Meeting: Meeting June 26 & 28, 2007 and Non-commercial Operations Subgroup Meeting June 26 & 27, 2007

Transcription

1 Subjet: EASA Operations Rulemaking Meeting: Meeting June 26 & 28, 2007 and Non-ommerial Operations Subgroup Meeting June 26 & 27, 2007 File: EASA Reported by: Ray Rohr Summary: The OPS.001 Rulemaking Group met on June 26 & 28 to review progress in the subgroups and address open issues. The Group was advised that EU OPS will be updated to inlude Amendments 9 to 12 in July of this year. They will be effetive the same date as EU OPS. Ten additional 10 NPAs from Amendments 13 and 14 will be added to EU OPS later this year probably with a transition period. Also, it was reported that the FCL Rulemaking Group had reahed agreement in priniple as to what training related material will be inluded in Part FCL and what will be in Part OPS. The Rulemaking Group met on June 26 & 27. They reviewed the work that had been ompleted to date and agreed to anel their planned July meeting. EASA staff will onsolidate the work done by the Sub-groups and prepare a draft Part OPS that the Rulemaking Group will review at an Otober meeting. Subsequent to that meeting work will be undertaken to resolve any outstanding issues. The European HEMS and Air Ambulane Committee made a presentation to the Rulemaking Group. A opy of the presentation is linked to this report. At the ninth meeting of the Non-Commerial Operations with Complex Motor- Powered Airraft Sub-group the abin rew implementing rules were reviewed and finalised. Other issue that were reviewed inlude: The impat of the lause maximum approved seating onfiguration of more than 9 seats in the definition of omplex motor-powered airraft, Conern of the impat of the hanging definition of omplex motor-powered airraft on the non-ommerial IRAs, Flight Time Limitations provisions and the potential impliations of work underway in EASA, and Outstanding issues related to delaration and/or ertifiation for nonommerial operations. It was agreed to hold the disussion paper on regulation of non-ommerial operations involving frational ownership and management ompanies and use it only if it is required at some point in the future. Agreement was reahed on a proess to manage issues that may emerge as the result of subsequent regulatory development ativity. The draft minutes of the meeting are linked to this report. The next OPS.001 Rulemaking Group meeting is sheduled for Ot , Impliation for Business Aviation:

2 This is a very important ongoing projet with a number of issues that must be resolved. Fortunately progress to date has been positive. Deisions Required: Nil at this time. This report ontains material for the sole information of IBAC Members and no guarantee or undertakings are given, or should be assumed, as to their auray. The ontent is under the opyright of the author and IBAC, and may not be distributed to third parties without speifi agreement of the IBAC Diretor General.

3 1. Issue Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies To develop for Part OPS 2 the regulatory provisions and assoiated guidane material for the regulation of non-ommerial operations involving frational ownership and other airraft management organisations should the amendments to the Essential Requirements proposed of the Counil of the European Union be adopted. 2. Bakground In the Commission proposal of to amend Regulation (EC) No. 1592/2002 ommerial operation is defined as: a remunerated aeronautial ativity overed by a ontrat between an operator and a ustomer, where the ustomer is not, diretly or indiretly, an owner of the airraft used for the purpose of this ontrat and the operator is not, diretly or indiretly, an employee of the ustomer. 1 Artile 6b.3 of the Commission proposal states: Operators engaged in the non-ommerial operation of omplex motorpowered airraft shall delare their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. 2 If these provisions are adopted all non-ommerial operations, inluding frational ownership operations and other arrangements involving airraft management organisations, will need only to delare their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. There will not be any requirement for ertifiation of suh operations. However, this situation may be altered if the reommendations of the Permanent Representatives Committee of the Counil of the European Union are adopted. The Counil has proposed that ommerial operation be defined as: any operation of an airraft, against remuneration or other valuable onsideration, whih is available to the publi or, when not made available to the publi, whih is performed under a ontrat between an operator and a ustomer, where the latter has no ontrol over the operator. They also proposed that Artile 6b.3 be amended to read as follows: Unless otherwise determined in the implementing rules, operators engaged in the nonommerial operation of omplex motorpowered airraft shall delare their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. 3 The Counil also proposed that Artile 6b.5 be amended to read as follows: 5. The Commission shall adopt, in aordane with the proedure laid down in Artile 54(3a), the rules for the implementation of this Artile. In doing so, it shall speify in partiular: a. the onditions to operate an airraft in ompliane with the essential requirements laid down in Annex IV; b. the onditions for issuing, maintaining, amending, limiting, suspending or revoking the ertifiates referred to in paragraph 2 4 and the onditions under whih a ertifiate shall 1 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Counil amending Regulation (EC) No. 1592/2002 of 15 July 2002 on ommon rules in the field of ivil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Ageny, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels Ibid. 3 COREPAR Report to Counil on Amendment of (EC) No. 1592/2002 of 15 July 2002, Counil of the European Union, Brussels, Paragraph 2 refers to ommerial operations and the ertifiate issued to ommerial operators. OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 1 draft of June 18, 2007

