A-NPA- OPS 33 ENAC Position OST 01-04. A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position2 Applicability of JAR-OPS 0 and 2 to foreign aircraft and operators Identical JAA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Westin Dragonara Resort, Malta 4 March 2013 Implementation of the new Air Operations Regulations in Malta Capt Michael OBrien Head of Flight Operations.
Advertisements

AIRWORTHINESS ASPECTS OF AIRCRAFT LEASING
Introduction to the Concept of Continuing Airworthiness
LEASE AND INTERCHANGE.
Module N° 3 – ICAO SARPs related to safety management
Role , Responsibility and achievements of SARI 145 Working Group
EASA and the EU Regulatory Framework
Permit to Fly: the new rules
Foreign Air Operator Validation & Surveillance Course
Foreign Air Operator Validation & Surveillance
Foreign Air Operator Validation & Surveillance Part I ~~ History.
Safety Regulation Group Slide 1 INCAPACITATION AND REPLACEMENT OF SENIOR CABIN CREW MEMBERS 2 nd Presentation to OST 28 March 2006.
Implementation of ICAO Type Ia Recorder in JAR-OPS 1 Presentation to EQSC Hoffdorpp 3 September 2002.
ICAO Aerodrome Safety Workshop Almaty, Kazakhstan – 18 to 22 November 2002 ICAO SARPS State Obligations.
International Civil Aviation Organization European and North Atlantic Office 1 ICAO EUR HLSC Preparatory Seminar 9-11 February 2010 Baku, Azerbaijan Theme.
Slide 2 OST 07-1 Use of Headsets JAR-OPS 3 OST WP HSST WP-06/15.3.
JAA 19th Annual FAA/JAA International Conference 1 TRANSITION FROM JAA to EASA Institutional changes in Europe Klaus KOPLIN JAA Chief Executive.
Certificates of Airworthiness
1 30/31 January 2013EASA/Estonian CAA Rulemaking Workshop From national to EU rules - Continuing Airworthiness Juan Anton Continuing Airworthiness Manager.
Helicopter Hoist Operations JAR-OPS 3
Paris, 25 – 27 January 2006 OST 06-1 AIRCRAFT LEASING.
Recording of Digital Communications AEA position and concerns with JAA FRSG WP Vincent De Vroey Manager Operations and ATM Association of European.
Slide 2 OST 07-3 SE Piston Operations JAR-OPS 3 Appendix 1 to 3.005(e) & Appendix 1 to 3.517(a) HSST WP-06/10.5 HSST EASA Form 07/002.
ICAO Provisions for Safety Management
Oint Aviation Authorities June 2004OST 04-2, Helsinki1 TGL No. 36 Approval of Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs) Georges Rebender – JAA Operations Director.
MODEL IMPLEMENTING IDERA REGULATION SUMMARY POWERPOINT FIRST EDITION NOVEMBER 2014.
Future Defence Aviation Safety Regulation Module 1 Introduction to EMAR May 2015.
European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness certificates - general Airworthiness Certificates – General introduction Peter Corbeel Rulemaking Directorate.
FAA ICAO ANNEX 6 PROPOSAL & OVERSIGHT ISSUES IN DISPATCH
Evgeny A. Gorbunov, General Director, Union of Aviation Industrialists
141 SEMINAR Review of Part 91 and Part 43
08 June 2006Portland; Oregon; USAPeter Corbeeel Reducing the risk of smoke and fire in transport airplanes: related EASA rulemaking actions Peter Corbeel.
EASA Airborne Separation Assistance Systems (ASAS) Certification
Page 1 Introduction of new European Requirements on Continuing Airworthiness (Not yet published) The presentation is based on the final draft. Franz Graser,
5/26/20161 AUDIT SERVICES PRIVATE/CORPORATE Captain Iain Tulloch tel /
EATS 2009 Evolving European Regulatory Environment Prague November 2009 Jean-Marc Cluzeau EASA Rulemaking Directorate.
PtF Permit to Fly. European Aviation Safety Agency PtF Slide 2 Permit to Fly - Some major principles of the new rules - Frequently asked questions - Discussion.
ICAO Requirements on Certification of Aerodromes Module - 2
Owner/Operator Responsibilities in Aircraft Maintenance & TSO’s and PMA’s Aircraft Owners and Operators Jim Niehoff – FAA Safety Team.
Update on European Rulemaking for ETOPS-LROPS Global ETOPS/LROPS Implementation: Timetables and Approaches Yves Morier, St Petersburg, 4 June.
Information requested following SMS implementation presentation.
08 June 2006 Portland 2006: aircraft certification session Yves Morier The EASA Advance -NPA for UAV systems Certification Presentation by: Y Morier EASA.
Harmonizing AOC & Operations Specifications. April 2008ICAO harmonization of the AOC & Ops Specs Outline Historical and current situation – ICAO Problem.
IAOPA Regional Meeting Larnaca 22 September 2007 EASA OPS.001 Working Group.
U.S./Europe International Aviation Safety Conference By: James Ballough, FAA, and Claude Probst, EASA Date: June 4, 2008 “Global Safety Management: Revolution.
Existing ICAO SARPs Relating to Aircraft
European Aviation Safety Agency Head of Aircraft Product Certification
Staying Current with Regulations ! Chris MARKOU Head, Operational Costs Management, IATA October 2015.
News from Cologne: Recent developments at the European Aviation Safety Agency Patrick Goudou EASA Executive Director Portland, USA, 6 June 2006.
8 June 2006Portland, Oregon, USAE. Sivel EASA Working Group on regulation of non-complex motor aircraft engaged in non-commercial operations E Sivel (EASA)
2005 Annual U.S./Europe International Aviation Safety Conference Improving Aviation Safety: The need for a multilateral approach Paul Lamy International.
Approval Guidance for RNP Procedures with AR February 10, 2015 Federal Aviation Administration Approval Guidance for RNP Procedures with AR C-384 Presentation.
Authority Requirements Margit Markus Tallinn, 7 May 2009.
2005 Europe/US International Aviation Safety Conference, Cologne 7-9 June The Europe-US International Aviation Safety Conference 2005 ‘ Aviation Safety.
Module 02 Essential Requirements for ATCOs. Training Objectives  Appreciate the content of the essential requirements for ATCOs as described within EASA.
ICAO TECHNICAL COOPERATION PROJECTS IN INDONESIA
Non-Commercial Operations
EU rules for Third Country operators ??
Foreign Air Operator Validation & Surveillance Course
ICAO SARPS State Obligations
ICAO EUR HLSC Preparatory Seminar
ALLPIRG/4 MEETING PARTICIPANTS (Montreal , 8 February 2001)
AIRWORTHINESS OF AIRCRAFT
Session – 4: Existing ICAO Standards relating to Air Traffic Control
Global Runway Safety Symposium
Foreign Air Operator Validation & Surveillance Course
Workshop for Licensing and Operations
USOAP Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA) Workshop
RSOO Role in Relation to New ICAO Strategies
Aerodrome Certification Workshop
Presentation transcript:

