Draft DOH 03

BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE

Design Organisation Handbook (DOH)

Doc. Ref.: Issue: Page:

Design Organization Handbook (DOH)

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 1 of 91

This document is proprietary of Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document




INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 2 of 91





TABL E OF CONTENT CONTENT 1 GENERAL ........................ ................................... ....................... ........................ ....................... ....................... ........................ ....................... .............. ...8 8 1.1 Distribution List / DOH Holders............................................ ................................................................... .............................. ....... 8 1.2 List of effective chapters ........................................... .................................................................. ............................................. ...................... 9 ................................................................... .............................................. ......................... 10 1.3 Manual management ............................................ 1.3.1 Manuel Updated......................................... Updated................................................................ .............................................. ................................ ......... 10 1.4 Amendment record table ............................................ ................................................................... ....................................... ................ 12 .................................................................... .............................................. ........................................... .................... 13 1.5 Definitions ............................................. 1.6 Abbreviations .............................................. ...................................................................... ............................................... ................................... ............ 16 1.7 Reference documents ............................................. .................................................................... .............................................. ......................... 18 1.8 Other referred documents ............................................ ................................................................... ....................................... ................ 19 2 BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE DESIGN ORGANIZATION ............................21 .................................................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................ ..... 21 2.1 General........................................... 2.2 Organization of the Authorities ............................................. .................................................................... ............................ ..... 21 2.3 Applicant ........................................... .................................................................. .............................................. .............................................. ......................... 22 2.3.1 Purpose of this Manuel .............................................. ..................................................................... ........................................ ................. 22 2.3.2 Basic rules .............................................. ..................................................................... .............................................. ..................................... .............. 22 ...................................................................... ................................... ............ 23 2.4 Organization Undertaking ............................................... 2.4.1 Statement of undertaking by the Accountable Manager...................... Manager .................................... .............. 23 Statement of Undertaking by Head of Design Organization ............................. ............................. 24 2.4.2 2.5 BISP ............................................ ................................................................... .............................................. .............................................. ................................ ......... 25 .................................................................... .............................................. ............................ ..... 25 2.6 Terms of Approval ............................................. 2.6.1 Scope of work ............................................ ................................................................... .............................................. ................................. .......... 25 2.6.2 Type of products ............................................ ................................................................... .............................................. ............................. ...... 25 2.6.3 Types of technologies ............................................ ................................................................... ............................................ ..................... 25 2.6.4 Beriev Irkut Seaplane Product covered by BISP DOA ..................................... ..................................... 25 .................................................................... .............................................. ....................................... ................ 26 2.7 Organization ............................................. 2.7.1 General ............................................ ................................................................... .............................................. ............................................ ..................... 26 Beriev Irkut Seaplane Flow Chart 1............................................... 1................................................................... .................... 26 2.7.2 2.7.3 Organization Chart 2 of Beriev Irkut Seaplane.............................. Seaplane.................................................. .................... 27 BISP Organization Chart 3 ............................................ ................................................................... ................................... ............ 28 2.7.4 2.7.5 Beriev Organization Chart 4 ............................................................... ............................................................................ ............. 29 2.7.6 Ivchenko Progresss Organization Chart 5.............................................. 5........................................................ .......... 30 2.7.7 Design Organization ............................................... ...................................................................... ........................................... .................... 31 2.8 Facilities and Means........................................... .................................................................. .............................................. ............................ ..... 33 ..................................................................... .............................................. ........................................ ................. 33 2.8.1 Facilities .............................................. 2.8.2 Human Resources ............................................... ....................................................................... ............................................... ....................... 34 2.8.3 Means .............................................. ..................................................................... .............................................. ............................................ ..................... 34 3 FUNCTIONS FUNCTIONS A ND RESPONSIBIL RESPONSIBIL ITIES...................... ................................. ....................... .......................36 ...........36 ............................................... 36 3.1 Airworthiness Certification Committee (ACC)............................................. 3.2 Functions ........................................... .................................................................. .............................................. .............................................. ......................... 36 3.2.1 Head of Design Organization (HDO) ........................................... ................................................................ ..................... 36 3.2.2 Head of Design Office (Chief Engineer) Engineer) ........................................... .......................................................... ............... 37 Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 3 of 91





3.2.3 Head of Airworthiness Office (Chief Airworthiness Engineer ) ..................... 37 Certification Coordinator (Deputy Chief Airworthiness Engineer)................... 37 3.2.4 3.2.5 Compliance Verification Engineer (CVE)......................................................... 38 3.3 Design Assurance Office ...................................................................................... 39 3.3.1 Head of Design Assurance ( DOA Manager ) .................................................. 39 3.3.2 Design Organization Approval Representative ................................................. 39 3.4 Resolution of conflicts........................................................................................... 40 4 AIRWORTHINESS............................................................................................ 43 4.1 General..................................................................................................................... 43 4.2 Type Certification Process .................................................................................. 43 4.2.1 Concurrent Type Certification Process scheme ................................................. 43 Type Certification .............................................................................................. 44 4.2.2 4.3 Flow Chart of the TC-Process ................................................................................ 45 4.4 Aircraft Type Certification Documentation................................................... 47 4.4.1 Operational Documentation ............................................................................... 47 4.4.2 Maintenance Documentation ............................................................................. 47 4.5 Certification Documentation................................................................................... 49 Compliance Record............................................................................................ 49 4.5.1 4.5.2 Certification Summary for Aircraft Model ........................................................ 49 Means of Compliance ........................................................................................ 50 4.5.3 4.6 Change to Approved Type Design ..................................................................... 51 4.6.1 General principle................................................................................................ 51 4.6.2 Approval of change............................................................................................ 52 4.6.3 Responsibilities .................................................................................................. 52 Post approval...................................................................................................... 52 4.6.4 4.7 Service Bulletin Process ....................................................................................... 53 4.7.1 General ............................................................................................................... 53 4.7.2 Service Bulletin approval Statement.................................................................. 53 4.7.3 Flowchart: SB Process Overview ...................................................................... 54 4.7.4 Vendor SB.......................................................................................................... 55 4.8 Structural Repair ................................................................................................. 55 4.8.1 General ............................................................................................................... 55 4.8.2 Repair Approval Sheet (RAS) ........................................................................... 55 4.9 Concession ............................................................................................................... 58 4.9.1 General ............................................................................................................... 58 4.9.2 Classification...................................................................................................... 58 4.9.3 Responsibilities .................................................................................................. 58 4.10 Continued Airworthiness ................................................................................. 58 4.10.1 General ........................................................................................................... 58 4.10.2 Manufacturer responsibilities........................................................................ 59 4.10.3 Continued Airworthiness System .................................................................. 59 Identification of Potential Unsafe Conditions............................................... 59 4.10.4 4.10.5 Corrective actions implementation ................................................................ 59 Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 4 of 91





4.10.6 Airworthiness Review Meetings/ Progress meetings .................................... 60 Information to Operators................................................................................ 60 4.10.7 4.10.8 Responsibilities .............................................................................................. 60 Flight Tests .......................................................................................................... 61 4.11 4.11.1 Organization................................................................................................... 61 4.11.2 Responsibility ................................................................................................ 61 Aircraft configuration .................................................................................... 61 4.11.3 4.11.4 Flight test and development ........................................................................... 62 4.11.5 Certification ................................................................................................... 62 4.11.6 Flight clearance .............................................................................................. 62 4.11.7 Pre-flight Test ................................................................................................ 62 4.11.8 Certification of flight tests results.................................................................. 63 5 CO-ORDINATION BETWEEN DESIGN AND PRODUCTION ....................65 5.1 General..................................................................................................................... 65 5.2 Responsibility ......................................................................................................... 65 6 DOA MONITORING SYSTEM .........................................................................67 6.1 General..................................................................................................................... 67 6.2 Organization ........................................................................................................... 67 6.3 Monitoring program ............................................................................................. 68 Audits ................................................................................................................ 68 6.3.1 Classification Level of finding........................................................................... 69 6.3.2 6.3.3 Corrective actions follow-up.............................................................................. 70 6.3.4 Training .............................................................................................................. 70 6.3.5 Qualification and Experience............................................................................. 70 6.4 Yearly report .......................................................................................................... 70 6.4.1 Yearly review..................................................................................................... 71 6.5 Change to Design assurance System ................................................................. 72 6.6 Authorized Signatories ......................................................................................... 73 6.6.1 General ............................................................................................................... 73 Nomination and qualification of authorized signatories .................................... 73 6.6.2 6.6.3 Authorized signatories files ............................................................................... 73 6.7 List of Authorized Signature .............................................................................. 74 6.7.1 DOA Functions .................................................................................................. 74 CVE Authorized signatories .............................................................................. 75 6.7.2 6.7.3 Office of Airworthiness Authorized Signatories ............................................... 76 7 DOCUMENTATION RETENTION...................................................................78 7.1 General..................................................................................................................... 78 7.2 Handling of DOA Archives ................................................................................. 78 7.3 Sites Archives ........................................................................................................... 80 7.4 Documentation ....................................................................................................... 80 7.4.1 Certification Documents format and approval process...................................... 80 8 SUPPLIERS ........................................................................................................ 82 8.1 General..................................................................................................................... 82 Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 5 of 91





8.2 Airworthiness Participation ................................................................................ 82 8.3 Content and Structure of Interface Documents and Quality Plan ............. 82 9 APPENDIX t o par agrap h 6.3 AUDIT MATRIX............................................85 10 APPENDIX t o par agr aph 6.3.1 AUDIT REPORT & INVESTIG. SHEET 86

11 12

APPENDIX t o par agrap h 6.4 YEA RLY REPORT ....................................88 APPENDIX t o p arag raph 6.5 DOA/DOH CHA NGE REQUEST .............91

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 6 of 91






Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 7 of 91



1



GENERAL

1.1 Distribu tion List / DOH Holders

Organization

Name

Registration N°

EASA

P. MARCOUX

B01

EASA

H. WILDEGANS

B02

BISP

A. YAVKIN

B03

BISP

A. MOUSSONGO

B04

BISP

I. YARKOVOY

B05

BISP

S. SHEPELEV

B06

BISP

N. TISHCHENKO

B07

BISP

NN

B08

RESERVED

NN

B09

RESERVED

NN

B10

RESERVED

NN

B11

BISP

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 8 of 91





1.2 List of effective chapters Chapter

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Pages

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Issue N°

Date

Page 9 of 91





1.3 Manual management The Design Organization Handbook is prepared, updated and issue by BISP in Toulouse, on behalf of the Head of Design Organization. Each copy of this manual is numerically registered, BISP Office of Airworthiness manages the distribution and the verification of the application of this manual.

