The EASA Opinion on the “European Commission policy initiative on aviation safety and a possible revision of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008” was published on 16 March 2015. This Opinion is one essential input to the EU Commission’s work on a legislative proposal for a comprehensive revision of the Basic Regulation.
Ralf Erckmann, Head of EASA’s Certification Policy & Safety Information Department, has coordinated the development of the Opinion which is the outcome of an extensive process leading, from the preparation of an Advanced Notice of Proposed Amendment (A-NPA) and careful analysis feedback from stakeholders, to the recent publication.
Mr. Erckmann, why is it necessary to revise the EASA Basic Regulation?
Aviation is a very dynamic domain covering a wide range of different industries as well as non-commercial activities. Advanced technologies, new business models, globalised systems of design and production develop rapidly and the scope and pace of change create new challenges for regulators.
Now it is time not only to respond to the diverse feedback we have received in recent years from external stakeholders about the EASA system, but also to address the “lessons learnt” within the Agency. Twelve years after the Agency was established, we operate in a stable and effective way; we now want to ensure that the system is fit to deal successfully with emerging challenges, such as the implementation of new technologies, further growth in air traffic, cooperation with emerging countries and addressing inherent resource issues. In the end, all of this aim to achieve EASA’s vision “Ever safer and greener civil aviation”. A more holistic approach in some areas should also increase its efficiency.
When and how did this process for a revision of the Basic Regulation start?
At the beginning of 2014, our new Executive Director, Patrick Ky, nominated me as person responsible within EASA to lead and coordinate the process of reviewing - and eventually revising - the Basic Regulation. Instantly we established a small core team to organise the work to be done and ensure close coordination with our counterparts from the European Commission. From the start, we had had extreme time pressure and high expectations from inside and outside the Agency. It was certainly a challenge, but also helped us to focus on fundamental issues and avoid getting lost in endless strategic discussions.
How did you organise the work internally?
Through a series of internal brain-storming sessions in 2009, the Agency began collecting subjects that ought to be addressed in the future. This was our starting point, together with other input we received from a specific Management Board Sub-Group established for this purpose, the famous “Article 62” evaluation of the EASA system and different studies from external consultants. All this material was developed further into the list of items finally addressed in the A-NPA and, subsequently, in the Opinion published on 16 March 2015. Throughout the entire process, I received great support from many colleagues in different areas: problem definition, drafting the A-NPA and the Opinion and – last but not least – reviewing more than 6000 comments we received during the consultation process. Given the time constraints and expectations from our own management, the European
Commission and other stakeholders, we had to take some unusual shortcuts in the established rulemaking process. That we succeeded in the end was only possible through an Agency-wide effort of many experienced and highly motivated people.
What is the main outcome of this process?
Whilst the European Commission’s policy initiative takes a broader view of the current European aviation system, our Opinion focusses more specifically on EASA and its Basic Regulation. However, this does not mean that the Opinion would only be limited to Basic Regulation changes. In fact, we also make several proposals for improvement which would mainly take place outside the scope of the Basic Regulation, such as availability of high quality training for Industry and Authorities, as well as a more proportionate and performance-based approach to new regulations and oversight.
In the narrow sense of the Basic Regulation revision, we suggest proceeding in various areas with the aim of further streamlining and ‘defragmenting’ the existing framework. The most significant areas are: General Aviation changes according to the General Aviation Road Map results; the optional and partial inclusion of Member State services; adjustments to Annex II; elaboration of responsibilities for security among different EU institutions; development of minimum safety standards to be addressed to Ground Handling Service Providers; clarification of institutional responsibilities for Single European Sky issues; EASA’s role in research coordination, its efficient use of available resources and sustainable funding solutions. Taken as a whole, the Opinion covers a wide range of topics that have an impact on civil aviation.
What are the next steps now?
First of all, the European Commission now needs to decide which of our proposals should find their way into a legislative proposal for the revision of the Basic Regulation. This is not in our hands anymore, but we have developed a very cooperative and collegial relationship with our counterparts in DG MOVE and we do not expect major dissenting views. If the European Commission decides to proceed on the basis of our Opinion, we will support them in the detailed legal drafting. This would certainly be another huge challenge but, with our team of experienced and dedicated colleagues from all directorates within EASA, I am confident we would succeed.
References available in EASA’s website : Opinion 01/2015 and A-NPA 2014-12
