Frequently asked questions

Participants in a civil air demonstration must meet certain qualification and experience requirements. These requirements are detailed in Article 10 of Royal Decree 1919/2009 and Annex II thereto.

Yes, it is necessary to have specific insurance for participation in the air demonstration, differentiated from compulsory insurance for aircraft and other participants, in accordance with Article 32 of Royal Decree 1919/2009.
Article 33 of the same Royal Decree establishes the minimum increases in the amount of the minimum civil liability cover.

The powers of the demonstration director are detailed in Article 7 of Royal Decree 1919/2009.
With regard to their functions and responsibilities, they are set out in article 6 of the aforementioned Royal Decree.

A declaration of conformity is required for all demonstrations except for the cases referred to in Article 26 of Royal Decree 1919/2009 of 11 December 2009, which are as follows:

• Events involving exclusively manned balloons.
  • Demonstrations consisting exclusively of parachuting exhibitions.
  • Exhibitions which limit the following activities:
• Non-motorised skydiving, hang-wing and paragliding;
• Wings delta and paragliding with motor or model aircraft.
• Demonstrations or restricted-access civil air exhibits not open to the general public.

In such cases the organiser must submit a responsible statement at least fifteen (15) days before the date of the event.

The application form for the issuance of a declaration of conformity is set out in Annex IV to Royal Decree 1919/2009 of 11 December.
In addition, it must take into account the provisions of Article 28 of the aforementioned Royal Decree in relation to the information to be included together with the request.

 Where a provision of the implementing legislation or reference material within the scope of competence of the Airport Inspections Division requires specific approval by EASA, the person concerned must complete the official application model (see Model) and, together with the required documentation in each case, and proceed to its processing at the Agency through official registration.

The following is schematically showing the administrative flow to be followed in these cases:

If an inspected data subject establishes another possible mode (or alternative means of compliance) to the permissible mode (or acceptable means of compliance), developed in an ITE or GUI, it shall demonstrate that its alternative has and maintains a level of safety comparable to that of the permissible mode. To this end, it is recommended that the interested party carry out an analysis or risk management, preferably the framework of its Safety Management System (SGS), which demonstrates such equivalence. In the corresponding process, AESA will assess the proposed alternative compliance mode, and if it is finally compliant, it can be implemented. 
 
If express approval by EASA is required, see standard administrative approval procedure.

EASA’s objective in the field of continuous surveillance involves carrying out annual inspections at airports with more than 10 million passengers per year, and biannual inspections in the rest.

The Agency has also developed a cyclical regulatory control inspection plan that will not exceed 48 months from 2015 in a manner consistent with the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No 139/2014.

The regulatory control inspection programme provides for different types of inspection, general ones whose scope is to obtain an overview of the person concerned/object inspected, and other specific ones focused on areas of importance for operational safety whose mission is to deepen these areas for continuous improvement.

If, during the EASA inspection, it finds non-conformities or observations, in accordance with Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2006 of 16 May, and pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 139/2014, these are categorised in:

• Non-conformity of Level 1: in the following cases, it is not an exhaustive list of the situations that may involve this type of non-conformities:
  • Significant non-compliance with the certification bases (CB) of the airport, the applicable requirements referred to in Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 and its implementing rules, the procedures and manuals of airport managers or apron management service providers, the terms of the certificate or the content of a declaration, which reduces or poses a serious risk to safety.
  • Not to provide the competent authority with access to the facilities of airports, airport managers or apron management service providers, as defined in point ADR.OR.C.015 of Regulation (EU) No 139/2014, during normal operating hours and following the submission of two written requests.
  • Proof of obtaining or maintaining the validity of a certificate by falsifying the documentary evidence submitted.
  • There is evidence of malpractice or fraudulent use of a certificate or authorisation issued by AESA.
  • The lack of an “Accountable Manager” is evident.
  • The inspected person fails to comply with any of the provisions required by Article 34 of the Aeronautical Inspection Regulation relating to obstruction or resistance to inspection.
  • The inspected person fails to comply with any of the provisions required by Article 33 of the Aviation Safety Act relating to safety obligations.
  • The inspected person fails to comply with any of the provisions laid down in Article 50 of the Aviation Safety Act relating to administrative offences.
• Non-conformity of Level 2: in the following cases, it is not an exhaustive list of the situations that may involve this type of non-conformities:
  • Significant non-compliance with the certification bases (CB) of the airport, the applicable requirements referred to in Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 and its implementing rules, the procedures and manuals of airport operators and apron management service providers, the terms of the certificate, the certificate or the content of a declaration, which could reduce safety or constitute a risk to it.
  • Non-compliance with the procedures and manuals of airport managers at certified airports.
  • Non-compliance with SGS at certified and non-certified airports.
  • Non-compliance with the provisions of the Technical Standards at uncertified airports.
• Remark: in cases that do not require Level 1 or Level 2 non-conformities. A non-exhaustive list of cases that will correspond to an observation is provided:
  • represents a proposed improvement based on future implementing regulations;
  • represents a proposed improvement based on good uses recommended by international standards;
  • it represents a proposed improvement based on previous experience at other airports. 

It is recommended that the “ Communication on changes in EASA ' s categorisation of non-conformities” be read.

The inspected person has the following deadlines for sending the various documents:

• Submission of documentation requested at the beginning of the inspection, in response to the Request for Documentation Communication (CSD): 10 working days, from the day following receipt of the request.
• Submission of arguments to DAI: 10 working days, from the day following receipt of the ICD.
• Submission of the PPAC: 20 working days from the day following receipt of the Minutes.
• Submission of submissions to IVPPAC: 10 working days from the day following IVPPAC reception.
• Sending of verifiable notice of remediation: maximum 15 calendar days from the date set out in the CAP for each corrective action.
• Submission of application for amendment of CAP: always before the expiry of the date set out in the CAP; in any event, in order for EASA to carry out the assessment of the amendment and notify the inspected person of its acceptance or refusal before the expiry of the CAP date, such communication should be made at least 20 calendar days before that date, except in exceptional cases.