A-NPA- OPS 33 ENAC Position OST 01-04

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position2 Applicability of JAR-OPS 0 and 2 to foreign aircraft and operators Identical JAA Registration - 2 safety standards JAA OperatorForeign Operator Airworthiness RegulationJAAState of Registry Type ApprovalJAA StateState of Registry Certificate of AirworthinessJAA StateState of Registry Maintenance ProgramJAA StateState of Registry MaintenanceJAR 145 / EASA Part 145Any! Flight Crew LicenseJAR FCLState of Registry Crew TrainingJAR FCLState of Registry Flight Time LimitationsNational regulationNational Regulation EquipmentJAR-OPS 2JAR OPS 2 (accepted selected items below Annex 6 part II ) Equipment Technical Specifications JAA TSO/EASA TSOState of Registry AW OperationsJAA StateState of Registry (+ Subpart E) RVSM ApprovalJAA StateState of Registry P-RNAV ApprovalJAA StateState of Registry Operations ManualJAR-OPS 2 no defined standards (best industrial practice?) JAR-OPS 2 no defined standards (best industrial practice?) Operator management structureRequired but no specific requirementRequired no specific requirement:

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position3 Applicability of JAR-OPS 0 and 2 to foreign aircraft and operators Possible solutions: Restriction of the JAR-OPS Registration to JAA-registered aircraft while requiring a formal transfer of responsibilities according to article 83bis of Chicago convention for the others; Publication of different Registration for: JAA operators and Foreign operators. Preparation of a specific regulation for foreign operators would be the best solution! (Note: it does not exist for Commercial Air Transportation yet!) (See following points)

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position4 Mixed Fleets - Operators with aeroplanes registered in different states EU operator may easily buy two different aircraft of the same type, one registered in Italy, the other in France. Under JAR-OPS 0 and 2, the two Authorities (Italy and France) maintain over each aircraft the responsibility of approving the maintenance program (EASA part M) and to issue the operational approvals. An operator may have for the same type of aircraft two different maintenance programs, two different set of operational procedures, etc.