4 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies be replaed by a delaration of the apability and means of the operator to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft;. the privileges and responsibilities of the holders of ertifiates; d. the onditions and proedures for the delaration by, and for the oversight of, operators referred to in paragraph 3 and the onditions under whih a delaration shall be replaed by a demonstration of apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the privileges of the operator reognised by the issuane of a ertifiate; 5 The definition of ommerial operation ontained in the Commission proposal would unquestionably result in operations where an owner ontrats with an airraft management ompany to operate an airraft on his/her behalf being lassified as non-ommerial when the operation is being onduted for the benefit of the owner and there is no remuneration other than the operating ontrat involved. This definition would also appear to lassify frational ownership operations as non-ommerial when the owner of a frational share of an airraft is being provided with air transport servies as long as: the airraft in whih the owner owns a frational share is used, or an agreement on dry lease and exhange of airraft between all of the frational share owners exists and an airraft within the program is used. The definition of ommerial operation proposed by the Counil would not appear to alter that situation. If the Counil proposal for amendment of artiles 6b.3 and 6b.5 is adopted there would be the option in the implementing rules to inlude a requirement for ertifiation of some non-ommerial operations. On that basis, the Authority Requirements and SMS Sub-group and the Non-ommerial Operation with Complex Motor-powered Airraft Sub-group of the OPS.001 Rulemaking Group met on and disussed options for the delaration proess and regulatory oversight of nonommerial operations should the amendments proposed by the Counil be adopted. The Subgroups agreed that there was no justifiation to require ertifiation of non-ommerial operations whih are onduted by the owner of an airraft. They agreed that the delaration proess was appropriate for suh operations. They also disussed a range of issues related to operations whih involved a management organization. They speifially explored options for situations suh as: frational ownership operations, and operations where an owner of an airraft ontrats with an airraft management ompany to maintain and operate the airraft on his behalf solely for his benefit. For the purposes of the paper an airraft management organization is defined as any legal or natural person operating or proposing to operate the airraft on behalf of the airraft owner. That definition inludes frational ownership operations and the traditional airraft manament ompanies that operate airraft for an owner through a ontrated arrangement. After disussion of a range of options it was agreed that the Consolidated Reommendations of the ECAC Task Fore on Frational Ownership of 24 January 2007 presented a reasonable starting point for a framework for regulation of frational ownership operations and that the priniples ontained in it should be used as a basis of the development of the EASA Part OPS 2 implementing rules. In the disussion some members of the Sub-groups expressed the opinion that owners of airraft who entered into ontrats with management organisations no longer retained aountability for the safety 5 COREPAR Report to Counil on Amendment of (EC) No. 1592/2002 of 15 July 2002, Counil of the European Union, Brussels, OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 2 draft of June 18, 2007

