Airframers would pay flat annual charge linked to average costs to certificate aircraft
US Federal Aviation Administration chief Marion Blakey says that a proposal by the European Commission that would require the European Aviation Safety Agency to charge identical fees for certificating and validating a new aircraft design could prevent a transatlantic safety accord.
"I am concerned at the European Commission's proposed rule on EASA fees and charges," Blakey told an American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics conference in Arlington, Virginia last week.
"They want to charge the same for validation as for certification, which flies in the face of actual costs," she said. "This could jeopardise our plans for a safety bilateral with the EC."
The US-EC bilateral aviation safety agreement, expected to be signed next month at the Paris air show, will consolidate the various safety agreements brokered between the USA and individual EC member countries.
Some industry advocacy groups are denouncing the EC's action as an affront to the agreement, which they say had already been negotiated.
"This violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the draft EC-US bilateral aviation safety agreement which states that fees shall be 'just, reasonable and commensurate with the services provided'," says the General Aviation Manufacturers Association.
Under the EC proposal, airframers would pay a flat annual fee linked to EASA's average costs to certificate an aircraft based on its weight, size or engine thrust. Currently, EASA charges an hourly fee for validation work, a process in which a non-state-of-design country certificates an aircraft produced elsewhere. The FAA does not charge fees for validating European-certificated aircraft.
"On the A380 we validated the EASA certification smoothly," says Blakey. "We intend to do the same thing on the Boeing 787, with the FAA doing the bulk of the work on certification."
Source: Flight International
