44
JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 1 of 44 ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05 Comments to JAA MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 JAAC - MARCH 2005 End of comment date: 01 April 2004 Comments to be send to: Ms Sarah Doherty Cmt Commentor Affected paragraphs 001 CAA Slovak Repulic No Comment/Support Adoption 002 Dassault Explanatory Note JAR-MMEL/MEL.045 003 Dassault JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(i) 004 Dassault Subpart B - MMEL 005 Dassault JAR-MMEL/MEL.050(a) 006 Police Aviation Services UK JAR-MMEL/MEL.050(a) 007 Police Aviation Services UK JAR-MMEL/MEL.080/.081 JAR-MMEL/MEL.090 008 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.050 009 MOT Austria JAR MMEL/MEL.010 010 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.075 011 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(d) & ACJ.065 012 MOT Austria ACJ MMEL/MEL 065 Appendix 1 013 MOT Austria ACJ MMEL/MEL 065 Appendix 1 014 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.090 015 CAA Denmark JAR-MMEL/MEL.005 016 CAA Denmark JAR-MMEL/MEL.050 017 CAA Denmark JAR MMEL/MEL.060(b) 018 CAA Denmark ACJ-MMEL/MEL.075 019 LBA JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE ......JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 2 of 44 ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    21

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 1 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Comments to JAA MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 JAAC - MARCH 2005

End of comment date: 01 April 2004 Comments to be send to: Ms Sarah Doherty

Cmt Commentor Affected paragraphs

001 CAA Slovak Repulic No Comment/Support Adoption

002 Dassault Explanatory Note JAR-MMEL/MEL.045

003 Dassault JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(i)

004 Dassault Subpart B - MMEL

005 Dassault JAR-MMEL/MEL.050(a)

006 Police Aviation Services UK JAR-MMEL/MEL.050(a)

007 Police Aviation Services UK JAR-MMEL/MEL.080/.081 JAR-MMEL/MEL.090

008 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

009 MOT Austria JAR MMEL/MEL.010

010 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.075

011 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(d) & ACJ.065

012 MOT Austria ACJ MMEL/MEL 065 Appendix 1

013 MOT Austria ACJ MMEL/MEL 065 Appendix 1

014 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.090

015 CAA Denmark JAR-MMEL/MEL.005

016 CAA Denmark JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

017 CAA Denmark JAR MMEL/MEL.060(b)

018 CAA Denmark ACJ-MMEL/MEL.075

019 LBA JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 2 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Cmt Commentor Affected paragraphs

020 LBA ACJ MMEL/MEL.060(b)

021 Eurocopter Germany JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

022 TYROLEAN AIRWAYS MMEL/MEL .090/ACJ .065 Appendix 1

023 UK CAA Explanatory Note

024 UK CAA Explanatory Note

025 UK CAA Explanatory Note

026 UK CAA Forward

027 UK CAA JAR-MMEL/MEL.005 (h)

028 UK CAA JAR-MMEL/MEL.005 (o) and (p)

029 UK CAA Subpart B - MMEL

030 UK CAA JAR MMEL/MEL.010/ACJ MMEL/MEL .010

031 UK CAA JAR-MMEL/MEL.020

032 UK CAA JAR-MMEL/MEL.035

033 UK CAA JAR-MMEL/MEL.045

034 UK CAA ACJ MMEL/MEL.055

035 UK CAA JAR MMEL/MEL.060(b)

036 UK CAA General/Variation Editorial

037 UK CAA ACJ MMEL/MEL.035

038 UK CAA ACJ MMEL/MEL.040/080

039 CAA Czech Republic JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

040 US ALPA JAR MMEL/MEL.060(c)

041 US ALPA JAR-MMEL/MEL.081

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 3 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Cmt Commentor Affected paragraphs

042 US ALPA JAR-MMEL/MEL.075

043 AEA Foreword

044 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.001 (a)

045 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.001 (a)(2)

046 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(e)

047 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(i)

048 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.005(m)

049 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.005

050 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.025(c)

051 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.035(b)

052 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.040 (a) (i) (b) (c) and (d)

053 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.045

054 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

055 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.060

056 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL 060(c)

057 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.075

058 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.085

059 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.090

060 AEA ACJ MMEL/MEL.025 Appendix 2

061 AEA JAR-MMEL/MEL.045

062 AEA ACJ MMEL/MEL.055/ACJ .065 Appendix 1

063 AEA ACJ MMEL/MEL.075

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 4 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Cmt Commentor Affected paragraphs

064 AEA ACJ MMEL/MEL.081

065 AEA ACJ MMEL/MEL.065 Appendix 1

066 LFV Sweden JAR-MMEL/MEL.005

067 LFV Sweden JAR-MMEL/MEL.050

068 LFV Sweden ACJ MMEL/MEL.060(b)

069 IACA General

070 IACA General

071 IACA ACJ 065, para 8 Appendix 1

072 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.081 para 3

073 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.055

074 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.055

075 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.010(c)

076 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.010(c)

077 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.001(d)

078 IACA ACJ MMEL/MEL.001(c)

079 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.090

080 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.090 – explanatory notes

081 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.085

082 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.081 intro

083 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.075 (a)

084 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.060(c)

085 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.050(a)

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 5 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Cmt Commentor Affected paragraphs

086 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.050(a)

087 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.045(b)

088 IACA JAR-MMEL/MEL.010(a)

089 IACA JAR- MMEL/MEL.001(a)(2)

090 KLM Cityhopper General Comment

091 DGAC France No Comment

092 MOT Austria JAR-MMEL/MEL.081 Nomenclature of CRD matrix - Reviewers position

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 6 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

A = Accepted N = Noted D = Declined PA = Partially Accepted

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

GENERAL COMMENTS AND EXPLANATORY TEXT

1 001 CAA Slovak

No comment/Support adoption N

2 Expl Note to .005

066 LFV Sweden

According to this text a JAA Authority could “approve a MMEL for an operator …”, which is confusing since the MMEL is not related to the operator but rather to the aircraft type. The wording should be changed.

A The WG accepted the change. Change NPA Expl Note .005 to:

“…approve a MEL for any JAA operator (i.e. the DGAC could approve a MEL for a UK operator).”

3 Expl Note to .010

024 UK CAA The phrase "an acceptable level of safety" is introduced in place of "the required level of safety". This implies that the acceptable level of safety may be below that intended by the applicable requirements incorporated in the aircraft TC. This is a fundamental issue and should be explained and justified in detail within the NPA. This practice is inconsistent with the approach taken during, for example, the certification of FADEC systems wherein the degree of faults permitted for dispatch is limited to the extent that compliance with the type certification basis is always maintained.

D The phrase “acceptable level of safety” has yet to be defined by the JAR 25.1309 Harmonisation Working Group. However, it is the intention to allow dispatch below the intended TC requirements on a case by case basis, provided alternative means are in place to ensure an acceptable level of safety for a defined exposure time. This is controlled by the use of further provisos, operational and maintenance procedures and the rectification interval. It is normally based on a risk assessment from the TC holder, taking into account the systems safety assessment in this dispatch scenario.

The JIP on Joint Operational Evaluation Board (JOEB)

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 7 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

Administrative and Guidance Procedures will be updated to include more information on how to determine an acceptable level of safety when proposing and reviewing MMEL entries.

The Time Limited Dispatch (FADEC) faults are incorporated in the type design requirements but not necessarily the requirements for certification. FADEC faults are not normally covered in the MMEL, other than by a reference to the engine manufacturer’s data. In this case, the rectification interval and associated dispatch conditions will normally be determined from the engine manufacturer’s data.

