REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL EUROPEAN UNION SAFA PROGRAMME
Date: 2011-03-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air safety, civil aviation, roadworthiness tests, safety standard

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 31.3.2011 
COM(2011) 159 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

EUROPEAN UNION SAFA PROGRAMME 

SEC(2011) 301 final 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

EUROPEAN UNION SAFA PROGRAMME 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

THE EU SAFA PROGRAMME  

1.1. 

Aviation  safety  as  key  priority  for  the  European  Union  and  for  its  Member 
States 

Aviation safety constitutes a priority for the European Union (EU) and for its Member States. 
In  the  light  of  this  objective,  a  key  instrument  is  the  EU  Safety  Assessment  of  Foreign 
Aircraft (SAFA)  programme.  This  programme requires participating  States  to  conduct ramp 
inspections on third country aircraft to verify compliance of aircraft, crew and operations with 
application  international  safety  requirements.  Ever  since  its  inception  under  the  auspices  of 
the  European  Civil  Aviation  Conference  (ECAC)  in  association  with  the  Joint  Aviation 
Authorities  (JAA)  back  in  1996,  the  SAFA  programme  has  increasingly  proven  to  be  a 
vanguard in enhancing European, and indeed international, aviation safety. 

The EU has from the outset fully endorsed and supported the SAFA programme, participating 
actively through membership in the SAFA Steering Committee and also through the provision 
of funding made available to the JAA by the European Commission. 

Within  the  framework  of  the  Community's  overall  strategy  to  establish  and  maintain  a  high 
uniform  level  of  civil  aviation  safety  in  Europe,  on  21  April  2004  the  Community  adopted 
Directive 2004/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the safety of third-
country  aircraft  using  Community  airports1  (the  so-called  'SAFA  Directive').  This  Directive 
introduced a legal obligation upon EU Member States to perform ramp inspections upon third 
country  aircraft  landing  at  their  airports,  where  ‘third  country  aircraft’  implied  an  aircraft 
which is not used or operated under control of a competent authority of an EU Member State; 
although  the  Directive  does  in  no  way  prohibit  EU  Member  States  from  inspecting  aircraft 
from  other  EU  Member  States.  EU  Member  States  were  given  a  window  of  two  years  for 
implementing this Directive through the enactment of national legislation.2

In  addition  and  following  a  decision  by  the  Directors  General  of  ECAC  member  states,  the 
SAFA  programme  was  transferred  under  European  Community  competence  where  as  of 
1 January 2007, responsibility for the management and further development of the EU SAFA 
programme  falls  upon  the  European  Commission  assisted  by  the  European  Aviation  Safety 
Agency  (EASA).  EASA  is  a  European  Commission  agency  based  in  Cologne  which  is 
responsible  for  the  operational  management  of  the  EU  SAFA  programme  on  behalf  of  the 
same Commission in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) 768/2006.3

1 
2 

3 

OJ L 143, 30.4.2004, p. 76. 
See in particular Report from the Commission on Safety of Third-Country Aircraft using Community 
Airports dated 24.9.2008. C(2008) 5265 final. 
OJ L 134, 20.5.2006, p. 16. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
  
  
                                                 
Until  2006  the  operational  elements  of  the  SAFA  programme  were  implemented  by  the 
Central  Joint  Aviation  Authorities  (CJAA).  At  the  end  of  2006  the  SAFA  coordination 
activities including the centralised database have been transferred from CJA A to EASA. 

The  continued  participation  of  the  fifteen  non-EU  ECAC  Member  States,  and  thus  the  pan-
European dimension of the programme, has been assured through the signature of a Working 
Arrangement  between  each  of  these  individual  States  and  EASA.  Including  the  EU-27 
therefore, the EU-SAFA programme boasts a total of 42 participating States (see Appendix A 
to the accompanying Staff Working Paper of the Commission). 

1.2.  Why this report? 

This  report  constitutes  a  clear  evidence  of  EU's  efforts  in  making  European  skier  safer. 
Transparency  of  safety  information  and  sharing  of  the  major  conclusions  pursuant  to  the 
SAFA  inspections  are  fundamental  tenets  of  a  safe  air  transportation  system.  Public 
confidence  in  the  safety  of  air  transportation  is  also  contingent  upon  access  to  adequate 
information  regarding  the  implementation  of  international  safety  standards.  In  this  context, 
Article  6  (2)  of  Directive  2004/36/EC  requires  the  Commission  to  publish  yearly  an 
aggregated information report available to the public and the industry stakeholders containing 
an  analysis  of  all  information  received.  The  analysis  needs  to  be  simple  and  easy  to 
understand and shall indicate whether there exists an increased safety risk to air passengers. 

