Staff Instruction (SI) No. 302-001

Assessment and Issuance of Conditions to an Airport or Heliport Certificate

Internal documents and documents hyperlinked and stored on Transport Canada's intranet mentioned in this document are available upon request. See Contact Office below.

Issuing Office: Civil Aviation Document No.: SI 302-001
File Classification No.: Z 5000-32 Issue No.: 02
RDIMS No.: 11105042-V13 Effective Date: 2016-07-27
  1. 1.0 INTRODUCTION
    1. 1.1 Purpose
    2. 1.2 Applicability
    3. 1.3 Description of Changes
  2. 2.0 REFERENCES AND REQUIREMENTS
    1. 2.1 Reference Documents
    2. 2.2 Cancelled Documents
    3. 2.3 Definitions and Abbreviations
  3. 3.0 BACKGROUND
  4. 4.0 ASSESSING MOSs OR CONDITIONS TO AN AIRPORT/HELIPORT CERTIFICATE
    1. 4.1 Assessment Requirements
    2. 4.2 Criteria for Assessment
    3. 4.3 Tools for Assessment
    4. 4.4 Assessment of MOSs & Associated Conditions to an Airport or Heliport Certificate Against the Criteria
  5. 5.0 PROCESS FOR REVIEW
    1. 5.1 Transport Canada National Air Services Policy Branch (ACEB)
    2. 5.2 Transport Canada Environnemental Protection and Standards Division (AARTG)
    3. 5.3 Flight Standards (AARTA)
    4. 5.4 Completion of Certificate
    5. 5.5 Signature
    6. 5.6 Process Chart
  6. 6.0 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
  7. 7.0 DOCUMENT HISTORY
  8. 8.0 CONTACT OFFICE
  9. APPENDIX A — PAGE 2 OF AIRPORT CERTIFICATE (FORM # 26-0610)
  10. APPENDIX B — PAGE 2 OF HELICOPTER CERTIFICATE (FORM # 26-0741)
  11. APPENDIX C — ASSESSMENT PAPER
  12. APPENDIX D — SUMMARIZED PROCESS CHART

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

  1. The purpose of this Staff instruction (SI) is to provide national standards and procedures for considering deviations of a permanent nature to certification regulatory standards and recommended practices at aerodromes and for the issuance of an airport certificate with associated conditions or the addition of conditions to an existing airport certificate pursuant to subsections 302.03 (3) of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs), or issuance of a heliport certificate with associated conditions or the addition of conditions to an existing heliport certificate pursuant to subsections 305.08 (4) of the CARs.

1.2 Applicability

  1. This document is applicable to Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), Headquarters (HQ) and Regional personnel involved with the issuance of an airport certificate with conditions pursuant to subsections 302.03(3) of the CARs, or issuance of a heliport certificate with conditions pursuant to subsections 305.08(4) of the CARs.
  2. The assessment procedures detailed in this SI do not apply to existing deviation, existing or exemptions to standards, national exemptions and/or operational limits; however ‘legacy’ deviations, exemptions to standards and/or operational limits are required to be listed on page 2 of the certificate.
  3. It should be noted that any reference to “exemptions” in this SI pertains to standards only and not exemptions from regulations.
  4. This information is also available to the aviation industry for information purposes.

1.3 Description of Changes

  1. New version of SI. Significant changes through-out document. Terminology streamlined to reflect a single new term, “modification of standards”. Historical background better explained. Assessment process clarified to reflect when assessment is required. Process for review has been streamlined. Legal review not necessarily required, Flight Standards (AARTA) to be consulted at initial application/assessment stage. AARTA provides QA and final sign-off. Completion of certificate section added. Appendix “examples” reflect actual conditions, limitations and/or procedures that exist.   

