Document Sample
                                           NEWS REGULATORY

                                           f r o m            r I c      p E r I
                                           V I c E p r E s I d E n T o f G oV E r n m E n T & I n d U s T r y A f fA I r s f o r A E A

The Aircraft Electronics Association’s international membership continues to grow. Currently, the AEA represents avionics
businesses in more than 35 countries throughout the world. To better serve the needs of the AEA’s international membership,
the “International News and Regulatory Updates” section of Avionics News offers a greater focus on international
regulatory activity, international industry news, and an international “Frequently Asked Questions” column to help promote
standardization. If you have comments about this section, send e-mails to

Global Safety in Challenging Times:
How Can We Better Achieve Harmonized Implementation?

       his month’s international column                European regulatory teams as well as Ca-               on the radar screen for the near term and
       comes to you from Athens, Greece.               nadian and Australian authorities, and for             the far term, allowing open discussion of
       Athens was the host city for this               the past two years, there has been partici-            current issues and international collabora-
year’s Europe/U.S. International Aviation              pation from ICAO.                                      tion.
Safety Conference. As in past years, this                 Fundamentally, this forum reviews all                  This year’s conference began with the
is a great forum to meet with the U.S. and             of the regulatory topics worldwide that are            sorrow over the loss of Air France 447
                                                                                                              on the night before the conference be-
                                                                                                              gan. Any accident is a devastating loss; a
                                                                                                              mid-air breakup in the middle of the night
                                                                                                              cannot be imagined. The AEA offers our
                                                                                                              deepest condolences to the passengers’
                                                                                                              families for their loss.
                                                                                                                 The hot issue during this year’s con-
                                                                                                              ference was the U.S. politics regarding
                                                                                                              the repair station oversight provisions of
                                                                                                              the FAA Reauthorization Bills. While the
                                                                                                              FAA and EASA did everything they could
                                                                                                              to be “politically correct,” it is quite clear,
                                                                                                              should Congress ignore the FAA’s efforts
                                                                                                              to develop relationships with the individu-
                                                                                                              al National Aviation Authorities of Europe
                                                                                                              and EASA, the entire industry will suffer.
                                                                                                                 The topic of safety management sys-
                                                                                                              tems was front and center on the agenda
                                                                                                              again this year, with some disappointing
                                                                                                              presentations. In spite of EASA’s previous
Ric Peri (left), vice president of government & industry affairs for AEA, greets Elias Kokkotas,              commitment to perform a gap analysis and
division manager for AEA member Scandinavian Avionics Greece S.A. in Athens, as part of his
                                                                                                              simply add missing elements, EASA now
trip to Greece to participate in the Europe/U.S. International Aviation Safety Conference.

20     avionics news   •   august   2009
is promising a stand-alone SMS program         Europe, so now its regulatory resources          FAQ.” These were not new issues; they
like the other authorities. ICAO’s brief-      are focused on bringing on the new suite         have been raised in the past as well. Spe-
ing on the misunderstanding of ICAO’s          of operational regulations. In addition,         cifically discussed was the international
intent with system safety fell on deaf au-     EASA has a new regulatory structure in           acceptance of aircraft parts following
thority ears. It seems this SMS “virus” is     the works. It is a radical change to the or-     maintenance, repair and alterations. This
spreading faster than the swine flu. From      ganizational structure of the regulations        issue also was raised during the annual
certification, it looks as though EASA (as     but there is very little functional change       AEA Europe Meeting in May.
well as the FAA and TCCA) are planning         for most of AEA members.                            When a part is approved for return-to-
a revision to the advisory materials for the      A good amount of the panel discussions        service after maintenance, it is important
changed products rule (21.101), which          kept coming back to the concept of leased        to remember the return-to-service author-
should be available late next year.            aircraft. Many of the issues we deal with        ity is based on the registry of the aircraft
    EASA spend a significant amount of         on international marketing of business air-      the part is to be installed on, not on the lo-
time discussing its new rulemaking struc-      craft are very similar to the issues faced by    cation of the maintenance facility. For ra-
ture. The AEA participated on the rule-        leasing companies. The discussions raised        dios in particular, there are few provisions
making working group for the B-3 license       the issue of harmonized documentation,           for radios to be considered “overhauled”
and led the discussions and proposal for a     mutually acceptable repairs and altera-          based on the European regulations. In ad-
B-4 license.                                   tions, and the inconsistencies of valida-        dition, Europe has specific criterion for the
    During the convention’s regulatory         tions from authority to authority.               substitution of component parts in TSO’d
session, EASA focused on its concept for          For most of the topics raised during this     articles.
better regulation of general aviation with     three-day conference, there are seldom              This year’s meeting ended with some
its Part 21 European light aircraft process,   any direct solutions, but rather the basis of    promising directions to address many of
simplifications to Part M and Part 66, as      a long-term regulatory or harmonization          the issues raised by the industry. Both the
well as promising proportionate rules for      project.                                         FAA and EASA recognized the value of
light general aviation aircraft operations.       The panel discussion on parts raised          international commerce between the U.S.
    EASA recently accepted the regulatory      some interesting issues, which are ad-           and Europe and promised to continue their
responsibility for operations throughout       dressed in this month’s “International           efforts to improve harmonization.

