NPA Part-M GA
NPA Part-M GA
NPA Part-M GA
6 November 2012
Background
In line with the requirements of the Basic Regulation, the Agency decided to perform an assessment of the impact of the implementation of the Part-M requirements in the General Aviation community. In order to obtain feedback on the effectiveness and proportionality of Part-M requirements for General Aviation, the Agency: - Initiated a survey on 04 July 2011, and - Organised a dedicated workshop in Cologne on 27 October 2011.
6 November 2012
Background
Following this workshop the Agency decided to create a Task Force to address Part-M for General Aviation, representing the diversity of General Aviation. The objective of the Task Force was to discuss and agree on actions to reduce the burden on the General Aviation community, differentiating 2 phases: Phase I: Change Part-M to provide alleviations in areas where high costs and no real safety benefits have been identified, limited to issues not requiring a full regulatory impact assessment. In particular: Maintenance Programmes Airworthiness Reviews Phase II: Address other issues where further action is needed but where more technical discussions and a full regulatory impact assessment are required, consider feedback received for the 2011 workshop. This may include: Rulemaking, Standardisation, Change Management, etc
6 November 2012 B2L and L workshop
3
Member Andreas Winkler Florence Leblond Joseph Sambiase Jiri Duda Dan kerman Holger Mhrke Klaus Ardey David G. Roberts Ian Robinson Jan Fridrich Werner Scholz Juan Anton Rgine Hamelijnck Jannes Neumann Mark Kieft
4
Phase I approach
Bottom-up approach
ELA 1/ELA 2 aircraft not used in commercial operations
Airworthiness Review
Maintenance Programme
6 November 2012
Scope
6 November 2012
11
6 November 2012
12
Currently, the MP for a particular aircraft registration will use as a basis, and among other aspects, the data issued by the Design Approval Holder (TC holder, STC holder, etc.). New option for ELA1 aircraft (except airships) not involved in commercial operations: The owner may use the Minimum Inspection Programmes (Appendix IX to Part-M) as the basis for the declared MP. NOTE: The MP still has to be customised to the particular aircraft registration (see M.A.302(h) and the template contained in AMC M.A.302(e))
6 November 2012
13
6 November 2012
16
6 November 2012
17
6 November 2012
6 November 2012
19
Proposal 7: Indirect approval by CAMO of the scope of work AMC M.B.703 has been amended to clarify that: It is possible for the NAA to endorse in the Form 14 (approval certificate) a scope of work for a certain aircraft group (example, Group 3), while the scope of work defined in the manual (CAME) does not include all Group 3 aircraft. - In this case, the NAA should be satisfied that the CAMO has the capability to manage the full Group 3. However, Baseline/Generic MP or individual MP (for contracted customers), are only needed for those aircraft types included in the detailed CAME scope of work. Changes to the scope of work in the manual (CAME) not affecting the Form 14 (example, the addition of a new aircraft type within Group 3) could be approved by the CAMO via an indirect approval procedure. - It is at that time when the Baseline/Generic MP or individual MP (for contracted customers) must be available for the new aircraft types.
6 November 2012
20