March 1, 2022
by Jason Dickstein
UK CAA accepts 8130-3 tags but not EASA Form 1. Is it possible for an EU based Part 145 organization who has both EASA and FAA approval to provide only a FAA single release certificate and only present this certificate to the UK based organizations as long as the UK based organizations are accepting of a single release certification for a part.
SHORT ANSWER:
No. If you ask an EU-based repair station that has both US and EU repair station credentials to maintain an aircraft part and to issue an 8130-3 to document the work it performed, and then subsequently proffer that 8130-3 as the basis for airworthiness determinations prior to installation on a UK-registered aircraft, then the work may be rejected by the UK on the grounds that it does not meet current UK regulatory requirements.
LONGER ANSWER:
Under the new UK CAA standards that go into effect April 1, 2022, the UK CAA will accept maintenance approved on an 8130-3 tag but will no longer accept maintenance released on an EASA Form 1 when issued after April 1. The questioner offers a clever approach to the impending UK CAA limits. Unfortunately, this approach puts form over substance. The root issue is the governmental oversight of the work – not the way that the work is documented. Therefore, using a clever approach to change the documentation will not be an acceptable way to circumvent UK CAA maintenance controls.
There are several inherent problems with this clever approach. First, it undermines the intent of the regulations. The current intent of UK CAA is that they will no longer accept maintenance performed by EU repair stations. Second, because the UK CAA intent is to reject maintenance performed by EU repair stations (except when they obtain UK CAA certification), the UK CAA’s established protocols will not permit the UK to rely on maintenance performed by EU-based repair stations (no matter what documentation they use) [NOTE: EU-based repair stations may apply for UK 145 certification, and then their work becomes acceptable under the UK system]. Third, even if it was not undermining UK CAA intent, it is not currently an available process under the existing bilateral agreements because it does not meet their plain language.
To understand why the clever approach does not work, it is important to understand the basis of aviation maintenance regulation. Under ICAO standards, the country of registry for an aircraft is responsible for the applicable maintenance standards. This means that the UK CAA is responsible for the continued airworthiness of aircraft on the UK registry. The UK CAA issues repair station certificates and provides ongoing oversight to those facilities in order to help manage the continued airworthiness processes.
Under normal bilateral airworthiness relationships, one country may agree to accept maintenance performed by repair stations located in the other. This can be accomplished through “reciprocal acceptance” or through “dual-certification.”
Under a reciprocal acceptance paradigm, the accepting country (which will be the country of registry with the applicable airworthiness responsibilities) would treat maintenance performed by the maintaining country (which will be the country that issued the repair station certificate) as if it had been performed by a repair station subject to the accepting country’s certificates. Typically, under a reciprocal acceptance paradigm, the repair station only needs one certificate (from its home government) and that certificate is acceptable for work performed for operators from both jurisdictions. An example of this can be found in the Canada-US relationship, where each country’s operators are permitted to rely on maintenance performed by the repair stations in the other. A reciprocal acceptance relationship seems easy, but it requires a tremendous level of trust between the aviation safety authorities. As a consequence, it is more common to see dual-certification relationships described in bilateral aviation safety agreements.
Under dual-certification relationship, the foreign nation issues foreign repair station certificates in collaboration with the home government. For example, the EU-US agreements have recognized that the repair station oversight systems of both FAA and EASA are very similar and achieve substantially similar goals. They have also identified a small number of critical differences between the two repair station certification schemes (these differences are known as “Special Conditions”). Repair stations in the United States that want to get EASA 145 credentials need to create a manual and a system that addresses those Special Conditions. An FAA Flight Standards maintenance inspector will inspect the EASA-145 applicant who is locate in the United States to confirm that (1) the repair station meets all of the FAA regulations and (2) the repair station complies with the EASA Special Conditions. If the repair station meets all of the requirements, then the FAA will recommend to EASA that it issue an EASA 145 certificate and EASA may issue such a certificate.
The FAA and EASA maintain a dual-certification relationship with respect to aviation maintenance. Repair stations must follow the requirements under that relationship to maintain their repair station credentials. Under the EU-US bilateral agreement, an EU-based repair station that has both sets of repair station credentials must issue an EASA Form 1 as a release document for maintenance. It does not have an option to issue an 8130-3 tag. In the event it must release work that is acceptable in the US but not in the EU, the repair station must release the work on an EASA Form 1 that is annotated with the phrase:
The work identified in Block 11 and described herein has been accomplished in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 43 and in respect to that work, the items are approved for return to service under certificate no.________.
This product/article meets 145.A.50 requirements, except for the following items, and therefore is “not” eligible to be installed on an EU-registered aircraft:
[** LIST THE DIVERGENCES **]
US-EU Maintenance Annex Guidance, Section C: Appendix 1, para. 7.5 (March 19, 2021).
So the first problem with the clever solution is that an EU-based dual certificated repair station is required to issue an EASA Form 1 under the FAA-EASA Maintenance Annex Guidance.
There is an additional technical impediment. The US-UK Maintenance Implementation Procedures (MIP) do not blindly rely on the 8130-3 tag. Under that US-UK MIP agreement, the UK CAA accepts approvals “for return to service by an AMO located in the United States under the FAA’s oversight.” The US-UK MIP does not accept work performed in the EU. So there is no legal basis for acceptance in the UK of an 8130-3 that documents work performed in the EU.
You must be logged in to post a comment.