5 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies of the operation of that airraft and, in fat, beame innoent ustomers of the management organisation, similar to ustomers of a ommerial operator. Some members of the Sub-groups also expressed the onern that unless the implementing rules are arefully onstruted both definitions of ommerial operation may provide loopholes that would permit airraft operators to ondut illegal harters through the use of ontratual arrangements. This issue is disussed in the Disussion paper on ertifiation versus delaration for operations with non-ommerial omplex airraft that was previously presented the Non-ommerial Sub-group. On that basis it was onluded that similar implementing rules should be onsidered for all operations involving airraft management organisations. 3. Disussion 3.1 ECAC Task Fore and Frational Ownership Considerations The ECAC Task Fore on Frational Ownership was omposed of representatives from the European Commission, EASA and the European aviation industry. Their year-long study addressed the safety aspets, seurity measures and onsideration of the nature of Frational Ownership operations. The Task Fore onluded that any new regime adopted in this area would require to give these operations a degree of flexibility that business operations need in order to be effiient. 6 They also noted that the industry representatives have pointed out in this regard that should European operators be required to hold an AOC that would greatly impinge on the European industry s ability to ompete internationally. 7 In their reommendations the Task Fore noted that as a first step there must be agreement on the definition of frational ownership. They reommended that a Frational Ownership program would be any ownership and airraft exhange program that enompassed all of the following elements: a. The provision of servies for management of the programme by a single programme manager ating on behalf of the owners; b. The availability of two or more airraft for servies;. One or more owners per airraft belonging to the programme, with at least one airraft having more than one owner; d. Eah owner owning a minimum perentage (to be determined) in at least one of the programme s airraft; e. An agreement on dry lease exhange of airraft between all the owners; f. Multi-annual agreements between partiipants in the programme, defining onditions with regard to ownership, management of the programme and exhange of airraft between owners; g. An expliit statement in an appropriate legal framework that the operation of a Frational Ownership programme falls under the private non-ommerial transport ategory would be required, as would be an indiation that part-owners in a Frational Ownership programme are in operational ontrol of the programme airraft, and must delegate all or part of the tasks assoiated with the operation of the airraft to the Programme Manager; h. A lear statement would be required that transport of passengers or goods or any operation for remuneration or hire under suh a programme is prohibited; i. A prohibition on the sale or lease of an airraft interest that is less than the minimum Frational Ownership interest unless the flights assoiated with that interest are operated under a ommerial regime by a ertified and liensed air arrier; and j. A requirement that passengers on a Frational Ownership flight must be designated by the relevant owner. 8 6 Speial ECAC Task Fore to Consider Frational Ownership, Summary of Reommendations adopted by Diretors General, European Civil Aviation Conferene, Brussels Ibid. 8 Ibid. OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 3 draft of June 18, 2007

6 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies The Task Fore also reommended that the European safety regulatory requirements for frational operations should require safety standards similar to those applied to ommerial operations but without the need for an air operator ertifiate. 9 With regard to the operational ontrol issue the Task Fore reommended the following priniples should be inluded in the regulatory regime: a. Operational tasks shall be delegated mandatorily to the Programme Manager and shall be listed. The Frational Owner ontinues to be jointly and individually responsible for the performane of these tasks and for ompliane with appliable regulations and requirements; b. The Programme Manager shall be the sole point of ontat with national authorities for speifiations, approvals and authorisations required by all national or European regulations pertaining to Frational Ownership Operations for the tasks delegated by the Frational Owner. These speifiations, authorisations and approvals should not be affeted by any hange in ownership of a programme airraft in the identified programme;. The Frational Owner shall formally aknowledge his/her responsibilities in the Programme Management ontrat, indiating that he/she has read, understood and aepted operational ontrol responsibility. The Frational Owner shall also aknowledge that he/she is in operational ontrol over programme airraft when the Frational Owner uses another programme airraft through the dry lease interhange agreement; d. Arising from the fat that Frational Owners are signatories to a dry lease interhange agreement whih is an essential element of a Frational Ownership programme, Frational Owners retain two areas of responsibility as follows: i. As the owner, he/she is responsible for his/her own airraft irrespetive of its use by any other owner from the programme; ii. As the member of the programme, he/she is responsible for any airraft he/she operates from the airraft pool. 10 The foregoing onditions parallel the requirements of FAR Part 91, Subpart K - the rules that govern frational ownership operations in the United States. 3.2 Impliations of the Definition of Commerial Operation While this regulatory framework may initially appear appropriate for appliation in Part OPS 2, it must be noted that given the definition of ommerial operation ontained in the Commission proposal of and in the Counil proposal of , frational ownership operations will be onsidered as non-ommerial operations as long as the operation is not available to the publi and a ontrat exists where the airraft owner has some ontrol over the frational programme operator. Therefore, it will not be neessary to speify in the implementing rules all of the attributes of a frational ownership operation that are ontained in FAR 91, Subpart K or that are reommended by the ECAC Task Fore. One of the most notable impats of either definition of ommerial operation would be that operational ontrol is not a relevant issue. This signifiantly simplifies the regulatory requirements. On the other hand, the situation where an operation would be lassified as nonommerial as long as: the operation of the airraft is not for remuneration, it is not available to the publi, and a ontrat exists where the airraft owner has some ontrol over the operator, results in the situation where both frational ownership operations and operations involving airraft management organisations fall within the same definition and it would not be possible to apply different requirements to one of them. If the Counil proposal is adopted, introdution of a means to differentiate between frational operations and managed operations may be appropriate. However, until that ours, the only ourse of ation is to develop a proess to work within the proposals that are now on the table. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 4 draft of June 18, 2007