                                               marking certain parts and products. These        requirements associated with these in-ser-
      UNITED STATES                            requirements generally are contained             vice articles.
  News & Regulatory Updates                    in Parts 21 and 45, and they apply only             With the exception of Part 45, §45.13(b)
                                               to the production approval holder at the         through (e), which applies only to the re-
                                               time of production. Parts not required to        moval, installation, changing or placement
FAA Provides Guidance to ASIs on               be marked during production also might           of identification information for aircraft,
Marking of In-Service Articles                 have identification information on identi-       aircraft engines, propellers, propeller hubs
   The Federal Aviation Administration         fication plates, tags, labels or on the actual   and propeller blades, there are no regula-
issued Notice N 8900.74, dated June 5,         part itself. The production approval holder      tions (other than life-limited parts) dealing
2009, which provides guidance to avia-         or its suppliers may apply such markings.        directly with part marking of in-service
tion safety inspectors (maintenance and            During the normal course of opera-           articles during maintenance or alteration
avionics) for advising operators and main-     tions and maintenance, some or all of this       of articles. Therefore, this issue must be
tenance providers about the marking of in-     information might be missing or become           evaluated in light of general airworthiness
service articles.                              illegible.                                       principles.
   The following information is extracted          In other cases, the person maintaining          While identification data for a compo-
from FAA Notice 9800.74; a review of the       the part might have added or changed             nent might be part of the aircraft’s type
entire notice is encouraged.                   marking information. The FAA has pro-            design, the fact that it might be missing
   Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regu-       vided inconsistent information to main-
lations provides limited requirements for      tenance providers about part marking                               Continued on following page

