Generelt

4. Oktober 2011

Commission Regulation EC No. 2042/2003 Annex I (Part M)

Relaterede EASA decisions

”Acceptable means of compliance (AMC)”

”Guidens Material (GM)”

EASA og General Aviation (GA)

GA er jo ikke raketvidenskab

EASA og GA

Hvem er GA problematikken henvendt til ?

Type af operation:

EASA og GA

Hvem er GA problematikken henvendt til ?

Type af luftfartøj:

EASA og GA

http://easa.europa.eu/events/events.php?startdate=27-10-011&page=Part-M_GA_Workshop

EASA og GA

EASA og GA

Emner til Part M - GA ”workshop”:

• Format of the rules

• Generic maintenance programs and indirect approval procedures

• Approval/acceptance of repairs and modifications

• Acceptance of components from US and Canada

• Scope of work authorised to the pilot-owner

• Scope of work authorised to independent certifying staff

• Licensing requirements for certifying staff

• Qualification and position (incompatibilities) requirements for airworthiness review staff

• Performance of the airworthiness review and issuance of ARC

Fortsat Luftdygtigheds styringsaftale

M.A.201 Responsibilities

The owner is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of an aircraft and shall ensure that no flight takes place unless:

1. the aircraft is maintained in an airworthy condition, and;

2. any operational and emergency equipment fitted is correctly installed and serviceable or clearly identified as unserviceable, and;

3. the airworthiness certificate remains valid, and;

4. the maintenance of the aircraft is performed in accordance with the approved maintenance programme as specified in M.A.302.

(e) In order to satisfy the responsibilities of paragraph (a),

(i) The owner of an aircraft may contract the tasks associated with continuing airworthiness to a continuing airworthiness management organisation approved in accordance with Section A, Subpart G of this Annex (Part M). In this case, the continuing airworthiness management organisation assumes responsibility for the proper accomplishment of these tasks.

Fortsat Luftdygtigheds styringsaftale

Appendix I

Continuing Airworthiness Arrangement

5.2. Obligations of the owner:

not modify the aircraft without first consulting the approved

organisation;

inform the approved organisation of all maintenance exceptionally

carried out without the knowledge and control of the approved

organisation;

report to the approved organisation through the logbook all defects

Found during operations;

inform on a regular basis the approved organisation about the

aircraft flying hours and any other utilisation data, as agreed with

the approved organisation;

CAMO Contracting

SUBPART B ACCOUNTABILITY

M.A.201 Responsibilities

h) In the case of commercial air transport the operator is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft it operates and shall:

Be approved, as part of the air operator certificate issued by the competent authority, pursuant to M.A. Subpart G for the aircraft it operates;

AOC holder skal være godkendt i henhold til Part M

subpart G altså med en CAMO.

CAMO Contracting

CAMO Contracting

„Contracting of continuing airworthiness management activities‟

CAMO Contracting

Issue: Continuing Airworthiness Management of aircraft

The current regulation:

Requires the CAT operator to manage the continuing airworthiness

of its fleet itself and therefore to be CAMO approved;

Allows any CAMO (linked to a CAT operator or not) to contract (to

approved or nonapproved organisations) certain CAM tasks under

its own quality system.

CAMO Contracting

The Agency proposes:

to provide more AMCs/GMs on the level of involvement of

the CAMO when it decides to contract certain CAM tasks

under its own quality system,

to amend the requirements of Part-M to provide more

flexibility to a CAT operator by allowing it to contract the

full CAM of its aircraft to an approved CAMO registered in

a Member State, subject to the introduction of appropriate

controls.

CAMO Contracting

Common Responce Document (CRD) not ready.

CAMO Quality Monitoring

CAMO quality monitoring of contracted activities to the Part 145 (Part F) organisations

Contracting not sub-contracting

CAMO Quality Monitoring

Dear Gian Andrea,

M.A.712 does not talk about "audits" but about "monitoring".

According to M.A.712(a), it is the function and responsibility of the

Quality System and the Quality Manager to "monitor" compliance

with, and the adequacy of, procedures required to ensure airworthy

aircraft.

This includes at least the areas described in M.A.712(b),which

includes "monitoring" that all contracted maintenance is carried out

in accordance with the contract.

CAMO Quality Monitoring

Looking now to AMC M.A.712(a) and AMC A.712(b), it is

clear that the "monitoring" function includes the performance of

"audits" (in addition it also includes a "feedback" system).

Nevertheless, and no matter the terms we use, what I think

should be clear for everybody is the following:

In order for the CAMO to comply with M.A.708(a) it must

continuously verify (or “monitor”, or “check”or whatever they want

to call it) that the maintenance is performed in accordance with the

contract.

CAMO Quality Monitoring

Otherwise they cannot ensure, for example,That:

“all maintenance is performed in accordance with the

maintenance programme and released in accordance with

M.A. Subpart H”.

This responsibility can not be transferred to the Quality System

because the audits they perform (as part of the monitoring function

described in M.A.712 only happen periodically). These audits should

be focused on verifying that the CAMO is properly monitoring

compliance with the maintenance contracts, which of course should

not only include verifying that the CAMO is monitoring compliance

with the contract but also some actual sampling of maintenance

activities verifying that they have been performed according to the

contract.

CAMO Quality Monitoring

Best regards

Juan Anton

Continuing Airworthiness Manager

Product safety unit – Rulemaking Directorate

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)

CAMO Quality Monitoring

En CAMO‟s kvalitets afdeling, skal altså ikke gennemfører en Part

145 audit af en ”kontraktet” organisation, for at tilfredsstille

kravene jf. MA 712 samt MA 708. Man kan altså accepterer den

godkendelse som den pågældende Part 145 organisation har fået

udstedt af myndighederne og stole på at, disse myndigheder samt

organisationens kvalitetssystem, har sikret tilfredsstillende forhold i

den ”kontraktede” organisation.

Men en CAMO‟s kvalitets afdeling bør tjekke at organisationen,

kontinuerligt bruger og tjekker de procedure og processer som er

indeholdt i kontrakten. Og som et tillæg hertil lave ”stikprøve

kontrol” af de elementer som kontrakten omhandler. For eksempel

komponenter eller luftfartøjer med fysisk audit og gennemgang af

dokumentation for samme.

EASA Standardisation

Hvorfor er myndighederne så forskellige i deres måde at behandle de samme sager ?

Hvad gør Trafikstyrelsen for at “ensrette” sagsbehandlingen landene imellem?

Hvad gør EASA for at “ensrette” sagsbehandlingen?

EASA Standardisation

Maintenance Standardisation Team ( MAST)

Competent Authorities Standardisation Meetings

Ca. to gange årligt

Agreed Practises er nu blevet til “conclusions”

Spørgsmål ?