text: Application for CofA/RCofA for used aircraft

text: Import Transfer

text: Follow M(L).A.906(a) or ML.UAS.906A/B(a). Follow M(L).A.905(a) or ML.UAS.905.

text: Was the former Notify the relevant no (R)CofA issued in Does the aircraft yes accordance with no have a(n) (R)CofA competent authorities as Part 21, but later issued in accordance stated in M(L).A.905 or revoked or with Part 21? surrendered? ML.UAS.905, as applicable

text: Notify the competent authority no Is the ARC valid? yes Is an evaluation yes See that issued the former (R)CofA as M(L).A.902(c) or programme stated in M(L).A.906, if required? ML.UAS.902(a).

text: applicable.

text: no yes Submit a copy of Can the validity the (R)CofA and ant be restored, or a new ARC doc in accordance obtained? with plic 21.174(b)(3)(i)(A)

text: Submit the documents in Ap Is a current yes accordance with airworthiness 21.174(b)(3)(ii), (B) to (F) statement available? and the corresponding no statement (A) or (G)(a).

text: Submit a copy of the (R)CofA and doc in accordance with B A no 21.174(b)(3)(i)(B).

text: Confirm that the NCA agrees Evaluation yes with the use of the evaluation programme to be developed by the C programme in accordance NCA? with 21.A.174(d).

text: Submit the documents in no accordance with 21.174(b)(3)(ii), D (B) to (F) and the evaluation

text: report.

text: Prepare the evaluation AO programme in accordance with 21.A.174(d)(3).

text: Perform airworthiness review* in CAMO Carry out investigations accordance with M(L).A.906, or Obtain the acceptance of the programme from the in accordance with ML.UAS.906, as applicable, taking into competent authority in 21.A.174(d)(4) and account the evaluation report. Issue an accordance with 21.A.174(d)(3). summarise the results in ARC or the recommendation, as The competent authority a report. The competent applicable. defines its involvement. authority may be involved in the. (*) with respect to airworthiness review, Investigations. when permitted it may be carried out by A independent certifying staff. Assess the evaluation report, if D not developed by NCA. Develop and execute the evaluation programme. Notify the former competent Summarise the results in a authority in accordance with report in accordance with (3) M(L).B.905(a). and (4) of 21.A.174(d). yes hority Was an ARC submitted? Notify the former competent aut Approve the AMP, if applicable authority iaw M(L).B.906, if applicable no

text: If applicable, notify the Amend the ARC with the new Recommendation assessment in former competent nationality and registration B authority in accordance E C marks in accordance with Competent accordance with M.B.902. with M(L).B.906. M(L).A.905(b)(1)(ii) or ML.UAS.905(b), as applicable.

text: Perform sufficient investigation Issue an (R)CofA and an ARC, if not issued yet, when it is activities to justify the issuance of the satisfied that the aircraft or the UAS, as applicable, Issue a (R)CofA in (R)CofA in accordance with conforms to an approved design and is in a condition for accordance with 21.B.320(a). This may include safe operation in accordance with 21.B.326(b) or 21.B.326(a)(2)(i) or inspections or may require additional 21.B.327(b) and the applicable requirements of Subpart 21.B.327(a)(2)(i), as aircraft documentation. H of Part 21 are met, as specified in 21.B.325. applicable.

identifier: AMC and GM to Part 21 — Issue 2, Amendment 18

beslut: ED Decision 2026/005/R

title: AMC and GM to Part 21 — Issue 2, Amendment 18

text: Acceptable Means of Compliance and Guidance Material to Annex I (Part 21) to

text: Commission Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: , Issue 2, Amendment 18

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R ‘AMC and GM to Part 21 — Issue 2, Amendment 18’

text: The amendments are presented as follows: — deleted text is struck through; — new text is highlighted; — an ellipsis ‘[…]’ indicates that the rest of the text is unchanged. Not e to re ad e r s ‘Agency’ and ‘EASA’ are used interchangeably, and this is most visible in consolidated texts. In all cases, both terms refer to the European Union Aviation Safety Agency.

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 1 of 18

text: AMC and GM to Part 21 Issue 2, Amendment 18

text: Annex I to Decision 2012/020/R of the Executive Director of the Agency of 30 October is amended as follows:

text: GM1 21.A.174(b) Application

text: NEW AIRCRAFT AND USED AIRCRAFT The process of obtaining an airworthiness certificate for a new aircraft relies on the assumption that the aircraft has been subject to a controlled process under the responsibility of the production organisation. In this context, the issuance of the airworthiness review certificate (without an airworthiness review) may be supported by the statement of conformity referred to in point 21.A.174(b)(2)(i), as long as no significant deviations in terms of aircraft usage, maintenance or configuration have occurred after the aircraft left the responsibility of the production organisation. If the aircraft has, for a significant period, remained outside the control of the production organisation (e.g. operated for purposes other than production-related check flights or positioning flights), the statement of conformity may no longer accurately reflect its condition. In such cases, the aircraft should be treated as used and an airworthiness review is required to assess its post-production history and ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. This means that for the purpose of point 21.A.174(b), an aircraft is normally considered ‘new’ if it has never been issued with an airworthiness certificate. However, the competent authority should assess specific situations on a case-by-case basis, such as aircraft that have been stored for extended periods after the aircraft left the control of the production organisation. This assessment should take into account factors such as when and how the continuing airworthiness management and maintenance were performed during the period after the aircraft left the control of the production organisation, and whether the aircraft has been subject to any significant ground or flight usage that could result in deviations from its original production condition. It should be noted that an aircraft may remain under the control of the production organisation after the statement of conformity referred to in point 21.A.174(b)(2)(i) (e.g. EASA Form 52) has been issued. In such cases, any maintenance performed on the aircraft should be certified using EASA Form 53.

text: GM1 21.A.174(b)(3) Application

text: AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE: APPLICATION AND ISSUANCE PROCESS FOR USED AIRCRAFT (a) A certificate of airworthiness (CofA) or a restricted certificate of airworthiness (RCofA) may only be issued if an airworthiness review has been satisfactory completed, making these processes inherently connected. Consequently, the requirements outlined in points M(L).A.905 and M(L).A.906 of

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: , as well as in points ML.UAS.905 and ML.UAS.906 of Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1107

text: , should be followed, as applicable. It is important to highlight that, in the context of aircraft transfers between Member States, an applicant that wishes to register an aircraft in another Member State and obtain a new airworthiness certificate should first notify both the current competent authority and the authority of the State where the aircraft will be registered. This is to prevent the aircraft from being deregistered before the application for a new airworthiness certificate has begun. If deregistration occurs too early in the transfer process, there may be a period during which no

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 2 of 18

text: Member State is responsible for the aircraft. This could result in the process being treated as an import rather than a transfer, requiring additional investigations to obtain the airworthiness certificate. (b) The flow diagram below illustrates the application process for obtaining a CofA or an RCofA for used aircraft.

