Air Operations

Reference: Reg. (EU) 965/2012, Article 2:

‘“commercial operation” shall mean any operation of an aircraft, in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration, which is available to the public or, when not made available to the public, which is performed under a contract between an operator and a customer, where the latter has no control over the operator.’

Pursuant to Article 140(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (the New Basic Regulation), ‘commercial operation’ shall still be understood as a reference to point (i) of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008. This is a transitional provision until not later than 12 September 2023, when the implementing rules adopted on the basis of Regulations (EC) No 216/2008 and (EC) No 552/2004 shall be adapted to this Regulation. The same definition of ‘commercial operation’ has already been transposed in Article 2 of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations and is applicable as of 9 July 2019.

Reference: CS-25 (Large Aeroplanes)

Baby bassinets are currently included in a certification process of the particular aircraft in which they will be installed; baby bassinets are not certified as a separate device and they are not certified for taxi, take-off, landing and turbulent weather conditions. Placards advising on their stowage during taxi, take-off, landing and turbulence are required either at the location where baby bassinets will be fixed to the aircraft structure (e.g. bulkhead) or a clearly visible instruction advising on the same must be in place on the baby bassinet itself.

Because of the standard fixation of the unit, they are not stable during turbulence, they may swing up and down, and therefore they must be stowed during turbulence.

The placarding requirements are related to the general certification requirements on placarding and intended function in accordance with Certifications Specifications and Acceptable Means of Compliance for Large Aeroplanes CS-25 (ED Decision 2012/008/R) and the marking requirements as specified in the approval of the equipment. The applicable reference paragraph is CS 25.1301, 25.1541. There is no specific mention of baby bassinets, however, equipment installed in an aircraft must meet the applicable requirements of the certification basis, the equipment specifications (if available) or aircraft manufacturer specifications (if available), or NAA requirements applicable to the operation of the aircraft.

For any questions on certification matters, do not hesitate to contact EASA Certification directorate.

Reference: Regulation (EU) 2018/1139, Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations

Essential requirements are high-level safety objectives and obligations put on persons and organisations undertaking aviation activities under Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (the Basic Regulation). Detailed rules are then adopted by the European Commission based on technical advice from EASA to further detail how to achieve these objectives and obligations. For example, the implementing rules for air operations (i.e. Reg. (EU) No 965/2012) have been developed in order to ensure uniform implementation of essential requirements related to air operations.

The Basic Regulation has annexes containing essential requirements for:

• airworthiness (Annex II),
• environmental compatibility related to products (Annex III)
• aircrew (Annex IV),
• air operations (Annex V),
• qualified entities (Annex VI),
• aerodromes (Annex VII),
• ATM/ANS and air traffic controllers (Annex VIII), and
• unmanned aircraft (Annex IX).

The Essential Requirements can be amended by the European Commission where necessary for reasons of technical, operational or scientific developments or evidence.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011, Regulation (EU) No 965/2012

These terms refer to certain legal concepts used in aviation safety regulations, in particular Reg. (EU) No 1178/2011 on aircrew and Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations.

'Grandfathering' designates the legal recognition and acceptance of certificates issued on the basis of national legislation by national authorities prior to the entry into force of a specific regulation. For example, in Reg. (EU) No 1178/2011, the conditions for the grandfathering of JAR-compliant and non-JAR-compliant pilot licences and medical certificates are set forth in its Articles 4 and 5. In Reg. (EU) No 965/2012, the conditions for grandfathering of EU-OPS AOCs are set forth in Article 7(1).

Grandfathering measures are included in the Cover Regulation to assist Member States in the transition from national rules to unified EU rules. In the case of aircrew licensing, provisions on grandfathering consider some national certificates issued in compliance with given regulations and by a certain date as being in compliance with the new Aircrew Regulation (i.e. Reg. (EU) No 1178/2011).

A 'transition measure' is a provision helping the national competent authorities and regulated entities to gradually adapt to the new EU rules. Several examples can be found in the Aircrew Regulation, such as in Article 11c (in relation to the obligation of Member States regarding the transfer of records and certification processes of those organisations for which the Agency is the competent authority) and in Article 4 (1) — the obligation of Member States to adapt grandfathered pilot licences to the new format by a certain date. 

The 'opt-out' is a form of transition measure applicable to Member States. Opt-out provisions allowed Member States to decide not to implement an EU regulation or certain provisions thereof for a certain period of time, delaying the date of application of the new regulation (or certain provisions thereof) within that Member State. For example, the opt-out provisions contained in the Aircrew and Air Ops regulations required the Member State to notify the European Commission and EASA of the 'opt-out', describing the reasons for such derogation and the programme for the phasing out of the opt-out and achieving full implementation of the common requirements.

Read more on opt-in and opt-out.

Many Commission Regulations adopted in EASA domains contain two different dates, usually under the heading “entry into force”. The example below is from Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations:

Article 10
Entry into force
1. This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 28 October 2012.

The entry into force of an EU regulation represents the date when the regulation has legal existence in the EU legal order and in the national legal order of each Member State.

It is common practice that the regulation enters into force 20 days after its publication in the Official Journal of the EU. That is the case when the legislator simply uses the expression “This Regulation enters into force on the 20th day after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.” Shorter periods are also used, as was the case in the example above.

Sometimes the date of entry into force is also the date of applicability of a regulation, meaning that from the date when it enters into force, the regulation is also applicable; it can be fully invoked by its addressees and is fully enforceable.

However, due to the complexity of the domains that are regulated, a period of time may be needed between the date the regulation enters into force, i.e. it legally exists, and the date it can actually be applied, i.e. the date when it is enforceable and the legal rights and obligations can be effectively exercised.

This period of time (vacatio legis) is deliberately introduced for Member States, competent authorities, operators, organisations, licence holders and any other addressees or beneficiaries of the regulations to prepare their systems, processes, procedures, documentation, etc. for compliance with the new rules.

Vacatio legis  is also a period given for the addressees of the regulation to adjust to the upcoming rights and obligations and take the necessary measures to benefit from the legal effects of the regulation, namely for the purposes of mutual recognition of certificates and approvals in the aviation internal market.

In those cases, it is common practice of the legislator to establish two different dates under the article on entry into force. One date establishes the legal existence of the act (entry into force); the second date establishes the date when it becomes applicable (applicability).

The date of applicability therefore represents the date from which the regulation can produce rights and obligations on the addressees and can be directly enforced towards the courts, administrations, national governments, etc. This means that before the date of applicability, obligations or privileges can neither be exercised nor enforced.

The same understanding is shared by the Legal Service of the Commission, which has also clarified in EASA Committee that the privileges provided for in a regulation can only be exercised as of the applicability date chosen by the legislator. Persons subject to the relevant regulation (including national aviation authorities) may prepare themselves for such an effective date (adapting their procedures and practices), but can neither enjoy the privileges nor enforce the obligations.

Legal consequences

This means that Member States cannot start delivering authorisations, approvals, certificates, etc. issued in accordance with the new regulations and at the same time producing all the legal effects of the regulation from the date of entry into force of the regulation, but only from the date of its applicability. However, during the gap period existing between the date of entry into force and the date of applicability, Member States and competent authorities can prepare the process towards the issuance of such authorisations, approvals, and any other certificates in accordance with the new provisions.

In addition, during the period of vacatio legis, an option that Member States and competent authorities can consider, in order to avoid issuing certificates on the last day before the date of applicability, is to issue the new certificates in accordance with the new regulation while clearly indicating in those certificates that they are only valid as of a certain date that would coincide with the date of applicability of the regulation on the basis of which those certificates are issued. This means that those new certificates may be issued, but are not yet effective and cannot be mutually recognised among Member States until the common date of applicability established by the regulation. Until they become effective, licence holders, organisations and operators should still retain and use the certificates already issued under the previous regime. Competent authorities are only obliged to accept the new certificates once the regulation has become applicable.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations and its amendments

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 entered into force on 28 October 2012.

Article 10 of the Air OPS Regulation includes an opt-out provision allowing Member States to postpone the applicability of Annexes I to V until 28 October 2014. This means that entire Annexes and/or specific parts of the Annexes will not be applicable if a Member States chooses to opt-out. The Agency has published an overview of the opt-out period applied by Member States here.

The amendments to the Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 have different applicability dates:

• Commission Regulation (EU) No 800/2013 on non-commercial operation became applicable on 25 August 2013 and the opt-out period is 3 years.
• Commission Regulation (EU) No 71/2014 on operational suitability data was published on 27 January 2014; it entered into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication and must be applied not later than 18 December 2017 or two years after the approval of the operational suitability data, whichever is the latest.
• Commission Regulation (EU) No 83/2014 on flight and duty time limitations and rest requirements was published on 29 January 2014, entered into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication and shall apply from 18 February 2016 and from 17 Feb 2017 for ORO.FTL.205(e).

