Experiences on the road to Fatigue Risk Management Regulation ICAO FRMS Symposium Montreal, 29-30 August 2011 Daniel Coutelier Rulemaking Officer, EASA Introduction: EASA has been asked to share some thoughts and experiences on the road to FRM in Europe’s future Flight and Duty Time and rest requirements regulation. But, since nothing has been decided yet and EASA is still in the middle of the process, what I will present here are just some thoughts about Flight and Duty Limitations, the need for flexibility in Flight and duty Time Limitations and the role that FRM could play in the future European regulation. In order to do so, I will try to very briefly introduce you to what EASA does in Europe as regards new regulation, especially for Flight and Duty Time Limits and rest requirements and how the regulatory process works in Europe.

European Aviation Safety Agency But before I start talking about experiences and thoughts on the road to Fatigue Risk Management Regulation from a European perspective, I would like to briefly acquaint you with EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency. The European Union is not a State, but an economic and political union of 27 states. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

What does EASA do? 31 Member States (27 + 4) Expert advice to the EU for drafting new legislation implement and monitor safety rules, including inspections in the Member States type-certification of aircraft and components, as well as the approval of organisations involved in the design, manufacture and maintenance of aeronautical products authorization of third-country (non EU) operators safety analysis and research Therefore EASA is not a National Authority but an independent Agency that inter alia assists the European Legislator in drafting new legislation in the field of civil aviation. As a technical body, EASA shall give expert advice according to the objectives described in what would be the European equivalent to a State’s Air Navigation Order. This is also the case when it comes to Europe’s future regulation for Flight and Duty Time Limits and rest requirements. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

EASA objectives Establish and maintain a high uniform level of civil aviation safety in Europe Provide a level playing field for all actors in the internal aviation market Ensure a high uniform level of environmental protection Facilitate the free movement of goods, persons and services Promote cost-efficiency in the regulatory and certification processes Assist Member States in fulfilling their obligations under the Chicago Convention Promote Community views regarding civil aviation safety standards and rules Amongst EASA’s objectives two are most relevant for preparing the proposals for a new European regulation establishing Flight and Duty Time Limitations and rest requirements (FTL): Of course our primary objective as the European Aviation Safety Agency is to establish and maintain a high uniform level of civil aviation safety in Europe, but there are also other objectives: EASA rules shall provide a level playing field for all actors in the internal (European) aviation market, because the European system aims for harmonization. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

European regulatory framework Basic Regulation Essential Requirements Legislator EC IR EASA CS In order to achieve those objectives the European legal system foresees different levels of regulatory material. On the left hand side of this slide we have the regulatory tools and on the right hand side you see the regulatory actors. The top level, the equivalent to Europe’s Air Navigation Order, the so-called Basic Regulation contains the Essential Requirements. ER specify the general objectives. The BR has been adopted by the European Legislator. On the central level on the right you see the European Commission (EC), The EC is the EU’s executive body. It is the EC’s task to propose and enforce legislation. The EC represents and upholds the interests of Europe as a whole. The EC’s regulatory tools are here on the left the Implementing Rules. The IR define common safety standards which are used to implement the ER and are adopted by the EC. EASA assists the EC with technical expertise when adopting new IR or amending existing IR. Below the continuous blue line you find in yellow EASA. EASA shall give input as regards air safety to the EC and the Legislator, that means EASA proposes ER and IR to the EC and the Legislator. the regulatory material on this technical level is issued directly by EASA, there are: Certification Specifications, descriptive technical standards, they shall be used in certification / approval processes. Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) describe one, but not the only one means to comply with the IR, they shall help regulated individuals or organisations to comply with ER and IR; And finally Guidance Material (GM) providing guidance on how the rules should be understood. AMC GM 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium 5

European regulatory framework Flight time limitation (FTL) requirements are addressed through: General safety objectives set out in the Basic Regulation, which will be complemented by: Implementing Rules, IR, containing prescriptive FTL requirements (NPA 2010-14) and providing proportionality and flexibility: ‘One size does not fit all’ The same principle applies to Flight and Duty Time Limitations and rest requirements. Also here the general safety objectives are outlined in the BR. And EASA has been given the task to propose the corresponding IR for Flight and Duty Time Limitations to the EC. Those IR shall contain prescriptive FTL elements, and that is the big challenge. EASA shall produce rules for all types of operations providing proportionality and flexibility but ‘one size does not fit all’, What does that mean? Our rules should be proportionate and provide for a controlled flexibility to cover all types of operations. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

European regulatory framework Proportionality: Rules should be proportionate to the nature and complexity of the operations, as well as to the level of risks involved Flexibility: Rules should allow operators to use FTL schemes adapted to their operational needs Proportionality means that the rules should reflect nature, size, complexity and the level of risk involved. Flexibility means that there should be room to use FTL schemes adapted to specific operational needs, provided those schemes achieve an equivalent level of safety. It is also important to foresee the possibility to attend to unforeseen urgent operational circumstances or operational needs of limited duration. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