1.3.1 Manuel Updated The evolution of the Design Organization are two different types which are described as follows: • •

DOH amendment DOH revision

DOH revisions are issued in case of changes to the Design Assurance System that are significant to the showing of compliance or to the airworthiness of the product as defined in Part 21.A247. DOH amendments are intended to include all other changes. The DOH is updated by amendments when necessary. 1.3.1.1 Signific ant Change The Significant changes in the Design Assurance System are defined as follows : a) Changes in organization: - Change in ownership; - Relocation to new premises; - Change in the industrial organization (partnership, suppliers, design worksharing) unless it can be shown that the independent checking function of the showing of compliance is not affected; - Change in the parts of the organization that contribute directly to the airworthiness (independent checking function, office of airworthiness [or equivalent]); - Change to the independent monitoring principles. b) Changes of responsibi liti es: Change of: - Chief Executive - Head of the Design Organization - Head of Airworthiness Office - Heads of main departments - Manager of the independent monitoring function of the Design Assurance System New distribution of responsibilities affecting airworthiness. -

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 10 of 91





c) Changes in procedures Change in the principles of procedures related to: - The Type certification; - The classification of changes as "major" or "minor"; - The treatment of major changes; - The approval of minor changes; - Continued airworthiness; - The configuration control, when airworthiness is affected; - The issue of information and instructions under the privilege of Part 21; - The acceptance of design tasks undertaken by partners or subcontractors. d)

Changes in resources:

- Substantial reduction in number and/or experience of staff. Approval is materialized by entry of AA acceptance letter reference and date on amendment pages in the "approval ref" column. The Head of Design Office signs DOH revisions for DOH amendments.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 11 of 91





1.4 Amendm ent record table Amdt N°

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Date

Delete Page

Add Page

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Reason

Approval Reference

Page 12 of 91





1.5 Definitions For the aim of this Document, the following terms listed below shall have the following meanings: TERMS

MEANINGS

BISP( Beriev Irkut Seaplane)

A subsidiary company of Beriev and Irkut Corporation, has been formed to assume all obligations of applicant and future Type Certificate holder of Be-200 in Europe; European aircraft manufacturer partnership constituted as a SAS in order to lead and coordinate the work related to the Beriev 200 programs.

EISP (EADS-IRKUT Seaplane)

Joint Venture in charge of Marketing, sales and Support of the Be200E amphibian aircraft for Western customers and monitors the certification activities

Airworthiness

Means the acceptable safety standard of an aircraft designed and built according to applicable requirements, when operated within its intended environment and within its quantified and declared limitations, and maintained in accordance with procedures acceptable to the responsible Authority.

Agency

Designates the European Aviation Safety Agency: EASA

Applicant

Designates the person or organization applying for Design Organization Approval (DOA) under the procedures defined in the .JAA Administrative and Guidance Material Section Three: Certification. document

Certification basis

The airworthiness standards that the Aircraft Type Design is required to meet in order to satisfy the applicable Aviation Requirements for Type (or Supplemental Type) Certificate.

Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR)

A Certification Maintenance Requirement is a Maintenance task arising from the certification process necessary to achieve certification objectives given by the Airworthiness requirements (in particular Part25.571, Part 25.1309, and Part 25.671).

Certification Process

Means of finding of compliance with the certification basis and environmental requirements by the certification authorities, based on the satisfactory completion of the agreed certification compliance program.

Certification Review Item

Identifies a certification subject which requires clarification of interpretation or represents a major technical or administrative problem is identified as Certification Review Item..

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 13 of 91





Continued Airworthiness

Means of control of the airworthiness of an Aircraft (including modifications) subsequent to the Type Design certification.

Design

Means all work including the preparation of manufacturing drawings, stressing, weight control and drawing issue handling procedure necessary for the manufacture of components or systems including analysis of test results and support of the certification process

DOA Holder

Organization applying for, and then holding, the DOA accepting responsibilities specified by the Authority according part 21 for the whole product so far as Type Certification is concerned

Equivalent Safety

Means of acceptance by the responsible Authority of an indirect compliance with an airworthiness requirement on the basis that relevant compensating airworthiness features will provide an equivalent level of safety.

Industrial Partners

An Industrial Partners ensures the design, management of the configuration, industrialization, manufacturing, control and delivery of Aircraft elements. BISP, being responsible for Airworthiness, ensures the general responsibility for t he definition.

Special Condition

Special airworthiness requirements established where the applicable airworthiness code does not contain adequate or appropriate airworthiness standards; because the product has novel or unusual design features or is intended for an unconventional use (Part 2116).

Subcontractor

Entity or person to whom the holder of obligations under contract has delegated part or all of such obligations

Subsidiary

Company (involved in BISP matters) the shares of which are held by BISP and/or one or several of its members and/or another subsidiary of BISP Industry or of its members: Beriev in Taganrog, Russia IRKUT in Moscow, Russia

Supplier

An organization that sells products for use by the air transport industry. The products may include spare parts, information and Electronic Data Processing.

Type certification Holder

Organization applying for, and then holding, the Type Certificate and accepting responsibilities specified by the Authority according part 21 for the whole product so far as Type Certification is concerned.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 14 of 91


BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE Type Design

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06



Specifications, drawings and listing of those drawings and specifications necessary to define the configuration and the design features of the product shown to comply with the applicable requirements. Information on materials and processes and on methods of manufacture and assembly of the product necessary to ensure the conformity of the product. Airworthiness limitations sections of the instructions for continued airworthiness as required by the applicable requirements. Other data necessary to allow, by comparison, the determination of the airworthiness of later products of the same type.

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 15 of 91





1.6 Abbreviations A/C ACD ACMR AD AFM AMM ARL ARM ARS ASB ATA BISP CAA CAE CC CEO CE CG CMR CN COM CRI CVE DAID DAR DAS DAT DCR DDP DOA DOAM DOAT DOID DOH DPM DT EADS EASA EIS FC FCOM FOM HAO HDO IAC IAC AR ICAO ISB

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Aircraft Airframe Certification Document Aircraft Configuration Management Rules Airworthiness Directive Aircraft Flight Manual Aircraft Maintenance Manual Action Record List Airworthiness Review Meeting Airworthiness Review Sheet Alert Service Bulletin Air Transport Association of America Beriev Irkut Seaplane Civil Aviation Authority Chief Airworthiness Engineer Certification Coordinator Chief Executive Officer Chief Engineer Center of Gravity Certification Maintenance Requirements Consigne de Navigabilité Company Organization Manual Certification Review Item Compliance Verification Engineer Design Assurance Interface Document Design Assurance Review Design Assurance System Design Assurance Team DOH Change Request Declaration of Design and Performance Design Organization Approval Design Organization Approval Manager Design Organization Approval Team Design Organization Interface Document Design Organization Handbook Design Progress Meeting Damage Tolerance European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company European Aviation Safety Agency Entry Into Service Flight Cycle Flight Crew Operating Manual Flight Operations Manual Head of Airworthiness Office Head of Design Organization Interstate Aviation Committee Interstate Aviation Committee Aviation Register International Civil Aviation Organization Inspection Service Bulletin

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 16 of 91


BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE ISO JAA JAR JV LEP MAS MMEL MOA MOC MRB MRBD MSN NECTAR OEB PCM POA RAD RAS RFC RTC SAS SB SP SRM TBM TC TCDS TD WBM

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06



International Organization for Standardization Joint Aviation Authorities Joint Aviation Requirements Joint Venture List of Effective Pages Modification Approval Sheet Master Minimum Equipment List Maintenance Organization Approval Means of Compliance Maintenance Review Board Maintenance Review Board Document Manufacturer Serial Number New Enhanced Certification Tools and Rulemaking Operations Evaluation Board Project Certification Manager Production Organization Approval Repair Approval Designed Repair Approval Sheet Request For Change Restricted Type Certification Société par Actions Simplifiée Service Bulletin Seaplane Procedure Structure Repair Manual Type Board Meeting Type Certificate Type Certificate Data Sheet Technical Dossier Weight and Balance Manual

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 17 of 91





1.7 Reference documents The following documents are the DOA related documents that are referenced in the table of reference documents (See. Below) Documentation

Title / Appli cation sections

European Commission Regulation (EC) n°1702/2003

Implementing rules for the airworthiness and environmental certification of aircraft and related products, parts and appliance, as well as for the certification of design and production organizations

PART 21 Annex to EC n°1702/2003

Certification of aircraft and related products, parts and appliances, and of design and production organizations

JAR-25/CS-25

JAA/EASA Certification Specifications for large aeroplanes

JAR-E/CS-E

JAA/EASA Certification Specifications for Engines

CS-34

EASA Certification Specifications Emissions and Fuel Venting

CS-36

EASA Certification Specifications for Aircraft noise

AMC& GM Part21

Acceptable Means of Compliance and Guidance Material for the airworthiness and environmental certification of aircraft and related products, parts and appliances, as well as for the certification of design and production organizations.

ICAO Annex 13

Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation

ICAO Annex 16

Environmental protection . Aircraft Noise and fuel venting

ISO 10011

Guidelines for auditing quality systems

ISO 9001

Quality Management System

for

Aircraft

Engine

Table of reference documents 1.7

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 18 of 91





1.8 Other referred documents Reference

Documentation

SP0010

Aircraft Configuration Management Rules (ACMR)

SP0011

Procedure for Change to Type Design

SP0012

Individual Aircraft Procedure

SP0014

Creation and Revision of the Service Bulletin (Including vendors SB)

SP0015

Repair procedure

SP0016

Flight Test Procedure

SP0017

Procedure for non conformities covered by concessions

SP0018

Continued Airworthiness Procedure

SP0020

Procedure for Operational Manuals( AFM,MMEL..)

SP0021

Creation and Revision of the Structure Repair Manuel(SRM)

SP0022

Procedure for Airworthiness Limitation Section (ALS)

SP0023

Procedure for Maintenance Review Board (MRB)

SP0024

WBM Approval Procedure

SP0025

Procedure for Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM)

SP0030

Procedure for Suppliers

SP0070

Type Certification Procedure

SP0071

Procedure for Certification Actions Management

SP0072

Procedure for establishing Certification Documents

SP0073

Procedure for Logistic & communication between parties

SP0074

Procedure for Documents Archiving

SP0075

Procedure for Establishing Certification Plan

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 19 of 91





CHAPTER 2 BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE DESIGN ORGANIZATION

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 20 of 91



2



BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLA NE DESIGN ORGANIZATION

2.1 General Within IRKUT organization, Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS located in Toulouse (France) has been formed to assume all the obligations of Applicant and future Type Certificate holder for Be200E in Europe. Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS will use the means and resources of several companies to perform the necessary activities, which share the work according to an agreed Work-sharing Document. Accountability is ensured through the consortium as prescribed by IR 21. The BISP Design Organization is manned by personnel from Beriev Aircraft Company, Ivchenko Progress and BISP placed under the authority of the Accountable Manager of Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS in charge of Design, Certification , Airworthiness and Design Assurance. The BISP Office of Airworthiness is formed to lead the Certification assessment process and ensure the final compliance of the aircraft Type Design with applicable airworthiness requirements. EADS and IRKUT have formed a Joint Venture named EADS-IRKUT Seaplane ( EISP) to run the Sales and Product Support of the Be-200E and to supervise the Certification process carried out by BISP. The Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS Arrangement Document complemented by Service Contracts between Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS, IRKUT Corporation, Beriev Aircraft Company, and Ivchenko Progress constitute the legal basis for the delegation of activities and responsibilities to the BISP Design Organization. Involved personnel hold Mission Letters ( contract, job description…) signed by the BISP Accountable Manager.