This is the fourth annual report covering the period 01 January to 31 December 2009. 

1.3. 

Functioning of the EU SAFA programme 

In each SAFA participating State, aircraft (third-country for EU states or foreign for non-EU 
ECAC  states)  can  be  subject  to  a  ramp  inspection,  chiefly  concerned  with  the  aircraft 
documents  and  manuals,  flight  crew  licences,  the  apparent  condition  of  the  aircraft  and  the 
presence  and  condition  of  mandatory  cabin  safety  equipment.  The  references  for  these 
inspections  are  contained  in  the  Standards  of  the  International  Civil  Aviation  Organisation 
(ICAO) Annexes 1 (Personnel Licensing), 6 (Operations of Aircraft) and 8 (Airworthiness of 
Aircraft). 

These  checks  are  carried  out  in  accordance  with  a  procedure  which  is  common  to  all 
participating States. Their outcome is then the subject of reports which also follow a common 
format.  In  the  case  of  significant  irregularities,  the  operator  and  the  appropriate  Aviation 
Authority  (State  of  Operator  or  Registry)  are  contacted  in  order  to  arrive  at  corrective 
measures  to  be  taken  not  only  with  regard  to  the  aircraft  inspected  but  also  with  regard  to 
other  aircraft  which  could  be  concerned  in  the  case  of  an  irregularity  which  is  of  a  generic 
nature.  All  data  from  the  reports  as  well  as  supplementary  information  are  shared  and 
centralised in a computerised database set up and managed by EASA.  

The main features of the EU SAFA programme can be summarised as follows: 

•  its application by all SAFA participating States: in principle all 42 ECAC States 
(EU  Member  States  and  non-EU  ECAC  States  that  have  signed  the  EASA 
Working Arrangement; 

•  the  broad  dissemination  of  SAFA  ramp  inspection  results  through  a  centralised 

database; 

EN 

3 

   EN 

•  its  bottom-up  approach:  the  Programme  is  built  around  ramp  inspections  of 

aircraft; 

•  its focused attention: primarily focusing on third country aircraft flying to the EU 
and  SAFA  participating  States  (although  SAFA  inspections  may  continue  to  be 
performed on aircraft from EU Member States); 

•  its  inherent  objective  of  checking  for  compliance  with  safety  international  rules 
(ICAO Standards) which are commonly applicable internationally to all inspected 
aircraft . 

1.4.  Major  contribution  of  the  EU  SAFA  programme  to  the  overall  aviation  safety 

chain 

Based upon the SAFA inspections performed over the last few years, experience shows that 
these give a general indication of the safety of foreign operators. However, this indication is 
limited in the sense that no full picture is obtained about the safety of any particular aircraft or 
operator. This is due to the fact that certain aspects are difficult to assess during an inspection 
(e.g.  crew  resource  management,  full  airworthiness  status,  etc.)  owing  to  the  limited  time 
available to perform an inspection and consequently the limited level of detail possible during 
such an inspection. The value of those indicators will be further enhanced by increasing also 
the  level  of  harmonisation  across  the  participating  States  in  the  performance  of  SAFA 
inspections. 

A  full  assessment  of  a  particular  aircraft  or  operator  can  only  be  obtained  through  the 
continuous oversight by the responsible national civil aviation authority (State of Operator or 
State of Registry). In this manner, the information gained through the EU SAFA programme 
is useful: 

–  Primarily as a pre-emptive tool helping to identify potential negative safety trends 
whereby a numerous and/or recurring number of findings concerning a particular 
operator,  is  a  very  good  indicator  of  potential  structural  weaknesses  both  with 
regard to the quality control management of that operator as well as the level of 
safety oversight exercised by the responsible national civil aviation authorities of 
the  state  where  that  operator  is  certified;  similar  negative  trends  may  also  be 
identified concerning specific aircraft types. 

–  More directly, SAFA inspections may contribute in real-time to the safe operation 
of the particular aircraft which has just been inspected, prompting the inspecting 
authorities  to  ensure  that  corrective  actions  are  taken  immediately  prior  to  any 
further operations being conducted by that aircraft. 

Additionally,  since  the  coming  into  force  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  2111/20054  establishing  a 
list of carriers which are banned from flying into the EU, SAFA inspections have acquired an 
increased  importance  as  one  of  the  criteria  considered  by  the  Commission  in  taking  its 
decisions  on  the  inclusion  of  carriers  in  the  Community  list.  Indeed,  this  has  been  the  case 
since the establishment of the first Community list in March 2006 and its subsequent regular 
updates. 

