# Presentation: 797452

## 2008 Annual U.S./Europe International Safety Conference

***Supporting the Future Global ******Air Transportation System***

- 2008 Annual U.S./Europe International Safety Conference

## Panel Speakers

- Philippe de Gouttes, Airbus
- AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD)
- Walter Desrosier
- General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA)
- Doug Lane, Boeing
- Aerospace Industries of America (AIA)
- Bob Mather
- International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Association (ICCAIA)

## Harmonization Needed in Global Environment

**Aviation industry** **is a global industry.  Harmonization must continue to ensure a viable, compliant, and expanding aviation industry.**
- In the global world of aviation one authority’s decisions affect all parties. Actions by individual authorities must consider the global impact.
**Harmonization** **of rulemaking is necessary to assure consistency of requirements, enabling efficient global acceptance of products**

## Harmonization Needed in Global Environment (Cont.)

**Harmonization has benefited **Industry and Authorities
- FAA/JAA Harmonization Program
- Focus on common airworthiness requirements
- Successfully addressed most significant regulatory differences
- Promotes Efficiency
- One design meets all requirements, same method of compliance applies
- Authorities can rely on each other’s findings
- Enhances Compliance
- Consistency of requirements helps ensure compliant products

## Harmonization Needed in Global Environment (Cont.)

**Continued harmonization** will:
- Prevent diverging requirements
- Create efficiency
- Ensure consistent compliance to sustain equivalent standards of safety
- Enhance the global acceptance of products
**Successful future harmonization **requires:
- Cooperation between aviation authorities
- Industry participation
- Coordination in all steps of rulemaking process

## Industry’s Concept of Future Harmonization

**Includes** design requirements, technical standards and procedural requirements
- For existing rules: identify and address differences
- Allow acceptance of differences when the safety objectives are the same (e.g., current ETOPS rules)
- Define actions to resolve the important differences
- For future rulemaking
- Require drafting teams to consider harmonization
- Need consistent intent and compliance approach, but do not need identical rule language

## Industry’s Concept of Future Harmonization (Cont.)

**Requires cooperation** between authorities:
- Agree on principles and objectives;
- Build up understanding of differences;
- Judge on basis of safety objectives;
- Coordinate implementation deadlines and findings of compliance.
- Will result in **better rules**, and **avoid implementation difficulties**.

## Industry’s Concept of Future Harmonization (Cont.)

- Encourage **participation by more authorities** in the public rulemaking process
- in order to promote acceptance of new requirements without further rework (e.g., Australia, Brazil acceptance of 14 CFR part 25 / CS-25).
- Participation in open, transparent rulemaking processes(e.g.  Review of rulemaking agendas, participating inpublic comment, etc)
- Such involvement will help to build up **understanding and trust**, enabling favorable acceptance by all national authorities.

## Some Examples of Needed Harmonization

**Design Requirements **and technical standards (not prioritized):
- Part/CS 23
- Airworthiness standards for high-performance Part 23 airplanes (very light jets, VLJ)
- Part/CS 25
- Fuel Tank Ignition – 25.981
- Ice protection
- Security regulations (e.g., design for security)
- Safety Improvements (FAA’s new part 26)
- Wiring Systems
- Aging Structure
- Operational rules which affect aircraft design or equipment
- CVR/DFDR
- Take-off and landing performance on contaminated runways
- New technology
- Fuel cells
- Engine open rotor

## Some Examples of Needed Harmonization (Cont.)

**Procedural Requirements and Policies**** **(not prioritized):
- New categories of parts for which Form 1 is not required
- Critical parts
- On-board or field software loading and part number marking
- Approval/Acceptance of 3D models
- Permit to Fly Flight Conditions
- MMEL development policy
- Repair stations

## Some Examples of Needed Harmonization (Cont.)

**ATM:**
- Interoperability and safety of future systems need to be ensured globally, through harmonized regulations and global validity of compliance findings for airborne components
- NGATS
- SES / SESAR
- ADS-B applications
- Etc.

## Conclusion

- The EASA-FAA rulemaking cooperation principles, as published in 2007, need to be sustained by:
- Strong commitment from Authorities
- Dialog with industry
- Constant monitoring and coordination, from rulemaking programming and initiation to adoption and implementation
- Industry stands ready to help develop future “harmonization” processes
- Dialog with Authorities in bilateral/multilateral oversight bodies
- Participate on dedicated standing expert groups(membership from Authorities and industry) to develop rulemaking

## Summary

- Continued harmonization is needed
- Harmonization means consistency of intent and compliance approach, but does not necessarily mean identical rule language
- Harmonization is the foundation for global acceptance of products
- Harmonization promotes increased compliance and greater efficiency
- Constant commitment, communication between Authorities and with industry are essential

## 2008 Annual U.S./Europe International Safety Conference

***Supporting the Future Global ******Air Transportation System***

- 2008 Annual U.S./Europe International Safety Conference

**QUESTIONS?**