2.2 Organization of the Authorities For the Be-200E Certification Process, IAC AR and EASA will coordinate their action and agree on a common certification basis, assessment process and f indings. Working Arrangement and Implementation Procedure agreement between the two Authorities cover the organization and procedures of the Concurrent Certification. A Joint Be-200ES-E/Be-200E Certification team is formed by IAC AR and EASA. IAC AR and EASA experts will conduct the assessment as a single team. The PCMs will manage this process.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 21 of 91



2.3



Applicant

The applicant for the Design Organization Approval is Beriev Irkut Seaplane S.A.S (“Societé par Actions Simplifiée”: simplified joint stock company) located in Toulouse (France). Its offices are registered at: 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte Immeuble Socrate EA1 – 31707 Blagnac Cedex France

2.3.1 Purpose of th is Manuel The purpose of this Manual is to define the organization, procedures, manpower and facilities for design, certification, continuous airworthiness and design assurance system. This Manual meets the requirements of paragraph Part 21A.243 and is prepared in compliance with the recommendations of associated Acceptable Means of Compliance and Guidance material . The procedures are approved by the undersigned and shall be adhered to by all personnel involved in this manual.

2.3.2 Basic rules This manual is prepared according with the following rules: -

BISP ensure technical control of its products in front of the Authorities. This covers responsibilities as defined in the Design and Certification work sharing arrangements

-

BISP and its industrial partners have set up a Design Assurance System (DAS) which is based on general and detailed instructions and procedures specified in binding full partners contracts

-

Industrial Partners provide BISP with all the necessary means to demonstrate initial compliance and upkeep of the Design Assurance System.

The DOH will allow the BISP Staff to identify how the organization complies through day-today activities with the Part 21 requirements, and this document shall comply with Part 21.243.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 22 of 91



2.4



Organization Undertaking

2.4.1 Statement of undertaking by the Accountable Manager By signing this statement, Mr. Christophe BRIAND acting as BISP President, acknowledge that the Design Organisation is having and will continue to have the required competence, means, resources and authority necessary to perform its obligations.

Christophe BRIAND President Beriev Irkut Seaplane

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 23 of 91





2.4.2 Statement of Undertaking by Head of Design Organization The undersigned who holds the utmost design responsibility of Beriev Irkut Seaplane, hereby agrees to strictly comply with the relevant procedures contained in the BISP Design Organisation Handbook(DOH). The undersigned will ensure that all involved personnel shall adhere to the procedures described in this document. The undersigned will take all necessary actions enabling the EASA to carry out monitoring both within BISP and its Partners, Subcontractors and Suppliers premises.

Alexander YAVKIN Head of Design Organisation Beriev Irkut Seaplane

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 24 of 91





2.5 BISP Irkut Seaplane S.A.S was created in 2003 in Toulouse. Company name change to Beriev Irkut Seaplane (BISP) in Dec 2005. Beriev Irkut Seaplane S.A.S (“Société par Actions Simplifiée” simplified joint stock company), a subsidiary company of Beriev Aircraft Company and IRKUT Corporation, has been formed to assume all obligations of applicant and future Type Certificate holder of Be-200E in Europe. BISP purpose is to manage the Be-200E program, a twin turbofan engine firefighter Aircraft and related derivative versions .

2.6

Terms of Approval

2.6.1 Scope of wor k BISP Design Organisation Approval has been implemented to enable the following activities for the large aeroplanes: • • •

Type design and Certification Change the type design Continued airworthiness including repair schemes

2.6.2 Type of produ cts Products covered by the approval are : •

Large transport aircraft (MTOW greater than 7,500Kg) powered by high bypass ratio turbofan engines.

2.6.3 Types of technologi es Technologies covered are: • • • • • •

Design of aeronautical parts, appliances and products Complex metallic and non metallic airframe structure Fly by Wire technology Advanced aeronautical systems Advanced aircraft avionics Integration of high bypass ration turbo fan engine

These types of technologies cover all ATA chapters.

2.6.4 Beriev Irku t Seaplane Produc t covered by BISP DOA The products covered by BISP DOA are Be-200E all Models and derivative versions.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 25 of 91





2.7 Organization 2.7.1 General Beriev Irkut Seaplane S.A.S (“Société par Actions Simplifiée”: simplified joint stock company), is a subsidiary of Beriev and IRKUT Corporation, shared as followed: • •

IRKUT Corporation owned 50 % of BISP Beriev Aircraft Company owned 50 % of BISP

Upon request of EADS and IRKUT, Airbus provides certification staff and service to the Beriev Irkut Seaplane Office of Airworthiness located in Toulouse/France The Joint Venture EADS-IRKUT SEAPLANE is in charge of Marketing, Sales and Support of the Be-200E amphibian aircraft for Western customers and supervise the Certification activities

2.7.2 Beriev Irkut Seaplane Flow Chart 1

30%

70%

EADS

IRKUT Joint Venture 50%

AIRB US Supervise Certification activities

Subcontract people

50%

BERIEV

Beriev Irkut Seaplane S.A.S

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 26 of 91





2.7.3 Organization Chart 2 of B eriev Irkut Seaplane BERIEV

IRKUT

Share hold ers Level

Joint Venture EADS-IRKUT Seaplane

EADS

Airworthiness Board Beriev A. Yavkin / Airbus A. Quet

Beriev Irkut Seaplane BISP Level

Design office

BISP CEO C. Briand Head of Design Organization Beriev A. Yavkin

Head of Prog ress Design Office/Chief Engineer A. Shch olok

Head of Beriev Design Office/Chief Engineer

Head of Airw orthiness Office G. Meurey

Progress Design Office

Beriev Design Office

Ai rw orth iness Offic e -List of Staff refer to Chapt. 6.7.3

-List of CVEs refer to Chapt. 6.7.2.2


Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Certification Coordinator O. Demyanenko

Head of Design As surance A. Mous songo

DOA Representativ e Progress S. Shepelev


Page 27 of 91


DOA Representative Beriev I. Yarkovoy


2.7.4



CEO BISP

BISP Organization Chart 3

Ai rw or th in ess Bo ard Ai rb us Airw or th in ess VP Beriev Airworthin ess VP

Head of Design Organisation

e Head of Design Office / c i Chief Engineer f f Progress O n g i s e D Progress CVEs

Head of Design Office / Chief Engineer Beriev

Beriev CVEs

e c i f f O s s e n i h t r o w r i A

Head of Ai rw or th in ess Offic e Certification Coordinator

Flight, Handling Qualities Flight, Performance Operational Integration Flight Controls / Fly-by-Wire Hydro mechanical Systems Structures Maintenance Integration Manuals Engines Noise Avionics, Software Electrical Systems Fuel & Propulsion Systems Cockpit & Interior Systems Oxygen Systems Continued Airworthiness Manager * Individual A/C Certification Manager * Draft_DOH_03.doc

Head of Design Ass ur ance

Beriev Organization Appr oval Representative

Ai rw orth iness Offic e st aff

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

e c n n g i a s r e u D s s A

* Position Post RTC

Page 28 of 91


Progress Organization Appr ov al Representative



2.7.5 Beriev Organization Chart 4

Deputy Director General – development plant director

Deputy Director General Chief Designer A.Yavkin


Director General V. Kobzev

Flight Test Facility

Project control group

Strength department

Strength tests department

Maintainability department

New technology department Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Deputy Director General for certification and quality V.Grigoriev

First Deputy Director General for engineering and technology

Division for advanced development

Division for power plants, ECS and anti-icin s stem

Airframe division

Mechanical systems division

Avionics division

Electrical equipment department

DESIGN STAFF Page 29 of 91


Quality department

Certification and quality department

Standardization and unification department

Technical inspection department

QUALITY & CERTIFICATION STAFF




2.7.6 Ivchenko Prog resss Organization Chart 5 Design er General F.M. MURAVCHENKO

Program Chief Designer A. SHCHOL OK

Project Designer P. BELASCHOV

Compressor V.ARCHIPOV

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Design Assurance S. SHEPELEV

Chief Designer G. KRITSYN

Combustion Chamber V. GUSEV

Power Plant V. BUGRIN

Deputy Designer General

First Deputy Designer General

Turbine V.MERCULOV

Control V. SEDRISTIY

D1

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Deputy K. CHUPRINA

Head of Offic e of Ai rw or th in ess N. TISHCHENKO

IT Support A.DA SHKOVSKY

Stress A.SHEREMETY EV Page 30 of 91


D2

D3




2.7.7 Design Organization 2.7.7.1 Design Office activities The Design Offices of Beriev Aircraft Company and Ivchenko Progress contribute to the Certification process as Members of the Be-200E industrial partnership. They participate in: • • • •

Defining the overall certification policy Presenting the design to the Authorities Negotiating applicable requirements and their interpretation Continued Airworthiness process

For their domains of responsibility as defined in the “Certification Work sharing” document they: • • •

•

Ensure the compliance with applicable requirements Coordinate all activities leading to proof of compliance Present the proof of compliance against applicable requirements Prepare and present the Certification Documents according to the agreed Certification Program.

2.7.7.2 Office of Airw orth iness activi ties The BISP Office of Airworthiness ensures the coordination and supervision of the tasks leading to certification of Be-200E in cooperation with the certification experts within Beriev Aircraft Company, Ivchenko Progress and Airbus seconded Staff, who contribute to the certification process as Members of the Be-200E industrial partnership : • • • • • • •

Certification organization Certification procedures and policies Certification management at aircraft and engine level Programs and schedules Preparation of the certification basis Coordination of the compliance program and demonstrations Documentation management and archiving

The BISP Office of Airworthiness is the focal point for certification matters at aircraft level. The BISP Office of Airworthiness reports to and acts under the authority of Beriev Irkut Seaplane SAS acting Program Director for all matters of its responsibility. For all design and technical matters the Beriev Irkut Seaplane Office of Airworthiness will report to HDO.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 31 of 91





This Office will work jointly with the IAC AR and EASA Program Certification Managers to manage the Be-200ES-E/Be-200E Concurrent Certification process according implementation procedure ref :XXXXX.

2.7.7.3 Design Assurance Office activities The staff is accountable for ensuring that the Design Organization Approval for the Company is maintained in compliance with the Part 21 requirements. The staff is accountable for the management of all activities within BISP for all subjects dealing with approval of the design organization. The staff is also providing expertise for all organizational and procedural matters connected to provision Part 21 subpart JA.

