Avionics Digital Edition

International Civil Aviation Regulatory Updates

International civil aviation regulatory updates.

Here are some of the latest updates aviation professionals should be aware of across all segments of the industry, especially those relating to roles associated with designing, manufacturing, installing, servicing and operating avionics systems.


Canadian ADS-B Airspace Mandate Delayed Amid Transponder Supply Chain Constraints

The start of Canada’s Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B) Out airspace mandate has been delayed by six months amid "supply chain limitations and backlogs" associated with aircraft transponder equipment, according to an Aug. 2 announcement from Nav Canada.

In February, the Canadian air navigation service provider (ANSP) introduced its new ADS-B Out airspace mandate in partnership with Transport Canada—the state civil aviation regulator—that would require aircraft flying in Class A and B airspace to be equipped with transponders that meet the applicable standard of DO-260B by Feb. 23, 2023. Now, under a new update to the policy, aircraft operating in Class A airspace only, need to be equipped with ADS-B Out by Aug. 10, 2023.

Additionally, aircraft operating in Class B airspace need to meet the equipage requirements by May 16, 2024. The third phase of the updated policy applicable to aircraft operating in Class C, D and E airspace remains unchanged from the timeline that was rolled out in February. Those aircraft need to be equipped “no later than 2026.”

While not referencing any specific avionics manufacturers by name, Nav Canada updated the timeline for its ADS-B mandate based on "customer feedback regarding supply chain limitations and backlogs to acquire and install the appropriate transponder, as well as current equipage levels in each class of airspace," according to their announcement.

EASA Proposes Delay to ELT Distress Tracking Regulation for Passenger Jets

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has proposed a two-year delay to its Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS)-inspired regulation requiring commercial passenger jets to be equipped with emergency locator transmitters of a distress tracking type (ELT (DT)), according to a draft rulemaking amendment released by the agency.

EASA's proposed delay focuses on the autonomous distress tracking (ADT) portion of the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) adoption of Amendment 39 to Annex 6 of its normal aircraft tracking standards and recommended practices (SARPs) in November 2015. The SARPs require operators to track aircraft operating under normal flight conditions every 15 minutes with an additional abnormal-event minute-by-minute tracking capability.

The ADT requirement adopted by EASA applies to aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of over 27,000 kg (60,000 pounds) with an airworthiness certificate issued after Jan. 1, 2023, would have to autonomously transmit position information once every minute or less when that aircraft is operating under distressed conditions or those that could cause a diversion or accident. ICAO's GADSS initiative—implemented by civil aviation regulators on an agency-by-agency basis—was developed after the 2014 disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370.

In 2018, EASA adopted the ADT portion of ICAO's Standard 6.18.1 as "point CAT.GEN.MPA.210," or ‘Location of an aircraft in distress — Aeroplanes’ of Annex IV (Part-CAT) to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012. However, several factors summarized in their proposed amendment to CAT.GEN.MPA.210 have led EASA to seek a delay for the timing of the regulation due to delays aircraft manufacturers are experiencing in getting newly manufactured aircraft equipped with ELTs that meet the mandate’s performance objectives.

According to EASA, in March 2022, the International Coordination Council of Aerospace Industry Associations (ICCAIA) sought a delay to ICAO's applicability of Standard 6.18.1 on behalf of the aircraft manufacturers it represents. Airbus simultaneously petitioned EASA for a similar delay to the applicability of CAT.GEN.MPA.210. A series of meetings held with groups representing airlines, EASA member states, and other stakeholders impacted by EASA's ELT DT regulation ultimately led to the agency deciding on implementing a delay.

"The intelligence gathered through those meetings and discussions revealed that aircraft manufacturers are facing significant delays in certification due to the time needed to fit the aeroplanes concerned with the necessary equipment," EASA writes in the proposed delay. "The COVID-19 pandemic affected the planned delivery in 2022 of 700–1000 aeroplanes with an MCTOM of more than 27,000 kg, which had been designed and manufactured without the equipment needed to comply with point CAT.GEN.MPA.210 and Standard 6.18.1."

Under EASA's proposed delay, the ELT (DT) equipage installation deadline moves from Jan. 1, 2023, to Jan. 1, 2024, with a new applicability date of Jan. 1, 2025. This option was found to be ideal because it "would keep the number of ADT-system-equipped aircraft largely at the 2023 baseline figures, while still providing industry with the two-year deadline extension that it requested," according to EASA.

FAA Changes Pre-Flight Requirements for Selective Aware ADS-B Receivers

In May, the FAA updated its policy requirements for operators of aircraft featuring Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) Out equipment using the Selective Availability (SA)-Aware GPS receivers in ADS–B rule airspace.

Previously, operators using these receivers were required to perform a preflight availability prediction test prior to operating in ADS-B rule airspace to ensure their transponders would accurately show position updates to controllers.

The FAA's new policy became effective May 10, 2022, eliminating this pre-flight requirement based on even years of data showing that ADS-B Out SA-Aware GPS receivers can “consistently provide an equivalent availability to that of radar at 99.9 percent or greater operational availability.”

"Aircraft equipped with SA- Aware GPS receivers during periods of GPS constellation degradation that negatively impact the ability of ADS–B Out equipment to meet performance requirements associated with the rule will be deemed compliant with the ADS–B Out rule requirements," the agency writes in the policy update. "Therefore, the operators of aircraft equipped with position sources that meet the performance requirements of TSO–C196 (SA-Aware) is not required to perform a preflight availability prediction to fulfill their § 91.103 due diligence obligation."


GAO Report Compares EASA, FAA Approaches to Certifying Commercial Airplanes

A new report published by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found key differences in the approaches used by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and Federal Aviation Administration toward compliance and verification engineering activities for the certification of new and modified commercial airplane designs.

The 48-page report was compiled by GAO based on interviews primarily with officials representing both civil aviation regulatory agencies, Airbus, Boeing, and other aviation industry OEMs. One interesting discovery reported by GAO’s researchers pertains to the difference in how EASA regulates Design Organisations (DO) versus FAA’s regulation of companies that have Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) approvals.

“FAA is responsible for making airplane certification compliance determinations but generally delegates the vast majority of these determinations for manufacturers to make on its behalf,” GAO writes in the report. “However, EASA officials told us manufacturers in Europe are themselves responsible for making all compliance findings and verification under oversight of EASA.”

EASA prohibits its own compliance verification engineers from providing verification compliance services on systems or designs that they have worked on as an employee of that manufacturer. The European agency also requires Design Organisations to feature participation from all engineering units of an OEM’s company that contribute directly to a product’s design, type certification, and compliance activities. Aviation OEMs in the U.S., however, typically only have certification compliance activities completed by those experts who have been delegated to complete them within a specialized ODA unit of the company.

Based on interviews with multiple aviation stakeholders about this difference between how DOs and ODAs are structured, GAO concludes that “because a Design Organisation includes more parts of the manufacturer’s company, this means EASA evaluates more aspects of the manufacturer’s company when approving and overseeing the Design Organisation than FAA does for ODA holders.”