Part 91 IAG Meeting Record

03/04/2008 Page 1 of 1 Date saved: 02/04/08

ICAO Compliance Project – Session ONE

Issues Assessment Group Meeting Record

Chair / Facilitator: Chris Lamain – Manager Rules Development CAA Scribe: Lisa Farrelly Date: 27/2/08 Time: 9:30-11:30 Location: Wellington Airport

ATTENDEES

Tony Parish – Jetconnect

Bryan Pawson – Airways

Dave Watson – AIA

Austin Healy – Air NZ

John Cook – Air NZ

Johnny Walker – NZALPA

Apologies: Bob Fletcher – Air NZ

CAA: Paul Elton – Rule Project Specialist

Greg Perris – Rule Project Specialist

Mike Shouse – Rule Project Specialist

Agenda

Item Subject Introduction

1 7/ISS/35 Communication between flight and cabin crew

2 7/ISS/41 Flight safety document system

3 7/ISS/75 Carriage of air operator cert

4 7/ISS/80 Noise certification document

5 8/ISS/14 Airworthiness Information

6 8/ISS/26 Provision of information

Part 91 IAG Meeting Record

03/04/2008 Page 2 of 2 Date saved: 02/04/08

Discussion

Item Led by Description

Introduction Chris Lamain

The Issues Assessment Groups (IAGs) are convened to assess an issue or a number of related issues that have been identified during the Trigger Phase of the rule development process. The purpose of each IAG is to focus on the problem identification and definition of each issue, undertake the risk assessment for each issue and identify solution options (rule-based and/or non rule-based).

Each rule issue being assessed is reviewed to ensure that the issue description and risk details are accurate and that the appropriate solution is chosen.

The purpose of the meeting is not to discuss the specifics of a rule amendment (should a rule amendment be the appropriate solution).

Should this project be included on a future rules programme, the rule solution will be discussed in detail with a Project Working Group that will include key industry stakeholders.

Chris Lamain clarified for the meeting that an ICAO rule project is on the current 2007/8 Rules Programme and that the purpose of this IAG was to assess rule issues for inclusion to the ICAO rule project.

1 RPS/MRD 7/ISS/35 Communication between flight and cabin crew ICAO Annex 6, Part1, 13.2.1 requires that in all aeroplanes which are equipped with a flight crew compartment door, this door shall be capable of being locked, and means shall be provided by which cabin crew can discreetly notify the flight crew in the event of suspicious activity or security breaches in the cabin. Rule Parts 108.53 (domestic operations) and 108.55 (international operations) were amended in late 2005 to address requirements in Amendment 10 to Annex 17 that require measures by which unauthorised persons are prevented from entering the flight deck of the of the air operators aircraft during flight (Annex 17 Eight Edition, April 2006, Standard 4.3.3 and CARs Part 108.53 (b) (11) and 108.55 (b) (18) refer).

These amendments were not designed to address either this specific Annex 6 requirement or those related ones in Part 1, 13.2.2 and 13.2.3 relating to strengthened cockpit doors and pilot station monitoring of the door area outside the flight crew compartment . Rather they were intended to address the specific Annex 17 requirement in current Standard 4.3.3. This absence of a specific regulatory requirement addressing Annex 6, Part1, 13.2.1 resulted in a finding from ICAO during its Universal Safety Oversight Audit of New Zealand during March 2006 with the accompanying recommendation that CARs be amended appropriately. This Finding and the accompanying recommendation was accepted. Guidance to States on acceptable means of compliance with the Annex 6 requirement is contained in ICAO Doc 9811 AN/766 RESTRICTED, Manual on the Implementation of the Security Provisions of Annex 6. Notwithstanding the lack of specific regularly requirement in this area operators conducting international operations from New Zealand substantially already have operational policies and procedures in place to achieve the outcomes indicated as

Part 91 IAG Meeting Record

03/04/2008 Page 3 of 3 Date saved: 02/04/08

Item Led by Description acceptable in Doc 9811.

Note: Rules Issue in respect of those requirements contained in Annex 6 Part 1, 13.2.2 and 13.2.3 has been previously submitted by Manager Security on 09 March 2006 (Current Rules Unit Work Request 7/ISS/5 - Strengthened Flight Deck Doors refers) and it is considered that this new matter is most appropriately dealt with in tandem. It is considered appropriate that this requirement be applied to both international and domestic and international operations to ensure maximum security benefit and protection of passengers and crew can be obtained via the locking of cabin doors where these are fitted and the application of effective communication procedures between cabin and flight crew to aid flight crew decision making in the event of suspicious activity or security breaches in the cabin.

