Anda di halaman 1dari 132

Introduction to the Safety Assessment

Methodology
A centre of excellence in ATM Training

SAF-SAM

NSA-SOSM

Copyright 2012 EUROCONTROL

05 - Supervision and Safety Oversight

Any use of this training material is subject to prior written consent by EUROCONTROL.
Requests shall be addressed to:
Head of the Institute of Air Navigation Services,
12, rue Antoine de Saint-Exupry,
L-1432 Kirchberg, Luxembourg.

The EUROCONTROL Institute of Air Navigation Services aims to provide the services that you want and to make your
stay in the Institute as enjoyable as possible. All Institute personnel are there to ensure that your stay at the Institute is
successful. However, if you do have a complaint (or a compliment) please tell us. If you are not satisfied with the
service we provide or you would like to propose an improvement then please fill out the form at
http://www.eurocontrol.int/ians/complaint.html, or contact IANS.complaints@eurocontrol.int directly.

Copyright 2012 EUROCONTROL

SAF-SAM Course
Table of content

Course Programme
Glossary
01 Introduction to Safety Management in ATM
02 ATM Safety Regulatory Framework
03 Key concepts of Risk Assessment and
Mitigation
04 Traffic Risk Exercise
05 Safety Assessment Methodology Overview
06 Initiation of ATM change safety assessment
07 Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety Objectives
08 Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety Objectives Exercise
09 Risk Mitigation Strategy of ATM Change
Design for Operations
10 Risk Mitigation Strategy of ATM Change
Design for Operations Exercise
11 Safety Verification and Validation
12 Risk Assessment and Mitigation of ATM
Change Implementation Exercise
13 Risk Assessment and Mitigation of ATM
Change Transfer into Operations Exercise
14 Safety Argument / Case Principles
15 Practicalities

DAY/TIME

09:00

10:00

12:30

Session
00
Monday
Course
Intro

Tuesday

Debrief
1st day

13:30

Debrief
2nd day

Session 02

Introduction to Safety Management


in ATM

ATM Safety Regulatory


Framework

Key Concepts of
Risk Assessment and
Mitigation

Session 06

Session 07

Initiation of ATM Change


Safety Assessment
Example

Hazard Identification,
Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Objectives

Session 04

Session 05

Road traffic
Exercise

Risk assessment and mitigation


Overview of SAM &
Fish tank Example

Session 10

Debrief
3rd day

Friday

Debrief
4th day

Session 09

Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and


Determination of Safety Objectives

Exercise

Safety
Verification and
Validation

Session 15
SAM
Assistant

Risk Mitigation Strategy of


ATM Change Design for
Operations

Session 14

Risk Assessment and Mitigation of


ATM Change Implementation

Exercise

Session 16
Practicalities

Risk Mitigation Strategy


of ATM Change Design
for Operations

Exercise

Session 13

Session 12

Session 11
Thursday

Session 03

Session 01

Session 08
Wednesday

17:00

Session 17

Session 18

Test &
Debrief

Course
Debrief

Risk Assessment and


Mitigation of ATM Change
Transfer into Operations

Exercise

12:00

Safety Argument / Case

Principles

Abbreviations and Acronyms useful for IANS SAF-SAM Training Course

AC, Ac
A-SMGCS
ACAS
ACAS-IR
ACC
ACID-IR
ADQ-IR (I)

AGL
AIC
AIP
AIS

ALARP
AMAN
AMC
ANS

ANSP
AO
APP
Arg
ARR
Art
ASBU
ASM

A-R

ATC

ATCO(s)
ATFCM

Aircraft
Advanced Surface Movement Ground Control Systems
Airborne Collision Avoidance System
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1332/2011 of 16 December 2011 laying down common
airspace usage requirements and operating procedures for airborne collision avoidance
an Area Control Centre (an en-route ATC unit)
Commission Regulation (EU) 1206/2011 of 22 November 2011 laying down
requirements on aircraft identification for surveillance for the single European sky
Commission Regulation (EU) No 73/2010 of 26 January 2010 laying down requirements
on the quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information for the SES this
regulation covers the production and distribution of such data/ info)
Aerodrome Ground Lighting
Aeronautical Information Circular
Aeronautical Information Publication
Aeronautical Information Service, a part of the air navigation services (ANS), meaning a
service established within the defined area of coverage responsible for the provision of
aeronautical information and data necessary for the safety, regularity, and efficiency of
air navigation
As Low As Reasonably Practicable
Arrival Manager
Acceptable Means of Compliance
Air Navigation Services, meaning air traffic services; communication, navigation and
surveillance services; meteorological services for air navigation; and aeronautical
information services
an organisation providing or offering to provide air navigation services
Airport Operator
an ATS Approach Unit (an ATSU)
Argument
Arrival
article (such as in a Regulation etc)
ICAO Aviation System Block Upgrades (coordinated approach to the introduction of
ATM solutions)
Airspace Management, a planning function with the primary objective of maximising the
utilisation of available airspace by dynamic time-sharing and, at times, the segregation of
airspace among various categories of airspace users on the basis of short-term needs
(EC) Regulation No 551/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10
March 2004 on the organisation and use of the airspace in the single European sky (the
airspace Regulation, one of the four main SES Regulations); as amended by Regulation
(EC) No 1070/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009
Air Traffic Control, meaning a service provided for the purpose of:
(a) preventing collisions:
between aircraft, and
in the manoeuvring area between aircraft and obstructions;
and
(b) expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of air traffic
air traffic controller(s)
Air Traffic Flow and Capacity Management (EUROCONTROL concept)

ATFM

ATFM-IR
ATIS
ATM

ATM/ANS

ATM/ANSP
ATS

ATSP
ATSU
AVISO
BALTIC FAB
BLUE MED

BOS
BR
CA

CA-IR

CAA
CANSO
CATF

CATF GM

CCA

Air Traffic Flow Management, an ATM function established with the objective of
contributing to a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic by ensuring that ATC
capacity is utilised to the maximum extent possible, and that the traffic volume is
compatible with the capacities declared by the appropriate air traffic service providers
Commission Regulation (EU) No 255/2010 laying down common rules on air traffic flow
management
Automatic Terminal Information Service
Air Traffic Management, meaning the aggregation of the airborne and ground-based
functions (air traffic services, airspace management and air traffic flow management)
required to ensure the safe and efficient movement of aircraft during all phases of
operations
Depending on the context:
Air Traffic Management (ATM) and Air Navigation Services (ANS) as
defined in Article 2(4) and 2(10) of the SES framework Regulation (F-R) see
ATM and ANS definitions separately
In accordance with EASA Basic Regulation: the air traffic management
functions as defined in Article 2(10) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, air
navigation services defined in Article 2(4) of that Regulation, and services
consisting in the origination and processing of data and formatting and
delivering data to general air traffic for the purpose of safety-critical air
navigation
an organisation providing ATM/ANS
Air Traffic Services (a part of ANS as well as of ATM), meaning the various flight
information services, alerting services, air traffic advisory services and ATC services
(area, approach and aerodrome control services)
An organisation providing or offering to provide air traffic services
an operational unit of an organisation providing air traffic services (e.g. an APP unit, an
aerodrome tower unit etc)
Aide la Visualisation Sol (a ground surveillance system used in France)
the BALTIC FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces within
responsibility of Poland and Lithuania
the BLUE MED FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces within
responsibility of Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Malta. Other non-EU States are associates and
observers to this FAB
Boston International airport (USA)
EASA Basic Regulation (see EASA BR)
Depending on the context, CA can refer to:
Conformity assessment (linked with interoperability)
Competent authority (an EASA concept)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2042/2003 of 20 November 2003 on the continuing
airworthiness of aircraft and aeronautical products, parts and appliances, and on the
approval of organisations and personnel involved in these tasks
a Civil Aviation Authority (e.g. as established in many States originally to fulfil the legal
obligations incurred by that State under the 1944 Chicago Convention)
Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation
Conformity Assessment Task Force; a EUROCONTROL forum which, inter-alia,
produced a widely coordinated Guidance Material for Conformity Assessment in the
context of SES interoperability
The EUROCONTROL Guidelines on conformity assessment for the interoperability
Regulation of the single European sky, version 3.0, available at
http://www.eurocontrol.int/ses/public/standard_page/conf_assessment.html
Common Cause Analysis

CCS-IR

CE (CE marking)

CEN
CENELEC
CFIT
COM

Contd
COTR-IR

CNS
CRD
CRs
CR-IR

CCS-IR

CS

CTR
CWP
DANUBE FAB
DEP
DFW
DK-SE FAB
DLS-IR
DoC
DoV
DSU
EAD
EASA
EASA BR
EASP
EATMN

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1794/2006 of 6 December 2006 laying down a common


charging scheme for air navigation services; as amended by Commission Regulation
(EU) No 1191/2010 of 16 December 2010
a mandatory conformity mark for products placed on the market in the European
Economic Area (EEA). With the CE marking on a product the manufacturer ensures that
the product conforms with the essential requirements of the applicable EC
directives/regulations. The letters CE stand for Conformit Europenne (European
conformity). Under the SES IOP-R, systems and their constituents are exempted from CE
marking (or CE affixing)
European Committee for Standardisation, one of three recognised ESO
European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation, one of three recognised ESO
Controlled Flight Into Terrain
Communication services, one of CNS services and a part of ANS; or, depending on
context, an abbreviation used in the references to Communications of the European
Commission (such as COM(2008)750 final, etc)
continued
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1032/2006 laying down requirements for automatic
systems for the exchange of flight data for the purpose of notification, coordination and
transfer of flights between air traffic control units
Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (services and/or systems & procedures), a
part of ANS
Comments Response Document (e.g. following consultation on an EASA NPA etc)
the common requirements for the provision of ANS iaw CR-IR
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1035/2011 laying down common requirements for the
provision of air navigation services and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2096/2005 and
amending Regulations (EC) No 482/2008 and (EU) No 691/2010
Commission Regulation No 1794/2006 of 6 December 2006 laying down a common
charging scheme for air navigation services, as amended by Commission Regulation
(EU) No 1191/2010 of 16 December 2010
Depending on the context:
- a Community Specification in relation to the interoperability regulation (No 552/2004);
or
- a Certification Specification in relation to the EASA framework;
Control Tower Region
Controller Working Position
the DANUBE FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces within
responsibility of Bulgaria and Romania
Departure
Dallas/Ft Worth international airport (USA)
The Danish/ Swedish FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces
within responsibility of Denmark and Sweden
Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 of 16 January 2009 laying down requirements
on data link services for the single European sky
an EC Declaration of Conformity iaw Article 5 IOP-R
an EC Declaration of Verification of systems iaw Article 6 IOP-R
a Declaration of suitability for use iaw Article 5 IOP-R
the European Aeronautical Information System Database
the European Aviation Safety Agency
the EASA Basic Regulation, Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 as variously amended
European Aviation Safety Programme
The European air traffic management network, a concept of eight systems in relation to
interoperability as defined in Annex 1 of IOP-R

EC

ECAA
ECAC
ECCAIRS
ECTRL
ED
e.g.
EN
EoSM
EP
ER, ERs

ERND
ESARR

ESARRs
ESARR 1
ESARR 2
ESARR 3
ESARR 4
ESARR 5
ESARR 6
ESO
ESSIP

ETSI
EU
EUIR
FAA
FAB(s)
FAB-IR
FAB CE

FABEC

Depending on the context:


the European Community (as in Regulation (EC) No. xxx/)
the European Commission (in all other cases)
European Common Aviation Agreement
European Civil Aviation Conference (usually used to refer to the ECAC Region,
comprising those States members of ECAC)
the European Co-ordination Centre for Aviation Incident Reporting System, a software
platform developed by the EU; also adopted for ADREP use in 2004
EUROCONTROL
EUROCAE document; a series of technical standards issued by EUROCAE
for example
European Norm (Standard)
the Effectiveness of Safety Management; a KPI developed under the PS-IR and measured
by a methodology based on the ATM Safety Framework Maturity Survey
the European Parliament
Depending on the context:
essential requirements (as defined in IOP-R)
essential requirements (as defined in the EASA basic regulation)
European Route Network Design (one of the three network functions iaw NF-IR)
one of six EUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory Requirement documents adopted under
the EUROCONTROL Revised Convention; Following the adoption of the SES I
legislative package, most of the contents of the six ESARRs has been transposed into the
SES legislation
a collective reference to the six ESARR documents
Safety Oversight in ATM, current edition 2.0 of December 2009
Reporting and Assessment of Safety Occurrences in ATM, current edition 3.0 of
December 2009
Use of Safety Management Systems by ATM Service Providers, current edition 1.0 of
July 2000
Risk Assessment and Mitigation in ATM, current edition 1.0 of April 2001
Safety Regulatory Requirement for ATM Services' Personnel, current edition 2.0 of April
2002
Software in ATM Functional Systems, current edition 2.0 of May 2010
European Standardisation Organisation; a recognised regional standardisation body under
Annex 1 of Directive 98/34/EC
The European Single Sky ImPlementation plan; a EUROCONTROL performanceoriented process that describes common implementation actions required to improve the
European ATM network over the next five to seven years
European Telecommunication Standards Institute, one of three recognised ESO
European Union
the foreseen European Upper Flight Information Region, a SES concept
the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States
Functional Airspace Block(s) established iaw Article 9a of SP-R
Commission Regulation (EC) No 176/2011 on the information to be provided before the
establishment and modification of a functional airspace block
FAB Central Europe, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces within
responsibility of the seven FAB CE States: Austria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia,
Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovak Republic and Slovenia
FAB Europe Central, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces within
responsibility of six FABEC States: Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg,
Netherlands and Switzerland