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 3 of 18

text: / C

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 4 of 18

text: GM1 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii) Application

text: IMPORT OF AIRCRAFT (a) An application for an airworthiness certificate may be submitted for a used aircraft that does not have an airworthiness certificate issued in accordance with Part 21. This process is commonly referred to as ‘import of aircraft’ and includes the following cases: — aircraft previously registered in a third country; — aircraft used to carry out activities or services as defined in

text: Article 2(3)

text: (a) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2018/1139

text: (e.g. police, search and rescue, firefighting), if Section I (airworthiness and environmental protection) has not been opted in in accordance with Article 2(6) of that Regulation; — aircraft that are registered in a Member State, but their regulatory safety oversight has been transferred to a third country, i.e. under the

text: Article 83

text: bis agreement of the Chicago Convention; — aircraft that were issued with an airworthiness certificate by a Member State in accordance with Part 21, but the certificate has been revoked or surrendered; — aircraft that were registered in a Member State after being imported from a third country and have not been issued with an airworthiness certificate by a Member State; — unmanned aircraft that have not been issued with an airworthiness certificate by a Member State under Part 21, as they are not intended to be operated in the ‘high-risk’ (i.e. SAIL V–VI) operation in the ‘specific’ category. In all such cases, the continuing airworthiness requirements set out in

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: or in Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1107

text: , as applicable, may not have been previously applicable, as the aircraft may have been subject to a different regulatory framework. Consequently, the import process requires careful verification by all parties involved to ensure that the aircraft complies with all applicable requirements and meets the expected airworthiness standards. (b) As required by point (a)(3) of point M(L).A.906 of

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: and point ML.UAS.906 of Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1107

text: , as applicable, all maintenance must be performed to comply with the approved, or declared, aircraft maintenance programme (AMP). Among other requirements, the AMP must meet the applicable provisions of Annex I (Part-26) to

text: Regulation (EU) 2015/640

text: . In some cases, particularly when an aircraft originates from a different regulatory framework, additional assessments and approvals may be required, potentially extending the process of obtaining an airworthiness certificate. Therefore, it is recommended that the person or organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft initiate the review of these requirements as early as possible to avoid unnecessary delays in obtaining an airworthiness certificate. (c) If an aircraft is imported from a third country with which the EU has concluded a bilateral agreement, the application for an airworthiness certificate should follow the provisions outlined in that agreement and the associated implementation procedures, where applicable (e.g. Technical Implementation Procedures (TIPs)).

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 5 of 18

text: GM2 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii) Application

text: AIRWORTHINESS CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE IMPORT OF USED AIRCRAFT During the process of obtaining an airworthiness certificate for a used aircraft that does not have an airworthiness certificate issued in accordance with

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: , several distinct but interrelated processes should be followed. Each of these processes has a specific scope and objective, and takes place at a different stage of the import process. While their roles are distinct, synergies can be leveraged; for example, the investigations and the respective results from the evaluation programme should be considered during the airworthiness review. In particular, when determining the items to be sampled, due consideration may be given to areas already subject to detailed scrutiny, allowing the sampling to focus on areas not previously examined or where gaps or uncertainties have been identified. The following key steps are expected to be followed as part of the import process: (a) Airworthiness statement or evaluation programme The airworthiness statement confirms the aircraft’s airworthiness status and, if applicable, identifies any deviations, on the basis of the verifications performed by the former aviation authority. As specified in ICAO Annex 8, some Contracting States to the Chicago Convention facilitate the import of aircraft onto the register of another State by issuing of an ‘export certificate of airworthiness’ or a similar document. Although such a document is not valid for the purpose of flight, it provides confirmation by the exporting State that a recent and satisfactory review of the aircraft’s airworthiness status has been carried out. By issuing such a statement, the exporting State confirms that the persons and/or organisations involved in the continuing airworthiness management and maintenance of the aircraft held the appropriate approvals to perform their respective responsibilities while the aircraft was registered in that State. In effect, it indicates that, had the aircraft remained on the register of the exporting State, it would have continued to qualify for the continuation of its certificate of airworthiness. It is expected that the State issuing such an airworthiness statement follows procedures closely aligned with those applicable to the issuance or renewal of a certificate of airworthiness. This confirmation from the exporting State serves as a reference for the organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft, enabling it to rely, to an appropriate extent, on validated records and prior assessments. Applicants for an airworthiness certificate are advised to consult the competent authority of the Member State in which the aircraft is intended to be registered at an early stage of the process. In addition, before proceeding with the import of an aircraft, applicants should verify that the exporting State is willing and able to issue the statement referred to in point 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii)(A). In exceptional cases where such an airworthiness statement cannot be obtained, an evaluation programme may be used as an alternative, subject to the agreement of the competent authority of the Member State of intended registration. Where agreed, the evaluation programme should be developed in accordance with point 21.A.174(d)(3) and submitted to that competent authority for acceptance. The investigations defined therein should subsequently be conducted in accordance with point 21.A.174(d)(4). The evaluation programme is to be

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 6 of 18

text: implemented at the beginning of the import process and is intended to compensate for the reduced level of assurance resulting from the absence of verification performed by the former aviation authority prior to issuing an airworthiness statement. The evaluation programme is an investigative process that should focus on developing a comprehensive understanding of the aircraft’s prior condition and operational context, with the objective of identifying and resolving any gaps, inconsistencies or uncertainties. The evaluation programme includes, but is not limited to, assessments of the continuing airworthiness records, operational history, maintenance performed, design changes embodied and storage conditions of the aircraft. Some of these assessments may require the involvement or support of a design organisation. (b) Tasks performed by the person or organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft under

text: Regulation (EU) 2018/1139

text: The person or organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft should perform all necessary actions to ensure that the aircraft is airworthy and fully compliant with the applicable continuing airworthiness requirements. This includes, but is not limited to, developing the aircraft maintenance programme with details of any bridging checks, ordering the required maintenance, ensuring compliance with applicable ADs, addressing any defects and ensuring that the aircraft conforms to its approved configuration. The depth and scope of the investigations required to ensure that the aircraft is airworthy and complies with the applicable continuing airworthiness requirements may vary depending on the associated risk, including the aircraft’s operational and maintenance history, and the extent and quality of any prior investigations already conducted. (c) Airworthiness review An airworthiness review should be conducted after the person or the organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft has completed all necessary investigations to gain sufficient knowledge of the aircraft to be able to properly manage the continuing airworthiness tasks required to ensure the airworthy condition of the aircraft, such as ordering the necessary maintenance. The airworthiness review may start while the aircraft is subjected to maintenance; however, it can only be finalised once it is confirmed that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition, typically after all necessary maintenance has been completed. The objective of the airworthiness review is to confirm the aircraft’s airworthy condition and, if applicable, to identify any shortcomings related to its airworthiness. However, it is not intended to replace the other investigations or tasks that the person or organisation responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft is required to carry out. (d) Involvement of the competent authority During the process of obtaining an airworthiness certificate, the competent authority to which the application was submitted must conduct its own investigations. They may be conducted in coordination with organisations involved in the process, such as during the evaluation programme or independently, or both, as deemed necessary.