Appendix 1 to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ MMEL/MEL.065 states that “any aircraft discrepancy message that affects dispatch will normally be at a status message level or higher. Therefore, systems conditions that result only in a Maintenance Message are not normally addressed in the MEL as they, in themselves, do not prohibit dispatch of the aircraft.” Most FADEC messages will normally be at a maintenance status, and therefore are not required to be reflected in the MMEL.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 8 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

4 Expl Note to .045

002 Dassault The MMEL Procedures document, quoted in the Expl Notes, is needed during the NPA consultation period, so as to understand the proposed JAR MMEL/MEL paragraphs.

A The information from the JIP MMEL Procedures Manual (now JAA Administrative and Guidance Material, Section One: General, Part 2: Procedures) will be included in the Explanatory Notes.

Change NPA Expl Note .045 to:

“This procedure is also defined in other MMEL Procedures document being drafted and is general policy when dealing with foreign MMELs. “

“The MMEL Procedures Manual in JAA Administrative and Guidance Material, Section One: General, Part 2: Procedures states in para 2.4.2 (b):

“The usual source [for ‘foreign manufactured’ aircraft] will be the MMEL approved by the Authority of the State of Design as modified by a JAA MMEL Supplement recommended by the JOEB for approval by the NAAs, and published by the manufacturer.”

5 Expl Note to .060(b)

025 UK CAA It is proposed here that an alternative MMEL produced or approved by another (third party) non-JAA Authority (e.g. FAA or TCCA) may be used. This is supported in principle, however this should be limited in application to those cases where the NAA has a BASA/IPA in place with the pertinent other non-JAA Authority.

D Not all JAA countries have a BASA or IPA with other non-JAA countries. However, it is possible for a JAA country to validate an MMEL from a non-JAA authority without a BASA/IPA in place. The MMEL must be subject to a legal finding from the Authority.

6 Expl Note to .081

023 UK CAA The Expl Note states that: “…this rule has been changed to allow each Authority to determine the appropriate timescale.” This suggests divergence between the Authorities. Whilst the desire by the Authorities to exercise their freedom is appreciated, it might be better to agree on

A The intent was to allow flexibility, as each NAA has their own internal procedure for dealing with Rectification Interval Extensions. The WG agreed to put a limit on this timescale of 1 month.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .081(c) to read:

“The Authority is notified of any extension granted within a timescale acceptable to the Authority, not to exceed one month.”`

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 9 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

standardisation ready for EASA. When EASA assumes responsibility for operations in 2006, the Member States will be forced to use the same timescale therefore it would therefore seem more logical to standardise now.

7 Expl Note to .090

080 IACA This paragraph is about operations outside the scope of the MEL, but the text says that the UK CAA has withdrawn their Special Procedure outside of the MMEL! Therefore, we do not understand why this procedure is changed insofar as it does not affect operations outside the MEL but not outside the MMEL. The idea of JAR/MMEL/MEL is to harmonise across JAA member states in order to achieve a level playing field. So why now revert to the situation where this can be ‘negotiated’ on a national basis?

D Reference to the UK CAA will be removed from the text, as it was a WG decision to remove this Appendix. It was agreed to remove reference to the term “Special Procedures” as this had a specific meaning in the UK, which differed from the meaning in JAR-MMEL/MEL. The intention was to simplify the procedure of operating outside the scope of the MEL, by allowing NAAs to exempt an operator from compliance with the MEL on a case by case basis. The Appendix was deemed to be too prescriptive as the Exemption can be covered under the normal NAA procedures.

Replace first para of NPA Expl Note .090 with:

“Due to the different interpretation of the term ‘Special Procedures’ in some JAA countries, all references have been removed and the associated Appendix has been deleted entirely.”

8 General Comment

069 IACA Amend JAR-OPS 1/3.030 by inserting a reference to JAR MMEL/MEL.

D This action is not addressed to the JAA MMEL/MEL WG. The action has been passed onto the Operations Sectorial Team for their consideration when reviewing JAR-OPS 1/3.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 10 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

9 General Comment

070 IACA Include, either directly or by reference, TGL 26 as this is directly linked to JAR MMEL/MEL Subpart C.

D It is not common practice to refer to a TGL in a JAR, as a TGL is essentially a temporary document. TGL 26 will not be incorporated into JAR-MMEL/MEL at this Revision 1.

10 General Comment

090 KLM The MEL of KLM fleets is in many cases more restrictive than the applicable MMEL. If an extension is require outside the MMEL limits then the operator will seek approval from the Authorities prior to the extension. In case of major problems related to the delivery of materials, complex trouble shooting etc., it is important that the operator has the option to extend items within MMEL limits.

D If an operator has a more restrictive Rectification Interval in their MEL, the Rectification Interval Extension should not be extended out to the level of the MMEL. The operator’s MEL has been made more restrictive for a good reason, and therefore this reason should not be ignored when applying a RIE.

See item 61.

11 General Comment

091 DGAC No Comments N

FOREWORD

12 Para 5 026 UK CAA The phrase "an acceptable level of safety" is introduced in place of "the required level of safety". This implies that the acceptable level of safety may be below that intended by the applicable requirements incorporated in the aircraft TC. This is a fundamental issue and should be explained and justified in detail within the NPA. This practice is inconsistent with the approach taken during, for example, the certification of FADEC systems wherein the degree of faults permitted for dispatch is limited to the extent that compliance with

D See item 3.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 11 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

the type certification basis is always maintained.

13 General 043 AEA Delete items 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Items 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 are not related to the specific JAR MMEL/MEL. Respective information should be contained in a general introduction to JARs. Item 8 belongs to “Terminology” but not to the Foreword.

PA Item 8 will be removed as this is included in JAR-MMEL/MEL.005.

Although some of the remaining items will be superseded by EASA, they may still apply to non-EU member states of the JAA. These items will be retained for clarity.

Delete item 8 from the Foreword in NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 and re-number subsequent items.

SUBPART A GENERAL

14 .001(a)(1) 044 AEA Add additional text “JAR MMEL/MEL applies to aircraft operated under JAR-OPS 1 or 3”. A statement is missing that the MMEL and MEL regulations apply to commercial operations only. This statement was initially contained but has been deleted with the Feb 1999 draft.

D JAR-MMEL/MEL applies to aircraft operated under all types of operation, not just commercial operations under JAR-OPS 1 / 3. JAR-MMEL/MEL .015 states “The MMEL shall cover the types of operation for which the aircraft is type certificated.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 12 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

15 .001(a)(1) 036 UK CAA The text should be amended to “This JAR MMEL/MEL became effective on 1 June 2000”.

PA The WG agreed that the effectivity of JAR-MMEL/MEL should be removed from .001 ‘Applicability’ and that new paragraphs for .002 ‘Effectivity’ and .003 ‘Compliance’ should be created.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .001 to read:

”(a) Limit of MEL Applicability. The MEL is applicable up to the commencement of flight.(See ACJ MMEL/MMEL .001(a).)

(b) Airworthiness Directives and other Mandatory Requirements. Where there is a conflict between the MMEL or MEL and an Airworthiness Directive or any other Mandatory Requirement, it is the data or information contained in the Airworthiness Directive or the Mandatory Requirement (e.g. Continued Airworthiness requirement) which shall override.”

Add new paragraph NPA-MMEL/ MEL-2 .002 ‘Effectivity’ to read:

“Amendments to JAR-MMEL/MEL become effective 6 months after publication.”

Add new paragraph NPA-MMEL/ MEL-2 .003 ‘Compliance’ to read:

“This JAR will not be applied retrospectively. MMELs and MELs existing prior to 1 May 2000 will continue to remain valid and applicable.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 13 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

16 .001 (a)(2) 045 AEA Rewrite: “After 1 June 2002, MELs and subsequent amendments will only be approved in accordance with JAR MMEL/MEL Subpart C.”

PA See item 15.

17 .001 (a)(2) 089 IACA Change “After 1 June 2002, new MELs will …” to “After 1 June 2002, first issued and subsequent revisions, will”

PA See item 15.

