Transcript Item 4-a - Oversight - UK CAA

CAA UK Preparation
Activities for the
ADQ IR
Nick Yearwood – Aerodrome Strategy, Policy,
Standards
29 May 2013
1
Do we need to change CAA policy and/or
procedures?
 Art
8. Review CAA policy documents and/or procedures
relating or referring to origination, management and/or
publication of aeronautical information in the UK IAIP.
 Consider
the impact of Art 2(2b) on non EASA aerodromes
which publish special VFR entry/exit procedures.
 Art
6. CAA to develop guidance for aerodromes that fall
within scope by virtue of SVFR requirements. CAA need to
reflect in audit / inspection protocols for Art 7(5) personnel
performance.
May 2013
2
Do we need to initiate a change to National
legislation?
 National
legislation will be required for any delegation of
Member State functions from DfT to CAA, and also to deal
with sanctions for non-compliance
3
Do we need to amend CAA Publications
(CAP) and other associated
documents?
 Art
2. New CAP has been drafted by DAP and is now
undergoing Public Consultation . The CAP includes:
 ADQ
IR Generic Requirements
 ICAO/ADQIR
 Aeronautical
 Data
Data Quality Requirements
Information Process & Data Specifications
Submission Requirements
 Regulatory
Oversight
4
Do we need to alert the Military Aviation
Authority to any aspects of the
regulation?
•
MOD is aware and intends to comply with
CAA policy and ADQ IR.
•
MOU will be established between CAA and MOD for
provision of Military data in-scope of the ADQ IR regulation.
The MOU will specify appropriate regulatory oversight
arrangements.
5
Do we need to amend approval
documentation such as licences,
certificates, approvals?
 Art
2 - CAA to review NATS Licence in light of this regulation
to determine if its requirements are fully addressed in the
Operational Specification for AIS.
 Approvals
and/or Certification e.g. Aerodrome, ANSP, AISP
licensing, Procedure Design Approval, must include
requirements to conform to ADQ IR provisions to enable
enforcement capabilities.
6
Are there any new associated Training
requirements for CAA staff?
 Art
7(5) CAA oversight for ADQ IR will require additional staff
who will need an understanding of a number of subjects,
such as QMS, Data Assurance, Data Quality, Safety,
Security, Software/System verification and conformance.
 In-line
with current CAA strategy a risk based approach to
regulation of all parties (aerodromes, ANSP, IFP designers,
surveyors) in-scope of ADQ IR will need to be implemented
by the CAA.
7
What are the implications for the
UK/Ireland FAB?
 Non-compliance
to ADQ IR by either party could affect FAB
relationships. This will be raised at the next FAB safety
harmonisation working group.
8
Does information and guidance on
these regulatory aspects need to be
publicised to UK industry?
 Art
5(2). CAA industry workshops initiated in 2012 and
further workshops planned in 2013.
 CAA/Aerodrome
pilot projects initiated in March 2013 to
assess aerodrome comprehension of CAA policy and ADQ
IR compliance capabilities.
 Art
10. CAA will focus on key areas of the ADQ IR (e.g. the
QMS elements of the IR) further guidance will be necessary
in many areas.
9
Do we need to amend sections of the
UK AIP?
 Art
2. All AIP data and information with an assigned
assurance level will be updated as a consequence of the IR
requirements.
 Aeronautical
Data with new quality attributes will replace
existing data. All legacy data in scope will need to be
renewed before the end of June 2017.
 Consequential
impact on aerodrome survey periodicity i.e.
surveys will require additional ADQIR meta-data, and
alignment with ICAO 5 year review of IFP.
10
Other ADQ IR related issues
 In
support of a DAP comms plan to communicate with
aerodromes, AATSD inspectors will need to be liaising with
aerodromes and providing advice and guidance towards
ADQ IR compliance.
 As a priority, prime the inspectors with key messages with
regards to what we are doing in relation to this IR and any
indicative position(s).
 Work is in hand to address availability of electronic Terrain &
Obstacle Data (eTOD) as required by Annex 1 Part b (a) of
the ADQ IR.
11
ADQ Constituents
 Origination,
production, storage, handling, processing,
transfer and distribution equipment can be considered as
constituents requiring a Declaration of Conformity or
Suitability for Use.
 Guidance
needed for constituent definition and conformance
– link to CATF Guidelines.
 Further
clarification is required to determine if all aerodromes
are considered ANSP and therefore subject to Article 5, 2
provisions for exchanging aeronautical data.
12
Eurocontrol ADQ specifications
specified as guidance in CAA policy for
compliance to ADQ IR
 Data Assurance
Levels (DAL)
 Data
Quality Requirements (DQR )
 Data
Origination (DO)
 eAIP
Specification (eAIP)
 Aeronautical
Information Exchange (AIX)
13
ADQ Implementation Risks
Consumer and Public
Risks
•
•
•
•
•
Provision of quality assured data not achieved
New concepts of operation cannot be supported
Efficient/dynamic use of airspace not realised
Unable to meet forecast increase in flights
Potential for enhanced flight safety not realised
Strategic Risks
•
•
•
•
•
•
Not understanding consumer risk/addressing wrong risk
Pursuing the wrong strategies, policies, and approach
Significant gaps in corporate capability
Financial threats
Relationship risks e.g. political, international, industry
Data contributors fail to comply with ADQ requirements
Business Risks
•
•
•
•
•
•
Infraction proceedings
Inadequate technical skills to carry out a role
Poor application of management skills
Errors in business plan
Project risks
Threats to business continuity
14
ADQ Implementation Risks
•
Inadequate policy/guidance;
•
Regulation deadlines not met;
•
Stakeholders do not comply with requirements
•
Inadequate CAA enforcement regime
•
Infraction Proceedings.
15
Mitigating Implementation Risk
 Understand
practical implications of ADQIR compliance on
stakeholders;
 Provide
 Develop
advice and guidance to project candidates;
oversight methodology based on experience
gained;
 Develop
further guidance material for all stakeholders.
 Stakeholder
Projects
16
Stakeholder Pilot Project - Candidates
 Major
international airport (agreed)
 Small
licensed aerodrome (pending)
 Aerodrome
Survey company/Approved Procedure
Designer of IFP. (pending)
 MoD
data originator/provider (agreed)
17
QUESTIONS?
Thank you for your attention
18