ARO.OPS.200 Specific approval procedure

Regulation (EU) 2019/1384

(a) Upon receiving an application for the issue of a specific approval or changes thereof, the competent authority shall assess the application in accordance with the relevant requirements of Annex V (Part-SPA) and conduct, where relevant, an appropriate inspection of the operator.

(b) When satisfied that the operator has demonstrated compliance with the applicable requirements, the competent authority shall issue or amend the approval. The approval shall be specified in:

(1) the operations specifications, as established in Appendix II, for commercial air transport operations; or

(2) the list of specific approvals, as established in Appendix III, for non-commercial operations and specialised operations.

PROCEDURES FOR THE APPROVAL OF CARRIAGE OF DANGEROUS GOODS

When verifying compliance with the applicable requirements of SPA.DG.100, the competent authority should check that:

(a) the procedures specified in the operations manual are sufficient for the safe transport of dangerous goods;

(b) operations personnel are properly trained in accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO Doc 9284-AN/905); and

(c) a reporting scheme is in place.

PROCEDURES FOR THE APPROVAL FOR REDUCED VERTICAL SEPARATION MINIMA (RVSM) OPERATIONS

(a) When verifying compliance with the applicable requirements of Subpart D of Annex V (SPA.RVSM), the competent authority should verify that:

(1) each aircraft holds an adequate RVSM airworthiness approval;

(2) procedures for monitoring and reporting height keeping errors have been established;

(3) a training programme for the flight crew involved in these operations has been established; and

(4) operating procedures have been established.

(b) Demonstration flight(s)

The content of the RVSM application may be sufficient to verify the aircraft performance and procedures. However, the final step of the approval process may require a demonstration flight. The competent authority may appoint an inspector for a flight in RVSM airspace to verify that all relevant procedures are applied effectively. If the performance is satisfactory, operation in RVSM airspace may be permitted.

(c) Form of approval documents

Each aircraft group for which the operator is granted approval should be listed in the approval.

(d) Airspace monitoring

For airspace, where a numerical target level of safety is prescribed, monitoring of aircraft height keeping performance in the airspace by an independent height monitoring system is necessary to verify that the prescribed level of safety is being achieved. However, an independent monitoring check of an aircraft is not a prerequisite for the grant of an RVSM approval.

(1) Suspension, revocation and reinstatement of RVSM approval

The incidence of height keeping errors that can be tolerated in an RVSM environment is small. It is expected of each operator to take immediate action to rectify the conditions that cause an error. The operator should report an occurrence involving poor height keeping to the competent authority within 72 hours. The report should include an initial analysis of causal factors and measures taken to prevent repeat occurrences. The need for follow-up reports should be determined by the competent authority. Occurrences that should be reported and investigated are errors of:

(i) total vertical error (TVE) equal to or greater than ±90 m (±300 ft);

(ii) altimeter system error (ASE) equal to or greater than ±75 m (±245 ft); and

(iii) assigned altitude deviation equal to or greater than ±90 m (±300 ft).

Height keeping errors fall into two broad categories:

             errors caused by malfunction of aircraft equipment; and

             operational errors.

(2) An operator that consistently experiences errors in either category should have approval for RVSM operations suspended or revoked. If a problem is identified that is related to one specific aircraft type, then RVSM approval may be suspended or revoked for that specific type within that operator's fleet.

(3) Operators’ actions:

The operator should make an effective, timely response to each height keeping error. The competent authority may consider suspending or revoking RVSM approval if the operator's responses to height keeping errors are not effective or timely. The competent authority should consider the operator's past performance record in determining the action to be taken.

(4) Reinstatement of approval:

The operator should satisfy the competent authority that the causes of height keeping errors are understood and have been eliminated and that the operator's RVSM programmes and procedures are effective. At its discretion and to restore confidence, the competent authority may require an independent height monitoring check of affected aircraft to be performed.

APPROVAL OF HELICOPTER OFFSHORE OPERATIONS

(a) Approval

When verifying compliance with the applicable requirements of Subpart K of Annex V (Part-SPA) to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, the competent authority should ensure prior to issuing an approval that:

(1) the hazard identification, risk assessment and risk mitigation processes are in place;

(2) operating procedures have been established applicable to the area of operation;

(3) helicopters are appropriately certified and equipped for the area of operation;

(4) flight crew involved in these operations are trained and checked in accordance with the training and checking programmes established by the operator; and

(5) all requirements of Part-SPA, Subpart K are met.