Once the Implementing Rules have been adopted, it is still possible that transition measures defer their applicability to a later date. Therefore, the exact date of applicability of each requirement will depend on the transition measures adopted by the European Commission. Until the date the new Implementing Rules apply, Member States' national rules and EU-OPS remain in force.

Please refer to the information provided by the European Commission on comitology.

More information

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, associated Decisions (AMC/GM)

EU-OPS was the basis for the creation of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations, which is the currently applicable regulation in the field of air operations with aeroplanes and helicopters.

EU-OPS is published in the Official Journal of the EU as Regulation (EC) No 859/2008 of 20 August 2008 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 as regards common technical requirements and administrative procedures applicable to commercial transportation by aeroplane.

Implementing rules (IRs) are binding in their entirety and used to specify a high and uniform level of safety and uniform conformity and compliance. They detail how to comply with the essential requirements of the Basic Regulation and regulate the subject matters included in its scope. The IRs are adopted by the European Commission in the form of Regulations. EU law is directly applicable (full part of Member States' legal order).

Detailed implementation aspects are included as Certification Specifications (CS) or Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC). 

Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) are non-binding. The AMC serves as a means by which the requirements contained in the Basic Regulation and the IRs can be met. The AMC illustrate a means, but not the only means, by which a requirement of an implementing rule can be met. Satisfactory demonstration of compliance using a published AMC shall provide for presumption of compliance with the related requirement; it is a way to facilitate certification tasks for the applicant and the competent authority. However, NAAs and organisations may decide to show compliance with the requirements using other means. Both NAAs and the organisations may propose alternative means of compliance (AltMoCs). ‘Alternative Means of Compliance’ are those that propose an alternative to an existing AMC. Those AltMoC proposals must be accompanied by evidence of their ability to meet the intent of the IR. Use of an existing AMC gives the user the benefit of compliance with the IR.

Read more on the difference between AMC and AltMoC.

Certification Specifications (CS) are non-binding technical standards adopted by EASA to meet the essential requirements of the Basic Regulation. CSs are used to establish the certification basis (CB) as described below. Should an aerodrome operator not meet the recommendation of the CS, they may propose an Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) that demonstrates how they meet the intent of the CS. As part of an agreed CB, the CS become binding on an individual basis to the applicant.

Special Conditions (SC) are non-binding special detailed technical specifications determined by the NAA for an aerodrome if the certification specifications established by EASA are not adequate or are inappropriate to ensure conformity of the aerodrome with the essential requirements of Annex VII to the Basic Regulation. Such inadequacy or inappropriateness may be due to:

• the design features of the aerodrome; or
• where experience in the operation of that or other aerodromes, having similar design features, has shown that safety may be compromised.

SCs, like CSs, become binding on an individual basis to the applicant as part of an agreed CB.

Guidance Material (GM) is non-binding explanatory and interpretation material on how to achieve the requirements contained in the Basic Regulation, the IRs, the AMCs and the CSs. It contains information, including examples, to assist the user in the correct understanding and application of the Basic Regulation, its IRs, AMCs and the CSs.

Frequently Asked Questions: FAQs are published on the EASA website and cover a wide range of material. Although the information contained in the FAQs is a summary of existing law or procedures, it may contain the results of a more complex interpretation of IR or other rules of law. In such cases there is always an internal quality consultation within the Agency prior to the publication of the FAQ on the website. The EASA FAQs are necessary to share information and enable to get a common understanding.

The FAQs are not additional GM.

References: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations as amended by Regulation (EU) No 800/2013; Reg. (EC) No 216/2008 

Yes, non-commercial operations with aeroplanes and helicopters are covered by Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations. The applicable rules are determined by the complexity of the aircraft being used: Annex VI (Part–NCC) applies to non-commercial operations with complex motor-powered aircraft) and Annex VII (Part–NCO) applies to non-commercial operations with other-than-complex motor-powered aircraft. 

The definition of complex motor-powered aircraft is found in Article 3 of  Reg. (EC) No 216/2008. Pursuant to Article 140(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (the New Basic Regulation), ‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ shall still be understood as a reference to point (j) of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008. This is a transitional provision until not later than 12 September 2023, when the implementing rules adopted on the basis of Regulations (EC) No 216/2008 and (EC) No 552/2004 shall be adapted to this Regulation. The definition is as follows:

“complex motor-powered aircraft' shall mean:

(i) an aeroplane:

• with a maximum certificated take-off mass exceeding 5 700 kg, or
• certificated for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nineteen, or
• certificated for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or
• equipped with (a) turbojet engine(s) or more than one turboprop engine, or

(ii) a helicopter certificated:

• for a maximum take-off mass exceeding 3 175 kg, or
• for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nine, or
• for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots,

or

(iii) a tilt rotor aircraft”.

The definition for 'commercial operation' is in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012:

“(1)(d) 'commercial operation' means any operation of an aircraft, in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration, which is available to the public or, when not made available to the public, which is performed under a contract between an operator and customer, where the latter has no control over the operator”.

Training flights fall under either Part-NCC or Part-NCO, depending on the complexity of the aircraft used for the non-commercial operations.

In addition, Part-SPA applies to any operation requiring a specific approval (e.g. low visibility operations, transport of dangerous goods, performance-based navigation and more).

Finally, Annexes II (Part-ARO) and III (Part-ORO) contain the authority requirements and respectively the organisation requirements. Annex III applies to operators of complex motor-powered aircraft, both commercial and non-commercial.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations and the associated Decisions

This is determined by the nature of your flight, and in the case of non-commercial operations, by the type of aircraft used. The following diagram indicates under which requirements your flight should be operating.

Part-SPA (specific approvals) applies to all types of operations, as the case may be.

CMPA = complex motor-powered aircraft

Ot-CMPA = other-than complex motor-powered aircraft

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, associated Decisions (AMC/GM)

The Agency has published a cross-reference table to assist industry in transitioning to the new rules. This table contains detailed information on the transposition of EU-OPS / JAR-OPS 3 provisions (both Section 1 and Section 2 - for aeroplanes, TGL 44) into the new Implementing Rules (IR), Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and Guidance Material (GM):

• new rule reference and rule title;
• old rule reference and rule title;
• indication of any differences to EU-OPS / JAR-OPS 3 provisions by stating “No change”, “Amended”, “New” or “Not transposed”; and
• short description of the differences, if any, between the old and new rules.

With this cross-reference table one can analyse in detail where and how the old provisions have been transposed into the new regulatory framework.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations

At the present stage no EU operational requirements exist for flights related to design and production activities (“manufacturer flights”). Instead these flights are regulated under national law. This is laid down in Paragraph 3 of Article 6 of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as follows:

“By way of derogation from Article 5 of this Regulation and without prejudice to point (b) of Article 18(2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 and to Subpart P of Annex I to Commission Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 concerning the permit to fly, the following flights shall continue to be operated under the requirements specified in the national law of the Member State in which the operator has its principal place of business, or, where the operator has no principal place of business, the place where the operator is established or resides:

(a)   flights related to the introduction or modification of aeroplane or helicopter types conducted by design or production organisations within the scope of their privileges; (…)”

In the Information on Alternative Means of Compliance notified to the Agency page there is a list with all the AltMoCs adopted by the Member States.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, Annex I Definitions

Annex I (Definitions) of the Regulation (EU) 965/2012 on air operations contains definitions for critical phases of flight for aeroplanes and helicopters:

“'Critical phases of flight' in the case of aeroplanes means the take-off run, the take-off flight path, the final approach, the missed approach, the landing, including the landing roll, and any other phases of flight as determined by the pilot-in-command or commander.

'Critical phases of flight' in the case of helicopters means taxiing, hovering, take-off, final approach, missed approach, the landing and any other phases of flight as determined by the pilot-in-command or commander.”

As one can see from these definitions, for helicopters taxiing is defined as a critical phase of flight, while for aeroplanes it is not. Rules for activities considered acceptable during critical phases of flight are provided in the Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations – in Annex III (Part-ORO), Annex IV (Part-CAT), Annex VI (Part-NCC), Annex VII (Part-NCO) and Annex VIII (Part-SPO). Basically, these implementing rules require crew members during critical phases of flight:

• to be seated at his/her assigned station; and
• not to perform any activities other than those required for the safe operation of the aircraft

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex I (Definitions) and Annex III (Part-ORO)

The term 'Sterile Flight Deck' is used to describe any period of time when the flight crew members shall not be disturbed e.g. by cabin crew, except for matters critical to the safe operation of the aircraft and/or the safety of the occupants. In addition, during these periods of time the flight crew members should focus on their essential operational activities without being disturbed by non-flight related matters, i.e. flight crew members should avoid non-essential conversations, should not make non-safety related announcements towards the passengers, etc.

