Upload
others
View
10
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
International Civil Aviation Organization
Eduardo Chacin Regional Officer Flight Safety
ICAO
ICAO State Safety Programme (SSP) and Safety Management Systems (SMS) perspective
CAR/SAM Regional Workshop on the use of Aeronautical Studies in the Aerodrome Certification Process
Mexico City, Mexico, 21 ‐24 August 2012
Programme1. Objective2. Background3. Introduction4. Definitions and concepts5. SSP and ICAO SARPs6. The ICAO SSP framework7. SSP implementation8. The role of SSP in supporting SMS implementation9. Summary10.Conclusion of SSP/SMS Implementation Workshop
22012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 3
1. Objective
Objective
Introduce the framework for development and implementation of:– SSP– SMS
Introduce the combination of both elements: – Prescriptive – Performance‐based
42012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 5
2. Background
6
ICAO Role
Promoting a safety and efficient industryTo meet the needs of the peoples of the world for a safe, regular, efficient and economical air transport (Chicago Convention, Article 44)
2012 ICAO
7
ICAO Strategic Objectives
2011 – 2013:SafetySecuritySustainability
ICAO2012
8
Strategic Approach
Goal– Reduce the risk of loss of human life through continuously enhancing aviation safety
Safety Targets– Safety targets will be defined according to risk criteria
– Continually measured for significant change
Global Safety Initiatives– Linked to global safety targets– Specific metrics will monitor GSIeffectiveness
2012 ICAO
Goal
Safety Targets
Global Safety Initiatives
9
ICAO Safety Framework
Safety Data Policy & Standardization
– GASP Update– Safety Annex
Safety Analysis– Evolving to a risk‐based process
Safety Monitoring– Continuous Monitoring Approach
Implementation– Runway Safety
Collaboration– States, Regional and International
Organizations, Learning Institutions, etc.2012 ICAO
10
ICAO GASP & ISSG GASR
2012 ICAO
GASP: Global Aviation Safety PlanISSG: Industry Safety Strategy GroupGASR: Global Aviation Safety Roadmap
Visit: www.icao.int/fsix/
11
Global Aviation Safety Plan ‐ GASP
High‐level policy document– Guiding efforts of the States, industry andinternational organizations
Update scheduled for 2012– Introduce safety management principles to createa strategic approach to implementation of GlobalSafety Initiatives (GSIs)
– In parallel and harmony with the update of theGlobal Aviation Safety Roadmap (GASR)
2012 ICAO
12
Current Global Safety Initiatives (GSIs)
(GSI‐1) CONSISTENT IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES
(GSI‐2) CONSISTENT REGULATORY OVERSIGHT (GSI‐3) EFFECTIVE ERRORS AND INCIDENTS REPORTING (GSI‐4) EFFECTIVE INCIDENT AND ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION (GSI‐5) CONSISTENT COORDINATION OF REGIONAL PROGRAMMES (GSI‐6) EFFECTIVE ERRORS AND INCIDENTS REPORTING AND
ANALYSIS IN THE INDUSTRY (GSI‐7) CONSISTENT USE OF SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (SMS) (GSI‐8) CONSISTENT COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATORY
REQUIREMENTS (GSI‐9) CONSISTENT ADOPTION OF INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES (GSI‐10) ALIGNMENT OF INDUSTRY SAFETY STRATEGIES (GSI‐11) SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF QUALIFIED PERSONNEL (GSI‐12) USE OF TECHNOLOGY TO ENHANCE SAFETY
2012 ICAO
13
Objective of Updated GASP
Strategic coordination of global safetyactivities
Guide the prioritization and allocation ofaviation safety resources
Measureable achievement of global safetytargets
2012 ICAO
GASP
14
Proposed Global Safety Initiatives (GSIs)
GSI 1: Implementation of International Standards and Recommended Practices
GSI 2 ‐ Establishment and Management of a Regulatory Oversight System
GSI 3 ‐Maintaining Sufficient Number of Qualified Personnel GSI 4 ‐ Establishment and Management of Accident and
Incident Investigation Capabilities GSI 5 ‐ Establishment and Management of a Safety Reporting
System GSI 6 ‐ Alignment and Coordination of Regional Programmes GSI 7 ‐ Implementation of State Safety Programme (SSP) GSI 8 ‐ Use of Technology to Enhance Safety GSI 9 ‐ Continuous Monitoring and Improvement of State’s
Aviation Safety System
2012 ICAO
ICAO High‐level Safety Conference 2010Recommendation 2/5 ICAO should develop, in close collaboration
with States, international and nationalorganizations, a new Annex dedicated tosafety management responsibilities andprocesses which would address the safetymanagement responsibilities of Statesframed under the State Safety Programme(SSP)
