Frank P. Paskiewicz Walter Gessky

1. International Production and Airworthiness Certification ConferenceFebruary 2002.Global Manufacturing Frank P. Paskiewicz Walter Gessky

2. Production and Airworthiness CertificationConference - February 2002 • Areas discussed during the Production and Airworthiness conference: • Structure and impact of EASA, • Co-ordination between Design and Production, • Industry activities through the IAQG, • Authority oversight of distributors, • e-Commerce and e-Forms, • Global Manufacturing • This presentation will center on Global Manufacturing. • The objective of which was to establish a process for working together to solve common issues and to standardize or institute common requirements and processes.

3. Goal Enhance safety by working with the international airworthiness authorities and industry to establish a system where aircraft products and parts: • can be manufactured anywhere, • move quickly and seamlessly to the end user, • are supported by electronic documentation • and there is one authority action for each industry action.

4. Why This Initiative • Increased reliance on global suppliers • Supplier control consistently top problem area • Independent Authority/Industry initiatives have had minimal positive effect • FAA audit data • Feedback from other authorities • Data is flat • Industry’s move toward common requirements and processes • Authorities must evolve with industry

5. Why This Initiative • FAA/JAA Conference • Few Production & Airworthiness representatives • Little time dedicated to Production & Airworthiness issues • Saw a need for a separate meeting that would include more than FAA and JAA countries. • Created the Production & Airworthiness Conference for countries that have a bilateral with the U.S.

6. Goal Enhance safety globally by working in partnership with the international airworthiness authorities and industry to establish a system where aircraft products and parts:……... • Authority actions • Industry actions

7. Authorities • Production & Airworthiness Conference • First held in Brussels, BL, February 1999 • A one-sided series of presentations by the FAA on our processes with discussion from other authorities on how the FAA could change to better fit their processes. • Second held in Washington, DC, August 2000 • More of a “let’s get to know one another through presentations from other authorities” meeting • Third held in Brighton, UK, February 2002 • Working meeting where agreements were made to work towards common processes and requirements

8. Authorities • Brighton Meeting • Attended by approximately 40 attendees representing 20 countries • Focus of meeting was on Global Manufacturing • Authority Actions • Common Requirements and Processes in PAH Surveillance, Supplier Control and Airworthiness Certification • Industry Actions • Brainstorming identified 60 ideas of which 85% were for the authorities and 15% were for industry

9. Authorities • Brighton Meeting (continued) • Identified the top ten issues - agreed to work three • Common definitions of terms between authorities (priority parts, supplier, subcontractor, etc.) • Establish minimum supplier surveillance standards. • Authorities to set common supplier control standards for manufacturers at some common level • Recognition of local NAA Production Approval system as basis for common surveillance process

10. Authorities • Brighton Meeting (continued) Remaining seven issues from the “Top Ten” • Global standardisation of authority requirements and procedures • More agreements between authorities – recognise end products – not necessarily harmonise systems • Common requirements – common rules (include other parties such as subcontractors) • Harmonise method to determine the level of surveillance that authorities will perform on their manufacturers • Standardise the content of contractor-subcontractor agreement • Manufacturers only to subcontract activity that they have the technical competence to control. Only subcontract capacity not capability • Create common requirements for auditing subcontractors by the contractors and use for authorities surveillance process

11. Current Process FAA collaborates with: IAQG AAQG Problem AIA GAMA ARSA ASA

12. Current Process Results IAQG AAQG Problem AIA GAMA ARSA ASA No shared vision Poor planning Poor coordination Redundant efforts Missed industry segments Missed targets

13. Current Initiatives The IAQG / AAQG have approximately 16 open Projects and Studies

14. Future Direction • Linking authority and industry initiatives through involvement with: • Production and Airworthiness Conference • FAA/JAA Harmonization Conference • Industry Association Meetings • Establish work program based on: • high risk/historical problems • current initiatives under way • new initiatives based on “Goal” statement • feasibility & return on investment • Establish working groups to design/deliver products • Not Necessarily Industry Group/Association Specific

15. Summary • Global Manufacturing remains significant challenge • Past & present initiatives have had minimal success • Lack of communication & coordination between Authorities and Industry have been counter productive • Significant improvements can only be realized if the Authorities and Industry collaborate: • common goals • joint planning • joint initiatives • industry-wide acceptance & implementation • monitoring effectiveness

16. Questions