Sterile flight deck procedures are meant to increase the flight crew members' attention to their essential operational activities when their focused alert is needed, i.e. during critical phases of flight (take-off, landing, etc.), during taxiing and below 10 000 feet (except for cruise flight).

The sterile flight deck procedures were published in Regulation (EU) 2015/140 as an amending regulation to (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations. EASA published the associated AMC and GM with ED Decision 2015/005/R.

Reference: Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, Regulation (EU) No 965/2012

The term 'commercial operation' is now defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as follows (previously in Reg. (EC) No 216/2008):

“'Commercial operation' means any operation of an aircraft, in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration, which is available to the public or, when not made available to the public, which is performed under a contract between an operator and a customer, where the latter has no control over the operator.”

The term 'commercial air transport (CAT) operation' is defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 as follows:

“'Commercial air transport' means an aircraft operation to transport passengers, cargo or mail for remuneration or other valuable consideration.”

The two definitions make it clear that 'commercial operations' include 'CAT operations'. Specialised operations (SPO) are another type of commercial operations. They are also defined in Article 2 of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex II (Part ARO, ARO.GEN and ARO.RAMP)

There is no further guidance on how many on-site audits should actually be performed. This decision depends on the confidence of the authority in the operator, on results of past certification and/or oversight activities required by ARO.GEN and ARO.RAMP and on the assessment of associated risks. The number of on-site audits is therefore part of the oversight responsibility of the authority.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, Annex III (Part ORO)

The TCO authorisation issued by the Agency is no substitute for requirements regarding wet-lease agreements between EU and third country operators that are contained in Part ORO of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations. For wet-lease agreements, the TCO operator must demonstrate equivalence to EU safety requirements. Before entering into a wet-lease agreement, the EU operator should demonstrate to the authority that (1) the TCO has a valid AOC, (2) that safety standards of the TCO regarding continuing airworthiness and air operations are equivalent to the EU continuing airworthiness requirements of Reg. (EU) No 1321/2014 and (3) the aircraft has a standard Certificate of Airworthiness (CofA) issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 8.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex II (Part ARO), Annex III (Part ORO)

As stated in ORO.AOC.100, an operator has to submit, as part of its application for an AOC, a description of its management system, including the organisational structure, which constitutes its safety management manual, whose content is described in AMC1 and AMC2 to ORO.GEN.200(a)(5).
The Competent Authority has to check the content of the operator's Safety Management Manual (SMM) as mentioned in ARO.GEN.310(a) and in the corresponding AMC to ARO.GEN.310.

Information on the content of the operator's Safety Management Manual (SMM), which can be part of the Operations Manual or included in a separate manual, can be found in AMC1 and AMC2 to ORO.GEN.200(a)(5). It should be noted that the SMM is not required to be approved according to ORO.GEN.200(a)(5) and the related AMCs. Nevertheless, changes affecting the operator's management system are required to be approved (ORO.GEN.130 + GM1) and these changes would have to be reflected in the operator's manual dealing with Safety management.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, Annex III (Part-ORO)

Regarding code-sharing, Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations requires from the EU Operator, who wishes to enter into a code-sharing agreement with a third country operator (TCO), compliance with the requirements of Annex III to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012. This means the TCO as a code-share partner will undergo comprehensive audits for the initial verification of compliance and continuous compliance with the applicable ICAO standards [AMC1 ORO.AOC.115(a)(1)]. These audits can be performed either by the EU operator itself or a third party provider. The AMC (AMC2 ORO.AOC.115(b)) refers to the possibility of using industry standards. The audit will focus on the operational, management and control systems of the TCO (see AMC1 ORO.AOC.115(a)(1)).

Continuous compliance of the code-sharing TCO with the applicable ICAO standards will be performed on the basis of a code-share audit programme (see AMC1 ORO.AOC.115(b)).

This means that the audit and verification requirements contained in Part-ORO of Regulation 965/2012 cannot be substituted by a TCO authorisation issued by the Agency. For code-share, an EU operator must, in addition to the TCO authorisation, audit and monitor the TCO.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex IV (Part-CAT)

There are no specific provisions for loadmasters, either in terms of their duties or in terms of their qualification. The only provision applicable to loading is in Part-CAT:

CAT.POL.MAB.100 Mass and balance, loading

CAT.POL.MAB.105 Mass and balance data and documentation, stating:

• The loading of an aircraft shall be performed under the supervision of qualified personnel in a way that is consistent with the results of mass and balance calculations.
• The person supervising the loading of the aircraft shall confirm by hand signature or equivalent that the load and its distribution are in accordance with the mass and balance documentation given to the commander.
• The person who prepared the mass and balance documentation must be named on it.
• The operator has to specify principles and methods for the loading and the mass and balance system in use in its Operations Manual.

Regarding the categorization of such personnel, a loadmaster can be either ground personnel or a crew member if the operator assigns him/her duties on board (as it is the case for some cargo operators), but certainly not flight crew.

Of course this does not prevent a flight crew member to be also qualified as a loadmaster, but he or she would be flight crew independently from being a loadmaster at the same time.

Please note that in accordance with ORO.GEN.110(e), it is the operator's responsibility to “ensure that all personnel assigned to, or directly involved in, ground and flight operations are properly instructed, have demonstrated their abilities in their particular duties and are aware of their responsibilities and the relationship of such duties to the operation as a whole”.

“The acceptable means of compliance for operators seeking an ETOPS operational approval to operate aeroplanes with a maximum passenger seating configuration of 19 or less, in excess of 180 minutes at the approved one-engine-inoperative (OEI) speed (in still air) from an adequate aerodrome is AMC 20-6. For operations in excess of 120 minutes at the approved OEI, refer to the below’’

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex IV (Part CAT)

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 must be considered, especially point CAT.OP.MPA.140, which states:
“(a)    Unless approved by the competent authority in accordance with Annex V (Part SPA), Subpart F, the operator shall not operate a two-engined aeroplane over a route that contains a point further from an adequate aerodrome, under standard conditions in still air, than the appropriate distance for the given type of aeroplane among the following:
[...].
for performance class A aeroplanes with an MOPSC of 19 or less, the distance flown in 120 minutes or, subject to approval by the competent authority, up to 180 minutes for turbojet aeroplanes, at the OEI cruise speed determined in accordance with (b);”

Therefore, a specific ETOPS approval under Part-SPA (Annex V to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012) is not required to operate between 120 and 180 minutes from an adequate aerodrome; nevertheless, an operator is required to hold an approval based on the provisions contained in AMC1 CAT.OP.MPA.140(c). Without this approval, an operator cannot operate in excess of 120 minutes from an adequate aerodrome.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex IV (Part CAT)

Please note that the rules on CDFA are now specified in the following rule of Regulation (EU) 965/2012: CAT.OP.MPA.115 Approach flight technique - aeroplanes. To this implementing rule, three AMCs and one Guidance Material are assigned.

AMC1 CAT.OP.MPA.115 (a)(5) specifies the following: “This DA/H should take into account any add-on to the published minima as identified by the operator's management system and should be specified in the OM (aerodrome operating minima).” This means that the use of any add-on is left to the responsibility of the operator.

Usually, the operator should avoid going below DA/H if the missed approach is initiated. Therefore, (a)(7) specifies: “The operator should establish a procedure to ensure that an appropriate callout is made when the aeroplane is approaching DA/H. If the required visual references are not established at DA/H, the missed approach procedure is to be executed promptly.”

• The requirement to record data link communication messages stated in paragraphs CAT.IDE.A.195, CAT.IDE.H.195, NCC.IDE.A.170, NCC.IDE.H.170, SPO.IDE.A.150 and SPO.IDE.H.150 should be understood as follows: if an aircraft is equipped with data link communication equipment and it is going to use this equipment during part or the entire flight (when also required to be equipped with a CVR and first issued with an individual CofA on or after the applicability date stated in the relevant paragraph), then it must also have a working data link recording function.  The expression ‘where applicable’ in CAT.IDE.A.195(a) is to indicate that the requirement applies when information enumerated in CAT.IDE.A.195(a)(1) is exchanged or could be exchanged via data link replacing voice during the flight. This is also valid for the expression ‘where applicable’ in CAT.IDE.H.195(a), NCC.IDE.A.170(a), NCC.IDE.H.170(a),  SPO.IDE.A.150(a) and SPO.IDE.H.150(a).
• Examples where this requirement would not apply include but are not limited to:
  • the case where the aircraft is only operated in airspace where no data link communication service is offered and therefore only voice communications are used between the aircraft and ATS;
  • the case where the airborne data link communication equipment is not compatible with the data link services of the airspace where it is operating and therefore, voice remains the means of communication between the aircraft and ATS;
  • the case where the data link communication equipment is disabled permanently and in a way that it cannot be enabled again during the flight and therefore voice remains the means of communication between the aircraft and ATS.