2.0 REFERENCES AND REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Reference Documents

  1. It is intended that the following reference materials be used in conjunction with this document:
    1. Aeronautics Act (R.S., 1985, c. A-2);
    2. Part III, Subpart 2 of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) — Airports;
    3. Part III, Subpart 5 of the CARsHeliports;
    4. Transport Canada Publication, TP 312, — Aerodrome Standards and Recommended Practices;
    5. Transport Canada Publication, TP 2586, Edition 03, 1985-04-01 — Heliport and Helideck Standards and Recommended Practices;
    6. Transport Canada Publication, TP 7775, Edition 02, 1991-03-01 — Procedures for the Certification of Aerodromes as Airports;
    7. Transport Canada form number 26-0610, Version 0902-03 — Civil Aviation Airport Certificate;
    8. Transport Canada form number 26-0740, Version 0902-01 — Airport Certificate Paper for forms 26-0610, 26-0741 & 26-0742;
    9. Transport Canada form number 26-0741, Version 0902-01 — Civil Aviation Heliport Certificate; and
    10. Transport Canada form number 26-0742, Version 0902-01 — Civil Aviation Water Airport Certificate.

2.2 Cancelled Documents

  1. Not applicable.
  2. By default, it is understood that the publication of a new issue of a document automatically renders any earlier issues of the same document null and void.  

2.3 Definitions and Abbreviations

  1. The following definitions are used in this document:
    1. Assessment: a comprehensive, documented process used in decision-making to determine a course of action and, for the purposes of this SI , is deemed equivalent to the aeronautical study specified in paragraph 302.03(1)(b) of the CARs.
    2. MOS: ‘Modification of Standards’ means any change to airport or heliport standards or replacement conditions as specified by the Minister that relate to the same subject matter as the unmet requirement and that are necessary to achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to the one that is established by the requirement to protect the public interest and to ensure aviation safety. For the purposes of this SI, MOS shall include the following terms:
      1. Deviation: an alternative procedure developed to provide an equivalent level of safety approved by the Chief, Air Navigation Policies and Standards. (This terminology [specific to aerodromes] was discontinued shortly after the introduction of the CARs on 10 September 1996, however many permanent deviations still exist.).
      2. Recurring Exemption: For the purpose of this SI means any exemption to standards required for certification that has had multiple renewals.
    3. Minister: the Minister of Transport
  2. The following abbreviations are used in this document:
    1. CAD: Civil Aviation Directive
    2. CARs: Canadian Aviation Regulations
    3. NCAMX: National Civil Aviation Management Executive
    4. OPI: Office of Primary Interest
    5. PRS: Policy and Regulatory Services
    6. RDIMS: Records, Document and Information Management System
    7. SEA: Strategic Environmental Assessment
    8. TCCA: Transport Canada Civil Aviation

3.0 BACKGROUND

  1. Under subsections 302.03(3) and 305.08(4) of the CARs, where an aerodrome does not meet a standard set out in the aerodrome standards and recommended practices publications, the Minister or an authorized officer may specify in an airport or heliport certificate such conditions relating to the subject-matter of the standard as are necessary to ensure a level of safety equivalent to that established by the standard and as are necessary in the public interest and to ensure aviation safety. In order to include conditions on an airport certificate that provide for an equivalent level of safety, an aeronautical study is required in under paragraph 302.03(1)(b) of the CARs.
  2. Historically, deviations have been granted by the Minister to airports that were certified but could not necessarily meet all of the standards required for initial or ongoing certification. The term “deviation” was for the most part discontinued after the introduction of the CARs in late 1996, however many deviations were permanent in nature. After the introduction of the CARs, “exemptions” were used as the tool to identify airport and heliports that required changes or modified standards in order to be certified or to maintain certification. Some of these issued exemptions were permanent in nature however many had short renewal timeframes and as a result have become “recurring exemptions”. This SI introduces the concept of the Modification of Standards (MOS) as a simplified method to deal with both past and present deviations and exemptions to standards.
  3. When considering specifying conditions of a permanent nature to an airport or heliport certificate in the course of the initial certification process of an airport or heliport or for specifying conditions to an existing certificate, TCCA HQ and Regional personnel shall demonstrate due diligence and document the decision making process on behalf of the Minister.
  4. Conditions to an airport certificate issued pursuant to Subpart 302.03 of the CARs or a heliport certificate issued pursuant to Subpart 305.08 of the CARs constitute a MOS authorized by the Minister to establish an alternate means of compliance with the applicable standards. The conditions to a certificate are used for initial certification or for continued certification purposes and can include airport or heliport changes to the “level of service”, modifications to the physical characteristics or changes the operational use associated with their facility. Operational use changes refers to runways, taxiways or FATOs and may include changes such as aircraft type or size.
  5. Accordingly there are a number of requirements not specific to Part III of the CARs, but which are required by other regulations, or Acts, such as the Canadian Environmental Protection Act , 1999. These additional requirements are detailed within this SI.
  6. Attached Appendix A and B provide examples of the types of MOSs, conditions and operational limits that should be listed on page 2 of the certificates.