FAQ
FAROS
FAT
FC-IR

FDPS
FFPG
FHA
FIR
FIS
FL
FLS
FMTP

FMTP-IR

FOD
FPL
F-R

FUA
FUA-IR
FTA
GA

GAT
GM
GPS
GSN
HAL
HMI
HF
HW
Hz
IA-IR

IANS
IAW (iaw)

Frequently Asked Questions


Final Approach Runway Occupancy Signal
Factory Acceptance Tests
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 of 3 November 2011 laying down technical
requirements and administrative procedures related to civil aviation aircrew pursuant to
Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as
amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 290/2012 of 30 March 2012
flight data processing system (and procedures), referring to a sub-category of EATMN
system no. 3 (systems and procedures for ATS, iaw Annex I of IOP-R)
FAB Focal Points Group, one of the two SES Coordination Platforms organised by the
European Commission with support from EUROCONTROL (the 2nd one is NCP)
Functional Hazard Assessment
Flight Information Region (ICAO)
Flight Information Service, a part of ATS
Flight Level
Field Lighting System
Flight Message Transfer Protocol; FMTP is based on industry-standard Transmission
Control Protocol / Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) provisions; a community specification
associated to FMTP-IR
Commission Regulation (EC) No 633/2007 of 7 June 2007 laying down requirements for
the application of a flight message transfer protocol used for the purpose of notification,
coordination and transfer of flights between air traffic control units
Foreign Object Debris
Filed Flight Plan submitted by an aircraft
Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10
March 2004 laying down the framework for the creation of the single European sky (the
framework Regulation of the SES legislation); as amended by Regulation (EC) No
1070/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009
(The concept of) flexible use of airspace
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2150/2005 laying down common rules for the flexible
use of airspace
Fault Tree Analysis
General Aviation (one of the two categories of civil aviation), meaning all flights other
than military and scheduled airline and regular cargo flights, both private and
commercial. General aviation flights range from gliders and powered parachutes to large,
non-scheduled cargo jet flights (source: wikipedia).
General Air Traffic
Guidance Material
Global Positioning System
Goal Structuring Notation
Human Assurance Level
human machine interface (systems and procedures), referring to a sub-category of
EATMN system no. 3 (systems and procedures for ATS, iaw Annex I of IOP-R)
Human Factors
hardware
Hazard
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1702/2003 of 24 September 2003 laying down
implementing rules for the airworthiness and environmental certification of aircraft and
related products, parts and appliances, as well as for the certification of design and
production organisations
the EUROCONTROL Institute of Air Navigation Services in Luxembourg
in accordance with

ICAO
ICB

Id, ID
i.e.
IFPL

IFPL-IR
IFR
IMC
IOP
IOP-R

IOP-IRs
IR(s)

Km/h
KPA
KPI
L/U
LAX
LDG
LoA(s)
LoC
LSSIP
LVO
LVP
MAC
MET
METP
MIT
Mode S-IR
MoC

MS
MSAW

The International Civil Aviation Organization


The Industry Consultation Body established by the European Commission iaw Article 6
of the SES framework Regulation to advise the Commission on the implementation of the
SES. The ICB comprises representatives of the ANSPs, associations of airspace users,
airport operators, the manufacturing industry and professional staff representative bodies
Identifier
that is; from the Latin id est
refers to the procedures and requirements for the provision, processing and distribution of
FPLs in the pre-flight phase (preceding the 1st delivery of ATC clearance); a community
specification associated to IFPL-IR
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1033/2006 laying down the requirements on procedures
for flight plans in the pre-flight phase for the single European sky
Instrument Flight Rules (ICAO Annex 11); a flight may be conducted in accordance with
VFR or IFR; an IFR flight is a flight conducted in accordance with instrument flight rules
Instrumentent Meteorological Conditions
Interoperability
Regulation (EC) No 552/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10
March 2004 on the interoperability of the European Air Traffic Management network
(the interoperability Regulation, one of the four main SES Regulations); as amended by
Regulation (EC) No 1070/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21
October 2009
a collective reference to the implementing rules for interoperability (Commission
Regulations and Decisions adopting implementing rules within the framework of IOP-R)
implementing rule(s); in the SES and/or EASA context, these are usually implementing
measures adopted in the form of Commission Regulations or Decisions, complementing
or refining specific legal obligations and requirements laid down in the SES main
regulations, the EASA Basic Regulation or, depending of the legal basis, other EP and/or
Council acts such as regulations, directives, decisions
kilometers per hour
Key Performance Area, a concept in relation to ATM performance and the performance
scheme iaw PS-IR
Key Performance Indicator
Line Up
Los Angeles international Airport (USA)
Landing (usually used
Letter(s) of Agreement (such as between two ATSUs)
Loss of Control
the Local Single Sky ImPlementation documents coordinated by EUROCONTROL in the
ESSIP common framework
Low Visibility Operations
Low Visibility Procedures
Mid Air Collision
Meteorological service, an air navigation service
An organisation providing or offering to provide MET services
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Commission Regulation (EC) No 262/2009 of 30 March 2009 laying down requirements
for the coordinated allocation and use of Mode S interrogator codes for the SES
Means of Compliance; a generic reference to (usually) voluntary standards of which
application may ensure that specific binding requirements are met or fulfilled by an
activity, product or function
Member State(s) of the European Union
Minimum Safe Altitude Warning (a safety net in the ATC system)

MTBF
MUAC
NAA
NAV
N.B.
NBs
NCP
NEFAB

NF
NF-IR

NM
NOP
NOTAM
NPA

NRA
NSA
NSP
OAT
ODS
OJEU
OJTI
OLDI

OPS (ops)
OR
OSED
PAL
PANS
PANS-ATM
PAPI
PBN
PBN-IR
PP
PRB
PRC

Mean Time Between Failure


Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre
National Aviation Administration (as in the EASA framework)
Navigation services, one of CNS services and of ANS
nota bene
notified bodies, iaw IOP-R and IOP-IRs; NBs are accredited under the New Legislative
Framework
the NSA Coordination Platform, one of the two SES Coordination Platforms organised
by the European Commission with support from EUROCONTROL (the 2nd one is FFPG)
the North-European FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces
within responsibility of Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Norway; Denmark and Sweden
opted out of the NEFAB initiative in early 2011
the network functions, as defined in NF-IR
Commission Regulation (EC) No 677/2011 of 7 July 2011 laying down detailed rules for
the implementation of air traffic management (ATM) network functions and amending
Regulation (EU) No 691/2010 (the performance Regulation)
The nominated Network Manager of the SES iaw NF-IR
The Network Operations Plan developed by the Network Manager iaw NF-IR
Notice To Airmen
Notice of Proposed Amendment; in the EASA rule-making procedure, an NPA is issued
following the drafting of new or amended regulatory material, for the purpose of
consultation
a collective, generic reference to national regulatory authorities/ agencies
a National Supervisory Authority nominated or established iaw Article 4 of the F-R
The Network Strategy Plan developed by the Network Manager iaw NF-IR
Operational Air Traffic; in other words, other than General Air Traffic (GAT) air traffic
which is not operated in accordance with the ICAO SARPs and procedures
Operational Display System
the Official Journal of the European Union
On the Job Training Instructor
On-Line Data Interchange, a community specification in association to COTR-IR; OLDI
specifies the facilities and messages to be provided between FDPSs serving ATC units
for the purpose of, inter-alia, notification of flights, coordination prior to transfer of flight
to next unit, civil-military coordination, situational awareness, transfer of communication
of such flights, support to A/G datalink etc
depending on context, operations (e.g. flight operations), operational, or relating to
operations/ operational
operational requirements, as defined in NF-IR
Operational Service and Environnment Description
Procedure Assurance Level
ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation Services
ICAO Doc 4444, Procedures for Air Navigation Services Air Traffic Management
Precision Approach Path Indicator
Performance Based Navigation
Commission (EU) Regulation (under development) laying down the requirements for
performance based navigation within the SES
performance plan, in accordance with PS-IR
The designated Performance Review Body of the SES in accordance with Article 11(2)
of the SES framework Regulation (in relation with the performance scheme, PS-IR)
The Performance Review Commission established under the EUROCONTROL Revised
Convention; The PRC and the PRB of the SES conduct their activities in close
consultation and synergy.

PS
PS-IR
PSC
PSSA
QE

QMS
R&D
R/T
RAT
RCS
RDPS
Reg, Reg.
REL
RIL
RIMCAS
RoP
RP, RP1 etc

RWSL
RWY
SAFA
SAM
SARPs
SAT
SC

SCDM
SERA-IR
SES
SES I
SES II

SESAR
SESAR JU, SJU

The SES Performance Scheme, as per Article 11 F-R and PS-IR


Commission Regulation (EC) No 691/2010 laying down a performance scheme for air
navigation services and network functions and amending Regulation (EC) No 2096/2005
Project Safety Case
Preliminary System Safety Assessment
a Qualified Entity to which an NSA may decide to delegate in full or in part supervisory
tasks (e.g. iaw Article 3 of SP-R or SO-IR); QEs were formerly referred to as recognised
organisations in SES I
Quality Management System
research and development
Radio telecommunications
Risk Analysis Tool, in relation to one of the KPIs for safety in the implementation of the
performance scheme (PS-IR)
Risk Classification Scheme
Radar Data Processing System
Regulation (as in Regulation (EC) No 550/)
Runway Entry Lights (a concept of the Runway Status Light RWSL system)
Runway Intersection Lights (a concept of the Runway Status Light RWSL system)
Runway Incursion Monitoring and Conflict Alert System
rules of procedure (of a group, task force, committee etc)
a reference period in the frame of the performance scheme (PS-IR). RP1, the 1st
reference period, is set from 01 January 2012 until 31 December 2014. RP2 and
following reference periods will be of five calendar years each, unless decided otherwise
through amendments to PS-IR
Runway Status Light
Runway
Safety Assessment of Foreign Aircraft; an EU programme coordinated by EASA for the
assessment of the safety of foreign aircraft operations at EU airports
Safety Assessment Methodology
a collective reference to the ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices laid down in
the 18 Annexes to the 1944 Chicago Convention on international civil aviation
Site Acceptance Tests
Depending on the context:
- Safety Case
- Severity Class (usually followed by a number ranging from 1 to 5)
Safety Case Development Manual
Commission Regulation laying down standardised European rules of the air (under
development)
the Single European Sky, an initiative introduced by the SES I legislative package
the first legislative package of the single European sky (2004) of four EC Regulations of
the European Parliament and of the Council (see F-R, SP-R, A-R and IOP-R)
the 2nd legislative package of the single European sky (2009) comprised of
- Regulation (EC) No 1070/2009 of 21 October 2009 of the European Parliament and of
the Council amending the four regulations of the 1st SES package in order to improve
the performance and sustainability of the European aviation system; and
- Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009 of 21 October 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No
216/2008 (the EASA Basic Regulation) in the field of aerodromes, air traffic
management and air navigation services and repealing Directive 2006/23/EC
the Single European Sky Aviation Research programme
the SESAR Joint Undertaking, the single managing entity for the SESAR development
phase (2008-2013), established by Council Reg. (EC) No 219/2007 of 27 Feb 2007