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 32 of 91



2.8



Facilit ies and Means

2.8.1 Facilities BISP facilities are located in three countries at the main partners facilities as following: Beriev Irkut Seaplane 1 Rond point Maurice Bellonte Immeuble Socrate EA1 31707 Blagnac (France) Beriev Aircraft Company 1 Aviator Square 347923 Taganrog ( Russia)

            

Beriev Aircraft Company Irkutsk



Ivchenko Progress 2 Ivanova street 69068 Zaporozhje (Ukraine)

      

Headquarter Certification Airworthiness Design Assurance Design Office Certification Airworthiness Design Assurance Static and Fatigue Test Bench test ( Aircraft systems and equipment Flight Test Hydroaviation training center Production of the Aircraft Prototype Design Office

Design Office Certification Airworthiness Design Assurance Static and Fatigue Test Bench test Production of the Engine Prototype

IRKUT Cooporation 68, Bldg. 1, Leningradsky prospekt, Moscow, 125315 (Russia)



IRKUT Irkutsk



Aircraft Production

Motorsich 15 Vos'mogo marta street 69068 Zaporozhje (Ukraine)



Engine production Support

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc



Program management

Page 33 of 91





2.8.2 Human Resources BISP staff consists of : • • • • •

Personnel directly hired by BISP Beriev nominated personnel Ivchenko Progress nominated personnel Airbus seconded personnel Major suppliers staff

The total BISP workforce is approximately 139 (at the end of 2006). The breakdown of the Workforce is shown below. Company Name BISP Airworthiness Office (France)

Nb pers 9

Beriev Aircraft Company

70

Ivchenko-Progress

40

Irkut Corporation

20

Total

139

2.8.3 Means BISP use the means of its main partners. BISP DOA personnel is supported by internal tools in his specific activities, such as: •

• •

Configuration management electronic tools, such as AMCS (Aircraft Modification Configuration System (TBC in Beriev) Personal computer and associated standard software Access to internal collaborative tool (eRoom).

The Design Office is equipped with: • •

•

• •

Workstations Computer Aided Design , Computer Aided Engineering, Computer Aided Manufacturing and Product Data Management Unigraphic, AutoCAD Patran/Nastran Computerized documentation management tools such as (TBD)- Standard Doc to gain access to the Directives or procedures to follow Direct link (via Internet or through intranet system) to National and international Authorithies Technical software for flight physics

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 34 of 91





CHAPTER 3 FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 35 of



3



FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 Airwor thiness Certification Committee (ACC) The ACC is a forum to review matters of airworthiness and organization, independent from the design activities with the following people: JV airworthiness Board members Head of Airworthiness Office Certification Coordinator

• • •

3.2 Functions The functions of the Design Organization staff are described as follows:

3.2.1

Head of Design Organizatio n (HDO)

The CEO of BISP nominates the BISP Head of Design Organization. In accordance with Part 21 he has the direct or functional responsibility for all departments having a responsibility for the design and development of the product, including the continued design support to the aircraft in service and the implementation of the Design Assurance system. Therefore in this position he acts on behalf of the company: To organize and manage the Design Organization to fulfill AA requirements and company objectives To ensure that all instructions of the handbook are adhered to To nominate staff as "Compliance Verification Engineers" responsible to approve compliance documents as defined in Part 21.A239 (b) To nominate personnel belonging to the office of Airworthiness responsible as defined in Part 21.A239 (a) To perform a yearly review of the design assurance system To establish and send out to the Authority a yearly activity report To implement a Design Assurance System intended to ensure that his responsibilities are properly discharged in accordance with Part 21.A239 (a) : •

• •

•

• • •

(i) the appropriate regulations of this Part 21; and (ii) the terms of Approval issued under Part 21.A251. To independently monitor the compliance with, and adequacy of, the documented procedures of the system. This monitoring must include a feed-back system to a person or a group of persons having the responsibility to ensure corrective actions To sign declaration of compliance (Part 21.97 (a)) with the applicable airworthiness regulations and the environmental protection requirements after •

•

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 36





verification of satisfactory completion of the Type Investigation and to caution that procedures as specified in handbook have been followed.

3.2.2

Head of Design Office (Chief Engineer)

The Be-200E Head of Design Office (Chief Engineer) leads the design process. He is responsible for the overall compliance of the design against applicable regulations. He’s accountable to the following tasks: • • • • • • • • • •

Define the BISP standards Define the Aircraft design specification Define the tools & processes Identify deliverables versus time Organize the technical work covering the Design, Certification and Flight test Ensure compatibility with work share Ensure follow-up of work to program Define solutions, proving them and delivering them Ensure that the Top Level Aircraft specification are met Participe to Continued Airworthiness.

3.2.3 Head of Airwort hiness Offic e (Chief Airworthiness Engineer ) The Head of Airworthiness Office leads all certification and airworthiness activities in view of obtaining EASA Type Certification; he is accountable for the management of: Type and change approval Individual aircraft certification Continued airworthiness • • •

The Head of Airworthiness Office prepares the Application for Type Certification and produce the final statement of compliance at aircraft level and the TCDS proposal. The Head of Airworthiness Office is the direct correspondent of the Chief of the Engineering department on all certification issues. The Airworthiness function’s resources at the sites report on airworthiness and certification matters to the Chief Airworthiness Engineer (CAE).

3.2.4

Certif ication Coord inator (Deputy Chief Airw orthi ness Engineer)

The Certification Coordinator (Deputy Chief Airworthiness Engineer) is nominated to manage and coordinate the airworthiness activities within his scope of responsibility, relative to the site design activities as defined by the work sharing. He pertains to the CAE team and acts locally on behalf of CAE.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 37





He provide airworthiness support to the design office and also coordinate the activities of the relevant CVEs for Be-200ES-E/Be-200E concurrent certification and organizes appropriate involvement of the site CVEs. The main functions of the Certification Coordinator are as follows: •

• •

•

•

•

3.2.5

Provide advice on airworthiness matters to designers, Participate to the selection of CVEs, Ensure appropriate involvement and coordination of the site CVEs for each airworthiness process under his responsibility, Communicate CAE and Program objectives to all involved personnel on the site, Participate to Change approval process: - Identify changes to be approved, - Manage changes compliance demonstration activities with appropriate CVEs and /or design office specialists - Acts as Major Change coordinator when designated by the CAE Participate to Continued Airworthiness: - Manage In Service Reporting Occurrences - Coordinate Airworthiness Review Meeting (ARM) preparation with CVEs and design offices specialists - Participate to ARM

Compliance Verification Engineer (CVE)

This function is also known as “independent verification” or “compliance verification” as required by Part 21A.239 b). Staff having the necessary technical certification background and competence in the subject perform the Independent Checking signature. They shall be involved in the corresponding showing of compliance process, but they are sufficiently independent from the task/subject performed by the Showing Compliance Engineer( Originator ). This signature assumes in particular that the following check have been performed: Certification Document overall quality − Certification Document identification, scope, applicability, … in compliance with NECTAR tool data − Certification Document completeness − Certification Document conclusions clearly showing compliance with referenced codes, and properly reflected in the Compliance Statement − Design characteristics considered in accordance with those resulting from the Type Design Definition and Certification objectives (in particular: Flight envelope, Weight/CG envelope, kind of operation, etc.) −


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 38





Possible identified interface issues (with other technical areas, other Departments) are either already addressed an other Certification Plan, or are to be reported for resolution. −

- Distribution list is in accordance with the nature of the Document − Confidentiality Statements are properly included •

The CVE prepare and participate to Certification Meetings with Airworthiness Authorities Specialists. He reports to the Chief Engineer for technical matter and to CAE (or local Certification Coordinator) for certification issues.

3.3 Design Assurance Office 3.3.1 Head of Design Assur ance ( DOA Manager ) He ensures the proper deployment and functioning of the Design Assurance System in any BISP sites. He ensures the following main tasks : • • • •

• • •

Define and implement the System Monitoring Identify specific sites procedures that needs to be maintained Deploy DOA training and awareness including notification of DOH changes Coordinate related DOA contractual arrangement for design suppliers including assessment and surveillance Report to HDO of BISP any deficiency identified during day to day work Perform surveillance Audit and a posteriori investigations Perform corrective actions follow-up

3.3.2 Design Organization Approval Representative Beriev Aircraft Company and Ivchenko Progress have appointed Design Organization Approval Representatives (DOAR assigned to the Design Assurance System for each of their sites (Taganrog, Russia / Zaporozhje, Ukraine). They perform the DOA tasks and assume responsibilities belonging to DOA Representatives described below: They ensure the proper deployment and functioning of the Design Assurance System in their sites. They ensure the following main tasks at site level : • • •

Implement the System Monitoring Identify specific sites procedures that needs to be maintained Deploy DOA training and awareness including notification of DOH changes


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 39


BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE •

•

• •



Coordinate related DOA contractual arrangement for design suppliers including assessment and surveillance Report to Head of Design assurance of BISP any deficiency identified during day to day work Perform surveillance Audit and a posteriori investigations Perform corrective actions follow-up

3.4 Resolution of conflict s If specialists cannot agree at a technical level, they should try to resolve the problem by appropriate consultation within their Site Certification Coordinator (Beriev in Taganrog and Ivchenko Progress In Zaporozhje) and BISP office of Airworthiness in Toulouse. The Head of Airworthiness Office shall be consulted to try to resolve the problem. He will ensure appropriate coordination within BISP and the partners Sites Certification Coordinator. When design is involved, the issue will be raised at the appropriate Design Progress Meeting. When found necessary, the Head of Airworthiness Office may raise the issue at the ACC. When design is directly involved, the BISP Head of Airworthiness Office (CAE) will bring the issue to the HDO. If resolution cannot be reached there, the JV Airworthiness Board will make the final decision.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 40





CHAPTER 4 AIRWORTHINESS AND CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 41







Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 42



4



AIRWORTHINESS

4.1 General Certification procedures ensure a structured and traceable certification process covering all activities from detailed work to final compliance demonstration. These procedures are defined, established and issued by the Head of Airworthiness Office.

4.2 Type Certif ication Process 4.2.1 Concurrent Type Certific ation Process scheme Due to concurrent certification process by IAC AR and EASA, BISP is also applicant to IAC AR for Validation and initiates the Validation process by sending via EASA an application for Be-200E validation. Two Airworthiness Authori ties with equal involvement Two Applicants Two Aircraft Types Two Certification Projects BUT One Single Certification Process Concurrent Certification / Validation

IAC AR

Be-200ES-E Primary RTC Be-200E RTC Validation

EASA

Be-200ES-E RTC Validation Be-200E Primary RTC

One Common Certification Basis One Concurrent Airworthin ess Authorities Ass essment One Offic ial Meeting Planning One Comm on Ag enda For each meeting Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 43





Refer to IP…..TBD

4.2.2

Type Certification

4.2.2.1 General BISP is applicant and future TC holder of Be-200E series Type Certificate and also applicant for EASA DOA as required by Part21. Refer to Procedure SP0070.