                                                                                                       avionics news   •   august   2009   21
INTERNATIONAL NEWS                             markings should not be routinely “miss-            • Knowledge that the article received
Continued from page 21                         ing.” Aviation safety inspectors (ASIs)        an appropriate incoming inspection and
                                               who become aware of specific TSOA or           remains within the control of the same
or illegible does not mean the aircraft is     PMA articles with consistently missing         operator or maintenance provider
not airworthy when the article is contin-      markings should forward the information            Even if not prohibited by §45.13(b)
ued in service or installed. The National      to the production approval holder’s Man-       through (e), it is generally inadvisable to
Transportation Safety Board case law           ufacturing Inspection District Office and      remove original identification even if it is
and FAA legal interpretations have con-        copy the Aircraft Engineering Division         illegible. Instead, add additional informa-
cluded not every minor deviation (such         (AIR-100). This information can help the       tion as described below. For questions
as dents, scratches, pinholes of corrosion     production approval holder’s MIDO re-          concerning replacing identification infor-
or missing screws), no matter how mi-          solve any deficiencies in either the TSO/      mation on parts not covered by §45.13(b)
nor or where it is located on the aircraft,    PMA standard or the TSOA/PMA hold-             through (e), the ASI should provide the
dictates the conclusion that the aircraft’s    er’s design or manufacturing processes         following advice:
design, construction or performance has        for part marking permanency.                       • Maintenance providers performing
been impaired by the defect to a degree           The following guidance for ASIs con-        work for an air carrier or commercial
the aircraft no longer conforms to its type    cerns the absence of identification data on    operator under Part 145, §145.205, must
certificate.                                   a part (including but not limited to PMA       follow the operator’s parts identification
   Existing FAA guidance for evaluating        and TSOA articles) and the subsequent          procedures. If there are no instructions,
parts (such as AC 20-154, “Guide for De-       re-marking of these components:                the maintenance provider should request
veloping a Receiving Inspection System            • Part marking is not essential for de-     written guidance from the operator. The
for Aircraft Parts and Material”) recog-       termining the continued airworthiness of       operator may authorize the repair station
nizes part markings are only one of many       an in-service article, provided the opera-     to follow the repair station’s own iden-
factors an inspector can use to establish      tor and/or its maintenance provider can        tification procedure; in such cases, the
the airworthiness of parts for installation    determine it conforms to its approved          operator should clearly communicate this
on type-certificate products. The current      design and is in condition for safe opera-     fact.
edition of Order 8130.21, “Procedures for      tion.                                              • Encourage maintenance providers to
Completion and Use of the Authorized              • Except for §45.13(b)-(e), there are no    contact the design or production approval
Release Certificate, FAA Form 8130-            regulations (other than life-limited parts)    holder to obtain re-identification informa-
3, Airworthiness Approval Tag,” states         requiring or prohibiting re-marking of a       tion. Unless contrary to §145.205, obtain-
the production approval holder may use         part received with a missing or illegible      ing a new identification plate, label or tag
a Form 8130-3 as a substitute means of         identification plate, label, tag or other      from the manufacturer and following its
identifying parts when the information is      identifying marks.                             instructions (such as CMM/service bul-
no longer visible on the part itself.             • Except for §45.13(b)-(e), there are no    letin) is an acceptable method for remark-
   This practical approach to airworthi-       regulations (other than life-limited parts)    ing/re-identifying the part.
ness means conformity to type design           requiring or prohibiting a person perform-         • Maintenance providers may develop
of in-service aircraft and other articles is   ing maintenance on the part from adding        their own written procedures for evaluat-
evaluated under Part 43 and/or the main-       identification information.                    ing identification information and deter-
tenance and inspection portions of the ap-        When identification data is no longer       mining whether and how to re-apply illeg-
plicable operating rules. The operator or      visible, the operator or maintenance pro-      ible or missing data or add identification
maintenance provider must employ other         vider must determine the part was pro-         information. This should include:
suitable methods for determining airwor-       duced in accordance with Part 21, and              1. A receiving inspection noting the
thiness if the identification information is   might need to investigate further to de-       identification marking is missing and/or
missing or illegible. Indeed, this is true     termine the article’s identity and airwor-     illegible.
regardless of whether the parts were re-       thiness. Frequently, airworthiness can be          2. The method for ensuring the article is
quired to be “permanently” marked at the       established by other means, including but      what it purports to be.
time of manufacture.                           not limited to:                                    3. The method for applying the re-iden-
   In accordance with Part 21, §21.607(d)         • Visual and other kinds of inspections     tification or additional information in a
and § 45.15, technical standard order au-         • Operational or functional checks          manner that will not impact airworthiness.
thorization and parts manufacturer ap-            • Reference to an illustrated parts cata-       4. The method the maintenance pro-
proval articles are required to be perma-      log and/or a component maintenance             vider uses to document its identification
nently and legibly marked; therefore, part     manual                                         information.

