FAQ

FAQs on other topics can be found here.

What is the comitology procedure?

Under the Treaty the European Commission is responsible for the required implementation of Community legislation in many areas. When exercising these delegated powers it is often obliged to work with national civil servants appointed by Member States in different committees. These committees, which are a forum for discussions and the voicing of opinions, are chaired by the European Commission.

For the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 (the Basic Regulation, BR) the European Commission is assisted by the EASA committee and the Single European Sky committee. Another committee of importance as regards aviation safety is the Air Safety committee, which is best known for being the guardian of the so called ‘Safety list’ as provided by Directive 2004/36/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on the safety of third-country aircraft using Community airports.

The procedures which govern the work of these committees follow the standard procedures established in Regulation (EU) 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers. It replaces Decision 1999/468/EC. This Regulation introduces a new ‘comitology’ procedure, which gives somewhat amended rights to Member States to control the way the Commission uses its delegated powers. The powers conferred to the European Parliament have been reduced slightly by the new Regulation and an Appeals Committee has been introduced in case no agreement can be reached in the committee. The latest comitology regulation can be consulted using the following link.

In principle the new comitology works as follows:

For the adoption of detailed implementing rules, the basic act may provide for the application of the examination procedure or the advisory procedure, taking into account the nature or the impact of the implementing act required.

The examination procedure applies, in particular, for the adoption of:

  1. Implementing acts of general scope;
  2. Other implementing acts relating to:
    1. programmes with substantial implications;
    2. the common agricultural and common fisheries policies;
    3. the environment, security and safety, or protection of the health or safety, of humans, animals or plants;
    4. the common commercial policy;
    5. taxation.

The advisory procedure applies, as a general rule, for the adoption of implementing acts not falling within the ambit of the aforementioned areas. However, the advisory procedure may apply for the adoption of the implementing acts referred to there in duly justified cases.

For the adoption of EASA implementing measures in the field of ATM/ANS and aerodromes only one procedure is relevant: the examination procedure.

However, to understand comitology in conjunction with the ATM and aerodromes regulatory processes it should be taken into account that the BR still refers to the old comitology process. In particular Articles 8a (Aerodromes) and 8c (Air Traffic Controllers) refer to Article 65(4) of the BR, which reads as follows:

Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5a (1) to (4), and Article 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.

Under the old regime this was dealt with by Single Sky and EASA committees using the Regulatory Procedure with Scrutiny.

Article 8b of the BR, however, refers to Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, which reads as follows:

Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.

This was dealt with by the Single Sky Committee under the Regulatory Procedure (without scrutiny).
As said before, the new Regulation 182/2011 repeals the old comitology Decision, however, its Article 12 indicates that:

  • The effects of Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be maintained for the purposes of existing basic acts making reference thereto.

So the regulatory procedure with scrutiny stays.

Article 13 indicates:

c. where the basic act makes reference to Article 5 of Decision 1999/468/EC, the examination procedure referred to in Article 5 of this Regulation shall apply ….

This means that the examination procedure replaces the old regulatory procedure. However, the examination procedure does not differ very much from the regulatory procedure. The whole procedure stays with the Single Sky committee and the EASA committee, even if no agreement is reached. It may in that case go to an appeal committee. In exceptional cases there may even be a consultation round by the Commission amongst the Member States. The Council is no longer involved. Parliament is involved only at a distance.

Conclusion:

Procedures applicable to aerodromes rules and ATCO licensing will hardly change.
Procedures applicable to ATM/ANS rulemaking will stay within the SSC, with possibility of appeals committee; there is no Council involvement; Parliament’s involvement only on distance.

What does cover regulation mean?

Implementing rules are Commission Regulations. They are usually composed of a short introductory regulation, colloquially known as ‘cover regulation’, and Annexes thereto, containing the technical requirements for implementation. In the EASA system, these Annexes are usually called Parts (e.g. Part-21 is an Annex to Regulation 1702/2003).

The ‘cover’ regulation is usually short (3-4 pages) and it includes:

  • Considering clauses (“whereas”), explaining the principles and considerations that lead the legislator when adopting the Regulation;
  • A description of the objective and scope of the regulation;
  • Definitions that are used throughout the Regulation and its Annexes;
  • the establishment of the applicability of its annex(es)
  • Conversion and transition measures

Where can I find definitions for ‘shall’, ‘must’, ‘should’ and ‘may’, as used in the Agency’s rulemaking publications?