4 

OJ L 344, 27.12.2005, p. 15. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
1.5. 

Progress of the programme during 2009 

The Commission services together with EASA are continuously monitoring the functioning of 
the current SAFA programme with a view to identifying any room for further improvement.  

In  particular,  as  tasked  under  Commission  Directive  2008/49/EC5,  EASA  has  issued  and 
published  a  second  set  of  detailed  Guidance  Material  on  Ramp  Inspection  Procedures.  The 
procedures cover all applicable areas: planning, preparation, and execution of inspections as 
well as follow-up activities. 

A  number  of  initiatives  started  in  2007  have  also  continued  in  2009,  becoming  regular 
standard  activities  under  the  EU  SAFA  programme.  These  are  for  example  the  database 
quality  review  of  reports  entered  by  participating  States  in  the  SAFA  database  and  the 
database  analysis.  Conducted  on  a  four-monthly  basis  this  analysis  attempts  to  identify  as 
early  as  possible  potentially  negative  safety  concerns  and  trends  in  order  that  they  may  be 
addressed in a timely manner before indeed becoming a threat to international aviation safety. 
The methodology for conducting this analysis was further refined and enhanced to maximise 
the use of the available SAFA data. 

In  addition,  during  the  year  2009  and  pursuant  to  the  request  of  the  Commission,  EASA 
engaged in negotiations with various aviation authorities around the world aiming at enlarging 
the  participation  in  the  EU  SAFA  programme  while  maintaining  a  high  level  of 
standardisation and harmonisation. 

Finally, EASA started a Standardisation programme to ensure that all SAFA inspections are 
done in a standardised manner in all SAFA participating States. All States are audited in order 
to  verify  the  transposition  of  the  applicable  EU  Directives  as  well  as  the  adherence  to  the 
common procedures for the qualification of inspectors and for the performance of inspections. 
The audits are carried out in accordance with the same working methods employed by EASA 
for standardisation visits dealing with other aviation safety domains, namely those contained 
in  the  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  736/2006.6
  In  2009,  5  audits  were  performed  in: 
Luxembourg, Lithuania, Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland. 

1.6. 

Introduction of a risk-based approach 

Commission Regulation (EC) No 351/20087 introduces the concept of prioritisation of SAFA 
inspection  from  a  pan-European  perspective  whereby  participating  States  are  required  to 
prioritise  a  portion  of  their  ramp  inspections  on  certain  subjects  (either  operators  or  all  the 
operators  certified  in  a  certain  state).  The  prioritisation  list  is  compiled  by  the  European 
Commission and updated regularly whenever  the need  arises according to the set of criteria 
established under the said Regulation, namely: 

–  information transmitted by EASA following the analysis of SAFA database; 

–  information stemming from the meetings of the Air Safety Committee; 

–  information received by the Commission from the Member States. 

5 
6 
7 

OJ L 109, 19.4.2008, p. 17. 
OJ L 129, 17.5.2006, p. 10. 
OJ L 109, 19.4.2008, p. 7. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
In  addition,  operators  which  are  listed  in  Annex  B  of  the  Community  list  of  banned  air 
carriers  (established  under  Regulation  (EC)  No  2111/2005)  as  well  as  the  other  operators 
certified in the same state as any operator featuring concurrently on the Community list are 
also subject to prioritised inspections. 

EUROCONTROL further supports this concept of prioritisation by means of its European Air 
Traffic  Management  centrepiece  which  provides  participating  States  with  real  time 
information on the flight planning situation of prioritised operators. 

During  2009,  out  of  a  total  11.349  SAFA  inspections,  2.253  (19,85%)  were  conducted  on 
subjects indicated in the prioritisation list. 

2. 

THE SAFA CENTRALISED DATABASE 

The SAFA centralised Database has been managed by EASA since December 2006, when it 
was  transferred  from  the  Central  Joint  Aviation  Authorities  (CJAA)  in  the  Netherlands  to 
EASA in Cologne, Germany. The inclusion of reports in the database remains a responsibility 
of the individual National Aviation Authorities (NAA) of the 42 SAFA participating States. 

In 2009 the SAFA participating States performed a record 11,349 inspections which revealed 
some 9.688 findings (see Appendix A to the Staff Working Paper). 

Data contained in the database is considered confidential. The database can be accessed by all 
National Aviation Authorities of participating States via the  (secured) internet. In 2009,  on-
line access was also granted to aviation authorities of third countries with regards to reports 
on operators licensed in their respective country. 

3. 

AREAS OF INSPECTION 

According to the 'SAFA Directive', aircrafts suspected of non-compliance with international 
safety standards (based on e.g. regular analysis of the database by EASA) are to be inspected 
with priority by the Member States. Furthermore the SAFA ramp inspections may be carried 
out using a spot-check procedure. 