text: AMC1 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii)(A) Application

text: AIRWORTHINESS STATEMENT

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 7 of 18

text: (a) The applicant that imports the aircraft should obtain an airworthiness statement, as with it the aviation authority previously responsible for its oversight provides information regarding the aircraft’s airworthiness condition. That aviation authority is typically better positioned to conduct an airworthiness assessment, as it has knowledge of the applicable regulatory framework to which the aircraft was subject and keeps some of the aircraft’s historical records. The airworthiness statement should declare either: (1) that the aircraft conforms to the design approved by the appropriate authority that was responsible for the oversight of the aircraft and complies with the continuing airworthiness requirements applicable at the time the airworthiness statement was issued; or (2) if agreed between the exporting and importing States through bilateral agreements or other means, that the aircraft conforms to the design approved by the Agency and complies with the continuing airworthiness requirements specified in

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: or in Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1107

text: , as applicable. Any deviation from the approved design and any non-compliance with the applicable continuing airworthiness requirements should be indicated. An example of an airworthiness statement may be found in ICAO Doc 9760 ‘Airworthiness Manual’. (b) In certain exceptional cases, an application may be accepted without a current airworthiness statement from the exporting State, as stated in point 21.A.174(d). These cases may include either of the following: — civil disturbances or war in the territory of the former State of registry; — discontinuation of the aviation authority in the former State of registry; — significant and repeated non-compliances with the ICAO minimum airworthiness standards by the former State of registry; — the absence of procedures by the former aviation authority for issuing airworthiness statements during the export of aircraft; — an airworthiness statement has been obtained but it lacks the necessary information or is older than 60 days. In some cases, the exporting State may decline to issue an airworthiness statement even if there are no airworthiness concerns (e.g. if the request is made after the aircraft has been deregistered, because once deregistration occurs, that State is no longer responsible for the aircraft’s oversight). Such cases may also be considered exceptional cases for the purpose of point 21.A.174(d), provided that the competent authority that reviews the application is satisfied with the reasons for the inability to obtain the statement. Furthermore, the competent authority should be satisfied that the situation is an isolated case and does not constitute a systematic practice by the applicant.

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 8 of 18

text: GM1 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii)(A) Application

text: RISKS OF HAVING AN AIRCRAFT WITHOUT REGISTRATION When an aircraft is exported from one State and registered in another, the applicant needs to ensure that there is a reasonable period available for the relevant States and other parties to coordinate the change of registration. In these circumstances, consultation among the exporting and importing States, and the relevant operators or owners can ensure that all parties have a common understanding of the proposed timing of, and requirements for, issuance of an export certificate of airworthiness or equivalent, and completion, on a nearly concurrent basis, of the deregistration by the exporting State and registration by the importing State. If an aircraft is deregistered by a State and the process of registration in another State is not promptly commenced, the owner should be aware that complications may arise if the condition is prolonged. The main consequence is that no State is responsible for the aircraft in accordance with the Chicago Convention and applicable Annexes, and therefore an export certificate of airworthiness will unlikely be obtained. In addition, when an aircraft is not registered for a long time, the continuing airworthiness status of the aircraft is disrupted, and assessment of the airworthiness status may become progressively more complex and may create difficulties in the issuance of an airworthiness certificate. In order to avoid any delays with the registration, it is important for the owner to know in advance the aircraft registration requirements of the importing State and deregistration requirements of the exporting State.

text: AMC1 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii)(D) and 21.A.174(d)(2) Application

text: ACCEPTABLE EVIDENCE OF THE INITIAL BUILT STANDARDS Evidence as to the approved design according to which the aircraft was initially built and delivered may include a certificate of airworthiness for export issued by the State of manufacture, or any other conformity statement issued by the State of manufacture or the production organisation. Such documentation should identify the aircraft, its type design, any changes to its type certificate embodied at the time of initial delivery, and any unintentional deviations from the approved type design occurring in production (often referred to as concessions, divergences or non-conformances). In some cases, obtaining the documents mentioned above may not be possible; for example, for older aircraft types. In such cases, and subject to the competent authority’s agreement, the applicant should provide alternative evidence containing sufficient information about the production organisation, the aircraft and its approved design at the time of initial delivery.

text: GM1 21.A.174(b)(3)(ii)(F) Application

text: CO2 EMISSIONS PRODUCTION CUT-OFF REQUIREMENTS FOR A USED AEROPLANE ORIGINATING FROM A NON- MEMBER STATETHAT AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION DOES NOT HAVE AN AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH Part 21 Volume III of Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention (‘ICAO Annex 16') includes CO2 emissions production cut-off standards that apply to subsonic jet aeroplanes with a Maximum Take-Off Mass (MTOM) greater than 5 700 kg and propeller-driven aeroplanes with a MTOM greater than 8 618 kg,

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 9 of 18

text: for which a type certificate was issued but that were not certified for CO2 emissions in accordance with Volume III of ICAO Annex 16, and for which the individual certificate of airworthiness (CofA) was first issued on or after 1 January 2028 (Sections 2.1.1.(f) and (g) of Chapter 2 of Part II of Volume III of ICAO Annex 16). These production cut-off standards were introduced with the first edition of Volume III of ICAO Annex 16. The applicant for a CofA (or a restricted CofA) for a used aeroplane originating from a non-Member Statethat at the time of application does not have an airworthiness certificate issued in accordance with Part 21 is specifically required to provide the date on which the first CofA was issued. This should permit the competent authority of the Member State of registry to establish whether a CO2 emissions production cut-off requirement applies to that aeroplane and verify that the compliance with this requirement has been demonstrated. If such a requirement applies, the applicant for a CofA (or a restricted CofA) shall provide the CO2 emissions evaluation metric value as certified in accordance with the applicable Standards and Recommended Practices in Volume III of ICAO Annex 16. The Agency publishes the CO2 emissions evaluation metric values approved by the Agency in the EASA Aeroplane CO2 Emissions Database . If a CO2 standard applies, approval of the aeroplane’s CO2 emissions evaluation metric value by the Agency is a prerequisite for a CofA (or a restricted CofA) from a Member State and is typically part of the Agency’s approval of the type design.

