1. The use of military aerodromes by civil aircraft

2. Introduction (1) Area of common interest of States
A harmonised approach would be beneficial in order to improve the level of safety
The words “military aerodromes” also include government owned facilities not regulated by CAA
Two different branches of administration with two different and conflicting sets of objectives and regulations
There is no evidence that military aerodromes have a worse safety record
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

3. Introduction (2)
The civil use of military aerodromes is small in comparison with the volume of civil aerodrome operations
There are persistent and delicate safety issues associated with the civil use of military aerodromes that need to be addressed and may require safety regulation solutions
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

4. Aim The purpose of this lecture is:
to examine some aspects of the use of military aerodromes from a CAA viewpoint
to identify areas of regulatory difficulty
to highlight potential vulnerabilities
to recommend solutions
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

5. Current position (1)
Civil aviation is based on interdependence of the ICAO SARPS
These SARPS do not differentiate between various ownerships
Annex 14 shall apply to all aerodromes open for civil aviation
Þ The standards should be the same !!!
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

6. Current position (2)
Compliance with the SARPS of ICAO Annex 14 varies among States
From full compliance to sometimes no compliance
Also there is a lack of visibility and traceability in the regulatory process
Even when standards are similar, interpretation may differ due to the different culture
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

7. Current position (3)
For some operations military regulations are more demanding (FOD, access control)
Military aerodromes are designed to meet national or other requirements
They are often optimised for fighter operations rather than large aircraft
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

8. Current position (4)
Military aerodromes can be divided into three categories, depending on the level of civil involvement:
Strictly military aerodromes
- managed and operated by a military organisation
Military aerodromes with commercial air transport infrastructure and operations
- part of the aerodrome is dedicated to commercial operations
Joint aerodromes
- regular civil aerodrome with scheduled passenger operations coexists with a military aerodrome
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

9. Potential safety issues (1)
There are two safety regulation problems:
military aerodromes that do not meet civil standards
military aerodromes that are not accountable to CAA
There are three areas with potential safety issues:
design
aerodrome operations (incl. ATM & CNS)
accountability
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

10. Discussion
The problem is approached by considering the parties involved, their responsibilities and interests:
Military authorities commanding the aerodrome
Civil operators
CAA AGA/ATM Divisions
CAA OPS Division
Military aviation authority/flight safety authority
Public interest/opinion
Civil aerodrome operators
Government
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

11. Military authorities:
Parties involved (1)
Military authorities:
are not accountable to CAA
by accepting civil use may have committed themselves legally to offer some minimum safety level
in case of an accident caused by negligence or failure to meet the standards, may be found responsible in civil court
usually benefit both economically and operationally from civil use (interest)
some civil operations may be vital
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

12. Parties involved (2) The civil operators:
are often bound by OPS requirements to define the safety level of the military aerodrome in Operations Manuals
are expected to specify requirement for RFF and visual aids effecting minima
the fact that other facilities do not meet the requirements may not be an important issue
if an accident is caused because the aerodrome did not meet the standards, the aircraft operator is not necessarily responsible
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

13. CAA AGA/ATM/OPS Divisions:
Parties involved (3)
CAA AGA/ATM/OPS Divisions:
are responsible for the safety regulation and inspecting of civil aerodromes and normally for the civil part of military aerodromes
this jurisdiction is given in national legislation
if military aerodromes are not exempted specifically from licensing this may imply that the CAA has responsibility and powers
in the case of foreign operators violating common operating regulations, CAA OPS can inform their counterpart in the State of the operator
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

14. Parties involved (4)
The military aviation authority/flight safety authority:
is the military counterpart of CAA
is expected to understand the issues of civil use of military aerodromes
often has powers to require corrections of the deficiencies endangering the operations
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

15. Public interest/opinion:
Parties involved (5)
Public interest/opinion:
often sees a military aerodrome as an under-utilised asset
a local community may regard the military aerodrome as its civil aerodrome
the community often acquires funds for the development
military aerodromes are often seen as a partial solution to the capacity problems at larger airports
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

16. The civil organisation operating on a military aerodrome:
Parties involved (6)
The civil organisation operating
on a military aerodrome:
may have similar responsibilities to operators of civil aerodromes
the civil part should be certified and there are regulations to that end
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

17. Parties involved (7) The Government:
is at least responsible for approval of instrument approach procedures and contents of AIP’s
is empowered to determine for which type of air services an aerodrome may be used for civil operations
of some contracting States restrict operations to only aerodromes that conform to Annex 14 regulations
may have to subsidise the aerodrome investment and operating costs
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

18. Options (1)
Any military aerodrome offering its services to civil aviation should be licensed and all facilities should be approved by CAA
- legislative amendments may be required
Without legislative change, the military cannot be obliged to accept a civilian aerodrome operator
- the CAA could open the discussion and take appropriate actions
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

19. Options (2)
If a comprehensive solution is not possible, military aerodromes could be transferred to civil operations on a case-by-case basis
- voluntary co-operation might be the way to proceed
As there are many parties interested in continuing civil use, parties could find a solution. CAA is the appropriate body to initiate. A key to this is financing
An alternative is to leave the situation unchanged, based on the premise that the military authorities have responsibility for meeting Annex 14 requirements in relation to civil aviation
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

20. Conclusions (1)
Currently many military aerodromes do not meet civilian standards
The military authorities are not normally accountable to CAA
This situation contravenes some basic principles of the safety regulation of civil aviation
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

21. Conclusions (2)
The situation could be resolved by requiring certification and accountability to CAA
Where this is not possible other options should be considered:
- make available only those aerodromes that meet Annex 14 requirements
- have audited and identified differences
- certification by the military as equivalent to civil standards
When comprehensive solutions are not possible use different partial solutions to alleviate pressing problems
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

22. Recommendations It is recommended that States:
review, and where necessary redefine, their policy on the use of government aerodromes
determine how best to address safety and liability concerns using the outlined options
formulate and introduce legislative amendments, if required, to implement that policy
Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002

23. Aerodrome Safety Workshop - Almaty, Kazakhstan - 18 to 22 November 2002