There are five areas on which the inspections can be focused: 

(1) 

Specific State of Operator (checking operators from a particular State). 

(2) 

Specific aircraft type. 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

Specific nature of operations (scheduled, non-scheduled, cargo, etc.). 

Specific third country operator. 

Specific aircraft identified by its individual registration mark. 

Appendices B, C and D to the Staff Working Paper list the states of operator, aircraft types 
and  operators  inspected  during  the  year  2009.  They  highlight  the  wide  coverage  of  the  EU 
SAFA programme and its non-discriminatory application on EU and non-EU operators. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

The  smooth  operation  of  the  programme  can  also  be  illustrated  by  the  table  below,  which 
aggregates the information in the Appendices and provides an overview of activities.  

Inspections 

11,349 inspections… 

Operator 

…on more than 1,100 different operators… 

State of Operator  …from 131 states… 

Aircraft type 

…operating 220 different aircraft types and variants 

The  table  below  meanwhile  reflects  the  fact  that  the  vast  majority  of  all  flights  within  EU 
Member States are carried out by EU operators and that in general, SAFA participating States 
were still using the broader criteria of the former ECAC SAFA programme. 

Inspections on EU 

Operators 

Inspections  on  non-EU 
Operators 

2009 

Percentage 

5,917 

52.1% 

5,432 

47.9% 

Out  of  11.349  inspections,  9.462  (83,4%)  were  performed  by  EU  member  states  (see 
Attachment A). 47.9% (5.432) were performed on operators licensed in third countries while 
the remainder 52.1% (5.917) were conducted on EU operators. 

4. 

MAIN RESULTS OF THE SAFA INSPECTIONS 

4.1. 

Inspection findings in general 

During any SAFA inspection, a checklist, comprising a total of 54 different inspection items, 
is  used  by  the  SAFA  inspector  to  examine  the  compliance  of  the  aircraft  with  international 
rules  (ICAO  standards).  These  inspections  may  reveal  a  number  of  findings  (usually  called 
"deviations from ICAO Standards") The following chart provides an overview of the number 
of total findings (F) compared to the total number of inspections (I) and the inspected items 
(II). However, in the majority of cases, not all items are checked during an inspection because 
the  time  between  the  arrival  of  the  aircraft  and  its  departure  is  not  sufficient  to  perform  a 
complete inspection. Therefore, the relationship between the total number of findings and the 
total  number  of  inspected  items  might  give  a  better  understanding  rather  than  a  ratio  based 
merely on the number of inspections.  

Period 

01 January 2009 – 31 December 2009 

Total Inspections (I) 

Total Inspected Items (II) 

11,349 

408,217 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
  
Total Findings (F) 

9,688 

Average  no.  of  Inspected  Items 
during an Inspection 

35.99 

Findings/Inspections (F/I) 

0.854 

Findings/Inspected Items (F/II) 

0.0237 

4.2. 

Inspection findings and their categories 

Not  only  the  absolute  number  of  inspection  findings  needs  to  be  considered,  but  also  their 
“severity”.  To  this  end,  three  categories  of  findings  have  been  defined.  A  “Category 1” 
finding  is  called  a  minor  finding;  “Category  2”  is  a  significant  finding  and  “Category  3”  a 
major finding. The terms “minor”, “significant” and “major” relate to the level of deviation 
from  the  ICAO  Standard.  The  prime  purpose  of  categorising  the  findings  is  to  classify  the 
compliance with a standard and the severity of non-compliance with this standard.  

The inspections and the categories of findings are recorded in the database and the results are 
presented in the table below: 

No. findings  
(F) 

Ratio of findings  
(Fcat./I) 

Year 

No.  inspections  
(I) 

1  

Cat. 
(minor) 

Cat. 2  
(significant) 

Cat. 3  
(major) 

total 

F cat.1 / I 

F cat.2 / I 

F cat.3 / I 

F total / I 

11,349 

3,880 

3,816 

1,992 

9,688 

0.342 

0.336 

0.176 

0.854 

2009 

40% 

39.4% 

20.6% 

100.00% 

4.3. 

