GM1 21L.B.16(a)(2) Management system

• ED Decision 2023/013/R found in: Initial Airworthiness and Environmental Protection (748/2012) Part-21 Part-21L (Jul 2024)

GM1 21L.B.16(a)(2) Management system ED Decision 2023/013/R SUFFICIENT PERSONNEL (a)     This GM on the determination of the required personnel is limited to the performance of certification and oversight tasks, excluding any personnel that are required to perform tasks subject to any national regulatory requirements. (b)     The elements to be considered when determining the required personnel and planning their availability may be divided into quantitative and qualitative elements, and there should be, at least: (1)     quantitative elements in accordance with [AMC1 21L.B.16](#_DxCrossRefBm1649098192); and (2)     the following qualitative elements: (i)      the size, nature and complexity of the activities of overseen organisations, taking into account: (A)     the privileges of the organisation (if applicable); (B)     the type of the approval (if applicable) and the scope of the approval/declaration; (C)     possible  certification to industry standards; (D)     the number of personnel; and (E) the organisational structure and the existence of subcontractors; (ii)     the safety priorities identified; (iii)     the results of past oversight activities, including audits, inspections and reviews, in terms of risks and regulatory compliance, taking into account: (A)     the number and the levels of findings; (B)     the time frame for the implementation of corrective actions; and (C)     the maturity of the management systems implemented by the organisation, and their ability to effectively manage safety risks; and (iv)     the size and complexity of the Member States’ aviation industry, and the potential growth of activities in the field of civil aviation, which may be an indication of the number of new applications, and of changes to existing certificates, approvals, declarations, and authorisations to be expected. (c)      Based on existing data from previous oversight planning cycles, and taking into account the situation within the Member States’ aviation industry, the competent authority may estimate: (1)     the standard working time required for processing applications for new certificates, approvals and authorisations, or registration of declarations; (2)     the number of new certificates and approvals to be issued, or registrations of declarations for each oversight planning period; and (3)     the number of changes to existing certificates, approvals, authorisations and declarations to be processed for each oversight planning period. (d)     In line with the competent authority’s oversight policy, the following planning data should be determined: (1)     the standard number of audits to be performed per oversight planning cycle; (2)     the standard duration of each audit; (3)     the standard working time for audit preparation, on-site auditing, reporting, and follow‑up, per inspector; (4)     the standard number of unannounced inspections to be performed; (5)     the standard duration of inspections, including the preparation, reporting, and follow-up, per inspector; and (6)     the minimum number and required qualifications of inspectors for each audit/inspection. (e)     Standard working time could be expressed either in working hours per inspector, or in working days per inspector. All planning calculations should, then, be based on the same units (hours or working days). (f)      It is recommended to use a spreadsheet application to process the data defined under points (c) and (d) to assist in determining the total number of working hours/days per oversight planning cycle required for certification, oversight and enforcement activities. This application could also serve as a basis for implementing a system for planning the availability of personnel. (g)     The number of working hours/days per planning period for each qualified inspector that may be allocated for certification, oversight and enforcement activities should be determined, taking into account: (1)     purely administrative tasks not directly related to certification and oversight; (2)     training; (3)     participation in other projects; (4)     planned absences; and (5)     the need to include a reserve for unplanned tasks or unforeseeable events. (h)     The determination of working time available for certification, oversight and enforcement activities should also consider, if applicable: (1)     the use of qualified entities; (2)     cooperation with other competent authorities for approvals that involve more than one Member State; and (3)     oversight activities under a bilateral aviation safety agreement. (i)      Based on the elements listed above, the competent authority should be able to: (1)     monitor the dates when audits and inspections are due, and when they were carried out; (2)     implement a system to plan the availability of personnel; and (3)     identify possible gaps between the number and the qualifications of personnel and the required volume of certification and oversight. Care should be taken to keep planning data up to date in line with changes in the underlying planning assumptions, with a particular focus on risk-based oversight principles. ##### GM1 21L.B.16(a)(2) Management system *ED Decision 2023/013/R* **SUFFICIENT PERSONNEL** (a) This GM on the determination of the required personnel is limited to the performance of certification and oversight tasks, excluding any personnel that are required to perform tasks subject to any national regulatory requirements. (b) The elements to be considered when determining the required personnel and planning their availability may be divided into quantitative and qualitative elements, and there should be, at least: (1) quantitative elements in accordance with [AMC1 21L.B.16](#_DxCrossRefBm485231689); and (2) the following qualitative elements: (i) the size, nature and complexity of the activities of overseen organisations, taking into account: (A) the privileges of the organisation (if applicable); (B) the type of the approval (if applicable) and the scope of the approval/declaration; (C) possible certification to industry standards; (D) the number of personnel; and (E) the organisational structure and the existence of subcontractors; (ii) the safety priorities identified; (iii) the results of past oversight activities, including audits, inspections and reviews, in terms of risks and regulatory compliance, taking into account: (A) the number and the levels of findings; (B) the time frame for the implementation of corrective actions; and (C) the maturity of the management systems implemented by the organisation, and their ability to effectively manage safety risks; and (iv) the size and complexity of the Member States’ aviation industry, and the potential growth of activities in the field of civil aviation, which may be an indication of the number of new applications, and of changes to existing certificates, approvals, declarations, and authorisations to be expected. (c) Based on existing data from previous oversight planning cycles, and taking into account the situation within the Member States’ aviation industry, the competent authority may estimate: (1) the standard working time required for processing applications for new certificates, approvals and authorisations, or registration of declarations; (2) the number of new certificates and approvals to be issued, or registrations of declarations for each oversight planning period; and (3) the number of changes to existing certificates, approvals, authorisations and declarations to be processed for each oversight planning period. (d) In line with the competent authority’s oversight policy, the following planning data should be determined: (1) the standard number of audits to be performed per oversight planning cycle; (2) the standard duration of each audit; (3) the standard working time for audit preparation, on-site auditing, reporting, and follow‑up, per inspector; (4) the standard number of unannounced inspections to be performed; (5) the standard duration of inspections, including the preparation, reporting, and follow-up, per inspector; and (6) the minimum number and required qualifications of inspectors for each audit/inspection. (e) Standard working time could be expressed either in working hours per inspector, or in working days per inspector. All planning calculations should, then, be based on the same units (hours or working days). (f) It is recommended to use a spreadsheet application to process the data defined under points (c) and (d) to assist in determining the total number of working hours/days per oversight planning cycle required for certification, oversight and enforcement activities. This application could also serve as a basis for implementing a system for planning the availability of personnel. (g) The number of working hours/days per planning period for each qualified inspector that may be allocated for certification, oversight and enforcement activities should be determined, taking into account: (1) purely administrative tasks not directly related to certification and oversight; (2) training; (3) participation in other projects; (4) planned absences; and (5) the need to include a reserve for unplanned tasks or unforeseeable events. (h) The determination of working time available for certification, oversight and enforcement activities should also consider, if applicable: (1) the use of qualified entities; (2) cooperation with other competent authorities for approvals that involve more than one Member State; and (3) oversight activities under a bilateral aviation safety agreement. (i) Based on the elements listed above, the competent authority should be able to: (1) monitor the dates when audits and inspections are due, and when they were carried out; (2) implement a system to plan the availability of personnel; and (3) identify possible gaps between the number and the qualifications of personnel and the required volume of certification and oversight. Care should be taken to keep planning data up to date in line with changes in the underlying planning assumptions, with a particular focus on risk-based oversight principles.