european safety programme for atm (esp

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


Incident Reporting and Data Sharing


Risk Assessment and Mitigation in Day-to-

day Operations

ESP IMPLEMENTATION REPORTING

AND MONITORING AND ESP

COORDINATION TEAM


System Safety Defences


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


Introduction


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


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)


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.


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


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


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


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 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


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 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.


ATC02.7 Implement Ground Based Safety Nets - Approach Path Monitor - Level 2.


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.


ESP Implementation


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 Implementation


� 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.


ESP Implementation


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 Implementation


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


and Related Safety Oversight






and Related Safety Oversight for ATCOs -

Part A Licence

� EAM5/GUI3 - Explanatory Material on

ESARR 5 Requirements for Engineers

and Technical Personnel


ESP Implementation


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


Prevention of Level Busts


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.


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


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.


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-


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.


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

[email protected].

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.


Activity Field 5


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


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

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.


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


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

[email protected]

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


NOVEMBER 2007

� 14 - 15 PC - Brussels

� 27-29 SAMTF - Madrid

DECEMBER 2007

� 4 - 5 - SASI WS9 - CEOs Meeting - (TBC)

� 14 - Contingency Planning TF Close


european safety programme for atm (esp

Documents