The European Aviation Safety Agency's (EASA) four-year delay in, and disproportionately high fees charged for, certifying the Robinson R66 turbine single might suggest a bigger problem with the bilateral agreement between the U.S. and Europe that governs the certification of aircraft and components.

That's the opinion of aviation attorney Jason Dickstein, whose U.S. clients include the Aviation Suppliers Association, the Aircraft Electronics Association, the Aircraft Fleet Recycling Association and the Modification and Replacement Parts Association. Dickstein said delayed certification of the R66 "is not an isolated case" and stems from endemic problems within the EASA that are bureaucratic, cultural and perhaps anti-competitively biased against U.S. products.

Under the 1997 bilateral agreement covering aircraft certification, widely known as the "Chicago Convention," the EASA (then the JAA) and the FAA are merely supposed to validate the certification data of aircraft and components certified in each other's jurisdictions. This makes sense because FAA and EASA standards are harmonized when it comes to rotorcraft certification. In practice, Dickstein said that the EASA often validates the data by, in essence, setting up shadow certification programs that have the effect of driving up costs and fees and delaying final certification. AIN contacted the EASA and the FAA for comment several times, but neither agency had responded by press time.

However, Fred Elliott, an international trade analyst specializing in aviation at the International Trade Administration at the U.S. Department of Commerce, told AIN that the FAA is currently discussing the problem with the EASA and that Commerce is waiting to see what progress those discussions yield. While acknowledging the problem, Elliott said that its magnitude is "nowhere near" the claws-out trade row that erupted between Airbus and Boeing over unfair government subsidies of civil aircraft. Thatmatter was ultimately resolved in Boeing's favor before the World Trade Organization in 2012, with the WTO holding that Airbus had received government subsidies of $18 billion, more than four times the amount received by Boeing.

Policies Called Anti-Competitive

Without commenting on the specifics of the Robinson case, Elliott said the problems that U.S. companies experience with the EASA typically fall into two categories: the amount of the fees the agency charges to validate FAA approval and the length of time it takes to get that approval regardless of the fees paid.

Elliott said the fee issue first surfaced in 2007 when the European Commission proposed a regulation to establish fees for certification approval to facilitate self-funding of the agency. The FAA does not impose reciprocal fees on European products. Elliott said that EASA fees remain the subject of "ongoing discussions" among the FAA, European Commission (EC) and EASA, talks that are "making progress." Elliott said further problems can arise when items within the certification basis differ betweenEASA and the FAA. "Both parties can have different certification requirements." This allows either certification body to request additional certification data when the requirements differ. Sometimes the desire to guard intellectual property makes companies reticent to release such information in a timely manner. Elliott said "that issue comes up all the time," but not so much in Europe.

Dickstein said that the EASA's cumbersome and expensive certification process has dissuaded many small U.S. aerospace firms from even attempting to enter the European market, especially with regard to STCs related to PMA parts.

Robinson's problem with EASA certification of the R66 provides a compelling example. Between 2010 and 2012, the EASA billed Robinson €752,233 (about $1 million) for work associated with R66 EASA approval¨Cabout the same amount the EASA charged Bell for certification of the substantially more complex 429 twin, according to Robinson. (Contacted by AIN, a Bell spokesman declined to validate this figure.) Those charges are disproportionate to what Robinson paid in other markets and continue to accrue. Robinson paid only $80,650 to get R66 certification in Canada and $178,000 to the CIS (Russia) for approval there. Japan and Mexico charged $6,000 each. Robinson unsuccessfully challenged the size of the fees to the EASA's Board of Appeal, which rejected it in January. In its appeal, Robinson called the fees "fundamentally unfair." Dickstein said Robinson's plight with the EASA, and that of other U.S. general aviation manufacturers, has gotten the attention of the U.S. Congress, which is considering drafting "an equal pain standard," which could affect the ongoing negotiations between the European Union and the United States over formation of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), a free-trade agreement expected to generate $418 billion in worldwide economic benefits. The agreement is slated for finalization later this year, subject to Congressional approval.

Elliott said inserting language into the TTIP to address the problem is "under consideration."

"There will certainly be technical provisions that deal with standards, writ large," Elliott said. "Those will cover a number of industries in a generic way that could include aerospace, and there may be provisions for specific sectors."

Aerospace has a huge stake in the agreement. "The American aerospace industry is the largest U.S. industry that produces a positive trade balance in the United States," Elliott said. "It's a net exporter. More U.S. jobs are supported by the export of aerospace products than by any other industry. These are high-paying jobs. Aerospace production workers earn, on average, two-thirds more than manufacturing workers in general. It's an industry we are competitive in that accounts for a huge trade surplus. Access to foreign markets is absolutely critical to us."

Robinson exports more than 70 percent of its helicopters. At this year's Heli-Expo, Bell Helicopter CEO John Garrison said that more than 80 percent of his company¡¯s new orders come from the export market.

The General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), the trade association charged with representing GA in the U.S., did not return phone calls seeking comment. GAMAmembership includes European companies. Dickstein said EASA actions disproportionately damage U.S. aircraft parts manufacturers and STC developers who currently dominate the worldwide market.

Meanwhile, Robinson is navigating the latest R66 EASA certification shoals, according to company CEO Kurt Robinson. Last year it was the performance of the hydraulics system. Now the EASA is examining hydrogen embrittlement of standard hardware, specifically nut fasteners, in critical applications. It's an issue for the entire helicopter industry, but one currently holding up the pending certification of new aircraft, among them the R66. "The FAA and the EASA are working on a solution and we are involved in those meetings. We are working on a solution."

"We just want to get the R66 certified in Europe as soon as possible," Kurt Robinson said. Despite the delay in EASA approval, Robinson has delivered 500 R66s since late 2010. "We have completed every test, every report, everything that the EASA has asked of us. As far as the aircraft goes, we are all done. Eventually we will get certification."