The new Safety Management Annex shouldfacilitate the provision of State and aircarrier safety information to the travellingpublic, in addition to specifying the highlevel safety responsibilities of States
ICAO2012 15
New Safety Annex 19 (Draft Version)
Safety Management
19
Two phased process:– Reorganization of existing
SARPs and supporting guidance material
– In‐depth review of SARPs to assess whether they need to be amended or expanded
ICAO2012 16
Safety Management Manual ‐ Doc 9859
Third Edition – 2012 (Unedited advance version)
Detailed guidance for SMS / SSP implementation
ICAO Safety Management website– http://legacy.icao.int/fsix/– http://www2.icao.int/en/ism/Pages/Guida
nceMaterials.aspx
Safety Management Guidance Material
ICAO2012 17
2012 ICAO 18
3. Introduction
19
Evolution of Safety Thinking
2012 ICAO
20
Workplace interaction
Aviation workplaces involve complex interrelationships among componentsTo understand operational performance, we must understand the interrelationship among components of the work place
2012 ICAO
SHEL MODELSoftware (S) (procedures, training, support,etc.); Hardware (H) (machines andequipment); Environment (E) (theoperating circumstances in which the restof the L‐H‐S system must function); andLiveware (L) (humans in the workplace)
21
Prescription & Performance
2012 ICAO
SafetyManagement
principles ICAOSARPS
Performance
PrescriptionRealisticimplementation
22
Prescription & Performance cont.
Prescriptive regulations– Prescribe what the safety requirements are andhow they are to be met
Performance based regulations– Specify the safety requirements to be met, butprovide flexibility in terms of how safetyrequirements are met
2012 ICAO
Prescriptive & Performance based environment
ICAO 23
Prescriptive based environment
Regulations as administrative controls
Rigid regulatory framework
Inspections
Audits
Regulatory compliance
Prescriptive basedenvironment
Prescriptive based environment
Regulations as safety risk controls
Dynamic regulatory framework
Data based identification
Prioritization of safety risks
Effective safety performance
Performance basedenvironment
2012
21‐22/06/2012
ICAO safety management SARPs(Standard and Recommended Practices)
24
Two audience groups– States– Service providers
Three distinct Standards– State safety programme (SSP)
• Acceptable level of safety (ALoS)
– Safety management system (SMS)• Safety performance of the SMS
– Management accountability
2012 ICAO
25
ICAO requirement
2012 ICAO
States shall establish a State SafetyProgramme (SSP), in order to achieve anacceptable level of safety (ALoS) in civilaviation
Current SARPs for SSP / SMS
Safety Management SARPs for Service Providers
Date Denomination Annex
Nov 2001 Safety Management Programme 11,14
Jan 2009 SMS 6, 11,14
Nov 2010 SMS 1
Nov 2010 SMS Framework (Appendix) 1, 6, 11,14
Nov 2013 SMS 8
Safety Management SARPs for States
Date Denomination Annex
Nov 2006 Safety Programme 6, 11,14
Nov 2010 SSP 1, 8,13
Nov 2010 SSP Framework (Attachment) 1, 6, 8,11,13,14
ICAO2012 26
SARPs: Standards and Recommended Practices
ICAO State Safety Programme ‐ SSP
SSP provides the means to combineprescriptive and performance‐basedapproaches to:
1. Safety rulemaking2. Safety policy development3. Safety oversight
272012 ICAO
SSP
SSP is a consequence of the growingawareness that safety management principlesaffect most activities of a civil aviationauthority (CAA):1. Safety rulemaking2. Safety policy development3. Safety oversight
282012 ICAO
CAA activities
1. Safety rulemaking: is based oncomprehensive analyses of the State’saviation system
2. Safety policies: are developed based onhazard identification and safety riskmanagement
3. Safety oversight: is focused towards theareas of significant safety concerns or highersafety risks
292012 ICAO
SRM & SA
SSP development is based upon twomanagement principles:– Safety Risk Management (SRM)– Safety Assurance (SA)
SSP is the bridge that closes the gap between:– Internal and external safety processes of a State– Internal safety processes of service providers
302012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 31
4. Definitions and concepts
What is the objective of a business organization?
322012 ICAO
Safety management – Rationale
In order to achieve its production objectives,the management of any aviationorganization requires the management ofmany business processes
Managing safety is one such businessprocesses
332012 ICAO
Safety management – Rationale cont.