This question relates to the English writing standards used in Community legislation. The following link gives access to the English Style Guide prepared by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Translation. Guidance concerning the use of verbs in legislation can be found in paragraphs 6.14-6.22, as well as an explanation of the distinction between the verbs used in enacting or non-enacting terms. For more information click here . The Joint Practical Guide of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission also gives guidance on the principles of drafting Community legislation, for more information click here

Will the new rules be available in all official languages of the European Union and where are the rules published?

The implementing rule will be available in all official languages of the European Union. They will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union and can also be searched electronically in the database EUR-LEX.  And later on also on the EASA web site.

AMC, GM and CS will be available on the website of EASA in English only.

Implementing Rules are available in all of the national languages of the EASA Member States. How is the quality of these translations assured? Who is responsible for the translations?

EASA is committed to facilitating the production of good quality translations. To ensure this and, where necessary, to improve, EASA has set up a Translation Working Group in 2008. This Working Group is made up of members of the National Aviation Authorities (NAAs), the Translation Centre of the EU Bodies (CdT), as well as EASA staff members. Also, EASA in cooperation with NAAs and CdT, is developing glossaries in the different aviation domains, such as Air Operations or Air Traffic Management, to enhance the quality of translations. The Member States also contribute to this project in order to capitalise on existing material and experience.

The final responsibility for translations lies with the EU Commission. The correction of translation mistakes of the Implementing Rules follows the same formal procedure as for their adoption: 1. preparation of the proposal, 2. interservice consultation, 3. committee, 4. scrutiny of European Parliament and of European Council, and 5. adoption. For minor mistakes, the procedure may be shorter. In any case, the linguistic changes will have to be agreed by the Commission’s translation services. These linguistic services will check that no substantial change is introduced, that the term used is acceptable according to an internal translation code or that the same change is included in all linguistic versions.

What is the scope of the Basic Regulation regarding aerodromes foreseen under Art. 4 Para. (3a)?

[3a of amending Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009] Aerodromes, including equipment, located in the territory subject to the provisions of the treaty, open to public use and which serve commercial air transport and where operations using instrument approach or departure procedures are provided, and:

  1. have a paved runway of 800 metres or above; or
  2. exclusively serve helicopters;  
    shall comply with this Regulation. Personnel and organisations involved in the operation of these aerodromes shall comply with this Regulation.  

What is the definition of an IR, AMC and CS and GM and what differences can be proposed?

Implementing Rules (IR) are binding in their entirety and used to specify a high and uniform level of safety and uniform conformity and compliance. The IRs are adopted by the European Commission in the form of Regulations.

Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) are non-binding. The AMC serves as a means by which the requirements contained in the Basic Regulation, and the IR, can be met. However, applicants may decide to show compliance with the requirements using other means. Both NAAs and organisations may propose alternative means of compliance. ‘Alternative Means of Compliance’ are those that propose an alternative to an existing AMC. Those Alternative Means of Compliance proposals must be accompanied by evidence of their ability to meet the intent of the IR. Use of an existing AMC gives the user the benefit of compliance with the IR.

Certification Specifications (CS) are non-binding technical standards adopted by the EASA to meet the essential requirements of the Basic Regulation. CSs are used to establish the certification basis (CB) as described below. Should an aerodrome operator not meet the recommendation of the CS, they may propose an Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) that demonstrates how they meet the intent of the CS. As part of an agreed CB, the CS become binding on an individual basis to the applicant. 

Special Conditions (SC) are non-binding special detailed technical specifications determined by the NAA for an aerodrome if the certification specifications established by the EASA are not adequate or are inappropriate to ensure conformity of the aerodrome with the essential requirements of Annex Va to the Basic Regulation. Such inadequacy or inappropriateness may be due to:

  • the design features of the aerodrome; or
  • where experience in the operation of that or other aerodromes, having similar design features, has shown that safety may be compromised. 

SCs, like CSs, become binding on an individual basis to the applicant as part of an agreed CB.

Guidance Material (GM) is non-binding explanatory and interpretation material on how to achieve the requirements contained in the Basic Regulation, the IRs, the AMCs and the CSs. It contains information, including examples, to assist the user in the interpretation and application of the Basic Regulation, its IRs, AMCs and the CSs.

Does EASA provide justification for provisions adopted from Annex 14 when they are equal, above or below the SARP?

The current Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA 2011-20) on aerodrome safety contains tables giving justifications. None is given when the draft rules are at the level of Annex 14, however, should they differ either way, full justification is provided and published in the NPA to support the change.

