Thread: IMC proposal
View Single Post
Old 2nd Oct 2009, 17:05
  #32 (permalink)  
David Roberts
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cirencester UK
Posts: 207
EASA has already proposed that certain regulatory proposals should apply ‘where so permitted under national law’,
Let's get things right. EASA has not proposed this. The Basic Regulation (216/2008) used this phrase in the context of the GP medical. The Basic Regulation is a Commission-drafted proposal that was passed by the Council and the Parliament. It is primary EU law, which is why it is called a Regulation. And the reason that phrase got into the Regulation, as distinct from the Implementing Rules - the next level down of lawmaking -for FCL, which rules are being drafted by EASA for Commission review / approval, was because the UK DfT negotiated it on our (particularly UK) behalf in 2007. I know, because.......

So for the AOPA solution for the IMCR to work may be the Basic Regulation would have to be changed. That's not to say it would have to be; there are other ways of adapting the legal framework, so maybe it - retaining the right to use IMCR in the UK but on an EU licence - will be one solution.

Now as regards FCL.008, that task group's work is quite separate from the main FCL proposals which are currently being reviewed in the light of the comments received from the recent NPA consultation. The review groups include 'industry' experts, including some from the GA community. The planned publication date of the CRD for FCL is March 2010 (medical part 2 months later) when all will have another opportunity to comment further on the revised proposals. EASA is still planning, under recent strict direction from the Commission, to deliver the FCL Opinion to the Commisson by mid 2011 for the start of implementation by April 2012. However, there is a strong possibility that the GA elements will be spread over the following three year period. This is particularly necessary to allow time for member states / NAAs to provide grandfathering transitions from some national licences, as well as get their heads around the final rules once they are published in the OJ in late 2011 or early 2012.

The FCL.008 NPA is expected in the first half of 2010, and then you can comment. Until then much of this speculation is misplaced. The EASA rules of engagement prevent me from correcting mis-placed speculation but one of the FCL.008 group members is planning to publish some real information soon, with the agreement of EASA. At the latest count I think there may be a pleasant surprise, and not a 'chocolate teapot', even if the UK centric views of a few are not fully realised as regards a pan-EU IMCR.

The UK CAA is, I am led to understand, fully behind trying to preserve the IMCR. How they achieve that remains to be seen, but the influence it has is not to be underestimated.

I say once again, the work of the officials at EASA, work which is at the bidding of the EU and within the constraints of EU law as delivered so far by the political classes, is not all bad. Some of it is, but not all. The recent change of EASA's direction at the behest of the Commission might just bring some light at the end of the tunnel. But until it does we do not give up our work in representing the interests of GA, particularly the non-commercial sectors.

In my view, the hope that sub-ICAO licences will be 'returned' to member states is but wishful thinking, because if for no other reason the aircraft within the scope of EASA airworthiness rules, already in place, and flown by pilots with sub-ICAO licences, would also have to be removed from EASA control. I can't see that happening. The other reason is the Basic Regulation would have to be amended, and that would be a significant stepback from the broader and political EU agenda, nothing to do with EASA.
David Roberts is offline