SMI
SMR
SMS
SO

SO-IR

SOCS
SOP
SP-R

SPR
SPI-IR
SR
SRR(s)
SSA
SSC
SSP
STCA
STL
SUR
SW
SW FAB
SWAL
SWIM
T/O
TCAS
TEU
TF
TFEU

THL
TLS
TMA
ToR
TWR
TWY
UIR

Separation Minima Infringement


Surface Movement Radar
Safety Management System
depending on the context:
- safety objective (in most of the cases)
- safety oversight
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011 on safety oversight in air traffic
management and air navigation services, replacing Commission Regulation (EC) No
1315/2007 and amending Commission Regulation (EU) No 691/2010
Safety Objective Classification Scheme
Standard Operating Procedures
Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10
March 2004 on the provision of air navigation services in the single European sky (the
service provision Regulation, one of the four main SES Regulations); as amended by
Regulation (EC) No 1070/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21
October 2009
Safety and Performance Requirements
Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1207/2011 laying down requirements for the
performance and the interoperability of surveillance for the single European sky
Safety Requirement
safety regulatory requirement(s), as defined in Article 2 SO-IR
System Safety Assessment
the Single Sky Committee, the comitology forum which assists and oversees the
European Commission implementing measures under the SES framework
a States Safety Programme (ICAO); also related to the application of the PS-IR in the
safety KPA
Short Term Conflict Alert (a safety net in the ATC system)
Saint Louis international airport (USA)
surveillance services, one of CNS services and of ANS
software
the South-West FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined airspaces within
responsibility of Portugal and Spain
Software Assurance Level
System Wide Information Management
Take Off
Traffic Collision Avoidance System
Treaty on the European Union, one of several founding treaties of the European Union
and of the European Communities
a technical file accompanying a DoV iaw Article 6 IOP-R
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; The title of the 'Treaty establishing the
European Community' was replaced by 'Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(iaw Treaty of Lisbon article 21, as of 1st December 2009 date of entry into force of the
Lisbon Treaty)
Take-off Hold Lights (a concept of the Runway Status Light RWSL system)
Target Level of Safety
Terminal control area (ICAO Annex 11, Air Traffic Services)
Terms of Reference (e.g. of a group, forum, committee, body etc)
(aerodrome) tower unit (an ATS unit)
Taxiway
Upper Flight Information Region (ICAO)

UK-IE FAB

UCS
USC
UTP
VCS-IR
VFR
WTA

The United Kingdom/ Ireland FAB, one of nine FAB initiatives, comprising defined
airspaces within responsibility of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern
Ireland and Ireland
Unit Competence Scheme
Unit Safety Case
Unit Training Plan
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1265/2007 of 26 October 2007 laying down
requirements on air-ground voice channel spacing for the single European sky
Visual Flight Rules (ICAO); a flight may be conducted in accordance with VFR or IFR
Wake Turbulence Induced Accident

10

Introduction to Safety Management


Session 01

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

What is the role of ATM?


What is Safety?
Why are ATM Services safe?
How does ATM contribute to Safety?
Why do we need Safety Assessment?
What are the future challenges?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Role of ATM?

To prevent Air and Ground


Collision

To manage traffic in an
orderly and efficient way

ATM is the aggregation of


ground based (comprising
ATS, ASM, ATFM) and
airborne functions required to
ensure the safe and efficient
movement of aircraft during all
phases of operations

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety and Security

Safety: Freedom from the unacceptable


risk of unintended harm
Harm means accident with fatalities or
serious injuries to human, or structural
damage to aircraft

Security: Freedom from the


unacceptable risk of intended harm

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Question:
Why is your ANS / ATM safe?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Why Safety Management System?

Video of berlingen accident

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Swiss Cheese Model

Model developed by J. Reason


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Swiss Cheese Model

H
A
Z
A
R
D
S

LATENT CONDITIONS

I A
NC
CC
I I
DD
EE
NN
T T
Model developed by J. Reason
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

What is Safety Management


Formalised,
explicit and
proactive
approach to
systematic safety
Process for
managing safety
risks

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

SMS Components
SMS

Occurrences
Competency
Ext. services

Lesson
Dissemination
Risk Assessment
and Mitigation

Safety
Responsibilities

Surveys
Monitoring
Records

QMS Internal Audits, Documentation Control System, external


services, elimination of causes of non conformities, etc.
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

Question:
Why is your ANS / ATM safe?

On-going ATM Services / Systems


Changes to ATM Services / Systems
New ATM Services / Systems

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

ATM Changes

Operational Environment is changing!

Systems / Services are changing!


Shall we remain acceptably safe?
If Change #1 is acceptably safe and Change
#2 is acceptably safe, are Changes #1 & #2
acceptably safe?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Traffic Growth in ECAC Region


.

2000

2020

8.0 Million Flights

16.0 Million Flights

Traffic tripled over last 25 years


Traffic may double over next 20 years

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Figures

14

Traffic & Accidents


One accident
per week!
Traffic grows

Accident rate is
stable

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

ATC Tools Change


From Paper Flight Strips

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

16

ATC Tools Change

to Electronic Flight Strips


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

ANS/ATM Evolution Change

Past

Today

Future

Procedural Control

Radar Control

the current and planned a/c


positions

Know the current and


estimate planned a/c
positions

Trajectory
Management

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Know & share the current


& planned a/c positions

18

SES Interoperability Regulations


Framework Reg.

Service Provision Reg.

Airspace Reg.

EC 549/2004 & 1070/2009

EC 550/2004 & 1070/2009

EC 551/2004 & 1070/2009

Interoperability
Reg.
EC 552/2004 & 1070/2009

Reg. 1032/2006 - Requirements for automatic systems for exchange of flight data for notification,
coord. & transfer of flights between ATC units
Reg. 1033/2006 - Requirements. for flight plans in the pre-flight phase
Reg. 633/2007 - Requirements for the application of a FMTP used for [] notification, coordination
and transfer of flights between ATC units
Reg. 1265/2007 - Requirements on A/G voice channel spacing
Reg. 29/2009 - Requirements on datalink services for the SES
Reg. 30/2009 amending Reg. 1032/2006 re the req. for automatic systems for exchange of flight data
supporting datalink services
Reg. 262/2009 - Requirements for the coordinated allocation and use of Mode S interrogator codes
for the SES
Reg. 73/2010 - Requirements on the quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information for
the SES (Part I)
Reg. 1207/2011 Reqs. on Surveillance Performance and IOP (SPI)
Reg. 1206/2011 - Requirements on Aircraft Identification (ACID)
Reg. xxx/201x ADQ II & PBN (under development)
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

SESAR ATM System

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

20

SESAR Operational Concept 2020


Business
trajectories
More
automation
support

Enhanced
information
management

SESAR
More strategic
planning

Change of
roles
Increased
flexibility
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

21

SESAR Performance Targets

Enabling EU skies
to handle 3 times
more traffic

Improving safety
by a factor of 10

Reducing
the environmental
impact
per flight by 10%

Cutting ATM
costs by 50%

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

22

Defragmentation - FABs

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

23

ATM Challenges
Environmental Impact
Delays

Security

Capacity

Single European Sky

Safety

Cost-efficiency
Flight efficiency

New Technologies
Fragmentation
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

24

Summary

What is the role of ATM?


What is Safety?
Why are ATM Services safe?
How does ATM contribute to Safety?
Why do we need Safety Assessment?
What are the future challenges?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

25

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

26

Safety Regulatory Framework


Session 02

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

SES, Eurocontrol and EASA frameworks


EASA Total Aviation System Approach in Safety
EASA Basic Regulation
Essential Requirements for ATM/ANS

Performance scheme
Safety Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Common Requirements on:


SMS
Risk assessment and mitigation of changes

Safety Oversight Requirements related to changes

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Single European Sky II

(2009)

Framework
Reg. (F-R)

Service Provision
Reg. (SP-R)

Airspace Reg.
(A-R)

Interoperability
Reg. (IOP-R)

Reg. 549/2004 & 1070/2009

Reg. 550/2004 & 1070/2009

Reg. 551/2004 & 1070/2009

Reg. 552/2004 & 1070/2009

Foundation of SES
ATM Master Plan
National
Supervisory
Authority (NSA)
Concept of
Implementing Rule
Industry
Consultation Body
(ICB)
Single Sky
Committee (SSC)
EUROCONTROL
Performance
scheme
EASA

NSA Tasks
Qualified Entities
Common requirements
Certification of ANSPs
Designation of ATSPs,
possibly of METPs
FAB Requirements
Charging Scheme for
common projects

Airspace
Classification

List of systems

European Upper
Flight Information
Region (EUIR)

Implementing Rules

Electronic
aeronautical
information

Conformity assessment
(DoC/DSU & DoV)

Rules of the Air


Network
Management
(incl. ATFM,
route design and
scarce
resources)

Essential Requirements
Community specifications

Alternative Verification of
Compliance
Notified bodies

Flexible use of
airspace
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

EASA Total Aviation System Approach in Safety

ATM/ANS

Aerodromes

Flight Crew Licensing

Flight Operations

Airworthiness

Former EASA Remit (Reg. 216/2008)

Current EASA Remit (Reg. 1108/2009)


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

New Tasks of EASA in ATM/ANS

Development of implementing measures with regard to


ATM/ANS and aerodromes

Safety Oversight of
3rd country ATM/ANSPs
Pan-European ATM/ANSPs
MS Competent Authorities (through standardisation
inspections)

Certification of
3rd country ANSPs
Pan-European ANSPs
ATCO Training organisations located outside EU
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Certification Specifications (CS) *

Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC)

FC-IR (Reg. 1178/2011)


IA-IR (Reg. 1702/2003 as variously amended)
CA-IR (Reg. 2042/2003 as variously amended)

ACAS-IR (Reg. 1332/2011)


ATCO-IR (Reg. 805/2011)
SO-IR (Reg. 1034/2011 repealing Reg. 1315/2007)
CR-IR (Reg. 1035/2011 repealing Reg. 2096/2005)

COTR-IR (Reg. 1032/2006 amended by Reg. 30/2009)


IFP-IR (Reg. 1033/2006)
FMTP-IR (Reg. 633/2007)
VCS-IR (Reg. 1265/2007)
DL-IR (Reg. 29/2009)
Mode S-IR (Reg. 262/2009)
ADQ I-IR (Reg. 73/2010)
Decision Exemptions under Art. 14 of DL-IR

EASA
Framework

Decision setting EU-wide performance targets and alert


thresholds (21/02/2011)
Decision Designation of
ECTRL as PRB (29/07/2010)
PS-IR (Reg. 691/2010 amended by Reg. 1216/2011)

SW-IR (Reg. 482/2008)


FAB-IR (Reg. 1765/2011)
CCS-IR (Reg. 1794/2006 amended by Reg. 1191/2010)
Decision Designation of Georg Jarzembovski as
FABs system coordinator (12/08/2010)

FUA-IR (Reg. 2150/2005)


AC-IR (Reg. 730/2006)
ATFM-IR (Reg. 255/2010)
NF-IR (Reg. 677/2011)
Decision Nomination of ECTRL as network manager

SES Framework

Binding

Implementing Rules (IR)

7
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

F-R

SP-R

A-R

IOP-R

EASA BR

(Reg. 549/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 550/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 551/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 552/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 216/2008
amended by Reg.
1108/2009)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Non-Binding

Implementing Measures

EASA Terminology

Basic Regulation (BR)

Soft Law
Law

Guidance Material (GM)

* CS are made binding through certification basis

http://easa.europa.eu/regulations/regulationshttp://easa.europa.eu/regulations/regulations-structure.php

SES and EASA Frameworks in ATM/ANS

SES and EASA Frameworks in ATM/ANS


F-R

SP-R

A-R

IOP-R

EASA BR
(Reg. 549/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 550/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 551/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 552/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 216/2008
amended by Reg.
1108/2009)

FC-IR (Reg. 1178/2011)


IA-IR (Reg. 1702/2003 as variously amended)
CA-IR (Reg. 2042/2003 as variously amended)

ACAS-IR (Reg. 1332/2011)