Proportionality in NPA 2010-14 on FTL Proportionality will be ensured by different sets of rules for: Commercial Air Transport (CAT) Commercial Operations other than CAT Non Commercial Operations …and, within CAT, by specific provisions for: Scheduled and Charter Operations Ultra Long Range Operations Sole Night Operations Air Taxi Operations Emergency Medical Service Single Pilot Operations Helicopter Operations In the case of EASA’s Notice of Proposed Amendment 2010-14 for the future European Flight and Duty Time Limitations and rest requirements, proportionality to nature and complexity of different operations is achieved by proposing different sets of rules for different types of operations. The initial proposals shall be applicable to Scheduled and Charter Operations. Proposals for specific provisions for other types of operations will follow. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

Flexibility in NPA 2010-14 on FTL Flexibility is provided by Articles 14.4 (exemptions) and 14.6 (derogations) of the Basic Regulation Now that we have covered how we intend to produce proportionate rules let us come to flexibility. European flexibility provisions are enshrined at a high regulatory level, they are in the Basic Regulation. Article 14 paragraphs 4 and 6 describe how and under which circumstances MS can grant exemptions from the rules or derogate from the rules. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium 9

Flexibility in NPA 2010-14 on FTL Article 14.4 Exemptions: An exemptions would allow to deviate from substantive requirements and IR to attend unforeseen urgent operational circumstances or operational needs of limited duration. Exemptions are under MS control and have to be notified to the EC, other MS and EASA only if they become repetitive or when granted for more than two months. But there is also a way to deviate from our rules regularly or to operate to different rules so to speak 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium 10

Flexibility in NPA 2010-14 on FTL Article 14.6 Derogations: If operators wish to deviate from IR they may do so by asking their NAA for a derogation from the IR. In that case the MS who wishes to grant an approval for a so called derogation shall notify the EC and EASA. The MS shall demonstrate the need to derogate and most importantly, it has to be demonstrated that an equivalent level of safety is achieved. EASA then issues a recommendation whether the derogation fulfils those conditions: The conditions are: The need to derogate, and that An equivalent level of safety is achieved. Approved derogations can be applied by all MS. After giving this very brief overview of the EASA system, I will now come to the our concrete proposals as regards FRM and the thoughts that have led us to where we are 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium 11

FRM in NPA 2010-14 on FTL FRM not mandatory, except in the “special” cases: Reduced rest provision FDP extensions starting between 18:00–21:59 Consecutive night operations of more than 4 sectors Eastward-Westward or Westward-Eastward transitions (to bypass additional rest between alternating rotations) FRM should be integrated in Safety Management System Fatigue management training mandatory We have not proposed FRM to be a general requirement in the NPA. But that does not mean that fatigue-related risks don’t have to be managed. EASA believes that the management of fatigue-related risks has to be part of an operator’s SMS in any case. The proposal foresees the use of FRM only in 4 special cases: FRM is an explicit requirement if an operator wishes to apply Certain Reduced rest provisions, for FDP extensions starting between 18:00–21:59, Consecutive night operations of more than 4 sectors and to bypass additional rest between alternating rotations Eastward-Westward or Westward-Eastward if transitions encroach 4 or more time zones. Mandatory Fatigue Management Training not only for flight and cabin crew but also for crew rostering personnel and concerned management personnel is a new element of our NPA. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

EASA vision on FRM Safety Management Systems (SMS) should manage all risks, including the risk of flight and cabin crew being fatigued. FRM may complement, not replace, prescriptive FTL requirements FRM should be fully integrated in the organisation’s safety management system (SMS) In case of derogations, FRM should be used to demonstrate that an equivalent level of safety is maintained This proposal is based on EASA’s vision of FRM. EASA believes that: Fatigue-related risks should always be considered in SMS, The implementation of prescriptive FTL requirements does not exempt from the need to manage fatigue-related risks, FRM should therefore complement and not replace prescriptive FTL requirements and FRM should be fully integrated in the organisation’s SMS. An operator could also use FRM to demonstrate that an equivalent level of safety is achieved when operating outside the prescriptive limits. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

State of play NPA comments are being reviewed. Implementation of FRM in future European FTL regulations is still under discussion. EASA opinion to be published in mid-2012. Following the EASA opinion, the European Commission will decide on the way forward. In doing so the Commission will consider the views of the EU legislators and the stakeholders. Coming to the end of my presentation, I would like to give you some information regarding where Europe stands now in the rulemaking process: At the moment the NPA comments are still being reviewed, it is too early to know what the final provisions for FRM in the future European Flight and Duty Time Limitations and rest requirements will look like. EASA’s opinion shall be published in mid-2012, after that the European Commission will decide the way forward taking into account stakeholders’ and the European Legislator’s views. 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium

EASA promotes a conservative approach: Conclusion EASA promotes a conservative approach: Prescriptive Rules as a safety net. FRM required to those using certain special provisions or derogating from the prescriptive rules. Thank you for your attention. You have seen that EASA has chosen a rather conservative approach: Our proposal is based on prescriptive requirements and FRM only needs to be implemented if an operator wishes to operate under certain special provisions as mentioned earlier. Nevertheless, the system as proposed will allow for some flexibility and FRM could always be used to demonstrate that an equivalent level of safety is achieved when applying for a derogation from the prescriptive requirements. Thank you for your attention 2011 ICAO FRMS Symposium