4.2.2.2 Responsibilities Compliance Verification The Compliance Verification of all compliance documents and manuals to be submitted to EASA for approval is ensured by the Checking Compliance Engineer( CVE). Refer to paragraph 6.7.2.1 to 6.7.2.2 for authorized signatories. Office of Airwort hiness The checking of all compliance documents as necessary to show compliance with the Type Certification applicable airworthiness and environmental protection requirements is performed by BISP Office of Airworthiness staff according EASA GM N° 1 21.A239(a) 3.1.4(n). The Office of Airworthiness Staff ensure the checking of required Type Design definition documents described in Part 21A31 and ensure that they are provided to EASA for approval when required according to EASA GM N°1 21.A239(a) 3.1.4(o). Refer to paragraph 6.2.3 for authorized signatories.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 44





4.3 Flow Chart of the TC-Process The following flow chart shows the aforementioned certification phases in relation to the Milestones for the development of a new A/C type (M0 to M12), certification process objectives and typical EASA activities as primary authority. Milestones/Pre-Conditions

Certification Process Deliverables

M0- Program Idea Established

Top Level Requirements

M1-Market Opportunities Identified

General a/c Configuration

M2- Standards and Requirements Established

General a/c Characteristics

M3- A/C Concept Selected

General Certification Objectives and Schedule

EASA Activities

Phase 0: Feasibility

TC Application acceptance M4- Configuration Baselined

Worksharing

Nomination of BISP Certification. Team

Nomination of CVE

Certification Procedures Document

Phase 1: Application & Project Organization Establishment

Nomination of: • EASA PCM • EASA Team EASA Familiarization Mtg

BISP initial TC Basis EASA Preparation of PID M5- Detailed A/C Concept Validated

Panel/Specialists Familiarized M6- Structure Systems Specification Completed CRIs

EASA Initial Certification Basis

CRIs with Different MOCs

Phase 2: Familiarization & TC-basis Preparation

EASA Team Familiarization Meeting Non-EASA/JAA National Coordinators Meeting

NECTAR Setup

NECTAR Update EASA Type Board Meeting

SCs with First AA Position

Agreed Certif. Milestones M7- Component Level Design Completed Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 45





Flow Chart of t he TC-Process Continu ed Milestones/Pre-Conditions

Certification Process Deliverables

EASA Activities

M8- Major Component Assembly Started Phase 3: Means of Compliance & Certification Plans

NECTAR Update

EASA Panel Meetings

EASA Type Board Meeting

M9- Begin of Final Assembly M10-Power ON

Type Design Definition Freeze

Agreed Certification Documents

NECTAR Update

Phase 4: Compliance Demonstration

Final Type Deign Agreed

EASA Review of NonDelegated Compliance Demonstrations, Inspections, Test

M11- First Flight Approved Manuals

TCDS Agreed

• Compliance Record Sheets • Statement Record Book • Compliance Checklist • Compliance Statements • Statement of Final Compliance • Declaration of Compliance

EASA Final TBM

M12- Type Certification Issue of EASA Type Certificate


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 46



4.4



Airc raft Type Certif ication Documentation

4.4.1 Operational Documentation 4.4.1.1 Ai rc raf t Fli gh t Manu al (A FM) BISP has the responsibility to establish AFM proposal and to obtain EASA approval. The Be-200E AFM is produced by Beriev and reviewed by BISP office of Airworthiness prior to submission for approval by EASA for TC and Major changes. Refer to Procedure SP0020. 4.4.1.2 Master Mini mum Equi pment L ist (MMEL) BISP has the responsibility to establish the MMEL proposal and to obtain EASA approval. A simplified Operations Evaluation Board (OEB) process is instituted jointly by EASA and IAC to review the MMEL of Be-200E. The Manager in charge of Operational Integration is responsible for presenting to the OEB the process and methods used to define the Be-200 MMEL and show how they relate with the policies of the Authorities. Refer to the procedure SP0020. 4.4.1.3 Weight and b alance Manual BISP has the responsibility to establish the Be-200E WBM proposal and obtain EASA approval. The chapter 1.10 of the WBM defines the loading limitations which must be approved by EASA. Refer to procedure SP0024.

4.4.2 Maintenance Documentatio n 4.4.2.1 Ai rw or th in ess L im it ati on Secti on (AL S) In accordance with JAR/CS 25.1529, Appendix H, paragraph 25.4, the ALS provides to the operators with a single Manual for maintenance tasks, inspection intervals and life limits originating from the Type Certification requirements (Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness). It is referenced in TCDS and approved by EASA. It comprises :

Refer to procedure SP0022 Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 47





a) Life Lim its / Monito red Parts The Life Limits / Monitored Parts provides each mandatory replacement time determined as necessary for compliance with JAR/CS 25.571. Sub-section limitations is applicable to components that are designed as ‘safe life’ concept. Sub-section demonstrated fatigue life parts provides traceability and monitoring records of parts for which life limit may need to be declared in the future (at end of fatigue test ). b) Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALI) The ALI document provides mandatory structural inspection, thresholds/intervals and the related structural inspection procedure as required for compliance with JAR/CS 25.571. The ALI of Be-200E is prepared under the responsibility of the Manager in charge of Maintenance Integration. c) Certific ation Maintenance Requir ements (CMR) The CMR provides mandatory system inspections thresholds /intervals and the related system inspection procedure as required for compliance with JAR/CS 25.1309 . Most of the tasks in the CMR originate from the System Safety Assessments.

4.4.2.2 Ai rc raf t Main ten anc e Manual ( AMM ) According to IAC AR procedure the AMM is an approved document for Be-200ES-E. Containing ALS in sections 4 and 5 . Consequently the Be-200E AMM will contain the Be-200E ALS and section ( TBD ) and BISP has the responsibility to establish the AMM / ALS proposal and obtain EASA approval. Refer to procedure SP0025. 4.4.2.3 Structur al Repair Manual (SRM) BISP has the responsibility to establish the SRM proposal and to obtain EASA approval The manager in charge for SRM needs to define : - Required identification of Structural parts, - Allowable damages limits, - Repairs to be included in the SRM. Refer to procedure SP0021. Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 48





4.4.2.4 Maintenance Review Bo ard (MRB) The MRB Report defines the initial minimum scheduled maintenance tasks and their thresholds/ intervals. Operators may escalate the thresholds and intervals of tasks appearing in these sections subject to approval by their Aviation Authority, based on their own service experience. An Industry Steering Committee (ISC) using the ATA Maintenance Steering Guide Issue 3 (MSG 3) analysis method normally defines the technical content of the MRB Report. The ISC also determines the need for revisions to address in-service experience and new/modified configurations. A simplified Maintenance Review Board (MRB) process is instituted jointly by EASA and IAC to review and validate relevant items for inclusion in Be-200E MRB Report. No ISC is formed for this initial process. The IAC and EASA experts, working with the Applicant’s experts, conduct the necessary assessments. Refer to procedure SP0023.

4.5 Certifi cation Documentation Certification Documents and associated Supporting Documents are used by BISP Office of Airworthiness to show Be-200E compliance to applicable requirements. Refer to procedure SP0072.

4.5.1 Compliance Record A Compliance Record covering all applicable certification requirements for each domain (ATA Chapter) is produced for the first aircraft model of a new Type. The Compliance Record contains all applicable requirements divided into paragraphs and subparagraphs with corresponding Means of Compliance, the Certification Documents and Compliance Statements for concerned ATA Chapter. The Compliance Record is established by the person in the Airworthiness Office responsible for the domain (ATA Chapter) in coordination with the CVE and is submitted to concerned Authorities Specialists for agreement. At the end of the Certification Process all Compliance Records are compiled to form the aircraft Compliance Record Book called “Grand Livre”.

4.5.2 Certification Summary for Aircraft Model The Final Report will summarize the activities of the EASA Team and the main issues raised during Be-200E Type Certification. Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 49





4.5.3 Means Means of Compliance Means of Compliance are categorized in 9 types, defined in the following MOC table with associated Compliance Documents. Compliance task

Engineering Evaluation

Means Means of Com pliance MC0 : Compliance Statement -reference to Type Design documents -election of methods, factors, ect -definitions

Type Design Documents Recorded Statements

MC1 : Design Review

Description, Drawings

MC2 : Calculation /Analysis

Substantiation Reports

MC3 : Safety assessment

Safety Analysis

MC4 : Laboratory Tests Tests

As so ci ated Com pl ian ce Documents

MC5 : Ground Test of A/C

Test Programs Test Reports Test Interpretations

MC6 : Flight Tests MC8 : Simulation Inspection Equipment Qualification

MC7 : Design Inspection by the Agency Specialists (on mock-up or A/C, ect.)

Reports of the inspection Visits

MC9 : Equipment Qualification

See note

Note : TSO (or ETSO) equipment is typically typically qualified against the requirements requirements of TSO or ETSO. The Declaration of Design and Performance is endorsed by the BISP Design Office, including limitations, or deviations from the specification if acceptable (Reasons justifying the acceptance of the deviations need to be appended to the DDP).

TABLE Means Means of Compl iance


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 50



4.6 4.6



Change Change to Appro ved Type Design Design

4.6.1

General General prin ciple cipl e

Each change to the Type Design has to be approved in accordance with Part 21 section A subpart D, each change is identified by a Change number or by a group of Modification numbers.

The overview of the process is given below : Need for change

Opening Change Technical Dossier

Major Change

Classification proposal against Part 21 criteria

Minor Change

Change Justified

Change Justified

Compliance verified

Compliance verified

Approved By EASA

Approved By BISP Office of Airworthiness

Refer to procedure SP0011 Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 51





4.6.2 Appr Ap prov oval al of change ch ange - Minor change is approved by BISP Office of Airworthiness under DOA privilege, by the authorized signatories, - Major change is approved by the EASA. After satisfactory satisfac tory verification of compliance, com pliance, the signatory, authorized on behalf of BISP Office of Airworthiness, will stamp and sign the Modification Approval Sheet (MAS). This signature shall not be the same person who has signed the “Compliance Checked” box on the MAS.

4.6.3 Responsibilities The Compliance Verification of MAS is ensured by the CVE : refer paragraph 6.7.2.1 to 6.7.2.2 list Authorized Signatories . The MAS approval statement is done by nominated persons from the Office of Airworthiness exc ept for the major changes signed by EASA ( see. GM N°1 to 21.A239(a) 3.1.4(r) ). The name of the nominated representatives and scope of their responsibilities are given in the list of Authorized Signatories in accordance with the paragraph 6.2.3

4.6.4 Post approval After approval of minor and major changes to Type T ype Design , the f ollowing actions will be performed by BISP Office of Airworthiness. AMCS (Aircraft Modification Modificat ion configuration System” electronic data base” ), will be updated, •

The completed MAS is signed by the authorized signatories of BISP Office of Airworthiness and the original shall be held at the Partner Airworthiness Office in accordance with the DOH (See. Chapter 6).


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 52





4.7 Service Bulletin Process 4.7.1

General

The SB is the document used to provide the Airlines with instructions and information on Approved technical and commercial data governing the embodiment of modifications or the performing of inspections on in service Aircraft. The SB is prepared according to a specific from compliant with ATA 2200 specification. The complete SB process is controlled by the procedures specified in the procedure SP0014.