(b) Demonstration flight(s)

The final step of the approval process may require a demonstration flight performed in the area of operation. The competent authority may appoint an inspector for a flight to verify that all relevant procedures are applied effectively. If the performance is satisfactory, helicopter offshore operations may be approved.

PROCEDURES FOR THE APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORT OPERATIONS WITH SINGLE-ENGINED TURBINE AEROPLANES AT NIGHT OR IN INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS (SET-IMC)

(a) When verifying compliance with the applicable requirements of Subpart L (SET-IMC) of Annex V (Part-SPA) to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, the competent authority should check that:

(1) the aeroplane is eligible for SET-IMC operations;

(2) the maintenance and operational procedures are adequate;

(3) a training programme for the flight crew involved in these operations has been established; and

(4) the operator has adequately assessed the risks of the intended operations.

In particular, the competent authority should assess the operator’s safety performance, experience and flight crew training, as reflected in the data provided by the operator with its application, to ensure that the intended safety level is achieved.

With regard to the operator’s specific SET-IMC flight crew training, the competent authority should ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of Subpart FC (FLIGHT CREW) of Annex III (Part-ORO) and Subpart L (SET-IMC) of Annex V (Part-SPA) to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, and that it is appropriate to the operations envisaged.

The competent authority should assess the operator’s ability to achieve and maintain an acceptable level of power plant reliability by reviewing its engine-trend-monitoring programme and propulsion reliability programme, which are established in accordance with Annex I (Part-M) to Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014.

(b) The competent authority may impose temporary restrictions to the operations (e.g. limitation to specific routes) until the operator is able to demonstrate that it has the capability to operate safely in compliance with all the applicable requirements.

(c) When issuing the approval, the competent authority should specify:

(1) the particular engine-airframe combination;

(2) the identification by registration of the individual aeroplanes designated for single-engined turbine aeroplane operations at night and/or in IMC; and

(3) the authorised areas and/or routes of operation.

VALIDATION OF OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY

Observation by the competent authority of a validation flight, simulating the proposed operation in the aeroplane, should be carried out before an approval is granted. This should include flight planning and preflight procedures, as well as a demonstration of the following simulated emergency procedures in simulated IMC/night:

(a) total failure of the propulsion system; and

(b) total loss of normally generated electrical power.

In order to mitigate the risks associated with the conduct of such emergency procedures, the following should be ensured:

(a) in case of planned single-pilot operations, the crew should be composed of the commander using view-limiting devices for the purpose of simulating IMC/night and a second rated pilot whose responsibility is to help maintain visual separation from other aircraft, clouds, and terrain;

(b) the flight should be conducted in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) by day, and additional, more restrictive weather minima may be established for the demonstration of the procedures involving higher risks; and

(c) touch drills should be used when simulating a total failure of the propulsion system.

PROCEDURES FOR THE APPROVAL OF LOW-VISIBILITY OPERATIONS

Before issuing an approval for low-visibility operations (LVOs), the competent authority should verify that the applicant has:

(a) taken account of the relevant airworthiness requirements and limitations;

(b) established the relevant aerodrome operating minima;

(c) established and documented the relevant operating procedures;

(d) established and conducted adequate training and checking programmes;

(e) adopted the minimum equipment list (MEL) for the LVOs to be undertaken;

(f) processes to ensure that only runways and instrument procedures suitable for the intended operations are used; and

(g) established and conducted the relevant risk assessment and monitoring programmes.

LIMITATIONS FOR HELICOPTER OFFSHORE OPERATIONS

The competent authority may impose limitations related to routes and areas of operation for offshore helicopter operations. Such limitations may be specified in the operations specifications (OPSSPEC) or specific approved documents or in the aeronautical information publication (AIP) or by other means.

For operations over sea areas, limitations may include a maximum significant wave height under which there is a good prospect of recovery of survivors. This should be linked with the available search and rescue capabilities in the different sea areas.