Safety management is a core businessfunction (financial management, HRmanagement, etc.)
There is no aviation organization that hasbeen created to deliver only safety
This brings a potential dilemma formanagement
342012 ICAO
Management levels
Protection Production
ResourcesResources
The management dilemma
3535ICAO2012
The management dilemma
Protection
Production
Catastrophe
Resources +
36ICAO2012
The management dilemma
Protection
Production
Bankruptcy
+ Resources
372012 ICAO
Safety management – The response to the dilemma
Safety issues are a by‐product of activitiesrelated to production/services delivery
An analysis of an organization's resources andgoals allows for a balanced and realisticallocation of resources between protection andproduction goals
The product/service provided by an aviationorganization must be delivered safely
382012 ICAO
Concept of safety
ICAO Doc 9859:Safety is the state in whichthe possibility of harm topersons or propertydamage is reduced to, andmaintained at or below, anacceptable level through acontinuing process ofhazard identification andrisk management
392012 ICAO
Safety facts
The elimination of accidents (and seriousincidents) is unachievable
Failures will occur, in spite of the mostaccomplished prevention efforts
No human activity or human‐made systemcan be guaranteed to be absolutely free fromhazard and operational errors
Controlled safety risk and controlled error areacceptable in an inherently safe system
402012 ICAO
Safety approach
The traditional approach: preventing accidentsFocus on outcomes (causes)Unsafe acts by operational personnelAttach blame/punish for failures to “performsafely”Address identified safety concern exclusivelyRegulatory compliance
412012 ICAO
Safety
The traditional approach:Identifies:
– What– Who– When
But not always discloses:– Why– How
422012 ICAO
Key definitions
Hazard: condition or object with the potential ofcausing injuries to personnel, damage toequipment or structures, loss of material, orreduction of ability to perform a prescribedfunction
Consequence: potential outcome(s) of the hazardSafety Risk: the assessment, expressed in terms ofpredicted probability and severity, of theconsequence(s) of a hazard taking as reference theworst foreseeable situation
432012 ICAO
Other important definitions
Probability: the likelihoodthat an unsafe event orcondition might occur
Severity: the possibleeffects of an unsafe eventor condition, taking asreference the worstforeseeable situation
442012 ICAO
Hazard analysis
45
State the generic hazard
(Hazard statement) Airport construction
Identify specific components of
the hazard Construction
equipment Closed taxiways Etc.
Naturally leading to specific
consequence(s) Aircraft colliding
with construction equipment
Aircraft taking wrong taxiway
Etc.
2012 ICAO
Documentation of hazards
Reactive method• ASR• MOR• Incident reports• Accident reports
Proactive method• ASR• Surveys• Audits
Predictive method• FDA• Direct
observation systems
Method Identification Management Documentation Information
Inform person(s)
responsible for implementing
strategies
Trend analysis
Haza
rds
Haza
rds
Feedback
Develop control and mitigation
strategies
Assignresponsibilities
Implement strategies
Safety bulletins
Report distribution
Seminars and workshops
Assess the consequences and prioritize
the safety risks
Safety managementinformation
Re-evaluate strategies
and processes
462012 ICAO
Safety risk management (SRM)
Definition:– The analysis and elimination, and/or mitigation to anacceptable level of the safety risks of theconsequences of identified hazards
Objective:– A balanced allocation of resources to address allsafety risks and viable safety risks control andmitigation
Importance:– Data‐driven approach to safety resources allocation,thus defensible and easier to explain
472012 ICAO
SRM
Intolerable region
Tolerable region
Acceptableregion
The safety risk is unacceptable as
it currently stands
The safety risk is acceptable based on
mitigation.Cost benefit
analysis is required.