4.7.2

Servic e Bulletin appr oval Statement

a) Responsibilities The Compliance Verification of SB is ensured by the CVE : refer paragraph 6.7.21 to 6.7.2.2 list of Authorized Signatories. ISBs and MSBs approval statement is done by nominated persons from the Airworthiness Office except for mandatory ISBs signed by EASA. The names of these nominated representatives and the scope of their responsibilities are given in the list of Authorized Signatories in accordance with EASA (see. GM N°1 to 21.A239(a) 3.1.4(t) )

- The Authorized Signatories approves the SB by signing the following statement:

The technical cont ent of th is doc ument (Rev xx) is approved under the authority of DOA n° EASA.21J.313 - In case of a mandatory MSB or ISB, BISP submit them to EASA, together with the relevant design data. BISP Office of Airworthiness keeps a copy of the signed ISB approval sheet.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 53





4.7.3 Flowchart: SB Process Process Overview

Airworthiness Repercussions (ARM)

Improvement

Customer Request

Vendor Service Bulletin

Reconfiguration

Information return to origin request

SB preparation

SB Leader signature

CVE signature

Authority (Mandatory ISB and MSB)

Office of Airworthiness Signature MSB,ISB

SB Approved

SB released


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 54





4.7.4 Vendor Vendor SB Service Bulletins prepared by vendors shall be issued containing the following statement « The technical content of this document is approved under the authority of DOA n° EASA.21J.313>>. The BISP Design Office gives this agreement through procedure SP0019. For Mandatory VSB the Vendor remains responsible for EASA approval process.

4.8 Structu Stru ctu ral Repair Repair 4.8.1

General

The purpose of this section is to describe the BISP repair procedure. A structural damage found on an in-service aircraft must be corrected through the application of an appropriate repair. This repair must be designed with the purpose to restore an acceptable safety level, at least identical to the one at time of the initial Type Design, in compliance with Part21A.433. Refer to procedure SP0015

4.8.2 Repair Repair Approv App roval al Sheet (RAS) (RAS) The RAS dossier consists of the RAS form, the damage identification and reporting source, the repair drawings and/or repair dispositions and the justification documents. 4.8.2.1 Repair Repair Classification / Approval Minor repair For minor repair, the Repair Approval Designee (RAD) endorses the RAS by signing the statement: Ap pr ov ed u nd er DOA n° EASA . 21J.313. 21J .313. A copy of approved RAS R AS is sent to the EASA for information. Major repair For major structure repair the RAS and substantiation dossier is sent to EASA for approval. Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 55





4.8.2.2 Responsibilities The Compliance Verification of RAS is ensured by the CVE : refer paragraph 6.7.2.1 t 6.7.2.2 list of Authorized Signatories. The Office of Airworthiness endorse the RAS for minor repair and provide RAS for major repair to EASA approval, refer paragraph 6.2.3 list of Authorized Signatories.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 56





4.8.2.3 Flowchart : RAS Process Overview Operator

Support engineering

BISP Design/ Stress Office

BISP Office of Airworthiness

(1) Damage identification 1

(2) Is any previous approved existing applicable (SRM)? 3

2

(3) reception of the repair information (4) forward damage/ repair detail, (5) Repair establishment/confirmation: - Repair scheme, drawings, - Classification, RAS, - Interim approval period when required Justification data. -

4

5

6

5’

7

(5’) Signature of the repair solution. (6) Repair file compilation including recording of the RAS

Not approved 8

9

(7) Verification of the RAS (8) Statement of approval: not approved, interim, definitive.

definitive 12

(9) Launch appropriate action to get approval. (10) Definitive approval with reference to DOA EASA.21J.313

11

archiving 12’

10

Interim 10’

11’

(11) Technical dossier file (12) Receive the RAS (10’) Interim approval with reference to DOA EASA.21J.313 (11’) Technical dossier file (12’) Receive the RAS


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 57





4.9 Concession 4.9.1 General The concessions are non conformity to Type Design or change to Type Design. Refer to procedure SP0017.

4.9.2 Classification Non recordable concessions part of general aircraft design configuration: refer to SP0010. Recordable concessions having impact of aircraft airworthiness and requiring approval by BISP Office of Airworthiness designated staff

4.9.3 Responsibilities The Compliance Verification of recordable concessions is ensured by the CVE : refer paragraph 6.7.2.1 to 6.7.2.2 list of Authorized Signatories. The Office of Airworthiness designated staff endorse the recordable concessions Sheet according to paragraph 6.2.3 list of Authorized Signatories.

4.10 Continued Airworthiness 4.10.1 General The BISP obligation is to keep an acceptable level of safety of the Be-200E ( a derivative of Be-200 and Be-200ES/ES-E aircraft). The objective for BISP is to design, produce and verify aircraft to the highest possible level of safety.

Consequently, each firm involved in the design, production, operation and/or maintenance of commercial transport aircraft considers having an internal aircraft safety organization to provide additional assurance of airworthiness to company management, and to the relevant Authorities. It is a collective responsibility between Operators and BISP to accomplish the duty of ensuring the airworthiness of aircraft.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 58





It is the responsibility of BISP, as a Type Certificate Holder, to develop a system for safety engineering in the design, development, test, production, and support of its product during its operational life. To achieve this objective, BISP has developed a "Continued Airworthiness System". Refer to procedure SP0018.

4.10.2 Manufacturer responsibilities BISP, as a type Certification Holder, has the following responsibilities: to notify to the National authorities reported failures, malfunctions or defects that could result in a hazard to safety, as defined in Part 21.3 (b) and (c), to maintain an adequate level of safety for the fleet, taking any appropriate corrective actions.

•

•

4.10.3 Continued Airworthi ness System The BISP Airworthiness system as follows: -

Identification of safety items and unsafe conditions Analysis and decision making Criteria for BISP to report to AA Definition of corrective actions Information to Operators.

4.10.4 Identification of Potential Unsafe Conditio ns In accordance with Part 21A.3(b) the type certificate holder report to the Authorities. BISP Office of Airworthiness informs EASA about identified reportable occurrences. For those events which have safety impact and those for which an urgent action is required, the information report will be forwarded to the EASA not later than three days after identification of the failure, malfunction or defect, unless exceptional circumstances. Identification and classification of safety items and unsafe conditions BISP opens an Airworthiness Review sheet for each significant occurrence to be reported to Authority.

4.10.5 Corrective actions implementation Corrective actions are implemented in accordance with the severity of the reported occurrence.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 59





4.10.6 Airworthiness Revi ew Meetings/ Progress meetings Airworthiness Review Meetings (ARM) are held between BISP and EASA on regular basis to cover routine issues. ARM meetings are organized to cover: - Structure, - Systems, - Engine.

4.10.7 Information to Operators. BISP must inform all Operators about occurrences and any associated corrective actions that could affect the fleet safety level. BISP operators report to BISP any problem deriving from the implementation of the corrective actions.

4.10.8 Responsibilities The Office of Airworthiness designated staff ensure initiation of activities as response to failure evaluation and provide information to EASA according EASA GM N°1 to 21A.239(a)3.1.4(u). Refer to paragraph 6.2.3 list of Authorized Signatories


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 60





4.11 Flight Tests 4.11.1 Organization The Flight Testing embraces those aspects of flight development and certification for Be-200E series assigned to Taganrog facilities. BISP organization, to perform all activities related to flight test, is described in BISP Flight Operational Manual (FOM) . Production aircraft are handled in accordance with FOM. The Acceptance Manual (AM) gives the program of the customer acceptance flight. Refer to procedure SP0016.

4.11.2 Responsibility All flight test crewmembers belong to Beriev flight test department. In matters relating to flight discipline and flight safety they are under accountability to the Chief Test Pilot. Flight Tests department (refer to Beriev Organization chart No 4) is responsible to manage tests and production Aircraft acceptance flights and to organize and carry out the flight tests required for development and certification of Be-200 series. An integrated team is responsible for co-ordination of all actions necessary to ensure that different materials (drawing, hardware pieces, computers at the right standard, etc) are available to achieve the required configuration and is responsible to follow-up the technical problems and the results of the tests. BISP Partner Beriev flight test department has overall responsibility for flight test installation.

4.11.3 Aircraft co nfiguration During certification testing the Aircraft is in a condition representative of the type Design in all-relevant aspects. The Aircraft configuration is handled by procedure SP0016.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 61





4.11.4 Flight test and development Under the overall technical responsibility of the BISP Chief Engineer, the Flight Tests department in conjunction with the integrated BISP formally defines the Aircraft configuration to meet each flight of flight program phase. The Flight Test Instrumentation is defined by the Flight Test Installation Team, flight test department and specialist engineers.

4.11.5 Certification The Certification Flight Test Program will include all the flight tests necessary to demonstrate compliance with applicable requirement and is submit to EASA for approval. The Program will contain details of the proposed flight tests and will identify those tests that the Authority requires to perform or witness. Before certification flight tests, BISP Office of Airworthiness submit to the Authorities the Flight-test program in order to obtain the Authorities approval of the Certification Flight Testing program.

4.11.6 Flight clearance The development aircraft, which have not yet obtained their type certificate from EASA, are authorized to fly with a "permit to fly" delivered by the local AA. The application for “permit to fly” is made in accordance with Part 21A174. A permit to fly has to be requested from any foreign country being over flown or flown to by the Aircraft manufacturer, when flights have to be performed for test or demonstration purposes.

4.11.7 Pre-flight Test Pre-flight actions are performed in accordance with the FOM. Before flight of a new prototype the complete flight order and associated limitations is signed by Head of Design Organization and attached to the Flight Clearance certificate being presented to the flight crew of the Aircraft. This is signed by the Captain and Flight Test Engineer to indicate the acceptance.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 62





4.11.8 Certification of flight tests results Flight Test Department is responsible to endorse the flight crew reports or flight test results and analysis ( refer to SP0016), including an additional independent verification performed by the relevant CVE in accordance with the list of Authorized signatures ( see paragraph 6.7.2.1 to 6.7.2.2). BISP Office of Airworthiness provides EASA with the complete documentation according to procedure SP0070 or SP0011.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 63





CHAPTER 5 CO-ORDINATION BETWEEN DESIGN AND PRODUCTION


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 64



5



CO-ORDINATION BETWEEN DESIGN AND PRODUCTION

5.1 General The BISP Design Organization as necessary collaborates with the programme of the Production Organization to ensure: - Satisfactory co-ordination of design and production; and - Proper support of the continuing airworthiness of the product. The BISP Aircraft Configuration Management Rules (ACMR) manual describes: - how the Aircraft configurations shall be managed by the Design Organization and the Production Organization ; and - the transfer of up to date approved design data from Design Organization to the Production and Maintenance Organizations. Refer to procedure SP0010.

5.2 Responsibilities BISP Chief Engineer Aircraft Be-200E and Chief Engineer Engine D-436TP ensure coordination between their respective Design Organizations and Productions Organizations. Refer to chapter 6.7.1 for list of signatories.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 65





CHAPTER 6 DOA MONITORING SYSTEM


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 66



6



DOA MONITORING SYSTEM

6.1

General

Part 21.A239 (a)(3) requires to independently monitoring the compliance with, and adequacy of, the documented procedures of the system (usually done by means of surveillance programs). This monitoring (system) must include a feedback system to the responsible managers in charge of the corrective actions. Monitoring at BISP is the complete activity purposing at checking proper functioning of the Design Assurance System. It shall enable identification, reporting and resolution of DOA deficiencies.