text: AMC1 21.A.174(d) Application

text: EVALUATION PROGRAMME The process for developing and carrying out an evaluation programme consists of four main steps: — assessment of applicability and preconditions; — development of the evaluation programme and obtaining the competent authority’s acceptance of the evaluation programme; — conduct of the investigations outlined in the evaluation programme; — issuance of an evaluation report with conclusions. All four steps have to be carried out by a single organisation approved as referred to in point 21.A.174(d)(i) or, if applicable, by the competent authority referred to in point 21.A.174(d)(ii). Since the airworthiness review is a different process, it does not need to be conducted by the same approved organisation or, if applicable, by the competent authority that implemented the evaluation programme. The evaluation programme should be developed and implemented taking into account the following: (a) Preconditions to establish an evaluation programme: (1) evidence of the approved design according to which the aircraft was initially built and delivered; (2) availability of the previous maintenance programme or, if not, availability of the ICA; (3) sufficient historical records are available to meet the aircraft’s continuing airworthiness record system requirements in point M.A.305 of Annex I (Part-M) or point ML.A.305 of

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 10 of 18

text: Annex Vb (Part-ML) to

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: , or in accordance with point ML.UAS.305 of Annex I (Part-UAS) to Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1107

text: , as applicable, or to an equivalent level; (4) journey logs and/or technical logs are available to establish the nature of previous aircraft operations (e.g. aerial work, commercial air transport), previous aircraft utilisation (e.g. flight hours, flight cycles) and previous aircraft operating environment (e.g. frequent icing/de-icing, sandstorms, saline environments). Lost, destroyed or illegible records may be reconstructed, for example, by: — reference to other records which reflect the time in service; — research of records maintained by maintenance organisations; — reference to records maintained by individual mechanics. The reconstructed records should be submitted to the competent authority for acceptance. If the records cannot be reconstructed, sufficient activities should be performed to ensure the airworthiness of the aircraft and its components. Such activities may include additional maintenance, such as part replacements, overhauls, additional inspections, including nondestructive testing (NDT), and other activities as agreed upon with the competent authority. (b) All relevant factors should be assessed to determine the appropriate level of confidence and, consequently, the required depth (e.g. level of detail) and scope (e.g. how far back in the past and which aspects require increased attention) of the investigation activities under the evaluation programme. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) reasons for the unavailability of the airworthiness statement; (2) any experience of the organisation or the competent authority developing the evaluation programme related to the import of aircraft from the previous State of registry; (3) any experience of the organisation or the competent authority developing the evaluation programme related to the import of aircraft from the previous aircraft owner/operator; (4) completeness, accuracy, consistency and reliability of the aircraft’s continuing airworthiness records and journey logs and/or technical logs reviewed. Particular focus should be placed on the period following the most recent periodical inspection or other equivalent determination of continued airworthiness, carried out for the purpose of the issuance, renewal or continued validity of the last certificate of airworthiness, or equivalent; (5) aircraft age and ownership history since the period specified in point (b)(4) (i.e. registrations, length of period(s) without a registration, owners/operators); (6) previous aircraft operating environment(s) and previous aircraft operating profile(s); (7) physical aircraft condition; (8) aircraft preservation condition. (c) The following content should be included in an evaluation programme to be proposed to the competent authority for acceptance:

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 11 of 18

text: (1) the conclusions drawn from the factors listed in point (b); (2) a description of any reconstructed aircraft’s continuing airworthiness records; (3) a description of any difficulties encountered with the documents used to determine conformity with a design approved in accordance with

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: , such as missing, incomplete or outdated design data, unclear applicability of repairs, or supplemental type certificates; (4) identification of all events that may have required unscheduled maintenance (e.g. lightning strikes, hard landings, long-term storage, propeller or rotor overspeed, overtorque, impact on a main rotor blade, etc.) and that have occurred since the period specified in point (b)(4), as well as any relevant events that have occurred throughout the aircraft’s lifetime that might require closer attention, such as significant damage to the aircraft. An assessment should be conducted of the aircraft’s continuing airworthiness records in relation to the identified events, and the conclusions identified in the evaluation programme with respect to the actions taken, if needed, to restore the aircraft condition for safe operation (including any evolution of the approved design) after these events; (5) proposed investigation activities including physical inspection suitable to: (i) identify the current aircraft configuration and deviations from the design approved by the Agency; (ii) identify repairs, unrepaired damage and modifications previously performed on the aircraft, including verification of the actions taken in response to the events identified in point (c)(4); (iii) identify any unclear or unacceptable design or maintenance standards; (iv) clarify any ambiguous aspects arising from the conclusions in point (b); (6) identification of the organisations needed to determine the current aircraft configuration and determine deviations from an EASA approved design (e.g. POA, DOA, manufacturer, TC/STC holder, CA(M)O, etc.); (7) identification of the organisations needed to support the investigation activities. These may include, for example: (i) approved maintenance organisations responsible for carrying out inspections, functional tests, panel openings, etc.; (ii) the organisation responsible for the management of continuing airworthiness, if different from the one developing the evaluation programme; and (8) the date and location the inspections and investigations proposed as part of the evaluation programme are to be performed. (d) If the evaluation programme is developed by an organisation, it should be accepted by the competent authority before it is implemented. The competent authority may also wish to be involved in the implementation of the programme, as specified in AMC1 21.B.326(a)(3) and 21.B.327(a)(3).

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 12 of 18

text: The evaluation programme must be implemented in accordance with what was agreed. Any significant deviations from the accepted evaluation programme should be coordinated with, and compensating measures, if any, agreed by the competent authority. (e) Upon completion of the investigations defined in the evaluation programme, an evaluation report should be issued and submitted to the person or the organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft. The report should contain, as a minimum, the following information: (1) reference to the accepted evaluation programme; (2) a description of the investigation activities performed; (3) a description of the inspection and investigation results; (4) a listing and justification of deviations (if any) from the accepted evaluation programme, including the compensating measures agreed with the competent authority. If necessary and appropriate, the organisation or competent authority that implemented the evaluation programme should provide assistance to the person or the organisation that is responsible for the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft, specifically in addressing any airworthiness-related issues identified during the investigations. This may include clarification of the issues detected or recommendations on how to address specific concerns.

text: AMC2 21.A.174(d) Application

text: HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION OF THE AIRCRAFT The following aspects relating to the assessment and analysis of historical documentation (records and manuals) should be considered when developing an evaluation programme: (a) Previous air operations and operating environment(s) The effects of the previous operating profiles and operating environments (on ground and in flight) should be assessed. Support from the design approval holder may be necessary to address the impact on continuing airworthiness and on airworthiness limitations in cases such as: (1) ground and/or flight operations previously conducted beyond the limitations established in accordance with

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: (e.g. flight envelope limitations specified in the AFM); and/or (2) ground and/or flight operating environments not addressed in the ICA established in accordance with

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: . (b) Conformity to an approved design and equipment required for air operations Configuration elements (e.g. changes to type design) previously incorporated in the aircraft, as well as operational, emergency or other equipment installed or carried on board — in particular those associated with former air operations such as firefighting — should be identified. In order to remain installed on the aircraft, such elements or equipment should comply with the applicable approval requirements of

