FAA and EASA Pledge Deeper Cooperation on SMS, Certification, Automated Flight Deck, and Cyber Threats

Quick Answers

What did FAA and EASA agree at their 2026 International Aviation Safety Conference?

At the 2026 FAA–EASA International Aviation Safety Conference, both agencies made nine cooperation pledges covering: information exchange on safety oversight; SMS advancement; operational data sharing for rulemaking; certification harmonization; automated flight deck integration; cockpit PEDs; aircrew training modernization; coordination on cyber threats, conflict zones, and GPS interference; and multilateral safety collaboration.

Does the FAA–EASA 2026 joint declaration create new compliance obligations?

No. The FAA–EASA 2026 declaration is a joint statement of intent, not a rulemaking action. It signals future regulatory direction but does not create immediate compliance obligations. Watch for specific ADs, advisory circulars, or guidance from FAA and EASA that translate these pledges into concrete requirements over the coming months.

Quick Compliance Summary


Bodies	Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
What happened	FAA and EASA reaffirmed their commitment to advancing global aviation safety at their Annual Safety Conference
Status	Joint declaration — policy signal, not a regulatory mandate
Who should care	Compliance managers, regulatory affairs teams, SMS managers, certification engineers, MRO quality departments
Compliance deadline	None — this is a forward policy declaration
Source	2026 FAA–EASA International Aviation Safety Conference; Washington Aviation Summary, July 2026

Who Should Read This

This update is directly relevant to:

Directors of Safety and SMS Managers
Regulatory Affairs and Compliance teams operating across FAA and EASA jurisdictions
Aircraft certification and design organization staff
Continuing Airworthiness Managers (CAMs) tracking SMS obligations
MRO Quality Managers with dual FAA/EASA approval
Training organizations managing pilot competency in automated environments

This is not an airworthiness directive. No immediate compliance action is required. But the direction signaled by both regulators at their highest-level bilateral meeting has direct implications for organizations navigating dual oversight and managing evolving safety management obligations.

At a Glance

Item	Details
Event	2026 FAA–EASA International Aviation Safety Conference
Host country	United States
Attendees	Senior leadership of FAA and EASA, including UK CAA, Transport Canada, CASA delegates
Key outputs	Nine cooperation pledges covering SMS, certification, automated flight deck, cyber threats, GPS interference
Nature of output	Joint declaration — not a rulemaking action
Binding effect	None directly — signals future regulatory direction for both agencies
Related development	UK CAA signed bilateral agreements with Transport Canada, CASA, and ANAC at the same conference

What Was Agreed

FAA and EASA issued a joint statement reaffirming their commitment to advancing global aviation safety through deeper collaboration, transparency, and trust during a period of rapid technological innovation.

Nine specific cooperation pledges were made.

The Nine Pledges — What They Mean in Practice

1. Strengthen information exchange on safety oversight

FAA and EASA will increase the sharing of safety oversight findings, audit outcomes, and identified risks. For dual-approved organizations — those holding both FAA and EASA approvals — this means oversight activities on one side of the Atlantic are more likely to be visible to the other regulator. Organizations that manage FAA and EASA compliance in silos should review whether that approach remains adequate.

2. Advance Safety Management Systems

Both regulators pledged to advance SMS. This comes directly alongside the ICAO Annex 19 Amendment 2 applicability date of November 26, 2026. SMS advancement is no longer just an ICAO obligation — both FAA and EASA are explicitly signaling it as a bilateral priority. Organizations with FAA-mandated SMS programs and those preparing for the ICAO Annex 19 deadline should treat this as converging regulatory pressure from multiple directions.

3. Expand collaboration and sharing of operational data to support rulemaking

Both agencies will share more operational data as a basis for future rulemaking. This has implications for how regulations are made — future ADs and rule changes may be based on a broader global data pool. It also reinforces the case for proactive voluntary data contribution through programs like ASIAS and EASA’s Data4Safety.

4. Streamline approval processes for advanced aviation technologies — harmonize certification pathways

This pledge directly addresses one of the most persistent friction points for manufacturers and design organizations working across both systems. Post-Brexit divergence has worsened dual-certification burdens for UK-based organizations, too. Harmonized certification pathways, if delivered, would reduce the cost and time of obtaining simultaneous FAA and EASA approval for new products, modifications, and supplements.

5. Accelerate safe integration of automated flight deck technologies

Both regulators specifically named automated flight deck technologies as an area for accelerated integration. This covers autopilot systems, advanced auto-throttle, autoflight envelope protection, and emerging technologies including AI-assisted flight management. For compliance and certification teams working on next-generation avionics, this signals that both agencies are moving toward a more enabling — rather than purely cautious — posture on automation.

6. Accelerate use of Portable Electronic Devices in the cockpit to transform operations with real-time data

Portable Electronic Devices (PEDs) in the cockpit — electronic flight bags, tablets with real-time weather, digital charts, and connected crew tools — are now a bilateral priority. Both agencies want to move faster on integrating these tools. Organizations managing pilot PED policies and operations specifications should expect evolving guidance from both regulators.

7. Modernize aircrew training and simulator capabilities to sustain pilot competence in automated environments

Maintaining pilot competence when operating in increasingly automated cockpits is a recognized global challenge. Both regulators are signaling that simulator-based training requirements and approval standards are due for modernization. Training organizations and airlines should expect updated guidance on evidence-based training, automation-related scenario requirements, and simulator qualification standards.