7 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies Another issue that may deserve further onsideration is whether it may be appropriate to speify in the implementing rules what onstitutes an aeptable degree of ontrol of the operator by the ustomer so as to onstitute a non-ommerial operation. This of ourse would depend to some degree on the adopted definition of ommerial operation. For purposes of this regulatory impat analysis it is assumed that an operation that met either of the following riteria would be lassified as non-ommerial; 1. The airraft is owned by a sole owner and the ontrat is with an airraft management organisation seleted by the owner, and: a. The airraft is managed under a long term management ontrat, b. The management ontrat is speifially for the provision of operational servies for the owner s airraft,. The airraft is solely or mainly used by the owner for the arriage of himself and persons or goods designated by the owner, and d. There is no remuneration or other valuable onsideration related to the arriage of persons or goods. Note: In this ase it would appear that where a substitute airraft is provided these riteria will not be satisfied and the operation would be lassified as a ommerial operation. That ould be altered where a dry lease exhange agreement between the airraft owners existed. 2. The owner owns a frational share of an airraft and the ontrat for the provision of servies for management of the programme is with a single programme manager ating on behalf of all of the owners of the airraft, and: a. The programme manager has two or more airraft available for servies; b. There are one or more owners per airraft belonging to the programme, with at least one airraft having more than one owner;. There is an agreement on dry lease exhange of airraft between all the owners; d. There are multi-year agreements between partiipants in the programme, defining onditions with regard to ownership, management of the programme and exhange of airraft between owners; e. There is no remuneration or other valuable onsideration related to the arriage of persons or goods; and f. The airraft is solely or mainly used by the owner for the arriage of himself and persons or goods designated by the owner. 4. Proposed Regulatory Provisions Based on the foregoing, it would appear that if the amendments to artiles 6b.3 and 6b.5 proposed by the Counil are adopted, there are three options that must be onsidered with regard to the regulation of non-ommerial operations involving airraft management organisations. 1. No requirements other than a delaration by the operator of their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. 2. The requirement that operations involving airraft management organisations are onduted under an airraft management ertifiate. 3. The requirement that operations involving airraft management organisations are onduted under an air operator ertifiate similar to that required under OPS Part 1. For purposes of option 2 it is assumed that the airraft management ertifiate requirements would parallel the Management Speifiations of FAR Part 91, Subpart K. For example, the ertifiation proess would require that in order to reeive an airraft management ertifiate the airraft management organisation would be required to present to the NAA: 1. A urrent list of all airraft owners and types of airraft, registration markings and serial numbers; 2. The authorisations, limitations, and speifi proedures under whih these operations are to be onduted; OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 5 draft of June 18, 2007

8 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies 3. The speifi loation of the airraft management organisation s prinipal base of operations and, if different, the address that will serve as the primary point of ontat for orrespondene between the regulatory authority and the airraft management organisation and the name and mailing address of the airraft management organisation 's agent for servie; 4. Any authorised deviation and exemption granted from any requirement of OPS Parts 0 and 2; and 5. An operations manual that demonstrates the means of disharging the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft under Part OPS 2. The NAA would issue the airraft management ertifiate if, after review, they find that the appliant: 1. Meets the appliable requirements of Part OPS 2; and 2. Is properly and adequately equipped in aordane with the requirements of OPS Parts 2 and is able to ondut safe operations under that Part and the provisions of the airraft management ertifiate. An appliation for an airraft management ertifiate would be denied if the NAA finds that the appliant is not properly or adequately equipped or is not able to ondut safe operations. 5. Regulatory Impat Assessment As noted in setion 2 of this Disussion Paper, Artile 6b.3 of the Commission proposal as amended by the Counil states: Unless otherwise determined in the implementing rules, operators engaged in the nonommerial operation of omplex motorpowered airraft shall delare their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. 11 Therefore, any requirement beyond the basi delaration requirement must be justified through a regulatory impat assessment (RIA). This RIA will assess the three options for the regulation of nonommerial operations involving airraft management organisations with omplex motor-powered airraft in aordane with the provisions identified in setion 4 of this paper should the amendment as proposed by the Counil be adopted. 5.1 Option 1 Delaration for Management Companies and Frational Ownership Operations Safety With only limited regulatory oversight there is some risk that airraft managers ould engage in operations without meeting the requirements of Part OPS 2 for some time without being deteted. As all frational operations in Europe are now onduted under a ommerial air operator ertifiate, this may be onsidered a redution in the level of safety only when operators hoose to operate under non-ommerial rules rather than ommerial. Given that managed operations are ommon in North Ameria and Europe, and have been onduted without requirement for of any type of ertifiate and that there have not been identified safety problems, it would appear that this is not a signifiant safety onern with this segment of aviation. Eonomi No eonomi impat as a delaration is required for suh operations by the Essential Requirements. Environmental No environmental impat. 11 COREPAR Report to Counil on Amendment of (EC) No. 1592/2002 of 15 July 2002, Counil of the European Union, Brussels, OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 6 draft of June 18, 2007