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: or be accepted under the

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 13 of 18

text: provisions of the applicable bilateral agreement; otherwise, they should be permanently removed. The permanent removal of a configuration element (e.g. a modification) should always be carried out in accordance with approved maintenance data, such as a service bulletin issued by the type certificate holder. If no approved maintenance data is available, appropriate approved data should be obtained in accordance with

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: to support the removal and ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. Depending on the complexity of the tasks (such as the removal of wiring), detailed maintenance instructions may be required. Following instructions intended for the temporary removal of equipment may not be appropriate, as this could result in a condition that deviates from the type design (e.g. residual mounting holes). (c) Certification of maintenance The certificates issued after maintenance should be reviewed to confirm that the maintenance was performed using approved data and by appropriately qualified staff or approved organisations. The objective is not to verify whether the staff or organisations were appropriately approved, but rather to confirm that they were authorised to perform the work and that the work was within their scope of approval. (d) Airworthiness limitations Assessments should be conducted to ensure that the aircraft and any installed components have not exceeded their airworthiness limitations, taking into account the effects of previous air operations and operating environments on those limitations. Any change to the airworthiness limitations should be approved in accordance with

text: Regulation (EU) No 748/2012

text: GM1 21.A.174(d)(1) Application

text: FORMER AVIATION AUTHORITY When importing an aircraft for which the aviation authority responsible for its oversight has not issued a statement confirming its airworthiness status, it is important to understand the reason for this omission. It should be ensured that the reason for this omission is not due to airworthiness concerns that may indicate that the aircraft cannot reasonably be returned to an airworthy condition. If there are known airworthiness issues that have been identified, addressed and properly corrected, the import of aircraft may still be acceptable through the development of an evaluation programme. Some States do not link the process of aircraft registration with the issuance of certificate of airworthiness and therefore it is possible that a registered aircraft has never been issued with a certificate of airworthiness. In these cases, a statement from the State of registry may not be sufficient if the airworthiness condition of the aircraft has not been assessed by the relevant authority. Therefore, relevant information regarding the airworthiness status of the aircraft may only be available from the authority that issued the last certificate of airworthiness.

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 14 of 18

text: AMC1 21.B.320 Investigation

text: INVESTIGATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE FOR USED IMPORTED AIRCRAFT (a) The competent authority should establish a procedure describing the investigation process to ensure that the documentation provided with the application is accurate and that the aircraft or unmanned aircraft system (UAS), as applicable, conforms to an approved design, is in a condition for safe operation, and meets the applicable requirements of Section A Subpart H of Annex I (Part 21). The depth of such investigations should be determined using a risk-based approach, considering multiple factors, including but not limited to the following: (1) Origin of the aircraft Assess the oversight environment under which the aircraft was previously operated. This assessment may include, as appropriate: (i) consideration of the safety oversight capabilities of the States where the aircraft was registered; for example, based on the ICAO airworthiness implementation score; (ii) the existence of bilateral agreements or working arrangements with the State of registry; (iii) verification of whether the aircraft was part of an operator included in the EU Air Safety List or originated from a State with operators listed there. (2) Previous experience with the organisations involved Take into account how the organisation responsible for the continuing airworthiness management and the organisation responsible for issuing the airworthiness review certificate or recommendation have previously complied with the applicable requirements. (3) Type of previous operations Consider whether the aircraft was used in commercial air transport, private operations, special operations such as firefighting, or other categories that may influence its airworthiness status. (4) Time outside the EU regulatory system Assess the period during which the aircraft has been subject to a different regulatory system. (b) The assessment of the recommendation for the issuance of the airworthiness review certificate, as per point M.B.902 of

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: , may be conducted in conjunction with the investigations required for the issuance of the airworthiness certificate. (c) If there are doubts about the adequacy of the maintenance performed, including concerns regarding its quality or integrity, it may be necessary to either perform the maintenance again or have it thoroughly inspected by a person or an approved organisation, as applicable under

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 15 of 18

text: Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

text: or Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1107

text: , to ensure that the aircraft meets the applicable airworthiness standards. This may be required, for example, if the maintenance was performed by organisations with inadequate oversight or if there is evidence indicating that the aircraft has been subject to poor airworthiness standards. (d) When importing an aircraft from a third country with which the competent authority has limited previous experience, the competent authority may contact other Member States that have previously imported aircraft from that same third country in order to benefit from their experience and share any relevant information.

text: AMC1 21.B.326(a)(3) and 21.B.327(a)(3) (Restricted) Certificate of airworthiness

text: ACCEPTANCE OF THE EVALUATION PROGRAMME BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY When an application for an airworthiness certificate is submitted without a statement reflecting the aircraft’s airworthiness status, as specified in point 21.A.174(d), an evaluation programme should be submitted to the competent authority for acceptance. If the competent authority finds that the proposed evaluation programme is suitable to properly evaluate the status of the aircraft with regard to its configuration and maintenance, including conformity to the approved type design, existing modifications and repairs and maintenance, and continuing airworthiness status, it should accept it and notify the applicant about the acceptance and, if applicable, about the involvement of the authority in the proposed investigation activities. In making this determination, the competent authority should, if relevant, take into account its own experience with imports of aircraft originating from the same third-country regulatory framework or with known shortcomings typically observed in the same aircraft models that may require particular attention. If the competent authority finds that the proposed evaluation programme is insufficient to properly evaluate the status of the aircraft, it should reject the evaluation programme and provide a justification for its decision to do so.

text: GM 21.B.325(a) Airworthiness certificates

text: 1. Completion of the certificate of airworthiness by a Member State Block 5: Insert restrictions developed in accordance with Part 21, including any reference to limitations as indicated in GM 21.B.320(b)(6). 2. Completion of the restricted certificate of airworthiness by a Member State Block 5: Insert restrictions developed in accordance with Part 21, including any reference to limitations as indicated in GM 21.B.320(b)(6).

text: GM 21.B.325(b) Completion of the Airworthiness Review Certificate by a Member State

text: 1. Purpose

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 16 of 18

text: In accordance with the applicable continuing airworthiness requirements a certificate of airworthiness is valid only if a valid airworthiness review certificate is attached to it. For new aircraft, the competent authority will issue the airworthiness review certificate when issuing the certificate of airworthiness.