The safety risk is acceptable as it currently stands
AsLowAsReasonablyPracticable
482012 ICAO
Safety risk index/tolerability
49
Safety risk severitySafety risk probability Catastrophic
AMajor
CMinor
DNegligible
EHazardous
BB
Frequent 5
Occasional 4
Remote 3
Improbable 2
Extremelyimprobable 1
5A 5B 5C 5D 5E
4A 4B 4C 4D 4E
3A 3B 3C 3D 3E
2A 2B 2C 2D 2E
1A 1B 1C 1D 1E
2012 ICAO
Safety risk mitigation at a glance
Feedback (Safety assurance)
Hazard/consequence identification
and safety risk assessment
Assessment of the defences within the
safety system
Control and mitigation of the
safety risk(s)
Accepting the mitigation of the
safety risk(s)
Does it address the safety risk(s)? Is it effective? Is it appropriate? Is additional or
different mitigation warranted?Do the mitigation
strategies generates additional safety risk(s)
H H H H
R R R R
Each consequence
Each safety risk
Intolerable region
Tolerable region
Acceptableregion
502012 ICAO
System performance in the real world
51
Systemdesign
Baseline performance Practical
driftOperational deployment
2012 ICAO
52
Baseline performance Practical
drift
Organization
Navigational aids for managing safety
Reactive Proactive Predictive
Managing safety – “Navigating the drift”
2012 ICAO
Navigational aids
53
Reactive methodThe reactive method responds to the events that already happened, such as incidents and accidents
Proactive methodThe proactive method looks actively for the identification ofsafety risks through the analysis of the organization’s activities
Predictive methodThe predictive method captures system performance as it happens in real-time normal operations to identify potential future problems
2012 ICAO
Strategies – Levels of intervention & tools
54
HAZA
RDS
Predictive
Highly efficient Very efficient Efficient Insufficient
Proactive Reactive Reactive
FDADirect
observationsystem
ASRSurveysAudits
ASRMOR
Accidentand incident
reports
Safety management levels
2012 ICAO
Acceptable Level of Safety (ALoS)
It is the minimum degree of safety that must be assured by a system in actual practice
552012 ICAO
Another key concepts
Level of safety: degree of safety of a system,representing the quality of the system, safety‐wise,expressed through safety indicators
Safety indicators: parameters that characterizeand/or typify the level of safety of the system
Value of safety indicators: quantification of a safetyindicator
Safety targets: concrete objectives to be achievedValue of safety targets: quantification of a safetytarget
562012 ICAO
Selection of safety indicators
The selection of appropriate safety indicators is:– An essential foundation for the development andimplementation of ALoS
– A function of the detail to which the level of safetyof the system is to be represented
Meaningful safety indicators must berepresentative of the elements that characterizesystem safety
572012 ICAO
A fundamental differentiation
Safety measurement– Not a continuous process– A spot check– Conducted following pre‐specified timeframes
Safety performance measurement– Continuous process– Monitoring and measurement of selectedoperational activities necessary for the provisionof services
582012 ICAO
Safety measurement
Strategic and generally associated to the SSPQuantification of outcomes of selected high‐level or high‐consequence events– Accident rates– Serious incident rates
Quantification of selected high‐level State functions– Development/absence of primary aviation legislation– Development/absence of operating regulations– Level of regulatory compliance
A measure of achievement of high‐level safety objectivesof safety interventions and/or mitigations strategies
592012 ICAO
Safety performance measurement
Tactical and generally associated to an SMSQuantification of the outcomes of selectedlow‐level, low‐ consequence processesA measure of the actual performance ofsafety interventions and/or mitigationstrategies, beyond accident rates andregulatory compliance
602012 ICAO
Basic safety management SARPs
ALoS to be achieved shall be established bythe StateWhen establishing ALoS, consideration mustbe given to:– The level of safety risk that applies– The safety risk tolerance– The cost/benefits of improvements to the aviationsystem
– The public expectations in civil aviation system
612012 ICAO
Expressing the ALoS
Values of safety indicators and safety targets– Initial ALoS: quantitative action statements on
• High level/high consequence outcomes (safetymeasurement)
– Mature ALoS: quantitative action statements on• High level/high consequence events (safetymeasurement)
• Low level/low consequence outcomes (safetyperformance measurement)
622012 ICAO
ALoS – Mature SSP
Once States develop safety data collection and analysis capabilities under the Safety Assurance component of the SSP, ALoS should reflect a combination of:– Safety measurement – Safety performance measurement
632012 ICAO
ALoS – Legal considerations
Establishing ALoS related to the SSP:– Does not replace legal, regulatory, or otheralready established requirements, but it mustsupport compliance with them
– Leaves unaffected the obligations of States, anddoes not relieve States from compliance withSARPs
642012 ICAO
Transition from initial to mature ALoS
65
Initial ALoS(Safety measurement)
Quantification of outcomes of selected high-level/high-consequence events
Quantification of selected high-level State functions
State safety assurance Safety oversight
Safety data collection, analysis and exchange
Safety data driven targeting of oversight on areas of greater concern or need
Mature ALoS(Safety measurement and
safety performance measurement)
Quantification of outcomes of selected high-level/high-consequence events
Quantification of selected high-level State functions
Quantification of outcomes of selected low-level/low-consequence events
Timeline
2012 ICAO
Delivering ALoS – Safety action plans
Tools and means todeliver the safetytargets of an SSP:– Regulations– Training– Technology