8. Improve information-sharing and coordination on external risks: cyber, conflict zones, GPS/GNSS interference, and extreme weather

This pledge is the broadest and arguably the most operationally immediate. Four specific external threats are named:

Cyber threats — consistent with FAA’s Civil Aviation Cybersecurity ARC and EASA’s Part-IS framework
Conflict zones — consistent with the EASA Middle East CZIB restructuring covered in earlier ARW articles
GPS/GNSS interference — directly affecting operations across the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Arctic routes
Extreme weather — a growing factor in operational risk management

For compliance professionals managing safety risks across multiple theatres, this pledge signals that FAA and EASA will coordinate more closely on these four areas. Guidance and advisories issued by one agency are more likely to be reflected — or accelerated — by the other.

9. Support global aviation safety initiatives through collaboration with other regulatory authorities and organizations

This is the broadest multilateral pledge — essentially committing both agencies to work more closely with ICAO, Transport Canada, CASA, UK CAA, and others. It reflects the conference setting, where the UK CAA signed bilateral agreements and multiple national authorities were represented.

Why It Matters for Compliance Professionals

Three threads run through all nine pledges that directly affect your compliance program.

SMS convergence is accelerating

Pledges 2 and 3 both reinforce SMS as the shared framework for safety management across both systems. With ICAO Annex 19 Amendment 2 applicable from November 26, 2026, and both FAA and EASA explicitly advancing SMS as a bilateral priority, organizations that have not yet built or matured their SMS are under converging pressure from multiple regulatory directions simultaneously.

Dual-approval complexity may reduce over time

Pledge 4 is the most commercially significant for manufacturers and design organizations. Harmonized certification pathways between FAA and EASA have been discussed for decades. The fact that both agencies are naming it publicly as a current priority — not a distant aspiration — signals genuine movement. Watch for joint FAA–EASA certification guidance in 2026–2027.

External risk categories are now a bilateral compliance matter

Pledge 8 names four specific external threat categories. For airlines and CAMOs managing risks from GPS interference, conflict zone routing, and cyber exposure, those risks are now on the bilateral regulatory agenda — meaning both FAA and EASA are likely to issue coordinated guidance, advisories, and potentially rulemaking on all four.

Context — IATA’s Separate Concern

At the same conference period, IATA issued a separate and less supportive statement on the EU air passenger rights reform. IATA said the rules do “little to improve the passenger experience and nothing to shore up European competitiveness,” while acknowledging some positive elements. IATA flagged future enforcement implementation and Europe’s Aviation Strategy as concerns.

This is separate from the FAA–EASA technical safety declaration, but it illustrates the divergence between the regulatory cooperation agenda (which both FAA and EASA are advancing jointly) and the commercial regulatory burden agenda (where IATA and airlines maintain their own position).

Key Dates

Event	Date
2026 FAA–EASA International Aviation Safety Conference	June 2026 (United States)
UK CAA bilateral agreements signed (same event)	June 2026
ICAO Annex 19 Amendment 2 applicability date	November 26, 2026
EASA Part-IS full compliance deadline	August 2027

Source Documents

Washington Aviation Summary, July 2026 Edition — Kirstein & Young PLLC (item I.6: FAA, EASA Pledge Cooperation For New Era Of Aviation)
FAA — International Aviation Safety Conference
EASA — International Cooperation and Partnerships
Related ARW articles: ICAO Annex 19 Amendment 2 (November 2026 deadline); EASA Middle East Conflict Zone Restructure; EU Air Passenger Rights Reform

FAQ About FAA and EASA Pledge Deeper Cooperation

Is this declaration legally binding on operators?

No. This is a joint statement of intent from two regulatory authorities. It signals future regulatory direction but does not create new compliance obligations. Watch for specific rulemaking, guidance material, or advisory circulars from FAA and EASA that translate these pledges into concrete requirements.

How does this relate to ICAO Annex 19 Amendment 2?

Pledge 2 (advance SMS) and the ICAO Annex 19 November 26, 2026 applicability date are aligned. Both FAA and EASA are signaling that SMS maturity — not just SMS documentation — is a regulatory expectation. The convergence of these signals should inform your Annex 19 gap analysis.

What does certification harmonization mean for organizations with dual FAA/EASA approval?

If delivered, harmonized certification pathways would reduce the cost and administrative burden of obtaining simultaneous FAA and EASA approval. In practice, this is likely to emerge as coordinated guidance, joint validation procedures, or mutual acceptance agreements for specific product categories — rather than a single unified system.

What specific cyber threat guidance should we expect?

The FAA’s Civil Aviation Cybersecurity Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), established in 2025, is the most likely vehicle for US-side guidance. EASA’s Part-IS framework is already in force. Coordinated output from the bilateral pledge could take the form of joint advisory material on aviation cyber risk management.

Does this affect our conflict zone risk assessment procedures?

Pledge 8 specifically names conflict zones as a bilateral coordination priority. This means EASA conflict zone bulletins (like the Middle East restructure) and FAA conflict zone guidance are more likely to be coordinated going forward. Watch for joint or parallel advisories.