Upload
dinhkhanh
View
226
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EUROCONTROL
April 2007 - European Safety Programme for ATM Stakeholders’ Report
April 2007DAP/SSH
EUROPEAN SAFETYPROGRAMME FOR ATM
(ESP) STAKEHOLDERS’REPORT
EUROPEAN SAFETYPROGRAMME FOR ATM
(ESP) STAKEHOLDERS’REPORT
N°2
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 3 April 2007
Contents
Editorial by Co-Chairmen of ESP
Implementation Coordination Group
ESP Programme Manager’s Introduction
ESP ACTIVITY FIELD 1
Implementation and Support to European
Safety Legislation/Regulation
ESP ACTIVITY FIELD 2
Incident Reporting and Data Sharing
ESP ACTIVITY FIELD 3
Risk Assessment and Mitigation in Day-to-
day Operations
ESP IMPLEMENTATION REPORTING
AND MONITORING AND ESP
COORDINATION TEAM
ESP ACTIVITY FIELD 4
System Safety Defences
ESP ACTIVITY FIELD 5
Safety Management Enhancement
ESP Research and Development Activities
ESP Human Factors - Hera Janus
ESP Photography Competition - Results
ESP Goes Global
ALLCLEAR? The Path to Clear
Communications
EVENTS
4
5
6
9
12
13
23
25
27
28
30
31
31
32
CONTENTS
April 2007 page 4 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Editorial
Welcome to the 2nd European Safety
Programme for ATM (ESP) Stakeholders’
Report. Although barely into its second
year, the ESP can already boast some
notable achievements: the success of the
SASI and SeRT programmes; the release of
EUROCONTROL Specifications for STCA; the
initiation of a voluntary incident reporting
and data sharing database with the airlines;
developments in ATM safety culture; the
transposition of ESARR 1 requirements into
Community law; and the release of SAM V2
are but a few.
These efforts and those achieved during the
SSAP, have now been recognised officially
and the SSAP/ESP was the winner of the
prestigious Jane’s “Contribution to
European ATM Award” for 2007. The prize
was presented to Dr Erik Merckx, Deputy
Director ATM Programmes, and Mr Peter
Stastny, Head of the Safety Regulation Unit,
at a ceremony held at the ATC Maastricht
2007 exhibition on 13 February. Although
the award was accepted by EUROCONTROL
HQ, it belongs to all of us, and we offer our
congratulations to all of you who have
been, or are involved in, the process of
strengthening European ATM Safety
Regulation and Safety Management
through these two programmes.
Whilst it is tempting to dwell on these past
successes, it is important that we maintain
our focus on future horizons so that we can
meet the challenges ahead. Being proactive
is at the core of the ESP and for its part the
EUROCONTROL Organisation, EEC and SRU
will continue to provide essential develop-
ments, programmes and products across a
wide range of disciplines to help ANSPs and
Regulators fulfill their ESP obligations. By
doing so, we will continue to shape the face
of European ATM Safety Management and
Safety Regulatory frameworks in support of
the SES. We have made a good start and
must maintain the momentum.
Moreover, we are confident that the contri-
bution of ESP and related activities along-
side that driven by the EC Common
Requirements “certification” process will be
reflected in the outcome of the 2007 Safety
Framework Maturity Survey which is cur-
rently being undertaken. The results of this
survey, combined with those of the 2007-
2011 E/LCIP process, will also provide us
with the first formal indications of how suc-
cessfully the ESP Recommendations are
being implemented. Stakeholder contribu-
tion to this process is important to achieve
an accurate overview about the level of
safety maturity in ECAC. The results will be
communicated in the next Stakeholders’
Report and form the basis of a mid-
Programme report for, inter alia, the EURO-
CONTROL PC in November. Indeed, contact
with our Stakeholders will also continue to
be of critical importance. Relationships
have been,and will continue to be,renewed
and built through workshops and other
routine Group, Team and Task Force activi-
ties. The link with the E/LCIP process has
also been strengthened; furthermore, the
Safety Team agenda is now focused largely
around the work in the ESP Activity Fields.
In the regulatory area, the SRC Work
Programme is fully integrated into the ESP
structure.These measures provide addition-
al leadership and direction for the
Programme, as well as for future Safety
Roadmap developments in the Safety
Domain.
2007 will be a pivotal year for the ESP and as
you will see in the rest of this Report there is
still much to be done. We are sure,however,
that we can continue to count on your sup-
port and look forward to working with you
in the months ahead. Finally, if you have any
comments concerning the contents of this
Report or about the ESP in general then
please contact us via [email protected] .
AlexanderSkoniezki(Head DAP/SSH)Co-Chairman ESP
Implementation
Coordination Group
Peter Stastny(Head SRU)Co-Chairman ESP
Implementation
Coordination Group
EDITORIAL
Dear Stakeholders,
I would like to welcome you to this 2nd ESP
Stakeholders’ Report. The Programme is
now well into its second year and 2007 is
going to be pivotal in shaping the future
successes we all hope to achieve. Many of
you will have been through the SES CR
Certification process and to those of you
who have been certified, I offer my hearty
congratulations. However, there is still
much to be done and a gauge of this will be
the outcome of the 2007 ATM Safety
Framework Survey which is ongoing. The
improvement in the 2006 scores was
impressive and we are confident that the
combined effects of the activities associat-
ed with ESP and the certification process,
we will see a similar reward this year.
I would also like to add my congratulations
to those of the two ESP co-Chairmen con-
cerning the award of the Jane’s
Contribution to European ATM Award to
the EUROCONTROL ATM Safety Project -
namely the European Safety Programme for
ATM (ESP) and its predecessor the Strategic
Safety Action Plan (SSAP). The award recog-
nises the significant contribution made by
both programmes in helping to raise the
maturity levels of safety frameworks across
Europe. I also believe that this prize is fitting
evidence to the work that all of you have
delivered. At the same time it shows that
we have been successful in helping a high
number of ANSPs to implement SMS. In my
view, the success criteria have been as fol-
lows:
� Firstly, we have defined, together with
the ANSPs, in true partnership, pro-
grammes to put SMS in place. We creat-
ed constant awareness for the issues
and got buy-in at all levels. The pro-
grammes had challenging but doable
timescales and it was a multidisciplinary
team effort.
� Secondly, we measured the progress
that ANSPs were making. By doing that,
we were able to see who needed what
type of support. We could therefore
resource our support in the most effec-
tive way.
� Finally, we gave the support, and it was
this that ultimately made the difference.
The support was tailor-made, to the
point, and given by people who had the
right operational background and expe-
rience, in a no-nonsense approach.
Working together and proactively will be
the same key feature this year. The
Programme will continue to be steered by
the Safety Team and SRC, but it is the
involvement of the related groups, task
forces and safety initiatives in the field that,
again, really makes the difference. From the
position of the Agency the specific, but not
exclusive, goals that I would like to see ful-
filled this year are:
� Activity Field 1 - The continuation of the
SASI Project.
� Activity Field 2 - The initiation of the
development of the single ATM Safety
Data Repository of EUROCONTROL.
� Activity Field 3 - The production of
Guidance Material to support the imple-
mentation of Contingency Plans and
Degraded Modes of Operation.
� Activity Field 4 - The release of the
EUROCONTROL MSAW Specifications.
� Activity Field 5 - The development of the
Airspace Infringement Initiative.
Details of progress of these issues will be
reported on in the Activity Field summaries
which follow this piece.
Of course, this is only a snap-shot of the
overall activities that are taking place in sup-
port of the Programme. But these essential
deliverables from the Agency are the
enablers for many of the ESP recommenda-
tions and their effects should be felt long
after ESP has been consigned to history.
Communication will also be at the centre of
our activities again this year. Establishing
and maintaining the excellent working rela-
tions we enjoy will not happen unless we
continue to speak, meet and talk to each
other. The Programme staff here in Brussels
are building up an extensive network of ESP
Focal Points and contacts and this has been
helped by the combined visits with the ECIP
that they have made to many of you in the
last few months. It is our intention to carry
on with this important liaison and thus
ensure that ESP continues to have the high
profile that it deserves.
In closing I wish you a pleasant and enjoy-
able read and if you have any feedback on
this or any other ESP related issue please do
not hesitate to contact us at esp@eurocon-
trol.int
INTRODUCTION by Tony Licu, ESP Programme Manager, April 2007
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 5 April 2007
Introduction
April 2007 page 6 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 1
ACTIVITY FIELD 1IMPLEMENTATION & SUPPORT TO EUROPEAN SAFETY LEGISLATION/REGULATION by Gilles Le Galo and Peter Stastny
ACTIVITIES AND DELIVERABLES:
� SASI
� EUROCONTROL Generic Safety
Management Manual.
� Oversight of ESARRs:
� ESIMS
� EAM Guidance Material
� Transposition of ESARRs into
EU Law
� Safety Regulatory Training (SeRT)
The following activities have taken place
since the launch of the ESP. (The ESP
Recommendation Numbers in brackets
are from the ESP Programme Document -
see www.eurocontrol.int/esp )
SAFETY MANAGEMENT ISSUES
SASI 2007
A meeting of SASI CEOs took place in
Cyprus on 6 December 2006 to review the
outcomes of the preceding year and to
provide directions for the SASI 2007 activ-
ity programme. The CEOs reiterated their
high appreciation for the work accom-
plished in the framework of the SASI proj-
ect and on behalf of the CEOs, the Cypriot
Minister of Communication and Works, Mr
Harris Thrassou, expressed his thanks to
the SASI project team.