Historical overview 

Year  

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

75 

1,748 

2,767 

2,833 

2,394 

2,706 

3,234 

3,413 

4,568 

5,457 

7,458 

8,594 

10,337 

11,349 

Total 
Inspections (I) 

Total Inspected 
Items (II) 

Total Findings 
(F) 

Findings/Inspec
tions (F/I) 

1,675 

31,413  88,400  95,524  80,454  82,935  93,681  100,014 148,850 181,440  260,524  300,035 

212 

1,951 

2,573 

2,631 

2,587 

2,851 

3,064 

3,242 

6,799 

8,492 

12,481  12,073 

2.8267  1.1161  0.9299  0.9287  1.0806  1.0536  0.9474  0.9499  1.4884  1.5562  1.6704  1.405 

Findings/Inspected 
Items (F/II) 

0.127 

0.062 

0.029 

0.028 

0.032 

0.034 

0.033 

0.032 

0.046 

0.047 

0.048 

0.040 

Total  
1996-
2009 

66,933 

358,046  408,217 

2,231,208

11,298 

9,688 

79,942 

1.093 

0.854 

0.032 

0.024 

1.194 

0.036 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
  
11,349

10,337

8,594

7,458

5,457

4,568

2,767 2,833

2,706

2,394

1,748

3,234 3,413

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

75

0

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Annual No. of SAFA inspections since the beginning of the programme in 1996. 

2.83

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00

1.67

1.56

1.49

1.40

1.08

0.93

1.05

0.95

0.95

1.12

0.93

1.09

0.85

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Average number of findings per inspection (1996-2009) 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
4.4. 

Inspection findings on a regional basis 

No. of findings (F) 

Ratio of findings (Fcat./I) 

of 

No. 
States 
inspected 

of 

No. 
Operat. 
inspected 

Inspect. 
(I) 

Cat.  
1 
(minor) 

Cat. 
(signif.) 

2

Cat.  3
(major) 

Total 

F 
cat.1/I 

F cat.2/I 

F 
cat.3/I 

F total/I 

27 

528 

5,917 

1,603 

1,562 

845 

4,010 

0.271 

0.264 

0.143 

0.678 

43 

677 

7,570 

2,202 

2,173 

1,064 

5,439 

0.291 

0.287 

0.141 

0.718 

7 

3 

88 

931 

408 

381 

219 

1,008 

0.438 

0.409 

0.235 

1.083 

111 

633 

263 

159 

139 

561 

0.415 

0.251 

0.220 

0.886 

20 

43 

171 

86 

105 

44 

235 

0.503 

0.614 

0.257 

1.374 

18 

22 

94 

40 

1,284 

618 

650 

345 

1,613 

0.481 

0.506 

0.269 

1.256 

410 

140 

204 

98 

442 

0.341 

0.498 

0.239 

1.078 

Region 

EU8 

EUROPE 
(ECAC)9  

Russian 
Federation, 
Belarus & 
Central 
Asia10 

North 
America11 

Latin 
America  & 
the 
Caribbean12 

Middle  East 
and  North 
Africa13 

Africa14 

Asia15 

17 

47 

315 

155 

136 

80 

371 

0.492 

0.432 

0.254 

1.178 

8 

9 

10 

11 
12 

13 

14 

15 

EU - Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, 
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, 
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom. 
Europe  (ECAC)  -  Albania,  Armenia,  Austria,  Azerbaijan,  Belgium,  Bosnia-Herzegovina,  Bulgaria,  Croatia, 
Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Estonia,  Finland,  France,  Georgia,  Germany,  Greece,  Hungary,  Iceland, 
Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia,  Malta,  Republic  of 
Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, 
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom. 
Russian Federation, Belarus and Central Asia - Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, 
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan. 
North America (NA) - Bermuda, Canada, United States of America. 
Latin America & the Caribbean (LAC) – Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, 
Belize,  Bolivia,  Brazil,  Cayman  Islands,  Chile,  Colombia,  Costa  Rica,  Cuba,  Dominica,  Dominican  Republic, 
Ecuador,  El  Salvador,  Grenada,  Guatemala,  Guyana,  Haiti,  Honduras,  Jamaica,  Mexico,  Netherlands  Antilles, 
Nicaragua,  Panama,  Paraguay,  Peru,  Puerto  Rico,  Saint  Kitts  and  Nevis,  Saint  Lucia,  Saint  Vincent  and  the 
Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 
of). 
Middle  East  and  North  Africa  (MENA)-  Algeria,  Bahrain,  Egypt,  Iran(Islamic Republic  of),  Iraq,  Israel,  Jordan, 
Kuwait, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, 
Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen. 
Africa  (AFR)  -  Angola,  Benin,  Botswana,  Burkina  Faso,  Burundi,  Cameroon,  Cape  Verde,  Central  African 
Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, 
Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, 
Mali,  Mauritania,  Mauritius,  Mozambique,  Namibia,  Niger,  Nigeria,  Rwanda,  Sao  Tome  and  Principe,  Senegal, 
Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Swaziland, Togo, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, 
Zimbabwe. 
Asia  (AS)  -  Afghanistan,  Bangladesh,  Bhutan,  Brunei  Darussalam,  Cambodia,  China,  Democratic  People's 
Republic  of  Korea,  Hong  Kong  (Special  Administrative  Region  of  China),  India,  Indonesia,  Japan,  Lao  People's 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Oceania16 