18 .001 (a)(2) 036 UK CAA As written it is unclear what the additional text "and subsequent amendments" refers to, therefore it is suggested that this phrase be moved such that the text reads: “….2002, MELs and subsequent amendments will only be approved…”

PA See item 15.

19 .005(b) 015 CAA Denmark

The Definition of “Approval by the Authority” should be consistent with the definition in JIP, Part 2, Chapter 11, item 11.1.1.

D The definition should be aligned fully with JAR 1, and reference to NAAs should be deleted as it does not appear anywhere else in JAR-MMEL/MEL and is not defined in JAR-1.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(b) to read:

“Approved by the Authority” means documented by the Authority as suitable for the purpose intended (Refer to JAR-1).”

Add a new definition in NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005:

“Authority” The competent body responsible for the safety regulation and oversight of Civil Aviation. In the context of JAR-MMEL/MEL Subpart B this means the Authority of the State of Design. In the context of JAR-MMEL/MEL Subpart C this means the Authority of the State of Operator.”

20 .005(d) 011 MOT Austria

For clarification of “Commencement of flight” add text: “The point when an aircraft begins

D This is a standard definition, relating back to ICAO.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 14 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

the first move under its own power for the purpose of preparing for take off.” This covers the case when the aircraft has to interrupt the taxi e.g. for de-icing with engine shut down.

21 .005(e) 046 AEA Harmonise with FAA by adding to “Day of Discovery” the following text: “This day is excluded from the calendar days or flight days specified in the MMEL for the rectification of an inoperative item. This provision is applicable to all MMEL items i.e. categories A, B, C and D”.

D This point is already covered by the existing text for .040 Rectification Intervals.

22 .005(h) 027 UK CAA A change has been made to the text to introduce the term "equipment". It is suggested that this should also be used in the sentences "Some systems..." so that it now reads "Some equipment..." and "...not mean that the system..." This paragraph also needs to amended to delete an historical reference to what are now commonly used systems by deleting ".... monitored by digital computers..."

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(h) to read:

“Inoperative” means that the equipment does not accomplish its intended purpose or is not consistently functioning within its design operating limits or tolerances. Some equipment has been designed to be fault tolerant and is monitored by computers which transmit fault messages to a centralised computer for the purpose of maintenance. The presence of this category of message does not necessarily mean that the equipment is inoperative.

23 .005(i) 003 Dassault Recommend that further clarification given to “JAA MMEL” by adding a paragraph requiring that concerned National Aviation Authorities formally approve MMEL. Note, for the purpose of this comment “concerned NAAs” means an Authority who registers in its own country an airplane for which the

D The JAA can only make technical findings - these are transformed into legal findings by each NAA. The JAA only make a recommendation for ’acceptance’ of the MMEL. The NAA then ‘accepts’ the MMEL thereby making it legal in their

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 15 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

MMEL is discussed. country. This process should be covered by Implementing Procedures in the JIP, rather than JAR-MMEL/MEL. The JIP will be updated accordingly.

24 .005(i) 047 AEA Rewrite the definition of JAA MMEL to read as: “(i) "JAA MMEL" - The MMEL approved by the JAA (JOEB) (or by one member-NAA on behalf of JAA?) (in the case of a type certified within the JAA area) or the source MMEL accepted by JAA (JOEB) and, if necessary, supplemented by a "JAA MMEL Supplement” (in other cases)." The wording in the Expl note is in conflict with JAR-OPS 1.030. It was assumed up to now that the JOEB ‘approves’ a new MMEL for all JAA members, or ‘approves’ a JAA Supplement to an MMEL originating from a non-JAA Authority. The term ‘endorsed’ in part (i) is not defined at all in the JAA system. What process should be applied by NAAs to approve these MMELs if the JAA does not actually approve them?

PA See item 23.

The term “JAA MMEL” should include reference to a JAA MMEL Supplement.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(i) to read:

“JAA MMEL” means the MMEL (including MMEL Supplement) which is recommended by the JAA for acceptance by the Authority.

25 .005(l) 036 UK CAA The second and third sentences should be amended as follows: "The supplement identifies any differences from the MMEL approved by the State of Design. The MMEL approved by the State of Design and...."

A ‘Source MMEL’ is not defined anywhere and the proposed terminology is more widely understood.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(l) to read:

“The Supplement identifies any differences from the MMEL approved by the State of Design. The MMEL approved by the State of Design and the Supplement constitute the JAA MMEL.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 16 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

26 .005(m) 048 AEA A "rectification interval", although named like that, should not be interpreted as a limitation to the operating time before a mandatory rectification but, in accordance with common practice in the US and Canada, be used as a limitation on the ability of an airplane to be dispatched under MEL conditions.

D The meaning of the term ‘rectification interval’ is that the defect is rectified (repaired or replaced) within the interval.

If needed, the Rectification Interval Extension can be used as a tool for extending the Rectification Interval. See JAR-MMEL/MEL.081.

27 .005(o)(p) 028 UK CAA Inconsistency with JAR/Part 21. The merging of Type Certificate and Supplemental Type Certificate (and their holders) is not accordance with the specific descriptions of a TC and the responsibilities of a TC holder as defined in JAR.21/EASA Part 21 (Paragraph 21.41) and the differentiation between the responsibilities of an STC holder (Paragraphs 21.117, 21.118A and 21.120). Unless these differentiations are made, only TC holders will be able to make changes to MMELs despite the stated responsibilities of STC holders (see also Paragraphs 21.92, 21.101 and 21.120).

A The WG agreed with the need to separate the terms ‘Supplemental Type Certificate’ (STC) and ‘Type Certificate’ (TC) as the definitions and responsibilities are different in JAR 21/EASA IR Part 21. The definitions will be aligned with JAR 21/EASA IR Part 21 for consistency.

.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(o) to read:

“Supplemental Type Certificate” is defined in JAR 21 / EASA IR Part 21.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(p) to read:

“Supplemental Type Certificate Holder” is the holder of, or applicant for, a Supplemental Type Certificate.

Add NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(q):

“Type Certificate” is defined in JAR 21 / EASA IR Part 21.

Add NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005(r):

“Type Certificate Holder” is the holder of, or applicant for, a Type Certificate.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 17 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

28 .005 (Various)

049 AEA Addition of following definitions: “(x1) "Flight Day" – A 24h period (from midnight to midnight) based on UTC or local time as selected by the operator, during which at least one flight is commenced for the affected aircraft." [The term ‘flight day’ is used by the FAA, and also in emergency medical kit in TGL 26] “(x2) “Authority” – In relation to subparts A and B “authority” means the JAA-member (National Aviation Authority) acting on behalf of the JAA (e. g. for MMEL approval) or on its own. In relation to subpart C “authority” means the competent authority which has granted the air operator’s certificate (AOC).” [JAR-MMEL/MEL often cites ‘Authority’ – the meaning of this term is unclear] “(x3) "Source MMEL" - The MMEL approved by a non-JAA authority for an aircraft type first certificated outside the JAA area (or: ...for which application for first type certification is made to a non-JAA authority).” “(x4) "NAA-MMEL" - The MMEL accepted by a member-NAA as being the national MMEL to be used as reference per JAR OPS 1.030 by operators within the NAA’s area of competence. This can be the JAA MMEL (in the case of a type certified within the JAA area) or the source MMEL, if necessary supplemented by a "NAA MMEL Supplement” (in other cases).” “(l) "JAA MMEL Supplement" - Supplement (established and approved by JOEB or by one member-NAA on behalf of

PA

PA

D

D

(x1) The WG agreed to add the definition of Flight Day provided it aligned with ICAO Annex 6 requirements. In the absence of ICAO Annex 6 requirements, an adaptation of the FAA definition will be used as the basis for JAR-MMEL/MEL. (x2) see item 19. (x3) see item 25. (x4) see item 19.