SASIS 2006 CEOs’Working Session.
Left to Right: Mr Nicos Nicolaou, Chief Operations
Officer Cypriot Ministry of Communication and Works;
Mr Harris Thrassou - Cypriot Minister of Communication
and Works, Dr Erik Merckx, EUROCONTROL Deputy
Director ATM Programmes
Contrary to expectations, the demand for
both working sessions and training ses-
sions is still very high. This has led to the
production of another ambitious pro-
gramme for the SASI project in 2007.
Gilles Le Galo(DAP/SSH)SASI Project Manager
ESP Activity Field 1
Thread Leader
Peter Stastny(SRU)ESP Activity Field 1
Thread Leader
SASI’s 2006 CEOs’Working Session.
Left to Right: Mr Nicos Nicolaou, Chief Operations Officer Cypriot Ministry of Communication and Works; Mr Harris
Thrassou - Cypriot Minister of Communication and Works, Dr Erik Merckx, EUROCONTROL Deputy Director ATM
Programmes
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 7 April 2007
Activity Field 1
SASI 2007 PROGRAMME
As can be seen from the programme
overview above, there will be an
increased emphasis on individual on-site
support in 2007 and probably 2008-2009.
This is a logical continuation of the SASI
activities that, until now, have concentrat-
ed efforts on setting-up SMS. We now
need to ensure that the necessary Safety
Management implementation activities
actually take place within ANSPs. The
overall working arrangements have, how-
ever, proved to be very efficient and will
remain as depicted here.
WORKINGSESSION(s)
Identification ofActions requirede.g. coordination with
regulator orConsultation with Staff
FIELDIMPLEMENTATION
Facilitated by DAP/SSH
DAP/SSH support
DraftProcedure(s)
Identificationof awarenessrequirements
Identificationof Training
needs
Carry outActions requirede.g. coordination with
regulator orConsultation with Staff
Get theTraining done
Conduct ofawarenessinitiatives
PublishedProcedure(s)
SASI PROGRAMME 2007
SASI Working SessionsN° SASI Session Subject Target audience Duration Hosting offers / Location Dates2 (M) WS2-07 Licensing of ATCOs - Safety managers 4 days Prague June 12-15
(EC directive) - Competence assessorsSafety Assessments - Regulatorsexperience sharing - Safety specialists of assessments
(OPS and TECH)- NSA (bring along if you wish)
3 (M) WS3-07 Just Culture All staff: ANSPs and CAA 3 days Belgrade Sept 11-134 (M) WS4-07 External services - Safety managers 4 days Prague Oct 23-26
Quality and Safety - Legal advisors- Procurement staff- Safety expert “external services”
5 (M) WS5-07 CEOs meeting CEOs and Directors safety/ safety managers 2 days Malta (TBC) Nov 6-7
SASI Training Sessions - 1st semester 2007N° Session Subject Target audience Duration Hosting offers / Location Dates1 TRG1-07 SAF-TOOLS - Investigators 4 days: Luxembourg April 2-5
Completed - SMS support staff Monday 10.00to Thursday 12.00
2 TRG2a-07 HUM-TRM Professionals selected to become TRM 5 days: Start 09.00 IANS June 25-29facilitators End 16.00
3 TRG3-07 SAM1-FHA Safety specialists assessments 5 days: Start 14.00 Zagreb April 16-20Completed (OPS and TECH) End 16.00
SASI Training Sessions - 2nd semester 2007N° Session Subject Target audience Duration Hosting offers / Location Dates4 TRG4-07 SAF-AOI - Investigators 5 days: Start 10.00 Ljubljana Nov 5-9
End 12.005 TRG2b-07 SAF-TOOLS - Investigators 4 days: Start 09.00 Luxembourg IANS Oct 8-11
- SMS support staff End 17.006 TRG5-07 CISM Professionals selected to become CISM 5 days TBD (DFS - Langen TBD
facilitators Academy)7 TRG6-07 SAM2-PSSA Safety specialists assessments 5 days: Start 10.00 Prague June 18-22
(OPS and TECH) End 13.008 TRG7-07 SAM3-SSA Safety specialists assessments 5 days: Start 14.00 Prague Nov 19-23
(OPS and TECH) End 13.009 TRG8-07 A-TRM Middle management (OPS and TECH) 3 days: Start 09.00 Luxembourg IANS Dec 18-20
End 13.00 (TBC)
April 2007 page 8 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 1
SAFETY REGULATORY ISSUES
SAFETY REGULATION
With the European Community’s Single
European Sky gaining momentum, con-
siderable work on ATM safety regulation
is taking place to support its implementa-
tion and ensure that harmonised regula-
tions are applied across Europe. The SRC
has worked closely with the European
Commission (EC) to ensure that the
already established EUROCONTROL
Safety Regulatory Requirements (ESARRs)
are transposed into Community Law. The
transposed ESARRs will form the
Community ATM safety legislation in
accordance with Article 4 of the
Regulation on ANS Provision. In order to
meet EUROCONTROL’s Safety Objective
the SRC has made very good progress in
ensuring that, as far as possible, ESARRs
are transposed unaltered. In addition the
ESIMS programme has continued to mon-
itor implementation of ESARRs and relat-
ed EC legislation. Eight ESIMS audits are
planned in 2007 and seven in 2008. In
addition, four ICAO USOAP audits will be
conducted in ECAC in 2007 and eight in
2008, with the SRU participating in most
of them, as per the Memorandum of
Cooperation (MOC) with ICAO. For further
information on ESARR transposition and
ESIMS contact juan.vazquez-sanz@euro-
control.int .
CERTIFICATION OF ANSPS
After the publication of Commission
Regulation (EC) 2096/2005 in December
2005, the NSAs were, in principle, required
to complete the certification of all ANSPs
operating in the Europe Union within one
year. Several NSAs experienced significant
difficulties in achieving certification due
to lack of qualified resources and previous
experience. The guidance material pro-
duced by EUROCONTROL in the context
of the SESIS Project was key to easing the
task.This material included a series of SRC
deliverables intended to facilitate the
application of ESARR 1 in the certification
process.
Regulation (EC) 550/2004 allows a six
month extension to the certification
deadline wherever a State requests it.This
option has been used in a number of
cases in regard to all or part of the ANSPs
operating in the European Union.
Furthermore there were difficulties expe-
rienced in understanding some of the cer-
tification requirements and help was
given by EUROCONTROL in close coordi-
nation with the EC to assist the NSAs in
their interpretation.
Some NSAs undertook the certification
themselves whilst a few employed recog-
nised organisations. By the end of 2006,
21 states had certified their nationwide
ANSPs. Decisions on the certification of
pan-European services such as Galileo
have yet to be finalised.
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 9 April 2007
Activity Field 2
ACTIVITIES:
� Implementation of SAFREP
Recommendations
� Just Culture
� Incident Reporting and Data Sharing
� Information Exchange - Cooperation
with Airlines
� EUROCONTROL Single ATM Safety Data
Repository
� Safety Performance Indicators
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SAFETYKPIS
Development of Safety Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs) is an important task that
falls within ESP Activity Field 2. The
SAFREP TF has been re-convened to take
this work forward and, as part of its activ-
ities, an ad-hoc group of SAFREP TF met in
January 2007 to start work on the devel-
opment of a Safety KPI Road Map. The
outcomes of the ad-hoc group meeting
will be presented to the SAFREP TF when
it meets again in May. After further work,
it is intended to present the Road Map to
the EUROCONTROL PC in November
2007. Thereafter, the Safety KPI work
should be completed by 2009.
INCIDENT REPORTING AND DATASHARING
The exchange of voluntary incident data
established with the airlines’ associations
and their members is progressing well. All
of the major European airlines associa-
tions are included in this activity (IATA,
IACA, ELFAA, ERA and AEA). Indeed, the
number of airlines providing data has
grown from 20 when the project started
and now exceeds 40. Information on ATM
related incident data is received on a daily
basis and in all about 800 reports have
been received since the scheme began in
August 2006. The scheme will be
enlarged when the volunteer ANSPs join
in during 2007. Just Culture principles
(confidentiality and de-identification) are
applied during the process of the incident
data collection and study. Of the 800
reports received, about 300 have been
‘analysed’ and loaded into
EUROCONTROL’s TOKAI (Tool Kit for the
ATM Occurrence Investigation) database.