9 Soial No soial impat. Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies Other aviation requirements No impat on other aviation requirements. Foreign omparable regulatory requirements The requirements for frational ownership operations would be less than the requirements in the USA. This ould have a negative impat on efforts to ensure a level playing field between USA and European operators. The provision for managed ompanies would be ompatible with international Standards and Reommended Praties. Equity and fairness issues There are no equity and fairness impats. 5.2 Option 2 Airraft Management Certifiate for Management Companies and Frational Ownership Operations Safety The requirements for airraft management ompanies and frational ownership operations to hold an airraft management ertifiate would ensure a reasonable level of safety for airraft owners who are not fully aware of the regulatory and safety responsibilities assoiated with airraft ownership and operation and their fellow passengers. Given that frational ownership operations are more omplex than other non-ommerial operations, some additional oversight may be justified even though the safety reord of this aviation segment is exellent. While all suh operators would be required to meet the requirements speified in the Essential Requirements and assoiated Implementing Rules there may be a small risk that faed with additional regulatory burden assoiated with ertifiation some existing airraft management ompanies may withdraw from the market whih ould in fat result in a degradation of safety. The safety reord of airraft management ompanies has been exellent, so the safety ase for additional regulatory provisions for suh operations beyond the Essential Requirements and assoiated Implementing Rules is limited. Eonomi Under this option the airraft management ompanies would inur the osts assoiated with meeting the initial airraft management ertifiate issue requirements and in some States the ost assoiated with ongoing regulatory surveillane. These osts would be passed on to the airraft owners. As this is a new requirement for management ompanies and it is antiipated that there would be a signifiant number that would require ertifiation, this option will result in new osts to NAAs. As all existing European frational ownership operations hold Air Operator Certifiates there would be no inremental ost to them. Environmental No environmental impat. Soial No soial impat. Other aviation requirements No impat on other aviation requirements. OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 7 draft of June 18, 2007

10 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies Foreign omparable regulatory requirements This proposal exeeds the regulatory requirements in the USA and those ontained in the proposed amendment to Annex 6 Part II for airraft manament ompanies. Should there be signifiant osts to the operator assoiated with the ertifiation proess and the assoiated regulatory oversight these have the potential to put suh operators at an eonomi disadvantage with operators in other areas of the world. As the ertifiation requirement for frational ownership operations is designed to parallel the USA requirements there would be a level playing field between USA and European operators. Equity and fairness issues The introdution of a new requirement for airraft management ompanies to be ertifiated where no safety onern has been identified ould be onstrued as unfair. As all existing European frational ownership operations hold air operator ertifiates there would be no equity and fairness issues to them. 5.3 Option 3 Air Operator Certifiate for Management Companies and Frational Ownership Operations Safety Requiring an air operator ertifiate would ensure an equivalent regulatory safety oversight for non-ommerial operations as is provided for ommerial operators. This level of safety oversight would be far in exess of that applied to non-ommerial operations in other areas of the world and ontrary to international standards established by ICAO. This option does not reognize the safety responsibilities of the owner whih is a fundamental priniple for regulating non-ommerial operations in the international Standards and Reommended Praties. There appears no justifiation for imposing ostly new regulatory provisions on an industry that has an exellent safety reord. Eonomi The airraft manage ompanies would inur substantial osts assoiated with meeting the initial air operator ertifiate issue requirements and the ost assoiated with ongoing regulatory surveillane. These osts ould have a very signifiant negative impat on this non-ommerial aviation setor. There would also be signifiant ost inreases to NAAs. Environmental No environmental impat. Soial There ould be signifiant negative soial impat if this non-ommerial aviation setor were subjeted to signifiant ontration. Other aviation requirements The requirement for an air operator ertifiate would be anomalous to other aviation regulatory requirements in Europe. Foreign omparable regulatory requirements The requirement for an air operator ertifiate is signifiantly in exess of the requirements in the USA and in international Standards and Reommended Praties and would have a detrimental effet in efforts to ahieve a level playing field. Equity and fairness issues The requirement for an air operator ertifiate for non-ommerial operations would be unfair to owners and inequitable to other similar non-ommerial ativities. OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 8 draft of June 18, 2007