text: GM1 Appendix V and Appendix VI — EASA Form 24 and EASA Form 25 — (Restricted) Certificate of Airworthiness

text: COMPLETION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF AIRWORTHINESS (CofA) AND RESTRICTED CERTIFICATE OF AIRWORTHINESS (RCofA) Block 4: If the certification specification used primarily to certify the aircraft is in the left column, use the corresponding categories identified in the right column of the following table: Certification specifications (R)CofA category (Block 4) CS-LSA Light Sport Aeroplanes CS-VLA Very Light Aeroplanes CS-VLR Very Light Rotorcraft CS-22 Sailplanes or Powered Sailplanes CS-23 ‘Normal, Utility, Aerobatic and Commuter Aeroplanes’ or ‘Normal-category airplane’ CS-25 Large Aeroplanes CS-27 Small Rotorcraft CS-29 Large Rotorcraft CS-31HB Hot Air Balloons CS-31GB Gas Balloons CS-31TGB Tethered Gas Balloons Alternatively, Member States may use the information provided in the field on airworthiness category in the TCDS. Block 5: Insert the restrictions developed in accordance with Part 21 or Part 21 Light, including any reference to limitations as indicated in GM 21.B.320(b)(6) or GM1 21L.B.161(a)(6).

text: GM1 21.B.326(a)(3) and (b)(3)(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(3)(iv) Certificate of airworthiness

text: CO2 EMISSIONS PRODUCTION CUT-OFF REQUIREMENTS Volume III of Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention (‘ICAO Annex 16') includes CO2 emissions production cut-off standards that apply to subsonic jet aeroplanes with a Maximum Take-Off Mass (MTOM) greater than 5 700 kg and propeller-driven aeroplanes with a MTOM greater than 8 618 kg, for which a type certificate was issued but that were not certified for CO2 emissions in accordance

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 17 of 18

text: with Volume III of ICAO Annex 16, and for which the individual certificate of airworthiness (CofA) was first issued on or after 1 January 2028 (Sections 2.1.1.(f) and (g) of Chapter 2 of Part II of Volume III of ICAO Annex 16). These production cut-off standards were introduced with the first edition of Volume III of ICAO Annex 16. — For a new aeroplane (21.B.326(a)(3)(1)(ii)): The competent authority assesses whether an aeroplane CO2 emissions production cut-off requirement applies to the aeroplane, and, if such a requirement applies, that the aeroplane conforms to this requirement before issuing the first CofA. — For a used aeroplane that does not have an airworthiness certificate issued in accordance with Part 21 (for example, an aeroplane imported from a third country) (21.B.326(b)(3)(a)(3)(iv)): The competent authority assesses whether an aeroplane CO2 emissions production cut-off requirement applied to the aeroplane when its first CofA was issued, and, if such a requirement applied, that the aeroplane conformed to that requirement on the date on which the CofA was first issued. The competent authority may check that the CO2 metric value provided by the applicant for a CofA corresponds to the CO2 metric value approved by the Agency for the aeroplane type. Note: For a used aeroplane that has an airworthiness certificate issued in accordance with Part 21 (for example, an aeroplane imported transferred from a Member State), the compliance with the applicable environmental protection requirements was already assessed for the issuance of the previous CofA. The competent authority may refer to the corresponding certified CO2 emissions evaluation metric values that are published by the Agency in the EASA Aeroplane CO2 Emissions Database . These specific requirements ensure that the CO2 emissions production cut-off requirement that may apply to the aeroplane is not overlooked. Further guidance material on the applicability of the aeroplane CO2 emissions requirements is provided in ICAO Doc 9501 ‘Environmental Technical Manual’, Volume III ‘Procedures for the CO2 Emissions Certification of Aeroplanes’.

text: Annex I to ED Decision 2026/005/R Page 18 of 18

type: vagledning

utgivare: easa


identifier: AMC & GM to Part 21 — Issue 2, Amendment 2

amnesord: Part 21 - Airworthiness and Environmental Certification

beslut: ED Decision 2014/007/R

publisher: Europeiska unionens byrå för luftfartssäkerhet

sprak: en

serie: amc-gm

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

type: stycke

text: The Annex I ‘Acceptable Means of Compliance and Guidance Material to be used in the airworthiness certification of products, parts and appliances and the approval of organisations involved in their design or manufacture’ to ED Decision 2012/020/R of the Executive Director of the Agency of 30 October 2012 is hereby amended as follows:

text: The text of the amendment is arranged to show deleted text, new or amended text as shown below: (a) deleted text is marked with strike through; (b) new or amended text is highlighted in grey; (c) an ellipsis (…) indicates that the remaining text is unchanged in front of or following the reflected amendment.

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: Amend AMC 21.A.4 as follows:

text: AMC 21.A.4 Transferring of information on eligibility and approval status from the design holder to production organisations

text: Where there is a need to provide (normally outside the design organisation) a visible statement of approved design data or airworthiness, operational suitability or environmental protection data associated with the approved design data, the following minimum information must be provided. The need for a visible statement may be in relation to Company holding a production organisation approval (POA) in relation to 21.A.163(c). …

text: Amend AMC 21.A.14(b) as follows:

text: AMC 21.A.14(b) Alternative Procedures

text: … 4. Issue of information and instructions to owners, operators or others required to use the data 4.1 General Information and instructions include the operational suitability data. 4.2 Data related to changes The information or instructions issued by a TC, STC, approval of changes to type design, approval of repair design holder are intended to provide the owners of a product with all necessary data to implement a change on the product, or a repair, or to inspect it. The information or instructions may be issued in a format of a Service Bulletin as defined in ATA 100 system, or in Structural Repair Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, Engine and Propeller Manuals, etc. The preparation of this data involves design, production and inspection. The three aspects should be properly addressed and a procedure should exist. 4.23 Procedure The procedure should address the following points: - preparation - verification of technical consistency with corresponding approved change(s), repair(s) or approved data, including effectivity, description, effects on airworthiness or operational suitability, especially when limitations are changed - verification of the feasibility in practical applications. The persons authorised to sign before release of information and instructions to the Agency for approval should be identified in the procedure. The procedure should include the information or instructions prepared by sub-contractors or vendors, and declared applicable to its products by the TC, STC, approval of changes to type design or approval of repair design holders. 4.34 Statement

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: The information and instructions should contain a statement showing Agency approval.

text: Insert new GMs as follows: GM No 1 to 21.A.15(d) Clarification of the term ‘as applicable’. The term ‘as applicable’ indicates that not all elements as listed in 21.A.15(d)(1) through (6) are always part of the OSD. For example, when the operational rules do not require cabin crew for an aircraft with a certain number of passenger seats, the element of (d)(4) is not required for the OSD of this aircraft. Another example is that a minimum syllabus for pilot type rating training is not required if the aircraft is in a class rating.