662012 ICAO
System today
67
State Civil Aviation AuthorityState Civil Aviation
Authority
Safety
measurement
Capture
Storage
Service providers
Airport N° 1
Airport N° 2
Airport N° 3
2012 ICAO
Initial ALoS
68
State Civil Aviation AuthorityState Civil Aviation
Authority
Safety
measurement
Capture
Storage
Service providers
Airport N° 1
Airport N° 2
Airport N° 3
Initial ALoS
2012 ICAO
Initial ALoS
69
State Civil Aviation AuthorityState Civil Aviation
Authority
Protected safety
data
Capture
Storage
Process
Analysis
Service providers
Airport N° 1
Airport N° 2
Airport N° 3
Initial ALoS
Exchange of protected safety data
Safety data collection & processing system
2012 ICAO
Mature ALoS
70
State Civil Aviation AuthorityState Civil Aviation
Authority
Protected safety
data
Capture
Storage
Process
Analysis
Service providers
Airport N° 1
Airport N° 2
Airport N° 3
Initial ALoS
Exchange of protected safety data
Safety data collection & processing system
2012 ICAO
Summary
71
Set o
f act
ivitie
sSe
t of a
ctivi
ties
ATS Service provider
Aerodrome operator AMOAircraft
operator N° 1
SSP(ALoS)
ATS Service provider
Aerodrome operator AMO
Aircraft operator N° 2
Training organization
SMSSMS SMSSMS SMS
State accepts and oversees individual service providers’ SMS
Safety performance
State accepts and oversees individual service providers’ SMS
State agrees and supervises individual service provider’s SMS safety performance
Safety performance Safety performance Safety performance Safety performance
Safety performance Safety performance Safety performance Safety performance Safety performance
Trainingorganization
SMS SMS SMSSMS SMS
2012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 72
5. SSP and ICAO SARPs
SSP definition
SSP is an integrated set of regulations and activities aimed at improving safety
732012 ICAO
SSP
States shall establish the SSP in order toachieve an acceptable level of safety (ALoS)ALoS will be set by the StateSSP is a management system for themanagement of safety by the State
742012 ICAO
SSP in context
The implementation of an SSP must becommensurate with the size and complexity ofthe State’s aviation system
752012 ICAO
SSP in context
Requires coordinationamong multipleauthorities responsiblefor individual elementsof civil aviationfunctions in the State
762012 ICAO
Responsibilities and accountabilities in an SSP
77
Responsibilities: are functions and duties whichdescribe the safety purpose of what an individualis required to do, with regard to the operation ofthe SSP
Accountabilities: are statements of what anindividual is required to deliver, either directly orthrough supervision and management of others,including those to whom the individual hasdelegated responsibility, with regard to theoperation of the SSP
2012 ICAO
Accountable person in an SSPShall have administrative responsibility andaccountability for the implementation,coordination and maintenance of the SSP, and:– Final authority on issues related to the allocation ofresources within the State aviation organization thathas been designated as the placeholder for the SSP
– Authority over service provider’s certificatemanagement aspects
– Responsibility for the coordination of the resolutionof State’s aviation safety issues under the SSP
782012 ICAO
SMS State requirement
That a service provider implement the SMSacceptable to the State that:– Identifies safety hazards– Ensures the implementation of remedial actionnecessary to maintain agreed safety performance
– Provides for continuous monitoring and regularassessment of the safety performance
– Aims at a continuous improvement of the overallperformance of the safety management system
792012 ICAO
Safety Management Systems ‐ SMS
The SMS is a systematic approach to managingsafety, including the organizational structures,accountabilities, policies and procedures
802012 ICAO
SMS
81
Service providers are responsible for establishing the SMS
States are responsible for the acceptance and oversight of service providers’ SMS
2012 ICAO
Service providers and SMS
82
Organizations that are required to implement the SMS:– Approved training organizations that are exposed tosafety risks during the provision of their services
– Aircraft operators– Approved maintenance organizations– Organizations responsible for design and/ormanufacture of aircraft
– Air traffic services providers– Certified aerodromes
2012 ICAO
Basic safety management SARPs
83
The SMS shall clearly define lines of safetyaccountability throughout a service providerorganization, including a direct accountabilityfor safety on the part of senior management
(Accountability: Obligation or willingness toaccount for one’s actions)
2012 ICAO
Basic safety management SARPs
842012 ICAO
SSP – SMS relationshipProtection Production
Services providerState
StateSafety
Programme (SSP)
Organization’sSafety
Management system (SMS)
Service delivery
Objective:Support safety objectives
Objective:Supportsafety objectives
Objective:Support productionobjectives
Safety assurance
AcceptancePrescriptivesurveillance
Performance-basedsurveillance
852012 ICAO
SummaryStates: States shall establish a
State safety programme(SSP), in order to achievean acceptable level of safety(ALoS) in civil aviation
ALoS to be achieved shallbe established by the State
86
Service providers: States shall require, as part of their
SSP, that a service providerimplement an SMS acceptable to theState that: Identifies safety hazards Ensures the implementation of remedial
action necessary to maintain agreedsafety performance
Provides for continuous monitoring andregular assessment of the safetyperformance
Aims at a continuous improvement ofthe overall performance of the safetymanagement system
2012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 87
6. The ICAO SSP framework
Core operational activities of an SSP
State safety risk management (SRM)State safety assurance (SA)
882012 ICAO
Core operational activities of an SSP cont.