Note:

Commission Regulation (EU) No 29/2009 requires aircraft performing IFR flights above Flight Level 285 in the airspace of most EASA Member States to ‘have the capability to operate some data link services by February 2020 , except for older aircraft and State aircraft.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex IV (Part CAT)

“In use for more than 1 cumulative hour” should be understood as an hour of cumulative ELT operation, whatever the purpose may be (testing, intended or unintended transmitting).

The passenger cabin is not approved for as a cargo compartment and it does not meet the applicable requirements for the transportation of cargo. This is in accordance with the type certification of the large aeroplanes certified for passenger transport. The carriage of cargo in the cabin beyond already approved stowage areas is therefore neither covered by the approval of the aircraft nor by the approval of the seats and that is the reason why an exemption is needed. Additionally, limitations and/or procedures must be introduced to compensate for the non-compliance related to smoke detection or fire suppression means.

The details as to what extent cargo can be carried in a passenger compartment without additional certification are also provided by the relevant EASA Special Condition on this subject, recognized by both Boeing MOM-MOM-20-0239-02B and Airbus FOT 999.0028/20.

AMC2 CAT.OP.MPA.160 (b) (2) specifies the need for approved restraint equipment to secure the intended cargo. However, the term “cargo” in this AMC refers to anything that belongs to the passenger traveling in the adjacent seat but it is not a piece of luggage (e.g., a musical instrument that may have to be restrained to the seat). Thus, the AMC was never intended to facilitate the use of the cabin as a cargo compartment.

By means of the ED Decision 2021/005/R the AMC/GM to CAT.IDE.A.220 and CAT.IDE.A.225 have been updated in line with the existing evidence and expert opinion. The use of automated external defibrillators (AED) is essential to increase the chances of survival in case of a cardiac arrythmias such as ventricular fibrillation (VF) and non-perfusing ventricular tachycardia (VT) when used in the first 10 minutes.

AMC1 CAT.IDE.A.220 (b) (4) stipulates that the aircraft operators should carry automated external defibrillator (AED) on board all aircraft equipped with a first-aid kit and required to carry at least one cabin crew. When operating multi-deck aircraft, operators should assess if additional equipment is needed on each deck.

AED (Automated Emergency Defibrillators) can be considered as carry on board medical equipment. The provision where the AED will be stowed should be certified (capable to carry the load and placarded accordingly). If the AED is stowed in a stowage as for passenger luggage we would not necessarily ask for full 25.853 compliance especially when considered as carry on board equipment. If you want to certify it (being part of the modification) then compliance to the applicable CS requirements must be demonstrated. 

In addition, you should have a look into the guidance material to Part CAT 140. Here you will find some information related to the electro mechanical interference of medical equipment.
If the AED is considered as carry on board medical equipment, there is no need for a certified installation. The operator is however obliged to conduct an assessment as per AMC1 CAT.GEN.MPA.140.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex V (Part SPA)

It is not the medical equipment itself that has to be approved in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 748/2012, but its installation on the helicopter. Therefore, if it is a fixed installed equipment, it has to be approved; if it is removable, the housing or any other part which is installed has to be approved. In general terms, the principle applied here is that no kind of equipment (medical or not, installed or not) shall affect the airworthiness or the safe operation of the aircraft even in the case of failures or malfunctions.

This means, for example, that if the equipment is powered by a power source of the aircraft, there shall be no adverse effect on the power source itself or on other systems or parts of the aircraft, or that the equipment is checked and cleared against electromagnetic interference.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex III (Part ORO), Annex IV (Part CAT), Annex V (Part SPA), Annex VI (Part NCC), Annex VII (Part NCO)

European rules regarding the transport of dangerous goods can be found in the Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations (Air OPS). Air OPS Regulation substitutes the EU-OPS Regulations. So far, only the rules for commercial air transport and non-commercial operations have been published in Annexes I to VII of the Air OPS. The rules on aerial work (specialised operations) will follow later to complete it.

Apart from the implementing rules which are comprised in the Regulation (EU) 965/2012, the Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and Guidance Material (GM), which are published as EASA Decisions on the Agency's website, should be taken into account as well (namely Decisions 2012/015/R through to 2012/019/R, respectively the amended ones 2013/017/R through to 2013/022/R).

The requirements in ORO.GEN.110, CAT.GEN.MPA.200, SPA.DG.105, NCC.GEN.150 and NCO.GEN.140 are more general, whereas the related AMC/GM (especially AMC1 SPA.DG.105(a) in ED Decision 2013/020/R on Part SPA) include more specific details.

The requirements stipulated in Part I, Chapter 4 of the ICAO Doc 9284-AN/905, Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air, mentioned as a further reference in the Air OPS Regulation, must also be complied with.

In addition, national aviation authorities are responsible for approving the dangerous goods training in their countries and therefore they have to establish the conditions under which they shall be approved. For detailed information on training requirements (including the type of training interaction - classroom or computer-based training), each operator should contact the national aviation authority in their country of registration.

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations, Annex IV (Part CAT); Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 on the right of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air

Portable air concentrators (POC) do not contain oxygen as such; they only concentrate the oxygen in the surrounding area. Therefore they should not be confused with oxygen bottles/cylinders. Under the European regulations, POCs do not have to be approved to be carried and used on board.

As POCs contain batteries, they fall under the definition of portable electronic devices (PEDs).

In accordance with the European regulations (AMC1 CAT.GEN.MPA.140 (b)(2)(i)), medical equipment necessary to support physiological functions (i.e. POCs) does not need to be switched-off during any phases of the flight.

Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 establishes the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air. Article 4(3) of this Regulation requires an air carrier or its agent to make publicly available the safety requirements and relevant information on restrictions. For more information on Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006, please refer to the Commission's interpretative guidelines on this regulation from 11.06.2012, which has been published on the Commission's website and can be accessed using this link.

If passengers have special needs, they should request more information from the airline at the time of booking.

[NOTE: Q1 and Q2 must be read together as they are closely related.]

Reference: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations; Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 on the right of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air

Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 establishes the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air. The Regulation also stipulates that air operators should provide assistance, including transportation of medical equipment subject to dangerous goods legislation. Article 4(3) of this Regulation requires an air carrier or its agent to make publicly available the safety requirements and relevant information on restrictions. Annex II to the Regulation stipulates that the relevant legislation on dangerous goods can be invoked to limit the transport of mobility equipment. For more information on Regulation 1107/2006, please refer to the Commission's interpretative guidelines on this regulation from 11.06.2012, which has been published on the Commission's website and can be accessed here.

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 of 5 October 2012 on Air Operations (Air OPS Regulation) refers to Annex 18 of the Chicago Convention and the Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by air when relating to their carriage on board. For safety reasons, oxygen/air cylinders or bottles are considered dangerous goods and fall under Annex 18 of the Chicago Convention; therefore, the provisions under Part 8 of the ICAO Technical Instructions must be applied to passengers who intend to carry these items with them on board. Oxygen/air cylinders for medical use of no more than 5 kg gross weight and never containing liquid oxygen are allowed in checked and carry-on baggage or on the person, with approval of the operator. In addition, the operator must provide the pilot-in-command with written information on their number and location on board. The valves and regulators of oxygen bottles must be protected from damage which could cause inadvertent release of the contents. Under the ICAO Technical Instructions, spare oxygen cylinders of a similar size are also allowed to ensure an adequate supply for the duration of the journey. The operator's Operations Manual, which has been approved by the National Authority, will contain procedures on the use of oxygen bottles.

Nevertheless, for safety reasons, national authorities may decide to prohibit all oxygen bottles, irrespective of their size, from being carried on board by passengers. Where the national authorities allow oxygen bottles of less than 5 kg to be taken on board, it is still left to the discretion of the operator to accept them, also due to safety reasons (oxygen is highly flammable and it cannot be guaranteed that the bottles/valves have been maintained properly).  
If passengers have special needs, they should request more information from the airline at the time of booking.

The rule reference is ORO.GEN.110 (j). All operators subject to ORO.GEN.005 must establish and maintain dg training programmes in all cases. The approval, however, is only necessary if:

• It is a CAT operation
• The operator is transporting dangerous goods and performing:
  • Commercial specialised operations:
  • Non-commercial operations with complex motor-powered aircraft; or
  • Non-commercial specialised operations with complex motor-powered aircraft.