6.2

Organization

The DOAM reports directly to the HDO. He collaborates with the responsible managers of the Design Organization in the development and implementation of the Design Assurance procedures and practices. He remains independent from the monitored functions, in the day-to-day operation. Coordination between technical departments and the persons in charge of the monitoring system has been established: To ensure quick and efficient reporting on resolution of difficulties encountered using the handbook and associated procedures To maintain the design assurance system To optimize auditing activities. •

• •


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 67





6.3 Monitoring program The DOAM establishes an annual surveillance program in order to review the whole Design Organization and procedures within a period of three years (see. Appendix 9). Sample checks, inquiries, any kind of investigations process, as well as products, system, human factor audits can be performed according to events or business and management needs.

6.3.1

Audits

The audits is used to allow the surveillance in order to check on regular basis that the procedures and the activities described in DOH are correctly applied and implemented in the system an audit are described as follows: a) Preparation For each planned audit, the selected lead auditor(s) will define main items described in the DOH to be reviewed according to the program and associated required working documents. b) Performance Audits are carried out by qualified auditor(s), with if necessary the participation of specialists of the audited activity. c) Debriefing and reporting The auditor(s) shall perform the following tasks: Debriefing to the auditees and their management on the discrepancies, Acceptance of the audit results by the auditees and their manager, Corrective actions and target date for implementation shall be discussed and agreed described on Non conformance sheet (see. Appendix 10). Distribution of the report to the auditee(s), and to the HDO. • • •

•


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 68



6.3.2



Classification Level of finding

When evidence of non-compliance to the Part 21 and DOH procedures is detected by the EASA it shall be classified according Part 21A.258 criteria: (i.e. Level 1, 2 or 3). After receipt of the notification of finding by the Authority, BISP will proceed as follows: Level 1 finding : In case of level one the holder of DOA will demonstrate corrective action to the satisfaction of the Agency within a period of no more than 21 working days after written confirmation of the finding Level 2 finding : In case of level two findings, the correction action period granted by the Agency shall be appropriate to the nature of the finding but in any case initially shall not be more than six months. In certain circumstances and subject to the nature of the finding the Agency may extend the six-month period subject to a satisfactory corrective action plan agreed by the Agency. Level 3 finding : The DAS responsible will demonstrate corrective action to the satisfaction of the Agency within the period defined by BISP. In case of level 1 or 2 findings, the BISP DOA may be subject to a partial or full suspension or revocation. Head of Design, CAE and Design assurance Manager, will confirm reception of the notice of suspension or revocation of the BISP DOA in a timely manner. A presentation of the monitoring activity result (audits) is performed on yearly basis by Design Assurance System responsible to the Authority. BISP allows Airworthiness Authority to perform any investigations including investigation to BISP Industrial Sub-Contractors and Suppliers. The DAS responsible also provides the necessary arrangement to allow the Authority to make any investigations including investigations of subcontractors, necessary to determine compliance with the applicable regulations of Part 21 section A subpart J.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 69





6.3.3 Corrective actions follow-up The Design Assurance Manager ensures that agreed corrective actions (see above paragraph) are implemented in due time, by reviewing periodically the NonConformance Sheets. Non-fulfillment of agreed actions and target dates is systematically reported to the HDO by the DOAM. The DOAM performs an assessment of the auditees response and either, closes the corrective action or launches further additional investigation until the results of his assessment are satisfactory

6.3.4 Training The staff of the Design Assurance System shall be trained on the basic principles of the Design Organization and specific subjects related to their function. It is set-up by modules covering the following subjects: • • •

Design Organization Approval, Basic Principles, Documentation “Airworthiness Regulations” “Basic procedures” for Type Certification, Individual A/C Certification, Continued Airworthiness.

The level of details will be adapted to the training degree required.

6.3.5 Qualification and Experience BISP is stating the Qualifications and Experience of the management staff and other persons responsible for making decisions affecting airworthiness by issuance of a EASA form 4. The qualification of certifying staff is based on their knowledge, background and experience and a specific training is established by the organization to ensure that it is appropriate to the product, part, or appliance to be released. The staff in all technical departments is due to their special qualifications and experience, able to provide assurance of the design or changes of a part or appliance as well as the compilation of all data needed to meet the applicable airworthiness requirements while taking into account the present state of the art and new experience.

6.4

Yearly report

The BISP Design Organization Approval Manager, establishes a yearly activity report by compiling the data issued by the DOAM, this report includes a synthesis of the monitoring activities. It is submitted to the HDO for validation and issue to the EASA (see. Appendix_11). Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 70





6.4.1 Yearly review Once a year the Design Organization Approval Manager organizes a meeting with the HDO, CAE and the responsible staff of the Design Organization, aimed to review the Design Assurance System are described as follows: -

Design Organization activity (including, suppliers), Monitoring program and its status, Training, Perspective, If necessary, procedures and organization arrangements.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 71





6.5 Change to Design assur ance System The Design Assurance system is subject to continuous modifications. This section covers those modifications, the assessment of the significance of the changes and the manner in which changes are managed and documented up until approval and implementation (see. Appendix_12). Changes to Design organization system surveillance are within the following domains: - Responsibilities - Resources - Procedures Change to the Design Organization System Monitoring is classified as significant when affects: - Terms of reference - DOA holder - Relocation of new premises - Industrial organization (partnership, suppliers, design worksharing) - CVE - Independent monitoring principles - Procedures directly reported in the DOH - Substantial reduction in number and/or experience of the staff. As consequence of a significant change, a new issue of the DOH will be sent by DAS responsible to the EASA for approval. All other changes to DAS that are not in the above list will be classified as not significant. A non-significant change will originate a new issue of the DOH that will be directly approved by DAS manager. Copy of the new issue will be sent by DAS responsible to the Authority. All DOH new issues, originated by significant or not significant changes, will be distributed inside the Design Organisation.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 72



6.6



Autho rized Signatories

6.6.1 General An authorized signatory is a person authorized to attest validity of the content of Certification Documents (justifications documents) by signing them. The design assurance authorized signature is covered by the List of authorized signatories in paragraph 6.7.

6.6.2

Nomination and qualification of authorized signatories

6.6.2.1 General All authorized signatories are nominated according to written procedures with due regard to their qualification and experience. The signatories may sign as soon as they are nominated in writing. Notification of nomination of design assurance signatories are kept on file by DOAM. DOAM shall be informed of any signatory change between two DOH issues. In case of unsatisfactory performance of a signatory, the Airworthiness and Certification Committee will request appropriate action to be taken.

6.6.3 Authorized signatories f iles For each authorized signatory identified in the list of authorized signatories paragraph 6.7 the following information is kept, on paper form:

- Name; and -

Date of birth; and Identification number of the authorization; and Job located in; and Position; and Qualification relevant to the position; and Date of first issue of the authorization.

The DOA Manager controls these files. The personnel get access to his/her own file. Access to the certifying personnel files is given to the Authority representative when investigating the record system for initial and continued approval or when the Authority has cause to doubt the competence of a particular certifying person. The Design Organization keeps the record for at least two years after the certifying personnel has ceased employment with the organization or at withdrawal of the authorization whichever is the sooner. Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 73




6.7


List of Authorized Signature

6.7.1

DOA Function s NAME

FUNCTION

SITE

Alexander Yavkin

Head of Design Organization

BISP Russia

Gerard Meurey

CAE BE-200E / D-436TP

BISP France

Oleg Demyanenko

Certification Coordinator

BISP Russia

Serguey Fursov

Chief Engineer Be-200E

BISP Russia

TBD

Deputy Chief Engineer Be-200E

BISP Russia

Anatoly Shchyolok

Chief Engineer Engine D-436TP

BISP Ukraine

Gennady Kritsyn

Deputy CE Engine D-436TP

BISP Ukraine

Andre Moussongo

DOA Manager

BISP France

Igor Yarkovoy

DOA Representative

BISP Russia

Sergey Shepelev

DOA Representative

BISP Ukraine


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 74





6.7.2 CVE Authori zed sig natories Authorized signatories Signing as Compliance Verification Engineers ( CVE) for Type Certification document, MAS, RAS, SB and Concessions for their respective ATAs 6.7.2.1 Compliance Verification Engi neer Be-200E BISP in Taganrog, Russia and BISP Toulouse, France

ATA

Sub jec t General Airworthiness requirements FHA,SSA Structures Landing Gear Flight Control System Autopilot Radiocom Indication /Recording Sytem Navigation Oxygene Equipment Icing protection Performance Fly by Wire Fuel System Electrical System Design Structural Aircraft Flight Manual Hydraulic /Pneumatic System Power Plant Fire Protection system Operating Limitations Power Plant Engine Indication, Ignition Noise ARIA-200M Complex Fire Protection Flight Recorders Lightning Protection HIRF Protection Software Lights Controllability and Stability


Draft_DOH_03.doc

CVE

Deputy CVE

Anatolij Sasin

German Kobyzev

Victor Nikulin Victor Kubrak Victor Khandigo Victor Khandigo Vladimir Gozulov Sergej Ganin Igor Goncharov Victor Belenovsky Victor Belenovsky Victor Belida Sergei Kreerenko Leonid Babaev Peter Belov Peter Bagrych Oleg Volkoderov Oleg Lusinov Nickolay Kulinichev Igor Zabaluev Igor Putin A. Yurchenko Yuri Ledovskih Igor Goncharov Igor Dida Anatoly Nadolinsky Victor Putin Yuri Dolgosheev Peter Teichert Yuri Gulyaev Yuri Ogolev

Nickolay Sidirov Ivan Gavrilov NN NN NN Anatolij Sasin Ivan Gavrilov NN NN Ivan Gavrilov Igor Kovalev NN Nickolay Sidirov Valeri Strekoz Ivan Gavrilov Igor Kovalev NN Igor Kovalev Igor Kovalev Igor Kovalev NN NN NN NN NN Alexei Yavkin NN NN Page 75





6.7.2.2 Engine D-436TP Compli ance Verif icati on Engineer (CVE) BISP Zaporozhje, Ukraine

ATA

Sub jec t

Deputy CVE

CVE

Compressor Combustion Chamber Turbine Control Power Plant Stress Engine D-436TP

Vladimir Archipov Vladimir Gusev Vyacheslav Merkulov Vladimir Sedristiy Vladimir Bugrin Alexander Sheremetyev Nickolay Tishchenko

Vyacheslav Merkulov Alexander Sheremetyev Vladimir Archipov Nickolay Tishchenko Nickolay Tishchenko Nickolay Tishchenko Konstantin Chuprina

6.7.3 Office of Airworthiness Authorized Signatories BISP Taganrog, Russia, BISP Zaporozhje, Ukraine and BISP Toulouse, France ATA

Sub jec t CAE BE-200E / D-436TP Certification Coordinator Engine D-436TP Deputy Engine D-436TP HydroMechanical Systems, Cabine Safety/ECS Manuals Electrical Systems Structures Flight Test Engineer Flight Test Pilot Powerplant & Fuel Systems Performance & AFM Flight Controls /Flight by Wire Performance, AFM, Cabine Safety /ECS Noise Avionics/Software Maintenance Integration Operational Integration


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Name Gerard Meurey Oleg Demyanenko Nickolay Tishchenko Konstantin Chuprina Ivan Gavrilov Valeri Strekoz Alexander Stadnik Nickolay Sidorov Dymitri Shkondin Constantin. Babich Igor Kovalev Vladimir Kozachenko NN German Kobyzev Peter Teichert Olivier Avezou Norbert. Guitard

Page 76





CHAPTER 7 DOCUMENT RETENTION


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 77



7



DOCUMENTATION RETENTION

7.1 General Each partners, subcontractor and BISP directorate is responsible to maintain their own archives and keep them available on request from the Authorities. They shall provide visibility of archive content to BISP Office of Airworthiness in Toulouse.