Add to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .005 the following definition:

“Flight day” means a 24 hour period, (from midnight to midnight) either UTC or local time, as established by the operator, during which at least one flight is initiated for the affected aircraft.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 18 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

JAA?) to the source MMEL if this source MMEL is not accepted by JAA as JAA MMEL without change. Its contents will be the differences from the source MMEL. “(x5) "NAA MMEL Supplement" - Supplement (established by a NAA) to the source MMEL if this source MMEL cannot be accepted by this NAA as NAA MMEL and there is no JAA MMEL. Its contents will be the differences from the source MMEL.. [what is needed for better transparency is a definition of all of the various MMEL versions which may occur].

PA

(x5) see item 25.

SUBPART B - MMEL

29 .010

030 UK CAA Whilst the change to the term "acceptable level of safety" is supported, it is believed that guidance is needed to clarify that in establishing the level of safety, consideration must be given to the possible modes of failure of the equipment rather than just to the consequences of operation with the equipment failed. Therefore addition to ACJ .010 is proposed [see attached]

D See item 75.

30 .010(a) 088 IACA Many JARs have now been replaced by EASA CS. New aeroplane types will not be certificated per JAR. Replace “in the applicable JAR.” with “in the applicable JAR or equivalent” or “in the applicable CS or equivalent”.

A JAR-MMEL/MEL should still refer to JARs at this stage. When JAR-MMEL/MEL is transitioned across to EASA, it will need to be amended to refer to the applicable EASA regulations. There are still countries that are not part of the JAA regime and most aircraft have been

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .010 (a) to read:

“The MMEL is a document that lists the equipment which may be temporarily inoperative, subject to certain conditions, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety as intended in the applicable JAR or

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 19 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

certificated under the JARs. equivalent Requirement.”

31 .010(c) 009 MOT Austria

Add the following text: “…...passenger convenience items and other non-safety related items need not be listed (see ACJ MMEL/MEL .010(c)).”

D The list of non-safety related equipment is not exhaustive and the associated ACJ will be amended to further explain what is meant by non-safety related equipment – this is based on draft FAA PL 33 “MMEL Relief for Installed Non-Safety Related Items”.

See item 73 for ACJ changes.

32 .020 031 UK CAA Amend the paragraph as follows in order to allow the STC holder to amend the MMEL: “(a) The Authority will only accept an application for the initial approval of an MMEL from the Type Certificate holder. (b) The Authority will only accept applications for the approval of changes to an already approved MMEL from either the Type Certificate holder or from an organisation having an appropriate Design Organisation Approval (see Paragraph 21.112).”

PA JAR 21.112 also states that the Authority may agree to accept application for an STC from a person who does not hold, and has not applied for, a DOA, for a change which is of a simple design. The WG agreed to the addition of para (b) but with slightly simpler wording.

Replace NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .020 with new title and text:

.020 Preparation of MMEL

“(a) The initial JAA MMEL or JAA MMEL Supplement shall be issued by the Type Certificate Holder.

(b) Amendments to the JAA MMEL or JAA MMEL Supplement shall be issued by the Type Certificate Holder or Supplemental Type Certificate Holder, as appropriate.

(c) Applications for the initial acceptance of an MMEL shall originate from the Type Certificate Holder.

(d) Applications for the acceptance of changes to an already accepted MMEL shall originate from either the Type Certificate Holder or a Supplemental Type Certificate Holder.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 20 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

33 .025 050 AEA Add sub-paragraph (c): “The JAA MMEL and any supplement shall be issued and revised as necessary by the Type Certificate Holder”

A Care must be taken not to exclude any revisions from an STC Holder.

The WG agreed to add similar text (taking into account amendments by an STC holder) to .020, under the new heading of Preparation and Approval of MMEL.

See item 32.

34 .030 036 UK CAA The final part of the sentence "…which may have a significant effect upon safety." is unnecessary and should be deleted.

A As “significant effect on safety” is difficult to define, it is accepted to remove this statement from JAR-MMEL/MEL.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .030 to read:

“The MMEL shall take into account the effects of multiple unserviceabilities which may have a significant effect upon safety.”

35 .035 032 UK CAA The acceptability of any proposed alleviation is based on both the redundancy capabilities of the system in question and the necessity for any compensatory procedures to provide safe operation of the aircraft and its systems in this ‘degraded’ mode of operation. Para .035(a) should be changed as follows: “These Procedures shall be identified to, and approved by, the Authority during…”. Para .035(b) should revert to the use of “concurrently” to ensure timely production of procedures by the manufacturer. Para .035(c) should be reinstated otherwise procedures could become out of date with the MMEL alleviation.

PA

A

A

The WG concluded that it is not necessary to approve the (O) and (M) procedures themselves during the assessment of the MMEL. It was agreed that it is sufficient for the intent of the procedure to be supplied. An additional requirement will be added to JAR-MMEL/MEL.035 for the TC and STC holder to produce MMEL procedures. Accepted, now in (c). Accepted, reinstated in (a).

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .035 to read:

“(a) Operational and Maintenance procedures are necessary to support certain MMEL items. These Procedures shall be produced and published by the Type Certificate Holder or the Supplemental Type Certificate Holder, as appropriate. The procedures shall be appropriately amended, as and when the MMEL is revised.

(b) The intent of these procedures shall be identified during the development of the MMEL. However, the procedures themselves will not be subject to

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 21 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

[This para does not require approval of (O) and (M) in the MMEL, which is at variance to para .075 which requires approval of (O) and (M) in the MEL.

approval.

(c) These procedures shall be referenced in the MMEL and published concurrently with the MMEL.”

36 .035(b) 051 AEA At present the rule proposed in the NPA does not specify who is responsible for publishing the (O) and (M) procedures. The NPA proposal of changing “concurrently with” to “in conjunction with” is not advantageous for operators. Now it would be completely legal if the DDG is published much later than the related MMEL edition, although operators may depend upon the DDG to present (o) and (m) procedures for MEL approval. Propose the following amended text: “(b) ... and published by the type certificate holder concurrently with the MMEL as a guide for operators."

A See item 35.

37 .040 036 UK CAA The opening sentence should be amended to read: "The MMEL shall provide categories A, B…"

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .040 to read:

“The MMEL shall provide categories A, B, C and D Rectification Intervals.”

38 .040 052 AEA Proposed revised text to reflect comment under .005(m) (see comment 048): “(a) (i) No standard interval is specified, however, items in this category shall be applied as stated in the “remarks and exceptions” column of the MMEL." “(b) Category B: Items in this category have a rectification interval equal to three consecutive calendar days

D The WG did not accept this change as the rectification intervals have been defined, and understood, since the original issue of JAR-MMEL/MEL in May 2000.

The WG did accept that the definition for the A category rectification could be clarified and agreed to a slight change in the

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .040 (a)(ii) to read:

“Where a time period is specified in calendar days, it shall start at 00:01 on the calendar day following the day of discovery.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 22 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

excluding the day of discovery.” “(c) Category C: Items in this category have a rectification interval equal to ten consecutive calendar days excluding the day of discovery.” “(d) Category D: Items in this category have a rectification interval equal to one hundred and twenty consecutive calendar days excluding the day of discovery.”

wording.

39 .045 033 UK CAA No allowance is made for revisions to the MMEL. It is suggested that the Paragraph should be amended as follows: .045 (a) when it is satisfied that the Type Certificate holder or Supplemental Type Certificate holder has ...". .045 (b) "... as approved by the Authority of the State of Design..." Note: In this paragraph the terms "source MMEL" and "base MMEL" are used, it is suggested that consistent terminology is required in this paragraph and throughout the whole document. .045 (c) "Where a change to the Type Certificate or the embodiment of a Supplemental Type Certificate has an effect upon the MMEL, the Type Certificate holder or the Supplemental Type Certificate holder..." [There is a need to allow the STC Holder to amend the MMEL]

PA The WG agreed to remove reference to ‘source’ and ‘base’ MMEL as these are not defined – see item 25.

