1. IMPLEMENTATION OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS
Brussels, 27 to 28 October 2005

2. OVERVIEW
Manual on implementation of ICAO language Proficiency Requirements – Doc 9835
Evaluation of language proficiency
Training
EUR/NAT regional approach
Responsibilities
International cooperation
These are elements you may wish to consider in your analysis leading to the implementation of safety programme and safety management systems.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

3. Assembly Resolution A32-16 ICAO SARPs Linguistic Aspects
MANUAL ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ICAO LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS – DOC 9835
Assembly Resolution A32-16
ICAO SARPs
Linguistic Aspects
Language Training
Aviation Language Training
It will therefore be necessary for all States to establish regulatory provisions concerning ATS safety management, together with the necessary supporting infrastructure to enable them to discharge their responsibilities in relation to oversight of these provisions.
In the previous presentation, we addressed the role of the civil aviation inspector and mentioned how the first line of intervention was within the organization rather than in the authority. This is what I am referring to.
There are two prerequisites for the introduction of a regulatory system. These are:
a) the provision, in the basic aviation law of the State, for a code of air navigation regulations and the promulgation thereof;
b)the establishment of an appropriate State body, hereinafter referred to as the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), with the necessary powers to ensure compliance with the regulations.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

4. EVALUATION OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
Why is it important to initiate evaluation of language proficiency rapidly?
Recruitment purposes
Benchmarking purposes
To be timely prepared
States will, in general, already have their basic aviation law and code of air navigation regulations in place.
The first step in establishing the regulatory framework for ATS safety management will therefore be to examine the existing legislation and regulations to identify what changes, if any, will be necessary to provide the CAA with the necessary powers to ensure that the requirements of Annex 11, and the associated procedures in PANS-ATM, are complied with in the provision of ATS within its area of responsibility.
In addition to promulgating the necessary regulations, this will require the establishment of an appropriate body to carry out oversight of the operation of the ATS safety management programme.
The organizational structure and size of the ATS Safety Regulatory Authority should suit the national environment and the complexity of the existing civil aviation system. The function may be placed within the CAA, or in an autonomous statutory body independent of the ATS service providers, with the legal powers to perform the regulatory function.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

5. EVALLUATION AND TRAINING
COMPETENCE
EXISTING REQUIRED
EVALUATION OF EXISTING COMPETENCE
DETERMINATION OF TRAINIGN NEEDS
DESIGNING AND PLANNING OF TRAINING
PROVISION OF TRAINING
EVALUATION OF TRAINING OUTCOME
Functions of the Safety Regulatory Authority
The core functions of the Safety Regulatory Authority are:
a)                  development and updating of the necessary regulations;
b)                  setting national safety performance requirements; and
c)                  safety oversight of service providers.
With reference to point a) above, the extent to which new regulations will be necessary can vary considerably from one State to another depending on the scope of existing regulations, and will not be discussed further here.
With reference to point b) above, the safety performance requirements set by the Safety Regulatory Authority would be requirements for the overall system. They should take into account any national safety performance requirements which may have been set by the State for the aviation system as a whole. Setting safety performance targets will be discussed later in Mr. Vanier’s presentation.
In order to maintain effective oversight, the staff responsible for this function require a good knowledge of, and preferably, practical experience of safety management procedures. While there is only one chapter devoted to specific regulatory issues in this manual, they should have a comprehensive knowledge of all the subjects which are covered in the remaining chapters.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

6. EVALUATION AND TRAINING
TRAINING MEASURES
State responsibility
Quality management
Resources management
Process design
Safety Oversight
The objective of the safety oversight of service providers is to verify compliance with relevant:
a)                  ICAO SARPs and procedures;
b)                  national legislation and regulations; and
c)                  national and international good practices.
The methods of safety oversight may include safety inspections and/or safety audits of the organizations concerned. Safety oversight should also involve a systematic review of significant safety occurrences.
The safety oversight procedures should be standardized and documented to ensure consistency in their application. Procedures should also be easily understandable, mandatory, and form a complete documented system.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

