Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Normal Operations Data: Air Traffic Facility Evaluations and NOSS

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Normal Operations Data: Air Traffic Facility Evaluations and NOSS"— Presentation transcript:

1 Normal Operations Data: Air Traffic Facility Evaluations and NOSS
Presented to: Second ICAO Global Symposium on TEM/NOSS in Air Traffic Control By: Karen Burcham Date: February 8, 2007

2 Briefing Objectives FAA Safety Data Sources
Purpose, objectives, and philosophy of Safety Evaluations and Audits Internal Evaluation and Audit processes NOSS role and status

3 Heinrich’s Triangle and Safety
Leading Indicators Lagging Indicators 1 Aircraft Accident ~30 Incidents ~300 Hazardous Conditions ~1,000 Unreported “Unsafe Acts” (OE, OD, NMAC, PD) (Non-Compliance, Bad Documentation, bad phraseology, etc.) (Non-Reported OE’s/OD’s, Missed Readbacks, etc.)

4 Safety Data Reporting Requirements

5 Safety Data Sources

6 FAA Safety Data Sources (cont.)

7 So We Went Looking For The Big Picture
. Some data only shows the tip of the problem. Multiple databases may provide a lot of information but what does it all mean? What is needed to identify better precursors? Photo courtesy of Claudia VIRLAN, ANSS Directorate, Romanian CAA

8 Sources of Leading Indicators
Data Collected During Normal Operations—not as the result of an Incident/Accident Revamped Air Traffic Facility Evaluations/Audit Process NOSS

9 Safety Evaluations Serve the Assurance Component of SMS
Supporting Requirements ATO must continue to meet its performance targets for safety Reduce operational errors Reduce runway incursions To date, ATO collects the number, rate, and severity of these incidents (“lagging” safety indicators) ATO does not consistently collect data that may identify precursors to these incidents (“leading” safety indicators) Continual tracking and analysis of lagging and leading indicators will drive toward the identification of mitigation strategies that have a greater impact on the achievement of safety performance targets Policy Architecture FAA Safety Management System Assurance Safety Promotion Assurance Component of SMS 1 Safety assurance and evaluations 2 Safety data tracking and analysis

10 Safety Evaluations Purpose/Mission
Conduct audits, program assessments, operational assessments, and facilitate evaluations of ATC facilities to promote safety, quality, and efficiency of the ATC system. Measure, through the evaluation and audit processes, ATC system compliance with established policies, procedures, and requirements. Identify leading indicators of operational errors and deviations (OE/Ds), near mid-air collisions, controlled flight into terrain, and other safety hazards. Monitor and report trends of system compliance with established policies, procedures, and requirements.

11 Goals of New Evaluations Process
Knowledge sharing through sharing of mitigation plans across facilities/service areas Ability to compare facility performance on key safety indicators Data collection/analysis capability that results in: Identification of safety hazards Identification of leading indicators Communication of Evaluations/Audit findings throughout the ATO

12 Safety Evaluations Data Sharing
Field Customers -- Service Areas -- Hubs -- Facilities Headquarters Customers -- OIG / GAO -- Administrator -- COO & Executive Council -- Safety Oversight

13 Facility Internal Evaluations
Purpose is to identify compliance issues and safety hazards at a facility by evaluating and rating a set of checklist items. Conducted by every Facility in the NAS except Flight Service and NFCTs (approximately 520 facilities) Completed at least once per year Due August 1st each year (beginning August 1, 2006)

14 Safety Audits An audit is a method of assessing an air traffic facility’s performance and compliance with FAA directives and procedures. Audit is Independent Oversight Audit is NOT a check of the facility Internal Evaluation All AT Facilities audited at least every 3 years. Federal Contract Towers (FCT’s) audited every other year. Conducted by Safety Employees. Support from Service Areas/Hubs. Audit sites determined through application of criteria Audits are little or no notice to the Facility.

15 Facility Safety Assessment System (FSAS)
Web-based database tool that supports Safety Evaluations and Audits Facilitates conduct of facility internal evaluations and audits by serving as a central source of information on requirements as contained in current directives. Serves as a central collection point of the evaluation/audit data as it is completed. Serves to facilitate coordination and approval throughout the process. Plans to expand FSAS to support other safety processes

16 Where NOSS Fits NOSS provides data about normal situations
Identify situations that resulted in safe and efficient operations Profile effective system performance A new technique for the Evaluations office toolbox More in-depth look at a facility or portion of a facility than is provided by current audit process Provides structured look at operations Assess precursors to operational errors (leading indicators) Use results to help target safety improvements

17 FAA NOSS Status The ATO-P Human Factors Research and Engineering Group focused first on the science of NOSS Conducted a study of NOSS observer inter-rater reliability at WJHTC (8/06) to assess the consistency in how operational experts make the same interpretations of data Partial training of 4 Evaluations specialists on the TEM model and NOSS observation approach Plan to conduct a field trial at an En Route facility in the April/May timeframe

18 Summary FAA ATO-Safety Evaluations focuses on Safety Assurance portion of SMS (leading indicators) Most data currently collected on incidents (lagging indicators) NOSS could provide a more in-depth tool for collecting leading indicators

Download ppt "Normal Operations Data: Air Traffic Facility Evaluations and NOSS"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google