It was agreed that this paragraph could be clarified.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .045 to read:

MMEL Acceptance

“(a) New JAA MMELs and amendments to existing JAA MMELs will only be accepted in accordance with this JAR-MMEL/MEL Subpart B.

(b) The JAA MMEL (including MMEL Supplement) shall be recommended to the Authorities for their acceptance. It is the responsibility of each Authority to accept the MMEL for use by their operators.”

40 0.45 053 AEA Request rewrite of paragraph [refer to comment 048]: New sub-paragraph: “(a) For aircraft types for which application for first type

D The JAA MMEL is recommended to all JAA Authorities for their acceptance. It is the responsibility of each individual Authority to accept a

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 23 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

certification is made to a JAA Authority, the JAA MMEL must be approved on behalf of the JAA by the authority responsible for oversight of the type certificate holder. Each NAA shall accept the JAA-MMEL as NAA-MMEL.” “Renumber old (a) as (b)” “Renumber old (b) as (c)” and reformat: “For aircraft types for which application for first type certification is made to a non-JAA Authority either: (i) the Source MMEL shall be accepted as JAA MMEL on behalf of the JAA by the authority responsible for oversight of the type certification holder, or (ii) if deemed appropriate, the Source MMEL shall be supplemented by a JAA MMEL Supplement approved on behalf of the JAA by the authority responsible for oversight of the type certification holder. This supplement contains the differences from the Source MMEL. Each NAA shall accept the JAA-MMEL as NAA-MMEL. If there is no JAA MMEL each NAA shall perform the same actions as assigned above to the JAA, resulting in the NAA MMEL.” Renumber old (c) as (d) In addition, we propose to change the title of this paragraph to read as “MMEL Approval/Acceptance” to comply with JAR-OPS 1.030.

JAA MMEL for their operators to use as the basis of their MEL.

See item 23.

The WG agreed to review the JIP to address what the Authority should do in the absence of a JAA MMEL i.e. follow their own National process for approving/accepting MMELs.

41 .045 061 AEA Propose a new schematic - refer to 005 D The WG agreed that the flowchart

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 24 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

new proposals. Suggest a graphical overview on the Approval process [see attached].

would not be appropriate for JAR-MMEL/MEL. However, the material is under consideration for inclusion in the JIP.

42 .045(b) 087 IACA Change text to ”a non-JAA, non-EASA authority”. Is EASA a JAA or a non-JAA authority?

D Until JAR-MMEL/MEL is transferred across to the EASA system, it will retain references to the JAA.

43 New Paragraph

029 UK CAA A new rule is required to address the preparation of an MMEL (in the same way that Paragraph .060 addresses preparation of the MEL). Suggested wording for the new rule is: “a) For aircraft initially certificated by the JAA, the MMELs for all appropriate aircraft types to which JAR-MMEL/MEL will apply shall be prepared and published by the Type Certificate holder. (b) For aircraft that are not initially certificated by the JAA the approved MMEL from the Authority of the State of Design (SoD) may be used as the JAA MMEL. If the JOEB requires differences from the (SoD) MMEL, an MMEL Supplement will also be required; this will be prepared and published by the Type Certificate holder. (c) An approved MMEL must be published prior to entry into service of the aircraft type. (d) In those cases where the introduction of a modification has an effect upon the MMEL, the Type

PA (a) See item 35. (b) See item 35. (c) Not accepted by the WG, for the following reasons: • Further justification is required

for this entry. • This new requirement would be

more appropriate in EASA IR Part 21, not JAR-MMEL/MEL.

• The applicability of this requirement is not clear - does it only apply to aircraft in commercial service, or all operations which require an MEL?

(d) See item 35.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 25 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

Certificate holder or Supplemental Type Certificate holder will be responsible for preparing and presenting the required MMEL, or Supplement, revision proposals to the JOEB for approval.”

44 General 004 Dassault Confusion for the applicability of Subpart B as far as term “JAA MMEL” is defined in MMEL/MEL .005(i) but not used in Subpart B. Is Subpart B applicable to JAA MMEL/MEL, or applicable to the MMEL formally approved by the NAAs? Also, App 2 to .025 proposes an example of MMEL Preamble, in which it states: “A MMEL is developed by the TC Holder and approved by the Authority to improve utilisation… The JAA MMEL includes those items of equipment…” This example has reinforced the confusion.

A See item 39 for changes to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .045. Subpart B is applicable to JAA MMELs (and Supplements) as defined in .005(i) – see item 24.

The wording “approved” will be removed from Appendix 2 to ACJ.025.

Change the second paragraph of Appendix 2 to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ.025 to read:

“The JAA Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) is developed by the Type Certificate Holder and approved by the Authority to improve aircraft utilisation and thereby provide more convenient and economic air transportation for the public. The JAA MMEL includes…”

SUBPART C - MEL

45 .050(a) 005 006 016 019 021 036 039 054 067 085

Dassault PAS CAA Denmark LBA Euro’pter UK CAA CAA Czech AEA LFV Sweden IACA

It appears text has been omitted. Should Read as follows: “(a) The MEL is a document that lists the equipment which may be temporarily inoperative, ….”

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .050(a) to read:

“The MEL is a document that lists the equipment which may be temporarily inoperative…”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 26 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

46 .050(a) 036 UK CAA The text should be amended to "This document is prepared by the operator for their own...".

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .050(a) to read:

“This document is prepared by the operator for their own…”

47 .050(a) 086 IACA Insert reference to acceptable level of safety, as per para .010. See also ACJ.075.

D See item 75.

48 .050(c) 054 AEA Clarification: Develop an ACJ to explain the decision making process for Non-safety related equipment.

A See item 31. Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .050(c) to read:

“Non-safety related equipment, such as galley equipment and passenger convenience items, need not be listed. Operators shall establish an effective decision making process for failures that are not listed to determine if they are related to airworthiness and required for safe operation (see ACJ MMEL/MEL .010(c)).”

49 .050(c) 008 MOT Austria

Add the following text: “…...passenger convenience items and other non-safety related items need not be listed.”

D See item 31.

50 .060(b) 017 CAA Denmark

The CAA Denmark cannot support the use of an alternative MMEL approved by another National Aviation Authority as such approvals do not provide an acceptable equivalent level of safety.

N Noted. There is no need to change JAR-MMEL/MEL.

51 .060(b) 035 UK CAA (a) The proposal, that an alternative MMEL produced or approved by another (third party) non-JAA Authority (e.g. FAA or TCCA) may be used, is supported in principle, however this should be limited in application to those cases where the NAA

A (a) See item 5.

(b) The ACJ will be clarified. See item 85.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 27 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

has a BASA/IPA in place with the pertinent other non-JAA Authority. (b) It should be added that the base MMEL is “as agreed by their NAA” where there is no JAA MMEL or TC authority MMEL, otherwise it appears to be the operator’s choice as to which MMEL they use.

52 .060(c) 040 US ALPA Fully supports the requirement for an operator to change the MEL within 90 days from the change in a MMEL.

N

53 .060(c) 055 AEA Suggest the addition of new text to (c): “(c) the type certificate holder shall actively inform the operators when a new revision to the JAA MMEL or any MMEL supplement has been published” In the case of electronic publishing it is essential to direct the attention of operators to the revision publication. Operators cannot be forced to daily check web-pages to find out if new information is available. Paper publishing always ensures compliance with above new paragraph.

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .060(c) to read:

“When a MMEL revision is issued, an operator will have 90 days from the date of revision to submit the revised MEL to the Authority. “

Add to Subpart B for MMELs as new section .046 MMEL Revisions:

“The Type Certificate or Supplemental Type Certificate holder, as appropriate, shall positively inform all known operators when a revision to the JAA MMEL (including MMEL Supplement) is published.”