text: If a new aircraft type is considered a variant for licensing purposes a full syllabus for type rating training is not required, but the applicant can suffice with the syllabus for differences training. Most of the OSD elements are not applicable to aircraft in the category ‘other than complex motor-powered’. In more detail: — The requirement to produce minimum syllabi for type training of pilots is only applicable when the aircraft has a type rating. By default, small aircraft will be in a class rating. However, the Agency can decide on an ad-hoc basis that a type rating is necessary due to performance, design or other features that require specific training. For most small aircraft this is not the case and they will be in a class rating. Whether a new aircraft type should have a type rating or can be in a class rating will be part of the OSD approval process and finally will be decided by the Agency. The assessment is based on objective criteria which are included in the Certification Specifications for the related OSD element. When no individual type rating is required for the aircraft, it means that the relevant OSD elements are not required. Nevertheless, on a voluntary basis, the applicant can always provide a minimum syllabus for type training to be approved under OSD. — The requirement to produce minimum syllabi for type training of maintenance certifying staff is only applicable for the aircraft required to have a type rating training, which are the aircraft in Group 1 as per Annex III of (EC) Regulation 2042/2003 (point 66.A.5). When no individual type rating training is required for the aircraft, it means that the relevant OSD elements are not required. Nevertheless, on a voluntary basis, the applicant can always provide a minimum syllabus for type training to be approved under OSD.

text: — Simulator data is only required when the syllabus for pilot type rating includes the use of full flight simulators. This is typically not the case for small aircraft. — The type specific data for cabin crew training is only required when the operational rules require cabin crew for the maximum approved passenger seating capacity. Currently, cabin crew is required for aircraft with a maximum approved passenger seating configuration of more than 19. Small aircraft do not have this number of passenger seats.

text: — The requirement to establish an MMEL is applicable to all aircraft that can be used for commercial operations since the relevant operators must have MELs for those aircraft. This means that also for other-than-complex aircraft type certificate or restricted type-certificate an MMEL will be required. However, in order to minimise the burden for the TC and STC applicants the following applies:

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: • For other-than-complex aeroplanes excluding very light aeroplanes (VLA), light sport aeroplanes (LSA) and powered sailplanes generic MMELs by means of a dedicated CS are established by the Agency. The TC or STC applicant for an aircraft or change to an aircraft within that category can suffice with identifying the items of the generic MMEL that are appropriate for its design.

text: • For very light aeroplanes (VLA), light sport aeroplanes (LSA), very light rotorcraft (VLR), sailplanes, powered sailplanes, balloons and ELA2 airships, the Agency considers that the list of required equipment as included in the TCDS and/or AFM/POH, in combination with equipment required for the flight by the associated implement rules, such as operational requirements, airspace requirements and any other applicable requirements to the intended operation, establishes the list of equipment that must be operative for all flights. Other equipment may be inoperative and this constitutes the MMEL. Design approval applicants for these aircraft are, therefore, not required to establish an MMEL.

text: GM No 2 to 21.A.15(d) Determination of type or variant

text: The criteria for the determination whether an aircraft with a new type certificate (TC) is considered a new type or is a variant with reference to another aircraft type from the same TC holder for the purpose of the specific OSD element, are provided in the applicable certification specifications for maintenance certifying staff data, flight crew data and cabin crew data.

text: GM No 3 to 21.A.15(d) OSD content

text: The OSD will typically consist of elements that are required to be included by the TC applicant and elements that can be added at the request of the TC applicant. (see also GM No.4 to 21.A.15(d)). Both the required elements and the additional elements will have a part that is mandatory to be used by the operator or training organisation (status of rule) and a part which is not mandatory to the operator or training organisation (status of AMC). For illustration of this concept the below figure is included.

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: Figure 1:OSD boxes concept

text: Box 1: required from TC holder; mandatory for end-users. Box 2: required from TC holder; not mandatory (recommendations) for endusers. Box 3: at request of TC holder; mandatory for end-users. The TC applicant may wish to apply for the approval of differences training between variants or types to reduce training, checking or currency requirements for operations of more than one type or variant. This is regarded as an optional element in addition to the required elements of Box 1 and 2. Box 4: at request of TC holder; not mandatory (recommendations) for end-users. The exact content of the four boxes in the above figure is determined by the certification specification that is applicable to the specific element. The status the data will have on the side of the operator or training organisation should be indicated in the OSD by segregating the data in a section called ‘Mandatory’ and a section called ‘Non-mandatory (recommendations)’.

text: GM No 4 to 21.A.15(d) Scope of operational suitability data.

text: (a) In the application-extension for approval of operational suitability data, the TC applicant may apply for the approval of different types of operations. If the aircraft is certificated for certain types of operations (e.g. ETOPS, RNP, LVO) the impact on the elements of 21.A.15(d) should be addressed. (b) Under the term ‘Other type-related operational suitability elements’ of 21.A.15(d)(6) there are several possibilities for including elements in the OSD at the request of the TC applicant in addition to the required elements. These additional elements should be linked to one of the required elements or should concern the operational suitability of the aircraft type.

text: GM 21.A.17B (a)(1) Reference date for operational suitability certification basis

text: The date of application as referred to in 21.A.17B (a)(1) is the date of the TC application when this includes operational suitability data, or the date the application was supplemented to include operational suitability data.

text: Amend AMC 21.A.20(b) as follows:

text: AMC 21.A.20(b) Certification programme

text: 1. For a particular project and as part of the technical familiarisation, the applicant provides a certification programme that includes: 1.1 a plan containing the following information: - Description of the project and the kind of operations envisaged - The proposed certification specifications, special conditions, equivalent safety findings and environmental protection requirements - The description on how compliance will be demonstrated, with proposed means of compliance (see appendix to this AMC below for codes), and any selected guidance material. The description of the means of compliance should be sufficient to

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: determine that all necessary data will be collected and compliance can be demonstrated.

text: - A compliance checklist addressing each paragraphs of the type-certification basis, the operational suitability certification basis and environmental protection requirements applicable to the project, with reference to the means of compliance and to the related compliance documents. - Identification of relevant personnel making decisions affecting airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection interfacing with the Agency, unless otherwise identified to the Agency;

text: 1.2 a project schedule including major milestones. …

text: Amend AMC 21.A.20(c) as follows:

text: AMC 21.A.20(c) Compliance documentation

text: 1. Compliance documentation comprises of one or more reports, drawings, specifications, calculations, analysis etc. and provides a record of the means by which compliance with the applicable type-certification basis, the operational suitability certification basis and environmental protection requirements is demonstrated. … Insert new GMs as follows:

text: GM to 21.A.21(f), 21.A.23(b) and 21.A.103(a)4 Approval of OSD

text: It is acknowledged that it may not always be possible to have the operational suitability data available at the date of the issuance of the type certificate (TC) change approval or STC. The derogation provided by points 21.A.21(f), 21.A.23(b) and 21.A.103(a)4 are intended for that case. The TC, change approval or STC can be issued before compliance with the operational suitability data certification basis has been shown, provided the applicant declares the date that the OSD will be available. The OSD should be approved before the data must be used by a training organisation for the purpose of obtaining a European license, rating or attestation, or by an EU operator. This is normally at the entry into service of the first aircraft by an EU operator but could also be later for some of the elements such as the data for simulators which should only be available when a simulator has to be qualified. However, there may be a need to make one or several OSD elements available before the entry into service, or even before the TC is issued. For example, there may be a need to start training activities before all elements contained in the OSD application can be approved. Therefore, before the availability of a complete and fully compliant OSD, the Agency can certify partial compliance of only one or several provisional OSD elements under the TC, change approval or STC, the use of which can then be limited to specific purposes.

text: GM to 21.A.62, 21.A108 and 21.A.120B Availability of Operational Suitability Data

text: (a) When making data available, the holder of the design approval (TC, change approval, STC) should take into account the applicable security laws.