Of note, the detailed analysis remains
the responsibility of the ANSPs or air-
lines concerned. Moreover, the scheme
does not replace the direct contact
between airlines and ANSPs which is nec-
essary for full investigation and analysis of
incidents to be conducted. However, in
some instances, for a variety of reasons,
direct contact is not possible and
EUROCONTROL’s role is to act as a conduit
to put the respective parties in touch with
one another. By doing this, the aim is to
be proactive and help facilitate quick fix
solutions to identified safety problems
and issues. The scheme is also intended
to complement mandatory reporting sys-
tems and not to undermine them in any
way. In an ideal world where Just Culture
prevails, it could be argued that there
would be no need for voluntary reporting
schemes since everybody would be com-
fortable with using the mandated mecha-
nisms. However, whilst we strive towards
that goal, there is still a place for voluntary
systems to supplement the mandated
ones and provide the essential raw data
that we need for trend analysis, identify-
ing lessons learnt and preventing future
incidents and accidents. The Safety Team
will be discussing these issues when it
next meets in June 2007. Trial analysis
based on the collected data, which cover
period January - August 2006 show the
following:
ACTIVITY FIELD 2INCIDENT REPORTING AND DATA SHARING by Dragica Stankovic & Charlie Govaarts
Dragica Stankovic(DAP/SSH)ESP Activity Field 2
Thread Leader
Charlie Govaarts(SRU)ESP Activity Field 2
Thread Leader
60% of occurrences fall within APP/TWR competence
and 40% are within the Area Control.
ANNUAL SUMMARY TEMPLATE
It has been recognised that there is an
essential requirement to develop a
swifter AST mechanism and more fre-
quent reporting to achieve the objectives
as outlined in SAFREP Recommendation
No7. More frequent AST reporting is a
pre-requisite in order to enable and facili-
tate more proactive analysis capabilities
with regard to European safety trends
and key risk areas. An AST Focal Point
Working Group found that it would be
feasible to adopt six-monthly AST report-
ing and to that end at SRC 28 in March
2007, the SRC agreed to a second AST
reporting cycle in September of each
year.
EUROCONTROL ATM SAFETYDATA REPOSITORY
Research has continued to identify the
existing ATM safety data repositories
within EUROCONTROL; 10 safety data
areas were found to exist:
ACAS, RVSM, Runway Incursion, Level
Bust, Air Ground Communication, Call
Sign Confusion, 8.33 Khz Channel
Spacing, PLOC (Prolonged Loss of
Communication), Bretigny R&D and
SRU (AST) Mandatory Data.
The ACAS monitoring function has
already been moved from Bretigny and
the processes of collection and analysis of
data has been fully consolidated within
Activity Field 2 work. The monitoring of
the implementation of Runway Incursion,
Level Bust and Call Sign Confusion data
will use existing data collection methods
through the current voluntary reporting
schemes; no additional collection meth-
ods will be necessary. The next step
towards rationalisation is the full inclu-
sion of 8.33 kHz Channel Spacing reports.
Work is also ongoing concerning the
PLOC and Bretigny R& D databases to find
the best way forward. The other benefits
of the EUROCONTROL ATM Safety Data
Repository are:
� A view on the trends of safety con-
cerns (Local, Regional, Pan-European)
� Quick provision of feedback informa-
tion from ANSPs or Airlines
� Quick fix of safety problems without
involvement of investigators
April 2007 page 10 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 2
Within the 10 main common factors the highest rates include:
- Clearance Instructions Information;
- Traffic Information; and
- Psychological;
Spoken Communication
Call sign confusion and misunderstanding or misinterpretations account for the majority of the causal factors falling
within Spoken Communication.
Common Trends
Spoken Communication
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 11 April 2007
Activity Field 2
� Ad-hoc meetings for corrective
actions
� Availability of safety focal points
(Airlines, ANSPs, Regulators etc)
� Eurocontrol assistance in interfacing
between airlines and ANSPs
� Access to the Safety Data Repository
for deeper expert analysis
� Compatibility with other safety data
bases (ECCAIRS, ADREP)
� Monitoring of the implemented Safety
Action Plans
� Periodical statistics
� Sharing of best practice and lessons
learned etc.
� A facility to provide safety recommen-
dations and safety performance
reports.
SAFER
The ATM Safety Data Repository will form
the ATM part of the “SAFER” (Safety
Analysis Function EUROCONTROL and
Associated Repository) system, which is
being designed to integrate and merge
the existing ESARR2/AST mechanism and
other European data flows (as described
earlier), while establishing complete inter-
operability and achieve full dissemination
of ATM related data and safety lessons
learned.
UPGRADE OF TOKAI
The Agency and SRU have also been
working together to develop the techni-
cal requirements for the upgrade of
TOKAI in preparation for its full integra-
tion with ECCAIRS.The upgrades to TOKAI
should significantly improve the work of
all TOKAI users. Primarily, the upgrades
will provide improved utility enabling
much better efficiency of the overall data
analysis, loading and transfer of data from
TOKAI to ECCAIRS functions. Full technical
support including training sessions will
be provided during the test period of the
new TOKAI. Moreover, during this time,
users’ feedback will be sought to enable
further refinements of TOKAI.
COOPERATION WITH THEINTERNATIONALORGANISATIONS
Besides the cooperation with the airlines’
associations related to the voluntary ATM
incident data exchange, Activity Field 2 is
working closely with ICAO on the promo-
tion of the voluntary incident data
exchange through the ICAO ATMGE and
Safety Occurrence Task Force. The aim of
this work is the promotion of Just Culture
principles and enlargement of the
Activity Field 2 work areas to encompass
the State Regulators and ANSPs of the
eastern part of the ICAO EUR Region.
As part of the upgrade of TOKAI, the
Agency and SRU are working closely with
EASA on the development of a common
ATM taxonomy. This should lead to full
compatibility between HEIDI/TOKAI and
ECCAIRS taxonomies, thus enabling the
smooth transfer of data from TOKAI to
ECCAIRS. Furthermore, the Agency and
SRU are actively engaging with EASA on
potential improvements to the regulatory
side of incident reporting, notably the
possible merger of the two EC directives
42/2003 and 56/94.
JUST CULTURE GUIDANCEMATERIALS
In accordance with the SAFREP Task Force
recommendations and conclusions, and
ESP activities on the development and
establishment of the Just Culture princi-
ples related to incident data reporting,
draft Guidance Materials for the ‘Robust
ANSPs Incident Data Collection and
Analysis System’ as well as for the
‘Interface with Legislator/Judicial System’
has been prepared. Information concern-
ing these two documents was presented
to the SISG in April 2007 to familiarise ATC
professional with the subject so that they
would be in a position to provide com-
ments when the final draft documents are
ready for review. Work on the Guidance
Material for the interface with the Media
is also ongoing. A Just Culture Media
workshop is planned for October 2007
and it is anticipated that the first
Guidance Materials will be ready by the
end of the year.
‘SAFER’ Model
April 2007 page 12 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 3
ACTIVITIES:
ESARR 4 Implementation :
� Development of a Design Risk
Classification Scheme
� SAM (Safety Assessment Methodology)
� Guidelines:
� ATM Procedure Safety Assessment
� Safety Case Development
� Assess and Manage Degraded
Modes of Operation
� Define and Assess Changes to ATM
System
� Human Factors Aspects of Safety
Assessment
� Promote Safety Assessment
Practices
ESARR 4 IMPLEMENTATION
RISK CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (RCS) TO
SUPPORT ATM SYSTEM DESIGN
(ESP Rec 3.1.1)
A questionnaire has produced based on
the output of the first RCS Focal Point
Group meeting that proposed various
approaches to define the material to be
included in the Implementing Rule (IR) or
provided as guidance material support-
ing the IR’s application and oversight. The
questionnaire was distributed in January
2007 and the results were discussed at
the 2nd meeting of the RCS Focal Point
Group in March 2007. It is intended that a
draft IR will be submitted for consultation
later in the year with the scheme itself
completed by mid-June 2008.
SAFETY ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
(SAM) (ESP Rec 3.2.1)
SAM V2.1
Since SAM V2.0 was released (04/2004),some
new SAM Guidance Material (Level 2) has
been developed and issued (see previous
SAM Newsletters). The release of a new ver-
sion of SAM was necessary to offer into one
single package of the updated or new
Guidance Material. However, SAM Level1
(the methodology itself) has not been modi-
fied. SAM V2.1 is accessible only via SAM
Electronic tool that offers user friendly access
to the whole SAM documentation set.
SAM NEWSLETTER
Three On Line SAM Newsletters (Nos 10-12)
have been released; they provide a wealth
of useful information and guidance on SAM
related activities - see:
www.eurocontrol.int/safety/public/subsite-
homepage/homepage.html to subscribe.
ACTIVITY FIELD 3RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION IN DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS by Patrick Mana & Françoise Girard
Patrick Mana(DAP/SSH)ESP Activity Field 3
Thread Leader
Françoise Girard(SRU)ESP Activity Field 3
Thread Leader
This article continues on page 21 >>>
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 13 April 2007
ESP Implementation
INTRODUCTION
We are fast approaching the mid point in
the ESP Programme and so this
Stakeholders report is timely in serving as a
reminder of not only how much has been
achieved, but how much is left to be done.
It seems like only yesterday that the pro-
gramme was launched on 28 February
2006.
2007 will continue to see detailed monitor-
ing activity. During 2006, the ESP
Programme Management team visited a
number of States to spread awareness of
the ESP programme as a whole, but also to
discuss progress and issues they were expe-
riencing. 2007 will be equally busy in this
respect.
ATM SAFETY FRAMEWORK
MATURITY SURVEY
The 2007 ATM Safety Framework Maturity
Survey has now started with the question-
naires having been sent to the ANSPs,
Regulators and Airspace Users, which
should be returned by mid May.