54 .060(c) 056 AEA Amend the sub-paragraph to read: “(c) When a MMEL revision is issued, an operator will have 120 90 days from the date of receipt of the revision to revise the MEL”. Experience has shown 90 days is too tight for operators to update the MEL.

D The WG do not accept this comment. It was argued that the Authority may take up some of the 90 days when reviewing an MEL revision. However, the WG agreed that this requirement relates to the operator preparing the MEL for submission, and does not take into

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 28 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

account the time taken by the Authority to accept the MEL. On the basis that the Authority part of the approval process should not be included in this 90 days, the wording has not been changed.

55 .060(c) 084 IACA Replace “…date of receipt…” with “… date of revision …” More and more MMELs are placed on websites rather than sent by mail, so receipt may not be the appropriate phrase.

A See item 53.

56 .075 042 US ALPA Completely agrees with the statement that “operational and maintenance procedures are part of the MEL” etc. We support the idea that these procedures are an integral part of the compensating provisions.

N

57 .075(a) 083 IACA Clarification required “…shall be identified…” Text not clear, procedures are either incorporated in the MEL or a reference to a procedure is incorporated in the MEL.

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .075(a) to:

“Operators shall take operational and maintenance procedures referenced in the MMEL into account when preparing their MEL. An operator shall be prepared to present these procedures to the Authority during the MEL approval process.”

58 .075(d) 057 AEA Propose resort to original text: “(d) The procedures themselves, or symbols to indicate them, are required in the operator’s MEL.” The text stating “indicating their need and location” is not clear enough.

PA The WG agreed to clarify the current text.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .075(d) to:

“(d) The procedures themselves, or symbols indicating their need and reference to their location, are required in the operator’s MEL.”

59 .075(g) 010 MOT Austria

Add additional sub-paragraph: “(g) The MEL shall not be used as a tool

D The WG concluded that the existing wording in Appendix 1 to NPA-

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 29 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

for maintenance planning.” [Operators using the MEL to avoid ground times for change of life time limited equipment before the next scheduled maintenance]

MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ .065 under item 4 “Maintenance Action” is sufficient to cover this point.

60 .081 007 PAS Add additional sub-paragraph: “(e) Notwithstanding sub-paragraph (b) above, the operator may, subject to the approval of the Authority, apply to the Authority for further extension of a Rectification Interval on a case-by-case basis. Further extension will only be granted by the Authority once an assessment of the circumstances, operational requirements and nature of the individual MEL defect has been made.”

D The WG decided that the existing procedures for RIEs are adequate and clear enough.

61 .081 082 IACA Replace “… as specified in the MEL” with “… as specified in the MMEL”. By limiting the same duration requirement to the MEL in place of the MMEL, operators who add their own safety margin by making some “C” items into a “B” item, are now compelled not to do that as they cannot fall back anymore in a case of hardship. This will reduce safety.

D There is a reason for adding a safety margin. This reason still applies even if the spares are not available and an RIE is required. If an operator (or Authority) has made the MEL more restrictive than the MMEL for a safety reason, it does not make sense to ignore that reason and allow further extension to the RI specified in the MMEL.

62 .081 041 US ALPA Fully supports these requirements, especially allowing only one extension.

N

63 .081 092 MOT Austria

Extension of interval “D” would allow an increase to 240 days. The operator should be able to resolve MEL items with 120-day rectification date within the allowed interval.

D The WG concluded that it would be overly restrictive to implement this change. JAA MMELs currently take into account the potential for an extension to a D category.

64 .085 081 IACA Delete entire paragraph. Why is this D JAR-OPS 1/3.030 and ICAO Annex

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 30 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

paragraph needed at all? Pursuant to 050(a), the procedure for preparing a MEL is already approved and there is a quality system to ensure that this procedure is applied properly.

6 requires that the MEL is approved, thereby including amendments.

65 .085 058 AEA MEL approval has been a contentious issue when JAR MMEL has first been issued. Acceptance (defined in JAR 1) would be more appropriate considering that existing rules require that MMEL’s are approved and that MEL’s may not be less restrictive than MMEL’s. Even an acceptance process would enable authorities to timely intervene in case of violation of above rules. Experience has shown that the approval process is time-consuming and expensive for authorities and it decelerates the transfer of MMEL revisions into operators’ MELs. If MEL approval is unavoidable then we propose to start this paragraph with: "(a) The MEL shall be approved by the NAA responsible for the operator.” followed by "(b) The NAA shall only approve ...".

D JAR-OPS 1/3.030 and ICAO Annex 6 requires that the MEL is approved, thereby including amendments.

66 .090 014 MOT Austria

Delete text: “….on a case by case basis, provided such exemption complies with acceptable limitations in the MMEL.” Exemptions within the limitations of the MMEL are mostly not possible. Example: An aircraft is equipped with a storm scope instead of a weather radar. The storm scope is not listed in the applicable MMEL or in the operator’s MEL. In this case the operator has to use a ferry flight

D MMEL limitations should be complied with. If the item is not in the MMEL/MEL then either the MMEL/MEL should be amended or it may be possible to class the item as non-safety related equipment. In this case, JAR-MMEL/MEL .010(c) applies.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 31 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

procedure. But if the sentence is removed from the .090, the operator is able to dispatch in accordance with this para of JAR-MMEL/MEL.

67 .090 022 Tyrolean The requirement to obtain authority approval for Ferry Flights prior to commencement of the flight will lead to major economic impact to the operators since presently some authorities (their competent personnel) are not available after office hours (i.e. weekends, holidays, etc.) and the aircraft will be AOG until that personnel will be available again.

N This paragraph does not relate to ferry flights specifically – ferry flights are a separate subject from the MMEL/MEL. All reference to ferry flights has since been removed from JAR-MMEL/MEL. Operators should agree with their Authority the required procedures for ferry flights, taking into account any applicable MMEL/MEL limitations.

68 .090 059 AEA It is not compatible with the JAA’s aim for standardization and equal treatment within the JAA area to leave it up to the individual NAA to agree to a “Special Procedure” under which an operator is allowed on a case-by-case basis to go below the MEL. The JAR-MMEL/MEL should at least state the right of each airline operator to set-up such a procedure with his competent NAA, unless there are regulations, which prohibit it.

D The purpose was to allow each NAA to develop their own procedures to allow operations outside the scope of the MEL. The facility to exempt an operator from JAR-OPS (and therefore the MEL) already exists in the form of JAR-OPS 1.010. NAAs can already use their own procedures to allow such exemptions. The aim of this change was to align JAR-MMEL/MEL with JAR-OPS 1. See item 7.

69 .090 079 IACA … case by case basis .. Clarification of this phrase is needed. Some consider it to apply to individual cases of a defect. Others regard it as referring to operator by operator. The Expl Note, page 5, second paragraph, suggests the latter.

A The WG decided to remove the reference to “on a case by case basis” as this is implicit already.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .090 to read:

“Notwithstanding JAR-MMEL/MEL .081, subject to the approval of the Authority, the operator may be exempted from compliance with the appropriate MEL on a case by case basis provided such exemption

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 32 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

complies with the applicable limitations in the MMEL.”

ACJ – SUBPART A

70 .001(c) 078 IACA Clarification required: “… date of applicability …” Which date is meant? • 1 June 2002; • 6 months after Amdt 1 publication; or • date of transposition into national system?

A Once an amendment is issued, it becomes applicable e.g. when the text is changed in JAR-OPS it applies retrospectively. For products issued before, grandfather rights apply. Applicability is dependent on the latest amendment. The 2 year period was introduced to allow operators to update their MEL in line with JAR-MMEL/MEL when it was first issued.

See item 15 for changes to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .001.

ACJ .001(c) to be renumbered as ACJ .003 in accordance with new rule.

Renumber NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ .001(c) ‘Retrospective Action’ to become .003 ‘Compliance’ and move down so that it appears after existing ACJ .001(d) now (a).