ATCO-IR (Reg. 805/2011)
SO-IR (Reg. 1034/2011 repealing Reg. 1315/2007)
CR-IR (Reg. 1035/2011 repealing Reg. 2096/2005)
COTR-IR (Reg. 1032/2006 amended by Reg. 30/2009)
IFP-IR (Reg. 1033/2006)
FMTP-IR (Reg. 633/2007)
VCS-IR (Reg. 1265/2007)
DL-IR (Reg. 29/2009)
Mode S-IR (Reg. 262/2009)
ADQ I-IR (Reg. 73/2010)
Decision Exemptions under Art. 14 of DL-IR

EASA
Framework

Decision setting EU-wide performance targets and alert


thresholds (21/02/2011)
Decision Designation of
ECTRL as PRB (29/07/2010)
PS-IR (Reg. 691/2010 amended by Reg. 1216/2011)

SW-IR (Reg. 482/2008)


FAB-IR (Reg. 1765/2011)
CCS-IR (Reg. 1794/2006 amended by Reg. 1191/2010)
Decision Designation of Georg Jarzembovski as
FABs system coordinator (12/08/2010)

FUA-IR (Reg. 2150/2005)


AC-IR (Reg. 730/2006)
ATFM-IR (Reg. 255/2010)
NF-IR (Reg. 677/2011)
Decision Nomination of ECTRL as network manager

SES Framework

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

ERs
for
ATS
(from
EASA
BR)

ERs for CNS (from EASA BR)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

ERs for ATM/ANS Systems & Constituents (1)


(from EASA BR)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

ERs for ATM/ANS Systems & Constituents (2)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

ERs for ATM/ANS Systems & Constituents (3)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

SES and EASA Frameworks in ATM/ANS

3 Safety KPIs
1. Effectiveness of Safety Management
SP-R

A-R

IOP-R

EASA BR
(Reg. 550/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 551/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 552/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 216/2008
amended by Reg.
1108/2009)

EASA AMC/GM on implementation and measurement of Safety KPIs

15
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

16

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

FC-IR (Reg. 1178/2011)


IA-IR (Reg. 1702/2003 as variously amended)
CA-IR (Reg. 2042/2003 as variously amended)

4 Key Performance Areas (KPAs) including safety

ACAS-IR (Reg. 1332/2011)


ATCO-IR (Reg. 805/2011)
SO-IR (Reg. 1034/2011 repealing Reg. 1315/2007)
CR-IR (Reg. 1035/2011 repealing Reg. 2096/2005)
COTR-IR (Reg. 1032/2006 amended by Reg. 30/2009)
IFP-IR (Reg. 1033/2006)
FMTP-IR (Reg. 633/2007)
VCS-IR (Reg. 1265/2007)
DL-IR (Reg. 29/2009)
Mode S-IR (Reg. 262/2009)
ADQ I-IR (Reg. 73/2010)
Decision Exemptions under Art. 14 of DL-IR
FUA-IR (Reg. 2150/2005)
AC-IR (Reg. 730/2006)
ATFM-IR (Reg. 255/2010)
NF-IR (Reg. 677/2011)
Decision Nomination of ECTRL as network manager

SW-IR (Reg. 482/2008)


FAB-IR (Reg. 1765/2011)
CCS-IR (Reg. 1794/2006 amended by Reg. 1191/2010)
Decision Designation of Georg Jarzembovski as
FABs system coordinator (12/08/2010)

EASA
Framework
SES Framework

Decision setting EU-wide performance targets and alert


thresholds (21/02/2011)
Decision Designation of
ECTRL as PRB (29/07/2010)
PS-IR (Reg. 691/2010 amended by Reg. 1216/2011)

No EU-wide quantitative targets set


States can set targets for themselves and/or add new Safety KPIs

F-R

(Reg. 549/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

Performance Scheme & Safety KPIs


(PS-IR Reg. 691/2010)

2. Risk assessment of ATM occurrences (RAT)

3. Reporting of Just Culture

http://www.easa.eu.int/agency-measures/acceptable-means-of-compliance-andguidance-material.php#SKPI

SES and EASA Frameworks in ATM/ANS


F-R

SP-R

A-R

IOP-R

EASA BR
(Reg. 549/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 550/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 551/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 552/2004
amended by Reg.
1070/2009)

(Reg. 216/2008
amended by Reg.
1108/2009)

FC-IR (Reg. 1178/2011)


IA-IR (Reg. 1702/2003 as variously amended)
CA-IR (Reg. 2042/2003 as variously amended)

ACAS-IR (Reg. 1332/2011)


ATCO-IR (Reg. 805/2011)
SO-IR (Reg. 1034/2011 repealing Reg. 1315/2007)
CR-IR (Reg. 1035/2011 repealing Reg. 2096/2005)
COTR-IR (Reg. 1032/2006 amended by Reg. 30/2009)
IFP-IR (Reg. 1033/2006)
FMTP-IR (Reg. 633/2007)
VCS-IR (Reg. 1265/2007)
DL-IR (Reg. 29/2009)
Mode S-IR (Reg. 262/2009)
ADQ I-IR (Reg. 73/2010)
Decision Exemptions under Art. 14 of DL-IR
FUA-IR (Reg. 2150/2005)
AC-IR (Reg. 730/2006)
ATFM-IR (Reg. 255/2010)
NF-IR (Reg. 677/2011)
Decision Nomination of ECTRL as network manager

SW-IR (Reg. 482/2008)


FAB-IR (Reg. 1765/2011)
CCS-IR (Reg. 1794/2006 amended by Reg. 1191/2010)
Decision Designation of Georg Jarzembovski as
FABs system coordinator (12/08/2010)

Decision setting EU-wide performance targets and alert


thresholds (21/02/2011)
Decision Designation of
ECTRL as PRB (29/07/2010)
PS-IR (Reg. 691/2010 amended by Reg. 1216/2011)

17
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

18

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

EASA
Framework
SES Framework

Common Requirements (CR-IR Reg. 1035/2011)


SMS

Annex II (Specific Requirements for the


Provision of Air Traffic Services)
3. SAFETY OF SERVICES
3.1. Safety management system
3.1.1. General safety requirements
A provider of air traffic services shall, as
an integral part of the management of its
services, have in place a safety
management system (SMS) []

Common Requirements (CR-IR Reg. 1035/2011)


Risk Assessment and Mitigation of Changes

Annex II
3. SAFETY OF SERVICES
3.1. Safety management system
3.1.2. Requirements for safety achievement
Ensure that risk assessment and mitigation is
conducted to an appropriate level to ensure that due
consideration is given to all aspects of the provision
of ATM (risk assessment and mitigation).
As far as changes to the ATM functional system are
concerned, the provisions of part 3.2 of this Annex
shall apply.
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

Common Requirements (CR-IR Reg. 1035/2011)


Risk Assessment and Mitigation of Changes

3.2. Safety requirements for risk assessment


and mitigation with regard to changes
3.2.1. Section 2
The hazard identification, risk assessment and
mitigation processes shall include:
(a) a determination of the scope, boundaries
and interfaces of the constituent part being
considered, as well as the identification of the
functions that the constituent part is to
perform and the environment of operations
in which it is intended to operate;
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

20

Common Requirements (CR-IR Reg. 1035/2011)


Risk Assessment and Mitigation of Changes
(b) a determination of the safety objectives to be placed
on the constituent part, incorporating:
- an identification of ATM-related credible hazards
and failure conditions, together with their combined
effects,
- an assessment of the effects they may have on the
safety of aircraft, as well as an assessment of the
severity of those effects, using the severity
classification scheme set out in Section 4,
- a determination of their tolerability, in terms of the
hazards maximum probability of occurrence,
derived from the severity and the maximum probability
of the hazards effects, in a manner consistent with
Section 4;
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

21

Common Requirements (CR-IR Reg. 1035/2011)


Risk Assessment and Mitigation of Changes
(c) the derivation, as appropriate, of a risk mitigation strategy which:
- specifies the defences to be implemented to protect against the
risk-bearing hazards,
- includes, as necessary, the development of safety requirements
potentially bearing on the constituent part under consideration, or
other parts of the ATM functional system, or environment of
operations, and
- presents an assurance of its feasibility and effectiveness;
(d)verification that all identified safety objectives and safety
requirements have been met:
- prior to its implementation of the change,
- during any transition phase into operational service,
- during its operational life, and
- during any transition phase until decommissioning.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

22

Common Requirements (CR-IR Reg. 1035/2011)


Risk Assessment and Mitigation of Changes
3.2.3. Section 3
The results, associated rationales and evidence of the risk
assessment and mitigation processes, including hazard
identification, shall be collated and documented in a manner which
ensures that:
- complete arguments are established to demonstrate that the
constituent part under consideration, as well as the overall ATM
functional system are, and will remain tolerably safe by meeting
allocated safety objectives and requirements. This shall include, as
appropriate, specifications of any predictive, monitoring or survey
techniques being used,
- all safety requirements related to the implementation of a change
are traceable to the intended operations/functions.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

23

Requirements on SMS and Risk Assessment and


Mitigation of Changes Summary

CR-IR (Reg. 1035/2011) require Service


Providers to:
Implement a Safety Management System
(SMS)
Perform safety assessments on any change to
the ATM system
Document these safety assessments
(argument + evidence)
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

24

Safety Oversight Requirements Related to


Changes (Reg. 1034/2011)
Article 9 (Safety Oversight of Changes to Functional Systems)
1. Organisations shall only use procedures accepted by relevant competent
authority when deciding whether to introduce a safety-related change to
their functional systems. []
2. Organisations shall notify the relevant competent authority of all
planned safety related changes.[]
Article 10 (Review Procedure of the Proposed Changes)
1. Competent authorities shall review the safety arguments associated
with new functional systems or changes to existing functional systems
proposed by an organisation when:
(a) the severity assessment conducted in accordance with Annex II,
point 3.2.4 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1035/2011 determines a
severity class 1 or a severity class 2 for the potential effects of the
hazards identified; or
(b) the implementation of the changes requires the introduction of new
aviation standards.
3. The introduction into service of the change under consideration in the
review shall be subject to acceptance by competent authorities.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

25

Summary

SES, Eurocontrol and EASA frameworks


EASA Total Aviation System Approach in Safety
EASA Basic Regulation
Essential Requirements for ATM/ANS

Performance scheme
Safety Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Common Requirements on:


SMS
Risk assessment and mitigation of changes

Safety Oversight Requirements related to changes

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

26

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

27

Key Concepts for Safety Assessments


Session 03

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

What is a risk?
What is a Risk Classification Scheme?
Safety criteria
ATM-related categories of accidents
ATM-related hazards
How safe do we need to be?
Success and failure perspective

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Risk in various areas

What types?
Safety
Financial
Environmental
Legal
Security

Who is exposed?
Individuals
Companies
Society

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Hazard and Safety Risk


Likelihood

HAZARD

of hazards

Hazard Effects

Likelihood

with Severity

of effects

RISK of incidents / accidents

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Risk of what?
Likelihood / Probability

Initiating
Event /
Failure

ATM

Major

Serious

Hazard

Incident

Incident

Accident

Severity increases
Hazard Prevention

Hazard Protection / Recovery


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Severity of Effects

SEVERITY 2

SEVERITY 3

SEVERITY 4

SEVERITY 5

ACCIDENTS
INCREASING SEVERITY

SEVERITY 1

SERIOUS INCIDENTS

MAJOR INCIDENTS

SIGNIFICANT INCIDENTS

NO IMMEDIATE EFFECT ON SAFETY

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Severity Classification Scheme


(Reg. 1035/2011 Repealing 2096/2005)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Frequency of Occurrence of Effects

How often?
Once every

Decreasing Frequency

10-2/h

10-3/h

10-4/h

10-5/h

10-6/h

3 days

month

year

decade

century

Very
frequent

Frequent

Rare

Extremely
Rare

Likely

Illustrative only
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Use of Appropriate Units


Per
Movement

Per
operational
hour per
sector

Per mission

Per month,
year
Per Flight Hour
Per
operational
hour

DEPENDENT ON SYSTEM

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

A Typical Transportation Risk Comparison

deaths per 106 journeys

deaths per 1010 psgr - km

540

11

30

Air

30

Train

Bus

60

United Kingdom 1970-1989

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

A Typical Transportation Risk Comparison


Means of
transport

Killed passengers
by 100 million
passenger-kilometers
1999

Means of
transport

2001-2002

Killed passengers
by 100 million
passenger-hours
1999

2001-2002

Motocyclette/
cyclomotor

16

13,8

Pedestrian
displacement

7,5

6,4

Bicycle

6,3

5,4

Convey

0,8

0,7

30

25

0,33

0,25

Air (civil aviation)

36,5

16

Ferry

10,5

Ferry

Motocyclette/cycl
omotor

500

440

Bicycle

90

75

Pedestrian
displacement

30

25

Convey

Bus and coach

0,08

0,07

Air (civil aviation)

0,08

0,035

Bus and coach

Train

0,04

0,035

Train

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

Some Individual Fatality Risks

Hazardous situation

Fatalities per million


per year

Probability of
fatality per year

road user
car driver
while at work
falling aircraft

0.02

2*10-8

resident near chemical plant


smoking 20 cigarettes/day

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Some Individual Fatality Risks

Hazardous situation

Fatalities per million Probability of


per year
fatality per year
-4

road user

100

10

car driver

150

1.5x10

while at work

10

10

falling aircraft

0.02

2x10

resident near chemical plant

35

3.5x10-5

smoking 20 cigarettes/day

5000

5x10

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

-4

-5
-8

-3

14

Risk Acceptability

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

Factors Affecting Risk Perception

Visibility of benefits
News headlines
Harm caused by accident
Personal experience
Personal control
Uncertainty
Time-delayed effects
Human vs natural causes
Confidence in operator / regulator

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

16

Risk Perception Exercise


Unknown
A way of representing the way
people feel about risk is to place
the risk on a matrix which shows
if they rate as fear or not fear,
known or unknown.

