Alan George/BRUSSELS
The European Commission (EC) is preparing to push radical new proposals to set up a European AviationSafety Authority (EASA) at a meeting of transport ministers later this month. The new agency, which will have sweeping powers, could be operational by 2000 according to well-placed sources in Brussels.
Any ministerial decision agreeing the broad shape of EASA would give new impetus to a project which has been dogged by delay as individual European member states have jockeyed to protect their national interests. Talks between the EC and the various interested parties have also been complicated by differences over the role of the existing Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA). The 27-member club of national civil-aviation authorities issues a wide range of aviation directives but these are not legally binding on JAA member states.
At June's meeting of the council of transport ministers, it was resolved to require national experts to formulate recommendations on the powers and tasks of EASA. Work has been under way in earnest since September, focusing in particular on how EASA will relate to member states, on the new organisation's internal structure and on its funding.
"By the end of the year, the experts will be in a position to bring to the Council some points for political decision and some proposals for further work," says the high-level source.
In spite of the work to date, there are understood to be three major areas of disagreement needing resolution. First is the question of whether EASA should be entitled to issue binding regulations in the area of airport and air traffic movement safety from the outset, or whether it should take on these tasks at some later point. Complicating this issue is the role of Eurocontrol, the Maastricht-based multi-national agency responsible for regulating en route air traffic in European airspace. Some national airport operators, meanwhile, oppose the separation of service provision and regulation, while France and Germany are pressing hard for EASA to have only limited powers in this field at its inception.
The degree of executive independence to be enjoyed by EASA, especially in the realm of type certification, is the second key area of dissent between European Union (EU) member states. There is broad agreement that the agency's executive should have a regulatory role and be able to issue type certificates. There is disagreement, however, over whether the executive itself should be empowered to promulgate certification regulations and issue certificates.
Although arguments in this area are being couched in terms of national sovereignty, an underlying problem is thought to be that senior air-safety personnel in EU member states stand to lose jobs.
The third main area of disagreement is whether, or to what extent, EASA should be empowered to make decisions affecting the funding of national civil aviation authorities. While EASA would issue type certificates - and charge for doing so - other documents, such as air operator's certificates will continue to be issued by national authorities.
These three key areas of dissent will be the subject of intensive consultation during the UK's coming six-month presidency of the EU which starts in January.
Three further and even more crucial issues will also require attention during the British presidency - if they give the issue the priority Brussels would like. First is the question of whether EASA should be established as a European Commission body created by a European Council decision, or whether it should be formed by a treaty between the EU, its member states and other European states which might wish to join.
To date, the Commission has favoured the latter and, in December 1996, adopted a proposal for the creation of an air-safety authority by a treaty. The question nevertheless remains undecided.
Secondly, the organisational structure of the new agency needs to be decided and, in particular, the relationship between EASA's executive and political levels of management.
Thirdly, it must be decided whether the decisions of an EASA formed by treaty would be directly applicable to individuals or whether the decisions would first need to be incorporated into national laws. "These three problems are interrelated. Essentially, they are political problems with serious legal implications", comments the official.
The European Community resolved to harmonise aviation rules and procedures as long ago as December 1991, but the project for the establishment of a single air-safety body has moved slowly, not least because of resistance from the national safety regulators themselves, who have been reluctant to relinquish their influence, promoting instead the JAA as an embryonic European air-safety watchdog.
Although taking the view that the JAA, as established, could not easily assume the role of a pan-European safety agency, Brussels acknowledges that the JAA has a big role to play. As Claude Probst, Head of the European Commission's Air Safety Unit, commented in a conference address this month, "rather than re-inventing the wheel and trying to develop its own proposals, the Commission decided to use the work done, and to be done, by the JAA, to build the set of common safety rules required for the Community".
The EU official says: "Now, people have a clear view of the outlines. If it were decided that EASA should be a treaty organisation, it could be operational by 2001 or 2002. If EASA were to be a Commission body, it could be in place by 2000-if everybody can agree on funding and on the location of the new agency".
Source: Flight International