71 .001(d) 077 IACA Delete “The operator’s MEL should include procedures to deal with … “ This phrase is very broadly written, is subject to interpretation and, most importantly, has no basis in the Section 1 rule, as that restricts applicability up to start of taxi and does not address the subsequent situation.

D It is the responsibility of each operator to determine whether the MEL will be used after dispatch i.e. during taxy. The ACJ wording has been developed to cover this situation, rather than make it a rule. The wording “should” has been used to indicate that this is ACJ guidance material, rather than the rule.

72 .001(d) 011 MOT Austria

For clarification of “Commencement of flight” add text: “The point when an aircraft begins the first move under its own power for the

D The WG agreed that the definition of “commencement of flight” should not be changed, as it is widely

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 33 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

purpose of preparing for take off.” This covers the case when the aircraft has to interrupt the taxi e.g. for de-icing with engine shut down.

understood. If an operator requires further clarification, they can amend their MEL to include procedures for specific scenarios such as de-icing with the engine shut down.

73 .010(c) 075 IACA What is the difference between airworthiness and certification in this respect? We believe there is none. ACJ 040/080 uses the phrase “certification status”. Proposed Text: “… not required for certification …”

A The WG agreed to remove the reference to airworthiness, as all aspects are covered by certification and operational reasons.

Change ACJ to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .010(c) to read:

“Non-safety related equipment refers to equipment that is not required for airworthiness, certification or operational reasons. In order for inoperative installed equipment to be considered non-safety, the following criteria should be considered:

(a) The operation of the aircraft is not adversely affected such that standard operating procedures related to ground personnel, in-flight personnel and/or flight personnel are impeded.

(b) The condition of the aircraft is not adversely affected such that the safety of passengers and/or personnel us jeopardised.

(c) The condition of the aircraft is configured to minimise the probability of a subsequent failure that may cause injury to passengers / personnel and/or cause damage to the aircraft.

(d) The condition does not include the use of required emergency

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 34 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

equipment and does not impact emergency procedures such that personnel could not perform them.

74 .010(c) 076 IACA Replace “… or operational reasons …” with “… or JAR-OPS”. This phrase is too vague. It is up to the operator to decide the requirements for operational reasons of many kinds. Only the operational requirements pursuant to JAR-OPS may be referred to here. (ref. JAR-OPS 1.240(a)(3) and Subparts K and L.)

D The wording has been kept general deliberately, so as not to refer to specific JARs. There may be operational reasons (such as crew workload) why an item of equipment is required for a flight, regardless of whether it is ‘legally’ required by JAR-OPS.

75 .010 030 UK CAA Requirement to provide guidance on the term “acceptable level of safety”. Consideration should be given to the modes of failure of the equipment that could have safety repercussions beyond a simple loss of function, such as: 1) the presence of wiring or connector faults that could lead to shorting and arcing if the system is dispatched with power connected. 2) faults caused by an overheating condition within an electronics module. 3) software faults which could reset in flight in an undefined state.

D The WG agreed that this proposal should be reflected in the JIP, rather than JAR-MMEL/MEL. There is still no definition of “acceptable level of safety” but there is an ongoing action on the JAR 25.1309 Harmonisation Working Group to define this statement. Once a definition has been agreed, the associated JIP will be updated.

ACJ – SUBPART B

76 .030(1) 036 UK CAA This should refer to "all combinations of unserviceabilities are considered".

A Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ .030 part 1 to read:

“MMEL Preambles should make it clear that not all combinations of unserviceabilities are considered.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 35 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

77 .035 (Proposed)

037 UK CAA An ACJ to Paragraph 035 is required to support the approval (O) and (M) procedures. Proposed Text: ”Where operational and/or maintenance procedures are specified, these should referenced to Type Certificate Holder's or Supplemental Type Certificate Holder's operational and/or maintenance procedures contained in documents such as the aircraft maintenance manual.”

PA See item 35, which has introduced changes to the rule itself, rather than new ACJ material.

78 .040/.080 038 UK CAA For readability paragraphs (3) and (4) should be interchanged. In the original (4), the colon at the end of the last sentence should be deleted. Additionally, it is suggested that the original Paragraph (3) should be replaced with the following text: “Operators may allow alleviation in their MELs for the unserviceability of equipment that is not required for Airworthiness or Certification reasons and where this equipment is not required by the Operational requirements applicable to the undertaking of a particular operation. This equipment, some of which may not be included in the MMEL, will be classified as "Non-Required Equipment" and must be listed as such in the operator's MEL. Such equipment need not have a rectification interval allocated to it. The operator's MEL entries for these items should include appropriate operational

A

D

The WG accepted this editorial change. The WG did not accept this proposal, as it has already been covered by non-safety related equipment under item 31.

Swap paragraphs (3) and (4) of NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ.040/080 and remove unnecessary colon.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 36 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

and maintenance procedures. The operator's MEL will be approved through the normal process of the appropriate NAA. When the unserviceability of non-required equipment cannot be rectified prior to dispatch, the associated maintenance procedure must be completed prior to dispatch and recorded in the aircraft's technical records. Any associated operational procedure must also be followed. Continued operation with this non-required equipment inoperative must be reviewed with the NAA every six months or whenever the nature of the operation to be conducted is changed. This review may result in further maintenance action, which may involve deactivation, inhibition, or the removal of non-required equipment by an approved procedure, or modification. The unserviceability, deactivation, inhibition or removal of this equipment must not adversely affect the safe operation of the aircraft and will not, under any circumstances, lower the aircraft’s inherent safety or fitness for flight.” [The use of this text provides a clearer definition of the equipment that may use such an alleviation, gives guidance on what additional actions may be required to safely use the alleviation and provides further control on the continuing use of the alleviation]

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 37 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

Appendix 1 to ACJ MMEL/MEL .025

Appendix 2 to ACJ MMEL/MEL .025 79 Definitions 60 AEA Proposed revised text to reflect comment

under .005(m) (see comments 048 and 052): “(a) (i) No standard interval is specified, however, items in this category shall be applied as stated in the “remarks and exceptions” column of the MMEL." “(b) Category B: Items in this category have a rectification interval equal to three consecutive calendar days excluding the day of discovery.” “(c) Category C: Items in this category have a rectification interval equal to ten consecutive calendar days excluding the day of discovery.” “(d) Category D: Items in this category have a rectification interval equal to one hundred and twenty consecutive calendar days excluding the day of discovery.”

D See items 26 and 38.

ACJ – SUBPART C

80 .055 Para 1 073 IACA Revised text: “The MEL should include the dispatch conditions associated with the type of operation being planned.” There are many other flight conditions implicit in JAR-

PA The ACJ states that the MEL should include dispatch conditions associated with Special Authorisations – though this is not an exhaustive list of the applicable

Replace first line of NPA-MMEL/ MEL-2 ACJ .055 with:

“The MEL should include the dispatch conditions associated with flights

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 38 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

OPS 1.240, Subparts K and L which are not listed in the Special Authorisations.

types of operation. The ACJ will be changed to give examples of the type of operation.

conducted in accordance with the Special Authorisations list shown in the Air Operator’s Certificate e.g. RVSM, RNAV, ETOPS etc..”

81 .055 Para 2 034 UK CAA Need for clarification over Ferry Flights ACJ does not clearly separate MEL/MMEL issues from ferry flight considerations. A ferry flight is a stand-alone operation, not formally a particular type of MEL/ MMEL operation, (although the thought processes and procedures which approve and enable ferrying are similar to those which drive MMEL.). Therefore, ferry flights seem to be outside the MEL by definition, rather than 'maybe' outside, as mentioned in the ACJ. Also, it is not clear whether the ACJ is addressing the 'no multiple failure' aspects of ferrying (with its own allowed deficiencies) in conjunction with deficiencies not directly related to the ferry configuration, as allowed under the MEL.

See item 67.