4 

14 

35 

8 

8 

3 

19 

0.229 

0.229 

0.086 

0.543 

Average/all States 

0.342 

0.336 

0.176 

0.854 

3.50

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00

AF R

AS
CIS

Europe (ECAC)

EU

LAC
MENA

NA

OC

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

The  five  years  evolution  shows  that  the  average  number  of  findings  (per  inspection)  has 
decreased for all geographic regions.  

From this table, one may note that: 

–  Operators  from  States  in  the  EU,  ECAC  and  Oceania  have  fewer  findings  per 

inspection than average. 

–  The  ratio  Findings/Inspections  shows  the  greatest  improvement  for  the  African 
region, although this is influenced by the very high number of inspections (163) 
on  the  Angolan  carrier  TAAG;  those  inspections  were  imposed  after  the  partial 
removal of this carrier from the Community List of banned carriers. 

16 

Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, 
Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Vietnam. 
Oceania (OC) - Australia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, New Zealand, 
Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
  
 
                                                                                                                                                         
4.5. 

Distribution by ICAO regions 

No. of findings (F) 

Ratio of findings (Fcat./I) 

Region 

No. of 
States 
inspected 

No. of 
Operat.
inspected 

Inspect. 
(I) 

Cat.  
1 
(minor) 

Cat. 2 
(signif.) 

Cat. 3 
(major) 

Total 

F 
cat.1/I 

F 
cat.2/I 

F 
cat.3/I 

F 
total/I 

APAC17 

ESAF18 

EUR19 

MID20 

NACC21 

SAM22 

19 

10 

56 

18 

10 

9 

WACAF23  12 

All States 

134 

58 

19 

311 

148 

125 

312 

75 

82 

78 

36 

351 

0.476 

0.402 

0.251 

1.129 

193 

0.240 

0.263 

0.115 

0.619 

784 

8,957 

2,931 

2,833 

1,428 

7,192 

0.327 

0.316 

0.159 

0.803 

85 

953 

334 

418 

127 

652 

288 

178 

20 

21 

66 

98 

39 

65 

58 

122 

221 

144 

23 

62 

973 

0.350 

0.439 

0.232 

1.021 

610 

0.442 

0.273 

0.221 

0.936 

120 

0.591 

0.879 

0.348 

1.818 

249 

0.663 

1.245 

0.633 

2.541 

1,114 

11,349 

3,880 

3,816 

1,992 

9,688 

0.342 

0.336 

0.176 

0.854 

From this table, one may note that: 

–  Operators  from  States  belonging  to  the  EUR  have  fewer  findings  per  inspection 

than average. 

–  Operators from States belonging to the MID, SAM, WACAF, NACC, APAC and 

ESAF have more findings per inspection than average. 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