An important aspect of the survey is the fol-
low-up interview as this provides the ideal
opportunity to clarify what has been said in
the questionnaire and to answer any
queries the recipient may have. The level of
response in the past three surveys has
improved - the following table shows the
trend between the three surveys conduct-
ed since 2002.
As the Maturity Survey is a key monitoring
vehicle, it is essential that 2007 sees a 100%
response rate, for the ANSPs and Regulators
in particular. We also need to see a greater
response with regard to the interviews.
The scope of the 2007 survey has increased
due to cover an additional 11 States in the
ICAO Eastern European and North African
Region outside of ECAC. We are working
together with ICAO, Paris in this activity, and
a workshop took place in Paris 19-23 March.
The outcome of this meeting and subse-
quent progress will feature in the next ESP
Stakeholders’Report.
ESP IMPLEMENTATION REPORTING AND MONITORING By The ESP Programme Management Team
Eve Grace-Kelly(DAP/SSH)ESP Coordinator
ESP Monitoring Focal
Point
ESP Bulletin
Editor of ESP Publicity
Material
Richard Lawrence(DAP/SSH)ESP Coordinator
ICG Secretary
Thread Leaders Group
Secretary
Editor, ESP Stakeholder
Reports
ESP Military Liaison
Leila Ikan(DAP/SSH)ESP, SMS and Safety
Enhancement
Webmaster
SASI Project Support
ESP Implementation
Tracking & Monitoring
Gerald Amar(DAP/SSH)ESP/LCIP Coordination
Contingency Project
Manager
Danny Debals(DAS/SIS)Acting LCIP Manager
David Marten(DAP/SSH)ESP Safety Maturity
Survey Coordinator
Status on 12 May 2006
April 2007 page 14 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
ESP Implementation
ESP MONITORING
There are two main vehicles used to enable
us to monitor the ESP:
� ECIP/LCIP PROCESS
As many of the ESP activities are already
contained in existing ECIP objectives we
work closely with the LCIP team to
determine progress on the ESP activi-
ties. This collaboration has been in place
since September 2006 and is working
well. Wherever possible we combine vis-
its to States and share the workload.
These visits also provide the ESP
Programme Management Team with an
opportunity to spread the awareness of
the programme’s activities and require-
ments. An internal Lessons Learned
workshop between the ESP and LCIP
teams is planned to take place at the
end of May 2007, with the objective of
identifying where we can potentially
improve our overall monitoring activity.
The collaboration between the two
teams also benefits our Stakeholders in
that they are not asked for the same
information from a number of different
programmes having similar information
requirements.
The LCIP and ESP Focal Points in States pro-
vide a great service is coordinating the
responses within their individual States.
� ATM SAFETY FRAMEWORK
MATURITY SURVEY
Many requirements not met by monitor-
ing through the ECIP/LCIP process are
met via analysing the results of the ATM
Safety Framework Maturity Survey.
Once we have the input from these two
monitoring vehicles we analyse the data to
spot inconsistencies and trends. We are a
proactive programme and, as such, want to
identify the ‘hotspots’ and address these
before they become real issues.
The LCIP 2007-2011 cycle is nearing com-
pletion and to date we have analysed
approximately 50% of the reports. A synop-
sis of the results of the LCIP objectives that
affect the ESP is as follows:
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 15 April 2007
ESP Implementation
ECIP OBJECTIVE AND STATUS
AOP03 Improve Runway Safety by Preventing Runway Incursions.
Currently, the majority of States are progressing well with no real issues.
ATC02.2 Implement Ground Based Safety Nets - STCA Level 2.
The target date for this objective is 2008. Some States are progressing well in that they have completed this activity or have plans in place.
However, it is early days yet to enable us to draw firm conclusions.
ATC02.5 Implement Ground Based Safety Nets - Area Proximity Warning - Level 2.
This objective is currently Tentative and so progress has been minimal.
ATC02.6 Implement Ground Based Safety Nets - Minimum Safe Altitude Warning - Level 2.
This objective is currently Tentative and so progress has been minimal.
ATC02.7 Implement Ground Based Safety Nets - Approach Path Monitor - Level 2.
This objective is currently Tentative and so progress has been minimal.
SAF01.2 Update existing SMS to comply with ESARR2 and Common Requirements.
As at the end of 2006, around 70% of the ANSPs report having fully or partially implemented a conforming Safety Management System and
many of the remaining States have plans in place.
During 2006, the Air Navigation Services providers of the EU and associated SES States have been subject to certification in accordance with
the Commission Regulation (EC) No 2096/2005 of 20 December 2005 laying down common requirements for the provision of air navigation
services. As expected, most of these states have completed the objective. Remaining EU States have plans in place.
SAF02 Implement European ATS contingency measures.
This objective has been changed to a GENERAL objective (GEN 01) under the ownership of the SCG. A EUROCONTROL Task Force has been
formed and new Guidance Material is scheduled to be produced by the end of 2007.
SAF03 Implement a harmonised methodology for incident reporting and data sharing.
In September 2005, the Agency finalised the development of the material to be submitted to the SRC as a Proposed Means of Compliance
for ESARR2. So far, the AMC is pending approval by the SRC. Once promulgated by the regulators, the ANSPs will have, as necessary, to mod-
ify the current practices accordingly, and to train personnel involved in safety related activities to ensure a harmonisation of best practices in
reporting and assessment of safety occurrences in ATM.The Agency will support them by providing awareness and training material.
Implementation status within ANSPs varies greatly due to different understanding of the Objective. Several consider it not applicable either
because there is not yet an AMC for ESARR2 or they use different means of compliance.Others report completed as they comply with nation-
al regulations.Finally several ANSPs plan to implement the existing EUROCONTROL tools (e.g.TOKAI).Similarly,there are various status report-
ed by Regulators.
April 2007 page 16 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
ESP Implementation
ECIP OBJECTIVE AND STATUS
SAF04 Implement measures to reduce the risk of level bust occurrences.
This safety improvement activity is undertaken in the European Safety Programme (ESP) - Activity Field 5 - Safety Management
Enhancement.
On the regulatory side, the promulgation of national documentation on the basis of the ‘European Action Plan for the Prevention of Level
Bust’ was due by the end of 2006. To date, around 10 Regulators have promulgated this documentation - some Regulators are reporting
resource issues. At mid-term, around 40% of ANSPs have totally or partially completed the implementation of the action plan. Most of the
remaining ANSPs plan to implement the action plan by the end of 2007.
Only two Regulators and two ANSPs have no plan to implement it, demonstrating a lack of awareness and buy-in of the action plan.
SAF05 Implement measures to prevent air/ground communications induced safety occurrences.
This safety improvement activity is undertaken in the European Safety Programme (ESP) - Activity Field 5 - Safety Management
Enhancement.
Involved aviation stakeholders have to implement and apply measures to improve the overall air/ground communications domain in order
to reduce the risk of incidents and accidents due to air/ground communications errors.Such occurrences cover pilot/controller communica-
tions, via voice and/or data link, communication infrastructure and related interfaces, air and ground systems and sub-systems, human fac-
tors, application of regulations, standards and operating practices.
At the end of this first year of reporting,22% of the ANSPs have totally or partially completed the actions.Amongst the remaining States,36%
have plans while the rest are reviewing the objective. Only one Regulator has partially completed the action.
SAF06 Facilitate the implementation of the SES safety provisions, along with ESARRs through improved awareness
and commitment.
This objective provides supplementary information for the monitoring activity pertaining to Activity Field 1 (Implementation and Support to
European Safety Legislation/Regulation) of the European Safety Programme for ATM (ESP).
This objective aims at supporting stakeholders to demonstrate improved commitment and to acquire greater understanding and awareness
of SES and ESARRs safety obligations by participating in European,Regional and National Workshops. During 2006,the certification of ANSPs
of EU and associated SES States has been an important incentive for the ANSPs to keep abreast of the SES.
At the end of this first year of reporting, 39% of the ANSPs report to have totally or partially implemented this objective. Most of the ANSPs
of the SES States (EU and associated) have totally or partially completed the actions.A few ANSPs do not yet have plans. With regard to non-
EU States, most of the ANSPs report plans to implement the actions by the end of 2008.
SAF07 Implement a ‘Just Culture’ environment for supporting incident reporting and data sharing in ATM.
This objective provides supplementary information for the monitoring activity pertaining to Activity Field 2 (Incident Reporting and Data
Sharing) of the European Safety Programme for ATM (ESP).
One of the key requirements in this objective is to establish an interface with national judiciary systems. There has been limited progress in
this area. Some States do not have a non-punitive reporting system and feel that their legislative procedures cannot be changed.This objec-
tive is being reviewed to ensure that the requirement is fully understood.
The two most significant SLoAs for this ECIP edition are:
� For the Regulators to establish a forum between ANSPs, investigators and airspace users by mid 2007 to encourage ‘Just Culture’ during
investigation.To date only 20% of states report to have partially or totally completed the action.Many Regulators are reviewing the objec-
tive but information gained through ESP visits indicates a lack of understanding about what is required. A large number of States are
reporting difficulties (e.g Nordic, Eastern and Mediterranean countries).