There is also an alleviation in ORO.GEN.110 (k) for operators of sailplanes, balloons, and certain single-engined propeller-driven airplanes and single-engined other-than motor-powered helicopters of 5700 Kg or less of MCTM and an MOPSC of 5 or less operating in a flight taking off and landing at the same aerodrome/operating site under VFR by day, where the requirement is that operators shall ensure that the flight crew has received an appropriate training or briefing to enable them to recognise undeclared dangerous goods brought on-board by passengers or as cargo (refer to the rule for more information).

There are some differences between European Air Ops rules for NCC and ICAO Annex 6 SARPs. However, none of these differences would result in a lower safety level than intended by ICAO. 

The following list describes differences generated by Regulation (EC) 216/2008 and Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations. 

Differences generated by Reg. (EC) 216/2008:

• Aircraft category (difference in drawing the line between complex and non-complex aircraft): some aircraft are considered complex in the European rules, while at ICAO level, they are considered non-complex; European rules exceed ICAO standards. 
• Oversight: European rules assign oversight responsibilities to the State of the Operator and not to the State of Registry; European rules achieve the safety target with an alternative method.
• Declaration: the operator requirement to declare itself to the competent authority supports authorities to discharge their responsibilities; European rules exceed ICAO standards.

Differences generated by Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations:

• List of specific approvals: European rules exceed ICAO standards; ICAO may require this list by November 2018.

The European provisions for the structure of the Operations Manual are specified in AMC2 ORO.MLR.100. The structure is very flexible and – where needed – could be amended through an alternative means of compliance.

It is strongly advised that the operator work with a single Operations Manual, which should address the specified minimum items of the State of the Operator and the State of Registry.

An OM template helps an operator to organise its procedures and information that the personnel need in order to accomplish their safety tasks. However, the operator has to make sure that its OM reflects the specificity of its operation – be it commercial or non-commercial. At the same time, the manual should cover the areas described in Subpart ORO.MLR.

In parallel with that, the operator has to ensure also that the operation itself – not just the manual – is compliant with the applicable rules. The requirements related to the operations manual are only a part of the applicable rules.

The intent of the declaration is to:

1. have the operator acknowledge its responsibilities under the applicable safety regulations and that it holds all necessary approvals;
2. inform the competent authority of the existence of an NCC or an SPO operator; and
3. enable the competent authority to fulfil its oversight responsibilities in accordance with ARO.GEN.300 and 305.

When the NCC operation is managed by a third party on behalf of the owner, that party may be the operator in the sense of Article 3(13) of the Basic Regulation (EU) 2018/1139, and therefore has to declare its capability and means to discharge the responsibilities associated with the operation of the aircraft to the competent authority.

In such a case, it should also be assessed whether the third party operator undertakes a commercial operation in the sense of Article 2(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012.

AMC1 ORO.GEN.200(b) ‘Management system. Size, nature and complexity of the activity’ provides criteria to determine if an operator belongs to the group of complex organisations or the one of non-complex organisations. These criteria are based on the assessment of the size, nature and complexity of the operator’s activity.

At the same time, AMC1 ORO.GEN.200(b) does not include any overly detailed complexity criteria. This is because it is impossible to address all cases and, more importantly, it is not the intent that the AMC be used as a substitute for the operator’s own risk assessment.

The main ‘alleviations’ for a non-complex operator are the following:

• The operator may use simple procedures and tools for its safety risk management process (e.g. checklists), and safety performance monitoring and measurement (no need to perform extensive safety studies, surveys, etc.).
• The accountable manager or a person with an operational role in the organisation may fulfil the role of safety manager.
• The organisation does not need to have a safety review board.
• The accountable manager may also be the compliance-monitoring manager if he or she has demonstrated to have the required competence and that the independence of the internal audits is maintained.
• Simple checklists may be used to document compliance monitoring audits and inspections.

Before the operator decides which AMCs to follow, it should demonstrate proper understanding of the risks entailed by its activities. Upon initial implementation of the EASA management system framework, the organisation will normally start describing and analysing its activity and processes, to determine not only how best to implement the management system framework, but also where to focus the risk management efforts. Not investing in this step will lead to inefficient/costly management system implementation and require subsequent rework.

Such system description and related analysis will be an effective means for identifying hazards proactively. It will also create a baseline for the management of changes and will allow identifying safety performance requirements for safety relevant processes, as well as related performance indicators and controls in order to manage the defined performance goals.

The standards and recommended practices (SARPs) of ICAO Annex 6, Part II are based on the State of Registry (SoR) principle.

The European rules for NCC operations are based on the State of the Operator (SoO) principle.

This does not constitute a contradiction to the Chicago Convention but rather establishes a complementary safety instrument, particularly when a European operator uses third-country registered aircraft.

The SoR is responsible for the oversight of the aircraft in its registry. The EU SoO is responsible for the oversight of operators having their principal place of business in an EU Member State. Although the EU SoO is the competent authority for the operators having their principal place of business in an EU Member State, the EU SoO and the foreign SoR should cooperate in order to ensure proper oversight of these operators, in compliance with the ICAO requirements.

When the SoR and the SoO are both EU Member States, they oversee the aircraft, as well as the organisations and personnel involved in their operation in a complementary manner and according to the same rules. The European regulatory framework permits both the SoR and the SoO to duly exercise their respective oversight responsibilities and to take the appropriate enforcement actions. Oversight and enforcement are therefore ensured at all times, irrespective of the EU Member State in which the aircraft is registered or where the operations take place. It is at all times legally clear which EU Member State is responsible for each aspect of the safety oversight of any aircraft registered in an EU Member State and operated by an operator having its principal place of business in an EU Member State acting as SoO.

European Implementing rules for continuing airworthiness (EU) 2014/1321 do not apply to European NCC operators for third-country registered aircraft unless the regulatory oversight has been delegated to an EU Member State.

In particular, tasks related to the continuing airworthiness management do not need to be implemented by a CAMO in the sense of Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014. However, the essential requirements established in Annex V of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (the “Basic Regulation”) must be complied with. For airworthiness, the elements required in Annex V point 6 must be ensured by an organisation as required in point 8.8.

In short, European NCC operators of third-country registered aircraft need to ensure that an organisation is managing the continuing airworthiness of their aircraft and that this organisation is able to demonstrate that the aircraft comply with the continuing airworthiness requirements contained in Annex V of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (the "Basic Regulation"). This organisation does not need to be a CAMO; it can be the operator itself or any other organisation or natural person under the responsibility of the operator.

Please also see  FAQ 47404.

The rules concerning non-commercial operations are developed separately for complex motor-powered aircraft (MPA) and other-than-complex MPA because it does not make sense to have the same requirements apply to operations with an Airbus 320 for example and a Cessna 172. This way, the principle of proportionality of rules is preserved.

An ATO is required to comply with Part ORA of Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 and either Part-NCC or Part-NCO of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, depending on the aircraft being operated. Part-ORO is not applicable to ATOs.

NCC stands for non-commercial operations with complex motor-powered aircraft. The term ‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ is defined in the Article 2(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations (previously in Reg. (EC) No 216/2008).

NCC.GEN.100 specifies the following: “The competent authority shall be the authority designated by the Member State in which the operator has its principal place of business or is residing”.  
This means that the State of the Operator (SoO) designates the competent authority for NCC operators. Here are some examples:

1. For a European NCC operator with aircraft registered in a Member State, the Competent Authority is designated by the State of the Operator.
2. For a European NCC operator with third-country registered aircraft, the Competent Authority is designated by the State of the Operator. These operators may also have to comply with rules of the third-country State of Registry (SoR) if this State has not delegated its responsibilities to the European State of the Operator.
3. For a third-country NCC operator having its principal place of business in a third country and performing operations with aircraft registered in a Member State, the Competent Authority is designated by the State of the Operator (the third country SoO). However, these operators may also have to comply with rules of the EU Member State (State of Registry) related to the aircraft if the State of Registry has not delegated its responsibilities to the State of the Operator.

For cases under (2) and (3), the State of Registry and the State of the Operator need to coordinate their safety and security oversight actions in accordance with ICAO SARPs (3.4.2.1.2 of ICAO Annex 6 Part II).

To avoid interferences with the responsibility of a third-country State of Registry for specific approvals, Part-SPA SPA.GEN.100 specifies that the European competent authority shall not issue operational approvals when they are required by Annex 6 and issued by the third-country State of Registry. 

EASA has published a draft Guidance Material (GM) related to this topic, in order to make it easier for declared operators (NCC and SPO) to determine which their competent authority is. The GM can be found in the draft AMC&GM related to Opinion 04/2017, published for information 'draft GM proposed to Annex I Definitions'.

The following Annexes contain applicable rules for NCC operations:

• Annex I – Definitions
• Annex II – Part-ARO
• Annex III – Part-ORO
• Annex V – Part-SPA
• Annex VI – Part-NCC.

Yes, this is permitted.

European pilots or pilots flying for a European operator will have to hold a European licence irrespective of whether the aircraft is EU registered or registered in a third country. 