4.0 ASSESSING MOSs OR CONDITIONS TO AN AIRPORT/HELIPORT CERTIFICATE

4.1 Assessment Requirements

  1. Mosses issued prior to the publishing of this SI are not required to be re-assessed. Previously issued MOSs still in-force, are considered to have met the regulations, standards and policies in effect at the time of original issue. They however are still required to be identified on page 2 of their respective airport or heliport certificates.
  2. Traceability of the historical documentation is required to verify the origins of past deviations, exemptions to standards or MOSs. If historical documentation cannot be produced then the assessment process outlined in this SI shall be followed.
  3. Prior to initiating the assessment process, the HQ Flight Standards Branch (AARTA) shall be consulted for concurrence that a new MOS request can be addressed under subsections 302.03(3) or 305.08(4) of the CARs.
  4. Assessments shall be conducted for the consideration of all new MOSs of a permanent nature and associated conditions to an airport or heliport certificate. An assessment is a comprehensive, documented process used in decision-making to determine a course of action. For the purposes of this SI, assessments are conducted to determine whether to specify, deny or cancel conditions to an airport or heliport certificate.
  5. Each assessment, when required shall be conducted and documented independently. Regardless of the results of previous or similar assessments, an assessment shall be conducted each time a decision pertaining to a condition to an airport or heliport certificate is considered, to assess the potential risks associated with the conditions, which may have changed with the passage of time and the circumstances, under which the conditions were originally issued, denied or cancelled.
  6. Operational limits or restrictions may form part of the conditions attached to the MOS for an airport or heliport. As such, the specific limiting or restricting conditions for airports as determined by CAR 302.03(3) shall be specified on the airport certificate. Examples of this could be a restriction to a very specific aircraft type, size, weight, passenger capacity, etc. Specific limiting or restricting conditions for heliports as determined by CAR 305.08(4) or operational limits for heliports as determined by CAR 305.20 shall also be specified on the heliport certificate Operational limits specific to CAR 305.20 do not require an assessment.

4.2 Criteria for Assessment

  1. The decision to issue, deny or cancel conditions to an airport certificate pursuant to subsections 302.03(1) and (3) of the CARs or a heliport certificate pursuant to subsections 305.08(1) and (4) of the CARs shall be made further to an assessment of the two following criteria:
    1. level of safety equivalent to that established by the standard; and
    2. public interest.

4.3 Tools for Assessment

  1. The “Assessment Paper” (Appendix C to this SI) is one example of a tool available for the assessment of the aviation safety and the public interest criteria when considering conditions to an airport certificate pursuant to subsection 302.03(3) of the CARs or a heliport certificate pursuant to subsection 305.08(4) of the CARs.
  2. Regardless of what assessment tool is chosen when considering MOSs of a permanent nature and the associated conditions to an airport or heliport certificate, the assessment exercise shall include the analysis of the two-fold test set out in paragraphs 302.03(1)(a) and (b) of the CARs or paragraph 305.08(1)(b) and subsection 305.08(4) of the CARs, namely the level of safety to that established by the standard test and the public interest test.

