In brief

  • A former military air traffic controller may instruct on civil simulators, but needs an endorsement that the national authority did not yet have the task of issuing. The right existed from 13 May 2026, and the authority’s task was dated 1 January 2029. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/2111 moves the task 964 days earlier, to that same date of 13 May 2026.
  • In Romania, the authority that issues the endorsement is the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority. It has to check the applicant’s military licence, training and assessments and to draw up the national conversion report. The controllers licensed here work for ROMATSA, which runs the initial training course and has the simulators on which the instruction would take place.
  • The regulation enters into force on 24 September 2026, that is, on the day of publication, but the date of application it sets is 134 days in the past. The act says nothing about that interval, which is exactly the period in which, according to recital 3, the 2025 amendment could not be put into practice.
Act: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/2111 of 23 September 2026 correcting Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2143 as regards the date of application of certain provisions
Published: Official Journal of the European Union, L series, 2026/2111 of 24 September 2026
In force from: 24 September 2026, that is, on the day of publication, under Article 2 of the regulation

The European Commission has corrected a date in a regulation of a year ago and has thereby unblocked a possibility that existed on paper from 13 May 2026 but could be used by nobody: for an air traffic controller who served in the armed forces to teach on the simulator of a civil controller training school. The act has a single substantive article and three lines of enacting text, yet it touches the same sensitive point as the order under which interior refurbishment in airport areas no longer requires a fresh approval from the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority, namely what the aeronautical authority may and may not do when a European rule gives it a new task.

The starting point is Regulation (EU) 2015/340, which lays down technical requirements and administrative procedures relating to air traffic controllers’ licences and certificates. On 23 October 2025, by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2143, the Commission introduced competency-based training and assessment and virtual training into it, and among the amendments it rewrote point ATCO.C.005 of Annex I, the one saying who is entitled to provide practical training. The basic rule remains that only the holder of a controller’s licence with an on-the-job training instructor (OJTI) endorsement or a synthetic training device instructor (STDI) endorsement may instruct. Point (b) adds an exception: a person who holds or has held a national military air traffic controller licence issued by a Member State may be authorised to instruct on synthetic training devices, if that person proves having exercised the privileges of the military licence, has passed the training and assessments provided for in point ATCO.C.035 and meets the requirements of Part ATCO in accordance with the national conversion report.

That is where the gap appeared. The amended point ATCO.C.005 started to apply from 13 May 2026, under the third paragraph, point (c), of Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2025/2143. The two points of Annex II that give the national authority the task of issuing, revalidating and renewing STDI endorsements, however, namely point (ca) of ATCO.AR.A.010 and point 1a of ATCO.AR.D.001(a), were to apply only from 1 January 2029, the general date of application of the 2025 regulation. Recital 3 of the new act describes the consequence without circumlocution: without the prompt application of those provisions by the national authorities, the amendment cannot be put into practice, because the endorsement has to be granted by the national authority. In other words, the right was open and the gate through which it was obtained was shut until 2029.

Article 1 of the new regulation does a single thing: it adds to the list of provisions applying from 13 May 2026 a new point, „(ca) points 1 and 2 of Annex II”. The effect is that the national authority’s task moves 964 days earlier, to exactly the date on which the applicant’s right had become applicable. Article 2 provides for entry into force on the date of publication, so on 24 September 2026, and the regulation applies directly, with no Romanian transposing act.

What it changes in practice

The first effect is felt by the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority. Under Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/340, the competent authority for Annex I is the one designated by the Member State in which the licence is applied for, and in Romania that is the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority. From 24 September 2026 it has, among the tasks listed in point ATCO.AR.A.010, the issuing, revalidation and renewal of STDI endorsements on the basis of point ATCO.C.005(b) and (c). For a former Romanian military controller, the same authority also carries out the check under point (b)(2) and draws up the national conversion report under Article 8a, since Article 8a(1) sends the conversion application to the authority of the State in whose armed forces the applicant served.

The second effect is on the controller training schools. The privileges opened by point (b) are expressly limited by point (c): training and assessment only on the aspects under point ATCO.C.030(a)(1), exercised in accordance with point ATCO.C.040 and only for air traffic controller training organisations certified to provide initial training. This is therefore not about instruction at the actual working position, nor about unit training, but strictly about the simulator, in the initial training phase. In Romania that course is run by ROMATSA, which also has the tower simulators.