7.2 Handli ng of DOA Archives Archives for existing documentation are located in the Partners facilities. a) General: - Relevant correspondence between Authorities and BISP (official letters), - Minutes of meetings between Authorities and BISP written by BISP: ARM, Type Board Meetings, Certification Meetings, Interface Issue Meetings,

b) Type Certifi cation and Major Changes: -

Application letter or equivalent, Approval Letter, Declaration of Compliance, Type Definition, Modification Approval Sheets, Certification Documents, Supporting Documents, Compliance Record Book, Compliance Check List, Certification Review Items, Compliance Summary Report, Certification Summary Report, Flight Clearance Certificates, Originals of Type Certificates.

c) Minor Changes: - Modification Approval Sheet, - Modification Register through AMCS (Modification Data base).


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 78





d) Individual Aircraft Certification: - Application for (Export) Certificate of Airworthiness, Noise Certificates and Registration, - Aircraft Design Declaration, Copy of Aircraft Certificates including Export Certificate of Airworthiness, Noise Certificates and Non Registration Certificate, - SB approval Sheet. e) Repair: - Repair Approval Sheets, - Justification Documents.

f) Continued Airwort hiness/ Limitations: - Airworthiness Review Sheet and Supporting Data, - Inspection and Mandatory Service Bulletin Release Sheets, - ALS. g) DOA documents: -

DOA Certificates, Design Organization Handbook (DOH), DOH Change Requests, Design Organisation Interface Document (DOID) Surveillance Plan, DOA Annual Report and Attachments, Design Assurance Review, DAT Minutes and Attachments, Surveillance Reports from DOAT, BISP DOA Audit Reports, Authorities correspondence (in), BISP correspondence with Authorities (out), JAR 21 Amendments, Form 4’s, BISP DOA related documents referenced in the DOH, Notification of nomination of signatories as per chapter Authorized signatories.


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 79



7.3



Sites Archives

BISP relies on its main Partners Airworthiness Archive Department for organization of legal archives: Beriev Aircraft Company in Taganrog, archives the following documents Originals of Certification Document Originals of Supporting Documents for Certification Documents, Design information and drawing, Reports and correspondence with the Authorities Specialists, originating from the sites, for compliance issues, Complete modifications technical dossiers and originals of the justification documents and MAS, Originals of Be-200 Loads Manuals. • • • •

•

•

Ivchenko Progress in Zaporozhje, archives the following documents: Originals of Certification Document Originals of Supporting Documents for Certification Documents, Design information and drawing, Reports and correspondence with the Authorities Specialists, originating from the sites, for compliance issues, Complete modifications technical dossiers and originals of the justification documents and MAS. • • • •

•

BISP in Toulous e, Archives the following documents: Original of minutes of meetings with the Authorities Specialists written by the sites  All Be-200E series Certification Documents in electronic format. •

•

7.4 Documentation 7.4.1

Certification Documents format and approval process

Original paper documents are scanned in electronic format as often as it is possible in order to avoid delay in paper transmission and to reduce number of travels. The use of advanced e-business tools has to be maximized for the same reasons. The creation of BISP industrial and AAs e-Rooms to manage communication between Industry and Airworthiness Authorities allows exchanging documents made in electronic format refer to the procedure SP0073. Documents are treated thought an internal validation process by industrials partners into “Industrial eRoom” before their submission to Airworthiness Authorities through the “AAs e-Room”/NECTAR. Ref: XX.xxx/ 06 of 91

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 80





CHAPTER 8 SUPPLIERS


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 81



8



SUPPLIERS

8.1

General

BISP will evaluate and select all news suppliers on the basis of their ability to meet contract requirements including quality management system and specific quality assurance requirements. The compliance with EASA Part21A.239(c) “The design organization shall specify the manner in which the design assurance system accounts for the acceptability of the parts or appliances designed or the tasks performed by partners or sub-contractor according to methods which are subject of written procedures” is demonstrated throughout the application of that policy. Refer to procedure SP0030.

8.2 Airw orthiness Participation For the specific case of supplier (partner/ subcontractors) organizations that have been given a level of authority in the process of the Airworthiness approval of design data, BISP Design Organization Approval has carried up the following work position: To establish to its own satisfaction and the satisfaction of the Aviation Authorities, the adequacy of that supplier’s Design Assurance System in accordance with Part21A.243 (b). For that aim a set of supplementary questions has been developed by DAOM ( refer to SP0030). It shall be used as a basis for assessment of a new supplier where a delegation of Airworthiness approval is envisaged. •

BISP has to ensure that for these suppliers an Interface Document is established with a statement of the assurance of compliance required by Part 21A.239 (b) and directly or by cross-reference, descriptions and organization of the design and Airworthiness activities of those suppliers, to establish this statement. •

8.3

Content and Structure of Interface Documents and Quality Plan

The Interface document is a means retained to comply with Part21 for the supplier or partner that has been given a level of authority for the Airworthiness approval of the design data. A supplier must demonstrate during assessment compliance with certain basic requirements that are fundamental to the effective control and assurance of design that cover as follows: Product qualification Process qualification (compliance to ISO and additional requirements specific to Airworthiness matters) • •


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 82





Description, functioning and procedures for Design, Design Assurance, Certification and Airworthiness Organizations Communication and Liaison with BISP Development and Test Program Design and Documentation Change Control Management of the second level subcontractors Transfer of design data to BISP Transfer of design data to manufacturing Product support Defect and accident investigation Records and archiving Security and safe keeping BISP acceptance of the document Supplier statement of undertaking (to ensure application within organization). Scope of design work Scope of authorization for approval. •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Surveillance of suppliers Procurement Quality conducts the general Monitoring of all selected suppliers. In addition, regarding the suppliers for which an Airworthiness approval of design data has been granted with an Interface Document as part of this DOH, the verification of the efficiency of their Design Assurance System is done during specific surveillance meeting (Design Assurance Review) led by BISP with Procurement Quality concurrence. These are carried out on a regular basis between BISP and the supplier with the assistance of dedicated Engineering BISP specialists. As a minimum, the surveillance meeting for DOA shall ensure that: BISP DOH, Interface Document are known and applied and made available to all staff involved with the applicable procedures. The Interface Document is reviewed accurately and any need of evolution accepted by BISP Discrepancies raised by Engineering specialists are scrutinized and corrective actions taken The exercise of the delegations is properly carried out BISP is aware of any change in the authorised signatories list Audits have been done in accordance with audit programme including the sublevel suppliers; corrective actions have been followed-up until resolution. •

•

•

• • •


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 83





APPENDICES TO DOH


Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 84



9



APPENDIX to p aragraph 6.3 AUDIT MATRIX SUPPORTING PROCEDURES MAIN PROCESS

DOH reference

Type certification and Restricted type process

SUBJECT

PART21

Classification

21.91

Major change, including configuration control

Approval of minor changes

21.20 21.31 21.93 21.95 21.113 21.114 21.115 21.A239(a) 21.93 21.95 21.113 21.114 21.A239(a) 21.93

Continuous airworthiness

Continuous airworthiness

21.3

Change to approved changes Records keeping

Change to approved changes Records and keeping

21.117

Documentation

Technical Documentation

21.31

Establisment of maintenance and operating documentation

Minor change, including configuration control

Approval of minor changes

Repairs

Repairs

Personnel

Training personnel files

21A243

Tests

Ground and flight tests

21.35

Majors suppliers

Technical specificationcontract handling Monitoring system

21.A239© 21.A243 21.A239(a)

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Year 1

21.55

21.57 21.61 21.119 21.120 21.431

Monitoring

Date of planned audit

Page 85 of 91


Year 2

Year 3 Remarks




10 APPENDIX to paragraph 6.3.1 AUDIT REPORT & INVESTIG. SHEET Internal AUDIT REPORT External

Beriev Irku t Seaplane SUBJECT: Audit N°. : Company/site: Date of the Audit:

Main Reference document incl. Issue: Report N°.:_ _ _ _/_ _ Issue Date :

Conclusion of the audit

Anomaly Report

Auditor comments

Distribution list: AUDITEE (S)

AUDITOR(S)

•

•

•

•

•

•

Report agreed by Auditee

Name

Date& Signature

Audit Team Leader

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 86 of 91





APPENDIX to paragraph 5.3.1 INVESTIGATION SHEET AUDIT INVESTIGATION SHEET BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE Title :

Description:

Origin:

Open on :

Object :

Reference

Responsible:

Target:

Action:

Closed on:

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 87 of 91





11 APPENDIX to paragraph 6.4 YEARLY REPORT MEMO Date :


Title : BISP DOA YEARLY REPORT

FROM : BISP DOAM

REFERENCE : BISP-M00.001/06

TO

COPIES

Prepared by: DOAM

Approved by: HDO

Signature:

Signature:

Date

Date

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 88 of 91





MEMO BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE

TABLE OF CONTENT 1. COMPANY EVOLUTION

1.1 Evolutions report 1.2 Evolutions implemented during the period of reference 1.2.1Activities 1.2.2 Company Structure 1.2.3 Staff 1.2.4 Subcontractors 1.2.5 Evolutions planned for next period reference 1.3 Summary of qualit y assurance syst em evol uti ons 1.3.2 Period of reference 1.3.3 Organization 1.3.4 Staff 1.3.5 Missions 1.3.6 Methods 1.3.7 Quality Documentation 1.3.8 Planned evolution for the next period of reference 2. ACTIVITY REPORT 2.1 Changes developed in the period of reference (major and minor) 2.2 Repairs developed in the period of reference (major and minor) 2.3 Comparison with previous period 2.4 Scheduled activity for next period 3. MONITORING PROGRAM 3.1 Internal surveillance program 3.1.1 Scheduled program 3.1.2 Internal surveillance program results synthesis 3.1.3 Internal surveillance program for the next period of reference 3.2 External surveillance program 3.2.1 Scheduled program 3.2.2 External surveillance program results synthesis 3.2.3 External surveillance program for the next period of reference

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 89 of 91





MEMO BERIEV IRKUT SEAPLANE

3.3 Surveillance performed by customers 4 NON CONFORMITY HANDLING 4.1 Non conformity record list 4.2 Corrective action programme 4.3 Impact on surveillance 5. Conclusions

Ref: XX.xxx/ 06

Draft_DOH_03.doc

Page 90 of 91


Draft DOH 03

Recommend Documents