82 .055 Para 2 036 UK CAA The second paragraph (beginning “Ferry flights..”) provides for an exemption against the rule. This is not acceptable in accordance with JAR 11.045(c). It is suggested therefore that this text be relocated to JAR MMEL/MEL.055

A JAR 11.045(c) states that if it is to be permitted that an exemption may be granted from any provision of a JAR, the section one of that JAR must include a provision which conforms with ACJ 11.045(c).

Move second sentence of ACJ into the rule.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 .055 to read:

“With the agreement of the Authority, the MEL may include specific provisions for particular types of operation carried out by the operator (e.g. crew training, positioning flights, demonstration flights etc.).”

Change first paragraph of NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ .055 to read:

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 39 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

“The MEL should include dispatch conditions associated with flights conducted in accordance with the Special Authorisations list shown in the Air Operator’s Certificate. In addition, the types of operation referred to in this paragraph may include, but not be limited to, crew training, positioning flights and demonstration flights.”

83 .055 Para 2 062 AEA Add text: “Permission for such a flight, however, must be granted by the appropriate Authority before the flights takes place unless the airline operator has made an agreement with its local Authority on an authorised procedure for ferry flights.” For operational reasons it is not always practical to obtain permission from the Authority prior to the flight.

See item 67.

84 .055 Para 2 074 IACA Clarification required “… Permission for such a flight …” What is meant with such a flight? • A ferry flight; or • A ferry flight with less than equipment per the MEL

See item 67.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 40 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

85 .060(b) 020 LBA Proposed revised text to reflect JAR 21: “If a MMEL has been approved by Authority JAA for a particular aircraft type, then the operator may use a MMEL produced by the manufacturer design organisation and approved by the Authority of the State of manufacturer design.” [The JAA rules e.g. JAR 21 does not contain the term “manufacturer”, but uses “design organisation” and “production organisation”. The design organisation has the documentation of the aircraft type and consequently are able to produce the MMEL]

PA Change ACJ .060(b) to read:

“If a MMEL for a particular aircraft type has not been approved by the Authority, then the operator may use a MMEL produced by the Type Certificate Holder and approved by the Authority if the State of Design. If this does not exist, an alternative MMEL produced or approved by another non-JAA Authority (e.g. FAA, TCCA) may be used.

The use of an alternative MMEL is subject to agreement with the operator’s Authority.”

86 .060(b) 068 LFV Sweden

Proposed revised text: “… produced by the manufacturer and approved by the Authority of the State of manufacturer produced by the organisation responsible for the type design and approved by the Authority of the State of Design.”

PA See item 85.

87 .075 018 CAA Denmark

Information required indicating that operational and maintenance procedures are not necessarily part of the approval process for MEL as they are not part of the approval process in MMEL creation.

N (O) and (M) procedures are not approved as part of the MEL, but may be requested by the Authority during approval process.

See item 57.

88 .075 063 AEA Replace the first sentence of ACJ. e.g “Operational and Maintenance Procedures are part of the MEL. They are an integral part of the compensating conditions needed to maintain an acceptable level of safety, enabling the Authority to approve the MEL”. With:

D See item 57.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 41 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

“For clarification the authority may request presentation of specific (o) and/or (m) procedures in the course of the approval process.” Practically requiring the approval of (o) and (m) procedures (and all changes?) is excessive. The sentence in ACJ “(o) and (m) procedures are part of the MEL” is not in line with common understanding and would mean that in some cases the AMM is part of the MEL. It also would support arguments that all procedures must be approved as part of the MEL approval, which is overdone.

89 .081 064 AEA Rephrase para 2 (third sentence) to read as “Authorising personnel managers, who must be senior experienced technical and operational managers technical and operational adequately trained, should be listed by appointment and name. The Authority should consider the engineering competence of the operator and the acceptability of the authorising personnel managers. In many airlines managers are not specifically trained to give authorisation, but the operations engineers (not managers) are specifically trained to give such authorisations.

PA Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ .081 Item 2 to read:

“…Authorizing personnel, who must be adequately trained in technical and/or operational disciplines, should be listed by appointment and name. The Authority should consider the engineering competence of the operator and the acceptability of the authorising personnel….”

90 .081 (3) 072 IACA Clarification required: Why should the Authority provide such a document? If this is the Authority’s task, then harmonise it by making a single Form for all JAA members. Better, however is, to leave the format of this form to the

D The WG agreed that the Authority should provide the form, thereby ensuring consistency of the contents submitted by all of their operators. There is no need to create a JAA template for such a form, as this is a

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 42 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

individual AOC holder. simple task for each Authority.

Appendix 1 to ACJ MMEL/MEL .065

91 Para 5 036 UK CAA The opening paragraph refers to the letter designations being given in the “Cat” column of the MEL. As clearly shown in the Specimen format, this column header has been revised to “Rectification Interval Category”. The text in this paragraph should be changed therefore to reflect this.

A Change Appendix 1 to NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 ACJ .065 para 5 to read:

“…by the following letter designators given in the “Rectification Interval Category” column of the MEL.”

92 Para 6 011 MOT Austria

For clarification of “Commencement of flight” add text: “The point when an aircraft begins the first move under its own power for the purpose of preparing for take off.” This covers the case when the aircraft has to interrupt the taxi e.g. for de-icing with engine shut down.

D See item 20.

93 Para 8 071 IACA Add text “… in the MEL Preamble or the Operations Manual …” Why in the MEL preamble? Current App1 to 090 para (c)(2) requires the procedure to be prescribed in the Operations Manual, not the MEL preamble.

D Appendix 1 to .090 was deleted in NPA-MMEL/MEL-2. The MEL is part of the Operations Manual.

94 Para 9 013 MOT Austria

Add text to end of paragraph: “… before flights take place or is granted as part of the Operations Outside the Scope of the MEL Procedure agreed with their Authority.”

See item 67.

95 Para 9 022 Tyrolean The requirement to obtain authority approval for Ferry Flights prior to commencement of the flight will lead to major economic impact to the operators since presently some authorities (their competent personnel) are not available after office hours (i.e. weekends,

See item 67.

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 43 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

holidays, etc.) and the aircraft will be AOG until that personnell will be available again.

96 Para 9 062 AEA Add text: “Permission for such a flight, however, must be granted by the appropriate Authority before the flights takes place unless the airline operator has made an agreement with its local Authority on an authorised procedure for ferry flights.” For operational reasons it is not always practical to obtain permission from the Authority prior to the flight.

See item 67.

97 General 012 MOT Austria

Placarding procedure not mentioned in the Appendix.

A Add to Definitions in NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 Appendix 1 to ACJ .065 Item 4: “Note: To the extent practical, placards should be located adjacent to the control or indicator for the item affected; however, unless otherwise specified, placard wording and location should be determined by the operator.”

98 General 065 AEA Text Changes: i. In 9th para under item 1. Introduction “ferry” should be deleted. [contradiction with new ACJ .055, second para and with text under item 9 Ferry Flight] ii. In first para under item 2. Contents of MEL the last part of first sentence should read: “… provided that appropriate and limitations and procedures are observed.” iii. In item 5, first para: Adopt “Cat”

A

A

i. See item 67. ii. Accepted. iii. Accepted. See item 91.

Change NPA-MMEL/MEL-2 Appendix 1 to ACJ .065 ‘Contents of MEL’ para 1: “...provided that appropriate limitations and procedures are observed.”

JAA WP JAR MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 COMMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENT

JAR-MMEL/MEL NPA - 2 Comment Response Document Page 44 of 44ADOPTED BY JAAC MAR 05

Item Paragraph Comt. Org. Summary Posn. Justification Proposed text or ref.

designation to the one used in MMEL sample page. iv. In item 5, Category explanations: See text proposed for JAR-MMEL/MEL.040. (comment 052) v. Item 9: See comment ACJ 055 (comment 062).

D

iv. Declined. See item 38. v. See item 67.