SPECIFIC APPROVALS FOR TRAINING ORGANISATIONS

The specific approvals, as established in Appendix III, for non-commercial operations and specialised operations, also apply to training organisations with a principal place of business in a Member State.

INSERTION OF RELEVANT INFORMATION INTO THE OPERATIONS SPECIFICATIONS

When issuing the operations specifications in accordance with Appendix II, where the operation does not include helicopter operations, the helicopter-related elements contained in the operations specifications may be omitted.

ARO.OPS.205 Minimum equipment list approval

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012

(a) When receiving an application for initial approval of a minimum equipment list (MEL) or an amendment thereof from an operator, the competent authority shall assess each item affected, to verify compliance with the applicable requirements, before issuing the approval.

(b) The competent authority shall approve the operator’s procedure for the extension of the applicable rectification intervals B, C and D, if the conditions specified in ORO.MLR.105(f) are demonstrated by the operator and verified by the competent authority.

(c) The competent authority shall approve, on a case-by-case basis, the operation of an aircraft outside the constraints of the MEL but within the constraints of the master minimum equipment list (MMEL), if the conditions specified in ORO.MLR.105 are demonstrated by the operator and verified by the competent authority.

EXTENSION OF RECTIFICATION INTERVALS

The competent authority should verify that the operator does not use the extension of rectification intervals as a means to reduce or eliminate the need to rectify MEL defects in accordance with the established category limit. The extension of rectification intervals should only be considered valid and justifiable when events beyond the operator’s control have precluded rectification.

ARO.OPS.210 Determination of distance or local area

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012

The competent authority may determine a distance or local area for the purpose of operations.

GENERAL

The distance or local area should reflect the local environment and operating conditions.

ARO.OPS.215 Approval of helicopter operations over a hostile environment located outside a congested area

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012

(a) The Member State shall designate those areas where helicopter operations may be conducted without an assured safe forced landing capability, as described in CAT.POL.H.420.

(b) Before issuing the approval referred to in CAT.POL.H.420 the competent authority shall have considered the operator’s substantiation precluding the use of the appropriate performance criteria.

APPROVALS THAT REQUIRE ENDORSEMENT

(a) Whenever the operator applies for an approval in accordance with CAT.POL.H.420 for which an endorsement from another State is required, the competent authority should only grant the approval once endorsement of that other State has been received.

(b) The Operations Specification should be amended to include those areas for which endorsement was received.

ENDORSEMENT BY ANOTHER STATE

(a) Whenever the operator applies for an endorsement to operate over hostile environment located outside a congested area in another State in accordance with CAT.POL.H.420, the competent authority of that other State should only grant the endorsement once it is satisfied that:

(1) the safety risk assessment is appropriate to the area overflown; and

[applicable until 24 May 2024 — ED Decision 2014/025/R]

(1) the safety risk assessment is appropriate to the area overflown, considering which of the following operations are relevant to the application:

(i) HEMS operations, in accordance with SPA.HEMS.125(a)(2);

(ii) HEMS operations, in accordance with SPA.HEMS.125(a)(3);

(iii) CAT operations, other than the above; and

[applicable from 25 May 2024 — ED Decision 2023/007/R]

(2) the operator’s substantiation that preclude the use of the appropriate performance criteria are appropriate for the area overflown.

(b) The competent authority of that other State should inform the competent authority of the Member State responsible for issuing the approval.

DESIGNATED AREAS

The authority may, based on its own assessment or on the substantiation of operators, designate different areas for the following operations:

(a) HEMS operations, in accordance with SPA.HEMS.125(a)(2);

(b) HEMS operations, in accordance with SPA.HEMS.125(a)(3);

(c) CAT operations, other than the above.

[applicable from 25 May 2024 — ED Decision 2023/007/R]

ARO.OPS.220 Approval of helicopter operations to or from a public interest site

Regulation (EU) 2023/1020

The approval referred to in CAT.POL.H.225 shall include a list of the public interest site(s) specified by the operator to which the approval applies.

[applicable until 24 May 2024 — Regulation (EU) No 965/2012]

ARO.OPS.220 Approval of helicopter operations to or from a public interest site

(a) Upon receiving an application for the issue of, or changes to, an approval for a helicopter operation to or from a public interest site, the competent authority shall assess the application in accordance with point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV and conduct any additional assessment of the operator as deemed necessary.