It should be noted that European NCC pilots are entitled to fly with foreign licences in non-commercial operations until 8 April 2016.

Appendix V of the Authority Requirements (Part-ARO) contains a list of specific approvals for non-commercial operations and specialised operations. This list replicates in a proportionate manner the OpSpecs template for CAT operations.

The reasons for this list are to standardise the documentation of specific approvals for non-commercial operators and to support ramp inspectors in their oversight activities.

The European rule recognises the compliance with European industry standards.

The declaration form specified in the Organisation Requirements (Part-ORO, Appendix 1) requires operators to declare if they conform to an industry standard. Any compliance with a recognised European industry standard should be taken into account by the competent authority when planning and implementing their risk-based oversight activities. The competent authority may adapt its oversight programme, in order to avoid duplication of specific audit items.

This is further described in AMC1 ARO.GEN.305(b);(d);(d1) ‘Oversight programme’ and AMC1 ARO.GEN.305(b);(c);(d);(d1) ‘Oversight programme’.

A good starting point would be to describe your regular operation, the daily business. The description of your operation will give direction to your organisation’s effective SMS and will become its foundation.

This description should simply be a checklist containing the day-to-day activities, as it provides the understanding necessary to identify and manage the risks associated with the operation.

The analysis of your daily operation should consider the following aspects (this list is not exhaustive):

• What is the frequency of your flights?
• What aircraft type(s) do you have in your fleet?
• What are your departure & destination points?
• What is specific to the aerodromes you use?
• Which are the routes on which you fly – more or less the same routes or very different routes?
• Do you carry passengers?
• What type of operation do you perform on those routes? Be as specific as you can.
• Do you have a system that helps you prepare your flight?
• How do you plan and calculate the necessary fuel supply?
• Do you have any specific approvals (e.g., LVO, PBN, etc.)?
• Are your pilots’ training and qualifications compliant with the requirements? How about the other employees involved in operation?
• Are the operational procedures and any flight documents current and available to all the personnel involved in operation?
• How do you ensure that the necessary information is communicated to the right persons involved in operation?
• How do you ensure aircraft maintenance?
• What do you do if any of the elements above changes for one reason or another? Are you prepared to cope with that change and minimise its effects in your daily operation? How do you deal with such changes?
• Make sure you include the aspect of disruptive changes in your analysis.
• Have you set up the minimum levels of acceptance to which every key operational activity (e.g. scheduling, planning, flight execution, fuel consumption, training, aircraft maintenance) can go? In other words, have you set up your performance expectations?

The last two questions will lead to the second step in building your SMS:

• What could be the main potential risks associated to each of the elements above – what could go wrong with these daily variables?

Identifying the key elements of risk in this day-to-day operation will help you to spot more easily the strengths and weaknesses in your regular business, the errors, as well as the good practices.

The third step is then to choose/apply adequate mitigation measures to reduce the risks inherent to your daily operation:

• Make a list of solutions to reduce each risk to an acceptable level. Consider to use the Risk register checklist proposed in GM3 ORO.GEN.200(a)(3) for your safety risk management/assessment.

A fourth step is to assess whether the mitigation measures that you have prepared are effective and help you to achieve the required level of safety.

• Keep evidence of any occurrence, identify their cause, and see if they are repetitive and if they have anything in common.
• Find ways to prevent them from reoccurring by addressing the “root cause”.
• Check how well your solutions helped in preventing the reoccurrence of that event.

A fifth step ensures that the whole process becomes cyclic, and that you learn from your previous experience in order to make your operation safer and more efficient.

• Run this check once a year or after an event or change in the aspects mentioned above.

Does this scheme address your needs and help you to have a safe operation?

As an organisation (aero club) approved under the national legislation of Member State X, the national legislation of State X applies to you, to the skydivers, to the tandem passengers and all other registered members. Reg. (EU) No 1178/2011 on aircrew is not applicable to aero clubs that do not provide training for one of the Part-FCL licences and ratings — LAPL, PPL, CPL or ATPL.

The operation of the aircraft must be performed in accordance with Part-NCO of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations, as the aircraft you operate is a non-complex aircraft.

The competent authority for the oversight of your dry-leased aircraft is the State of registry, that is, the state where your aircraft is registered (see Reg. (EU) No 965/2012, NCO.GEN.100 ‘Competent authority’). However, the competent authority of Member State Y may delegate its oversight tasks to the competent authority of Member State X.

Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 NCO.GEN.145 point (b) states: ‘The operator shall implement […] (b) any relevant mandatory safety information issued by the Agency, including airworthiness directives.’

For NCO operations in the EU of a third country-registered aircraft, only the ADs mandated by the State of Registry apply — not the EASA ADs.

The word ‘relevant’ in point (b) of NCO.GEN.145 should be understood as ‘if applicable’ and allows to distinguish the different situation of an aircraft registered in an EASA Member State (ADs issued by EASA are relevant to these aircraft) as opposed to third-country registered aircraft, on which ADs mandated by the third-country State of Registry should be applied (refer to Annex 8 to the Chicago Convention).

It is common that ADs first issued by the State of Design are identically (or very similarly) issued or adopted by all States of Registry concerned. By European law (article 77 of Reg. (EU) 2018/1139, the so-called Basic Regulation (BR)), EASA performs State of Design functions on behalf of the EASA Member States. 

Note 1: In accordance with Article 83-bis of the Chicago Convention, if agreed, the country where an aircraft is registered may transfer the oversight functions (including airworthiness) to the country of the aircraft operator. If, in such case, the operator is established or resides in an EASA Member State, EASA ADs are relevant to this aircraft. 

Note 2: In accordance with article 77 of the BR, aircraft registered in an EASA Member State are required to comply with EASA-issued or adopted ADs. As per ED Decision No. 2/2003, EASA adopts ADs issued by the State of Design unless the Agency decides differently. Read more about ADs applicable to EASA Member State-registered aircraft in the EASA FAQ page on ADs.

‘Commercial’ or ’non-commercial’ operation - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations: Article 5

A commercial SPO operator is an operator who performs or intends to perform commercial non-transport operation such as specialised operations by receiving remuneration or other valuable consideration against those services. 

Sometimes the distinction between ‘commercial’ and ‘non-commercial’ is not easily evident, especially when the remuneration or another way of compensation is not formalised e.g. a farmer comes with its own aircraft to spray crops to another farmer, against some compensation agreed verbally between the parties. 

A clear example of non-commercial SPO operator is a farmer spraying his crops with his plane.

Competent authorities responsible for the oversight of SPO operators and operations should assess carefully each individual case to establish if there is a commercial operation, resorting if necessary to information otherwise available to social security or taxation bodies.

Specialised operations (SPO) are not commercial air transport (CAT) operation; hence, passengers cannot be transported during a SPO mission flight. However, task specialists may be carried during such a flight.

Size and complexity of the operator - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations: ORO.GEN.200 (b)  

AMC1 ORO.GEN.200 (b) paragraph (a) defines how to assess if an operator is complex or non-complex: 

The operator is non-complex if its workforce is less than 20 full time equivalents (FTEs). However, point AMC1 ORO.GEN.200 (b) paragraph (b) indicates that an operator with less than 20 FTEs may also be considered complex if, for example, it performs high-risk commercial SPO or operates in a challenging environment (offshore, mountainous area, etc.).

Prior to sending a declaration an operator should check with the competent authority, if their assessment of complexity is correct.

Third country registered aircraft - References: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations; Reg. (EU) No 748/2012 on initial airworthiness

In accordance with ORO.SPO.100 (b), the aircraft used in commercial SPO (SPO-COM) shall have a certificate of airworthiness (CofA) issued by an EU Member State in accordance with Reg. (EU) No 748/2012 or shall be leased-in in accordance with ORO.SPO.100 (c). This means that operators conducting SPO-COM must operate aircraft registered in an EU MS or, alternatively, leased-in aircraft registered outside the EU.

In non-commercial SPO operations (SPO-NCC and SPO-NCO), there is no requirement with regard to the State of registration of aircraft.

For operations, such as parachute dropping, sailplane towing or aerobatic flights with non-complex motor powered aircraft, eligible for the exemption under SPO.GEN.005 (c), there is no requirement with regard to the registration of aircraft either.

Annex II aircraft - Reference: Reg. (EU) 2018/1139 (The Basic Regulation): Annex I 

The use of Annex I aircraft in SPO activities is not regulated at EU level. You may be allowed to continue carrying out SPO with you Annex I helicopter or aeroplane, if this is permitted under your country national regulation. Please ask your competent authority what conditions apply to SPO operations with Annex I aircraft in your country.

Note, however, that any authorisation or certificate required by your national legislation may not be recognised by other Member States.

