International Civil Aviation Organization · Web viewTokyo, Japan, 12 to 14 June 2017 Agenda Item 4: MOG work plans and activities 4.1: Progress reports from each activity VOLCANO

METP WG-MOG/5 – SN/1225/05/17Revised 01/06/17

MET PANEL (METP) MET OPERATIONS GROUP (MOG)

INTERNATIONAL AIRWAYS VOLCANO WATCH (IAVW)

FIFTH MEETING

Tokyo, Japan, 12 to 14 June 2017

Agenda Item 4: MOG work plans and activities4.1: Progress reports from each activity

VOLCANO LEVEL OF ALERT COLOUR CODES FOR AVIATION

(Presented by the rapporteur of WG-MOG/2 (IAVW) Action Agreed 2/15)

SUMMARY

This study note provides a progress report on the follow-up to METP WG-MOG/2 (IAVW) Action Agreed 2/15 concerning the utility of the volcano level of alert colour codes for aviation used in volcanic ash products.

It provides an overview of the background to this issue, including where and how the colour codes are applied in ICAO-regulated aeronautical and meteorological products, and summarises the outcome of recent discussions held by the sub-team tasked with Action Agreed 2/15.

In addition, this study note informs that the colour code issue will be a component of the fifth WMO VAAC Best Practice workshop that immediately precedes the WG-MOG/5 (IAVW) meeting, with a view to better informing the WG-MOG on the opinion of volcanic ash advisory centres, State volcano observatories and users.

Action by the meeting is in paragraph 5.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The working group will recall that at its second meeting (WG-MOG/2 (IAVW) held in Buenos Aires, 27 to 28 April 2016) it formulated Action Agreed 2/15 that called for a review the utility of the volcano level of alert colour codes for aviation used in volcanic ash products (VONA, VAA, NOTAM), especially with respect to situational awareness.

METP WG-MOG/5 – SN/12

1.2 The intention of this study note is to inform the working group on the progress made in this regard and to propose a way forward.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 VONA and aviation colour codes

2.1.1 ICAO Annex 3 – Meteorological Service for International Air Navigation1, 3.6 requires State volcano observatories to monitor active or potentially active volcanoes. When observing significant pre-eruption volcano activity (or a cessation thereof), a volcanic eruption (or a cessation thereof) and/or volcanic ash in the atmosphere, State volcano observatories are required to send this information as quickly as practicable to their associated ACC/FIC, MWO and VAAC.

2.1.2 Annex 3, Appendix 2, 4.1 recommends the extent of the information to be sent in this regard, where it is noted that State volcano observatories may use the Volcano Observatory Notice for Aviation (VONA) format. The VONA format is included in the Handbook on the International Airways Volcano Watch (IAVW) — Operational Procedures and Contact List (ICAO Doc 9766) and is reproduced at Appendix A to this study note for ease of reference. Doc 9766 advises that the VONA was developed for State volcano observatories (or equivalent scientific agencies) to disseminate critical, operationally relevant information about volcanic activity to aeronautical users.

2.1.3 Element 4 of the VONA is the ‘Current aviation colour code’, where State volcano observatories are to assign a GREEN, YELLOW, ORANGE or RED ranking that explicitly addresses airborne ash hazards (as per Table 4-4 of Doc 9766). Table 4-4 of Doc 9766 is reproduced at Appendix B to this study note for ease of reference.

2.2 VAA/VAG and aviation colour codes

2.2.1 The template for the advisory message for volcanic ash (VAA), as given at Annex 3, Appendix 2, Table A2-1 enables, at element 10, a volcanic ash advisory centre (VAAC) to include a ‘Colour code’. Note, this inclusion of this element is optional rather than mandatory. The aviation colour code therefore that may be used in the VAA (and consequently indicated in the VAG also) is to be assigned as RED or ORANGE or YELLOW or GREEN or UNKNOWN or NOT GIVEN or NIL. A relevant excerpt of the VAA template is given at Appendix C to this study note for ease of reference.

2.2.2 It is worthwhile to note that while the VAA/VAG would permit (as an optional element) the inclusion of an aviation colour code, there appears to be an absence of supporting guidance for the VAACs on its application, including whether or not the aviation colour code carries an identical meaning that used in the VONA. Presently, not all VAACs include the colour code in their VAA/VAG products, perhaps due to this lack of clarity and/or its ‘optional’ status.

2.3 ASHTAM, NOTAM and aviation colour codes

2.3.1 ICAO Annex 15 – Aeronautical Information Services, Chapter 5 requires the preparation and international exchange of ASHTAM as well as NOTAM where States continue to use NOTAM for 1 Reproduced as WMO Publication No. 49, Technical Regulations, Volume II

2


the distribution of information on volcanic activity. Appendix 3 of Annex 15 provides the ASHTAM format together this instructions for the completion of the ASHTAM while the NOTAM format is given in Appendix 6 to Annex 15.

2.3.2 The ASHTAM format together with a relevant excerpt of the instructions is given at Appendix D to this study note for ease of reference.

2.3.3 It will be noted that Item E of the ASHTAM includes a ‘Volcano level of alert colour code, including any prior level of alert colour code’. The components of Item E – i.e. GREEN ALERT or YELLOW ALERT or ORANGE ALERT or RED ALERT – are entirely consistent with those to be used in the VONA format described above. This is unsurprising perhaps since much of the information included in the ASHTAM will be based on the information provided by a State volcano observatory through use of the VONA.

2.4 Other considerations

2.4.1 It is worthwhile to note further that, from an air traffic management perspective, a volcanic activity report (VAR) may also include a volcano alert status colour code as supplied by a vulcanological agency (as a minimum, ICAO Doc 9766, 4.3 and ICAO Doc 9691, 5.2.2.1 refer).