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position5 Mixed Fleets - Operators with aeroplanes registered in different states Possible solution: Mixed fleet should be allowed only after a formal transfer of responsibility according to Article 83bis of Chicago convention.

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position6 Base of Operational Control JAR-OPS 0 and 2 is going to institute a form of Safety Oversight on Corporate Aviation operators based on the localization of a base where the operator exercises operational control. No similar principle is used in JAR-OPS 1 or 3, even in case of local operations (i.e. HEMS activities) The practical identification of such a base is really difficult, and might need to be demonstrated in front of a judicial court.

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position7 Definition of Base of Operational Control Possible solution: Prepare a general policy valid for all kind of operations (CAT, GA, AW) with common safety oversight procedures for operational basis located in a country different from the State of Registry or State of Operator

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position8 Equipment Policy (1) JAA is renouncing to have its policy on equipment. FAA will continue to follow its autonomous policy instead In some case the same piece of equipment may be required with different text in different JARs (see GPWS, TAWS, Flight Recorder) The experience accumulated with JAR-OPS 1 implementation shows that the ICAO text is largely unable to define some key equipment (GPWS, TAWS and Flight Recorders)

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position9 Equipment Policy (2) JAR OPS 0, 2 and 4 is below ICAO standards in many issues, regardless the size of the aircraft FAR 129 mandates the adoption of USA technical specifications for TCAS II, GPWS, TAWS and reinforced doors, rather that the general ICAO text

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position10 Equipment policy Introduction of a Subpart K based on the following concepts: aircraft with a MCTOM more than 5700 kg: "same size/same number of passengers/same equipment" of JAR-OPS 1 smaller aircraft with more than six passengers: same number of passenger/same equipment, with controlled exceptions for most prominent items smaller aircraft up to six passengers: Annex 6 part II with some improvement (two altimeters, etc.)

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position11 Registration concept and safe operations Registration involves some kind of safety responsibility from the Authority, because Registration is a kind of recognition rather than a simple acknowledgement. JAR-OPS 0 and 2 requirements are enough detailed, and this coupled with the objective-base structure of many requirements may lead to widely different levels of regulatory safety. JAR-OPS 2 does not comprise the following concept as for JAR OPS 1/3: –JAR-OPS 1/3.175(f) An AOC will be varied, suspended or revoked if the Authority is no longer satisfied that the operator can maintain safe operations.

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position12 Registration concept and safe operations Possible solutions Publication of Joint Implementation procedures to define the process of Registration, defining the role and the responsibility of Authorities; Insertion the following phrases in JAR-OPS 2: – The registration will be varied, suspended or revoked if the JAA Authority is no longer satisfied that the operator can maintain safe operations; – An operator shall incorporate in the operations manual all amendments and revisions required by the Authority.

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position13 Improper use of risk assessment based requirements due to the lack of published guidance material the risk assessment process may greatly differ from operator to operator; small entities may not be able to perform risk assessments with the needed quality standards; the results of risk assessment may lead to different operational practice and different level of safety; statistical safety data are available only in aggregated form due to the small scale of operations of Corporate operators; the Authority has no regulatory means to "disapprove" a risk assessment performed improperly by an operator.

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position14 Improper use of risk assessment based requirements Possible Solutions: Publication of the guidance material procedures for acceptable risk assessment; Publication of the risk assessment "on top" of prescriptive requirements; Insertion in JAR-OPS 0, 2 and 4 of the faculty of the Authority to reject risk assessment;

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position15 JAR-OPS 4 - lack of specific requirements JAR-OPS 4 does not provide any specific requirement for aerial work No common methodology is given to assess the acceptability in terms of risk of Aerial Work practices The difference in the outcome may influence the cost of intended operations to an extent that safer operators are systematically excluded by the market No JAA Aerial work common market may be established in Europe before the publication of each specific Code of Practice

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position16 JAR-OPS 4 - lack of specific requirements Possible solutions Publication of set of COPs for the most common activities (hook operations, firefighting, aerial surveillance) Publication of guidance material on acceptable risk in aerial work environment

A-NPA OPS 33 - ENAC Position17 Codes of Practices (COPs) There's no procedure for individuation of applicable codes of practice. The lack of formal procedure may become a real issue in an international arena, where each State may have its national associations of interested parties. COPs are ACJ by their nature, and must comply with JAR 11 procedures. Possible solutions: –Publication guidance material for definition and formal adoption of COPs –Initiation an NPA procedure for adoption of ACJs containing COPs