Food colouring
X

This is shown here for the risks


posed by asbestos, food
colouring, fireworks and crime.
The exercise is to place on the
matrix your perception of the
risks posed by:
1)

Nuclear power

2)

Commercial aviation

3)

Mobile Phones

4)

Pesticides in Food

X Asbestos
Not Fear

Fear

X
Crime

X
Fireworks

C
Known risk

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

Common Risk Acceptability Levels


SEVERITY OF
EFFECTS

ATM Accident

UNACCEPTABLE
RISKS

RI
SK

Serious
Incident
Major
Incident
Significant
Incident

ACCEPTABLE
RISKS
Target Level
of Safety 1
(TLS1)

TLS2

TLS3

TLS4

FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF EFFECTS


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

18

Example of Risk Matrix / RCS


Frequency of Occurrence of Effect
Extremely
Unlikely
(TLS1)

Unlikely
(TLS2)

Occasional
(TLS3)

Effect
SC 1
Severity
SC 2

Likely
(TLS4)

Frequent

UNACCEPTABLE

SC 3
SC 4

ACCEPTABLE

SC 5

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

Safety Criteria

Absolute
Against an absolute Target Level of Safety
(TLS)

Relative
As safe as before or safer than before

Reductive
As Low as Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

20

How safe do we need to be and remain?

ICAO Target Levels of Safety (TLS)

ATM 2000+: risk of an accident not to increase (with time) and preferably
decrease

ESARR 4: risk of an accident with ATM contribution not higher than 1.55e-8 per
fligh-hour (up to 2015)

SES CIR 1035/2011:


To minimize the risk of aircraft accident as far as reasonably practicable
Safety objectives based on risk shall be established in terms of the hazards
maximum probability of occurrence, derived both from the severity of its effect,
and from the maximum probability of the hazards effect

National RCS

ANSP Safety Performance Targets and Safety KPI


E.g. MUAC (from Annual Safety Report 2010):
Objective: Minimize MUAC contribution to the risk of a air traffic accident
Primary goal (SPI): Zero Accident and Separation Minima Infringements (SMI)
5 SMI (Severity A & B) per year
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

21

Safety Performance Targets and Indicators

SES Safety KPI (from Reg. 691/2010):


1. Effectiveness of Safety Management
2. Risk assessment of ATM occurrences (RAT)
3. Reporting of Just Culture

Safety Performance Targets by Member States

Future SES Safety Performance Targets?

ATM Master Plan: To improve the safety performance by


a factor of 10
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

22

Phases of Flight and Accident Categories

Flight Guidance:

Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT)


Loss of Control (LoC) in Flight
Loss of Control (LoC) on Runway

Traffic Management:

Mid-Air Collision (MAC)


Wake Turbulence-induced Accident (WTA)
Runway Collision (RC)
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

23

Examples of ATM Hazards


Loss of Separation

Wrong Runway use

Airspace Infringement

Runway Incursion

Level Bust

Bird Strike Encounter

Wake Vortex Encounter

Runway Excursion

Adverse Weather Encounter

Runway Overrun

Flight Control Deficiency

Loss of Directional Control

Controlled Flight Towards


Terrain

Runway Undershoot

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

24

ATM/ANS Contribution to Safety


OperationalEnvironment

ANS/ATM
Airborne&
Groundbased
System(Pe,Pr,EQ)

WhatweWANT
systemtodo

Hazards
Pre
existing

Service

Hazards
System
generated

WhatweDONT
wantsystemtodo
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

25

Success and Failure Perspective


Minimumachievable
Risk

Risk with
Airbag

What we want
the airbag to do

Risk without
Airbag

~ Functionality &
Performance
~ 1/(Reliability
&Integrity)
What we dont want
the system to do

Airbag contribution to drivers safety

Risk R
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

26

Safety Barrier View of ATM/ANS


Separation
Provision

ATCinduced
conflicts

PilotRecovery

Separation
Infringement

ATCRecovery

PilotTacticalControl

ATCTacticalControl

Trajectory
tactical
conflicts

Collisionmisswithoutcontrol

Collision
Avoidance

Aircraftinduced
conflicts

Planning&Coordination

Conflicts

Flow&CapacityManagement

Pre-tactical

AirspaceDesign

Strategic
Conflict
Management

Communication,Navigation,Surveillance
AeronauticalInformation
MeteorologicalInformation
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

27

ATM/ANS Safety Performance for Design


Current
Level of
Risk

Pre-existing
Risk

Strategic
Conflict Mgt
Separation
Provision
Collision
Avoidance

Design targets must not


rely on Safety Nets !
(STCA, ACAS, )

Conflict
Geometry
/ luck
0

Risk R
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

28

Summary

What is a risk?
What is a Risk Classification Scheme?
Safety criteria
ATM-related categories of accidents
ATM-related hazards
How safe do we need to be?
Success and failure perspective

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

29

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

30

Risk Assessment and Mitigation


Overview of SAM
Session 05

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

Safety assessment logic


Safety assessment steps
Change lifecycle
Overall SAM process
Safety assessment approach
Safety assessment and possible deliverables

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Risk Management
Identification of Hazards

Hazard
Likelihood/Frequency
of Effects

Severity of
Effects
Risk of
Effects
Safety
Criteria
Acceptable?
Yes/No

NO

YES

Additional
Risk
Mitigation
Means

Risk-based Decision
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

ATM/ANS Elements to Consider


ENVIRONMENT
ATCOs
ATC

Maintenance

PROCEDURES

HUMAN
ACTORS

Operating

Support
Engineers
Pilots

SYSTEMS

Airspace

Managers

Surveillance
Information
Navaids

Communications
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

ATM/ANS Change Development Lifecycle


Change Definition

Change Design

Change Implementation

Transfer into Operations

Operation / Maintenance

Decommissioning

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety Assessment Logic


What can
go wrong?
What effect
can it have?
How likely
is it to
happen?
Risk
Monitoring

Is the risk
acceptable?

What needs
to be done
about it?

Risk assessment

Risk mitigation

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety Assessment Steps

Safety Assessment initiation:


Review of Concept of Operations
Review of Operational Service and Environment
Characteristics
Scoping and Change Assessment
Safety Considerations
Safety Criteria
Safety Assessment Organization
Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Safety Objectives
Risk Mitigation Strategy and Safety Requirements
Safety Verification and Validation
Safety Assessment of Change Implementation and Transfer
into Operations
Safety Performance Monitoring
Safety Argumentation and Case
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

What is SAM?

SAM = Air Navigation System Safety Assessment


Methodology

Developed by EUROCONTROL and ANSP to reflect best


practice in this domain

A process derived from Aircraft System Safety


Assessment: FHA, PSSA, SSA

3 levels: Method, Guidance Material, Examples

Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) to ESARR 4


A set of techniques to develop ATM/ANS safety assessment
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM & Change Lifecycle


SYSTEM LIFECYCLE

SAFETY ASSURANCE

Change Definition

FHA

Change Design

PSSA

How safe does the


system need to be?
Is the proposed
architecture able to
achieve an acceptable
level of safety?

Change Implementation

Transfer into Operations


SSA
Operation / Maintenance

Does the system


achieve an acceptable
level of safety?

Decommissioning
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

Inputs/Outputs of a Safety Assessment

Concept of
Operations

System
Functions

Environment
Description

Interfaces /
Stakeholders
Related SMS
Procedures

Safety Assessment

Safety Objectives,
Requirements and Evidence

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

S.A Steps and SAM process

Safety Assessment initiation:

Review of Concept of Operations

Review of Operational Service and


Environment Characteristics

Scoping and Change Assessment

Safety Considerations

Safety Criteria

Safety Assessment Organization


Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and
Safety Objectives
Risk Mitigation Strategy and Safety
Requirements
Safety Verification and Validation
Safety Assessment of Change Implementation
and Transfer into Operations
Safety Performance Monitoring
Safety Argumentation and Case
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

FHA

PSSA

SSA
SCDM
12

Plan the Work

For each step, define


Scope
Who? (roles and responsibilities)
What? (activities and deliverables)
When? (schedule)
How? (tools and techniques)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Safety Barrier View of ATM/ANS


Separation
Provision

ATCinduced
conflicts

PilotRecovery

Separation
Infringement

ATCRecovery

PilotTacticalControl

ATCTacticalControl

Trajectory
tactical
conflicts

Collisionmisswithoutcontrol

Collision
Avoidance

Aircraftinduced
conflicts

Planning&Coordination

Conflicts

Flow&CapacityManagement

Pre-tactical

AirspaceDesign

Strategic
Conflict
Management

Communication,Navigation,Surveillance
AeronauticalInformation
MeteorologicalInformation
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

Success & Failure Approach

Success approach: seeks to assess the


achieved level of safety when ATM/ANS is
operated as specified

Failure approach: seeks to assess the


achieved level of safety in the event of faults
and failures of ATM/ANS

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

EUROCONTROL SAM overall process

Safety
Considerations

Initial
Safety
Argument

Evidence

Operational
Concept

Evidence

FHA

System
Project
Evidence
Safety

PSSA

Safety
Plan

Update, if required

SSA
Case
Implementation

Integration

Evidence

Evidence

Update
Transfer into
Operation

Approval

Operation &
Maintenance

Evidence

Safety
Monitoring
Reports

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Unit
Safety
Case

Update

16

Safety Assessment and Possible Deliverables


Possible
Project
Deliverables

Project Plan
Concept of Operations (CONOPS)
Operational Service and Environnment Description (OSED)
Validation Plan
Validation Report

Possible
Safety
Deliverables

Safety Considerations
Safety Plan
Safety Assessment Report
Safety Case (Report)

Safety
Assessment
Outputs

Safety Criteria
Hazards
Safety Objectives
Safety Requirements
Safety Arguments and Evidence

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

Summary

Safety assessment logic


Safety assessment steps
Change lifecycle
Overall SAM process
Safety assessment approach
Safety assessment and possible deliverables

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

18

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

Aquarium system safety assessment

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

20

Aquarium system
Introduce a fish tank with
tropical fish

Required inputs before starting the safety assessment?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

21

Inputs/Outputs of a Safety Assessment

Concept of
Operations

System
Functions

Environment
Description

Interfaces /
Stakeholders
Related SMS
Procedures

Safety Assessment

Safety Objectives,
Requirements and Evidence

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

22

System Analysis
Water
quality

Water
temperature

Water
quantity

Food
quality
Cleaning

Structured brainstorming,
reports, studies, etc.