Will EASA provide guidance on how and when to use an ‘alternative CS’ ?

The term ‘alternative CS’ does not exist. The rulemaking groups drafted appropriate CSs. However, alternatives to a CS may be proposed by an operator in the form of an ELOS and by NAAs in the form of an Special Condition (see also above under definition of Certification Specifications and Special Conditions). 

What is meant with Certification Basis under Art. 8a, para. 2a and 2b of Regulation (EC) 1108/2009?

Awarding of an aerodrome certificate is a two stage process. The first stage is to establish the Certification Base (CB) using:

  • the applicable Certification Specifications (CSs). 
  • any proposed Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) by the applicant.
  • any special conditions (SCs) determined and notified by the NAA.

Once the first stage is finalised, the second stage involves using the Aerodrome Manual and Aerodrome Inspections to assess the aerodrome operator’s ability to meet the requirements of the Basic Regulation (i.e. the Essential Requirements (ER) and Implementing Rules (IR)). 
The NAA will issue the certificate(s) when:

  • the applicant has shown that the aerodrome complies with the agreed CB;
  • the aerodrome has no features or characteristics making it unsafe for operation.
  • it has approved the Aerodrome Manual submitted by the operator; and
  • the aerodrome operator has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the NAA, compliance with the applicable requirements of the ERs and IRs and any other applicable requirements, that have been notified by the NAA.

What happens to the existing aerodrome deviations under the CB process?

Existing Certificates/Licences have to be transferred into aerodrome certificates under the Basic Regulation. The new IRs will define the criteria for the transfer. It is proposed within the certification process that all aerodrome deviations should be individually addressed to identify suitable mitigation measures as appropriate. In some circumstances a safety assessment will need to be undertaken to establish an ELOS that will be included in the CB proposal; in other cases the NAA may propose an SC to be included in the application for the certificate.

What will be the transition period?

The transition period is called “conversion” and can be found under Art. 6 of the draft Implementing Regulation contained in the NPA; therein EASA proposes it to be 48 months, giving the NAAs the chance to convert existing certificates into those that are based on European rules.

To what extent will NAAs be allowed to take into account the differing environments and location of aerodromes: to what extent is there flexibility possible?

NAAs will be able to introduce Special Conditions (SCs) or assess any proposed Equivalent Levels of Safety (ELOS) to ensure the environment or location does not compromise an aerodrome’s ability to meet certification requirements.  

Would it be possible to first concentrate on the larger airports and deal with the regional airports/aerodromes later?

It is expected that NAAs will develop an internal plan for conversion of certificates commensurate with the types of aerodromes they oversee and ensuring they meet the proposed 48 months conversion period.

Does the EASA certificate replace the ICAO certificate? Is that explicitly stated in the BR?

Signatory States to the Chicago Convention are obliged to certify their aerodromes based on national legislation implementing the ICAO requirements. This generally leads to the awarding of a National Aerodrome Certificate/Licence. Within the EU, Member States have transferred to the Union the power to legislate in the area of safety of aerodromes. Therefore, as from entry into force of the IRs, Member States will continue to certify their aerodromes but in accordance with the Basic Regulation and its IRs, where the aerodromes in the EASA remit are concerned. 

Is it still planned that only Member State authorities undertake audits and issue certificates or is it planned that EASA will do its own audits in the area of safety, like those done by the EU Commission for aviation security?

EASA will undertake standardisation visits to the NAAs covering the certification of aerodromes, (similar to those in the area of continuing airworthiness). Some aerodromes may be visited to better understand the dealings between the authority and the aerodrome operator, but EASA would not raise findings against the operator.

Will the transposition of Annex 14 be into the implementing rules or with dynamic reference to the Annex 14?

Transposition of Annex 14 will be reflected into Implementing Rules, Acceptable Means of Compliance, Certification Specifications and Guidance Material, as found appropriate for each case. For more details please see the Explanatory Note to the NPA.

How will the differentiation between Standards and Recommendations be treated in the transition to the new rules? 