Take place under theumbrella provided by:– State safety policy andobjectives
– Supported by the Statesafety promotion
892012 ICAO
The ICAO SSP framework1. State safety policy and objectives
1.1 State safety legislative framework1.2 State safety responsibilities and accountabilities1.3 Accident and incident investigation1.4 Enforcement policy
2. State safety risk management2.1 Safety requirements for service providers SMS2.2 Agreement on service providers safety performance
3. State safety assurance3.1 Safety oversight3.2 Safety data collection, analysis and exchange3.3 Safety data driven targeting of oversight on areas of greater concern or need
4. State safety promotion4.1 Internal training, communication and dissemination of safety information4.2 External training, communication and dissemination of safety information
902012 ICAO
The components and elements of the SSP
Four components:1. State safety policy and objectives2. State safety risk management3. State safety assurance4. State safety promotion
Every component is composed of elements:– Eleven elements in total
912012 ICAO
The components and elements of the SSP
1. The State safety policy and objectivescomponent is composed of four elements:1. State safety legislative framework2. State safety responsibilities and accountabilities3. Accident and incident investigation4. Enforcement policy
922012 ICAO
State responsibility on safety policy and objectives
SSP can only be effectively implemented as partof an overall framework of accountabilities andresponsibilities within the State
SSP must include:– Explicit policies– Procedures– Management controls– Documentation– Corrective action processes to keep the State safetymanagement efforts on track
932012 ICAO
The components and elements of the SSP
2.The State safety risk management componentis composed of two elements:1. Safety requirements for the service provider’s
SMS2. Agreement on the service provider’s safety
performance
942012 ICAO
State responsibility on safety risk management
Rulemaking and policy development is basedon hazard identification and analysis of thesafety risks of the consequences of hazards– Regulations become safety risk controls whenadopted by service providers’ SMS
952012 ICAO
The components and elements of the SSP
3. The State safety assurance component iscomposed of three elements:1. Safety oversight2. Safety data collection, analysis and exchange3. Safety‐data‐driven targeting of oversight of areas
of greater concern or need
962012 ICAO
State responsibility on safety assurance
Surveillance activities under SSP aresupported by hazard identification and safetyrisk analyses– Surveillance of service providers is based oncompliance monitoring as well as the assessmentof safety performance of service providers’ SMS
• It is based on periodic audits and inspections• Assessment of safety performance of SMS leads toprioritized surveillance based upon the severity of thesafety risks of the consequences of the hazardsidentified by the SMS
972012 ICAO
The components and elements of the SSP
4.The State safety promotion component iscomposed of two elements:1. Internal training, communication and
dissemination of safety information2. External training, communication and
dissemination of safety information
982012 ICAO
State responsibility on safety promotion
State must provide its staff– Competence and technical knowledge on subjectmatter
– Additional knowledge regarding hazardidentification and safety risk analysis
State must communicate its SSP internally andexternally
992012 ICAO
State Safety Assurance (SA) Today: Prescriptive Surveillance
100
State’ssafety
surveillance
Service providers
AcceptancePrescriptivesurveillance
2012 ICAO
State Safety Assurance (SA) under SSP
Protection Production
Services providerState
StateSafety
Programme (SSP)
Organization’sSafety
Management system (SMS)
Service delivery
Objective:Support safety objectives
Objective:Supportsafety objectives
Objective:Support productionobjectives
Safety assurance
AcceptancePrescriptivesurveillance
Performance-basedsurveillance
1012012 ICAO
1. State safety policy and objectives1.1 State safety legislative framework1.2 State safety responsibilities and accountabilities1.3 Accident and incident investigation1.4 Enforcement policy
2. State safety risk management2.1 Safety requirements for service providers SMS2.2 Agreement on service providers safety performance
3. State safety assurance3.1 Safety oversight3.2 Safety data collection, analysis and exchange3.3 Safety data driven targeting of oversight on areas of greater concern or need
4. State safety promotion4.1 Internal training, communication and dissemination of safety information4.2 External training, communication and dissemination of safety information
ICAO SSP Framework
102
1022012 ICAO
Summary
There are four elements of the SSPThere are eleven components of the SSPThe ICAO framework is intended as aprincipled guide for an SSP:– Development– Implementation– Maintenance
1032012 ICAO
Summary cont.
