IAOPA Comments to EASA NPA 2008-17b, FCL
The International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations (IAOPA) appreciates the opportunity to comment on EASA Notice of Proposed Amendment 2008-17b. IAOPA represents the interests of more than 470,000 general aviation pilots and aircraft owners who are members of our 67 worldwide affiliates.
Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 (the Basic Regulations), Article 7, provides for “acceptance of licences and medical certificates issued by or on behalf of, a third country for pilots of third country aircraft that are being used by an operator established or residing in the Community”. However, the provisions of Article 12 of that document make it clear that universal acceptance of a non-member State’s certificates is not possible without a bilateral agreement. Further, the NPA (Annex III) suggests that a true act of acceptance is not really possible for a private pilot licence holder from outside the Community. This is because the Annex requires a complete skill test, an air law and human performance exam, fulfillment of EASA type and class rating experience requirements, a Class 2 ICAO medical certificate and at least 100 hrs time in the aircraft category for the privileges sought . These requirements do not constitute acceptance, rather they are a total re-testing, equivalent to the initial issuance of a pilot licence.
All of the above requirements indicate that the concept of acceptance in the spirit and intent of ICAO Annex 1 is not possible under the proposed rules. While ICAO provides no detailed guidance regarding this process, many States require just the presentation of a current pilot licence and medical certificate and, perhaps, a brief air law examination for the issuance of a new State certificate. Under the proposed rules a near-complete re-issuance of the PPL license will be required for third country pilots.
This acceptance process will impact thousands of pilots who either operate under a foreign pilot licence or will request acceptance of a foreign licence. Some estimates to accomplish this procedure exceed €1000 per person. States, such as Malta, do not issue their own licences, relying on other ICAO signatory States to issue them. This means that Maltese airmen must effectively be completely re-tested for a private pilot certificate to be able to enjoy the piloting privileges they have enjoyed for many years.
Comments:
- If a State has issued a licence and medical in accordance with ICAO Annex 1 that licence should be sufficiently similar to the accepting State’s requirements (EASA) to preclude the excessive procedures cited in Annex III.
- This will be a very expensive and time-consuming process. In fact, the requirements are so onerous as to discourage pilots from attempting acceptance (re-certification?). Furthermore, it is doubtful that sufficient flight training organizations and flight instructors exit to effectively recertify thousands of pilots affected by this proposal in a timely manner.
- The issue of validating a foreign private pilot’s licence on a temporary basis to enable a pilot to act as pilot in command of a European State registered aircraft is apparently not mentioned in this NPA. If that is true the validation standards and process will be left up to the member States’ aviation authorities which would seem to be at odds with the intent of the proposed extensive acceptance process.
- The only possible relief for this acceptance process appears to be a bilateral agreement between EASA States and non-EASA States. If every non-EASA State sought pilot licencing equivalence bilaterals the time and cost involved in generating and approving these agreements would be prohibitive. Therefore, the bilateral process for pilot licence acceptance is impractical, leaving only the time-consuming and expensive EASA proposed acceptance process.
- The regulatory impact assessment for the FCL proposal series, NPA 2008-22f, provides a large number of “statistics” regarding civil aviation in Europe to be used in justifying the actions taken in the various FCL NPA series. However, many of the numbers of airmen, aircraft, hours flown and accidents are based on unfounded statistical inference, extrapolations and outright estimates. Given the significant impact that this series of proposals will have on the general aviation community it is difficult to justify them on the basis of flawed statistics. IAOPA and other organizations have urged the European Commission to gather accurate and timely statistics regarding general aviation prior to significant regulatory actions are taken; this has apparently not yet been accomplished.
Finally, the intent of the ICAO Convention on International Civil Aviation is clear with regard to licencing:
“Article 33
Recognition of certificates and licenses
Certificates of airworthiness and certificates of competency
and licenses issued or rendered valid by the contracting State
in which the aircraft is registered, shall be recognized as valid
by the other contracting States, provided that the requirements
under which such certificates or licences were issued or
rendered valid are equal to or above the minimum standards
which may be established from time to time pursuant to this
Convention.”
The meaning and intent of the above article which has stood the test of time is clear: ICAO standards and recommended practices, agreed to by all signatory States, are designed to facilitate international air transportation among signatories. EASA is apparently ignoring this concept with its draconian acceptance process.
The real problem with these issues may lie with the basic regulations stated in EC 216/2008. However, the net effect on international civil aviation, regardless of root cause, is negative and corrosive. Bilateral agreements among States and their supra-national organizations as an alternative to meeting the additional acceptance requirements proposed in this NPA are time consuming, unnecessary and serve to further weaken the utility of the ICAO Convention. The willful departure from the treaty that has bound civil aviation for more than 60 years has and will continue to vitiate an effective international accord.
IAOPA strongly opposes the foreign private pilot licence acceptance process proposed in this NPA. Rather, a valid third-country private pilot licence should be readily “accepted,” by EU State authorities with few additional requirements.