Issue discussion

It was clarified that this issue was about developing a method/procedure for communications between flight deck and cabin crew. Feedback from the airlines indicated that they were already compliant.

Action on this issue could be dependent on the outcome of the security review currently in progress but the requirement is likely to apply down to 30 passenger seat aircraft.

Issue Outcome: Rulemaking is required.

2 RPS/MRD 7/ISS/41 Flight safety document system

ICAO finding OPS/01 state that although potential applicants for an air operator certificate are required to present a number of documents as part of the certification process, the CARs do not include a requirement for air operators to establish and maintain a flight safety document system to include a system for providing aircraft operating information to the operations staff and flight crew including mandatory revisions. In addition, there is no requirement for applicants to have a system for ensuring that air operators include certification limitations and operating limitations in the aircraft operating manual.

Issue discussion

This is an Annex 6 requirement which ICAO found not to be in the NZCARs.

Issue Outcome

Rulemaking is required.

3 RPS/MRD 7/ISS/75 Carriage of air operator cert

Refer 2006 ICAO Audit Findings Corrective Action Plan - 3 August 2006, Finding # Air 01. NZCARs do not require carriage of air operator certificate specified in Annex 6 for International Commercial Air Transport Aeroplanes Part 1, para 6.2.1, and in Annex 6, Part 3, para 4.1.2.

Issue discussion

As this is an Annex requirement a rule amendment is needed to require air operator certificates to be carried.

Also, the FAA now requires a certified true copy of the Ops Specifications to be carried.

Part 91 IAG Meeting Record

03/04/2008 Page 4 of 4 Date saved: 02/04/08

Item Led by Description

This will apply only to International Operators.

The detail of this rule amendment will be discussed by a Project Working Group.

Issue Outcome

Rulemaking is required.

4 RPS/MRD 7/ISS/80 Noise certification document

Refer 2006 ICAO Audit Finding Corrective Action Plan - 3 August 2006, Finding # Air 01 and Air 02. Annex 6 Part 1 (International Commercial Air Transport - Aeroplanes) para 6.13 and Part 3 (International operations - Helicopters) para 4.13 require aircraft to carry a document attesting to noise certification standards specified in Annex 16 Volume I. The CARs only require foreign registered aircraft operating within NZ to carry written evidence [91.111(5)].

Issue discussion

There are two parts for consideration in a rule amendment: 1. Issuing of noise certificate 2. Carriage of noise certificate on aircraft

A noise certificate will be required for each airframe.

The noise certificate would need to be reflected in the procedures for the approval of modifications to ensure that any modifications did not breach the noise certificate.

A noise certificate will only required for international operations.

Issue Outcome

Rulemaking is required.

5 RPS/MRD 8/ISS/14 Airworthiness Information CAR 91.603(a)(2) and (b) only require operators to comply with airworthiness directives and with the 'airworthiness limitations mandated by the airworthiness authority of the State of Design in the instructions for continued airworthiness issued for the aircraft'. As identified during the ICAO audit, the CARs do not contain a requirement for operators of aeroplanes over 5 700 kg and helicopters over 3 l80 kg maximum certificated take-off mass to obtain and assess continuing airworthiness information from the organization responsible for the type design.

Issue discussion

It was clarified that this amendment would require these operators to continually assess all airworthiness information produced by the manufacturer and make assessments based on this.

It was noted that many of the large operators do this anyway, and also many Part 135 Operators are applying this because it is part of their exposition.

If this rule requirement is to apply to all operators then notification of this decision should be advised early to operators.

It was clarified that this would be an amendment to Part 91 rather than 121/125/135 operating rules.

Appropriate training will be needed for aircraft manufacturer recommendations for such things as enhanced zonal inspection.

Part 91 IAG Meeting Record

03/04/2008 Page 5 of 5 Date saved: 02/04/08

Item Led by Description

The rule will need to include implementation requirements in addition to assessment requirements.

Issue Outcome

Rulemaking is required.

6 RPS/MRD 8/ISS/26 Provision of information

The CARs have no requirement for the pilot of an aircraft to provide information to the ATC of the dangerous goods that may be on board if an in-flight emergency occurs.

Issue discussion

It was noted that industry is largely compliant in this area, but the CARs need updating to reflect the provision of this information.

This should have little impact since the required information is contained in NOTOCs.

There was concern that the information was required to be provided for every flight. The ICAO requirement is that the information is only required in the case of an incident/accident (in-flight emergency).

It was understood by the meeting that the content of the information is in standard notation and therefore should be clear to emergency services.

Issue Outcome

Rulemaking is required.