The Wet-Leased A320 and the Ramp Inspector's Grounding Threat
Sahel Connect Airlines, a Nigerian AOC holder, has wet-leased a 9H-registered Airbus A320-214 from a Maltese lessor for six months to protect its Lagos–Kano–Abuja schedule. The aircraft keeps its Maltese certificate of airworthiness and is maintained under the lessor's EASA Part 145 organisation, but Sahel Connect's own certifying staff carry out the overnight daily and weekly checks at Lagos. In the first week, an NCAA airworthiness inspector on the ramp at Murtala Muhammed sees a Certificate of Release to Service for the daily check signed by a Sahel Connect engineer holding an NCAA AME licence, attached to a 'dual release' page from the lessor's organisation. The inspector tells the engineer: 'You are a Nigerian licence holder and this aircraft is not on the Nigerian register. Your signature here is worthless and this aircraft is grounded until the lessor's engineers arrive.' The engineer's supervisor asks you, as quality manager, to resolve the matter before the 06:50 departure with 168 passengers.
1. Analyse whether the Nigerian-licensed engineer may lawfully certify maintenance on this Maltese-registered aircraft, and state what must be verified before the aircraft departs.
Read the worked answer
The inspector's blanket statement is too broad, but his underlying point is sound. A licence is a national instrument: an NCAA AME licence confers privileges under Nigerian law and the Nig. CARs personnel licensing rules, not under Maltese law. Certification of maintenance is tied to the airworthiness system of the State of Registry (Chicago Convention Articles 31 and 33), and for a commercial operator also to the maintenance control arrangements required by Annex 6 Part I.
The real question is therefore not the signatory's nationality but whether he is authorised under the system that governs this particular release. Three lawful routes exist:
- The lessor's Part 145 organisation issues the release through staff it has itself authorised;
- Nigeria and Malta conclude an Article 83 bis agreement transferring airworthiness and personnel licensing functions to Nigeria, so NCAA rules and NCAA-licensed staff apply;
- The aircraft is placed on the Nigerian register.
A Nigerian licence plus an unexplained dual-release page proves none of these. Before departure the quality manager should obtain written evidence of the engineer's authorisation from the Maltese organisation, or have the lessor's certifying staff release the aircraft. The grounding threat is a separate discretionary safety measure that must be justified and recorded, not simply asserted at the gate.
2. Would an Article 83 bis agreement resolve the problem? Explain what it transfers and what it does not.
Read the worked answer
Article 83 bis of the Chicago Convention addresses exactly this gap: an aircraft registered in one State but operated under an AOC, lease or charter in another. The State of Registry may transfer to the State of the Operator its functions and duties under Articles 12, 30, 31, 32(a) and 33 in respect of that aircraft. Once the agreement is registered with the ICAO Council and notified, other contracting States must recognise the transfer.
If Malta transferred these functions to Nigeria, Nigeria would be responsible for the airworthiness of the aircraft and for licensing the personnel certifying its maintenance. An NCAA-licensed engineer working under an NCAA-approved maintenance organisation and properly authorised by the operator could then release the aircraft, and the NCAA could inspect and enforce directly.
What 83 bis does not do: it does not move the aircraft to the Nigerian register, does not transfer commercial or economic rights, and does not by itself make a Nigerian licence valid for a task outside the transferred functions. Without such an agreement, the NCAA's leverage over the aircraft is indirect - through the AOC conditions, requiring the Nigerian operator to demonstrate that continuing airworthiness is managed in accordance with the State of Registry's requirements. The quality manager should recommend that the lease file record which route applies, because the position will recur every night the aircraft is on the network.
3. List what the AME should have checked before certifying the daily check, and what documents must be aboard under Article 29.
Read the worked answer
Before signing, the certifying engineer should have verified: that his licence carries the correct category and the A320 type endorsement; that he meets the recency requirement; that he holds a current company authorisation from the organisation under whose system the release is being issued; that the task is within his scope of authorisation; that the approved maintenance data (AMM revision, task cards) was current; that any parts used carried acceptable release documentation; and that the release document itself is the one prescribed by the governing authority.
On board, Article 29 of the Chicago Convention requires: certificate of registration; certificate of airworthiness; appropriate licences for each crew member; journey logbook; radio station licence; passenger list showing places of departure and destination; and cargo manifest and detailed declaration of cargo where cargo is carried.
In practice the engineer should also be able to produce the aircraft's maintenance release documentation, the operator's maintenance control arrangements, and, for a wet-leased aircraft, the lease and any 83 bis notification. A missing or wrong release document is what turns a routine ramp check into a grounding, so the paperwork deserves the same attention as the task itself.