22    avionics news   •   august   2009
                                      the requirements of that part of           In this instance, I agree with
FREQUENTLY ASKED                      this subchapter applicable to           your inspector in that any change
QUESTIONS                             the product; (b) information on         that is different than the type
United States                         dimensions, material, and pro-          design is a change to the type
                                      cesses necessary to define the          certificate. However, his narrow
                                      structural strength of the prod-        interpretation that any change
Type Design                           uct; (c) the airworthiness limita-      to the type certificate is a major
                                      tions section of the Instructions       alteration is totally unsupported
The following information is from     for Continued Airworthiness as          by the FARs.
FAA Order 8110.4 and 14 CFR,          required by Parts 23, 25, 26, 27,          In the U.S. system, we have
Part 21.                              29, 31, 33 and 35 of this subchap-      a three-tiered system of aircraft
                                      ter, or as otherwise required by        changes: a major change in
QUESTION:                             the Administrator, and as speci-        type design, a major alteration
   My FAA inspector and I are         fied in the applicable airworthi-       and a minor alteration. A major
having a disagreement as to what      ness criteria for special classes       change in type design is defined
constitutes a change in type cer-     of aircraft defined in §21.17(b);       in 14 CFR, Part 21 Subpart D,
tificate. It is his contention any    and (d) any other data necessary        “Changes to Type Certificates,”
change to the type certificate is a   to allow, by comparison, the            and major and minor alterations
major alteration. What constitutes    determination of the airworthi-         are defined in Part 1.
a change to the type certificate?     ness, noise characteristics, fuel          Part 21 defined changes in
                                      venting and exhaust emissions           type design as major and minor.
ANSWER:                               (where applicable) of later prod-       A major change in type design
   Based on your e-mail to me,        ucts of the same type.                  requires the applicant to submit
your inspector is correct that the       Because the Federal Aviation         for a supplemental type certifi-
proposed alteration is a change       Regulations do not define an al-        cate (or amended TC if the ap-
to the type certificate. However,     teration, I will rely on the Web-       plicant is the OEM). A minor
your inspector is wrong in that       ster definition. Webster defines        change in type design is “ap-
the regulations clearly have          an alteration as “the act or pro-       proved in a method acceptable
created a three-tiered level of       cess of altering or the state of be-    to the Administrator.” Minor
changes to the type certificate       ing altered.” The dictionary fur-       changes in type design (Part 21)
— not one as he is proposing.         ther defines the result of altering     for in-service aircraft are major
   According to §21.41, a type        as “a modification.” A little more      and minor alterations (Part 1/
certificate includes the type de-     reading results in the definition       Part 43).
sign, the operating limitations,      of the verb “alter” as “to make            Therefore, because the regu-
the certificate data sheet, the ap-   different without changing into         lations define three levels of
plicable regulations with which       something else.”                        change in type design for in-
the Administrator records com-           So, any alteration to an aircraft    service aircraft, your inspector
pliance, and any other conditions     that is different than the “origi-      is incorrect that a change to the
or limitations prescribed for the     nal” design is a change to the          type certificate is automatically
product in this subchapter.           original type design. Any altera-       a major alteration. The alteration
   In addition, §21.31 defines        tion to an aircraft that is different   might rise to the level of a major
type design to include: (a) the       than the “original” design plus         change in type design requiring
drawings and specifications,          any “altered” design is a change        an STC, or it might not rise to
and a listing of those draw-          to the “current” type design. Be-       the level of major alteration and,
ings and specifications, neces-       cause the type design is an ele-        by regulation, must be a minor
sary to define the configuration      ment of the type certificate, any       alteration.
and the design features of the        change in type design is a change
product shown to comply with          to the type certificate.
                                                                                          Continued on following page