In considering transposition of the Standards & Recommended Practices (SARPs), the rulemaking working groups have found it necessary to use a case-by-case approach to determine, whether for EASA Member States, uniform application through IR is necessary or feasible. Where an IR is not necessary or feasible, AMC would be the appropriate transposition. This would also result in the complementary use of the verb ‘should’. For such cases, a high level requirement or safety objective should also be introduced or identified at the level of the IR. Additionally, some Recommended Practices may be more appropriate as GM, particularly for those provisions for which compliance cannot be measured. 
In addition to the above, working groups have attempted to follow the general understanding that; 

  • the majority of SARPs related to design will be transposed into a CS;  and 
  • everything else that implies an obligation of the operator will be transposed as an IR or AMC 

What is the timeline for the issue of the first draft implementing rules? 

The Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) was published in early December 2011. Publication of the Opinion by EASA is planned for December 2012 and finally that the IRs shall be adopted by the Commission before 31 December 2013.

Is it planned to have two different certificates, one for the aerodrome operator and one for the aerodrome infrastructure? 

Based on Art. 8a 2d both options are possible; the Member States will decide which certificates are to be issued. However, it is normally expected to be only one combined certificate.

What will be the development for aerodrome SMS? Will the EASA copy the ICAO concept or is something additional planned? 

The ICAO SMS concept will be adopted under the implementing rules for aerodrome operator organisations, called Organisation Requirements (see in the NPA).

Is an extension of the applicability of the EASA rules towards smaller aerodromes planned? 

Nothing at this stage, but Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 under recital (6) includes this as a future possibility.

Is it planned to have a regulation for the design of heliports? 

Yes, as required by the Basic Regulation. However, implementing measures for heliports (Annex 14, Volume II, Heliports) both in terms of stand-alone Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) heliports as well as Visual Flight Rules (VFR) heliports collocated at certified aerodromes will be done at a later stage. Until these implementing rules are in place, the respective national regulations will be applicable, to the extent they do not conflict with applicable rules of the EU.   

What is the meaning of Acceptance and Conversion?

Art. 8a of Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009, amending Regulation (EC) No 216/2008:
5(g) the conditions for the acceptance and for the conversion of aerodrome certificates issued by Member States, including measures which are already authorised by the Member State concerned on the basis of notified deviations from Annex 14 of the Chicago Convention before the entry into force of this Regulation

The EASA has been given the task of developing measures that allow Member States to convert their existing Aerodrome Certificates/Licences, based on National Aviation rules, into an Aerodrome Certificate, issued in accordance with the Basic Regulation and its IRs.

Prior to developing measures to address the task above, the period of 48 months to allow to Member States to convert their existing Aerodrome Certificates/Licences into Aerodrome Certificates under the Basic Regulation has been described as ‘Transition’. However, following the evolution of these measures, this term has been replaced by ‘Conversion’. Therefore, ‘Conversion’ relates to the dimension of time only and not the process involved in exchanging the old Certificate for the new one.

The major change following the introduction of the measures is the ‘Acceptance’ process involved in converting the existing Certificate/Licence. In principle, it allows the NAA to transfer the conditions of the existing Certificate/Licence to the new Certificate. The Basic Regulation does not foresee ‘Grandfathering’ of existing deviations or non-compliances. It is expected that existing deviations or non-compliances will be jointly reviewed during the acceptance procedure and compared with the new rules. Any that remain will be included in the new Deviation Acceptance & Action Document (DAAD). This document will include an action plan describing the conditions that may result in the removal of those deviations. Unlike the conversion, the DAAD action plan is not time bound. However; NAAs are encouraged to review the action plan periodically as appropriate.

This mechanism is designed to keep the acceptance procedure simple and the use of the DAAD will minimise the burden on NAAs and Aerodromes during the acceptance process and ensure continuity of the aerodrome operation.

What is the DAAD?

As described under the question above, the acceptance process is designed to allow Aerodromes to easily exchange their existing Aerodrome Certificates/Licences for a new one based on the EU rules. The Deviation Acceptance & Action Document (DAAD) has been developed to support the acceptance process only. It is not intended for the DAAD to be used in any other circumstances. It should be produced jointly by the NAA and the Aerodrome to document those existing deviations and non-compliances that remain after reviewing them with the new aerodrome rules. It should be noted that the EASA will take no part in the acceptance process; it is purely an action between the NAA and the Aerodrome.
Remaining deviations and non-compliances included in the DAAD should be accompanied with an action plan that indicates the conditions appropriate to removing them and/or any possible mitigation measures while they remain on the list. Once agreed, the DAAD will be attached to the new Certificate, possibly with caveats requiring review obligations.
It is intended that the DAAD will be individual to each Aerodrome, but may also contain state-wide elements as deemed appropriate by the NAA.