Story ID: 
EASA Releases A-NPA on Light Aircraft Standards
By: Kerry Lynch
Caption: EASA moving forward as timing in the U.S. remains uncertain.
Word Count: 731
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) released for comment an advance notice of proposed amendment (A-NPA 2015-06) that would rewrite certification standards covering most piston, turboprop and light turbine aircraft. Issued today, the A-NPA moves forward on an international effort to create a consensus approach to certification standards for CS-23/Part 23 aircraft. It was developed through an industry-government rulemaking committee reflecting the recommendations of the international Part 23 Reorganization Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC). The ARC, which included industry and regulatory officials from numerous countries, had established a goal of doubling safety while reducing the cost of certification by half.

In releasing the A-NPA, the EASA said, “Through this reorganization…a new concept will be introduced. The EASA certification specifications will be replaced by objective requirements that are design-independent and applicable to the entire range of airplanes within CS-23.”

The high-level objective requirements facilitate the development of more detailed standards that are adopted by a global standard-setting body. They provide for acceptable airworthiness design standards and means of compliance. “This flexibility is intended to encourage the introduction of safety-enhancing features and reduce certification costs for these types of airplanes,” the EASA said. The agency was careful to point out while the consensus process will enable faster adoption, it still retains ultimate responsibility for acceptance of those standards.

Greg Bowles, director of European regulatory affairs and engineering for the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, said the rulemaking package is “technology neutral,” written to accommodate new technologies such as electric airplanes. The proposal moves away from the prescriptive approach—for example, what needs to be in place for recovery of loss of control—to more performance-based—for instance, how to prevent inadvertent loss of control.

The rulemaking essentially covers aircraft that carry up to 19 passengers and weigh up to 8,618 kilograms (19,000 pounds), which is the same scope of the U.S. FAR Part 23 rules. While they cover the range from light pistons to more sophisticated turbine-powered aircraft, the standards would be better tailored to the performance and complexity of the aircraft.

Bowles notes that the A-NPA significantly streamlines the CS-23 rule, from a current document that includes about 170 pages to a potential rule that would approach about 20 pages. That does not include the specific standards for each aircraft, though.

The publication of the A-NPA puts the EASA on a much faster pace to release the document than the FAA. The EASA is accepting comments for three months and hopes to have an NPA later this year with a decision in the first half of 2016. This rule would not require European Commission review, Bowles said.

The EASA had been coordinating with the FAA on the development of the new rule, hoping to align the timing of the release as best as possible. But FAA officials have pushed back the timeline by a couple of years and have ceased open discussions since the proposal entered the rulemaking process.

This prevents dialog between the two government organizations on the drafting of the rule. The EASA's publication of the A-NPA and its call for comments might provide the FAA with an opportunity to provide input and provide a sense of direction. 

As for the timing of the U.S. rule, Congress had mandated that the FAA complete the final rule by year-end. But senior FAA officials have said the agency is targeting the end of 2017, two years after the congressional mandate. Industry groups were pushing the agency to release a notice of proposed rulemaking this summer, fearing any later could further delay the rule as the U.S. enters a presidential election season that brings in a new administration.

Bowles praised the A-NPA for including “very mature language” that had been in line with the goals of the FAA and the ARC. “We view this very positively,” he said.

The CS-23/Part 23 rewrite has been viewed as a potential template for similar rewrites for larger, more complex equipment. The FAA and industry are looking at some of the concepts for Part 27 and 29 next, but FAA Administrator Michael Huerta has not ruled out possibilities for Part 25 as well.

However, Bowles stressed that the rewrite must be put in place for lighter aircraft first, adding, “We have to show it works. We have to show it succeeds.”