(b) The approval referred to in point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV shall include a list of the public interest site or sites and helicopter type or types specified by the operator and to which the approval applies.

(c) The approval shall only apply to public interest sites established before 1 July 2002, or to public interest sites established before 28 October 2014 and for which a derogation from point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV granted under Article 6(6) has been notified to the Commission and the Agency.

(d) If changes to the obstacle environment at a public interest site are notified or discovered, the competent authority shall assess whether the approvals it has granted covering helicopter operations to or from that site remain valid. Where permanent changes to the obstacle environment have a significantly negative safety impact, the following shall apply:

(1) the competent authority shall limit the privileges of the relevant approvals granted under point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV to exclude helicopter operations to and from that site and remove the site from the list attached to the approval in accordance with point (b)

(2) the site shall no longer qualify for a public interest site approval under point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV;

(3) where the new obstacles are removed, operators may apply or reapply for an approval for a helicopter operation under point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV for the particular site.

(e) The competent authority shall not grant an approval under point CAT.POL.H.225 of Annex IV for a public interest site that was previously operated in performance class 1 following a change in the obstacle environment.

[applicable from 25 May 2024 — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1020]

APPROVALS THAT REQUIRE ENDORSEMENT

Whenever the operator applies for an approval in accordance with CAT.POL.H.225 to conduct operations to or from a public interest site (PIS) for which an endorsement from another State is required, the competent authority should only grant such an approval once endorsement of that other State has been received.

ENDORSEMENT BY ANOTHER STATE

(a) Whenever the operator applies for an endorsement to operate to/from a public interest site in another State in accordance with CAT.POL.H.225, the competent authority of that other State should only grant the endorsement once it is satisfied that:

(1) the conditions of CAT.POL.H.225(a)(1) through (5) can be met by the operator at those sites for which endorsement is requested; and

(2) the operations manual includes the procedures to comply with CAT.POL.H.225(b) for these sites for which endorsement is requested.

(b) The competent authority of that other State should inform the competent authority of the Member State responsible for issuing the approval.

(c) The competent authority of that other State should notify the competent authority of the Member State responsible for issuing the approval whenever the obstacle environment is known to have changed.

[applicable from 25 May 2024 — ED Decision 2023/007/R]

DIRECTORY OF PUBLIC INTEREST SITES

Each competent authority should maintain a directory of all public interest sites that are subject to an approval or an endorsement in its territory. The directory should contain, for each site:

(a) the dimensions;

(b) any obstacle resulting in non-conformance to performance class 1 requirements of helicopter types using the site.

Each competent authority should either publish, or provide to operators and other competent authorities on their request, the point of contact of a person responsible at the public interest site, if available.

[applicable from 25 May 2024 — ED Decision 2023/007/R]

GM1 ARO.OPS.220 Approval of helicopter operations to or from a public interest site

ED Decision 2023/007/R

(a) A permanent obstacle is a natural or artificial obstacle which is expected to remain for 1 year or more. Constructions that are expected to be removed within 1 year are non-permanent, temporary obstacles.

(b) In the case of temporary changes to the obstacle environment, the competent authority may take the appropriate temporary measures.

(c) In the case of changes to the obstacle environment at a site located on the territory of another State, the competent authority of the operator may liaise with the competent authority of that State.

[applicable from 25 May 2024 — ED Decision 2023/007/R]

ARO.OPS.225 Approval of fuel/energy schemes

Regulation (EU) 2021/1296

(a) The competent authority shall approve the fuel/energy scheme proposed by a CAT operator if the operator demonstrates compliance with all applicable requirements laid down in this Regulation related to fuel/energy for aeroplanes or helicopters involved in CAT.

(b) The competent authority shall assess and oversee the fuel/energy planning and in-flight re‑planning, selection of aerodrome and, in-flight fuel/energy management policies associated with the fuel/energy schemes, together with the processes supporting the implementation of these fuel/energy schemes.