Oxygen
level

Food
quantity

Common understanding on how the system works


and what the main functions are !
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

23

Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA)


INPUTS
SYSTEM
FUNCTIONS
CONCEPT OF
OPERATIONS
ENVIRONMENT
DESCRIPTION
EXTERNAL
INTERFACES /
STAKEHOLDERS

FHA
HAZARD
IDENTIFICATION

OUTPUTS
HAZARD EFFECT I.D.
SEVERITY CLASS

SYSTEM
SAFETY
OBJECTIVES

SAFETY OBJECTIVE
SPECIFICATION

RELATED SMS
PROCEDURES

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

24

Functions & failure modes


Overall Operational Objective
Maintain Health of Tropical Fish

System Functions

Maintain Water Quantity


Maintain Water Temperature
Maintain Water Quality
Food Level
Pollution Level
Oxygen Level

Failure Modes
For example:
Quantity
Total Loss
Partial Loss

75%
50%
5%

Temperature
Too High
Too Low
Quality - Food
Too Low

What can go wrong ?

<1 week
>1 week

Quality - Pollution
Too High >3 days < 1 week
>1 week < 2 weeks
>2 weeks
Oxygen
Too Low

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

25

Severity definitions
Severity Definitions
(in terms of effects on operations)

INCREASING SEVERITY

1 All fish within the tank die.


2 All Fish become unhealthy, many fish will die.
3 Many fish become unhealthy, some fish will die.
4 Uncomfortable environment, some fish may
become unhealthy.
5 No effect on the fish.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

26

Aquarium System FHA Results (1)


System Functions

Maintain Water
Quantity

Failure mode

Effect on operations

All fish within the tank die

All fish become unhealthy, many die


Many fish become unhealthy, some die

Uncomfortable environment, some may become


unhealthy

Too High

All fish within the tank die

Too Low

All fish within the tank die

Total Loss
75%

Partial Loss

50%
5%

Maintain Water
Temperature

Severity

Maintain Water
Quality
Food Level

(+ Exposure Time)

Too Low <3 days

Pollution Level

Oxygen Level

Too High

Uncomfortable environment, some may become


unhealthy

>3 days

Many fish become unhealthy, some die

>3 days<1 week

Many fish become unhealthy, some die

>1 week <2 weeks

All fish become unhealthy, many die

>2 weeks

All fish within the tank die

All fish become unhealthy, many die

Too Low

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

27

Aquarium System SOCS

Frequency of Occurrence of Hazard


Severity of
the Effect

Extremely
Rare

Rare

Occasional

Likely

Numerous

1
2

Unacceptable
3
4
5

Acceptable

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

28

Aquarium System FHA Results (2)


System Functions

Maintain Water
Temperature

Failure mode

Severity

Too High

Ext rare

Too Low

Ext Rare

Ext Rare

Occasional

Maintain Water
Quantity

Total loss

Pollution Level

Too High

>3 days<1 week

>1 week <2 weeks 2

>2 weeks

Safety
Objectives

Acceptable
Frequency

The frequency of occurrence of


water T exceeding 28C shall be no
greater than Extremely Rare.
The frequency of occurrence of
water T droping below 20C shall be
no greater than Extremely Rare.
The frequency of occurrence of a
total water loss shall be no greater
than Extremely Rare.
The frequency of occurrence of
pollution level exceeding dangerous
level for more than 3 days shall be
no greater than occasional.

Rare

The frequency of occurrence of


pollution level exceeding dangerous
level for more than 1 week shall be
no greater than rare.

Ext Rare

The frequency of occurrence of


pollution level exceeds dangerous
level for more than 2 weeks shall be
no greater than extremely rare.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

29

Preliminary System Safety


Assessment (PSSA)
INPUTS
ENVIRONMENT
DESCRIPTION

PSSA

FHA RESULTS
HAZARDS & SO

EVALUATE
PROPOSED
ARCHITECTURE(S)

PROPOSED
SYSTEM
ARCHITECTURE(S)

DERIVE SR
FROM SO

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

OUTPUTS
SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS
FOR SYSTEM
ELEMENTS

30

Proposed System Architecture

Water Containment
sub-system

Plastic tank

Heating sub-system

Heater, Thermostat

Feeding sub-system

Feed weekly

Filtration sub-system

Pump&filter

Oxygen sub-system

Big Bubble maker

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

31

Aquarium System PSSA


PSSA
Causes

Effects

Safety
Requirements

F1
D1

Hazard

Effect A
Sev 5

H
ER

Effect B
Sev 4

Safety
Objective

Effect C
Sev 3

F21
D3
D2
F2
F22
D4
D3
F3
F41
D3
D4
F4

Effet D
Sev 2

F42
D4

Effect E
Sev 1

Evaluate the proposed architecture, mitigate the remaining


unacceptable risks and iterate if necessary
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

32

Modified System Architecture


Allocate Safety Requirements to
system/sub-system elements
Validate System
Architecture

Identify Risk
Reduction Measures

Water Containment
sub-system

Glass tank

Heating sub-system

Heater, Thermostat
(Alarms+display)

Feeding sub-system

Feed daily

Equipment

Procedures
Observe Fish Daily
Feed daily
Test Pollution every 2 days
Clean Weekly
Testing Procedures
People

Filtration sub-system

Pump&filter

Oxygen sub-system

Tiny Bubble maker

Train Kids for Feeding &


Cleaning

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

33

Aquarium System Design Solution

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

34

System Safety Assessment (SSA)

INPUTS
SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION

SSA
OUTPUTS

FHA RESULTS
HAZARDS & SO
PSSA RESULTS SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS

ASSURANCE AND
EVIDENCE
COLLECTION AND
MONITORING

SAFETY
EVIDENCE

DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGY

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

35

Aquarium System SSA


Equipment

Evidence:
FAT, SAT, etc.
Safety Survey.
Equipment:
Is the risk mitigation in place?
Meeting design specification?

Procedures
Observe Fish Daily
Feed daily
Test Pollution every 2 days
Clean Weekly
People
Train Kids for Feeding &
Cleaning

Procedures:
Are the procedures in place?
Are they carried out effectively?
People:
Are staffing levels correct?
Have they been trained?
Is the training effective?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

36

Aquarium System
SAM is iterative:
Hazards may only appear during PSSA or SSA:
External Events, Common Cause Failures,
Design induced hazards, etc.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

37

SAM Process Summary


SYSTEM LIFECYCLE

SAFETY ASSURANCE

System Definition

FHA

How safe does the


system need to be?

System Design

PSSA

Is the proposed
architecture able to
achieve an acceptable
level of safety?

System Implementation

Transfer into operations


SSA
Operation / Maintenance

Does the system


achieve an acceptable
level of safety?

Decommissioning
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

38

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

39

Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and


Determination of Safety Objectives
SAM FHA Principles

Session 07

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

Purpose
Scope
Inputs
Core Activities
Outputs
Brainstorming

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

FHA Purpose

Define how safe the change needs to be

Identification of hazards

Assessing the operational risk

Define safety objectives for performance and


failure prevention
Hazards, Risks and Safety Objectives

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Bow Tie
PSSA

FHA

Causes
Safety
Requirements

F1
D1

Barriers
Hazard

Effect A
Sev 5

H
ER

Effect B
Sev 4

D2
F2

D3
F3

Safety
Objective

D4
F4

Effect

Effect C
Sev 3
Effet D
Sev 2
Effect E
Sev 1

SSA

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Scope

At the level of operational functions

Scope of FHA should be consistent with


scope defined for the safety assessment

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Generic ATM Functional Description


Tactical
Separation

Collision
Avoidance

Conflict
Detection

Sequencing
&
Metering

Conflict
Resolution
Between Aircraft:
IFR/IFR & IFR/VFR
Between Aircraft:
VFR/VFR
Between Aircraft & Ground

IFR/IFR
IFR/VFR Class B, C"
IFR/VFR Class "D
IFR/VFR Class E, F, G
VFR/VFR Class B, C, D
VFR/VFR Class E, F, G

IFR Arrivals
IFR Departures
VFR Arrivals
VFR Departures
Holding
Transits
Radar to Non-Radar

Situational Awareness
ATCO
Create

Situational Awareness
Pilot

Maintain

Create

Maintain

Coordination
&
Transfer
Adjacent Units:
ACC
APP
TWR
Military
GA Airfields
Transfer of Control
Assume Control:
Non-Radar
Radar with correlation
Radar without correlation

Flow &
Capacity
Management

Flight
Information
Service

Airspace
Management

Manage Flow Regulation


Sector Management
Routing Management

Airspace Information
Meteorological Information
Aerodrome Information
Status of Services & Systems
Procedures & Regulations

Strategic Airspace Management


Tactical Airspace Management
Runway Changes
Tactical Management of Unusual Occurrences

Alerting
Service

Supporting Services
AIS

Met
Services

High Risk

Comms
Systems

Nav
Systems

Surveillance
Systems
Problem Detection
Coordination with Rescue Services

Causal Link
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety Barrier View of ATM/ANS


Separation
Provision

ATCinduced
conflicts

PilotRecovery

Separation
Infringement

ATCRecovery

PilotTacticalControl

ATCTacticalControl

Trajectory
tactical
conflicts

Collisionmisswithoutcontrol

Collision
Avoidance

Aircraftinduced
conflicts

Planning&Coordination

Conflicts

Flow&CapacityManagement

Pre-tactical

AirspaceDesign

Strategic
Conflict
Management

Communication,Navigation,Surveillance
AeronauticalInformation
MeteorologicalInformation
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

FHA Inputs
System
functions
Concept of
operations
Environment
description
Interfaces /
Stakeholders
Related SMS
Procedures

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

FHA Core Activities


Brainstorming
Brainstorming

FUNCTIONAL
FUNCTIONAL

HAZARD
IDENTIFICATION

WHAT CAN GO WRONG ?

HAZARD EFFECTS
IDENTIFICATION

WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL


CONSEQUENCES?

EFFECTS SEVERITY
CLASSIFICATION

HOW SEVERE ARE THE


CONSEQUENCES?

SAFETY OBJECTIVES
SPECIFICATION

HOW SAFE DOES THE SYSTEM


NEED TO BE?
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

Hazard Identification
Function 1

Failure Mode
1.1

Hazard 1

Failure Mode
1.2
Hazard 2
Failure Mode
2.1
Function 2
Failure Mode
2.2

Hazard 3

Ext Event
E.1

Common understanding?

Scale

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

Examples of Failure Modes


Total loss / Inability to provide a function

Failure to start

Partial loss

Failure to stop

Error of input/ output:

Failure to switch

- missing data (partial loss, total loss)

Delayed operation (too late)

- detected erroneous/corrupted data (not


credible error/corruption)

Premature operation (too early)

- undetected erroneous/corrupted data


(credible error/corruption)

Inadvertent operation

- spontaneous data

Intermittent or erratic operation

- out of sequence

Modified operation

- out of range

Violation of operation (Routine or


unintentional)

Misdirection of data

Misheard

Inconsistent information

Misunderstood

Erroneous updating

Used beyond intent


Out of time synchronisation
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

Hazard Effect Determination


Effect
Hazard

Barrier A

Barrier B

Barrier C

Barrier D

Effect A
Sev 5
Effect B
Sev 4

Effect C
Sev 3
Effet D
Sev 2

1. Common understanding of the hazard

Effect E
Sev 1

2. Identify the barriers


3. Consider exposure time and hazard detection
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Severity Classification

Identify the factors or protective barriers


influencing the effects of each hazard

Assess the effectiveness of the barriers, and


determine the possible scenarios and their
end-effects

Allocate a severity class to each effect, in


accordance with the Severity Classification
Scheme from Reg. 1035/2011
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

Severity Classification Scheme


(Reg. 1035/2011 Repealing 2096/2005)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

List of examples of serious incidents from Reg. 996/2010


Near collision requiring an avoidance manoeuvre to avoid a collision or an unsafe
situation or
when an avoidance action would have been appropriate,
Controlled flight into terrain only marginally avoided,
Runway incursions classified with severity A according to the Manual on the
Prevention of runway
Incursions (ICAO Doc 9870) which contains information on the severity
classifications,
Take-off or landing incidents. Incidents such as undershooting, overrunning or
running off the
side of runways
Take-offs from a closed or engaged runway, from a taxiway, excluding authorised
operations by
helicopters, or from an unassigned runway
Aborted take-offs on a closed or engaged runway, on a taxiway, excluding
authorised operations
by helicopters, or from an unassigned runway,
Landings or attempted landings on a closed or engaged runway, on a taxiway,
excluding
authorised operations by helicopters, or from an unassigned runway,
Gross failures to achieve predicted performance during take-off or initial climb,
Fires and smoke in the passenger compartment, in cargo compartments or engine fires,
even though such fires were extinguished by the use of extinguishing agents,
Events requiring the emergency use of oxygen by the flight crew,
Aircraft structural failure or engine disintegration, including uncontained turbine engine
failures, not classified as an accident,
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL
Multiple malfunctions of one or more aircraft systems seriously affecting the operation of

16

ESARR 4 Severity Scheme


Severity
class

1
[Most Severe]

Effect

Accidents

5
[Least Severe]

Serious incidents

Major incidents

Significant incidents

No immediate effect
on safety.

on Operations
Examples of
effects on
operation
include:

One or more
catastrophic accidents,
One or more mid-air
collisions
One or more collisions
on the ground between
two aircraft
One or more
Controlled Flight Into
Terrain
Total loss of flight
control

No independent source of
recovery mechanism, such
as surveillance or ATC
and/or flight crew
procedures can reasonably
be expected to prevent the
accident(s).

Large reduction in
separation(e.g., a
separation of less than half
the separation minima),
without crew or ATC fully
controlling the situation or
able to recover from the
situation.

One or more aircraft


deviating from their
intended clearance, so that
abrupt manoeuvre is
required to avoid collision
with another aircraft or with
terrain (or when an
avoidance action would be
appropriate).

large reduction (e.g., a


separation of less than half
the separation minima) in
separation with crew or
ATC controlling the
situation and able to
recover from the situation.

minor reduction (e.g., a


separation of more than half
the separation minima) in
separation without crew or
ATC fully controlling the
situation, hence
jeopardising the ability to
recover from the situation
(without the use of collision
or terrain avoidance
manoeuvres).

increasing workload of the


air traffic controller or
aircraft flight crew, or
slightly degrading the
functional capability of the
enabling CNS system.

minor reduction (e.g., a


separation of more than half
the separation minima) in
separation with crew or
ATC controlling the
situation and fully able to
recover from the situation.

No hazardous
condition i.e. no
immediate direct
or indirect
impact on the
operations.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

Severity Class

1
[Most Severe]

Effects on
Operations

Accidents

Serious Incidents

Major Incidents

Significant Incidents

SEVERITY INDICATORS SET1: EFFECTS ON AIR NAVIGATION SERVICE


Effect on Air
Navigation Service
within the area of
responsibility

Total inability to
Serious inability to
provide or maintain provide or maintain
safe service
safe service

Partial inability to
provide or maintain
safe service

Ability to provide or
maintain safe but
degraded service

ATCO and/or Flight


Crew Working
Conditions

Workload, stress or
working conditions
are such that they
cannot perform
their tasks at all

Workload, stress or
working conditions
are such that they
are unable to
perform their tasks
effectively

Workload, stress or
working conditions
such that their
ability is significantly
impaired

Workload, stress or
working conditions are
such that their abilities
are slightly impaired

Effect on ground ATM Total loss of


System and/or Aircraft functional
Functional
capabilities
Capabilities

Large reduction of
functional
capabilities

Significant reduction Slight reduction of


of functional
functional capabilities
capabilities

ATCO and/or Flight


Crew Ability to Cope
with Adverse
Operational and
Environmental
Conditions

Large reduction of
the ability to cope
with adverse
operational and
environmental
conditions

Significant reduction
of the ability to cope
with adverse
operational and
environmental
conditions

Unable to cope
with adverse
operational and
environmental
conditions

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Slight reduction of the


ability to cope with
adverse operational and
environmental conditions

18

SEVERITY INDICATORS SET 2: EXPOSURE


Exposure time

The presence of the


hazard is almost
permanent. Reduction
of safety margins
persists even after
recovering from the
immediate problem.

Hazard may persist


for a substantial period
of time

Hazard may persist for


a moderate period of
time.

Hazard may persist for


a short period of time
such that no significant
consequences are
expected.

Too brief to have any


safety-related effect

Number of aircraft exposed /


area of responsibility

All aircraft in the area


of responsibility

All aircraft in several


ATC Sectors

Aircraft within a small


geographic area or an
area of low traffic
density

Single aircraft

No aircraft affected

Annunciation, Detection and


Diagnosis *

Undetected
misleading indication.

Ambiguous indication.
Not easily detected.
Incorrect diagnosis
likely

May require some


interpretation.
Detectable. Incorrect
diagnosis possible

Clear annunciation.
Easily detected,
reliable diagnosis

Clear annunciation.
Easily detected and
very reliable diagnosis

Contingency measures
(other systems or
procedures) available

No existing
contingency measures
available. Operators
unprepared. Limited
ability to intervene.

Limited contingency
measures, providing
only partial
replacement
functionality. Operators
not familiar with
procedures or may
need to devise a new
procedure at the time.

Contingency
measures available,
providing most of
required functionality.
Fall back equipment
usually reliable.
Operator intervention
required, but a
practised procedure
within the scope of
normal training

Reliable, automatic,
comprehensive
contingency measures

Highly reliable,
automatic,
comprehensive
contingency measures

Rate of development of the


hazardous condition,
compared to the time
necessary for annunciation,
detection, diagnosis and
application of contingency
measures

Sudden. It does not


allow recovery

Fast

Similar

Slow

Plenty of time
available.

SEVERITY INDICATORS SET 3: RECOVERY

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

Safety Objectives Specification

Severity Class

Risk
Classification
Scheme

Safety
Objective
Classification
Scheme

Safety
Objective

Safety Objective:
Maximum Acceptable Frequency of Occurrence of Hazard
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

20

FHA Outputs

Hazards
Effects
Severity class
Rationale / Barriers
Assumptions
SAFETY
OBJECTIVES

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

21

Risk Assessment Template


Hazard
Id

Function

Hazard

Context and
Exposure
Time

Factors,
Protective Barriers and
Effectiveness

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Effect on operations

Severity
Class

Rationale/
Remarks

22

Brainstorming

Participants/Functions
End users (ATCO, pilots, technicians)

Background, mindset, independence

Moderator

Optimise effectiveness

Safety expert

Safety process, challenger

Secretary

To make notes

Preparation is key

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

23

Summary

Purpose
Scope
Inputs
Core Activities
Outputs
Brainstorming

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

24

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

25

Risk Mitigation Strategy of ATM Change


Design for Operations
SAM PSSA Principles

Session 09

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

Purpose
Inputs
Scope
Core Activities
Safety Requirements
Assurance levels
Outputs

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

PSSA Purpose

Assess whether the proposed architecture of


Change to functional System is (are) able to
achieve an acceptable level of safety

Safety Requirements
Assurance Levels

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

PSSA Inputs

Environment
description
List of
hazards
List of Safety
Objectives
Proposed
design
architecture(s)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

PSSA Core Activities

EVALUATE PROPOSED
CHANGE ARCHITECTURE

DERIVE SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS

CAN THE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE(S)


CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO HAZARDS?
HOW?

HOW TO ALLOCATE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS


TO EACH INDIVIDUAL SYSTEM ELEMENT?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Questions for Change Design Phase

Will the performance of functionalities be sufficient?

Will it work properly, under all normal conditions of


the operational environment that it is likely to
encounter?

What happens under abnormal conditions of the


operational environment?

What happens in the event of a failure or error?

Are the Safety Requirements realistic i.e. could


they be achievable?
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Evaluate Proposed Change Architecture

Change architecture modelling


Functional / Logical Level
Task analysis
HF assessment

Design analysis 1 Normal conditions (Performance)


Safety Benefits analysis
Real Time Simulations

Design analysis 2 Abnormal conditions (Robustness)


Robustness analysis

Design analysis 3 Failure conditions (Integrity,


Reliability)
FTA (Fault Tree Analysis),
CCA (Common Cause Analysis)
HF assessment
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Bow Tie
PSSA

FHA

Causes
Safety
Requirements

F1
D1

Barriers
Hazard

Effect A
Sev 5

H
ER

Effect B
Sev 4

D2
F2

D3
F3

Safety
Objective

D4
F4

Effect

Effect C
Sev 3
Effet D
Sev 2
Effect E
Sev 1

SSA

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety Requirements

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

Derive Safety Requirements

Specify the safety requirements necessary to


meet the safety objectives

Provide assurance of the effectiveness and


realism of the safety requirements

Allocate an Assurance Level as appropriate

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

Safety Requirements

Risk Mitigation Means

Required to reduce the risk(s) to an


acceptable level

Risk mitigation strategy:


Eliminate hazard
Reduce frequency of occurrence of hazard
(prevention)
Reduce severity of effects (protection)
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

Success and Failure Perspective


Success

Failure

Hazard-types
Addressed

Pre-existing Hazards

System-generated Hazards

Safety
Contribution

Maximize ATM contribution


to aviation safety

Minimize ATM contribution to


risk of an accident

Dominant
Safety
Properties

System Functionality
Performance

System Integrity

and

What we
want
the system
to do

What we
dont want
the system
to do

Safety Requirements (SR)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Safety Requirements Topics

Functionality and performance

Integrity and reliability

Mobile detection rate


Timeliness of info / data provision
Accuracy of info / data provision
Position of sensors
Operational procedures on info / data usage

Failure rate
False alerts
Fail-safe degradation
Back-up procedures

Assumptions
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

SYSTEM FUNCTIONS

Safety
Objectives

Risk Apportionment
SR = Safety
Requirements
CHANGE
ARCHITECTURE

ATCOs

Operational
Procedures

SR+HAL SR+PAL

Equipment

ATCOs

S.R.

Hardware

Man Machine
Interface

SR

SR

Software

SR+SWAL

Operational
Procedures

Equipment

PAL = Procedure
Assurance Level
HAL = Human
Assurance Level
SWAL = Software
Assurance Level

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

Realism of Safety Requirements

Achievable
Necessary and sufficient
Effective
Traceable to Causes / Hazards / Safety
Objective(s)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

16

Assurance Levels

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

What is the idea of an Assurance Level?

You want to build a


Dog kennel?
House extension?
Skyscraper?

You have several methods


Do it yourself
Use a local builder
Use an architect
Which would you use?

Means of adapting the level of effort to the


criticality of the change
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

18

Where can we credibly quantify?

Procedure:

No No

PAL

People

PROCEDURES

PEOPLE

HAL

Equipment Software
SWAL

EQUIPMENT

SW: No

Equipment Hardware
Figures (MTBF, Etc.)

HW: Yes (+/-)


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

Allocation of an Assurance Level


Severity

Causes
F1
D1

Hazard

Effect A
Sev 5

H
ER

Effect B
Sev 4

D2
F2

D3
F3

Effect C
Sev 3

F4

Failing
Component

Worst
Credible
Effect

Effet D
Sev 2

Distance between failing


component and effect
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Effect E
Sev 1

20

10

Definition of the Assurance Level


Causes

Severity

F1
D1

Effect A
Sev 5

Hazard

Effect B
Sev 4

D2
F2

Effect C
Sev 3

H
ER

D3
F3

Effet D
Sev 2

Worst
Credible
Effect

Effect E
Sev 1

F4
Failing
Component

Distance between failing component and effect


Effect Severity

xxAL1

xxAL2

xxAL3

xxAL4

xxAL2

xxAL3

xxAL3

xxAL4

xxAL3

xxAL3

xxAL4

xxAL4

xxAL4

xxAL4

xxAL4

xxAL4

Distance between failing component & effect


Very Possible
Possible

Very Unlikely
Extremely Unlikely

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

21

PAL Objectives
Objectives to be fulfilled during the Procedure Life Cycle Phases:
i
Definition

Procedure
Assurance
Level
i.5
PAL 1

Ensure an approved
and systematic
specification

ii
Design and Validation

1)

ii.7

i.4

Ensure stakeholder
acceptance

ii.5
ii.6

iii
Implementation

Establish an
acceptable risk level
(in quantitative
terms)
Ensure independency
in design and
validation

iii.7

Ensure external expert


acceptance
Ensure enhanced
competence levels of
designers

iii.5

iii.8

iii.6

iv
Transfer into operations

Ensure independent
auditing of the
procedure
Ensure corporate level
of approval by
stakeholders
Ensure approval at
the Corporate level of
management
Establish evidence of
acceptable design
maturity

PAL 2

iv.5
iv.6
iv.7
iv.8

1.

PAL 3

2.

3.

Ensure involvement
of relevant
operational expertise
Ensure a minimum
set of quality
assurance activities
Establish a proven
and well-documented
starting point for the
definition exercises

ii.3

Ensure suitably
validation at different
levels

ii.4

Ensure robustness

1)

2)
3)

PAL 4

Establish an
acceptable risk level
(in qualitative terms)
Ensure that HMI has
been assessed
Ensure suitably
validation

iii.3

Ensure stakeholder
acceptance

iii.4

Ensure training levels

1.

Establish an
Implementation Plan
which includes
quality assurance
activities
Ensure an acceptable
quality assurance
level

2.

iv.4

1.

2.

3.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Ensure incremental
transfer
Ensure approval of
the Transfer Plan at
management level
Ensure stakeholder
acceptance of the
Transfer Plan
Ensure application
of an approved and
systematic method
to verify the transfer
process
Ensure enhanced
competence levels
of staff to perform
the transfer

Ensure that
feedback
concerning the
transfer process is
provided to involved
staff
Ensure
dissemination of
contingency
measures
Ensure documented
contingency
measures

v
Operation

v.7

Ensure that the


application of the
procedure is
reduced to its
minimum

v.6

Ensure acceptable
performance
levels

v.4

Ensure validity of
assumptions

v.5

Ensure
promulgation of
related incident
investigations

1.

Ensure
documentation
control
Establish a
reporting system
covering
occurrences
relating to the
procedure
Ensure highranking
proficiency levels

2.

3.

22

11

PAL 4 Objectives
Objectives to be fulfilled during the Procedure Life Cycle Phases:
Procedure
Assurance
Level

PAL 4

i
Definition

1.Ensure
involvement of
relevant
operational
expertise
2.Ensure a
minimum set of
quality
assurance
activities
3.Establish a
proven and
welldocumented
starting point
for the
definition
exercises

ii
Design and Validation

1. Establish an
acceptable
risk level (in
qualitative
terms)
2. Ensure that
HMI has been
assessed
3. Ensure
suitably
validation

iii
Implementation

1.Establish an
Implementation
Plan which
includes quality
assurance
activities
2.Ensure an
acceptable
quality
assurance level

iv
Transfer into
operations

1.Ensure that
feedback
concerning the
transfer
process is
provided to
involved staff
2.Ensure
dissemination
of contingency
measures
3.Ensure
documented
contingency
measures

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

v
Operations

1.Ensure
documentatio
n control
2.Establish a
reporting
system
covering
occurrences
relating to the
procedure
3.Ensure highranking
proficiency
levels

23

Day to day human issues

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

24

12

Day to day human issues

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

25

Day to day human issues

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

26

13

What is Human Performance ?


Myself

Team

Human
Potential

Interference

Human
Performance

Organisation

Environment

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

27

Human Performance Areas in ATM ?

Interference

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Human
Performance

28

14

System Used Beyond Capabilities

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

29

PSSA Outputs

SAFETY
REQUIREMENTS

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

30

15

Summary

Purpose
Inputs
Scope
Core Activities
Safety Requirements
Assurance levels
Outputs

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

31

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

32

16

Safety Verification and Validation


Risk Assessment and Mitigation of ATM
Change Implementation
& Transfer into Operations
SAM SSA Principles

Session 11

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

Purpose
Inputs
Core Activities
Outputs

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SSA Purpose

Demonstrate that change/system actually


achieves an acceptable level of safety from
implementation till decommissioning

Safety evidence
Assurance

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Timescale
FHA
PSSA

Decommissioning

Operations

Transfer to Ops

Implementation

Change Initiation

SSA

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Bow Tie
PSSA

FHA

Causes
Safety
Requirements

F1
D1

Barriers
Hazard

Effect A
Sev 5

H
ER

Effect B
Sev 4

D2
F2

D3
F3

Safety
Objective

D4
F4

Effect

Effect C
Sev 3
Effet D
Sev 2
Effect E
Sev 1

SSA

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SSA Inputs

Environment
description
Hazards &
SO
System
Architecture
Safety Rqts
ALs

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Verification Versus Validation

Verification
Have we built the system RIGHT?

Validation
Have we built the RIGHT system?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Need for Verification & Validation

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SSA Core Activities

Build and Collect Evidence that:


Safety Requirements / ALs are met
Safety Objectives are satisfied
Assumptions are correct
Users Expectations are satisfied
System achieves an Acceptable Level of Safety

For the whole lifecycle of the change/system!


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

What is Risky in Each Phase?

Implementation

Transfer into Operations

Operations

Maintenance

Decommissioning

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

For Each Phase

What type of evidence?

Verification or validation?

Who will provide this evidence?

What if you need acceptance by your NSA before


transfer into ops?

What if a SR is not met?

Can you use previous safety assessments as


evidence?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

Use your SMS & QMS!

SMS processes:

Roles and responsibilities (management commitment)


Occurrence Reporting & Investigation
Competency assessment
Monitoring
Safety Surveys
Lesson Dissemination
External Services

Quality Processes

Design
Document control
Management of problem reports

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Getting the Big Picture of Risk

Lack of evidence of risk


is not evidence of lack of risk

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

SSA Outputs

EVIDENCE &
ASSURANCE

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

Summary

Purpose
Inputs
Core Activities
Outputs

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

16

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

Safety Argument / Case


Principles
Session 14

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

Why do we develop Safety Arguments?

How to develop a Safety Argument?

How to present a Safety Argument?

What Safety Assurance activities?

What is a Safety Case?

What are the types of Safety Cases?

How to develop Safety Cases?

How to structure Safety Documentation?


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety Argument-Based Approach

To provide assurance
Safety
Safety Argument
Argument
To satisfy

Assurance
Level (AL)

To give confidence

To achieve

Activities
Activities
To produce

Evidence
Evidence

To provide structured and systematic approach

To address EC. 1035/2011 & ESARR4 requirement


Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Top Level Safety Argument


Cr001
Acceptably safe is
defined by the Safety
Criteria to be satisfied

C001
Operational Service &
Environment are described

J0001

Argue on basis of a safe


Specification and Logical
Design, full Implementation
of that design, safe
Transition into service and
Safety Monitoring for whole
operational service life

A0001
Assumptions
are stated

Arg 1

Arg 2

ATM system has


been specified to
be acceptably
safe

ATM system has


been designed to
be acceptably
safe

[tbd]

Arg 0
ATM Operations will
be acceptably safe.

Arg 3
ATM system
Design has been
implemented
completely &
correctly

Justification and
benefits are
provided

Arg 4
Transition from
current state to
full ATM system
will be
acceptably safe

[tbd]

Arg 5
ATM system will
be shown to
operate acceptably
safely throughout
its service

[tbd]
[tbd]
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

[tbd]
5

Safety Assurance Activities

Specification

Design

Implementation

Transfer into Operations

Operations

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Safety Lifecycle
Arg 1
Arg 3

Lower-level Safety Arguments

Operation &
Maintenance

Arg 5

Arg 4

Arg 4

Arg 5

Transfer into
Operation

Arg 0

Implementation &
Integration

Arg 3

Arg 0

Design & Validation


(High-level)
Evidence

SSA

Definition

Arg 2

PSSA

Arg 1

FHA

Arg 2

System Safety
Assurance Activities

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

What is a Safety Case?

Presentation of:
Structured argumentation to support a claim
Statements which claim that something is true
(or false)
Supporting rationale and evidence to show
that each argument is true

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Types of Safety Cases and their Use

Unit

System

Subsystems

Unit

Unit

System

System

Subsystems

System

Subsystems

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Unit Safety Case

Top-claim:
Air Navigations Services provided by ATSU
are, and will remain acceptably safe

What would you expect to see in such a unit


safety case?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

Safety Case Development Process


Safety
Considerations

Initial
Safety
Argument

Evidence

Operational
Concept

Evidence

FHA

System
Project

Evidence
Safety

PSSA

Update, if required

SSA

Safety
Plan

Case
Implementation

Integration

Evidence

Evidence

Update
Transfer into
Operation

Approval

Operation &
Maintenance

Evidence

Safety
Monitoring
Reports

Unit
Safety
Case

Update

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

Safety Documentation Structure


Safety Case
Report
Safety Register
(Hazard Log, S.R.,
Assumptions, )
Safety Assessment
Report
Part 1 & 2

Design
Documents

Other
reference
sources

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

System Safety Case Report Structure

Introduction
Change description
Safety Argument
Top argument
Safety criteria

Sub-arguments, rationale & evidence


Caveats (assumptions, limitations, open issues)
Safety Requirements
Conclusions
Reference
Appendices (S.A., simulations, test results,)
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

Summary

Why do we develop Safety Arguments?

How to develop a Safety Argument?

How to present a Safety Argument?

What is a Safety Case?

What are the types of Safety Cases?

How to develop Safety Cases?

How to structure Safety Documentation?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

Practicalities
Session 15

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Course Structure
NEED FOR SAFETY ASSESSMENT
KEY CONCEPTS
SAM PROCESS
FHA

PSSA

SSA

PRACTICALITIES

SAFETY ARGUMENTS

SAM ASSISTANT

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

Structure

SAM Practicalities
FHA Practicalities
PSSA Practicalities
SSA Practicalities

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 0
This is a little story about four people named
Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody.
There was an important job to be done and Everybody
was sure that Somebody would do it.
Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it.
Somebody got angry about that because it was
Everybody's job.
Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but
Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.
It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when
Nobody did what Anybody could have done.

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 1

At organizational level
Define who is doing what
Closely linked with:
Other SMS processes
Other QMS processes
Other project related activities

Make sure methodologies are useful and fit for


purpose
Share efforts: reusability, accessibility

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 2

Plan your safety assessment

Start safety assessment as early as possible

Adapt level of effort

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 3

Be careful when you subdivide a change


(overall risk not assessed)

Consider the future environment, not the


current one

Total system approach not followed


People, procedures, equipment
Key stakeholders omitted
Success approach not considered
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 4

Training needed for


Ops and project managers
Safety practitioners
Participants in a safety assessment

Methodological assistance may be needed


External safety/human experts
Manufacturers

KEEP CONTROL!!
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 5

Misuse of tools and techniques


Quantification
Goal Structuring Notation (GSN)
Fault trees
Event trees

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

SAM Practicalities - 6

Be aware of the advantages & limitations of


quantification
Advantages

Avoids diverging understandings


Clear targets to manufacturers
Apportionment of risks
Helps to check credibility of the results

Limitations
False sense of confidence
Not always feasible
Diverts people from dealing with the real issues

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

10

FHA Practicalities - 1

Scope of FHA should be at functional level!

Share your efforts!

Take enough time to describe the change

Involve the relevant people

Prepare the brainstorming sessions

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

11

FHA Practicalities - 2

Dont forget what we aim at:


Assessing the overall risks
Understanding how system works (safety
benefits)
Understanding how system fails (additional
risks)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

12

PSSA Practicalities - 1

Misuse of tools and techniques


Fault Trees
Missing barriers / mitigation means
AND gates are not always perfect!
Have you captured Common Causes, unavailability
of redundancy, Mean Time To Repair, etc.?

Quantification

On humans, procedures, software?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

13

PSSA Practicalities - 2

Safety Requirements focused on equipment


exclusively

No qualitative Safety Requirement

Unrealistic safety requirements


Too stringent failure rate on an equipment
component
Credibility towards supplier?
Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

14

PSSA Practicalities - 3

Do consider the success approach!

Make best use of SMS / QMS / project related


activities

Otherwise resulting architecture may not


meet the users needs!

PSSA should not drive design

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

15

PSSA Practicalities - 4

Safety assessments focused on individual


changes
Inconsistent assumptions (risk apportionment,
on going or short term changes not taken into
account)
Overall risk not assessed, may be
unacceptable

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

16

SSA Practicalities - 1

Closely linked with other SMS / QMS


processes

Dont neglect critical phases of the change!

Indicators should be relevant and useful for


monitoring (action to be triggered)

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

17

SSA Practicalities - 2

SSA safety plan very useful to help structure


the evidence collection process

Evidence collection usually requires a lot of


efforts

All interested parties should be made aware


of what they should produce / collect as
evidence

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

18

Summary

SAM Practicalities
FHA Practicalities
PSSA Practicalities
SSA Practicalities

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

19

Questions?

Copyright 2011 EUROCONTROL

20

10

Anda mungkin juga menyukai