11 Disussion Paper Regulation of Non-ommerial Operations Involving Frational Ownership and Management Companies 6. Conlusions and Reommendations 6.1 Conlusions Should artiles 6b.3 and 6b.5 be adopted as proposed by the Commission both operators involved in non-ommerial frational ownership operations and those involving a management ompany would only have to delare their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. However, if the Counil proposals are adopted there would be the option in the implementing rules to inlude a requirement for ertifiation of suh operations. In that ase, based on the onsiderations disussed in this RIA, there would appear to be some justifiation for inluding in the implementing rules for Part OPS 2 a requirement for a ertifiation proess for nonommerial frational ownership operations. Given that it would appear to not be possible to have different requirements for frational ownership operations and those involving management ompanies, the ertifiation would have to apply in both situations. It would also appear to be appropriate that the ertifiation requirements for frational operations and management ompanies should generally follow the priniples ontained in FAR Part 91, Subpart K. 6.2 Reommendations 1. It is reommended that no regulatory development ation be taken until the disposition of artiles 6b.3 and 6b.5 is determined. 2. If the amendments proposed by the Counil for artiles 6b.3 and 6b.5 are adopted, either: the Authority Requirements and SMS Sub-group and the Non-ommerial Operation with Complex Motor-powered Airraft Sub-group of the OPS.001 Rulemaking Group should be reonvened to develop Implementing Rules for ertifiation of frational ownership operations and airraft management ompanies, or the task should be assigned to EASA. 3. In this ase the ertifiation requirements for frational operations should generally follow the priniples ontained in FAR Part 91, Subpart K. 4. It is reommended that if the Counil proposal is aepted that a means be investigated to differentiate in either the Essential Requirements of Implementing rules between fational ownership operations and other managed operations espeially where one entity is owner of the entire airraft. 5. If a mehanism is developed to differentiate between traditional managed operations and frational ownership operations, all that should be required for airraft management ompanies where frational ownership of airraft is not involved, is a delaration of their apability and means to disharge the responsibilities assoiated with the operation of the airraft. OPS.001 Non-ommerial Sub-group page - 9 draft of June 18, 2007

12 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/2007 European Aviation Safety Ageny TASK OPS.001 RULEMAKING GROUP SUBGROUP NON-COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS WITH COMPLEX MOTOR-POWERED AIRCRAFT MEETING MINUTES OF 26 JUNE 2007, H H 27 JUNE 2007, H 13:00 H EASA PREMISES, COLOGNE Attendees: Douglas Carr (DCA), GAMA Mike Hamlin (MHA), ECOGAS Geoff Parker (GPA), UK CAA Jaob T. Pedersen (JTP), IAOPA Maro Pereira (MPE), Netjets (observer) Ray Rohr (RRO), EBAA Daniela Defossar (), EASA Rulemaking Offier Betty Leouturier (BLE), EASA Rulemaking Offier (26/06 morning) Herbert Meyer (HME), EASA Rulemaking Offier (26/06 morning) Eri Sivel (ESI), EASA Deputy Head of Flight Standards (26/06 afternoon) Apologies: Karl Brady (KBR), ECA Josef Maurer (JMA), ETF Dik Nederlof (DNE), CAA Netherlands 1. The subgroup reviewed the proposed agenda. Two additional AOB agenda items on ost reovery for demo flights and intra ompany harges were added. 2. The minutes of the last meeting and ation item list were reviewed. The meeting minutes were adopted without further hanges. 3. The subgroup re-addressed the issue of maximum approved passenger seating onfiguration and minimum abin rew. BLE and debriefed the subgroup that an emergeny evauation demonstration or analysis is only required for airraft with more than 44 seats. Some ertifiation requirements are applied through speial onditions for ertain airraft onfigurations. The appliable OPS 2 paragraph on minimum abin rew was therefore hanged to the number of seats installed. BLE and will develop guidane material to take into aount speifi airraft onfigurations. 4. The subgroup disussed the proportionality of the developed rule text. Some members expressed disomfort in knowing that these requirements would apply also to twin turboprop airraft and some piston engine airraft with more than 9 seats. Chairman and seretary responded that Page 1 of 9