Passengers - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations: Article 5(7) 

Except for crew members, persons other than those indispensable to the mission shall not be carried on board of flights, which take place immediately before, during or immediately after specialized operations and are directly connected to those operations. 

When SPO related rules apply to a flight or a number of flights, passengers (fare paying or not) cannot be carried on board such flights. In some SPO operations, the concept of “passenger” and “task specialist” do blend into each other. Therefore, for regulatory and risk mitigation purposes persons carried on board are considered task specialists, even if their “task” is to enjoy 0-G flight, a tandem jump, or a looping. The rules call for task specialists to be instructed on their tasks, including the risks connected to those tasks of which they are not sufficiently or at all informed. 

If passengers are being transported, the flight has to be performed in accordance with Part-CAT or Part-NCC or Part-NCO, as applicable.

Twin turboprops at or below 5.7 t MCTOM - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on Air Operations: Article 6(8)

The derogation of Art 6(8) of Regulation 965/2012 does not apply to non-commercial specialised operations or to commercial operations. It is only applicable to ‘pure’ non-commercial operations of complex motor-powered aeroplanes with a maximum certificated take-off mass (MCTOM) at or below 5 700 kg, equipped with turboprop engines. When operating such aircraft the operators shall comply with Part-NCO, instead of Part-NCC and Part-ORO.

Limited operations - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: SPO.GEN.005 (c)

The purpose of SPO.GEN.005 (c) is to alleviate certain flights that might otherwise be qualified as commercial (where compliance with Part-SPO is required) to comply with the less demanding rules of Part-NCO.  

The operator must check with the competent authority whether the operations it conducts are eligible for the alleviation of SPO.GEN.005 (c). The competent authority makes the final determination.

‘Marginal activity’, ‘Direct cost’… - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: SPO.GEN.005 (c)

These terms are used in SPO.GEN.005 (c) as well as in Article 6, paragraph 4a of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012.

Their meaning, in the context of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012, can be found in the guidance material placed under Article 6, paragraph 4a. The same meaning is also applicable for the purpose SPO.GEN.005 (c).

As regards ‘marginal activity’, AMC1 ARO.OPS.300 also applies in the case of parachute dropping, sailplane towing or aerobatic flights. This is because whenever a competent authority publishes criteria specifying to which extent it considers an activity marginal and how this is being overseen, the nature of flight (introductory, parachute dropping, sailplane towing or aerobatic flights) has little importance.

Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: Article 2 (8) 
Each competent authority may decide for their territory which commercial SPO operation poses a high risk, in particular to third parties on the ground. If you operate in the Member State where you are residing or your organisation is established or has its principal place of business, this is your competent authority; if you operate in another Member State, this is the competent authority designated by that Member State.
Even if the competent authority has not established its list of high-risk commercial SPO operations, the operator must determine through a risk assessment whether a particular operation is posing high risk to third parties on the ground in the event of an emergency. 
The competent authority should publish and regularly update the list of high-risk SPO for their territory. 
For more information, please refer to various publications about the high-risk SPO operations in the Member States available on this webpage,  including the Guidelines for cross-border high-risk commercial SPO.

Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: ARO.OPS.150 (f)
No, you do not. Where the cross-border SPO operation you are planning to carry out is on the list of high-risk SPO established by the competent authority of the place of operation,  you shall seek authorisation from your own competent authority, irrespective of whether that authority considers this particular operation ‘high risk’ or not. This is because in the EU the HR authorisation issued by your competent authority under Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 is recognised as valid by the competent authority of another Members State. 
For that purpose, the competent authorities involved will coordinate the validation process. The safety considerations of the competent authority of the place where the operation will be conducted need to be accounted for; both competent authorities need to be satisfied with the operator’s risk assessment and standard operating procedures - SOPs.
For more information, please refer to various publications about the high-risk SPO operations in the Member States available on this webpage,  including the Guidelines for cross-border high-risk commercial SPO.

Cross-border commercial SPO - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: Art. 8(4)

Article 8 (4) of Regulation 965/2012 foresees that specialised operators continue to comply with applicable national flight time limitation legislation until EU implementing rules are adopted and apply.

In the context of Part-SPO, the intent of ‘applicable national flight time limitation legislation’ with regard to specialised operators is understood to mean the national law of the Member State in which the operator has its principal place of business, or, where the operator has no principal place of business, the place where the operator is established or resides.

AOC or other certification - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: Part-ORO and Part-SPO

You are not required to obtain an air operator certificate (AOC). You are however required to submit a declaration to your competent authority. Please make sure that the Declaration is properly completed.

In addition, depending on the operations you conduct, you might need a specific approval for one or more of these: RVSM, MNPS, RNP AR APCH, LVO and DG.

In some cases of high-risk commercial SPO, an authorisation may be required.

Declaration - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: ORO.DEC.100

Every SPO operator (commercial and non-commercial), except NCO-SPO, submits a declaration. 

An operator may perform both commercial and non-commercial flights with complex motor-powered aircraft based on one declaration.

Operators are not required to submit a declaration before each flight, but must submit a new declaration in the case of changes.

Skydiving/parachute dropping

Parachutes are completely outside Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (the Basic Regulation), on account that they are not an aircraft.

In addition, the way people do skydiving (parachute jumps/tandem jumps) does not belong to the scope of Regulation 965/2012.

Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 applies to the flight operation of bringing parachutists at the required level for the execution of the jumps. 

Parachute dropping - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: Art. 6(4a); Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 on Aircrew: Art. 3(2) 

The holder of an LAPL or a PPL may conduct parachute-dropping flights, only if the conditions stipulated in Art 6 (4a) of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 are met. 

In all other cases, only pilots who hold at least a CPL can conduct SPO flights in accordance with Part-SPO.

Holders of a PPL (A) with instructor/examiner ratings may receive remuneration for providing training, testing and checking related to LAPL (A) and PPL (A), as well as associated ratings and certificates. 

The PPL holder cannot receive remuneration for conducting operations other than those listed in FCL.205.A of Reg. (EU) No 1178/2011, as well as for any of the flights mentioned in Article 6 (4a) of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012.

MOPSC - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: SPO.IDE.A.130

For the purpose of SPO.IDE.A.130, only one of the two values is used: either MCTOM of more than 5 700 kg or MOPSC of more than nine.

MOPSC is established for operational purposes. Where MOPSC is not established or is not relevant for a particular operation, the value of MCTOM should be used.

Declaration - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: ORO.DEC.100

A declaration is not meant to provide information about the nature of a flight at a particular moment. The ATS flight plan, if applicable, and/or the Journey log contain information on the nature of a particular flight.

Mixed operations - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: ORO.DEC.100

Yes. SPO operations are not covered by the AOC certification process. Therefore, an AOC holder when conducting SPO missions will have to comply fully with Part-SPO and its associated procedures. This means that the AOC holder must submit a declaration, as well as apply for a high-risk authorisation, if it performs high-risk commercial SPO activities. The aircraft used for the SPO activities are listed on the declaration and in the operations manual.

However, you do not have to submit a declaration, if you operate NCO-SPO i.e. non-commercial specialised operations with other-than complex motor-powered aircraft.

Specific approvals (SPA) for mixed operations - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations: ARO.OPS.200(b)

Duplications should be avoided whenever possible. However, a separate SPA approval might be needed if:
(a)    for its specialised operations the operator has a different training programme or has different operating procedures;
(b)    the validity of the SPA included in the OPSSPECS has expired; or
(c)    for its specialised operations the operator will use aircraft that are not included in its AOC and for which it does not have any SPA yet.

The operator does not have to duplicate in its operations manuals the procedures and training for the SPA used for SPO when they are the same as the ones used for CAT operations; a cross-reference, specified in its operations manual, to the place where the training and operating procedures are already detailed, is enough.

Permit-to-fly - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012: ORO.SPO.100 (b); SPO.GEN.140; and NCO.GEN.135

Aircraft used in commercial specialised operations that fall under Part-SPO, must have a certificate of airworthiness (CofA) in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 or may be wet leased-in from a third country operator or dry leased-in by an EU operator while being registered in a third country.

For commercial specialised operations as well as for any other specialised operation that fall under Part-SPO, the original certificate of airworthiness (CofA) need to be carried on each SPO flight (SPO.GEN.140 (a) (3)).

According to AMC1 SPO.GEN.140(a)(3) a permit to fly may (PtF) be used in SPO operations, if issued in accordance with the applicable airworthiness requirements and subject to compliance with the flight conditions established by the competent authority.  

The applicable airworthiness requirements are those contained in Commission Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 (Part-21 thereof). Part-21 contains a list of purposes for which a PtF may be issued under certain conditions. For example, a mission for air racing may be possible with PtF. Please check with your competent authority if the purpose of the SPO mission complies with that list and those conditions.