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: (b) When making data available, the holder of the design approval can impose conditions addressing the intellectual property nature of the data.

text: GM to 21.A.90A Scope

text: In case of changes to operational suitability data, the term ‘changes’ includes amendments, deviations, additions and supplements.

text: Amend GM No. 1 to 21.A.239(a) as follows:

text: GM No. 1 to 21.A.239(a) Design assurance system

text: … 3.1.4 Office of Airworthiness … i. Advising of all departments of the design organisation in all questions regarding airworthiness, operational suitability, environmental protection approvals and certification. … s. Monitoring of significant events on other aeronautical products as far as relevant to determine their effect on airworthiness or operational suitability of products being designed by the design organisation. … u. Ensuring the initiation of activities as a response to a failure (accident/incident/in-service occurrence) evaluation and complaints from the operation and providing of information to the Agency in case of airworthiness or operational suitability impairment (continuing airworthiness and continued operational suitability). … 3.1.5 Maintenance and Operating Instructions … b. In accordance with 21.A.57, 21.A.61, 21.A.107, 21.A.119, 21.A.120A and 21.A.449, ensuring that these documents are provided to all affected operators and all involved authorities. 3.1.6 Operational Suitability Data a. Ensuring the preparation and updating of all operational suitability data in accordance with relevant CS. For that purpose, the applicant should: • establish the list of all documents it is producing to comply with CS-MMEL or CS-GEN-MMEL, CS-FCD, CS- CCD, CS-SIMD and CS-MCSD as applicable; • define procedures and organisation to produce and issue these documents, using where applicable and so elected 21.A.263(c)(3) privilege. b. In accordance with 21.A.57, 21.A.62, 21.A.108, 21.A.119 and 21.A.120B, ensuring that these documents are provided to all affected operators and training organisations and all involved authorities.

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: Amend AMC No. 1 to 21.A.243(a) as follows:

text: AMC No. 1 to 21.A.243(a) Data requirements

text: … 4. A general description of the way in which the organisation performs all the design functions in relation to airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection approvals including: … 5 A general description of the way in which the organisation performs its functions in relation to the continuing airworthiness and continued operational suitability of the product it designs, including cooperation with the production organisation when dealing with any continuing airworthiness actions that are related to production of the product, part or appliance, as applicable. … 10. A description of the means by which the organisation monitors and responds to problems affecting the airworthiness or operational suitability of its product during design, production and in service in particular to comply with 21.A.3 (see also GM No. 1 to 21.A.239, paragraphs 3.1.4(s) and (u)). … 14. A description of the procedures for the establishment and the control of the maintenance and operating instructions (see 21.A.57, 21.A.61, 21.A.107, 21.A.119, 21.A.120A and 21.A.449). … 16. A description of the procedures for the establishment and the control of the operational suitability data (see 21.A.57, 21.A.62, 21.A.108, 21.A.119 and 21.A.120B).

text: Amend GM No. 1 to 21.A.243(d) as follows:

text: GM No. 1 to 21.A.243(d) Statement of qualifications and experience

text: 2. Who are the persons? … - the personnel making decisions affecting airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection: • compliance verification engineers [see GM No. 1 to 21.A.239(a), para.3.1.3; AMC 21.A.239(b)] • personnel of the Office of Airworthiness making decisions affecting airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection, especially those linked with the 21.A.263 privileges (signing documents for release, approving classification of changes and repairs, and granting the approval of minor changes and minor repairs, granting the approval of

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: SBs, and minor revisions to the aircraft flight manual) [see GM No. 1 to 21.A.239(a), para. 3.1.4]

text: 3. Kind of statement … 3.3 Personnel making decisions affecting airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection …

text: Amend GM No. 1 to 21.A.245 as follows:

text: GM No. 1 to 21.A.245 Requirements for approval

text: … 4 Organisation. The data submitted in accordance with 21.A.243 should show that: … 4.2 An Office of Airworthiness, or equivalent function, has been established and staffed on a permanent basis to act as the focal point for co-ordinating airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection matters (see GM No. 1 to 21.A.239 (a) paragraph 3.1.4); it reports directly to the Head of the design organisation or is integrated into an independent quality assurance organisation reporting to the Head of the design organisation. … Amend GM No. 2 to 21.A.245 as follows:

text: GM No. 2 to 21.A.245 Requirements for approval - Organisations designing minor changes to type design or minor repairs to products

text: … 2. Person(s) have been nominated to liaise with the Agency and to coordinate airworthiness, operational suitability and environmental protection matters. Their position in the organisation should allow direct report to the manager responsible for design. …

text: Amend GM 21.A.247 as follows:

text: GM 21.A.247 Significant changes in the design assurance system

text: In addition to a change in ownership (see 21.A.249), the following changes to the design assurance system should be considered as ‘significant’ to the demonstration of compliance or to the airworthiness, operational suitability or environmental protection of the products: 1. Organisation … • Change in the parts of the organisation that contribute directly to the airworthiness, operational suitability or environmental protection (independent checking function, office of airworthiness [or equivalent]) …

text: Annex to ED Decision 2014/007/R

text: 2. Responsibilities … • New distribution of responsibilities affecting airworthiness, operational suitability or environmental protection … 3. Procedures Change to the principles of procedures related to : … • continued airworthiness or continued operational suitability(see 21.A.3) • the configuration control, when airworthiness, operational suitability or environmental protection is affected …


identifier: AMC & GM to Part 21 — Issue 2, Amendment 3

beslut: ED Decision 2015/016/R

text: The Annex to Decision 2012/020/R is amended as follows: The text of the amendment is arranged to show deleted text, new or amended text as shown below: (a) deleted text is marked with strikethrough; (b) new or amended text is highlighted in grey; (c) an ellipsis (…) indicates that the remaining text is unchanged in front of or following the reflected amendment.

text: Two new paragraphs, GM 21.A.90B and GM 21.A.431B, are introduced:

text: GM 21.A.90B Standard changes — Certification Specifications

text: CS-STAN contains the certification specifications referred to in 21.A.90B(a)2. Guidance on the implementation of Standard Changes and Standard Repairs can be found in AMC M.A.801 of the AMC to Part-M.

text: GM 21.A.431B Standard repairs — Certification Specifications

text: CS-STAN contains the certification specifications referred to in 21.A.431B(a)2. Guidance on the implementation of Standard Changes and Standard Repairs can be found in AMC M.A.801 of the AMC to Part-M.