The work






5 meetings since March 06
First meeting we were told we were in front of a
blank sheet of paper. Do not refrain to be creative…
EGU produced a position paper: How to (de)regulate
gliding (available on our website)
We lost must time in finding an appropriate
procedure
Scope of view has been more and more restricted
Result: in August EASA issued A-NPA 14-2006 with
the first proposals
A-NPA 14
The options

•
•
•

•
•
•

•
•

•
•
Initial airworthiness:
relaxation of the existing system *
industry monitoring,
industry monitoring with self declaration)
Continuing airworthiness:
adjusting Part M *
owner Responsibility
no obligation at all
Licensing 2 option (no IR, Light IR)
No IR
Light IR *
Operations
no IR (only AMCs)
Light IR and AMC *
A-NPA 14
Evaluation











4400 answers were received (mail box filling!)
Entering in a data base
Reorientation of the work:
Modification of the TOR of MDM 032
Creation of a subgroup licensing
Creation of a subgroup for LSA like a/c
Next meeting in January
Problems:
Lack of an overal concept
Boundary conditions (time, Part M)
Many WG work in parallel
Conclusion

EASA has a positive attitude towards Air Sports
They have realized that they cannot regulate Sport
Aviation like Commercial Aviation
They are ready to accept a large degree of self
management
They accept us as competent partners

but:






Battle of power between NAAs and EASA
Decisions made by EP and Council: lobbying needed!
We need more competent peoples to represent us
More info

www.egu-info.org