(c) In addition to points (a) and (b), when approving individual fuel/energy schemes, the competent authority shall:

(1) verify that the operator has demonstrated the baseline safety performance of the current fuel/energy scheme;

(2) assess the capability of the operator to support the implementation of the proposed individual fuel/energy scheme; the following elements shall be considered as a minimum:

(i) the operator’s management system,

(ii) the operator’s operational capabilities;

(3) verify that the operator’s safety risk assessment that supports the proposed individual fuel/energy scheme achieves an equivalent level of safety to that of the current fuel/energy scheme; and

(4) establish an oversight plan to carry out periodic assessments of the approved individual fuel/energy scheme to verify compliance of the scheme or decide whether the scheme should be amended or revoked.

(d) The approval referred to in point CAT.OP.MPA.182 (d)(2) shall include a list of the isolated aerodromes that are specified by the operator for each aircraft type to which the approval applies.

(e) Without prejudice to points ARO.GEN.120 (d) and (e), the competent authority shall notify the Agency of the start of the evaluation of an alternative means of compliance related to fuel/energy schemes.

OVERSIGHT — VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE OF FUEL SCHEMES FOR CAT OPERATIONS WITH AEROPLANES

(a) When approving a basic fuel scheme, the competent authority should be satisfied that the operator fulfils the applicable criteria of point CAT.OP.MPA.180(a)(3)(i), taking into account the elements contained in the AMC applicable to the basic fuel scheme.

(b) When approving a basic fuel scheme with variations, the competent authority should be satisfied that the operator fulfils the applicable criteria of point CAT.OP.MPA.180(a)(3)(ii), taking into account the elements contained in the AMC applicable to the variation.

(c) When approving an individual fuel scheme that deviates, fully or partly, from the basic fuel scheme, the competent authority should be satisfied that the operator fulfils the applicable criteria of point CAT.OP.MPA.180(a)(3)(iii), taking into account the elements contained in the AMC applicable to the individual fuel scheme.

Before issuing the approval of an individual fuel scheme, the competent authority should verify the following:

(1) the maturity, capability, and suitability of the operator’s management system;

(2) the adequacy of this system for exercising operational control;

(3) the adequacy of the operator’s SOPs;

(4) the resolution of significant findings in the areas that support the application of the individual fuel scheme;

(5) the suitability of the communications and navigation equipment of the aircraft fleet to which the individual fuel scheme will apply;

(6) the areas of operation where the individual fuel scheme will be used;

(7) the operator’s ability to provide reliable and accurate aircraft-specific fuel data;

(8) the suitability of the relevant training programmes, including those for flight crew and operational control personnel;

(9) the experience of the personnel concerned, particularly of the flight crew, in the use of the procedures and systems that support the individual fuel scheme;

(10) any low-fuel events (including emergency fuel conditions) in the operator’s safety records; and

(11) the maintenance of the fleet in terms of reliability of the fuel system, including the accuracy of the fuel-measurement systems.

OPERATIONS TO AN ISOLATED AERODROME — GENERAL

The use of an isolated aerodrome exposes both the aircraft and passengers to a greater risk than in operations where a destination alternate aerodrome is available. The competent authority should, therefore, assess whether all possible means are applied to mitigate that greater risk.

ASSESSMENT AND OVERSIGHT OF POLICIES ASSOCIATED WITH FUEL SCHEMES

The competent authority’s assessment and oversight of:

             the fuel planning and in-flight re-planning policy;

             the selection-of-aerodromes policy; and

             the in-flight fuel management policy

may follow a two-step process: firstly, assess and oversee each policy individually, and secondly, and more importantly, assess and oversee all the policies together.

The competent authority should be satisfied with regard to the following:

             the robustness of the operator’s management system, particularly with regard to safety risk management; and

             in case of basic fuel schemes with variations and individual fuel schemes, the operator’s processes for performance monitoring and measurement.

APPROVAL OF INDIVIDUAL FUEL SCHEMES — QUALIFICATION OF PERSONNEL

(a) In accordance with point ARO.GEN.200(a)(2), the competent authority is required to have qualified personnel to perform the tasks under their responsibility. To approve individual fuel schemes, the competent authority’s inspectors should have the necessary knowledge and expertise to understand, monitor, and validate the criteria of point (c) of AMC1 ARO.OPS.225.