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 17 April 2007
ESP Implementation
ECIP OBJECTIVE AND STATUS
� For the ANSPs,28% of ANSPs have reported to have established an interface with national judicial system by end 2006.26% of the ANSPs
are planning the action while the same number are reviewing the action and reporting problems (e.g. Eastern and Mediterranean coun-
tries).There is also some lack of understanding with regard to what is meant by establishing an interface/set up forum.
SAF08 Implement best practices with regard to risk assessment mitigation in day-to-day operations
This objective provides supplementary information for the monitoring activity pertaining to Activity Field 3 (Risk Assessment and Mitigation
in Day-to-Day Operations) of the European Safety Programme for ATM (ESP).
For the 2007-2011 edition of the ECIP the most significant actions are:
� For the ANSPs to develop, adapt and implement SMS procedure on risk assessment and mitigation for changes to ATM system con-
stituents (by end of 2008). Around 45% of the ANSPs report to have completed the action, 15% partially and only 7% are reviewing the
objective.
� For the ANSPs to develop, adapt and implement SMS procedure for safety assessment of ATM procedures. Around 40% of the ANSPs
report to have completed the action, 15% partially and only 5% are reviewing the objective.
Both previous results demonstrate a large maturity of the ANSPs on risk assessment gained through the implementation of ESARR4 and re-
enforced by the SES certification for the concerned ones.
Regarding the development, adaptation and implementation of SMS procedure to be applied in the event of degraded working conditions
within ATM system, the action is less progressed (20% completed, 15% partially completed, 22% are reviewing the action). However, the
release (planned for end of 2008) of the EUROCONTROL “Guidance for Degraded Modes of Operation” will support its further implementa-
tion.
SAF09 Adapt and implement best practices to enhance safety management performance and processes associated
with key risk areas
This objective provides supplementary information for the monitoring activity pertaining to Activity Field 5 (Safety Management
Enhancement) of the European Safety Programme for ATM (ESP).
After a first year of reporting, we have a preliminary set of results.Around 25-30% of ANSPs report to have completed adaptation and imple-
mentation in their SMS of Generic Best Practices on Safety Management System Awareness Material,Safety Surveys Critical Shift,Work Safety
Issues (e.g. Single Person operations) and relationship between SMS and QMS.Within these ANSPs, there is a « core group » of seven ANSPs
that have totally or partially implemented all of them.
Far less advanced actions are generic best practices into local guidance material on SMS costs including staffing and on Safety Culture meas-
urement and advancement. For both actions, around 16% of ANSPs have totally or partially implemented the actions and around 28% are
still reviewing them.
In addition, around 40% of the ANSPs report to have partially or totally developed generic local Safely improvement initiatives procedures
and processes.Participation in Safety Improvement Sub Group (SISG) and SASI are supporting such a good level of achievement. In contrast,
the same action on the regulatory side is very low (around 15%) and almost 40% of the Regulators are reviewing the action.
SRC01 Implement ESARR 1 on safety oversight in ATM
Eight States report to have published the relevant regulation. Nineteen States have either partially completed or have planned to publish
ESARR1 by November 2007.While ten States announce implementation after November 2007, several others are awaiting the transposition
of ESARR1 into EC regulation.
April 2007 page 18 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
ESP Implementation
ECIP OBJECTIVE AND STATUS
SRC02 Implement ESARR2 on reporting and analysis of safety occurrences in ATM
This objective is now largely lagging behind schedule. In 2006, the overall progress of the implementation of ESARR2 by the national regu-
latory authorities is slow (+13%).
Around 65% of the National regulatory authorities report having fully or partially implemented ESARR2, five years after the deadline.
Remaining difficulties lay mainly with the publication of national regulations compliant with ESARR2 (68% of States have promulgated them)
and Safety oversight (63% have fully or partially implemented it).
SRC03 Implement ESARR3 on the use of safety management systems by ATM Service Providers
Around 63% of the Regulators have completed the publication of an ESARR3 compliant regulation (either through direct applicability for SES
related States or through transposition into national regulations). Six SES related States have not completed the objectives. They are either
planning to complete the action by mid 2007 or are referring to the need of additional transposition of ESARR3 requirements not covered
by the Common Requirements. Remaining States (except for one) have plans for implementation.
The verification of compliance of the ANSPs with these regulations is less advanced as several States are still in the process of certification of
their ANSPs.
SRC04 Implement ESARR4 on risk assessment and mitigation in ATM
Implementation of this objective progressed significantly in 2006 following the EC regulation 2096/2005 on Common Requirements.Around
60% of the national regulatory authorities have fully or partially implemented all the ESARR 4 measures. However, several SES related States
are still reporting that they have delays or no plan in place.
Fifteen States report having fully or partially defined their national ATM Safety minima.
Following the certification of ANSPs in 2006, progress in this area has been significant and now 65% of the ANSPs have partially or totally
implementing the objective. Several ANSPs of SES related States plan to fully implement ESARR4 by mid 2007.
SRC05.1 Implement ESARR5 on ATM services’ personnel (Air Traffic Controllers)
Licence/certificate of competence schemes are in place in most of the States and the bulk of the outstanding work relates to the assessment,
documentation and implementation of the differences between national regulations and ESARR 5 supplementary requirements.
The implementation of this objective by the national regulatory authorities in 2006 has continued to be at a slow pace (+ 7%).
Three years after the deadline for implementation, only 63% of States have published new regulation totally or partially compliant with
ESARR5 (ed 2.0) section 5.1 and section 5.2.Other States report an implementation date of 2007.For the SES related States, it is mainly imple-
mented within the context of the transposition of the EC directive on the licensing of Air Traffic Controllers into the national regulations.Only
a few States mention no date, or report an implementation date in 2008 or 2009.
SRC05.2 Implement ESARR5 on ATM services’ personnel (engineering and technical personnel)
The overall progress of this objective in 2006 has been very significant (+20%): 40% of the States report having published the required
regulation, 10% are partially compliant while the remaining 50% of the States are late.This progress is also the result of the direct applica-
bility for the SES related States of the Commission Regulation (EC) No 2096/2005 of 20 December 2005 laying down common requirements
for the provision of air navigation services. ESARR5 on ATM services’ technical and engineering personnel was fully covered by this regula-
tion. However, it should be noted that several of such States are still reporting not to have completed the action, although the majority are
planning to complete the action by end of 2007.
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 19 April 2007
ESP Implementation
ECIP OBJECTIVE AND STATUS
SRC06 Implementation of ESARR6 on Software in ATM Systems
Only 25% of the Regulators report having published regulations, while a further 45% of the Regulators have plans in place. The progress
(+15%) is far from the expectations of 2006,when 46% of the Regulators were planning to publish the regulation by November 2006.In addi-
tion, 30% of the Regulators are still reviewing the objective and are unable to give dates yet.
On the Service Provider side, only 22% of ANSPs have totally or partially implemented ESARR6. It should be noted that sometimes the ANSP
is more advanced than the Regulator (e.g.when ESARR6 has been applied on new ATM systems or included in internal SMS procedures/hand-
books) while sometimes ANSPs report dependency on regulation before being able to progress further.
Only 25% of the Regulators report hav-
ing published regulations, while a fur-
ther 45% of the Regulators have plans in
place. The progress (+15%) is far from
the expectations of 2006, when 46% of
the Regulators were planning to publish
the regulation by November 2006. In
addition, 30% of the Regulators are still
reviewing the objective and are unable
to give dates yet.
On the Service Provider side,only 22% of
ANSPs have totally or partially imple-
mented ESARR6. It should be noted that
sometimes the ANSP is more advanced
than the Regulator (e.g. when ESARR6
has been applied on new ATM systems
or included in internal SMS proce-
dures/handbooks) while sometimes
ANSPs report dependency on regula-
tion before being able to progress fur-
ther.
ESP SAF OBJECTIVES
� ATC02.2/02.5/02.6/02.7 - There are likely
to be changes to the implementation
dates of these objectives. The impact to
these changes on the ESP is being
analysed and will be communicated to
Stakeholders in the near future.
� SAF02 - Following consultation it has
been agreed that this objective will be
changed to a General Objective under
the ownership of the SCG. It will be a
Pan-European,“Agreed”objective.
� SAF06/07/08/09 - These objectives are
being reviewed to ensure further refine-
ment of the requirements.
� SAF10 - There is a proposal to create a
new Under Development objective to
cover Airspace Infringements.
