1. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS DURING PHASE II 10 TH COSCAP- SEA STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING, MACAU (CHINA), 9 – 10 OCTOBER 2008

2. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS OVERVIEW  PHASE II STARTED AS FROM 2008  COSCAP-SEA: PROGRAMME STATUS  COSCAP-SA RECENTLY SIGNED MoU  SHOULD COSCAP-SEA ALSO DO SO?  ADVANTAGES OF MoU  INFORMATION ON “SERVICES ON REQUEST”

3. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS  STATUS OF COSCAP-SEA: ICAO EXECUTED PROGRAMME  BASIS: PROGRAMME DOCUMENT  BILATERAL DOCUMENT  SIGNED BETWEEN ICAO AND EACH MEMBER  INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENTS ONLY

4. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS  COSCAP-SA RECENTLY SIGNED MoU (APRIL 2008)  ALL MEMBERS SIGNED  DECISION TAKEN AT 16 TH SCM, 27-29 NOVEMBER 2006 IN KATHMANDU  REASONS: BETTER INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP

5. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS SHOULD COSCAP-SEA ALSO SIGN AN MoU?  ADVANTAGES : –INSTITUTIONAL UPGRADE –COMMON APPROACH AMONG COSCAPS –ENHANCED BASIS FOR DONOR MOBILIZATION –BETTER ABILITY TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS AS RSOO –MUTUAL COMMITMENTS BETTER DEFINED –BETTER RECOGNITION OF/BY PARTNERS

6. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS SHOULD COSCAP-SEA ALSO SIGN AN MoU?  NO DISADVANTAGES: – NO ADDITIONAL COST – MEMBERS RETAIN FLEXIBILITY: AMENDMENT POSSIBLE AT ANY TIME; AMENDMENT POSSIBLE AT ANY TIME; OPTING OUT OF COSCAP POSSIBLE AT ANY TIME OPTING OUT OF COSCAP POSSIBLE AT ANY TIME – STEERING COMMITTEE REMAINS IN CONTROL OF MoU CONTENT –ICAO REMAINS INVOLVED –SIGNATURE USUALLY AMONG DGs ONLY (OR MOT), AS NO ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED OR SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL NATIONAL COMMITMENTS INVOLVED

7. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS OVERVIEW OF THE MoU ARTICLE 1 – OBJECTIVES ARTICLE 2 – FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 3 – ORGANS AND FUNDING ARTICLE 4 – PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT ARTICLE 5 – LOCATION ARTICLE 6 – OPERATION

8. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS OVERVIEW OF THE MoU II ARTICLE 7 – GOVERNING BODY – STEERING COMMITTEE ARTICLE 8 – JOINING COSCAP-SEA ARTICLE 9 – AMENDMENTS ARTICLE 10 – DISSOLUTION ARTICLE 11 – SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES

9. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS PROVISION OF SERVICES ON REQUEST  CORE SERVICES VS. SERVICES ON REQUEST  REGULATED IN ART. 2.1.2 MoU  CORE SERVICES: FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL MEMBERS  SERVICES ON REQUEST: FOR THE BENEFIT OF REQUESTING MEMBER(S)

10. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS  TYPES OF SERVICES ON REQUEST: –ASSISTANCE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF NATIONAL STANDARDS, PROCEDURES –EXECUTION OF SAFETY OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS ON BEHALF OF REQUESTING STATE –ASSISTING NATIONAL INSPECTORS IN SPECIFIC SAFETY OVERSIGHT TASKS –ASSISTANCE IN RESOLVING SAFETY-RELATED DEFICIENCIES FOUND THROUGH AUDITS –ANY OTHER TASKS WITHIN COSCAP-SEA OBJECTIVES

11. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS  SERVICES ON REQUEST: –NOT COVERED BY ANNUAL COSCAP-SEA BUDGET –CHARGES BORNE BY REQUESTING MEMBER(S), OR PARTLY / WHOLLY BY DONOR INSTITUTION –COST-RECOVERY PRINCIPLES SHALL APPLY TO CHARGES

12. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS  SERVICES ON REQUEST - ADDITIONAL MEANS TO ASSIST STATES WITH: –RESOLVING SAFETY-RELATED DEFICIENCIES FOLLOWING AUDITS –SPECIFIC OTHER SAFETY OVERSIGHT OBLIGATIONS –UPGRADING EXPERTISE OF NATIONAL INSPECTORS –IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW SARPS

13. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS  SERVICES ON REQUEST – IN LINE WITH A36-2 AND ICAO SAFETY OVERSIGHT MANUAL, PART B  LAID DOWN IN SEC. 2.1.2 MoU  ADOPTION OF MoU WOULD BE THE BASIS

14. OUTLOOK MOU will:  Serve as Multi-national Agreement among COSCAP-SEA Member States, with full recognition by its partners  Allow full menu of “Services on Request”, thus reducing costs to States  Possibly include fellowship training and equipment procurement  Enhance sharing of resources among States, such as REs and NEs  Become critical stepping stone towards RSOO for those States which cannot fulfil all USOAP safety oversight requirements within budget

15. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS ACTION  MEMBERS ARE INVITED TO NOTE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED  MEMBERS ARE INVITED TO AGREE, IN PRINCIPLE, TO THE RECOMMENDED MoU, SET OUT IN THE ATTACHMENT TO THE DP, SIMILAR TO COSCAP-SA

16. INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?