Safety management principlesprovides a plattform for paralleldevelopment of:– SSP by the State– SMS by the service providers
It allows that both to get aheadof safety risks
It allows to interact moreeffectively in the resolution ofsafety concerns
1042012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 105
7. SSP implementation
SSP ImplementationThe availability of a framework provides a principled guide for SSP implementation ICAO has developed guidance for the development of an SSP framework in order to facilitate SSP implementation
1062012 ICAO
SSP – Two considerations
The implementation of the SSP is commensurate with the size and complexity of the State’s aviation system
It may require coordination among multiple authorities responsible for individual element functions in the State
1072012 ICAO
State – Wearing two hats?
When the State is responsible for the provision of specific services (e.g. aerodromes, air navigation services, etc.) the organization providing the service should develop and implement its SMS
1082012 ICAO
SSP gap analysis
Allows to assess the existence and maturitywithin the State of the elements of an SSP– Guidance in Appendix 3 to Chapter 11 of the SMSManual
The components/elements identified asmissing or deficient will form, together withthose already existing or effective, the basis ofthe SSP implementation plan
1092012 ICAO
SSP implementation planA “flight plan” that guidesthe development of the SSP
Allows States to:– Identify those tasks underlyingthe strategy leading to theimplementation of the SSP
– Coordinate the activities bythe various State aviationorganizations under the SSP insupport of the implementationplan
1102012 ICAO
Why a phased approach to SSP?To manage the workloadassociated with theimplementation of the SSP
To prevent the “compliance byticking boxes”
Three implementation phasesare proposed based on:– The results of the gap analysis– The sequential application ofthe different components andelements of the SSP framework
1112012 ICAO
112
SSP implementation plan – Phase I
Plan and draft State Safety Policy
SSP implementation team
Assign responsibilities
Coordination with other
Initial SSP
2012 ICAO
SSP implementation plan – Phase II
113
Collect and evaluate Selection of safety indicators (initial ALoS) Confidential reporting systems Acceptance on service providers ‘SMS Inspections, audits, surveys
Initial SSP
2012 ICAO
SSP implementation plan – Phase III
114
Collect and evaluate (Cont.) State safety data collection and analysis capabilities Agreement on safety performance indicators ALoS with safety measurement +safety performance
measurement
Mature SSP
2012 ICAO
SSP implementation plan
115
Additional requirements During all the implementation phases, the State must
determine if additional safety arrangements are required to implement and maintain the organization’s SSP
SSP
2012 ICAO
SSP implementation plan – Summary Timeline
Develop SSP documentation – Element 3.2
Establish means for safety communication – Elements 4.1 and 4.2
Develop and deliver training – Elements 4.1 and 4.2
Initial SSPPlan and Draft
Elements:1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1,
3.2 and 4.1
Initial SSP Collect and evaluate
Elements:2.1, 3.1, 3.2; 4.1 and
4.2
Mature SSPCollect and evaluate
Elements:2.2, 3.2, 3.3 and 4.1
PHASE I PHASE IIPHASE III
1162012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 117
8. The role of the SSP supporting the SMS implementation
The elements of SMS
118
Safety policy and objectives1.1 – Management commitment and responsibility1.2 – Safety accountabilities1.3 – Appointment of key safety personnel1.4 – Coordination of emergency response planning1.5 – SMS documentation
Safety risk management2.1 – Hazard identification2.2 – Safety risk assessment and mitigation
Safety assurance3.1 – Safety performance monitoring and measurement3.2 – The management of change3.3 – Continuous improvement of the SMS
Safety promotion4.1 – Training and education4.2 – Safety communication
2012 ICAO
Safety Risk Management (SRM) and Safety Assurance (SA) – Summary
System description/gap analysis
SRM
Hazard identification
Safety risk assessment
Safety risk mitigation
Design
Actual operations
SA
Safety performance monitoring
Management of change
Corrective action
Operation
1192012 ICAO
The role of the SSP in supporting SMS implementation
Generate a context that supports theimplementation of an SMS by serviceprovidersSMS cannot perform effectively either in aregulatory vacuum or in an exclusivelycompliance‐oriented environment
1202012 ICAO
The role of the SSP in supporting SMS implementation
SMS can flourish only under the enabling umbrella provided by an SSP SSP is a fundamental enabler of the implementation of an effective SMS
1212012 ICAO
SSP and SMS components
122
Safety policy and objectives
Safety risk management
Safety assuranceSafety promotion
SMS components
State safety policy and objectives
State safety risk management
State safety assurance
State safety promotion
SSP components
2012 ICAO
The role of the SSP in supporting SMS implementation
1232012 ICAO
To provide a manageable series of steps tofollow in implementing an SMS
To effectively manage the workload associatedwith SMS implementation
To pre‐empt a “ticking boxes” exercise
Four implementation phases are proposed
Each phase is based upon the introduction ofspecific SMS elements
Why a phased approach to SMS?
