Oxygen Study Group Report for OST November 2005 Dr. Annette Ruge Aviation Health Unit, CAA UK

OSG – The Requirements JAR – OPS First-aid oxygen –Proposal to provide oxygen for passengers who may need it during normal flight JAR – OPS Supplemental oxygen –Proposal to decrease oxygen provision after decompression between altitudes ft and ft from 30% of passengers to 10% of passengers

History of OSG 1999: Operations Committee installs OSG October 2002: A-NPA OPS-32 (Oxygen) circulated for comments April 2003: Comment-Response Document and amended proposal to EQSC. Decision not to launch a full NPA

History of OSG June 2003: Specialist Group –to evaluate the proposals and –provide evidence that proposals are safe January 2005: Evaluation from 3 specialists received: Amended requirements may be safe for (young and) healthy passengers

Proposed amendments ICAO & FAA JAR – OPS –is not ICAO compliant today –no plans to amend ICAO rule –the proposed amendments further decrease the provision for supplemental oxygen –existing JAR – OPS is marginally lower than FAR (e) (depending on aircraft type)

OSG OSG re-installed in OST 04-1 No members from NAAs were nominated UK view: Amend JAR – OPS only if compelling medical evidence can be produced that the new provisions are safe for all occupants of an aeroplane

OSG AEA and Airbus nominated members Industry view: –Circulate the proposals as they stand in A- NPA OPS 32 as full NPA –consider to restrict changes to certain routes (Greenland, Iran, Afghanistan), or –consider to grant exemptions for these routes as FAA does

Medical Evidence Most studies have been carried out in the 1930ies in the military Opinions about safety vary because –the travelling public ages –passengers with medical conditions travel –even normal cabin altitude (8000 ft) is a medical problem for some passengers

Options Amend JAR – OPS for specific routes –may be too complicated –(rules should be simple) Grant exemptions as FAA does –compromises harmonisation in Europe Continue without change

Stabilisation Criteria for NPA activity Any proposed change to conform with: –lead to a positive contribution to the JAA’s aim for safety; or –to correct an acute implementation problem; or –to align with the EU; or –to comply with IACO Annexes; or –to harmonise with FAA; or –to permit the rapid implementation of new technological processes

The OST is asked to note that there is no compelling medical evidence that the proposed amendments are safe for all occupants of an aircraft medical evidence supporting the proposals does exist for healthy passengers

The OST is asked to note that the proposal in JAR – OPS to carry medical oxygen may be of advantage for sick passengers Industry is in favour of the proposed changes - or possibility of exemptions for specific routes - to regain a global level playing field

The OST is asked to note that the OSG did not achieve full consensus on the proposed amendments as outlined in A-NPA OPS 32 the JAA criteria for a NPA are not met

The way ahead The OST is asked to agree on the way forward with the options: –to continue the work considering specific routes only; or –to consider exemptions from the requirements for specific routes; or

The way ahead The OST is asked to agree on the way forward with the options: –not to amend JAR – OPS but consider changes to 1.760; or –not to amend the oxygen provisions in JAR – OPS