APAC-Asian  and  Pacific  ICAO  Region:  Australia,  Bangladesh,  Bhutan,  Brunei  Darussalam,  Cambodia,  China 
(incl. Hong Kong and Macao), Cook Islands, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Japan, 
Kiribati,  Lao  People’s  Democratic  Republic,  Malaysia,  Maldives,  Marshal  Islands,  Micronesia,  Mongolia, 
Myanmar,  Nauru,  Nepal,  New  Zealand,  Palau,  Papua  New  Guinea,  Philippines,  Republic  of  Korea,  Samoa, 
Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tonga, Vanuatu, Viet Nam. 
ESAF-Eastern  and  Southern  African  ICAO  Region:  Angola,  Botswana,  Burundi,  Comoros,  Djibouti,  Eritrea, 
Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, 
South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe. 
EUR-European  and  North  Atlantic  ICAO  Region:  Albania,  Algeria,  Andorra,  Armenia,  Austria,  Azerbaijan, 
Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, 
Georgia,  Germany,  Greece,  Hungary,  Iceland,  Ireland,  Italy,  Kazakhstan,  Kyrgyzstan,  Latvia,  Lithuania, 
Luxembourg,  Malta,  Monaco,  Montenegro,  Morocco,  Netherlands  (excl.  Netherlands  Antilles),  Norway,  Poland, 
Portugal,  Republic  of  Moldova,  Romania,  Russian  Federation,  San  Marino,  Serbia,  Slovakia,  Slovenia,  Spain, 
Sweden,  Switzerland,  Tajikistan,  The  former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia,  Tunisia,  Turkey,  Turkmenistan, 
Ukraine, United Kingdom (excl. Cayman Islands, Bermuda), Uzbekistan. 
MID-Middle East ICAO Region: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Cyprus, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, 
Libyan  Arab  Jamahiriya,  Oman,  Pakistan,  Qatar,  Saudi  Arabia,  Sudan,  Syrian  Arab  Republic,  United  Arab 
Emirates, Yemen. 
NACC-Northern  American,  Central  American  and  Caribbean  ICAO  Region:  Antigua  and  Barbuda,  Bahamas, 
Barbados,  Belize,  Canada,  Costa  Rica,  Cuba,  Dominican  Republic,  El  Salvador,  Grenada,  Guatemala,  Haiti, 
Honduras,  Jamaica,  Mexico,  Nicaragua,  Saint  Kitts  and  Nevis,  Saint  Lucia,  Saint  Vincent  and  the  Grenadines, 
Trinidad and Tobago, United States of America. 
SAM-South  American  ICAO  Region:  Argentina,  Bolivia,  Brazil,  Chile,  Colombia,  Ecuador,  Guyana,  Panamá, 
Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela. 
WACAF-Western  and  Central  African  ICAO  Region:  Benin,  Burkina  Faso,  Cameroon,  Cape  Verde,  Central 
African  Republic,  Chad,  Congo,  Cote  d’Ivoire,  Democratic  Republic  of  the  Congo,  Equatorial  Guinea,  Gabon, 
Gambia,  Ghana,  Guinea,  Guinea-Bissau,  Liberia,  Mali,  Mauritania,  Niger,  Nigeria,  Sao  Tome  and  Principe, 
Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Average Number of Findings by ICAO Region - Evolution over the last 5 years

APAC

ESAF

EUR/NAT

MID

NACC

SAM

WACAF

4,00

3,50

3,00

2,50

2,00

1,50

1,00

0,50

0,00

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

For  all  regions  the  ratio  Findings/Inspections  shows  an  improvement.  Although  the  ESAF 
region appears to have the largest improvement this is caused by the fact that more than half 
of the inspections on operators from this region were carried on the Angolan carrier TAAG 
(163 inspections). TAAG was included in 2007 in the Community list of banned carriers. In 
2009  TAAG  was  allowed  to  partially  restart  the  operations  into  the  European  Union  (with 
specific aircraft and only to Lisbon, Portugal) under the condition that every flight should be 
inspected by the Portuguese authorities.  

Comparison between EU, ECAC and the rest of the world 

No. of findings (F) 

Ratio of findings (Fcat./I) 

Region 

of 

No. 
States 
inspected 

of 

No. 
Operat. 
inspected 

Inspect. 
(I) 

Cat.  
1 
(minor) 

Cat. 
(signif.) 

2

Cat. 
(major) 

3

Total 

F 
cat.1/I 

F 
cat.2/I 

F 
cat.3/I 

F 
total/I 

EU 

27 

528 

5,917 

1,603 

1,562 

845 

4,010 

0.271 

0.264 

0.143 

0.678 

Rest 
of 
EUROPE 
(non-EU 
ECAC 
States) 

EUROPE 
(ECAC) 

Non-EU 
States 

All 
States 

16 

43 

149 

1,653 

599 

611 

219 

1,429 

0.362 

0.370 

0.132 

0.864 

677 

7,570 

2,202 

2,173 

1,064 

5,439 

0.291 

0.287 

0.141 

0.718 

107 

586 

5,432 

2,277 

2,254 

1,147 

5,678 

0.419 

0.415 

0.211 

1.045 

134 

1,114 

11,349 

3,880 

3,816 

1,992 

9,688 

0.342 

0.336 

0.176 

0.854 

4.6. 

Inspection findings related to checklist items 

Appendix  F  to  the  Staff  Working  Paper  provides  the  results  regarding  each  individual 
inspection  item  (III)  which  has  been  inspected.  It  indicates  the  number  of  times  that  a 
particular inspection item has been checked, the number of findings and the ratio F/III.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

  
 
 
 
 
 
4.7. 

The top 3 significant and major inspection findings related to checklist items 

The inspection checklist consists of four major parts. Part A concerns items to be inspected in 
the  flight  deck  of  the  aircraft.  Part  B  of  the  checklist  concerns  items  to  be  checked  in  the 
(passenger)  cabin,  and  mainly  consists  of  safety  equipment.  Part  C  relates  to  the  general 
technical condition of the aircraft which needs to be verified during a walk around check. Part 
D checklist items concern the cargo compartment of the aircraft and the cargo carried. 