The third effect concerns the pool of instructors. A simulator with no authorised instructor produces no controllers, and the pool from which instructors can be drawn widens by a category that could not be used in civil training until now: people with military air traffic experience, including those no longer in service, since point (b)(1) also accepts a person who „has held” a military licence. The matching requirement remains: the rating and, where applicable, the rating endorsement on the military licence have to correspond to the one for which the person is to instruct.

What has changed compared with the previous situation

Compared with the text of 24 October 2025, a single date has changed, but it was the one holding everything up. Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2025/2143 has three paragraphs: entry into force on the twentieth day following publication, that is, on 13 November 2025; general application from 1 January 2029; and a list of provisions applying earlier, from 13 May 2026. The list had four items, from (a) to (d), and covered amendments in Article 1, in Annex I and in Annex III. No item referred to Annex II, the one that rewrites Part ATCO.AR, that is, the rules for competent authorities. Item (ca) now covers the first two points of Annex II.

What has not changed deserves to be said just as plainly. The substantive conditions for instructing on a simulator are the same as those of 13 May 2026 and have not been touched: the military licence, proof of having exercised the privileges, the training and assessments under point ATCO.C.035, the national conversion report. Nor has the date of 1 January 2029 for the rest of the 2025 regulation changed, nor the transitional provision in Article 2 of that regulation, which accepts certificates for training started before 1 January 2029, provided the training and assessment are completed by 30 June 2029.

Point 3 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2025/2143 has also been left untouched; it replaces point (d) of ATCO.AR.D.005, on written notification of the suspension or revocation of a licence and on the right of appeal. That still applies from 1 January 2029. The Commission moved exactly the two points on which the endorsement depended, not the whole annex, and recital 3 names both of them, so the selection is deliberate.

Advantages and disadvantages

What it improves

  • It unblocks a possibility that was already in force but unusable: from 24 September 2026 an applicant can lodge an application for an STDI endorsement, and the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority has the task of dealing with it.
  • It changes no substantive requirement and no examination procedure, so it obliges nobody to start training again or to repeat an assessment.
  • The act is short and touches a single date, rather than rewriting the 2025 text. Anyone who has already read the October 2025 regulation needs three lines to know what has changed.
  • It applies directly in all Member States, so it does not depend on an order of the Minister of Transport or on a Romanian aeronautical regulation published later.
  • The selection is surgical: only points 1 and 2 of Annex II move, and the rest of the 2029 timetable is untouched, which does not force authorities to implement a whole package earlier.

What remains a problem

  • The date of application, 13 May 2026, is 134 days before the entry into force of the act that sets it, and the regulation contains no provision about that interval.
  • Of the two points moved, only one creates an obligation. Point ATCO.AR.A.010 lists the authority’s tasks, while point ATCO.AR.D.001(a) introduces its list with a permissive wording, „those procedures may include”, so a written procedure for STDI endorsements remains optional.
  • The act lays down no deadline within which the national authority is to answer an application for an STDI endorsement, and point ATCO.AR.D.001 contains no general deadline for endorsements.
  • The Romanian version of Article 1 refers to „articolul 3 alineatul (3)”, Article 3(3), of Regulation (EU) 2025/2143, but that article has unnumbered paragraphs, not numbered ones. The English version reads „third paragraph”, and so does recital 3 of the Romanian version.
  • The correction repairs a wrong date, not the process that produced it. The 2025 regulation set different timetables for a right and for the corresponding task of the authority, and the gap was spotted 335 days after that regulation was published.