(b) For this purpose, the inspectors should be able to understand the relevance and meaningfulness of the operator’s safety performance indicators (SPIs), targets, and means by which these targets are achieved.

(c) The competent authority should develop guidance to be used by its inspectors when approving and verifying individual fuel schemes.

APPROVAL OF INDIVIDUAL FUEL SCHEMES — APPLICATION OF INDIVIDUAL FUEL SCHEMES — GUIDANCE TO PERSONNEL

According to points ARO.GEN.115 and ARO.GEN.200(a)(1), the competent authority is required to develop guidance on the application of individual fuel schemes to be used by its inspectors. Such guidance should cover the following:

(a) the operator’s responsibilities:

(1) operational control systems (organisational control over internal processes);

(2) policies and procedures;

(3) qualified personnel:

(i) competence and experience of both flight crew and operational control personnel; and

(ii) their training;

(4) SOP compliance and suitability;

(5) monitoring of the effectiveness of individual fuel scheme processes; and

(6) continuous improvement;

(b) operational characteristics:

(1) of the aircraft: current aircraft-specific data derived from a fuel consumption monitoring system; and

(2) of the area of operations:

(i) aerodrome technologies;

(ii) meteorological information capabilities;

(iii) ATM infrastructure; and

(iv) aerodrome capabilities and ATS characteristics;

(3) a suitable computerised flight plan;

(4) flight monitoring or flight watch capabilities, as applicable;

(5) communications systems: ground-based and airborne systems;

(6) navigation systems: ground-based and airborne systems; and

(7) reliable meteorological and aerodrome information; and

(c) safety risk management:

(1) agreed SPIs;

(2) risk register;

(3) identification of hazards;

(4) risk monitoring; and

(5) compliance monitoring.

When collecting statistically relevant data, the competent authority inspectors should consider the specificities of the operations of each operator. As a minimum, the data should be collected for a period of 2 years.

Note: Further guidance is provided in ICAO Doc 9976 Flight Planning and Fuel Management (FPFM) Manual, Appendix 7 to Chapter 5 A performance-based approach job-aid for an approving authority (1st Edition, 2015).

INDIVIDUAL FUEL SCHEMES — RESOLUTION OF SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

The approval of an individual fuel scheme may be rejected, suspended or revoked when the operator has not resolved the relevant findings, or when there are unacceptable open findings that affect the areas that support individual fuel schemes (e.g. operational control, safety management system, safety risk assessment processes, availability of data, SPIs, pilot training, etc.).

ARO.OPS.226 Approval and oversight of evidence-based training programmes

Regulation (EU) 2020/2036

(a) Where a competent authority grants an approval for EBT programmes, inspectors must receive qualification and training in EBT principles, application, approval processes and continuing oversight.

(b) The competent authority shall assess and oversee the EBT programme, together with the processes that support the implementation of the EBT programme and its effectiveness.

(c) Upon receiving an application for the approval of an EBT programme, the competent authority shall:

(1) ensure the resolution of level 1 findings in the areas that will support the application of the EBT programme;

(2) assess the capability of the operator to support the implementation of the EBT programme. The following elements shall be considered as a minimum:

(i) the maturity and capability of the operator’s management system in the areas that will support the application of the EBT programme — in particular, flight crew training;

(ii) the operator’s EBT programme suitability — the EBT programme shall correspond to the size of the operator, and the nature and complexity of its activities, taking into account the hazards and associated risks inherent in those activities;

(iii) the adequacy of the operator’s record-keeping system, in particular with regard to flight crew training, checking and qualifications records in particular ORO.GEN.220 and ORO.MLR.115 points (c) and (d);

(iv) the suitability of the operator’s grading system to assess the pilot competencies;

(v) the competence and the experience of the instructors and other personnel involved in the EBT programme in the use of the processes and procedures that support the implementation of the EBT programme; and

(vi) the operator’s EBT implementation plan and a safety risk assessment supporting the EBT programme in order to demonstrate how an equivalent level of safety to that of the current training programme can be achieved.

(d) The competent authority shall grant an EBT programme approval when the assessment concludes that the compliance with at least ORO.FC.146, ORO.FC.231, and ORO.FC.232 is ensured.