2.4.2 It is worthwhile to note also that a volcano colour code system based on VONA best practice is used in a pseudo-regulatory way to support the implementation of the ICAO EUR/NAT Volcanic Ash Contingency Plan, in particular the pre-eruption phases of escalating activity.

3. RECENT PROGRESS

3.1 The application of the aviation colour code has a long history, and it is evident from the foregoing that it appears as an element or field in a number of ICAO-regulated aeronautical and meteorological products, including VONA, VAA/VAG and ASHTAM.

3.2 In April 2016, at the ICAO METP WG-MOG/2 (IAVW) meeting, the expert nominated by Japan submitted a paper that expressed a view that the use of aviation colour code in the VAA could cause confusion and so should be optional.

3.3 The outcomes of State volcano observatory (SVO) side meetings at the ‘Cities on Volcanoes’ conference in Chile in November 2016 emphasized a need for SVOs to be brought into these discussions to better understand their circumstances/standpoints and thereby enable a common awareness of what the needs for and applications of the aviation colour codes are. It was highlighted that there is currently no ‘umbrella’ organization for SVOs and so there were no processes to assure over-arching governance, QMS and cost recovery. SVOs do have different products and some SVOs go to volcano colour code ‘Red’ based on a predicted imminent eruption (pre eruption) while other SVOs only apply once a volcanic eruption detected (i.e. post eruption). It was therefore agreed that Sara Barsotti of the Icelandic Meteorological Office (IMO) be included in the referred sub-team responsible for WG-MOG/2 (IAVW) Action Agreed 2/15 to represent the views of the SVOs.

3.4 The sub-team held a teleconference on 25 April 2017, the summary of these discussions is provided at Appendix E to this study note for information.

3


4. CONCLUSION

4.1 It has been agreed that the nine VAACs will assign a significant amount of time to the volcano level of alert colour codes issue at the fifth WMO VAAC Best Practice workshop to be held in Tokyo from 7 to 9 June 2017 and subsequently reported with an agreed set of recommendations relating to the harmonised production and application of volcano colour codes, to the ICAO METP WG-MOG/5 (IAVW) meeting that follows (12 to 14 June 2017).

5. ACTION BY THE MEETING

5.1 The meeting is invited to:

a) note the information contained in this paper;

b) await the outcomes of the WMO VAAC BP/5 (2017) workshop in this connection; and

c) taking into account a) and b), formulate the following Draft Action Agreed accordingly:

Draft Action Agreed 5/xx – Volcano level of alert colour codes for aviation

That […] be invited to:

a) …; and

b) ….

<text to be developed at the METP WG-MOG/5 (IAVW) meeting>

______________

4


Appendix A

Current VONA format(extracted from ICAO Doc 9766 (Second Edition), Appendix E)

5


______________

6


Appendix B

Current volcano level of alert colour codes for aviation(extracted from ICAO Doc 9766 (Second Edition), Table 4-4)

7


Appendix C

Excerpt of current VAA template(extracted from ICAO Annex 3, 19th Edition, Appendix 2, Table A2-1)

[Note, VAA template continues to element 18]

8


Appendix D

Excerpt of current ASHTAM template(extracted from ICAO Annex 15, Appendix 3)

9


Excerpt of instructions for the completion of the ASHTAM format

…

…

10


Appendix E

Summary of discussions on sub-team teleconference held 25 April 2017

VONA is referenced in ICAO Doc 9766 Appendix E as ‘best practice’ template for summarizing volcanic activity information, where the volcano colour code is a subset of this information. The prevailing colour code assessments appear to be trying to address information needs for both pre-eruptive phase (e.g. ‘activity above known background levels’) and post-eruption phase (e.g. estimation of plume height). Is there an agreed mechanism for sharing other volcanic information such as plume height and characteristics, eruption start time etc e.g. VONA?

Requirements - First step should be to clarify user requirements and expectations for volcano colour codes e.g. how are the colour codes being used (strategically and/or tactically) within the aviation operational environment and, noting that not all of the VAACs currently include the colour code in their advisory information, is there actually a continuing need for a volcano colour code assessment to be included in the VAA/VAG?

Situational awareness – At present, it is somewhat unclear as to how/why colour codes are being utilized and by who in different parts of the world. For example, in Europe, colour codes are being used to inform the ICAO EUR/NAT Volcanic Ash Contingency Plan and operator safety risk assessments. To maintain the intent, it is believed that aeronautical users need the volcano colour code for purely pre-eruptive and immediate eruption advice as well as serving as a ‘heads-up’ for flight planning purposes (situational awareness). It is understood that airlines (represented by IATA) would consider some other type of operational code attached to the VAA/VAG by the VAAC. In any and all cases, the operational code has to be simple and globally consistent; currently it is not. From an ICAO perspective there is a need to work on consistency of implementation since this appears to be the main issue.

VAAC – SVO coordination – Given the dependency of VAACs on SVO information and the need for SVOs to be brought into discussions to facilitate a common awareness on this issue, there is perhaps a role for the VAACs in coordinating an assessment/survey of the supply, consistency and quality of SVO information for their respective area of responsibility (through VAAC and SVO Best Practice mechanisms). Such coordination would also take into account the differing abilities and capacities of SVOs around the world to produce colour code assessments, noting that many volcanoes are unmonitored despite the threat they pose to aviation.

- END -

11

Documents

International Civil Aviation Organization · Web viewTokyo, Japan, 12 to 14 June 2017 Agenda Item 4: MOG work plans and activities 4.1: Progress reports from each activity VOLCANO