4.4 Assessment of MOSs & Associated Conditions to an Airport or Heliport Certificate Against the Criteria

4.4.1 Aviation Safety
  1. With respect to the aviation safety criteria, consideration shall be given to whether and how the decision pertaining to the MOS and conditions to an airport certificate will impact the safety of the aviation transportation system and whether an level of safety equivalent to that established by the standard can be maintained if a certificate with condition(s) is issued or if conditions are added to an existing airport or heliport certificate.
4.4.2 Public Interest
  1. With respect to the public interest criteria, consideration shall be given, at a minimum, to whether the granting of the conditions to an airport or heliport certificate is in the public interest and whether and how it will impact the efficiency of the transportation system and the environment.
4.4.3 Economic Impact
  1. Under the umbrella of the public interest test, when considering a MOS of a permanent nature for an airport or heliport that has potential of unfair economic advantage of one airport or heliport over another, or any other situation where social or economic policy issues of national concern may be implicated, a socio-economic assessment shall be conducted in accordance with one of the assessment process under paragraph 4.3(1) of this SI.
  2. Transport Canada National Air Services Policy (ACEB) would normally conduct the assessment of the economic impact, when required, separately. The Office of Primary Interest (OPI) shall send the draft conditions, the draft assessment document along with the letter of request sent by the applicant to ACEB who should conduct the assessment of the economic impact.
  3. Following the reception of the results of the economic analysis by ACEB, the OPI shall include the conclusions of the economic analysis in the assessment tool, before submitting the file to Flight Standards (AARTA) for review.
4.4.4 Environmental impact
  1. Under the umbrella of the public interest test, in all cases, consideration shall be given to whether and how the MOS and associated conditions will impact the environment. A Strategic Environmental Analysis (SEA) may need to be conducted.
  2. The SEA contributes to decision-making by informing decision-makers about the positive and negative environmental effects of the decision and the means to optimize the positive effects and reduce or avoid the negative ones. When assessing a request to issue an airport certificate with conditions, the requirement to conduct a SEA is intended to identify any environmental effects that may result from the issuance of a certificate with conditions and determine the significance of those environmental effects in a defensible manner that is transparent within a policy process.
  3. The OPI shall send the draft certificate with conditions along with the letter of request from the applicant and the draft assessment document to Transport Canada Environmental Protection and Standards Division (AARTG) who will conduct the preliminary environmental scan of an SEA using the Transport Canada Preliminary Scan template.
  4. Should the preliminary scan reveal that the operation covered by the certificate with conditions has a potential to impact the environment, whether the impact is negative or positive, AARTG will coordinate the undertaking of a full SEA in the form of a detailed analysis.
  5. In the case of a request to reassess conditions to a certificate, a SEA shall be conducted if one has not been conducted during the assessment of the original issuance of the certificate with conditions. In the case where a SEA has been previously conducted, a validation of the previous SEA is to be made by AARTG during the assessment of the renewal request in accordance with and include in the assessment document.
  6. Following the reception of the SEA by AARTG, the OPI shall include the conclusions of the analysis in the assessment tool, before submitting the file to HQ Flight Standards Branch (AARTA) for review. In addition, the OPI shall include the SEA with the certification with conditions file as it goes through the approval process.

5.0 PROCESS FOR REVIEW

5.1 Transport Canada National Air Services Policy Branch (ACEB)

  1. If a socio-economic assessment has been conducted, sign-off from ACEB is required before submitting the file to AARTA for sign-off.

5.2 Transport Canada Environnemental Protection and Standards Division (AARTG)

  1. In all cases, sign-off from AARTG is required before submitting the file to AARTA for sign-off. AARTG are responsible for conducting the preliminary environmental scan of an SEA.

5.3 Flight Standards (AARTA)

  1. AARTA shall conduct the final review of all documents and will be the last sign-off before the original document is submitted for signature. The final review by Flight Standards may require consultation with Policy and Regulatory Services.

5.4 Completion of Certificate

  1. Forms 26-0610 — Airport Certificate, 26-0741 — Heliport Certificate and 26-0742 — Water Airport Certificate provide the template tombstone information for the front page of the certificate. All certificates shall be printed on the Certificate Paper form 26-0740. This paper can be ordered using the iProcurement process. Conditions, Limitations and/or Special Procedures are detailed on the reverse side of the appropriate certificate.