Any  general  findings  not  covered  by  Parts  A,  B,  C  or  D  can  be  administered  under  Part  E 
(general) of the checklist. 

When considering the findings established during a SAFA inspection, Category 2 (significant) 
and Category 3 (major) findings require the highest attention when it comes to the need for 
rectification. For each part of the checklist, the top 3 of Category 2 and 3 findings related to 
the  number  of  inspections  are  given  in  the  tables  under  Appendices  D  and  E  of  the  Staff 
Working Paper. 

5. 

ACTION TAKEN PURSUANT TO RAMP INSPECTIONS 

Based on the category, number and nature of the findings, several actions may be taken. 

If the findings indicate that the safety of the aircraft and its occupants is impaired, corrective 
actions  will  be  required.  Normally  the  aircraft  captain  will  be  asked  to  address  the  serious 
deficiencies which are brought to his attention. In rare cases, where inspectors have reason to 
believe  that  the  aircraft  captain  does  not  intend  to  take  the  necessary  measures  on  the 
deficiencies  reported  to  him,  they  will  formally  ground  the  aircraft.  The  formal  act  of 
grounding by  the State of  Inspection means that the  aircraft is prohibited  from resuming its 
flights until appropriate corrective measures are taken. 

Another  type  of  action  is  called  “corrective  actions  before  flight  authorised”.  Before  the 
aircraft is allowed to resume its flight, corrective action is required to rectify any deficiencies 
which have been identified. 

In  other  cases,  the  aircraft  may  depart  under  operational  restrictions.  An  example  of  such  a 
restriction would be the case where there is a deficiency regarding passenger seats. Operation 
of the aircraft is possible under the condition that the deficient seats are not occupied by any 
passengers. 

It is standard practice that the captain of the aircraft which has just been inspected is debriefed about 
the findings. In addition, Category 2 and Category 3 findings are communicated to the responsible 
Aviation Authority and the home base of the operator with the request to take appropriate action to 
prevent reoccurrence. 

In order to achieve best the objectives of the EU SAFA programme, close cooperation with 
the  Civil  Aviation  Authorities  of  all  those  States  whose  operators  and  aircraft  have  been 
subject of SAFA inspections is imperative. As part of their responsibility regarding the safety 
oversight of their national  operators  according to the relevant international safety standards, 
these Civil Aviation Authorities are requested to ensure proper implementation of corrective 
actions in order to address the reported SAFA findings. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

In  some  cases,  when  the  findings  on  an  aircraft  are  considered  important,  individual  SAFA 
participating States may decide to revoke the entry permit of that aircraft. This means that the 
particular aircraft is no longer allowed to land at airports or fly in the airspace of that State. 
Such  a  ban  can  be  lifted  if  the  operator  of  the  aircraft  proves  that  the  problems  have  been 
properly  corrected.  Such  entry  permit  repercussions  can  therefore  be,  and  usually  are,  of  a 
temporary character. 

As  regards  such  bans  and  their  subsequent  lifting,  those  SAFA  Participating  States  which 
belong  also  to  the  European  Union  shall  be  acting  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  laid 
down  in  Regulation  (EC)  No  2111/2005  on  the  establishment  of  a  Community  list  of  air 
carriers subject to an operating ban within the Community.  

ACTIONS 

TAKEN 

No. of Inspections 

No. of Findings 

information to the authority 
& the operator 

restriction on aircraft 
operation 

corrective actions before flight 
authorisation 

aircraft grounded 

immediate operating ban 

11,349 

9,688 

3,328 

95 

1,358 

10 

1* 

*not including bans/operational restrictions imposed by the EC pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 EC 

Pursuant  to  the  requirement  set  forth  by  Commission  Directive  (EC)  2008/49,  SAFA 
participating  states  monthly  send  to  EASA  reports  on  the  follow-up  actions  taken.  This 
information measures the ability and willingness of operators to rectify the findings identified 
during SAFA inspections. 

6. 

CONCLUSIONS 

During 2009 a record number of inspections has been reached and covered a higher number of 
operators when compared to previous years. As a result , the programme has become a better 
to tool to identify potential negative safety trends worldwide, contributing as well as in real-
time to the safe operation of the inspected aircraft. 
During  2009,  efforts  were  also  undertaken  to  improve  the  functioning  of  the  EU  SAFA 
programme, in particular through the issuing of Guidance Material, the carrying out of quality 
review analysis of SAFA reports or the initiation of the Standardisation programme, which in 
fine  aim  at  ensuring  that  all  SAFA  inspections  are  done  in  a  standardised  manner  in  all 
countries. 

EN 

15 

   EN