ESP DELIVERABLES
During 2006 a number of deliverables in the
form of documents were achieved, notably:
� Guidance Material EAM1/GUI5 - ESARR 1
in the Certification and Designation of
Service Providers
� Guidance Material EAM1/GUI7 - ESARR1
Guidance on the Criteria for the
Assessment of Compliance with the
Standards of ICAO Annex 11
� Guidance Material EAM2-GUI6 - ESARR2
Establishment of “Just Culture”Principles
in ATM Safety Data Reporting and
Assessment
� Guidance Material EAM2/GUI7 - ESARR 2
and Related Safety Oversight
� Guidance Material EAM3/GUI3 - ESARR 3
and Related Safety Oversight
� Guidance Material EAM4/GUI2 - ESARR 4
and Related Safety Oversight
� Guidance Material EAM5/GUI2 - ESARR 5
and Related Safety Oversight for ATCOs -
Part A Licence
� EAM5/GUI3 - Explanatory Material on
ESARR 5 Requirements for Engineers
and Technical Personnel
April 2007 page 20 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
ESP Implementation
� Guidance Material EAM5/GUI4 - ESARR 5
and Related Safety Oversight for
Engineering and Technical Personnel
� EUROCONTROL Generic SMS Manual
� Understanding Safety Culture in Air
Traffic Management
� Managing Shiftwork in European ATM
� Shiftwork Practices Study - ATM and
Related Industries
� Guidelines for SMS Safety Surveys (as a
Final Draft version)
� Safety Assessment Methodology V2 -
Electronic version
� Safety Assessment Methodology
Newsletters
� EUROCONTROL Specification and
Guidance Material for Short Term
Conflict Alert updated and released
� The European Action Plan for the
Prevention of Runway Incursions
� The European Action Plan for the
Prevention of Level Busts
� The European Action Plan for the
Prevention of the Air-Ground
Communication Errors
� Hindsight 3
� Hindsight 4
All of the above deliverables can be found
on the EUROCONTROL website. If you have
problems downloading a document, please
let us know and we will ensure they get to
you: [email protected].
A number of ESP related workshops were
also held during 2006 and the documenta-
tion from these can also be found on our
website.
KEEPING YOU INFORMED
The ESP Stakeholders’ report is produced
twice a year in April and October. To sup-
plement this report, we have developed an
ESP e-Bulletin, which will be issued in
between these publication dates. The first
e-Bulletin has already been distributed and
brings you up-to-date with what’s happen-
ing on the programme - if you didn’t receive
a copy and would like to be on the distribu-
tion list, let us know by writing to us at:
[email protected]. The intention is for the
e-Bulletin to be bite-sized to raise aware-
ness and to bring you ‘hot off the press’
items. We also welcome contributions from
our Stakeholders.
SUMMARY
In general, States have made very good
progress towards achieving their activities,
but there are still some areas for concern
and we are tackling these with the States
concerned. Once the remaining LCIP
reports have been reviewed and the 2007
Safety Framework Maturity Survey is com-
plete, we will consolidate our findings and
will provide a more detailed update in the
next Stakeholders Report.
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 21 April 2007
Activity Field 3
GUIDANCE MATERIAL FOR SAFETY CASE
(ESP Rec 3.2.2)
GUIDANCE MATERIAL:
The Safety Case Development Manual
(SCDM) has been approved by the SAMTF
(Safety Assessment Methodology Task
Force) and by the Safety Team (ST). The
released issue has been published as part of
SAM V2.1 (Level 2 Guidance Material Part IV
Annex I).
SAFETY ASSESSMENT TRAINING
COURSES:
Two pilot sessions of the Safety Assessment
Methodology - Safety Assessment of ATM
Procedure (SAM-SAAP) have been run in
Luxembourg. Official sessions will be
offered as part of IANS catalogue starting in
the second semester of 2007.
A SAM - Software course (based on
Recommendations for ANS SW V1.0
approved by the Safety Team) as well as a
Safety Case Development course (based on
SCDM) have been developed jointly with
UK NATS.The pilot sessions will be run in the
second quarter of 2007.Official sessions will
be included in the IANS catalogue in the
second semester of 2007.
COMMUNITY SPECIFICATION (CS):
SOFTWARE ASSURANCE LEVELS
A Community Specification (CS) on
Software Assurance Levels (SWAL) will be
developed which is intended to apply to
software components that are part of an Air
Navigation System (ANS), focusing only on
the “ground” segment of ANS. The CS will
provide a reference against which stake-
holders can assess their own practices for
software throughout the overall software
lifecycle. The outcome will be the develop-
ment of a standardisation deliverable for
software assurance (through EUROCAE)
based on the existing EUROCONTROL doc-
umentation ‘Recommendations for ANS
Software’. The European standard should be
available at the latest by the end of 2008.
EUROCAE WG64 (ESP Rec 3.2.4)
EUROCAE WG64 has issued ED125 V1.0
(Proposed Issue) for final WG64 review and
comment before finally submitting the doc-
ument to EUROCAE council.This document
proposes guidance to specify an ATM Risk
Classification Scheme and to derive quanti-
tative Safety Objectives in compliance with
ESARR4.
CONTINGENCY PLANNING - ANSBUSINESS CONTINUITY (Rec 3.2.3)
BACKGROUND
Part of ESP Activity Field 3
(Recommendation 3.5.2) is for the EURO-
CONTROL Agency to provide Guidance
Material (GM) for Contingency Planning. A
new generic ECIP Objective, GEN 01, has
been created to replace the previous SAF 02
and will be owned by the Stakeholder
Consultation Group (SCG). An internal
cross-domain EUROCONTROL Project Team
(PT) has been formed to begin develop-
ments of the new GM which will, in part,
refresh the previous material released in
1997. The PT’s activities will be steered by a
specially formed Contingency Planning
Task Force (TF) comprised of stakeholders
from ANSPs, Users and EUROCONTROL
Agency staff covering all disciplines related
to Contingency Planning.
OBJECTIVES
The objective is to provide Guidance
Material to ANSPs that will enable them to
meet their ICAO and SES CR obligations
regarding the availability and utility of
Contingency Plans. In turn, ANSPs will be
better placed to ensure the continuity of
ANS and related services in support of the
five Key Performance Areas (KPAs): Safety,
Capacity, Efficiency, Security and
Environmental Sustainability. Improved
harmonisation of Contingency Plans
between States and ANSPs is another goal
of the project.
GUIDANCE MATERIAL
The GM will be built around the classical
SMS model: Policy, Planning, Achievement,
Assurance and Promotion. The idea being
that the GM is user friendly and will guide
contingency planners and practitioners
through the maze of issues that need to be
April 2007 page 22 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 3
taken into consideration when constructing
a Contingency (Business Continuity) Plan.
The overall scope of the material is still
under discussion but inevitably it will
include topics such as the ATS services cov-
ered, roles and responsibilities, safety/risk
assessment, capacity (cost benefit analysis),
geographical coverage, regulatory issues,
military considerations, testing and training
and a host of other related topics.
DELIVERABLES
Some overriding principles will be followed:
Descriptive,high-level guidance,rather than
prescriptive, detailed guidance will be pro-
vided. Checklists and aidesmemoire will be
produced to guide stakeholders’ actions. It
is intended that Deliverable D1 will be ready
by early summer 2007 and D2 by the end of
the year.
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 23 April 2007
Activity Field 4
Ben Bakker(DAP ATS)ESP Activity Field 4Thread Leader
Françoise Girard(SRU)ESP Activity Field 4Thread Leader
ACTIVITY FIELD 4SYSTEM SAFETY DEFENCES by Ben Bakker & Françoise Girard
Scope: ESP Activity Field 4 concentrates on
supporting controllers with system safety
defences in a more complex traffic envi-
ronment with demanding traffic increases.
This includes material on cost/benefit
analysis, harmonised specifications and
operational requirements for ground
based safety nets and best practices,
including training support, as well as the
remaining work of ACAS RA downlink.
FARADS
The Feasibility of ACAS RA Downlink Study
(FARADS) project closes-out activities are
nearly completed. The project demonstrat-
ed that there are no major technical obsta-
cles to the implementation of RA downlink.
However, in order to fully assess the impact
of RA downlink on safety and operational
usability, further steps need to be taken.
These include systematic RA monitoring
and clarification of legal responsibility of
controllers once the RA will be displayed on
their screens. The required research will be
conducted in a new project that will be ini-
tiated in 2007 to develop the overall,coordi-
nated concept (see below).
SHORT TERM CONFLICT ALERT(STCA)
The EUROCONTROL Specification for STCA
and the comprehensive supporting EURO-
CONTROL Guidance Material for STCA were
finalised at the end of 2006. However, the
Specification is Draft as it will now be sub-
ject to formal consultation through the
EUROCONTROL Notice of Proposed Rule
Making (ENPRM) process in anticipation of
an EC regulatory activity.This will also allow
keeping the Specification aligned with the
latest developments:
� Clarification of the role of ground-based
safety nets with regard to ESARR 4
implementation is progressing through
the SRC Work Programme. The SRC
acknowledges that ground-based safety
nets are part of the ATM system and
therefore subject to the provisions of
ESARR 4. As a consequence, SRC Policy
Document 2 will be replaced by specific
ESARR 4 Guidance Material.
� ICAO PANS-ATM § 15.7.2 is in the process
of being changed following recommen-
dations originating from the European
Safety Programme.
In the meantime the period for achieving
compliance with ECIP Objective ATC02.2
(2007-2008) has commenced.
Documentation can be found at www.euro-
control.int/safety-nets.
MINIMUM SAFE ALTITUDE WARN-ING (MSAW)
The SPIN (Safety nets: Planning
Implementation and eNhancements) Task
Force is furthering the development of the
EUROCONTROL Specification for MSAW and
the EUROCONTROL Guidance Material for
MSAW. For the latter, the same approach is
followed as for STCA, i.e. the full life cycle of
MSAW - from policy setting, requirements
definition, verification and validation, to
monitoring and optimisation during opera-
tional use - is addressed in general terms as
well as in detail.The practical usability of the
guidance material is verified through a case
study in a demanding environment.