(e) Without prejudice to ARO.GEN.120 (d) and (e), the competent authority shall notify the Agency when it starts the evaluation of an alternative means of compliance related to EBT.

QUALIFICATION AND TRAINING — INSPECTORS

(a) For the initial approval and oversight of an operator’s EBT programme, the inspector of the competent authority should undertake EBT training as part of their required technical training (see AMC2 ARO.GEN.200(a)(2)). At the conclusion of the inspector training, the inspector should:

(1) know the principles of EBT, including the following underlying principles:

(i) competency-based training;

(ii) learning from positive performance;

(iii) building resilience; and;

(iv) data-driven training;

(2) know the structure of an EBT module;

(3) know the method of training delivery for each phase of an EBT module;

(4) know the principles of adult learning and how they relate to EBT;

(5) recognise effective observations based on a competency framework, and document evidence of observed performance;

(6) recognise and relate specific performance observations of competencies;

(7) recognise trainee performance to determine competency-based training needs and recognise strengths;

(8) understand methods for the evaluation of performance using a competency-based grading system;

(9) recognise appropriate teaching styles during simulator training to accommodate trainee learning needs;

(10) recognise facilitated trainee learning, focusing on specific competency-based training needs; and

(11) understand how to conduct a debrief using facilitation techniques.

(b) The objective of such training is to ensure that the inspector:

(1) attains the adequate level of knowledge in the principles of approval and oversight of the EBT programmes; and

(2) acquires the ability to recognise the EBT programme suitability.

QUALIFICATION AND TRAINING — PRINCIPLES OF EBT — DATA-DRIVEN TRAINING

EBT is a data-driven programme and proper oversight requires the inspector to have a good understanding of all features where data plays an important role in the EBT programme:

(a) Flight crew training data

(1) Data related to grading of competencies (level 1), data related to OBs (level 2) and how it can be used to drive the design of the operator’s EBT programme. Other training data (level 3) and how it is used in the contextualisation of an example scenario element.

(2) Individual flight crew training data — understand how it is used:

(i) in regard to licence revalidation and renewal; and

(ii) to provide tailored training and additional FSTD training.

(b) Data from the management system — understand how it may be used for the selection of the example scenario element(s) and the contextualisation of the example scenario element(s).

(c) Instructor standardisation and concordance data

(1) How the EBT data is used to standardise the instructor and how, at the same time, the operator ensures the necessary just culture and a non-jeopardy environment for the instructors (referred to in the instructor concordance assurance programme).

(2) Understand the importance of quality in the data – the feedback loop of the EBT programme.

QUALIFICATION AND TRAINING — OPERATOR’S EBT PROGRAMME SUITABILITY

To recognise and evaluate the suitability of an operator’s EBT programme, the inspector’s training programme may include those features as training objectives. AMC1 ORO.FC.231(a) provides the list of features of a suitable EBT programme.

INITIAL APPROVAL — VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE

When approving an EBT programme, the competent authority should ensure that the operator fulfils all the applicable criteria of ORO.FC.231 and its associated AMC. In particular, it should recognise the suitability of the operator’s EBT programme (AMC1 ORO.FC.231(a)).

EBT PROGRAMME SUITABILITY

As regards the suitability of the EBT programme, please refer to AMC1 ORO.FC.231(a).

OVERSIGHT PLAN — PERIODIC ASSESSMENT TO VERIFY THE COMPLIANCE OF THE EBT PROGRAMME

(a) After issuing the approval of the operator’s EBT programme, the competent authority should have a process to verify the operator’s continuing compliance.

(b) Each organisation to which an EBT approval has been issued should have an inspector (or inspectors) assigned to it who is (are) trained and qualified for EBT (see AMC1 ARO.OPS.226(a)).

(c) Audits and inspections, on a scale and frequency appropriate to the operation, should cover at least:

(1) management supervision of the EBT programme;

(2) ongoing identification of operational risks and inclusion into the operator’s EBT programme;

(3) relevance of the operator’s EBT programme to address its operational and training needs;

(4) effectiveness of the operator’s EBT programme to improve pilot competencies. When there is an ineffective programme, the competent authority should examine the operator processes which identify the lack of effective results;

(5) compliance with all requirements of ORO.FC.231;

(6) delivery of instructor initial training in accordance with AMC1 ORO.FC.146(c), including inspections of the training delivery;

(7) conduct of assessments of competence for EBT instructors, including periodic inspections of FSTD training;

(8) maintenance of crew records;

(9) administration of programme enrolment and compliance with the requirements of Annex I (Part-FCL) for licence revalidation and renewal;

(10) continuing standardisation of EBT instructors; and

(11) inspection of the training delivery.