13 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/2007 the subgroup had drafted a performane based rule that should over the whole range of operations. It was reminded that the implementing rule has to take into aount the essential requirements. DCA requested that the explanatory note of the NPA should mention the ongoing legislative proess while drafting the implementing rules and speifially the hange of the omplex motor-powered definition. 5. HME gave an outlook on the FTL requirements. He presented the framework of essential requirements and ICAO Annex 6 SARPS. He onfirmed that the FTL requirements and AMC/GM material prepared by this subgroup were a good basis for non-ommerial operations. The AMC may need some adaptations to inlude only global onsiderations and provisions without limitations. Proposed shemes should be moved to GM. HME advised that he will also review Annex 6 Part III and inlude it, as appliable. HME will ompile everything in a WP and irulate it to the ore group. The WP from JTP on fatigue management for small operators will be inorporated in the WP as well. 6. ESI joined the subgroup to reflet on some disussions that took plae in Counil and Parliament. As regards the definition of omplex motorpowered airraft the parliament proposal of 19 seats may be retained if the turbojet engine is retained as well. The wording of maximum approved passenger seating apaity may be hanged to maximum ertifiated seating onfiguration. Changes are highly dependent on future Counil and Parliament disussions that ould as well result in no further hanges to the definition. The Counil had some debate on the definition of ommerial operations and those ativities that would be aptured as ommerial. It found a ompromise solution when hanging Art 6b(3) (and 6b(2)) that allowed to differentiate the need for ertifiation from the type of operation. ESI explained the importane of oversight highlighting that a suffiient oversight system ould replae the ertifiation requirement in non-ommerial operations. ESI furthermore explained the obligation of Art. 56a Penalties. The subgroup agreed that in knowing the bakground of this provision and disussion in the Counil as well as having a suffiient oversight system a ertifiation requirement may not be neessary. 7. The subgroup disussed the proposal from OPS 1 on subpart N flight rew. It was highlighted that freelane pilots need to be trained in the use of the operator s SOPs. It was also larified that onversion training, as it stands in the present draft of OPS 2, needs to be onduted when hanging operators. offered to review the flight rew requirements of OPS 1 and adapt the OPS 2 requirements aordingly. The paper will then be send to the subgroup for omments. 8. The subgroup met with the authority subgroup to disuss the delaration proess and ertifiation of operators. ESI explained the importane of oversight. A ertifiate may not ensure safety but ensures ompliane with the rules and enforement. ESI highlighted the ompetent authority responsibility of oversight and identified 4 forms of oversight: Page 2 of 9

14 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/ aess to market oversight and the publi pereption of the need of safety; 2. independent 3 rd party oversight (for example used in the SES); 3. oversight following the delaration; and 4. pure poliing ativity. ESI stated that authority self-finaning as well as authority liability needs to be taken into aount when drafting the regulation as it may have an impat on Member State authorities. It should therefore be part of the RIA. Members of both subgroups agreed on the need of a risk based oversight for operations using the delaration. This risk based oversight inludes ramp inspetion, spot heks and periodi audits and should be proportionate to the size and sope of operations. It was also agreed that the poliing ativity is important. Provided that the ompetent authority is given suffiient tools, then whether a delaration or ertifiate is in plae is not, in itself, a safety matter. It was therefore agreed that if the delaration and oversight requirements manage to be preise enough and provide appropriate tools, ertifiation for non-ommerial operations should not be neessary. In the ase of management ompanies, the owner delares to the State of registry who is responsible for managing the airraft. The operator then delares to the State where it has its priniple plae of business how it omplies with the rule. States have the obligation to exhange information. For operators onduting ommerial and non-ommerial operations an addendum to the operations manual for non-ommerial operations seems suffiient. 9. The subgroup reviewed the operations manual template and made some orretions: Ch. 0 to delete the temporary revisions table, Ch. 1 to finalise management system when the authority subgroup has published its final proposal, Ch. 4 training personnel ould refer to the NBAA Management Guide. Corret links to the ontinuing airworthiness regulations need to be established as well. JTP asked subgroup members to send him the material so that he an pull everything together. 10. The subgroup finally reviewed the OPS 2 template and made some orretions. 11. Regarding ost reovery for demo flights it was agreed that this is not a ommerial operation but an ativity linked to selling an airraft. It was however reognised that the subgroup annot give a final interpretation of the definition. 12. Regarding intra ompany harges it was explained that one orporation may have a number of wholly owned subsidiaries inluding the flight department. In suh situations, the flight department may be funded by ost reoveries from the user subsidiaries within the Page 3 of 9

15 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/2007 orporation. It was noted that most States view suh operations as nonommerial as long as the entities involved are subsidiaries of the parent ompany and the servie is not publily available. It was agreed that it would appear that the same logi ould be applied under the proposed definition of ommerial operation. 13. The subgroup bloked the week of 10 th September for a meeting, if needed. ACTION LIST No. Meeting No. / Date /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/ /11/06 Task Resp. Timeframe Status Presentation on IS-BAO Cirulate meeting doumentation of last meeting of the ECAC Task Fore on frational ownership Put link to FAR 91 Subpart K on ira website Prepare WP on the basis of JAR-OPS 0 and 2 Distribute opy of ICAO Annex 6 Part II proposal NBAA Management Guide to be put on ira Presentation on FAR 91K and on ICAO disussions when drafting the proposal Annex 6 II regarding frational ownership Chek ICAO SARPs for approval requirements Condut RIA on requirements regarding determination of mass RRO Meeting /11/ /12/06 asap asap RRO+ Meeting /11/2006 RRO asap asap DCA Meeting /01/2007 asap Group Meeting /12/2006 See ation item 11. C Page 4 of 9