For non-commercial specialised operations falling under Part-NCO, NCO.GEN.135 (a) (3) requires the original certificate of airworthiness (CofA) be carried on each flight.

According to AMC1 NCO.GEN.135 (a) (3) a PtF may be used in NCO operations, if issued in accordance with the applicable airworthiness requirements and subject to compliance with the flight conditions established by the competent authority.  

The applicable airworthiness requirements are those contained in Part-21. Part-21 contains a list of purposes for which a PtF may be issued under certain conditions. For example, a non-commercial flying activity on individual non-complex aircraft or types for which a certificate of airworthiness or restricted certificate of airworthiness is not appropriate (mainly, but not limited to, the so-called ‘orphan’ aircraft) may be possible with PtF. Please check with your competent authority if the purpose of the SPO mission complies with that list and those conditions.

Yes, it is possible, but this decision belongs to the competent authority. Competent authorities may, for example, consider the following option:

• for flights over the congested areas of cities, towns or settlements or over an open-air assembly of persons, issuing only HRA. If such flights are to be operated below 300m, the HRA may integrate the permission under Part-SERA, without a separate procedure; and
• for flights elsewhere and not over an open-air assembly of persons, 
  • below 150 m, issuing permission under Part-SERA only. This permission may integrate potential risks under Part-SPO;
  • above 150 m, requiring neither HRA nor permission.

Yes, it is possible, but this decision belongs to the competent authority. Competent authorities may, for example, consider the following option:

• for flights over the congested areas of cities, towns or settlements or over an open-air assembly of persons, issuing only HRA. If such flights are to be operated below 300m, the HRA may integrate the permission under Part-SERA, without a separate procedure; and
• for flights elsewhere and not over an open-air assembly of persons, 
  • below 150 m, issuing permission under Part-SERA only. This permission may integrate potential risks under Part-SPO;
  • above 150 m, requiring neither HRA nor permission.

Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations, Article 6 (4a) and SPO.GEN.005(c)

The term ‘Limited operations’ (used in Regulation (EU) No 2015/1536) refers to certain specialised operations of other-than-complex motor-powered aircraft (SPO-NCO), such as competition flights, flying displays, parachute dropping, sailplane towing and aerobatic flights. Under strict conditions specified in Article 6 (4a) and SPO.GEN.005(c) of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012, those operations may be conducted in accordance with Part-NCO, and in particular subpart E thereof.

AMC1 NCO.GEN.135 (a) (3) specifies that an aircraft may be operated with a permit to fly issued in accordance with the applicable airworthiness requirements.

Thus, in the case of aircraft registered in an EU Member State and used in SPO-NCO, the permit to fly (PtF) is issued in accordance with Commission Regulation (EU) 748/2012 (Part-21 thereof) depending of the purpose. 

If the above conditions are met, it is possible to perform the so called ‘Limited operations’ under Part-NCO and its subpart E as long as the aircraft have a PtF for non-commercial flying under Part-21 and the operation is compatible with or is covered by the corresponding flight conditions (FC). 

For aircraft registered in a third country, the same applies, except that the PtF/FC must be issued in accordance with that third country legislation.

Third country operators – non-EU countries and non-EEE countries - Reference: Reg. (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations

Specialised operations (SPO) performed by third-country operators into, within, or out of the EASA Member States are not subject to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 (Part-SPO) or Commission Regulation (EU) No 452/2014 (Part-TCO), unless conducted under an approved wet lease-in agreement signed by an EU commercial SPO operator (ORO.SPO.100). For stand-alone third-country SPO, EU law does not require prior safety authorisation for such operations, however those operations (and their aircrew and aircraft) must comply, as per Article 59 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139, with the applicable ICAO standard – or to the extent that there are no such standards with the essential requirements of the above-mentioned Regulation – as well as EU requirements regarding use of the airspace when operating in the Single European Sky. 

In addition, in case the aircraft performing such operations is registered in an EASA Member State, the crew must comply with the EU aircrew requirements, unless responsibilities for the regulatory oversight of the aircraft has been transferred by the EASA Member State to the third country concerned. For further details concerning conditions for conducting SPO by a TCO in EASA Member States, including eventual need for obtaining permits for conducting this type of professional activity, please contact the Member State of the intended operations, as EASA is not responsible for oversight of these type of operations. 

Reference: SPA.HOFO.160(c)

HTAWS are currently mandated under SPA.HOFO.160(c), which requires HTAWS to ‘meet the requirements for class A equipment as specified in an acceptable standard’.

The only defined standards for H-TAWS are TSO-C194 and ETSO-C194, which both refer to Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) document DO-309. Any H-TAWS meeting these standards, or coming with improved features, is acceptable. 

UK CAP 1519 specifications are considered to introduce improvements to the existing standards. They are designed to reduce false warnings. They also introduce Helicopter Flight Envelope Warnings (H-FEWs) in addition to basic HTAWS functions. A CAP 1519 compliant HTAWS is therefore acceptable. 

The HTAWS rulemaking task (RMT.708) may change the requirements for HTAWS in the future. 

References: Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 is available on EUR-Lex website. Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 and Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 and the study EASA 2008.C.25 are available on EASA website. 

SCPs are passengers who, when carried on a flight, require special conditions, assistance and/or devices and their situation needs appropriate attention and adaptation to their particular needs. These passengers shall not be allocated, nor occupy, seats that permit direct access to emergency exits or where their presence could impede crew members in their duties, obstruct access to emergency equipment or impede evacuation of the aircraft. 

Under the EU law, aircraft operators are ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft and for the safety of passengers on board. Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 on air operations mandates the operator (airline) to establish procedures for its air operation. The operator’s procedures, and the operator’s activities overall, are under the oversight of the Competent Authority (CA) of the individual EU Member State. The CA has the necessary powers and allocated responsibilities for the certification and oversight of persons and organisations subject to Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 and its implementing rules.

The EU rule on SCPs states the following:

The rule is complemented by Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and Guidance Material (GM) which address aspects such as the factors the operator should take into account when establishing procedures for carriage of SCPs, information provided to SCPs, conditions for safe carriage of unaccompanied children, a passenger capable of assisting in case of an emergency, seating allocation, etc. The EU provisions are available on EASA website (the link ‘Easy Access Rules for Air Operations’ contains the rule and the AMCs and GMs in one document):
https://www.easa.europa.eu/regulations#regulations-air-operations

The rules for air operations on SCPs have been developed under the EASA rulemaking tasks RMT.0269/0270 involving a rulemaking group. The track of this rulemaking activity is available on EASA website: 

Terms of Reference (ToR) MDM.072 (a) & (b) (RMT.0269 & RMT.0270):
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/terms-of-reference-and-group-compositions/tor-mdm072-b-rmt0269-rmt0270

Notice of Proposed Amendment NPA 2014-01
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/rulemaking-subjects/carriage-special-categories-passengers-scps

Comment Response Document CRD 2014-01
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/comment-response-documents/crd-2014-01

ED Decision 2016/004/R
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/agency-decisions/ed-decision-2016004r

Study on Carriage by Air of Special Categories of Passengers (SCPs), EASA 2008.C.25:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/research-projects/easa2008c25

Additional information
Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency specifies the mandate entrusted to EASA by the European Parliament and by the Council: 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018R1139 

Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council contains the European provisions on rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility (PRMs) when travelling by air: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l24132  . Questions on this regulation should be addressed to the European Commission.

References: Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 is available on EUR-Lex website. Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 and the study EASA 2008.C.25 are available on EASA website.

Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility (PRMs) when travelling by air does not include the height of an individual in the definition of ‘disability or a person with reduced mobility’. Hence, the EU rules on air operations - Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 - do not include a height of an individual (i.e. a tall passenger) in the ‘special categories of passengers (SCPs)’. 

Air operators are free to order from an aircraft manufacturer an aircraft cabin/seat configuration they wish, provided that such cabin/seat configuration meets the certification safety requirements. The space between seat rows (so-called ‘seat-pitch’) is a matter of aircraft certification process*. *Questions on aircraft certification matters should be addressed to EASA Certification Directorate.  

EASA has conducted a study on Carriage by air of special categories of passengers, reference EASA 2008.C.25, which, amongst others, concludes that aircraft designers must take into account the increasing percentage of tall passengers.  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018R1139 

There may be passengers who do not fall into the category specified by the EU regulations on PRMs and SCPs referenced above, however they may have certain individual circumstances where intervention of the air operator or the Competent Authority may be beneficial or required. Most airlines offer various forms of assistance to passengers with certain requirements. For example, persons suffering from certain specific allergies (not necessarily food-related) are not considered disabled and do not fall into the SCP category either. However, passengers with any such circumstances may contact the operator, or the Competent Authority, to seek a solution prior to their travel.