APPROACH PATH MONITOR (APM)& AIRSPACE PROXIMITY WARNING(APW)
The SPIN Task Force aims to complete simi-
lar work for APM and APW by the end of
2008. It is currently anticipated that compli-
ance with the Specifications for MSAW,APM
and APW will have to be achieved in the
period 2009-2013.
OVERALL COORDINATED CONCEPT
As identified during SPIN surveys in 2004-
2005 and confirmed through the FARADS
work, there is an area of concern regarding
“understanding and management of possi-
ble interactions between STCA and ACAS”.A
feasibility study was completed that
demonstrated the usefulness of building on
the encounter model-based methodology
as successfully developed and applied in
the Mode S and ACAS Programmes.
A full study is now being initiated to devel-
op an overall coordinated concept for air-
April 2007 page 24 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 4
borne and ground-based safety nets. The
study will start with a number of monitoring
activities to improve the understanding of
the use of ACAS and STCA in Europe. The
findings will be used to configure the
encounter models. Comprehensive fast-
time simulations will then be conducted to
develop proper understanding of the inter-
actions and performance aspects.
SOME COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS:
Safety nets can also be used as tools
Safety nets are designed for maximum
effectiveness during hazardous situa-
tions. This necessitates technical trade-
offs that make safety nets unsuitable for
separation or navigation tasks. Safety
nets are not intended or accepted to
alter the normal way of working of con-
trollers and pilots.
STCA always precedes ACAS RA
Dependent on the geometry of the
encounter and also on the configura-
tion of STCA, the RA sometimes pre-
cedes STCA by several seconds.
Sometimes an RA occurs without STCA
(in particular, but not only, when STCA
takes the cleared flight level into
account).
STCA and ACAS are independent
Although there is no interconnection
between STCA and ACAS, both depend
on the same altitude-reporting
transponders.Moreover,they are “loose-
ly coupled” through their users: con-
trollers and pilots. In rare cases STCA will
trigger a controller action that in turn
will trigger an RA that otherwise would
not have occurred.
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 25 April 2007
Activity Field 5
ACTIVITY FIELD 5 IS WORK“ON THE FIELD”
Dear Stakeholder,
Let me report to you briefly on the
progress we have made on Activity Field
(AF) 5.The word ‘field’here can be taken lit-
erally, because the essence of AF5 is being
on the field - close to you and your every-
day problems. Our aim, through a pro-
gramme of continuous improvement, is to
provide you with a helping hand and sup-
port with the urgent operational safety
improvements such as attacking level
busts, separation infringements, runway
incursions, and airspace infringements to
mention but a few. Our work relies on the
data we receive, but it is not the collection,
analysis and storage of data that counts, it
is what we do with the end results that
matter. AF5 is, therefore, about sharing
lessons learned and best practices, and
developing high-quality, userfriendly
products to enhance safety performance.
SAFETY ALERTS
Safety Alerts are here to give you informa-
tion for the urgent safety issues.
With your help we continue to issue Safety
Alerts, in the form of Safety Warnings for the
most urgent issues and Safety Reminders
for revisiting good safety practices. During
the last four months we have published two
alerts:
� The first one is about the holding posi-
tion at a runway/runway intersection. It
reminds practitioners of the ICAO SARPS
in Annex 14 where a runway which
includes at least one runway/runway
intersection is used for taxiing purposes.
� The second reminder provided brief
information on 8.33 kHz above FL195 in
the ICAO EUR Region which took effect
15 March 2007.
All the published alerts are available on our
on-line “One click Safety Alert Board” -
www.eurocontrol.int/safety-alerts .
The information is applicable to airlines and
pilots, controllers and ANSPs, airports and
regulators. Please, serve as our ambassador
and make sure the word spreads to those
that need to know - your friends and col-
leagues from other segments of aviation.
They can register to this service simply by
sending an e-mail to
AIR-GROUND COMMUNICATIONSAFETY ACTION PLAN
“ALL CLEAR”IS COMING SOON!
Following the success of the Level Bust
toolkit,we are now developing an even bet-
ter one to support the European Action
Plan for Air Ground Communications Safety.
Called “All Clear”, the toolkit will contain
interesting videos, e-learning interactive
modules, easy to customise materials and
some surprise items. To register your inter-
est, please contact bengt.collin@eurocon-
trol.int in order not to miss it.
SAFETY IMPROVEMENT SUB-GROUP (SISG)
IMPROVING WAYS OF WORKING
Despite the successes we have had we can,
and must,still do better if we are to maintain
the safety standards we set ourselves.
Consequently, the SISG, which drives the
major safety improvement initiatives, is in
the process of re-examining its role in sup-
port of the Safety Team. The closer involve-
ment and possible integration of the air-
lines to discuss mutual areas of concern is
being considered but it is recognised that
there must still be room to concentrate on
ATM-only issues as necessary. Any future
change of direction for the SISG is likely to
be decided at the next meeting of the
Safety Team in June 2007.
Tzvetomir Blajev(DAP/SSH)Eurocontrol
Co-ordinator
Safety Improvements
Initiatives
ACTIVITY FIELD 5SAFETY MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENT by Tzvetomir Blajev
HINDSIGHT
YOUR HINDSIGHT GOES GLOBAL!
During a recent holiday to Cape Verde, an
group of islands off the west coast of Africa,
Karin Anghus from EUROCONTROL’s
Airport Operations and Environment unit,
visited the new ACC, and discovered
EUROCONTROL’s activities are far-reaching!
Staff at Cape Verde’s airport proudly pre-
sented the latest version of the Hindsight
magazine, which is produced by the Safety
Management Enhancement team in the
EUROCONTROL’s European Safety
Programme for ATM.
Hindsight is a magazine produced for Air
Traffic Controllers and is issued by the
Agency twice a year. Its main function is to
help operational air traffic controllers to
share in the experiences of other controllers
who have been involved in ATM-related
safety occurrences.
In this way, they will have an opportunity to
broaden their experience of the problems
that may be encountered; to consider the
available solutions; and therefore be better
prepared should they meet similar occur-
rences themselves. Around 4000 copies of
each issue are circulated globally to air traf-
fic controllers, aircraft operators, airlines,
user associations, head of ACCs, and work-
ing groups associated with the programme.
If you would like to learn more or would like
to read the Hindsight magazine, visit our
website: http://www.eurocontrol.int/safe-
ty/public/subsite_homepage/homepage.
html
Hindsight 5 will be published and released
in July 2007 and will have the theme of
Workload.
I opened this article with a description of
what AF5 is trying to achieve. We can only
do this with your active participation and
support and I look forward to continuing to
work with you in the future.
Yours sincerely
Tzvetomir Blajev.
April 2007 page 26 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Activity Field 5
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 27 April 2007
ESP R&D Activities
SAFETY CULTURE MEASUREMENT
The Safety Culture Measurement Tool
developed in 2006 was tested at one ANSP
in October 2006 with the main objective to
identify any problems with the question-
naire or interview structure. The question-
naire was distributed across the whole
ANSP targeting controllers, maintenance
engineers and management, where 185
staff responded. The questionnaires were
then analysed and the key safety culture
issues were identified. Nine follow-up inter-
views with a cross-section of the staff were
undertaken to go into more depth, and
understand better the results from the
questionnaire survey. A confidential report
is currently being completed for the ANSP.
The questionnaire was refined based on
feedback from the survey.
Four other ANSPs are involved in the Safety
Culture Measurement Tool validation sur-
vey in 2007. The first survey is currently
underway, where questionnaires have been
distributed and returned, and are being
analysed. The questionnaire for ANSP 2 was
answered by more than 300 participants
and allowed the identification of safety cul-
ture strengths and areas for improvement.
Four of these latter areas were explored in
separate mixed-expertise working groups
(eg controller, manager, ATSA, technician,
etc.) at the ANSP, resulting in a number of
recommendations for consideration into
how to improve safety culture. Some of the
results of this second exercise will be pre-
sented at the next Safety Team meeting in
June in Finland.
R&D ON TARGET SETTING ANDAPPORTIONMENT (by Eric Perrin - EEC)
A methodology has been developed that
apportion overall safety targets to provide
safety objectives for individual systems.
The methodology is expressed in general
terms that are applicable to any numerical
risk target, applied using any concept of
operations and any risk model. Illustrative
examples are provided using the Integrated
Risk Picture addressing Overall concepts,
Specific units of operations and Individual
Systems.The report will be ready for review
shortly.A leaflet is also being worked on giv-
ing a management overview of the
methodology. Both will be ready for review
by early Q2 2007.
ESP RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTACTIVITIES by Barry Kirwan
Barry Kirwan(EEC)Coordinator Safety R&D
Activities
April 2007 page 28 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
ESP
This article first appeared in the IAA
Journal in July 2006 and is reproduced her
with the kind permission of its author, Mr
Alan Byrne, ATM Specialist in the Safety
Standards and Procedures domain of the
Operations Directorate IAA
HERA-JANUS
WHAT IS HERA-JANUS?