5.5 Signature

  1. The airport certificate will be signed by the Regional Director, Civil Aviation of the appropriate TCCA Region. If additional certificate pages are required to detail the Conditions, Limitations and/or Special Procedures, each additional page shall be signed by the Regional Director, Civil Aviation of the appropriate TCCA Region.

5.6 Process Chart

  1. See Appendix D.

6.0 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

  1. Not applicable.

7.0 DOCUMENT HISTORY

  1. Staff Instruction (SI) 302-001 Issue 01, RDIMS 5058665 (E), 6536396 (F), dated 2011-06-27 — Assessment and Issuance of Conditions to an Airport or Heliport Certificate.

8.0 CONTACT OFFICE

For more information, please contact the:
Program Manager, Flight Standards - Aerodromes (AARTAA)

Phone: Telephone: 613-991-9939
Fax: 613-954-1602
E-mail: Email: guy.heneault@tc.gc.ca

Suggestions for amendment to this document are invited, and should be submitted via e-mail at:
TC.Flights.Standards-Normesdevol.TC@tc.gc.ca.

[original signed by]

Robert Sincennes
Director, Standards
Civil Aviation

APPENDIX A — PAGE 2 OF AIRPORT CERTIFICATE (FORM # 26-0610)

CONDITIONS, LIMITATIONS AND SPECIAL PROCEDURES

The following conditions, limitations and special procedures are in effect for this certificate.

[All certificates should list applicable standard used for certification and date of previous replaced certificate, if applicable]

Airport certified to TP 312 4th Edition

Replaces certificate issued June 02, 2004.

[Examples of Deviations, Exemptions or Modification of Standards]

Example A — Pre-existing exemption, deviation or modification of standards issued before
10 September 1996:

A deviation to standard was approved with respect to infringements of the transitional and take-off/approach surfaces as described in your Technical Analysis dated December 7, 1988. These deviations are in respect to standards described in TP 312 [3rd edition], Part 2, Chapter 7, Paragraph 7.3 and in TP 312, Part 2, Chapter 5, Paragraph 5.1.C. The current CFS ‘CAUTION’ is appropriate to provide an equivalent level of safety. This deviation dated prior to 10 September 1996 is considered to have met the regulations, standards and policies in effect at the time of original issue.

[This last statement is important for identifying older “legacy” deviations]

Example B — Pre-existing exemption, deviation or modification of standards issued after
10 September 1996:

The configuration of having Taxiway “x” feeding into the runway from behind the threshold via the paved runway strip end (blast pad) of this runway is not a standard configuration and thus specific standards do not exist for this situation.

The following MOS conditions are required:

  1. Threshold/end lights will consist of 3 inset and 1 elevated light in each group and/or wingbars including 5 runway end lights in each group are required.
  2. The end of the paved area prior to the threshold of runway is to be provided with 8 unidirectional red lights (runway end type) evenly spaced across the end.
  3. The light midway between the threshold and pavement end is to be a red unidirectional light facing down the runway.
  4. The intersection point where the taxiway joins the paved runway strip end nearest the end of the paved portion is to be provided with double blue edge lights.
  5. The paved portion prior to the threshold of runway “xx” is not to be considered as part of the LDA, TORA and ASDA declared distances for the opposing runway.

Example C — Another example of a Pre-existing exemption, deviation or modification of standards issued after
10 September 1996:

Due to excessive material back-fill requirements that are not economical or practical at some Northern Airports, the runway graded area for runway 15-33 — Code 4 Non-Precision Approach that normally is required to be 600 feet has been reduced to 400 feet. Scheduled passenger service operations using Runway 15-33 are restricted to usage by the declared critical aircraft (or less), being the Boeing 737-400.

The following MOS conditions are required:

  1. Scheduled passenger service operations for runway 15-33 are restricted to aircraft no larger than the B737-400
  2. Publish a 602.96 restriction “Pursuant to CAR 602.96, scheduled passenger service operations using runway 15-33 are restricted to aircraft no larger than the B737-400” in the CFS and appropriate CAP.
  3. Publish a “CAUTION — Runway 15-33 graded area non-standard.” in the CFS and appropriate CAP.