Practical advice

  1. If you were a military air traffic controller and are interested in simulator instruction, first check whether your military licence carries the rating and, where applicable, the rating endorsement that corresponds to the one you want to instruct for. Without the match required by point ATCO.C.005(b)(1), the other conditions no longer matter.
  2. The application for a national conversion report is lodged with the authority of the State in whose armed forces you served, under Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/340. For a Romanian serviceman that is the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority; for someone who served in another army in the Union it is that State’s authority, even if the endorsement is applied for in Romania.
  3. Ask in writing for confirmation of the date of application. Since the regulation sets 13 May 2026, an application rejected between 13 May and 24 September 2026 on the ground that the authority did not have that task is worth taking up again, invoking Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/2111.
  4. Check with the training organisation whether it is certified for initial training. Under point (c), the privilege in point (b) may be exercised only for organisations certified to provide initial training, so an endorsement obtained without such a commitment has nowhere to be used.
  5. Do not confuse the STDI endorsement with the on-the-job training instructor endorsement. Point (c) limits the privilege to the aspects under point ATCO.C.030(a)(1), so it opens neither instruction at the actual working position nor assessments for a unit endorsement.
  6. Note the date of 1 January 2029 for the rest of the 2025 regulation and that of 30 June 2029 for completing training started earlier. The correction has touched neither of them.

Frequently asked questions

From what date can I actually apply for the simulator instructor endorsement?
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/2111 enters into force on 24 September 2026, so from that date the task of the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority is beyond doubt. The date of application set by Article 1 is, however, 13 May 2026, because points 1 and 2 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2025/2143 are added to the list of provisions applicable from that date.
Do I have to be a serving military controller?
No. Point ATCO.C.005(b)(1) speaks of a person who „holds or has held” a national military air traffic controller licence issued by a Member State. The further condition, under point (2), is to have exercised the privileges of that licence and to have passed the training and assessments provided for in point ATCO.C.035.
What exactly am I entitled to teach with this endorsement?
Only training and assessment on synthetic training devices, on the aspects under point ATCO.C.030(a)(1) and only for training organisations certified to provide initial training. On-the-job training remains reserved to holders of an OJTI endorsement.
Does anything change for civil controllers licensed in Romania?
Not directly. Licences, ratings, unit endorsements and medical certificates are not touched by this regulation. The change concerns who may sit in the instructor’s seat at the simulator and what tasks the aeronautical authority has in connection with authorising that person.
Is a Romanian act needed in order to apply the rule?
No. The regulation is binding in its entirety and applies directly in all Member States, under the closing formula of Article 2. The Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority may, however, set up an application procedure of its own, because point ATCO.AR.D.001(a) allows it to include STDI endorsements among the procedures it documents.
What happened to applications lodged between 13 May and 24 September 2026?
The regulation says nothing about that interval of 134 days. Since the date of application set is 13 May 2026, the argument that the provisions were applicable in that period as well does exist, but the act does not confirm it by a transitional provision and does not provide for the reconsideration of applications decided before publication.

Errors and inconsistencies in the published text

  • Article 1 read against Article 2. Article 2 provides that the regulation enters into force on the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, that is, on 24 September 2026, and recital 5 explains why that date is chosen. Article 1, however, adds points 1 and 2 of Annex II to the list of provisions which, under the third paragraph of Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2025/2143, „shall apply from 13 May 2026”, a date 134 days before the entry into force of the act that sets it. The regulation contains no transitional provision and no clarification about that interval, although recital 3 describes it as exactly the period in which the national authority did not have the task of granting the endorsement. An applicant who applied for the endorsement in that interval and an official who rejected it may reach two different legal conclusions: that the provisions were applicable from 13 May 2026 and the refusal was unlawful, or that they became applicable on 24 September 2026 and the refusal was correct. Recital 3 also calls for the points to apply „as soon as possible”, a wording that looks forward, whereas the enacting terms send them back.

Editorial analysis

The regulation does what had to be done and does it with the minimum of text: one new point in a list, without rewriting anything else. The problem it repairs is, however, more interesting than the repair, because it shows how a European regulation breaks into two timetables. The 2025 act gave a person’s privilege one date, 13 May 2026, and gave the task of the authority that validates it another, 1 January 2029, a distance of 964 days. Nobody could use the privilege in all that time, and the defect was caught 335 days after the 2025 act was published. This was not a matter of fine drafting: it was a provision referring to another, applicable, provision without itself being applicable.