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE OPERATOR’S EBT PROGRAMME

(a) The effectiveness of the operator’s EBT programme can be determined by periodically reviewing pilot competencies across several domains, such as role, fleet (e.g. CPT/FO, A320, B737) and airline so that the continuing improvement of the EBT programme is linked to an improvement of the pilot competencies.

(b) The analysis of the pilot competencies across the domains should also take into account the operator’s experience in the EBT programme and the level of difficulty contained within the scenario elements of the programme, which may result in variations of the grading results and those variations may be acceptable.

STANDARDISATION OF EBT INSTRUCTORS — ACCEPTABLE INSTRUCTOR CONCORDANCE

The authority may require a minimum acceptable level of concordance. This may be a non-exhaustive list:

(a) Set a minimum acceptable level of concordance per aircraft fleet or by group of instructors.

(b) Set a minimum acceptable level of concordance per competency.

(c) Set a minimum acceptable level of concordance for all operators under its oversight, or a minimum acceptable level of concordance per operator (or type of operator) based on the risk of the operator.

ARO.OPS.230 Determination of disruptive schedules

Regulation (EU) No 83/2014

For the purpose of flight time limitations, the competent authority shall determine, in accordance with the definitions of “early type” and “late type” of disruptive schedules in point ORO.FTL.105 of Annex III, which of those two types of disruptive schedules shall apply to all CAT operators under its oversight.

ARO.OPS.235 Approval of individual flight time specification schemes

Regulation (EU) No 83/2014

(a) The competent authority shall approve flight time specification schemes proposed by CAT operators if the operator demonstrates compliance with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 and Subpart FTL of Annex III to this Regulation.

(b) Whenever a flight time specification scheme proposed by an operator deviates from the applicable certification specifications issued by the Agency, the competent authority shall apply the procedure described in Article 22(2) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008.

(c) Whenever a flight time specification scheme proposed by an operator derogates from applicable implementing rules, the competent authority shall apply the procedure described in Article 14(6) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008.

(d) Approved deviations or derogations shall be subject, after being applied, to an assessment to determine whether such deviations or derogations should be confirmed or amended. The competent authority and the Agency shall conduct an independent assessment based on information provided by the operator. The assessment shall be proportionate, transparent and based on scientific principles and knowledge.

ICAO DOC 9966 (MANUAL FOR THE OVERSIGHT OF FATIGUE MANAGEMENT APPROACHES)

Further guidance on fatigue risk management processes, appropriate fatigue management, the underlying scientific principles and operational knowledge may be found in ICAO Doc 9966 (Manual for the Oversight of Fatigue Management Approaches).

ARO.OPS.240 Specific approval of RNP AR APCH

Regulation (EU) 2016/1199

(a) When compliance with the requirements in SPA.PBN.105 has been demonstrated by the applicant, the competent authority shall grant a generic specific approval or a procedure-specific approval for RNP AR APCH.

(b) In the case of a procedure-specific approval, the competent authority shall:

(1) list the approved instrument approach procedures at specific aerodromes in the PBN approval;

(2) establish coordination with the competent authorities for these aerodromes, if appropriate; and

(3) take into account possible credits stemming from RNP AR APCH specific approvals already issued to the applicant.

TEMPORARY LIMITATION ON RVR

Where operators are new to RNP AR APCH operations and their initial application is for RNP < 0.3, it is appropriate to establish a temporary limitation for RVR minima, until operational experience is gained. This period could be based upon time (e.g. 90 days) and a number of conducted operations, as agreed by the competent authority and the operator.

REFERENCES

Additional guidance material for the specific approval of PBN operations, when required, can be found in ICAO Doc 9997 Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) Operational Approval Manual. In particular, a job aid can be found in paragraph 4.7 therein for assessment of applications for RNP AR APCH.