1 / 18

Changed Product Rule Advisory Material, Training and Implementation Update June 2003

Changed Product Rule Advisory Material, Training and Implementation Update June 2003. Overview. Advisory Material Training Implementation Continuous Improvement Team Website Lessons Learned . Advisory Material. AC 21.101-1 change 1 signed --April 2003

kentaro
Download Presentation

Changed Product Rule Advisory Material, Training and Implementation Update June 2003

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Changed Product RuleAdvisory Material, Training and ImplementationUpdateJune 2003

  2. Overview • Advisory Material • Training • Implementation • Continuous Improvement Team • Website • Lessons Learned

  3. Advisory Material • AC 21.101-1 change 1 signed --April 2003 • NPA 21-32 adopted by JAAC 19 November 2002: • Replaces ACJ to JAR 21.101 adopted by NPA 21-28 and published in amendment 4 to JAR-21 • To be published in amendment 5 to JAR-21, 01 June 2003 • TCCA AMA 500/16 – prior to June 2003 • Fully harmonized advisory material in accordance with CST Terms of Reference

  4. Advisory Material • Comparison between adopted NPA 21-32 and AC 21.101-1 change 1 • Differences based on current JAR/FAR differences, e.g., Administrator vs. Authority, other category products • Minor editorial differences

  5. Internal Guidance • Each Authority developing guidance based on principles clarified in the AC • Temporary Guidance Material (TGM) for JC/VP, JVP based on VI and JSTCP agreed by CST in May 2003 • FAA Order 8110. 48 – signed April 2003 • TCCA Aircraft Certification Policy Letter (ACPL) and Staff Instruction (ACSI) • Policy development coordinated among Authorities

  6. Training Development • TCCA, FAA, JAA, industry participated in joint training development • All materials shared among Authorities • JAA Prototype in Hoofddorp – 2-3 April • FAA Prototype in Ft. Worth – 26-27 March • TCCA Prototype – 25-27 February

  7. Training Delivery • FAA • Part 23 Classroom – Wichita, April 29-30 • Part 25 Classroom – Seattle, May 5-6, May 7-8 • Part 27/29 Classroom – Ft. Worth, May 14-15 • Part 33/35 Classroom – Burlington, May 28-29 • Students are key program managers, project officers, industry

  8. Training Delivery • FAA • Three three-day Interactive Video Teletraining sessions • 13-15 May • 20-22 May • 3-5 June • Students are mix of certification engineers, industry • Trainers for classroom and IVT are mix of FAA, JAA, TCCA, industry

  9. Training Delivery • TCCA • Train-the-Trainer/Prototype: February 25-27 • Seven specialist training offerings across Canada • 25-26 March in Ottawa • 15-16 April in Toronto • 7-8 May in Vancouver • 13-14 May in Calgary • 27-28 May in Halifax • 28-29 May in Montreal • 3-4 June in Ottawa

  10. Training Delivery • JAA • Phase 1 for CST, subCST,key PCMs, selected certification specialists and industry trainers (approx. 100 participants) (FAA trainers participating) • JAA prototype session - April 2-3 - CJAA • Session 1 – LBA, May 21-22 • Session 2 – DGAC-F, April 23-24 • Session 3 – CAA-UK, 28-29 May • Session 4 – Vienna, 14-15 May (engine/propeller)

  11. Training Delivery • JAA • Phase 2 for remainder of personnel in second half of 2003 (number TBD) • Approach decided by CST in May meeting: Based on minimising cost while keeping consistency of training delivery. Training sessions organised in NAAs, open to other NAAs and industry (on availability of seats). CJAA session if needed. • Training after Phase 2 dependent on actual needs (EASA)

  12. Training Noteworthy Points • US industry participated with Authority(ies) in development and delivery of materials • Industry ( for JAA focus on industry trainers ) and Authority will be trained together • critical that Authority and industry hear the same message • Materials will be subsequently incorporated into standard curriculum for new certification specialists

  13. ImplementationJAA • First four months (June-Sept) implementation under JAA and national authorities • After Sept 28 IR 21 applicable: EASA responsibility • Classification of significant/not significant changes and effect on JC/VP, JVP based on VI and JSTCP

  14. ImplementationCIT • FAA developed TOR for a Continuous Improvement Team • FAA, JAA, TCCA membership • Industry input • JAA CST has decided on a JAA CIT to participate in the harmonisation CIT

  15. ImplementationCIT • Continuous Improvement Team (CIT) • Allows us to monitor the CPR process after June 10 • Review emerging issues to insure a continuing common approach • Review alternate proposed best practices to insure common approach (e.g. for impractical exception) • Exchange experiences and decisions within FAA,JAA and with other authorities • Provide a forum for industry input • Support the FAA website with new processes, procedures, lessons learned and examples (include examples for future update of appendix 1 of AC(J)). • Review decisions to evaluate program success

  16. ImplementationWebsite • Changed Product Rule website • Frequently Asked Questions • Program updates • Supplement to Appendix 1 Tables

  17. Lessons Learned • When projects are extended over a long period of time (like this one), players and perspectives change. • Developing the AC with input from various authorities and international industry representatives results in compromises and understandings that vary based on the coming-in position of each party.

  18. Lessons Learned • During the implementation phase we learn that different authorities have varying degrees of understanding of the agreements reached and, therefore, what the AC means/says. (This may result from pre-conceived notions of what the certification basis should be for various types of design changes and products.) • We must communicate “why” the approach to establishing the certification basis is changing…and have a compelling reason for the “why.” Successful change can not beperceived as change for change sake.

More Related