7. EUR/NAT REGIONAL APPROACH
EANPG45 (December 2003) - Harmonization of training of the ATM personnel in the States from the Eastern part of the ICAO EUR Region
COG/30 (October 2004) – Development of the Action Plan to assist States in implementing the ICAO Language Proficiency (LP) Requirements (Task to COG ATM Training TF)
EANPG46 (November-December 2004) - Assistance to States in implementing LP requirements including Action Plan , Seminars/Workshops
Approaches to the Discharge of Regulatory Responsibilities
In the discharge of the regulatory responsibilities ATS Regulatory Authority may adopt either an active role, involving close supervision of the functioning of all activities of the ATS provider’s safety related activities, or a passive role, whereby greater responsibility is delegated to the ATS provider.
A system of active supervision by the regulatory authority could be so rigorous as to amount to complete domination and dictation of the conduct of operations, leading to an undermining of the morale of operations personnel and to lowering of safety standards. Such a system would also require the establishment of a large enforcement organizations.
The State, in the passive role, could leave both the interpretation and the implementation of the regulations to the ATS provider, relying upon the ATS providers’ technical competence and encouraging compliance through threat of enforcement action. This might place an unreasonable burden of responsibility on the ATS provider for interpretation of and compliance with the regulations. The State would not be in a position to assess the adherence of the ATS provider to the regulations other than by knowledge acquired by chance or in the course of accident or incident investigation. Such a system would not enable the State to exercise the necessary preventive and corrective function and consequently it could no adequately discharges its responsibility under the Convention.
The foregoing leads to the conclusion that considerable merit exists in a State regulatory system which falls between the active and passive extremes and which should:
a) Represent a well-balanced allocation of responsibility between the State and the ATS provider for the safety of provision of ATS;
b) Be capable of economic justification within the resources of the State;
c) Enable the State to maintain continuing regulation and supervision of the activities of the ATS provider without unduly inhibiting the ATS provider’s effective direction and control of the organization; and
Result in the cultivation and maintenance of harmonious relationships between the State and the ATS provider.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

8. EUR/NAT REGIONAL APPROACH
ICAO LP Seminar for Senior Officials (Kyiv, Ukraine, April 2005)
COG31 (June 2005): Action Plan (First Version)
ICAO-Eurocontrol EUR Seminar on LP for aeronautical communications (Brussels, October 2005)
EANPG/47 (Paris, 29 November – 1 December 2005) Action Plan (adoption expected)
ICAO LP Workshop (Baku, Azerbaijan, 7-9 December 2005)
The identification of hazards, implementation of safeguards and development of a safety-oriented organizational culture can only be done from within an organization. The safety management system must therefore be implemented and operated by the ATS provider. An external body, such as the Safety Regulator, can audit the system to see whether it complies with ICAO and national requirements, but it cannot actively manage the day-to-day operation of the safety management system.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

9. ICAO UNIVERSAL SAFETY OVERSIGHT AUDIT PROGRAMME (USOAP)
AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES PROTOCOL:
Aspects to be audited:
ANS Has the State developed and implemented procedures for ensuring competency of air traffic controllers to provide ATS to international air traffic in the English language?
These are elements you may wish to consider in your analysis leading to the implementation of safety programme and safety management systems.
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

10. ICAO UNIVERSLA SAFETY OVERSIGHT AUDIT PROGRAMME (USOAP)
AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES PROTOCOL
Example of evidence to be reviewed:
Review documented evidence of the procedures used to be ensure competency of air traffic controllers to provide service to international air traffic in the English language
Confirm effective implementation
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

11. State’s responsibility Employers responsibility
RESPONSIBILITIES
State’s responsibility
Employers responsibility
Individual obligation of the employee
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

12. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Cooperative approach
Harmonized implementation of ICAO Requirements
Partners
Brussels, 27 – 28 October 2005

13. IMPLEMENTATION OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS
Brussels, 27 to 28 October 2005
- END -