HERA-JANUS is a tool for analysing human
error in Air Traffic Management (ATM). It
was developed through extensive collabo-
ration between EUROCONTROL and the US
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This
collaboration produced the tool under the
title ‘HERA - JANUS’. HERA stands for human
error in ATM, while JANUS, the name of a
Roman god with two faces, symbolises
HERA’s prospective and retrospective
approach toward analysis of human erro-
neous performance. Hence, the HERA-
JANUS process looks at ATM incidents to
discover What happened, Why it happened
and then look forward at What can we do to
prevent it from happening again.
THE PROCESS
HERA-JANUS adopts a holistic approach to
human error analysis by examining all
aspects of the ATM system i.e. people, pro-
cedures and equipment.Furthermore,HERA
applies four levels of analysis of the error.
Firstly, once an error(s) have been identified
by an investigator the analyst will use the
HERA-JANUS technique to identify which
cognitive aspect of human behaviour was
implicated in the error. These error details
include:
� Rule breaking and/or violations
� Perception and vigilance errors
� Memory errors
� Planning and decision making errors
� Response execution errors.
Secondly, using a detailed flow chart, the
analyst then proceeds to establishing the
error mechanism or in other words, what
exactly happened (e.g. not detecting an
incorrect read-back or forgetting a planned
action). Once this error mechanism has
been established the analyst will then pro-
ceed to step three, i.e. identifying how the
controller mentally processed the informa-
tion presented at the time of the error(s).
The analyst will also determine the con-
troller’s task(s) at the time the error(s)
occurred.
Once this information has been accurately
established, it is important to establish the
context within which the error(s) occurred.
This fourth and final stage of the HERA
analysis process is vital in completing a
thorough investigation. Correctly identify-
ing any contextual conditions associated
with the error is critical in identifying the
most appropriate actions that can mitigate
a recurrence of the same error. It is during
this phase of the HERA analysis that correc-
tive recommendations are identified.
Identifying the context within which the
controller erred can reveal latent conditions
(i.e. organisational problems) that may exist
in the ATM system for a long time but man-
aged to trigger unwanted human perform-
ance.The ability to identify these latent con-
ditions represents one of the most benefi-
cial aspects of the HERA methodology.
HERA-JANUS has identified over 200 con-
textual conditions that can contribute to
human error. Generally these conditions lie
within 11 groups.These are as follows:
� Pilot/controller communications
� Pilot actions
� Traffic and airspace
� Weather
� Documentation and procedures
� Training and experience
� Workplace design and HMI
� Environment
� Personal factors
� Team factors
� Organisational factors.
BENEFITS OF HERA-JANUS TO AIR NAVI-
GATION SERVICE PROVIDERS (ANSP)
Over 70% of aviation safety related inci-
dents involve an element of human error.
Because of this, it was necessary to develop
a tool to investigate these occurrences.
HERA-JANUS is designed to help us identify
the specific human errors that may have
contributed to the incident, the cognitive
aspects behind each error, as well as the
contextual conditions within which the
errors occurred. The objective of HERA-
JANUS is to improve safety through the
identification of error trends and error
prone conditions and their mitigation
through refined and specifically targeted
recommendations and remediation. As
more EUROCONTROL Member States
employ the HERA-JANUS technique to their
analysis of human error, more opportunity
will arise to track the error trends, share
information,and learn from the errors of our
colleagues. After all, aviation safety is our
common goal.
ESP HUMAN FACTORS - HERA JANUS
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 29 April 2007
ESP
EDITORIAL NOTES:
The compliance of HERA with the ICAO
approved SHELL (Software, Hardware,
Environment and Liveware (x2)) model was
demonstrated at the Safety Team meeting
held in Madrid during September 2006.
Among the findings of the study that was
conducted to do a comparison test
between the two models it was determined
that:
� HERA-JANUS is included in TOKAI.
� HERA -JANUS taxonomy is mapped onto
the HEIDI taxonomy and coordinated
with ECCAIRS.
� ECCAIRS is ADREP (ICAO) compliant.
� HERA-JANUS is an optional tool.
April 2007 page 30 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
Winners of the European Safety Programme
photo competition were announced at ATC
Maastricht on 14 February 2007. Over 100
submissions were received from both just
around the corner and as far flung as
Australia,Taiwan and the USA.
The theme of ‘Safety in our skies’ proved to
be a difficult one, but our entrants rose to
the challenge!
Photos were judged on:
� ‘On topic’
� Clarity/quality
� Originality
FIRST PRIZEEric Steenwijk,The Netherlands.
Eric won the Canon EOS 400D Digital
Camera.
SECOND PRIZEThierry Grand-Perret, Belgium.
Thierry won the Fujifilm Finepix A700
Digital Camera
THIRD PRIZEAndrew Belshaw, UK.
Andrew won an Apple IPOD Shuffle 1GB
The above photos will be used in the vari-
ous documents and publications that we
develop.
Our congratulation go to the winners and
our thanks to everyone elso who participat-
ed in the competition.
RESULTS OF ESP PHOTOGRAPHYCOMPETITION
ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2 page 31 April 2007
At ICAO’s Symposium on Performance of
the Air Navigation System held at ICAO
Headquarters in Montreal 26-30 March
2007 the ESP received global publicity.
During the associated exhibition a presen-
tation was given on the ESP that generated
interest from a number of States on how to
develop ATM Safety programmes. States
that expressed an interest in the pro-
gramme included: Chile, Cuba, Ethiopia,
Haiti India,Japan,Morocco,Nigeria,Senegal,
South Africa, Thailand and Trinidad. There
was also considerable interest in the
Hindsight, the Safety Magazine for con-
trollers and the stock of copies of the latest
edition diminished quickly.
WORKSHOP, 16 OCTOBER 2007,EUROCONTROL, HQ, BRUSSELS
Call sign confusion, blocked transmission,
loss of communications and radio discipline
are some of the communication related
safety issues that deserve your attention.
The EUROCONTROL ALL CLEAR? Toolkit is
an important deliverable of the European
Action Plan for Air-Ground
Communications Safety and is designed to
help you to improve safety through better
communication.
Should you want to use this EUROCONTROL
Toolkit, then please joins us for an Air-
Ground Communications Safety Toolkit
Workshop, which will be held at EUROCON-
TROL Headquarters,Brussels,on 16 October
2007.
Civil and Military representatives from air-
craft operators (commercial, cargo, military
and general aviation), pilot groups, regula-
tors, airport operators, Air Navigation
Service Providers (ANSPs), as well as pilot
and controller associations are invited to
attend.
For registration,visit our website www.euro-
control.int/safety or send your query to
ESP GOES GLOBAL
ALLCLEAR? THE PATH TO CLEARCOMMUNICATIONS
The DG EUROCONTROL with Mr Roberto Gonzalez,
President of the ICAO Council, who is carrying a copy of
Hindsight.
Mr Tefera Mekonnen,the Ethiopian ICAO Council Representative,the Ethiopian ATM Safety Manager and the Director of
Operations with David Marten from the ESP Coordination Office
April 2007 ESP STAKEHOLDERS’ REPORT N°2
WEBSITEinfo www.eurocontrol.int/esp
© European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)
April 2007
This document is published by EUROCONTROL in the interests of exchange of information.
It may be copied in whole or in part, providing that the copyright notice and disclaimer is included.
The information contained in this document may not be modified without prior written permission from EUROCONTROL.
EUROCONTROL makes no warranty, either implied or expressed, for the information contained in this document, neither does it assume
any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information.
Published by :
EUROCONTROL Headquarters
General Secretariat Directorate
96, rue de la Fusée
B - 1130 Brussels, Belgium
EVENTSMAY 2007
� 2 - SAFREP 2 Meeting
� 8 - 10 - SPIN TF 12
� 8 - 10 - SASI Working Session 3a - (TBC)
� 14 - 15 - Contingency Planning Task Force (TF) - Brussels
� 23 - 25 - SAMTF 7 - Amsterdam
JUNE 2007
� 6-7 - Safety Team 29 - Finland
� 12 - SRC - Brussels
� 19 - 21 - SASI WS4 - Zagreb
� 27 - Key Performance Indicator Task Force 3 (KPITF) - Brussels
� 28 - SAM Newsletter
JULY 2007
� 27 - EEC Safety Culture Measurement Report
AUGUST 2007
� 31- SAM Newsletter
SEPTEMBER 2007
� 5 - Contingency Planning TF - Brussels
� 10 - KPITF4 - (TBC)
� 11 - 13 - SASI WS5 - Belgrade
� 25 - SAFREP 3 - Brussels
� 26 - 27 Safety Team 30 - Leuven
� 26 - 27 SRC 30 - Brussels
OCTOBER 2007
� 2 - 4 - SASI WS 2b - Brussels
� 3 - Air/Ground Communication Workshop - Brussels
� 9 - 11 - SASI WS3a - Lubijana
� 16 - 18 - SPIN TF 13- Frankfurt
� 22 - Contingency Planning TF - Brussels
� 23 - 26 - SASI WS8 - Brussels
� 24 - 26 - EEC R&D Seminar - Rome
� 31 - SAM Newsletter
NOVEMBER 2007
� 14 - 15 PC - Brussels
� 27-29 SAMTF - Madrid
DECEMBER 2007
� 4 - 5 - SASI WS9 - CEOs Meeting - (TBC)
� 14 - Contingency Planning TF Close
� 21 - SAM Newsletter