1242012 ICAO
Summary of the role of the SSP in supporting SMS implementation
1252012 ICAO
SMS implementation phases –Summary
PHASE I
Planning SMSElements:
1.1; 1.2; 1.3 and 1.5 ; [and 1.4]
PHASE II
Implementation of reactive safety management
processesElements: 2.1 and 2.2
PHASE III
Implementation of proactive and
predictive safety management
processesElements: 2.1 and 2.2
PHASE IV
Implementation of operational safety
assuranceElements:
1.1; 3.1; 3.2 ;3.3 4.1 and 4.5
Timeline
Develop documentation – Element 1.5
Develop and establish means for safety communication – Element 4.2
Develop and deliver training – Element 4.1
1262012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 127
9. Summary
128
Summary Aviation is the safest mode of transportationThere is no perfect safety systemSuccessful safety management requires theactive participation of all levels of managementand supervisionA clear understanding of the relationshipbetween an SSP and an SMS is essential forconcerted safety management action withinStates
2012 ICAO
Summary cont.States and service providers have safetyresponsibilitiesICAO standards requiere States to establish aSSPSSP is an integrated set of regulations andactivities aimed at improving safetyStates are required to establish an ALoS to beachievedServices providers are required to establishSMS
1292012 ICAO
130
Summary cont.The basic objective of a State, through its SSP, isto ensure public safety during service delivery byservice providersIt is achieved by defining the ALoS for the SSPand through the control of safety risks within theState by the two “operational components” ofthe SSP: Safety Risk Management (SRM) andSafety Assurance (SA)ICAO is supporting the implementation of SSPand SMS
2012 ICAO
2012 ICAO 131
10. Conclusions of SSP/SMS Implementation WS
ICAO NACC Regional Office, December 2011
132
Metodología
Siguiendo la metodología propuesta por elfacilitador de la OACI, los participantesidentificaron dichas problemáticas
Los participantes trabajaron en 3 grupos y sedividieron la tarea de analizar y proponeracciones recomendadas las cuales se presentanen las tablas siguientes
Los participantes debatieron sobre las accionesrecomendadas presentadas por los grupos
2012 ICAO
133
Introducción
Participaron en el Taller: autoridades deaviación civil, proveedores de servicio: tránsitoaéreo, líneas aéreas, aeródromos,organizaciones de mantenimiento aeronáuticoy la OACIA lo largo de las presentaciones losparticipantes identificaron diferentes barreraspara la implementación exitosa tanto del SSPcomo del SMS
2012 ICAO
134
Grupo I
2012 ICAO
135
Grupo II
2012 ICAO
136
Grupo II cont.
2012 ICAO
137
Grupo III
2012 ICAO
138
Grupo III cont.
2012 ICAO
139
Conclusiones
Los participantes al término del eventomanifestaron su conformidad con dicho taller,considerando que se cumplió el objetivo fijadoAsimismo, consideraron que el mismo les seráde mucha utilidad para la implementaciónexitosa del SSP/SMS en sus respectivasorganizacionesLos participantes instaron a la OACI acontinuar impartiendo este tipo de talleres
2012 ICAO
140ICAO
Questions?
2012
141ICAO
For additional información:
Contact: [email protected]
Visit: www.mexico.icao.int
2012
Thank You!
1422012 ICAO 142