The observation that cannot be seen by reading the act from start to finish is that the two points moved do not carry the same force. Point ATCO.AR.A.010 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2015/340 is headed „Tasks of the competent authorities” and introduces its list with „The tasks of the competent authorities shall include:”, so the new point (ca) adds an obligation. Point ATCO.AR.D.001(a), by contrast, says that the competent authority is to establish procedures for applications, issuance and revalidation, and then goes on with „Those procedures may include:”, the list into which point 1a is inserted. The practical result is asymmetrical: the Romanian Civil Aeronautical Authority has to issue the STDI endorsement, but is not obliged to publish a procedure for applying for it. A former military controller feels the difference as the absence of a form, of a list of documents and of a deadline for a reply.

The second observation concerns the Romanian version of Article 1. It refers to „articolul 3 alineatul (3) din Regulamentul (UE) 2025/2143”, Article 3(3) of Regulation (EU) 2025/2143, although Article 3 of that regulation has three unnumbered paragraphs rather than numbered ones. The English version reads „In Article 3, third paragraph”, and recital 3 of the Romanian version likewise reads „articolul 3 al treilea paragraf litera (c)”, the third paragraph of Article 3, point (c). The target remains identifiable, because point (ca) can only sit in the list that already has points (a) to (d), and that is the third paragraph. Since every language version of the Official Journal of the European Union is authentic, a reader working only with the Romanian text nonetheless has a cross-reference with nothing to match it. The same comparison brings out a second difference: the Romanian says „se adaugă”, is added, the English „is inserted”, and in the Union’s drafting technique an addition is made at the end of the list, after point (d), whereas an insertion places point (ca) after point (c). It changes nothing as to meaning, because the list has no order of effect, but it shows that the match between the two operations was not checked.

The third observation concerns what was not moved. Point 3 of Annex II, which rewrites the notification of the suspension or revocation of a licence and the reference to the right of appeal, stays on 1 January 2029. That is a choice consistent with the reasoning, since that point does not condition the endorsement, but it produces a side effect: until 2029, any revocation of an STDI endorsement is notified under the old text of point ATCO.AR.D.005(d), written for classic licences, ratings and endorsements. With the small number of cases that former servicemen will represent, that raises no immediate practical problem, but it remains a mismatch of timetables between authorising and de-authorising the same person.

What should be changed

  • The act should have said expressly what happens in the interval between 13 May and 24 September 2026. A single sentence, along the lines of „applications lodged under point ATCO.C.005(b) and (c) before the entry into force of this regulation shall be decided or reconsidered in accordance with it”, would have turned a legal argument into a rule. In practice, it would have given an applicant refused in that period a basis for reopening the matter, instead of a debate about the retroactive effect of a correction.
  • Point ATCO.AR.D.001(a) should require the procedure, not permit it. The wording „those procedures may include” was apt for temporary instructor and assessor endorsements, which are exceptions. For STDI endorsements granted on the basis of a military licence, where the applicant comes from outside the civil system and has no way of guessing what documents are required, a documented list ought to be mandatory. In practice, that would mean a form published on the authority’s website, rather than correspondence case by case.
  • A deadline for a decision would close the only real risk in this mechanism. Regulation (EU) 2015/340 already has a precedent: point ATCO.AR.E.005(b) imposes on the authority a deadline of no more than six weeks for approving a unit endorsement course after a change of competent authority. A similar deadline for the STDI endorsement would make it possible to plan a training intake, which depends on an instructor being available on a fixed date.
  • The two timetables should be tied together in the text of the 2025 regulation, not merely repaired from outside. Where a provision confers a right that can be exercised only through the decision of an authority, the date of application of the provision giving the authority that task should not be allowed to be later. A drafting rule of that kind, applied to Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2025/2143, would have made the correction of 24 September 2026 unnecessary.
  • Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2025/2143 would deserve a note matching points to dates. A reader now needs three documents open at once in order to find out from when each of the three points of a one-page annex applies. A table of application, on the model of those in the aviation safety regulations, would leave the authority and the applicant with a single source.

Original text of the legal act

The text below is reproduced in Romanian, the official form of publication.

The full text, as published in the Official Gazette of Romania

Official Journal of the European Union, L series, 2026/2111 of 24 September 2026 2 pages PDF, 449 KB

Open the official PDFDownload the PDF

The viewer is not shown on small screens. Use the buttons above to open or download the file.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific situations, consult a licensed attorney or tax advisor.