16 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/2007 No. Meeting No. / Date /11/ /12/ /12/ /12/ /12/ /12/ /12/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/07 Task Resp. Timeframe Status Review JAR-OPS 1 Subparts Review draft JAR- OPS 2 Subpart J and draft a proposal for the OPS 2 rule Clarify equivalent standard to FCL Redraft OPS 2 requirements regarding the ontent and struture of an OM Review EU-OPS Subpart Q and draft proposal for OPS 2; present FTL shemes Cirulate IS-BAO heklist for guidane material ICAO ross referene list Forward request on additional membership to ore group Address the issue of legal harter within the nonommerial rules to ore group Draft requirements on frational ownership based on FAR 91 K Cosmi radiation detetion equipment: hek EU Diretive Internal doors and urtains: hek against CS GPA, DCA,, JTP, JMA Meeting /12/2006 RRO Meeting /01/2007 Meeting /01/2007 RRO Meeting /01/2007 RRO Meeting /01/2007 RRO asap Meeting /01/2007 RRO asap RRO asap DCA/ Meeting 5 Meeting 56 KBA Meeting 5 Page 5 of 9

17 No. Meeting No. / Date /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ /01/ OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/2007 Task Resp. Timeframe Status Crash axes and rowbars: soure M&B WP: inorporate omments for next meeting OM WP: inorporate omments for next meeting FTL WP: inorporate omments for next meeting Seurity WP: inorporate omments for next meeting Draft WP on abin rew Chek CS 23 regarding the means for emergeny evauation Review Delaration WP for next meeting Forward paragraph on SOP to authority subgroup to onsider for SMS Draft requirements for OPS 2 aording to disussion on ICAO ross referene list Draft WP on operations with involvement of management ompanies All Meeting 57 RRO/ RRO/ RRO/ RRO/ Meeting 5 Meeting 5 Meeting 5 Meeting 5 RRO Meeting 6 KBA Meeting 6 All Meeting 6 asap Meeting 6 GPA/ JTP Meeting 6 Draft WP on DG Meeting 67 Page 6 of 9

18 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/ Forward Delaration WP and WP on operations involving management ompanies to Authority Subgroup and request joint meeting for April Insert abin rew WP into OPS 2 template Part OPS 2 template: reflet subgroup disussions; hek requirements against ER; prepare a ross referene with ICAO Annex 6 III heliopter general aviation Preview and prepare AMC/GM material Invite Mr. Maro Pereira, Netjets for April/May meeting Prepare WP for management speifiation Draft requirements and AMC/GM material for authorities and OPS 2 Part based on the 2 WP from the nonommerial subgroup asap Meeting 7 Meeting 7 RRO/ DCA/ GPA/ KBR/ JTP/ DNE/ Meeting 7 Meeting 7 RRO Meeting /05/2007 LCR/ Meeting /05/2007 Meeting /06/2007 Page 7 of 9

19 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/ Review Canadian GM material for use as AMC/GM for OPS 2 Prepare WP on OM template for small operations Meeting /06/2007 JTP Meeting /05/ Follow-up on MAPS Meeting /05/ Review FTL text RRO Meeting /05/2007 Meeting /06/ /05/2007 Reflet subgroup disussions in Certifiation WP RRO asap /05/2007 Develop RIA of Certifiation WP further /05/2007 Follow up on abin rew disussions Review and 15-16/05/2007 develop desriptions for OM template /05/ /06/ /06/ /06/2007 Review Subpart N WP and provide omments Develop guidane material on number of minimum abin rew to take into aount speifi airraft onfigurations Develop FTL WP and irulate to ore group and subgroup; inlude JTP WP on small operations Follow-up on subgroup disussions on operations manual and omplement the information as available all Meeting /06/2007 / BLE Meeting /06/2007 all, as Meeting 9 alloated 26-27/06/2007 by JTP all before end of May BLE/ asap HME asap o JTP/ asap o o Page 8 of 9

20 OPS.001 MoM 26+27/06/ /07/2007 Page 9 of 9