Hello,
Where does it say that an FAA AD is applicable to an EASA aircraft?
ML.A.303 states:
Any applicable AD must be carried out within the requirements of that AD unless otherwise specified by the Agency.
No AMC or GM attached. But what is meant by applicable AD?
And let’s assume that they are applicable. Would it be enough to only scan the EASA tool for AD’s? They seem to get all foreign AD’s there as well?
What if you found one from FAA that was not listed by EASA, what would that mean?
Sometimes EASA rejects FAA AD’s and publish them with an amendment under their own name. See Piper AD 2021-0107R2.
My understanding is that the foreign AD becomes legally mandatory only upon the EASA rendering it applicable explicitly, by basically issuing the very same AD, or an AD that says “apply this foreign AD in annex” or something like that.
Fly310 wrote:
Would it be enough to only scan the EASA tool for AD’s?
My understanding is yes legally. One might want to apply a foreign AD voluntarily for safety reasons.
Fly310 wrote:
They seem to get all foreign AD’s there as well?
I believe they do as a matter of routine render most foreign ADs applicable, and I expect that basically they put a foreign AD there in their database only if they have rendered it applicable?
Thanks lionel, it would save quite some time if one only needed to check the EASA tool. (if doing a lot of ARC renewals)
Would be interesting to know how CAOs and CAMOs deal with it in other countries.
From https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/the-agency/faqs/airworthiness-directives-ads
Are Foreign State of Design (non-EASA Member States) ADs that are not available in the Safety Publishing Tool applicable in Europe?
Commission Regulation (EU) No 748/2012, Article 3, paragraph 1 (a) (iii) specifies that “the applicable airworthiness directives were those of the State of design”. This means that all ADs issued by the State of Design before 28 September 2003 (start date of EASA), either applicable to European or non-European products (i.e. aircraft, engines, propellers), parts or appliances (or STC modifications), have been adopted by EASA under that Regulation.
As a result, all ADs issued by the State of Design authority for the affected product(s), part(s) or appliance(s) are valid in Europe, unless EASA has issued a different decision. Commission Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014, M.A.301, paragraph 5 (i) requires that the “aircraft continuing airworthiness […] shall be ensured by […] the accomplishment of any applicable airworthiness directive”, as identified by Regulation (EU) 748/2012. All Foreign State of Design ADs issued after 28 September 2003 have been (and still are) ‘automatically’ adopted by EASA under the provisions of EASA Executive Director Decision 02/2003 or, from 03 June 2019, Executive Director Decision 2019/018/ED. This later decision implies that any AD issued by the State of Design authority for the products, parts or appliances (or STC modification) to which that AD applies, becomes valid in Europe upon the day that AD becomes effective, unless the Agency issues a different decision (e.g. deviating AD, or statement of non-adoption). This decision applies to all State of Design ADs, not only those issued by the FAA.
So my reading of this FAQ and the Executive Director Decisions linked in it is that EASA automatically and implicitly adopt the AD form the state of design (the state regulating the company owning the TC or STC) except if explicitly rejecting or amending it.
So foreign State of design AD are applicable except if EASA explictly said so.
The above must be a change since the Cessna wing spar AD era… probably in 2019 as mentioned.
Aha, so I was right in theory, but not that much in practice.
The theory in law is that the AD becomes effective only upon EASA making it effective.
In practice, EASA has issued a blanket “make all ADs of the design state effective”.
My understanding now is that EASA will endeavour to publish all new ADs in their safety publication tool, but does not take legal responsibility for that, and that publication is not a condition to becoming applicable in EASA-land.
So, in theory, for new ADs, it should be sufficient to watch EASA’s tool because they will publish it all, IF THE PART has an EASA TC, STC or other, and was not installed under a one-off approval or something like that. In practice, to be 100% sure, one should also check the state of design’s AD publications. So, to be fully covered, for an USA part or plane, check EASA and FAA, for a Canadian part or plane check EASA and Transport Canada, for an Israeli plane or part check EASA and Israel CAA, etc.
lionel wrote:
So, to be fully covered,
Here it may get complicated ;-) as you have to have an overview of everything what is legally on your aircraft – especially since the EASA Single Serial Validations following FO.CERT may complicate matters. One example, one of my EASA planes does have the usual FAA parts, but when studying the records I also found parts from i.e. Canada being legalised and other NAAs – so to check the status I frequently have to scan 5 registers for all the parts being involved in airworthiness.
Thank you Xtophe, that seems to make it clear that they are applicable.
And the EASA tool should be sufficient but I am not sure what the local NAAs would say.
In practice, EASA has issued a blanket “make all ADs of the design state effective”.
This is an advantage of N-register: any certified aircraft operating on N-register has an FAA type certificate, regardless of the country that originally certified the type. The only ADs that apply are FAA ADs applied by FAA to the aircraft operating on the FAA TC. In this way, aircraft owners are unambiguously not subject to foreign law. Foreign ADs are all reviewed by FAA, modified and potentially rejected before being issued and there is likewise no ambiguity in whether a part or modification is approved.
As the owner of a N-registered plane that was originally certified in Europe (long before JAR or EASA), a similar although opposite situation to somebody who operates e.g. a US certified Cessna or Cirrus on EASA register, this something that makes my life a lot more straightforward.
Silvaire wrote:
This is an advantage of N-register
Yes, it seems better.