                                                                                avionics news   •   august   2009   23
INTERNATIONAL NEWS                        Regulatory Affairs Agenda
Continued from page 23
                                          Items Set for AEA Canadian                           EUROPE
                                          Regional Meeting                         News & Regulatory Updates
                                             At the upcoming AEA Canada
             CANADA                       Meeting, Sept. 10-11, 2009, in
 News & Regulatory Updates                Toronto, TCCA managers again            EASA Issues Various Type
                                          will be present to discuss issues       Certificates, Supplemental
                                          of concern to AEA membership in         Type Certificates
Transport Canada Updates                  Canada.                                    As per the second edition of EASA
Safety Management Systems                    The following items will be on       News, the European Aviation Safety
Implementation Date for all AMOs          the agenda:                             Agency’s newsletter, the agency has is-
   At the recent Aircraft Certification      • TCCA policy for re-certifica-      sued 250 type certificates, 4,000 STCs
Delegates Conference, TCCA con-           tion of undocumented parts. It is       and 8,500 major changes and repairs.
firmed safety management systems          anticipated TCCA will take steps        Among the ones issued in 2008 are air-
would be mandated for all AMOs            to alleviate avionics-rated AMOs        crafts such as the Tupolev Tu-204-120CE
approved under CAR 573, effective         from the current requirements of        and the Eclipse EA500.
Dec. 31, 2009.                            CAR STD 573.02 (11) (a) and (b),           The Tupolev is the first transport air-
   To assist small operators, includ-     and from the procedures of STD          craft designed by an organization from
ing AMOs, in SMS implementation,          571, Appendix H.                        the Commonwealth of Independent States
TCCA has issued Advisory Circular            • TCCA/EASA Bilateral Air-           receiving an EASA TC. The certification
107-002, “Safety Management Sys-          worthiness Treaty. TCCA will re-        process for the TU 204-120CE began
tems Development Guide for Small          veal the detailed provisions of this    within the Joint Aviation Authorities and
Operators/Organizations.” The AC          treaty, which should alleviate the      later was taken over by EASA.
includes appendices providing infor-      current time-consuming and costly          Ongoing certification projects include
mation for an organization to develop     process of EASA review of TCCA          the Falcon 2000LX, Boeing 787, Airbus
a safety management plan; occur-          STCs.                                   A350, Airbus A400M, Learjet LJ85, Em-
rence report and hazard identifica-          • Approval of installation of non-   braer ERJ 190-100 ECJ, B777F freighter,
tion form; incident/accident analysis;    required equipment. TCCA has            and Eurocopter EC175.
corrective/preventive action plan;        indicated it is willing to adopt the
risk management worksheet; and risk       guidance described in RTCA/DO-          Joint Aviation Authorities
matrix.                                   313, “Certification Guidance for        Hand Over Reigns to EASA
   The appendix for development of a      Installation of Non-Essential, Non-        On May 28, 2009, the Joint Aviation
safety management plan identifies al-     Required Aircraft Cabin Systems         Authorities hosted its farewell event to
ternate approaches for both a minimal     and Equipment.” More informa-           conclude 40 years of serving European
complexity — one-person operation         tion should be provided during the      civil aviation. The official closing date
— and a moderate complexity – five        meeting.                                was June 30, 2009.
to 10-person operation. Organizations        • Supplemental ICAs. TCCA is            JAA’s mission to improve overall civil
falling in between minimal and mod-       expected to issue an advisory cir-      aviation safety by establishing uniform
erate complexity must review any ad-      cular to replace the current MSI        European rules and regulations and har-
ditional SMS element expectations.        53, which will reflect the new FAA      monization with parties outside of Europe
The appendix also includes sample         policy on supplemental ICAs to          will be continued by the European Avia-
wording for a safety management           be defined in a revision to Order       tion Safety Agency.
plan for both minimal and moderate        8110.54. It is hoped the new FAA           In his speech, Rob van Lint, deputy
complexity organization.                  and TCCA policies will reduce the       inspector general for the Dutch Transport
   AC 107-002 is available from           burden to STC applicants for sup-       and Water Management, addressed the
TCCA at           plemental ICAs on simple avionics       importance of aviation safety and JAA’s
tion/IMSDoc/ACs/100/107-002.htm.          modifications.                          role in the past years. The Dutch govern-