Example D — Modification of Standards pursuant to this SI:

The [Airport name] Airport Authority has three (3) areas of terrain (glide path reflection pads for runway 11, 16 and 29) remaining in the runway strip that exceed the maximum allowable elevation as required by TP 312 5th Edition subsection 3.1.4.2(1). Under the authority of CAR 302.03(3) the Minister allows for this condition to exist as a requirement for continued airport certification, provided that grade transitions from compliant strip grading areas to non-compliant glide path areas do not exceed 5%. See Assessment Paper XXX-xxx-2015 for complete details. [Actual paper title may be more formalized].

[The purpose of page 2 of the certificate is to identify deviations, exemptions of standards and/or MOS that are attached to the airport. The level of detail should be minimal and is only intended to identify if any MOSs exists. All associated restrictions or conditions required to be in place to validate the related MOS shall also be listed on the certificate. These restrictions or conditions shall also be listed in the Canada Flight Supplement under CARs 602.96(3)(d).]

[The extended level of detail in the above listed deviation, exemptions to standards and MOS is for example purposes only.]

APPENDIX B — PAGE 2 OF HELICOPTER CERTIFICATE (FORM # 26-0741)

CONDITIONS, LIMITATIONS AND SPECIAL PROCEDURES

The following conditions, limitations and special procedures are in effect for this certificate.

[All certificates should list applicable standard used for certification and date of previous replaced certificate, if applicable]

Heliport certified to TP 2586

Replaces certificate issued June 02, 2004

[Operational limits]

Heliport classification, Non-instrument, Day/Night H2

Maximum helicopter length 17.5 m (57.5 ft)

Maximum helicopter weight 11,000 lbs

[Level of service]

The heliport listed on the reverse page of this certificate is NVG compliant.

Night VFR operations utilizing Night Vision Imaging Systems (NVIS) including Night Vision Goggles (NVG) are permitted under the following conditions:

  1. the helicopter operator must conform to Advisory Circular AC 603-001 titled “USE OF NIGHT VISION IMAGING SYSTEMS”.

[Past Deviation, Exemption to Standards or MOS]

Heliport parking pad 4 restricted to helicopters 40 feet in diameter or less at night.

APPENDIX C — ASSESSMENT PAPER

Purpose

The purpose of the Assessment Paper is to summarize the case being put forward by the party making the request for a Modification of Standards with a view to documenting both the MOS request process, and to justify the basis for the decision made by Transport Canada to either grant or refuse the request. In this way, the official record will show that the Minister’s discretion has been exercised in accordance with a solid process, having taken into consideration all of the relevant facts and law on each case being put before him. (Refer to Appendix A for the procedure for issuing exemptions).

The Assessment Paper will reflect Transport Canada’s consideration of the MOS request being made based on the facts, law and proposed conditions put before it; together with the results of the OPI’s assessment of the party’s arguments. Reference will be made to the evidence in support of both elements of the 5.9(2) test. The OPI will also have the opportunity within this document to provide a rationale for the decision based on the facts of the particular case to either grant or refuse the request.

Content

The contents of the Assessment Paper are an answer to the arguments being presented by the party making the MOS request and must include the following information:

  1. Criteria to show that the MOS is in the public interest and not likely to affect aviation safety.
  2. Conditions identified to mitigate any potential risk resulting from regulatory standards requirements being modified.
  3. Documented references of meetings, dates, attendees, issues addressed and decisions made.
  4. Documented references that the 5.9(2) test has been addressed.
  5. Documentation of the decision to grant or deny the request based on the findings.
  6. Conditions of the Exemption.
  7. Validity period.

Subject Headings

The subject headings of the Assessment Paper are:

  1. Background
  2. Public Interest
  3. Aviation Safety
  4. Justification to Grant/Deny
  5. Conditions
  6. Validity
  7. Final Disposition

APPENDIX D — SUMMARIZED PROCESS CHART

Date modified: