BELGIAN CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY - | Taalkeuze · In 2016, the focus will be on the development of a Just Culture climate and on the implementation of Regulation (EU) 376/2014 on

B E LG I A N C I V I L AV I AT I O N A U T H O R I T Y

S a f e t y P l a n 2 0 1 6 - 2 0 2 0U p d a t e 2 0 1 6

Federal Public ServiceMobility and TransportBelgian Civil Aviation Authority

Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety 2016-2020

4Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety 2016 - 2020

Contents

Executive Summary

IntroductionContent and structure of the Belgian Plan for Aviation SafetyBelgian Plan for Aviation Safety - InformationLink to the European Plan for Aviation Safety

Systemic Actions (SA)SA01: Further implementation of the Belgian Aviation Safety Programme SA02: Safety training and safety promotionSA03: Set up a dialogue with the Belgian aircraft operators on Flight Data Monitoring programmes

Operational Actions (OA)Outline of risks in the Belgian civil aviation sector

Commercial AviationOA01: Ground safety OA02: Targeting of aircraft with lasersOA03: Runway incursionsOA04: Separation minima infringements during parachuting operations OA05: Unruly passengersOA06: Dangerous goodsOA07: Bird strikes

General AviationOA08: Airspace infringementsOA09: Safety issues related to formation flyingOA10: Safety issues related to parachuting operations

Emerging actions (EA)EA01: Unmanned Aerial Systems /Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems

Appendix A: ANS safety performance

Appendix B: Acronyms and definitions

Appendix C: BCAA risk management process

Appendix D: BPAS August 2016 status report


exeCutive summary

Potential threats to aviation safety come in many different forms - spe-

cific technical issues, operational and natural events, human errors; the

list is long and diverse. By quantifying the relative importance of po-

tential threats, we should be able to create a systematic, effective and

proportionate series of actions that will help us to deal with the highest

safety risks. The Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety (BPAS) contains safety

initiatives to address these key safety risks in aviation. The safety ope-

rational risks are identified based on analysis of safety outcomes (i.e.

accidents and incidents) at both national and global level. Aviation is

a global business and lessons learned from across the globe may be

equally applicable in Belgium, so the BPAS is also affected by key safety

issues identified by ICAO, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA),

and even other States national safety plans. The BPAS is consistent with

what the Agency is doing at a regional level. We are fully committed to

work in partnership with EASA to ensure Europe maintains the highest

possible standards of aviation safety. In addition, systemic risks (e.g. re-

gulatory/policy issues) that underlie the operational performance of the

civil aviation system are addressed.

In 2016, the focus will be on the development of a Just Culture climate

and on the implementation of Regulation (EU) 376/2014 on the repor-

ting, analysis and follow-up of occurrences in civil aviation. This will

contribute to a continuous improvement of safety information collec-

tion and management, allowing continuous identification of potential

critical areas to be addressed at both State and Service Providers levels.

The new area “Emerging Issues” mainly addresses the use of Unmanned

Aerial Systems (UAS) and Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS). The

popularity and application of UAS/RPAS – better known by the public as

drones - continue to grow. The use of UAS/RPAS remains an emerging

risk to both commercial and general aviation.


Each action area includes the identification of safety issues as well as

the objectives to be achieved. During the period of this plan, the pro-

gress on the actions are monitored and evaluated. This feedback loop

ensures effective implementation aiming at continuous improvement.

The coordinated actions proposed in this edition of BPAS are expected

to make a difference in avoiding accidents and serious incidents, which

is the ultimate goal that links the activities together.

Nathalie Dejace,

The BCAA Director General a.i.


introduCtion

Content and structure of the Belgian Plan for Aviation

Safety

The Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety (BPAS) is the documented output of

an evidence based, pro-active approach to safety risks. At the heart of

the BPAS is the concept of safety risk management. The improvement

of safety is achieved by implementing actions that will best mitigate

these risks.

This edition of BPAS covers the five-year period between 2016 and

2020. Safety priorities identified in BPAS are addressed by specific ac-

tions through national rulemaking activities, through oversight activities

performed by the Belgian Civil Aviation Authority (BCAA) or through

specific safety promotion activities. Unfinished actions of the previous

plan are also included in the 2016 update.

The BPAS contains three categories of safety issues: systemic, ope-

rational and emerging. BPAS therefore contains three main chapters,

each one addressing the main safety areas and risk mitigating actions:

Ñ Systemic Issues

Ñ Operational Issues

Ñ Emerging Issues

The safety actions are therefore divided into 3 different types:

Ñ Systemic Actions (SA)

Ñ Operational Actions (OA)

Ñ Emerging Actions (EA)


These safety actions are realised through rulemaking and safety pro-

motion activities, or through focused oversight.

The following information is provided for each safety issue in the BPAS:

Ñ Description - Why has the issue been identified as an

important safety issue ?

Ñ Objectives - The expected safety benefits

Ñ Safety Performance indicators – How is the improvement

monitored ?

Ñ The safety actions

Ñ The action owner(s)

Ñ The alignment with the European Plan for Aviation Safety

(EPAS)

Ñ The target date

The BPAS is complemented by an Appendix D containing a status report

on the progress made until August 2016. The following information is

provided for each action item:

Ñ A summary of the work done

Ñ The action owner

Ñ The assessment whether the action is progressing according

to the BPAS

Ñ The identification of the status of the key deliverables. An

action is considered closed when the proposed deliverable

is achieved

This edition of the BPAS applies to commercial air transport (CAT)

operations, aerial work (AW) operations and general aviation (GA) ope-

rations helicopters.

Safety actions derived from safety recommendations by the Belgian Air

Accident Investigation Unit are also included in the BPAS.


Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety - information

The BPAS is annually assessed and available on:

http://mobilit.belgium.be/nl/luchtvaart

belgisch_veiligheidsprogramma/veiligheidsplan

http://mobilit.belgium.be/fr/transport_aerien

programme_belge_de_securite/plan_de_securite

Link to the European Plan for Aviation Safety

In the European aviation system, rulemaking, oversight and safety

promotion activities are shared between the Member States and the

European Institutions. The European Aviation Safety Programme (EASP)

describes the roles and responsibilities that each of them have while

performing these functions. As certain competencies have been trans-

ferred from the Member States to the European Union, in order to obtain

a complete picture of safety in any single State, both the EASP and the

Belgian Aviation Safety Programme (BASP) need to be considered.

The EASP describes among other things the process to develop and

update the European Plan for Aviation Safety (EPAS). The safety risks

identified in the EPAS are mitigated by safety actions that EASA, the

European Commission, the aviation sector and EASA Member States

take on board. All the partners work together, streamline their activities

and add their efforts to drive the accident rate further down.

The implementation of the BASP has resulted in the development of

the BPAS. BPAS forms a part of the Belgium aviation safety policy and

seeks to eliminate potential sources of safety problems through safety

promotion activities and through the optimization of regulatory and su-

pervisory activities. The BPAS is approved by the BCAA Director General

and is annually assessed and published.

Through the BPAS, the BCAA aims to contribute to the realisation of the

EPAS. The alignment between the EPAS and the BPAS is shown for the

relevant safety actions.

http://mobilit.belgium.be/nl/luchtvaart/belgisch_veiligheidsprogramma/veiligheidsplan


http://mobilit.belgium.be/fr/transport_aerien/programme_belge_de_securite/plan_de_securite



systemiC aCtions

This area addresses system-wide problems that affect aviation as a

whole. In most scenarios, these problems become evident by trigge-

ring factors and play a significant role in the final outcome of a safety

event. They often relate to deficiencies in organisational processes and

procedures.

SA01: Further implementation of the Belgian Aviation

Safety Programme

Description

The Belgian State shall further implement the Belgian Aviation Safety

Programme (BASP) in compliance with the ICAO Global Aviation Safety

Plan (GASP) and the EASP. The BASP describes the various regulations

and activities for maintaining and improving aviation safety and ensures

that Belgium operates in compliance with EU regulations and the safety

management requirements set forth in ICAO Annex 19. Included in the

BASP is the requirement for implementation of Safety Management

Systems (SMS) by the service providers. The transition to a State Safety

Programme requires increased collaboration across operational do-

mains to identify hazards and risks. The analysis of various forms of

safety data (safety occurrence reports etc.) is needed to develop ef-

fective mitigation actions. This requires that service providers and the

BCAA have to work closely together on safety risk management.

Collaborative efforts between service providers and the BCAA are also

essential to the development of safety performance indicators (SPI’s).

Safety data should be analysed to support the development and main-

tenance of SPI’s related to the risks of the Belgian aviation system. (see

also Appendix A: ANS Safety Performance)


The BCAA is an active member of the Network of Analysts (NoA). This

voluntary partnership between EASA and other aviation organizations

aims to enhance aviation safety in Europe by providing a framework for

the collaboration of safety analysis activity throughout the European

Aviation Safety Community. The primary mission is to improve aviation

safety by identifying safety risks and bringing such risks to the attention

of the decision makers. The NoA shall establish appropriate indicators,

elaborate a common European risk classification scheme and establish

analysis methodologies that will facilitate the sharing of information.

The BCAA conducted a gap analysis in 2016 to determine the remai-

ning gaps and actions for the further implementation of the BASP. This

analysis was conducted by means of the ICAO Gap Analysis Tool on iS-

TARS. This chapter has been reviewed in accordance with the outcome

of the latest analysis.

Objectives

Ñ Work with international organisations and service providers

to implement safety management

Ñ Improvement of the Belgian safety performance to enable

proportionate and timely corrective actions to be taken

Safety Performance Indicator

Ñ Timely implementation of actions and gaps as identified

through the ICAO Annex 19 State Safety Programme gap

analysis


Actions

Action Number Action title & objective Owner Alignment EPAS Date

SA01.01 Alignment of BCAA’s processes and procedures with Regulation (EC) 376/2014 BCAA/S-MAS MST.001 End 2017

Objective: To optimize BCAA’s safety risk processes and procedures with Regulation (EC) 376/2014 on the reporting, analysis and follow-up of occurrences in civil aviation.

SA01.02 Drafting of a circular following the publication of Regula-tion (EC) No 376/2014 BCAA/S-MAS MST.001 Begin 2016

Objective: To clarify the application of the new regulation to the service providers and the general aviation sector.

SA01.03 Optimize and harmonize BCAA’s methodology for risk based oversight BCAA/S-MAS MST.001 End 2016

Objective: To prioritize audits and surveys towards the areas of greater safety concern.

SA01.04 Development and maintenance of national SPI’s BCAA/S-MAS MST.001 Continuous

Objective: To establish and maintain national SPI’s for all key aviation safety issues.

SA01.05 Development of an Annual Safety Review (ASR) BCAA/S-MAS MST.001 June 2017

Objective: To inform the public of the level of safety in civil aviation.

SA01.06 Development of a process to assess acceptable and unac-ceptable behaviour within the framework of Just Culture BCAA MST.001 Begin 2016

Objective: To describe the process for determining the acceptability or non-acceptability of the behaviours of persons involved in safety occurrence reports.


SA02: Safety training and safety promotion

Description

Safety promotion is identified as one of the four components of a State

Safety Program (SSP). Safety promotion is therefore a major component

of the BASP and together with the BCAA’s Safety Policy an important

enabler for continuous safety improvement, which is achieved mainly

through safety risk management and safety assurance.

Safety Promotion has two elements, notably:

Ñ Training/education

Ñ Safety communication

The BCAA maintains a safety training program that ensures that all per-

sonnel is trained and competent to perform their BASP duties. Training

programs are adapted to fit the needs and complexity of the BCAA’s

organization. The scope of the safety training is appropriate to each

technical functions’ involvement in the BASP. The provision of appro-

priate training to all staff, regardless of their level in the organization, is

an indication of the BCAA’s management commitment to an effective

SSP.

The BCAA has also developed formal means for safety communica-

tion. Safety communication is an important enabler for improved safety

performance and reduces the chances of accident and incident re-

currence. The BCAA’s safety communication takes various forms. The

means of safety communication include, but are not limited to:

Ñ BCAA’s Aviation Safety Information Leaflets (ASIL)

Ñ Seminars and workshops

Ñ The Belgian Aviation Safety Management Group Platform

(BASMG)

Ñ The website of the Federal Public Service of Mobility and

Transport

The BCAA organizes or participates in safety seminars and workshops

in collaboration with the commercial and general aviation sector, the

Air Accident Investigation Unit, the Ministry of Defence, the European


Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the teams of the European Strategic

Safety Initiative (ESSI).

Extensive guidance material has been developed by teams of the

European Strategic Safety Initiative (ESSI) and the Safety Management

International Collaboration Group (SMICG) which addresses SMS prin-

ciples and implementation.

Objectives

Ñ Employees of the BCAA and the Air Accident Investigation

Unit are trained and competent to perform their SSP duties

Ñ Safety information is communicated and disseminated to the

aviation sector.


Ñ Percentage of relevant BCAA employees appropriately

trained against their training requirements

Actions

Action Number Action title & objective OwnerAlignmentEPAS

Date

SA02.01

Encourage the imple-mentation of safety promotion material developed by ESSI and SMICG teams

BCAA/S-MAS MST.002Conti-nuous

Objective:To encourage the implementation of the methods, guidance, best practices, etc. presented in the safety promotion material developed by the ESSI teams (ECAST, EHEST and EGAST) and the SMICG to the service providers and the general aviation sector.

SA02.02Promote the benefits of safety management sys-tems to senior managers

BCAA/S-MAS MST.002Begin 2017

Objective:To promote the benefits of safety management systems to senior managers by means of the SMICG documents “The Senior Manager’s Role in SMS” and “10 things you should know about safety manage-ment systems (SMS)”.

SA02.03Organize or participate in safety seminars and workshops

BCAA &AAIU(Be) MST.002

Conti-nuous

Objective:To organize or participate in safety seminars and workshops to discuss the most important safety risks applicable to the general aviation sector.


SA03: Set up a dialogue with the Belgian aircraft ope-

rators on Flight Data Monitoring programmes

Description

Many of the safety performance measures established to monitor safety

issues at industry level rely on data from Flight Data Monitoring (FDM)

programmes. FDM is the pro-active use of digital flight data from routine

operations to improve aviation safety and is mandatory for aeroplanes

with a Maximum Certificated Take-Off Mass (MCTOM) in excess of

27.000 kg. FDM offers the ability to monitor and evaluate operational

safety trends, identify hazards and risk precursors, and take appropriate

remedial action.

EASA and National Aviation Authorities (NAA’s) have formed a group

of experts called the European Authorities coordination group on FDM

(EAFDM). EASA will foster actions by States to improve FDM programmes

by the aircraft operators and assist States to monitor the standardization

of FDM events relevant to State Safety Programme top safety priorities.

The BCAA is an active member of the EAFDM.

The BCAA shall promote the operational safety benefits of FDM and

shall foster an open dialogue on FDM programmes. The BCAA shall

also encourage aircraft operators to include in their FDM programmes,

EADFM, EPAS and Belgian FDM events relevant for the prevention of

Runway Excursions (RE), Mid-air Collisions (MAC), Loss of Control in

Flight (LOC-I), Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) ,…

Objectives

Ñ Improve and promote FDM programmes with the objective to

bring safety benefits to operators

Ñ Allow the BCAA to better achieve its national safety objectives

and therefore to better manage the BASP

Ñ Sharing experience between aircraft operators.



Ñ Number of Belgian aircraft operators with Belgian and/or

EAFDM indicators into their FDM programmes

Actions

Action NumberAction title & objective

OwnerAlignmentEPAS

Date

SA03.01

Discuss the ex-pected benefits of FDM with Belgian aircraft operators

BCAA/OPS MST.003 Continuous

Objective:Meet Belgian aircraft operators in order to establish a national FDM Forum and to discuss the expected benefits of FDM. The national FDM Forum shall agree on a Terms of Reference and a confidentiality agree-ment.


operational aCtions

Outline of risks in the Belgian civil aviation sector

The risk management performed by the Belgian State relates to any

occurrence occurring on Belgian territory and in Belgian airspace. In

addition, occurrences occurring on foreign territory and foreign air-

space involving Belgian aircraft operators are also included. The various

aspects of aviation are considered, including aircraft, companies oper-

ating in the aviation sector, air traffic control services, airports, ground

handling services, etc.

Aviation occurrences reported are entered in the ECCAIRS data-

base. The main safety risks can be deduced from the analysis of

these occurrences, and the operational actions to be set by the

management in view of accident prevention can be determined.

These actions concern both general and commercial aviation.

The BCAA Safety Committee addresses the aviation risks to be dealt

with as a priority, selected by taking into account factors such as the

level of risk-mitigation actions already in place.


The table below shows the types of occurrences that are considered

posing the highest risk derived from the 2016 update.

Commercial Air Transport

Ground handling related events

Runway incursions

Separation minima infringements

Birds strikes

Aircraft encountered turbulence / windshear

Interference by laser

Difficult / Unruly passengers

General Aviation

Airspace Infrigements

Parachute dropping activities


CommerCial aviation

This section addresses all types of CAT operations. Through analysing

the accident(s), serious incidents and other incident categories in the

national occurrence database ECCAIRS, the following safety risk areas

for CAT operations have been identified.

OA01: Ground safety

Description

Ground safety includes both ground handling and ground collisions.

According to the EPAS, ground occurrences are the fourth most fre-

quent risk area for fatal accidents. This risk area also leads to significant

damage to aircraft and equipment, highlighting the need for greater

safety efforts in ground operations.

The analysis of the reported occurrences has demonstrated that prob-

lems related to ground handling RAMP (Region of Aircraft Movement

and Parking) are common. These reports comprise a broad spectrum

of occurrences, e.g. damage caused to aircraft by ground vehicles, in-

correct weight and balance calculations, incorrect loading or fuelling

of aircraft etc. This risk area leads to significant damage to aircraft and

equipment, highlighting the need for greater safety efforts in ground

operations. De-icing and anti-icing flaws, inadequate de-icing proce-

dures, incorrect loading and weight calculation can also lead to loss of

control in flight (LOC-I) which is a main topic in the EPAS.

Following occurrences are classified as ground handing incidents and

are included in this operational action: aircraft marshalling, aircraft

parking, de-icing, line maintenance, servicing (catering, fueling, fluids,

other), loading (baggage, cargo, cargo shifted, incorrect loading, over-

weight take-off, incorrect center of gravity, incorrect fuel balance), as

well as collision of towed aircraft with object/obstacles and collision


aircraft-vehicle while the aircraft is standing still or being pushed-back

or towed.

The Belgian State didn’t have sufficiently detailed national regulations

in place with respect to ground handling. The BCAA has therefore

published regulations on the approval of suppliers of ground handling

services at Brussels-National airport.

Part of the regulation is the introduction of safety management systems

(SMS) at the suppliers of ground handling services. An SMS involves

a systematic approach that includes the administrative structures,

accountability, safety policy and procedures required for safety man-

agement. Suppliers of ground handling services shall use their SMS to

identify safety threats, ensure corrective action to maintain appropriate

levels of safety, carry out continuous monitoring and regular assess-

ment of safety levels, and strive for continuous improvement of the

safety management system. The implementation of following actions

should result in lower risk levels as well as in a relative decline in the

number of occurrences related to ground handling RAMP operations.

Objectives

Increased internal supervision and auditing to monitor the ground han-

dling companies

Safety Performance Indicators

Number of collisions on ground at Belgian aerodromes as a result of

ground handling operations in proportion to the number of movements

(SPI-POR-03)


Action Number

Action title & objective OwnerAlignmentEPAS

Date

OA01.01Approval of ground handling activities at Brussels-National airport for existing ground handling companies

BCAA/AASMST.004MST.018

FEB 2016

Objective:Timely approval of ground handling activities for existing handling companies at Brussels-National airport in accordance with the relevant Ministerial Decree.

OA01.02Approval of the maintenance program at companies using rolling stock and essential stock, as well as the approval of the conditions for roadworthiness testing of rolling stock at Brussels-National airport


End 2016

Objective:Timely approval of maintenance program at companies using rolling stock and essential stock, as well as the approval of the conditions for roadworthiness testing of rolling stock at Brussels-National airport in accordance with the relevant Ministerial Decree.

OA01.03 Develop safety awareness animations for ground safety Brussels Airport Company MST.018 Continuous

Objective: Improve the safety awareness at Brussels Airport by developing safety promotion material

OA01.04Continuous oversight of ground handling activities at Brussels-National airport for ground handling companies

BCAA/AAS MST.018 Continuous

Objective:Improve aviation safety by organizing a continuous oversight of ground handling activities at Brussels-National airport for ground handling companies in accordance with the relevant Ministerial Decree.

OA01.05Continuous oversight of companies using rolling stock and essential stock, as well as the conditions for roadworthiness testing of rolling stock at Brussels-National airport

BCAA/AAS MST.018 Continuous

Objective:Improve aviation safety by organizing a continuous oversight of companies using rolling stock and essential stock, as well as the conditions for roadworthiness testing of rolling stock at Brussels-National airport.

The BCAA shall check if:• the rolling stock and essential stock is sufficient, appropriate and safe;

• the rolling stock and essential stock are maintained, inspected and, where appropriate, undergo a roadworthiness test according to the applicable regulations.

Actions


OA02: Targeting of aircraft with lasers

Description

Laser emitters continue to pose a significant threat to aviation safety

and security. The exposure of air crews to laser illumination may cause

hazardous effects (distraction, glare, afterimage flash blindness…) which

could adversely affect the ability of air crews to carry out their respon-

sibilities and therefore requires adequate countermeasures to mitigate

this threat.

The number of reports of Belgian aircraft being targeted by hand held

lasers has decreased. This decrease may be due to the effective re-

duction of the number of laser attacks and/or to a less good reporting

culture for this type of incident. The BCAA has already contacted the

Belgian ANSP, the Federal Police and the airport authorities in order

to review and assess the current procedures in place at a number of

Belgian international airports related to the targeting of aircraft with la-

sers and to share best practices. The BCAA shall continue to monitor


the situation in cooperation with the Belgian ANSP, the Federal Police

and the airport authorities.

Objectives

Ñ Minimize the number of laser attacks as well as the effects

they have on flight safety during the critical phases of flight


Ñ Number of laser targeting occurrences in proportion to the

number of movements (SPI-GEN-01)

Actions

Action Number


Date

OA02.01

Develop, review and assess the procedures to follow in the case of laser interference and to share best practices

BCAA/SAF MST.004 MID 2017

Objective:To improve the cooperation between the ANSP, the Federal Police and the BCAA to develop, review and assess the procedures to follow in the case of laser interference and to share best practices.


OA03: Runway incursions

Description

According to the definition provided by ICAO, a Runway Incursion (RI)

is defined as ‘any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect

presence of an aircraft vehicle or person on the protected area of a

surface designated for the landing and take-off of aircraft’.

The prevention of runway incursions is a key issue for airport safety. The

European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions (EAPPRI)

is the result of the combined efforts of multiple organizations dealing

with safety at airports. It contains recommendations to all airport stake-

holders (including regulators, airport operators, ATC, aircraft operators,

etc.).

The implementation of EAPPRI recommendations will enhance run-

way safety. The development of mature and performant Local Runway

Safety Teams (LRSTs) is a key objective for the BCAA.

Runway Incursions - Type

Objectives

Reduce the number of RIs in fixed-wing commercial air transport


Ñ Number of RIs by aircraft at Belgian aerodromes in proportion

to the number of movements (SPI-POR-01/SPI-ANS-03)

Ñ Number of RIs by vehicles at Belgian aerodromes in proportion

to the number of movements (SPI-POR-01/SPI-ANS-03)


OA03.05

Development of two Aviation Safety Information Leaflets (ASIL’s) on radiotelephony phraseology “Hold short on runway” and “Solo call sign suffix for student pilots”

BCAA/AAS MST.014 Begin 2016

Objective:To reduce the number of runway incursions. Phraseology issues have been identified after analysis of the reported runway incursion occurrences. The BCAA therefore decided to develop two ASIL’s on radiotelephony phraseology.

Runway Incursions - Severity

Actions

Action Number


Date

OA03.01Ensure that Local Runway Safety Teams are in place and effective

BCAA/AAS MST.011Continuous

Objective:At each Belgian airport LRSTs have been established, which comprise representatives from aircraft operators, Air Navigation Service Providers, airport operators and the BCAA. The BCAA is an active member of these teams. SMS audits performed by the BCAA verify their existence and effectiveness.

OA03.02Implement harmonized Terms of Reference (ToR) for all LRSTs


Begin 2016

Objective:To ensure the effectiveness of the LRSTs. The harmonized ToRs shall mention that LRSTs are systematically discussing runway incursions based on local risks.

OA03.03Develop a maturity indicator for LRSTs


Objective: To measure the effectiveness of the LRSTs.

OA03.04

Establish and update formal interfaces between the SMS’s of Belgocontrol and the Belgian international airports


Objective:To extend the scope of an organization safety management system to other stakeholders. In doing so, they shall establish formal interfaces with these stakeholders which may influence directly the safety of their services.

Action Number


Date


OA04: Separation minima infringements during para-

chuting operations

Description

Occurrences related to parachuting operations in areas with a high rate

of commercial air traffic lead to an increased risk of collision. Parachuting

operations have a low level of ATC controllability because of their late

conflict detection and their low possibility for an ATC recovery.

Parachuting operations often lacks standardized working procedures. A

standardized radiotelephony for these kind of activities is also missing,

which can lead to ambiguous transmissions and to a misperception of

auditory information. The ATC phraseology to indicate the starting and

ending of each phase of the parachuting operation is not sufficiently

detailed. This phraseology should be used at exact that moment the

aircraft ends a phase or wants to start the next phase of the flight.

The complex structure of the Belgian airspace (leading to a complex

sectorisation and to complex co-ordinations) and the very high fre-

quency of commercial operations in some ATC zones, in combination

with parachuting operations, contribute to an increase of the Air Traffic

Controller workload.

Objectives

Ñ Reduction of the number of occurrences related to separation

minima infringement during parachuting operations


Ñ Number of occurrences related to separation minima

infringement during parachuting operations


Actions

Action Number


Date

OA04.01 Organize a discussion platform between pilots, ATCO’s, supervisors and the BCAA on parachuting operationsANSP &BCAA

MST.010 Begin 2016

Objective:To agree on standardized working procedures and a standardized radiotelephony phraseology.

OA04.02 Revision of the working procedures and the ATC phraseology related to parachuting operations ANSP &BCAA

MST.010 End 2016

Objective:To revise the working procedures for parachuting operations and to develop a standardized radiotelephony phraseology.


OA05: Unruly passengers

Description

An unruly passenger is defined by Annex 17 to the ICAO Chicago

Convention as: “A passenger who fails to respect the rules of conduct

at an airport or on board an aircraft or to follow the instructions of

the airport staff or crew members and thereby disturbs the good order

and discipline at an airport or on board the aircraft.” And by the Tokyo

Convention (1963) as: “Acts which, whether or not they are offences

[against the penal law of a State], may or do jeopardize the safety of

the aircraft or of persons or property therein or which jeopardize good

order and discipline on board.”

Basically, unruly passenger refers to a passenger behaviour that jeop-

ardizes or might jeopardize the safety of the aircraft, persons or property

therein or the accepted level of good order and discipline on board.

Most of the unruly passenger occurrences are related to smoking in

the lavatories of the aircraft, the use of mobile devices on board of

the aircraft and to drunk passengers. Potential consequences of unruly

passengers are the return of the aircraft, flight delay and flight diversion.

Objectives

Ñ Reduction of the number of occurrences related to unruly

passengers.


Ñ Number of Unruly Passenger Occurrences (SPI-GEN-02)


Actions


Date

OA05.01 Perform a comprehensive analysis of the unruly passenger occurrencesBCAA/S-MASBCAA/SAF

_ End 2017

Objective:To understand the size of the issue at national level and to identify potential safety measures that could reduce the number of unruly passenger occurrences.


OA06: Dangerous goods

Description

Dangerous goods are articles or substances which are capable posing a

risk to health, safety, property or the environment. These include obvi-

ous things, such as: explosives, radioactive materials, flammable liquids,

dangerous or volatile chemicals, strong acids, compressed gases, poi-

sons and aerosols. Everyday items that can cause problems include

toiletries, aerosols, tools and lithium batteries.

One of the safety actions related to fire, smoke and fumes in the EPAS

are aimed to raise awareness on the risks associated with the transpor-

tation of lithium batteries. The major risk associated with the transport

of lithium batteries and battery-powered equipment is thermal runway,

where the batteries heat up and produce toxic and flammable gasses as

a result of short circuit, malfunctioning or mishandling of the batteries.

Aircraft operators have to be informed of the risks associated with the

transport of dangerous goods and more particularly with the transport

of lithium batteries. Passenger awareness should also be raised, there-

fore preventing them from unintentionally carrying non-allowed items

while acknowledging the risks posed by lithium batteries.

Objectives

Ñ Further reduce the risks of accidents and serious incidents in

this category


Ñ Number of dangerous goods occurrences


Actions


Date

OA06.01 Approval of the transport of dangerous goods activities for ground handling companies BCAA/OPSMST.005MST.018

End 2017

Objective:Approval of the transport of dangerous goods activities for ground handling companies in accordance with the relevant national regulation.

OA06.02 Systematic auditing of operators’ outstations in the field of the transport of dangerous goods BCAA/OPS MST.005 Continuous

Objective:Improve aviation safety by organizing a systematic monitoring of the transport of dangerous goods at the operators’ outstations.

OA06.03 Transportation of lithium batteriesBCAA/OPSBrussels Airport Company

MST.005 Continuous

Objective:Inform all involved parties (operators, ground handlers, forwarders, airport operators, etc.) and raise passenger awareness on the risks associated with lithium batteries.


OA07: Bird strikes

Description

The presence of birds and other animals on and in the vicinity of an

aerodrome poses a serious threat to aircraft operational safety. The

majority of collisions occur at low altitudes, in the vicinity of an airport

during take-off and landing. Annex 14-certified aerodrome operators

are required to take the necessary actions to identify, manage and mit-

igate the risk to aircraft operations posed by wildlife (birds and other

animals) by adopting actions likely to minimise the risk of collisions be-

tween wildlife and aircraft, to as low as reasonably practicable.

The appropriate authorities are required to have in place procedures for

the identification and control of wildlife hazards on and in the vicinity of

an aerodrome, and to ensure that competent personnel evaluates the

wildlife hazard on a continuing basis.

At present, hundreds of bird strikes are reported each year in Belgium

and the number of bird strike reports continues to increase. The

consequences of bird strikes vary between a scared pilot to a severe

damaged aircraft. The increasing number of flights and growing bird

population will bring new challenges in the future.

Objectives

Ñ Reduce the risk of collision with birds


Ñ Number of bird strikes including turbine engine ingestion at

the Belgian international airports (SPI-POR-02b)


Actions


Date

OA07.01

Exchange of experience about specific technical issues in the field of wildlife management through the Belgian Aviation Wildlife Hazard Committee (BAWiHaC)

BCAA/AAS _ Continuous

Objective:Create a strong and open collaboration between the international airports for Bird Control Unit matters and to give a higher priority to wildlife issues on all levels of management.


General aviation

This area includes operations performed by gliders, balloons, microl-

ights, as well as fixed-wing aerial work and GA operations performed by

fixed wing and rotorcraft.

OA08: Airspace infringements

Description

Airspace infringement (AI) is also referred to as an unauthorized pen-

etration of airspace and is generally defined as a flight into notified

airspace without previously requesting and obtaining approval from the

controlling authority of that airspace in accordance with international

and national regulations.

The analysis of the reported incidents clearly indicates that the majority

of infringements are committed by General Aviation flights.

The overall number of reported incidents has dropped slightly. This

trend can be influenced by the increasing awareness of this type of risk

at the general aviation pilots because of the safety promotion actions

taken by the Belgian Air Accident Investigation Unit and the BCAA.


Objectives

Ñ Reduced Risk of Collision


Ñ Number of Belgian airspace infringements caused by General

Aviation flights

Actions


Date

OA08.01

Raise awareness of general aviation pilots by periodically reviewing the aviation safety information leaflets on airspace infringements

BCAA &AAIU(Be)

MST.010MST.016

Continuous

Objective:The Belgian Air Accident Investigation Unit sends for each reported airspace infringement a standard questionnaire to the pilot to get more insight in the causes and nature of airspace infringements. The BCAA performs an in-depth statistical analysis of the airspace infringement problem in Belgium. The BCAA shall periodically revise the aviation safety information leaflets on airspace infringements to raise awareness of the risks involved with this type of occurrence and to provide correct information to general aviation pilots in order to avoid airspace infringements in the Belgian airspace.

OA08.02Support the initiative to simplify the complex structure of the Belgian airspace

BCAA/AAS &ANSP

MST.010 Begin 2016

Objective:The BCAA shall organise preparatory meetings with the stakeholders (Belgian ANSP Belgocontrol, the Belgian Air Force, a delegation of airspace users…) to discuss a possible simplification of the Belgian airspace in order to avoid airspace infringements in the Belgian airspace committed by general aviation flights.


OA09: Safety issues related to formation flying

Description

Formation flying is the disciplined flight of two or more aircraft un-

der the command of a flight leader. Historically, formation flight has

been a part of military training, almost since the start of military aviation.

Formation flying is used for discipline training, building trust in the other

pilots, providing mutual cover, etc.

In general aviation, formation flying is often observed for 2 reasons: tak-

ing photos of each other’s aircraft and because it is more challenging

than simply flying solo from point A to point B. Many aviation organi-

zations possess photos of their aircraft in flight. Many of those photos

however, where taken by pilots that were not briefed and trained for

performing formation flights. The BCAA will therefore take the initia-

tive to launch a safety information leaflet for general aviation related

to formation flying as a result of several safety recommendations from

aviation accidents.

Objectives

Ñ Fewer accidents or serious incidents due to formation flying


Ñ Not applicable

Actions


Date

OA09.01Develop a safety information leaflet for the general aviation community on formation flying

BCAA MST.004 Begin 2016

Objective:To inform the general aviation community on the existing regulation, highlight the associated risks and to provide guidance on the preparation of formation flying. The BCAA calls upon all Belgian federations, organizations and instructors active in civil aviation to limit formation flying among their community to a minimum and to accurately brief the hazards.


OA10: Safety issues related to parachuting operations

Description

The number of accidents and serious incidents with parachute drop

airplanes in Belgium in the past reflects not only the intensity of this

activity, but also the potential safety issues related to parachuting op-

erations. These accidents are coming on top on those linked to the

parachute activity itself. The risks associated with the parachute activity

itself are recognized within the parachute clubs. Through procedures,

training, re-training, supervision etc., these risks seem to be adequately

taken care of, while the associated flying activities are lacking equal

safety awareness. Currently, the regulatory requirements for parachut-

ing operations are those of aerial work. This means that these activities

require an authorization per Chapter VII, Section 4 – art. 50 of Royal

Decree of March 15th 1954.

Considering the volume of the activity and the potential danger to the

occupants of the airplanes involved, the BCAA will take the initiative to

launch actions pertaining to the activity of parachuting operations in

order to increase the safety of this activity to an acceptable level.

Objectives

Ñ Fewer accidents or serious incidents due to parachuting

operations


Ñ Not applicable


Actions


Date

OA10.01 Up-date BCAA guidelines related to parachuting operationsBCAA/OPSBCAA/AAS

MST.004 MID 2015

Objective:To avoid overlapping responsibilities between the aircraft operators and the parachuting clubs and to inform the general aviation community on the existing regulation and to highlight the associated risks.

OA10.02 The application of the articles in European Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 related to parachuting operations will be brought forward BCAA/OPS MST.004 MID 2015

Objective:To launch additional actions related to the activity of parachuting operations in order to increase the safety of this activity to an acceptable level.

OA10.03Development of an Operations Manual by the operators conducting parachute droppings following the requirements stated in the European Regulation (EU) No 965/2012

BCAA/OPS MST.004 Begin 2016

Objective:To verify the correct application of the operators’ procedures conducting parachuting operations.

OA10.04 Verification by the BCAA of the correct application of the requirements in European Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 related to parachuting operations BCAA/OPS MST.004 End 2016

Objective:To reduce the number of accidents and serious incidents due to parachuting operations.


emerGinG aCtions (ea)This chapter addresses already emerging issues as well as issues that

could potentially emerge in the immediate or near future. Giving con-

siderations to safety issues derived from operations or regulations that

have not been fully deployed, it incorporates a forward-looking ele-

ment in BPAS.

EA01: Unmanned Aerial Systems /Remotely Piloted

Aircraft Systems

Description

The popularity and application of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and

Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) – more commonly known

as drones - continues to grow. The use of UAS/RPAS represent an

emerging risk to both commercial and general aviation. The BCAA

therefore needs to provide clear guidance on the applicable regulations

and best practice when using UAS/RPAS either for leisure or aerial work.

ICAO and EASA are addressing future Standards and Recommended

Practices (SARPs) for the use of UAS/RPAS. ICAO established a UAS

study group in 2008 to recommend appropriate SARPs to be applicable

worldwide. Some SARPs in the areas of Annex 7 - Aircraft Nationality and

Registration Marks and Annex 2 - Rules of the Air became applicable in

2012 and ICAO will continue to develop further SARPs for all aspects

of UAS/RPAS operation. EASA has developed a concept of operations

for RPAS and is also working on guidance in the area of certification

of the aircraft and ground station, integration into controlled airspace,


communication requirements and remote pilot training. In Europe the

Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of Unmanned Systems group (JARUS)

was established to recommend a single set of technical, safety and

operational requirements in this area. The BCAA is following the de-

velopments in JARUS and contributed to the drafting of the proposals

by commenting the text during public consultation. The BCAA is also

strongly involved in the review of EASA proposals related to future UAS/

RPAS regulations.

The BCAA published a Royal Decree regulating the use of UAS/RPAS in

Belgian airspace for professional purposes (aerial work and air trans-

port). The purpose of this document is to set out the rules of the air, the

rules for registration of UAS/RPAS, the conditions for theoretical and

practical training of remote pilots and the issuing of the remote pilot

license after successful examination and the acceptance of UAS/RPAS

operations in Belgian airspace, based on an operation-oriented and risk

based approach.

The BCAA is aware of the need to continuously advise the public of the

hazards involved in flying these UAS/RPAS devices. The BCAA already

issued guidance to the public highlighting the circumstances when per-

mission is required to fly UAS/RPAS devices and also published a new

webpage for drone users indicating the conditions to fly and offering

templates to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Royal

Decree regulating the use of UAS/RPAS in Belgian airspace.

The BCAA launched several campaigns to inform the public about rec-

reational and professional use of UAS/RPAS and was also present at

different UAS/RPAS conferences and exhibitions.

Objectives

Fewer accidents, serious incidents or occurrences as a result of conflict

between a UAV /RPAS and another aircraft in Belgian airspace


Actions

Action Number


Date

EA01.01 Publish the Royal Decree regulating the use of UAS/ RPAS in Belgian airspace BCAA-

MAY 2016

Objective:To set out the rules of the air, the rules for registration of UAS/ RPAS, the conditions for theoretical and practical training of remote pilots and the issuing of the remote pilot license after successful examination and the acceptance of UAS/ RPAS operations in Belgian airspace.

EA01.02Participate in the development of an appropriate international regulatory framework to govern the operation of UAS /RPAS

BCAA - Continuous

Objective:To govern the operation of UAS /RPAS in order to remove restrictions on these kind of operations at EU level, so that all companies can make best use of these technologies to create jobs and growth while maintaining a high and uniform level of safety.

EA01.03Provide guidance to the public, to raise public awareness of the circumstances when permission is required to fly UAS /RPAS devices

BCAA - Continuous

Objective:To continuously advise the public of the hazards involved in flying UAS /RPAS devices

EA01.04 Establish an active follow up of UAS /RPAS occurrence reports BCAA - Continuous

Objective:To determine the most important safety risks applicable to UAS /RPAS devices, to detect safety issues and to develop further guidance and regulations based on lessons learned.

EA01.05Starting up a collaboration with the ANSP, the Federal Police and the BCAA for handling violations with UAS /RPAS devices

BCAA/SAF - MID 2017

Objective:To improve the cooperation between the ANSP, the Federal Police and the BCAA to develop, review and assess the procedures to follow in the case of violations with UAS /RPAS devices.


Appendix A: ANS Safety Performance

1. eu-wide safety performanCe indiCators

As required in 2011 by European Regulations, the Belgian State and its

National Air Navigation Service Provider (Belgocontrol) are subject to

the monitoring and reporting of their yearly safety performance. Since

2015, the monitored safety key performance indicators (KPIs) are sub-

ject to targets to be reached by 2019 at the latest. This implies constant

efforts to ensure a high level of safety performance in line with the ob-

jectives of the Single European Sky.

The measurement of the safety performance is based on three KPIs

applying to both State and service providers:

Ñ KPI#1 is the Effectiveness of Safety Management (EoSM).

Through questionnaires, this KPI measures the level of

implementation of following management objectives:

- Safety policy and objectives;

- Safety risk management;

- Safety assurance;

- Safety promotion;

- Safety Culture.

Ñ KPI#2 is the application of the severity classification. Based

on the use of the Risk Analysis Tool (RAT) methodology, this

KPI allows a standardized method to assess the severity and

repeatability of the following occurrences:

- Separation Minima Infringements (SMI);

- Runway Incursions (RI);


- ATM-specific occurrences at all Air Traffic Control -

Centers and at airports (ATM SO).

Ñ KPI#3 is the Just Culture.

Through questionnaires, this KPI measures the level of

presence and corresponding level of absence of Just

Culture. Just Culture means a culture in which front line

operators or others are not punished for actions, omissions

or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with

their experience and training, but where gross negligence,

willful violations and destructive acts are not tolerated.

The Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety (BPAS) provides an overview of the

current situation. The BPAS shall be updated annually to provide histor-

ical data and general actions to maintain or improve the Belgian safety

performance.


2. safety performanCe 2015

a) KPI#1 – Effectiveness of Safety Management (EoSM)

For the fourth year of measurement, the effectiveness of safety man-

agement has been assessed following the methodology defined by the

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Two online surveys were an-

swered identifying for each safety management objective, the level of

implementation characterizing the performance of the respective state

competent authority and air navigation service provider(s).

EFFECTIVENESS LEVELS AND EFFECTIVENESS SCORE

When answering the questions, one of the following levels of imple-

mentation had to be selected:

Ñ Level A which is defined as “Initiating”, meaning that processes

are usually ad hoc and chaotic;

Ñ Level B which is defined as “Planning/Initial Implementation”,

means that activities, processes and services are managed;

Ñ Level C which is defined as “Implementing” means that

defined and standard processes are used for managing;

Ñ Level D which is defined as “Managing & Measuring” means

that objectives are used to manage processes and that

performance is measured; and

Ñ Level E which is defined as “Continuous Improvement’

means continuous improvement of processes and process

performance.

Additional information can be found at:

http://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/agency-decisions/

ed-decision-2014035r

http://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/agency-decisions/ed-decision-2014035r

http://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/agency-decisions/ed-decision-2014035r


Based on the answers, the following scores have been derived:

KPI#1 – State:

In 2014, the average effectiveness score achieved by the individual

European States was 62%.

For 2014, the Belgian CAA and BSA-ANS obtained an overall effec-

tiveness score of 64,06% and for 2015, the score is now 68,84%. An

improvement of nearly 5% as compared to the previous year that keeps

Belgium within the top amongst the 30 States subject to the European

performance scheme.

The following figure shows the 2014 EoSM scores for all Member States.

(Source PRB).


The score obtained by the Belgian State in 2012 (61,82%) was set as

the baseline for the following years and an action plan linked with the

FABEC performance plan aims at improving the effectiveness of our

safety management.

Even if the percentage scores can be used to highlight the relative po-

sition in comparison with the European average and other states, the

European Commission has set targets to be reached at individual ques-

tion levels. By the end of 2019 at the latest, the level C shall be reached

in all the 36 study areas.

The current 2015 survey shows that Belgium already reached the targets

set at European level for 32 out of the 36 study areas. For 26 of them,

the Belgian State even reached a score above the required targets.

Some improvements have been achieved in the following domains:

Ñ Safety performance of service providers and State Safety Plan;

Ñ Compliance verification processes and oversight;

Ñ Implementation of a Just Culture climate, and;

Ñ Risk based oversight.

Some efforts remain to be done to:

Ñ Align some national regulations with the European regulatory

framework, especially on Aerodrome Flight Information

Service (AFIS);

Ñ Manage more effectively internal interfaces within the

competent authority;

Ñ Develop and measure a safety culture.


KPI#1 – ANSP (Belgocontrol):

In 2014, the average effectiveness score achieved by the individual

European Air Navigation Service Providers was 76%.

For 2014, Belgocontrol obtained an overall effectiveness score of

72,49% and for 2015, the score is now 76,26%. The Belgian Air Navigation

Service Provider is slightly above the average. It should be noted that

the higher the maturity, the more difficult it is to improve the scores.

Nevertheless, targets have been set and continuous improvement is ex-

pected for the following years.

The following figure shows 2014 EoSM scores for all Air Navigation

Service Providers. (Source PRB).

As for the State, the percentage score of Belgocontrol can be used to

highlight their relative position in comparison with the European aver-

age and the other service providers. For the different organizations, the

European Commission has also set targets to be reached at individual


question levels. By the end of 2019 at the latest, the level C shall be

reached in all the study areas related to safety culture (3 questions) and

the level D for the remaining 23 questions.

In 2015, Belgocontrol reached the level C for 7 of the 26 questions,

12 are at level D and 7 at the highest level E. As compared to the 2014

figures, it shows an improvement in the highest level considered as a

continuous improvement. The targets as set by the European Regulation

require a level D at least in all objectives by 2019, except for the safe-

ty culture where a level C is required. The safety culture target being

already reached, the current situation of Belgocontrol provides confi-

dence in achieving the remaining objectives.

As required by regulations, a verification of the answers provided by the

service provider is mandatory. The BSA-ANS made a formal verification

and no safety critical elements weaknesses were identified during the

verification of the questionnaires.

The highest possible scores are reached for:

Ñ the safety management system documentation;

Ñ the independence of safety management of the line

management;

Ñ the safety standards and procedure documentation;

Ñ the implication of the staff in the safety management;

Ñ the staff and contractor’s safety competency;

Ñ the risk management processes;

Ñ the routine publication of safety levels.

Some improvements are expected:

Ñ to go beyond compliance;

Ñ to develop further contingency and emergency procedure;

Ñ to develop the management of external interfaces;

Ñ to develop safety information sharing with industry

stakeholders, and;

Ñ to gather information on operational safety and

safety management system best practices from the industry.


b) KPI#2 – Risk Analysis Tool (RAT)

The Risk Analysis Tool is a web-based application allowing the assess-

ment of the severity of safety related occurrences. The application of

the severity classification based on the tool methodology is measured

on the individual occurrence basis with a “yes/no” value. This is done for

all separation minima infringements (SMIs), runway incursions (RIs) and

ATM Specific Technical Occurrences at ATS Centers and airports as-

sessed as “serious incidents”, “major incidents” or “significant incidents”.

The RAT methodology allows a report of an “Overall” score composed

of the ATM (Air Traffic Management) ground and the ATM airborne part.

The ATM ground being the extent to which ATM Ground’s actions con-

tributed to the occurrence and the ATM airborne being the extent to

which pilot’s actions contributed to the occurrence.

This indicator was expressed in terms of the percentage (%) of occur-

rences for which severity has been assessed using the RAT methodology.

More information can be found on:

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/3276.pdf

KPI 2 – State (RAT Overall score)

As required the State should establish arrangement to collect and re-

port the overall score. In 2012, the BSA-ANS initiated a complete review

of the safety data collection and reporting process and has developed

new processes in coordination with the BCAA Management System

Unit and the BCAA Aviation Safety Inspectorate to improve data quality.

The Risk Analysis Tool Methodology is implemented since 2013 and is

continuously improving.

As compared to the 2012 figures, the percentage of use of the meth-

odology shows very significant changes with a range from 0% in 2012

to 100% for all required occurrences types in 2014, providing evidences

of all the efforts made to improve the data quality in the occurrences

assessments.

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/3276.pdf


From 2015 and onwards, collaboration between the BCAA, BSA-ANS

and Air Navigation Service Providers will continue to ensure data shar-

ing and open publication. Safety meetings are organized on a monthly

basis to determine the overall score for the required safety occurrence

(see tables for overall percentage scores).

KPI 2 – Belgocontrol (RAT Ground score)

The implementation of the RAT (Risk Analysis Tool) at Belgocontrol

continued to progress to reach 100% by the end of 2014 as defined in

the FABEC Performance Plan. The tool is now fully implemented for the

assessment of all required types of occurrences.

In 2014, the Annual Summary Template as verified by the BSA-ANS re-

ported the following figures:

Ñ For SMI, 45 occurrences have been reported from which

100% have been assessed by Belgocontrol using the RAT for

their identified impact on the ATM ground provision;

Ñ For RIs, 44 occurrences have been reported from which

100% have been assessed by Belgocontrol using the RAT for

their identified impact on the ATM ground provision;

Ñ For ATM Specific Technical Occurrences, 115 occurrences

have been reported from which 100% have been assessed by

Belgocontrol using the RAT.

Following investigations and publication requirements, the 2015 figures

will be available in April 2016.

The following figure shows the percentage of use of the RAT as com-

pared to the reported occurrences from 2012 to 2015.

Reported Assessed Reported Assessed Reported Assessed Reported Assessed

ATM GROUND 58% 71% 100% N/AATM OVERALL 0% 31% 100% N/AATM GROUND 33% 100% 100% N/AATM OVERALL 0% 100% 100% N/A

N/A

Application of the severity classifiaction of the Risk Analysis Tool

N/A

N/A

N/A100% 100% 100%

9

78

45

13

107

45

44

115

Separation Minima Infringements (SMIs)

Runway Incursions(RIs)

ATM Specific Technical Occurrences (ATM-STOs) ATM OVERALL

2012 2013 2014 2015

52


The European Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2014/132 sets

Union-wide performance targets applicable for the KPI#2. By the end

of 2017, 80% of the ATM Ground and ATM overall for the required oc-

currences shall be assessed by the RAT and by the end of 2019, the

targets are set at 100%.

Looking at the 2014 figures, the targets as set for 2019 are already met.

The requirement for a 100% assessment maintains the challenge of

collecting safety data, manage investigation and reporting processes,

keeping pressure on the effectiveness of safety occurrences manage-

ment at all levels.

c) KPI#3 – Just Culture

The Just Culture KPI aims at measuring the level of presence and cor-

responding level of absence of Just Culture at State and at ANSP level.

The metrics have been constructed to respond to the criteria of: clearly

defined, auditable, verifiable, repeatable and indicative of the level of

Just Culture being implemented. The just culture KPI consists of met-

rics in the areas of “policy and its implementation”, “legal/judiciary” and

“occurrence reporting and investigation”.

The main aim of the indicator and of the questionnaires is to identi-

fy possible obstacles and impediments to the application of the Just

Culture (JC).

The questionnaires submitted identify several elements related to an

effective just culture, each element in turn with a number of sub-ele-

ments. These sub-elements are binary, i.e. the answer can only be “yes”

or “no”. The States and ANSPs may qualify the “no” answers in their


respective completed questionnaire by indicating the related obstacles.

A positive reply gives an indication of a just culture context while a

negative reply indicates a potential deficit/obstacles in just culture im-

plementation. However, it is not expected that all replies should be

positive but the identification of negative elements would give indication

of possible areas of improvement and could be considered as incen-

tives for improving the just culture in a particular State/organization.

KPI#3 – Just Culture (State + ANSP)

The following table shows the 2014 and 2015 results:

Belgium State 2014 2015YES NO YES NO

Policy and its implementation 3 6 8 1Legal/Judiciary 2 5 5 2Occurrence reporting and Investigation 2 0 2 0

TOTAL 7 11 15 3

The year 2015 identified several remarkable changes in the answers pro-

vided by the Belgian State. First of all, the publication of the European

Regulation (EU)376/2014 on occurrences reporting implied new re-

quirements directly linked with the Just Culture implementation. In

addition, the BCAA Management System Unit and the BSA-ANS devel-

oped a process to assess the acceptability of certain human behavior in

the framework of the Just Culture. Additional actions are expected in

2016 to include Just Culture elements in the Belgian State Safety Policy.

KPI#3 – Just Culture Belgocontrol

The following table shows the 2014 and 2015 results:

Belgocontrol 2014 2015YES NO YES NO

Policy and its implementation 10 3 7 6Legal/Judiciary 2 1 2 1Occurrence reporting and Investigation 4 4 4 4

TOTAL 16 8 13 11


As stated above, the counting of positive or negative answers does not

provide a clear identification of the obstacles or deficiencies in the im-

plementation of a Just Culture climate. The noticeable reduction of 3

positive answers in 2015 is linked with specific training requirements on

Just Culture. This is mainly due to a stricter approach of Belgocontrol

on the specificity of dedicated training requirements. Belgocontrol

considering that Just Culture courses should be extended to more than

initial training, actions are in progress to address continuation training

too. Review of such courses should be completed in 2016. In addition,

the FABEC performance plan has set targets on specific training mod-

ules for all ANSPs to be developed in collaboration with their respective

competent authorities.

Additional information on all KPIs can be found at:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/prudata/dashboard/pp_view_2014.html

d) FABEC RP1 Objectives and RP2 Targets

Progressing with the establishment of the Single European Sky, the 6

FABEC States (Belgium; France; Germany; Luxembourg; The Netherlands

and Switzerland) have published for the second time a common perfor-

mance plan covering the second reference period (2015-2019).

The first performance plan (2012-2014) required only a safety per-

formance monitoring and reporting from States and ANSPs and set 5

objectives to be reached by the end of 2014.

Those objectives were addressing:

Ñ a determined level to be achieved in safety maturity for both

States and ANSPs;

Ñ the implementation of the Risk Analysis Tool;

Ñ the evaluation of added values of automated reporting

systems and;

Ñ a common understanding of safety performance related

definitions and processes.

http://www.eurocontrol.int/prudata/dashboard/pp_view_2014.html


The safety maturity has improved according the objective. The RAT is

now implemented in all ANSPs and is also implemented in the BCAA

to determine the overall severity of each related safety occurrence.

The only objective not being reached was the evaluation of automated

safety reporting system. This evaluation was not completed due to re-

ducing the ANSP budgets.

For the second reference period, targets have been set at EU-wide level

and at local level (national of FABEC).

EU-wide targets have been set on the two first KPIs (EoSM and RAT):

Ñ EoSM ANSPs: all ANSPs shall reach the level C in the safety

culture management objective and level D in all remaining

management objectives by the end of 2019;

Ñ EoSM States: all States shall reach the level C in all management

objectives by the end of 2019;

Ñ The RAT shall be used by the end of 2019 for 100% of all the

mandatory safety occurrences for the determination of the

ground value and for 80% for the determination of the overall

value (ground + airborne evaluation).

At FABEC level, with a distribution at national level, specific targets have

been set on the third KPI (Just Culture):

Ñ There will be an explicit Just Culture policy in all 7 FABEC

ANSPs formally endorsed by their respective management

and staff representatives and made public.

Ñ The 7 FABEC ANSPs will ensure that Subject Matter Experts are

involved in the determination of “unacceptable behaviour”.

Ñ In the case of self-reported occurrences, Just Culture policy

will ensure fair treatment of the reporter in accordance with

the principles of the Just Culture.

Ñ The 7 FABEC ANSPs will provide legal support for its own

staff in case of prosecution / legal action related to a safety

occurrence.

Ñ The 7 FABEC ANSPs will establish a well-known stress

management system.


Ñ The 7 FABEC ANSPs will ensure that actions are taken in

respect to staff after an occurrence to preserve in full the pay

and benefits of the staff member concerned until the end of

the investigation.

Ñ The ANSPs will ensure that relevant staff working in the

ANSP is trained on Just Culture elements. For that purpose,

the ANSPs will prepare with the NSAs the modules and the

training courses on Just culture in order to deliver as soon

as possible to the staff this training and to have a common

FABEC approach on Just Culture promotion.

Conclusions

For the second time, safety performance was assessed on defined key

performance indicators. The first reference period covering 2012 till

2014 should be considered as a test phase for the following reference

periods.

The current safety performance for both the Belgian State and

Belgocontrol shall be considered as very good. Improvements are al-

ways possible and willingness is visible on both sides to works towards

excellence.

Both the State and Belgocontrol will be ready for the second reference

period that will cover 5 years (2015 – 2019). During this period, targets

are defined at an EU-wide and national level and further performance

improvements are expected.


Appendix B: Acronyms and definitions

Acronyms

AAIU(Be) Air Accident Investigation Unit (Belgium)

AFIS aerodrome flight information service

ANS air navigation service

ANSP air navigation service provider

ASIL Aviation Safety Information Leaflet

ASR Annual Safety Review

ATC air traffic control

ATCO air traffic controller

ATS air traffic services

ATM SO air traffic management specific occurrences

AW aerial work

BASMG Belgian Aviation Safety Management Group

BASP Belgian Aviation Safety Program

BPAS Belgian Plan for Aviation Safety

BCAA Belgian Civil Aviation Authority

BCAA AAS BCAA Airspace, Airports and Supervision Directorate

BCAA OPS BCAA Operations Directorate

BCAA SAF BCAA Aviation Safety Inspectorate

BCAA S-MAS BCAA Management System Unit

BSA-ANS Belgian Supervising Authority for Air Navigation Services

BAWiHaC Belgian Aviation Wildlife Hazard Committee

CAT commercial air transport

CFIT controlled flight into terrain

EA emerging action

EAFDM European Authorities Coordination Group on Flight Data Monitoring

EAPPRI European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions

EASA European Aviation Safety Agency

EASP European Aviation Safety Program

EC European Commission

ECAST European Commercial Safety Team


ECCAIRS European Coordination Centre for Aviation Incident Reporting Systems

EGAST European General Aviation Safety Team

EHEST European Helicopter Aviation Safety Team

EPAS European Plan for Aviation Safety

EoSM effectiveness of safety management

ESSI European Strategic Safety Initiative

FABEC Functional Airspace Block Europe Central

FDM flight data monitoring

GA general aviation

GASP Global Aviation Safety Plan

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

JARUS Joint Authorities for Rulemaking of Unmanned Systems

JC Just Culture

KPI key performance indicators

LOC-I loss of control in flight

LRST local runway safety team

MAC mid-air collision

MST member state

NoA network of analysts

OA operational action

PRB Performance Review Body

RAMP region of aircraft movement and parking

RAT risk analysis tool

RE runway excursion

RI runway incursion

RP reference period

RPAS remotely piloted aircraft systems

SA systemic action

SARPs Standards and Recommended Practices

SMI separation minima infringement

SMICG Safety Management International Collaboration Group

SMS safety management system

SPI safety performance indicator

SPOC single point of contact

SSP State Safety Program

UAS unmanned aerial vehicle systems


Definitions

Aerial work

Aerial Work is an aircraft operation in which an aircraft is used for specialized services such as agriculture, construction, photography, surveying,

observation and patrol, search and rescue or aerial advertisement.

Airspace Infringement

Airspace infringement occurs when an aircraft penetrates an area into which special clearance is required without having such clearance.

Belgian Aviation Safety Program

The Belgian approach to the ICAO requirements of State Safety Programs. It contains an integrated set of regulations and activities to improve

safety within the Belgian State. The

latest version is available at http://mobilit.belgium.be/nl/luchtvaart/belgisch_veiligheidsprogramma/beleid_en_programma (Dutch version) and

http://mobilit.belgium.be/fr/transport_aerien/programme_belge_de_securite/politique_et_programme (French version)

Commercial air transport

Commercial air transport operations involve the transportation of passengers, cargo and mail for remuneration or hire.

http://mobilit.belgium.be/nl/luchtvaart/belgisch_veiligheidsprogramma/beleid_en_programma

http://mobilit.belgium.be/fr/transport_aerien/programme_belge_de_securite/politique_et_programme


Controlled Flight Into Terrain

Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) occurs when an airworthy aircraft under the complete control of the pilot is inadvertently flown into terrain,

water, or an obstacle. The pilots are generally unaware of the danger until it is too late.

European Aviation Safety Program

European regional approach to the ICAO requirements of State Safety Programs. It contains an integrated set of regulations and activi-

ties to improve safety within EASA Member States. The latest version is available at http://easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/safety-management/

safety-management-system/sms-europe.

General Aviation

General Aviation means all civil aviation operations other than commercial air transport or an aerial work operation.

Mid-air collision

A mid-air collision (MAC) is an accident where two aircraft come into contact with each other while both are in flight.

Local Runway Safety Team

Local Runway Safety Teams (LRSTs) are aerodrome-centric, multi-organizational groups of experts providing practical suggestions to resolve run-

way incursion causal factors.

http://easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/safety-management/safety-management-system/sms-europe

http://easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/safety-management/safety-management-system/sms-europe


Loss of Control In-Flight

Loss of control in-flight (LOC-I) usually occurs because the aircraft enters a flight regime which is outside its normal envelope, usually, but not

always at a high rate, thereby introducing an element of surprise for the flight crew involved.

Occurrences

Any safety-related event which endangers or which, if not corrected or addressed, could endanger an aircraft, its occupants or any other person

and includes in particular an accident or serious incident.

Runway excursion

According to the definition provided by ICAO, a runway excursion (RE) is a veer or overrun off the runway surface. Runway excursion events can

happen during take-off or landing.

Runway incursion

A runway Incursion (RI) is defined as ‘any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft vehicle or person on the pro-

tected area of a surface designated for the landing and take-off of aircraft’. (ICAO Doc 4444 - PANS-ATM)


Safety management system

A safety management system (SMS) is a systematic approach to manage safety, including the necessary organizational structures, accountabilities,

policies and procedures (ICAO). ICAO through various Annexes to the Chicago Convention has incorporated requirements for service providers in

various domains of aviation to have an SMS.

State Safety Program

According to the ICAO definition, a State Safety Program (SSP) it is an integrated set of regulations and activities aimed at improving safety. ICAO

requires contracting States to implement SSPs.


Appendix C:BCAA Risk Management Process

Process 3: periodic rIskanalysis of occurrences

Process 1 (SPOC):Data collection &

storage in ECCAIRS

Occurrence reports from the

aviation sector

Process 2: monthly BCAASafety Coordinators meetings

for the assessment of occurrences

Prioritize Risk Domains

Evaluation

Risk MitigationActions

Process 4: draw-up and realize theBelgian Plan for Aviation Safety (BPAS)

Action closed Action continues

Aviation Sector & BCAA Directorates

BCAA SafetyCommittee


Appendix D: BPAS August 2016 Status Report

This document provides the individual details concerning each of the BPAS action items. It includes the latest status of the implementation of each

action until August 2016.

The BPAS August 2016 Status Report is available at :






info

Belgian Civil Aviation Authority - Headquarters

City Atrium

Vooruitgangstraat / Rue du Progrès 56

1210 Brussel / Bruxelles

Tel: 32-(0)2-277.31.11

E-mail: [email protected]

Internet: www.mobilit.belgium.be

Useful Links

Federal Public Service Mobility and Transports : www.mobilit.belgium.be

ICAO: www.icao.int

EASA: www.easa.eu

Federal Public ServiceMobility and TransportBelgian Civil Aviation Authority

http://www.mobilit.belgium.be

http://www.icao.int

http://www.easa.eu

Documents

BELGIAN CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY - | Taalkeuze · In 2016, the focus will be on the development of a Just Culture climate and on the implementation of Regulation (EU) 376/2014 on