24    avionics news   •   august   2009
ment said it was particularly proud of hav-
ing the JAA based in The Netherlands and                                               not claim overhauled unless the
will continue to support the JAA Training      FREQUENTLY ASKED                        article has been restored by in-
Organization (JAA-TO), which remains           QUESTIONS                               spection, test and replacement
in Hoofddorp.                                  International                           in conformity with an approved
   During the event, André Auer, chief                                                 manufacturing, design, main-
executive of JAA, performed a ceremo-          Dual Release                            tenance or quality standard ap-
nial handover of responsibilities to Patrick                                           proved by the competent author-
Goudou, executive director of EASA.            QUESTION:                               ity to extend the operational life
   A majority of directors general of Civil       Can a U.S.-based EASA 145            of the article.
Aviation Authorities from JAA’s 43 mem-        repair station dual sign an air-           Another area in which the U.S.
ber states took part in the event as well      worthiness tag based on U.S.            and Europe differ is, the FAA ac-
as leaders of other organizations, such as     criteria?                               cepts the replacement of OEM
the FAA, ECAC, Eurocontrol, IATA and                                                   component parts with PMA’d
ICAO.                                          ANSWER:                                 and TSO’d component parts as
   The JAA Training Organization will             No. If the U.S.-based EASA           a function of overhaul and re-
continue with training activities as a Dutch   145 is signing for maintenance,         pair. In Europe, any change to a
foundation and associated body of the Eu-      repair and/or overhaul of an            TSO’d article is a major change
ropean Civil Aviation Conference. Sched-       article on an EASA Form 1,              requiring an STC.
uled training courses are offered in Hoofd-    the maintenance, repair and/or             It is important for U.S.-based
dorp, Belgrade, London Gatwick, Vienna,        overhaul must be completed in           EASA 145 repair stations, when
Luxembourg, Singapore and Abu Dhabi.           accordance with the European            they are signing an airworthi-
                                               standards.                              ness release for European acces-
Eurocontrol Issues Business                       There are subtle differences.        sories, to ensure those parts are
Case for 8.22 kHz Operations                   For example, 14 CFR Section             maintained in accordance with
   Eurocontrol issued a revised business       43.2 prohibits any person from          the European standards unless
case, implementation plan and safety as-       claiming an accessory as being          superseded by the Bilateral Avia-
sessment for the planned expansion of          overhauled unless it has been           tion Safety Agreement. q
8.33 kHz operation below FL195. This           disassembled, cleaned, inspect-
revised document takes into account the        ed, repaired as necessary, and re-         Note: The AEA offers “Fre-
results of a frequency usage study, which      assembled using methods, tech-          quently Asked Questions” to foster
is a key concern for general aviation and      niques and practices acceptable         greater understanding of the avia-
military stakeholders.                         to the Administrator. It also must      tion regulations and the rules gov-
   In terms of frequency demand, simula-       be tested in accordance with ap-        erning the industry. The AEA strives
tions indicate 1,500 assignments for area      proved standards and technical          to ensure FAQs are as accurate as
control center and approach services are       data, or in accordance with cur-        possible at the time of publication;
foreseen until 2027.                           rent standards and technical data       however, rules change. Therefore
   The conversion to 8.33 kHz of area          acceptable to the Administrator,        information received from an AEA
control center and approach services pro-      which have been developed and           FAQ should be verified before be-
vides the highest benefits, and the con-       documented by the holder of the         ing relied upon. This information
version of tower services and aerodrome        type certificate, supplemental          is not meant to serve as legal ad-
terminal information service offers local      type certificate or a material, part,   vice. If you have particular legal
flexibility.                                   process or appliance approval           questions, they should be directed
   Given the complexity and the number         under §21.305 of this chapter.          to an attorney. The AEA disclaims
of impacted aircraft, a phased implemen-          In Europe, EASA 145 Block            any warranty for the accuracy of
tation for 8.33 kHz below FL195 was            12 of the EASA Form 1 can-              the information provided.
identified to be inevitable.

                                                                                         avionics news   •   august   2009   25

Shared By: