thirteenth air navigation conferenceicscc.org.cn/upload/file/20200603/20200603135246_36312.pdf ·...

Doc 10115, AN-Conf/13

INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION

THIRTEENTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE Montréal, 9 to 19 October 2018

REPORT

Approved by the Conference and published by authority of the Secretary General

MONTRÉAL 2018

Published in separate English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish editions by the INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION 999 Robert-Bourassa Boulevard, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3C 5H7 For ordering information and for a complete listing of sales agents and booksellers, please go to the ICAO website at www.icao.int Doc 10115, Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference Order Number: 10115 ISBN 978-92-9258-647-8 © ICAO 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior permission in writing from the International Civil Aviation Organization.

REPORT OF THE THIRTEENTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

To: President, Air Navigation Commission From: Chairperson, Thirteenth Air Navigation

Conference (AN-Conf/13) (2018) I have the honour to submit the report of the Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/13) which was held in Montréal, Canada, from 9 to 19 October 2018. Ms. Kirsten Riensema Chairperson

Montréal, Canada, 19 October 2018

ii – Table of Contents ii-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS …………………………………………………… iii-1 HISTORY OF THE CONFERENCE

1. Duration …………………………………………………………………….. iv-1 2. Representation ……………………………………………………………… iv-1 3. Officers ………………………………………………………………..……. iv-1 4. Secretariat …………………………………………………………………... iv-1 5. Adoption of the agenda ……………………………………………………... iv-1 6. Working arrangements ……………………………………………………… iv-2 7. Opening remarks

7.1 President of the Council …………………………………….…….. iv-2 7.2 Secretary General ............................................................................. iv-6 7.3 President of the Air Navigation Commission ……………………... iv-8

AGENDA OF THE CONFERENCE…………………………………………………… v-1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ………………………………………………….…………... vi-1 REPORTS OF THE CONFERENCE

Agenda Item 1: Air navigation global strategy…..….…………………………… 1-1

Agenda Item 2: Enabling the global air navigation system……............................ 2-1 Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system …………………… 3-1 Agenda Item 4: Implementing the global air navigation system and the role of

planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs) ……... 4-1

Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues ………………………………………………... 5-1 Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.1: Strategic plan ............................................................................ 6.2: Implementation of safety management ..................................... 6.3: Monitoring and oversight……………….…………………….

6-1 6-1 6-1

Agenda Item 7: Operational safety risks ……………………………………….... 7-1 Agenda Item 8: Emerging safety issues………………………………………….. 8-1

iii – List of Recommendations iii-1

LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS Page 1.1/1 1.2/1 1.3/1 1.4/1 2.1/1 2.1/2 2.2/1 2.2/2 2.3/1 2.3/2 2.3/3 2.3/4

Vision and overview of the Sixth Edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) ..................................................................................................... 1-3 Global technical level of the Sixth Edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) ........................................................................................................................... 1-4 Air navigation roadmaps .................................................................................................... 1-6 Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in support of assets deployment ........................................... 1-7 Aerodrome capacity and efficiency enhancement ............................................................. 2-2 Total airport management (TAM) and airport throughput ................................................. 2-3 Long-term evolution of communication, navigation and surveillance systems and frequency spectrum access .......................................................................................... 2-4 Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) evolution ........................................................ 2-7 Future provision of aeronautical meteorological service ................................................... 2-9 Further development of IWXXM for the exchange of aeronautical meteorological information ........................................................................................... 2-10 Provision of space weather information service meeting the operational needs of users .............................................................................................................. 2-10 Development of cost-recovery mechanisms for the provision of aeronautical meteorological information ......................................................................................... 2-11

3.1/1 3.2/1 3.2/2 3.3/1 3.4/1 3.4/2 3.5/1 3.5/2 3.5/3 3.5/4 4.1/1 4.2/1 4.3/1 4.3/2 4.4/1

System-wide information management (SWIM) .............................................................. 3-2 Trajectory-based operations (TBO) .................................................................................. 3-4 Flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE) ............................ 3-5 Network operations (NOPS) .............................................................................................. 3-6 Civil-military collaboration................................................................................................ 3-8 Civil-military cooperation implementation ........................................................................ 3-9 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) location indicator system and database of significant points ............................................................................ 3-13 Coordinated crisis management ......................................................................................... 3-14 Certification of air navigation services providers (ANSPs) ............................................... 3-14 True North .......................................................................................................................... 3-14 State National Development Plans ..................................................................................... 4-1 Implementation of essential air navigation services .......................................................... 4-2 Improving the performance of the air navigation system .................................................. 4-5 Regional and national collaboration and implementation initiatives ............................... 4-6 Search and rescue (SAR) and the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS) ............................................................................................. 4-9

5.1/1 5.2/1 5.3/1 5.4/1 5.5/1 5.5/2

Operations above flight level 600 ...................................................................................... 5-2 Very low altitude operations .............................................................................................. 5-4 Remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) ........................................................................ 5-6 Cyber resilience ................................................................................................................. 5-9 Supersonic transport (SST) ................................................................................................ 5-11 Commercial space transport (CST) .................................................................................... 5-12

iii-2 iii – List of Recommendations

5.5/3 6.1/1 6.1.3/1 6.2/1 6.2.1/1 6.2.3/1 6.3/1 7.1/1 7.1/2 7.2/1 7.2/2 7.3/1 7.3/2 7.3/3 7.3/4 7.3/5 8.1/1 8.2/1 8.2/2

Standard-making processes ................................................................................................ 5-12 Draft 2020-2022 Edition of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (Doc 10004, GASP) .......... 6-2 The global aviation safety oversight system (GASOS) ..................................................... 6-3 Supporting Effective Safety Management Implementation ............................................... 6-4 State safety programmes (SSPs) ........................................................................................ 6-7 Developing safety intelligence ........................................................................................... 6-8 Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA) ..................................................................................... 6-11 Data-driven decision-making ............................................................................................. 7-3 Standardized risk-based decision-making policies and best practices for validation of foreign products ...................................................................................... 7-4 Strengthening regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs) ...................................... 7-5 ICAO Runway Safety Programme — Global Runway Safety Action Plan ...................... 7-6 ICAO implementation strategies ........................................................................................ 7-10 Aviation Safety Implementation Assistance Partnership (ASIAP) .................................... 7-10 State national planning framework .................................................................................... 7-11 Regional office resources for implementation activities .................................................... 7-11 Support for the continuation of the Comprehensive Regional Implementation Plan for Aviation Safety in Africa (AFI Plan) ............................................................. 7-11 Measures to proactively address emerging issues .............................................................. 8-1 Remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) operations ....................................................... 8-3 Medical Standard for pilots of light aircraft ....................................................................... 8-3

iv – History of the Conference iv-1

REPORT OF THE THIRTEENTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

Montréal, Canada, 9 to 19 October 2018

HISTORY OF THE CONFERENCE 1. DURATION

1.1 The Thirteenth meeting of the Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/13) was opened by the President of the Council, Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu, at 1000 hours on 9 October 2018 in the Assembly Hall of the Headquarters of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in Montréal, Canada. The Secretary General, Dr. Fang Liu, addressed the Conference and the President of the Air Navigation Commission, Mr. Claude Hurley, addressed and attended the Conference. The closing Plenary was held on 19 October 2018.

2. REPRESENTATION

2.1 The Conference was attended by 1 022 Delegates nominated by 116 Member States and 37 international organizations, as well as by advisers and others. A list of participants may be found on the AN-Conf/13 website at: www.icao.int/meetings/anconf13.

3. OFFICERS

3.1 The following officers were elected at the opening Plenary meeting:

Conference Chairperson: Ms. Kirsten Riensema (United Kingdom) Conference Vice-Chairperson: Lt. Brig. Jeferson Domingues de Freitas (Brazil)

Committee A Chairperson: Mr. Alexis Brathwaite (Trinidad and Tobago) Committee A Vice-Chairperson: Mr. Peter Yu (Republic of Korea) Committee B Chairperson Mr. Simon Allotey (Ghana) Committee B Vice-Chairperson Mr. Guruprasad Mohapatra (India)

4. SECRETARIAT

4.1 The Secretary of the Conference was Mr. Stephen P. Creamer, Director, Air Navigation Bureau, who was assisted by Mr. Richard Macfarlane, Deputy Director, Air Navigation Capacity and Efficiency, Mr. Catalin Radu, Deputy Director, Aviation Safety, and Mr. Denis Guidon, Deputy Director, Monitoring and Oversight. He was also assisted by officers of the Air Navigation Bureau of ICAO and by officers of other bureaux and offices of the Organization as necessary.

5. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

5.1 The agenda transmitted to the Conference by the Air Navigation Commission was adopted at the opening Plenary.

http://www.icao.int/meetings/anconf13

iv-2 iv – History of the Conference

6. WORKING ARRANGEMENTS

6.1 The organization plan submitted to States in advance of the meeting was approved without change at the opening Plenary. The plan called for the establishment of two committees. The two committees were constituted as shown below:

Committee A (to consider Agenda Items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) Chairperson Mr. Alexis Brathwaite (Trinidad and Tobago) Vice-Chairperson Mr. Peter Yu (South Korea) Secretary Mr. Richard Macfarlane, assisted by Agenda Item Secretaries,

Ms. L. Cary and Messrs. C. Dalton, S. da Silva and Y. Wang supported by ANB Technical Officers

Committee B (to consider Agenda Items 6, 7 and 8) Chairperson Mr. Simon Allotey (Ghana) Vice-Chairperson Mr. Guruprasad Mohapatra (India) Secretary Mr. Catalin Radu, assisted by Mr. D. Guindon (DD/MO), Agenda

Item Secretaries Messrs. M. Costa, M. Marin and N. Rallo supported by ANB Technical Officers

6.2 The discussions in the main meeting were conducted in English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish. Some working papers were presented in English only. The report was issued in English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish.

7. OPENING REMARKS

7.1 President of the Council, Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

It is my great pleasure to welcome you to this Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference with the theme From Development to Implementation.

Aviation today is on the brink of some major transformations. This is reflected in the

fantastic growth in aircraft passenger and cargo traffic volumes that are poised to more than double by 2035, the increasing deployment of drone technology, the launch of autonomous, suborbital and supersonic activities, as well as other innovations such as artificial intelligence and block chain technologies.

Throughout our global aviation network and our ICAO Member States, a tremendous

modernization will take place over the years ahead. We will see the adoption of new technology and the implementation of new infrastructure in order to accommodate air navigation capacity and efficiency challenges.

Accordingly, our goal for the next two weeks is to define our collective vision of a safe,

interoperable, seamless and global civil air traffic management system for the 21st Century.

As some of you will recall, the air navigation system modernization process began with the Tenth Air Navigation Conference in 1991. At that time, our sector agreed to evolve itself from a ground-based to a largely satellite-based air navigation system.


Subsequently, at the Eleventh Air Navigation Conference in 2003, we endorsed a global air traffic management operational concept and developed a related work programme.

The Twelfth and most recent Air Navigation Conference, in 2012, then introduced the Aviation System Block Upgrades or “ASBU” framework. This was established to help guide sectoral harmonization and interoperability, and to align regional and national implementation initiatives while delivering some much needed investment certainty for State and industry planners.

This Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference was preceded by the Second Global Air

Navigation Industry Symposium, or GANIS/2, and the Safety and Air Navigation Implementation Symposium (SANIS) held back to back in 2017.

The main purpose of these GANIS and SANIS events were to gather advance industry

viewpoints on the evolution of global air navigation system and to develop insights into any new or existing implementation challenges respective of ICAO’s proposed updates to our Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) and Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP).

For many years following the 1991 Air Navigation Conference, the goal of our

community has been to realize what was referred to as the “Future Air Navigation System”.

That future is now, Ladies and Gentlemen, and our air traffic management and operations no longer have the luxury of time to adapt to and meet its challenges.

Through the ASBUs and the consensus-based targets and objectives set-out in the GANP

and GASP, ICAO has provided the tools you need to accelerate this transition and to realize the performance capabilities which will keep our sector vital, efficient and fully responsive to the needs and expectations of modern businesses and societies.

At the regional level, this will be supported by the planning and implementation regional

groups (PIRGs) and regional aviation safety groups (RASGs) which help guarantee the alignment of procedures and interoperability of systems.

A great deal of this progress can be achieved through better management and use of the

sectoral performance data and our over-arching concepts in terms of system-wide information management (SWIM) and collaborative decision making (CDM) are now guiding this process.

And as we adjust to drones or new types of operations above flight level 600, we should

not only remain ever-focused on the safety and efficiency performance which are the key value offering of air transport, but also be vigilant regarding potential threats to the increasingly connected systems supporting contemporary operations.

During the Conference you will, therefore, be evaluating some new proposals to define

and address these challenges in a way that engages every stakeholder in the aviation industry, notably through the creation of a new digital global “trust framework”.

This framework has been designed to build upon your existing certification and licensing

oversight commitments, enshrined in the Chicago Convention, and to enable the interoperable evolution of these new and connected systems.


Regarding the evolution of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA), some additional adjustments, are on the agenda of the Conference.

I am pleased to acknowledge that, after nearly two-decades of these audit activities,

ICAO has recorded significant improvements in effective implementation of global Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) in many member States, particularly since the introduction of the No Country Left Behind initiative.

Nevertheless, many States also continue to struggle in complying with the SARPs due to

shortfalls in their resources and technical capacities.

To address this, ICAO has been promoting regional mechanisms, including the establishment of collaborative regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs).

However, many of the established RSOOs are yet to be as effective as they should in

strengthening the safety oversight capabilities of their component countries.

There are many factors and challenges including varying degrees of delegated responsibility, lack of expertise and resources that are preventing the RSOOs from attaining their full potentials.

These persisting concerns were discussed at length at the RSOO Forum which ICAO and

the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) convened together in Swaziland, now Eswatini, in 2017.

It eventually endorsed that ICAO would pursue a new global aviation safety oversight system (GASOS) that is focused on streamlining ICAO’s engagement and support to RSOOs to enable them effectively discharge their mandates to their constituent States.

The initial concept and associated action plan were globally endorsed by the DGCA

meeting in 2017 and we are looking forward to you for the refinement of the programme and, in due course, its presentation to the 40th Assembly.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the outcome of your work during the next two weeks will enable ICAO to refine its work programme and pursue the standardization so urgently needed at this time to help our sector adapt and evolve.

Bear in mind as well that our discussions and endorsements here will help prepare us for efficient deliberations during the 40th ICAO Assembly in 2019.

Accordingly, with the vast majority of the technical topics that will have been discussed

and agreed on during the next two weeks, the Assembly’s Technical Commission will be able to occupy itself on a more detailed basis with the adoption of the new GANP, GASP and their supporting work programmes, as well as any urgent issues which may arise in the interim.

I am convinced that this approach will tremendously improve the overall efficiency of

ICAO with respect to its core air navigation responsibilities to the world.

I would also like to take a moment to recognize and thank the military community for its presence with us here and for its interest to work together with civilian authorities to improve the air navigation system as a whole.


Effective civil-military collaboration and cooperation remains essential to our goal of

guaranteeing the safety and efficiency of all flights and of addressing together the challenges of modernizing the air navigation system for all airspace users.

Before concluding today, I would like to turn your attention to the last Council Off-site

Strategy Meeting (COSM), held in June 2018, at which the ICAO Council took time to focus on Aviation of the Future and on how ICAO can better lead our sector in responding dynamically and effectively to the exponential changes and pace of innovation that we are witnessing and are anticipating in the decades to come.

The COSM particularly emphasized the challenges and opportunities associated with the

emergence of the commercial space sector.

In this regard, I believe that it is time for the Organization to take the bold steps to position itself as the leader in global standardization in this domain. And by doing this in a non-competitive but collaborative manner with our member States, we can set the template for addressing other emerging technologies.

The off-site meeting also emphasized the need to invest in and develop the next

generation aviation professionals who will be responsible for ensuring a safe, interoperable, seamless and global civil air traffic management system in the decades ahead of us.

The ICAO Next Generation of Aviation Professionals Programme plays an important

coordinating role in the implementation of strategies to address associated challenges.

And I have further proposed an aviation thematic competition among teenagers at national, regional and global levels as a means to stimulate their interest to pursue careers in aviation.

Dear colleagues, at this time, I wish to acknowledge the dedication, high degree of

professionalism and commitment of all aviation professionals to their role in aviation safety.

Just recently this commitment was very poignantly demonstrated by Mr. Anthonius Gunawan Agung, an air traffic controller at Mutiara Sis Al Jufri Airport in Palu, Indonesia. During the recent earthquake and tsunamis, Anthonius delayed evacuating the air traffic control tower until the safety of a departing aircraft was assured. As a direct consequence of his selfless heroism, he later died from the injuries he sustained.

Anthonius’ fervent commitment to aviation safety serves as an example to us all, as

individuals, organizations and States. In this regard, we should all acknowledge the delegation of Indonesia here with us today and extend our most heartfelt condolences to his family and those adversely affected by this tragic event.

Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen, as you are aware, the ICAO Council, in support of

the No Country Left Behind initiative, awards the Council President Certificate every year to recognize States from each ICAO region which have made significant progress in resolving their safety oversight deficiencies and improving the effective implementation (EI) of ICAO SARPs as measured through our USOAP CMA activities in the preceding year.

It’s been my great pleasure to present the 2018 Council President Certificates directly

to some recipient States that I have had the privilege to visit this year. However, as officials from a


number of our recipient States this year are present with us today, I thought it beneficial to celebrate their achievements at this Conference:

• Bangladesh • Burkina Faso • Finland • Jordan • Kuwait • Portugal • United Republic of Tanzania

Congratulations to the recipient Delegations and thank you everyone for your patience

and kind applause for these noteworthy accomplishments.

Finally, Ladies and Gentlemen, I now declare “open” this Thirteenth ICAO Air Navigation Conference and wish to invite the President of the ICAO Air Navigation Commission, Mr. Claude Hurley, to elaborate further on your challenging agenda.

I wish you all a very successful Conference.

7.2 Secretary General of ICAO, Dr. Fang Liu

Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen Over the next ten days, you will be exploring how to optimize the evolution of aviation safety and air navigation capacity and efficiency. As we work together toward these goals, we must also keep in mind aviation’s unique and tremendous potential to improve peoples’ lives. While I am confident that many of you are aware of the socio-economic contributions our sector makes to national and regional communities, at times that “big picture” can get lost in the technical details. A key challenge for us in helping States to not only appreciate but also act on this point concerns infrastructure under-funding. But please also recall that a great deal can be accomplished when States take the time to meaningfully integrate their aviation investment priorities into their national development strategies. It was for this purpose that the ICAO Secretariat has worked so hard to link your work to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) and through these to the socio-economic outcomes being sought under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The more clearly governments can appreciate these links, the more willing they will be to invest in aviation projects. This is one of the key messages myself and ICAO’s Council President have been delivering during ICAO’s global engagements, with special emphasis on how local levels of ICAO compliance play a critical role on how effectively States can optimize their aviation benefits.


This point is very clearly underscored by the fact that States’ attainment of no fewer than fifteen of the seventeen United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is greatly facilitated by the local availability of ICAO compliant operations. You will be delving into a range of topics during this event which pertain to many recent air transport innovations and it is important in this context to recognize how the emergence of new entrants continues to enhance and expand the socio-economic value of aviation. This point is illustrated by the fact that some of the concepts that you will be enabling here, through your work on the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) and the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) for example, have the potential to enable new aircraft types to provide internet connectivity to more than a billion people in the coming years. Additional capabilities should also be realized relating to the delivery of medicines to inaccessible areas or to reducing emergency response times in post-disaster scenarios. These are but a few examples of what your work here relates to, so please appreciate that life for many will improve on this planet directly because of the decisions and progress you are now poised to undertake together. As we appreciate those impacts, it is also important to recognize the role ICAO plays in helping you to realize them. It is much more efficient for you and for our sector in general to coordinate and collaborate here, collectively, than it is to have multiple efforts producing patchwork solutions which can vary from State-to-State or Region-to-Region. And in a related sense, it is critical that ICAO, for its part, is able to demonstrate with confidence that we are setting-out a global agenda which is as practical as it is visionary and which will make the best use of all available resources. To that point, it is important to note that the outcomes of your Conference will provide critical inputs to the development of the 2020-2022 ICAO Business Plan. Through it, we achieve the transparency you deserve with respect to what we spend and what we deliver. This accountability, in turn, gives the global community the confidence it rightfully demands regarding the purpose and value of our technical programmes. Efficiency and effectiveness will be high on your list of priorities as you assess everything before you over this ten-day event and they are also essential to how ICAO is organizing and prioritizing its resources. Improving this Organization’s ability to serve its Member States and the aviation sector, through a results-based management approach, has been a key priority of mine and one which is now shared across our Secretariat. This speaks to the many resource challenges ICAO is faced with in the current geo-political environment. We cannot, however, let these distract us from the continuing need to facilitate and implement your decisions.


Simply put, ICAO has had to become quite innovative in terms of how we fund and deliver our assistance and leadership in air transport. Many of you may be surprised to learn, for instance, that even some of the more important priorities we are hard at work on must all be paid for through extra-budgetary sources we proactively seek out and mobilize. This includes programme items such as cybersecurity and cyber-resilience, our work to assist with domestic remotely-piloted and unmanned aircraft guidance and other key developments we must accommodate and guide through our global Standards. Before concluding today, Ladies and Gentlemen, I would simply like to highlight that aviation remains the safest way to travel and that some of the credit for our sector’s incredible safety and efficiency performance refers directly to the progress achieved at past ICAO Air Navigation Conferences. It will now be my great pleasure to pass the floor to Mr. Stephen Creamer, the Director of ICAO’s Air Navigation Bureau, and in doing so let me please also wish you all a very successful series of discussions and decisions as you help to shape the coming decade of international civil aviation. Thank you.

7.3 President of the Air Navigation Commission, Capt. Claude Hurley

Good morning as well to Dr Liu, Mme Secretary General, Excellences of the ICAO Council, fellow Commissioners, members of the Secretariat, and you, our distinguished participants at this, ICAO’s Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference. There’s more than a thousand of you, occupying key roles in the States we serve and with our aviation industry stakeholders – more than a thousand of you who chose to be here today, at this Conference. Considering that it is 15 degrees warmer this morning than it was yesterday, I’m surprised that not more of you skipped my speech to instead go explore Montréal during this brief return to summer weather. But joking aside, I truly feel blessed to be in the same room as you, in this, the ICAO Assembly Hall – a room full of gravitas and hope – as we embark, together – through the exchange of ideas and constructive debate – on the difficult but necessary task of setting priorities and choosing key objectives for aviation safety and air navigation ahead of next year’s ICAO Assembly. What I would like to share with you are some thoughts on how thrilled I am about all of you being here today and how the choices you’ll make over the next two weeks will set the direction for how we’ll tackle together the challenges of implementation. But before I do, it might be worthwhile to explain that what you heard, just now, was the traditional ICAO protocol for speaking up in formal meetings, whether it’s in the Commission, the Council or even the Assembly. For me, I use the words “Thanks/Hello/Welcome/Topic” to remember the protocol. But rest assured that, while it’s not needed in this setting, I only bring it up today as I had the occasion lately to reflect that, as a pilot coming in from the cold, so-to-speak (it was January when I first arrived at ICAO…), it took me almost a year to find my voice in these formal meetings.


And yet, for all of us to find our voice and to speak up with our opinions – whether we’re from Industry or States – is perhaps the key to ICAO getting early feedback on any proposals so that we, together, can build a shared situational awareness on any potential implementation challenges and for us – then – to build consensus on how best to tackle these challenges, together. As you well know, it’s not for lack of good intentions that things do not always work out.

What we understand are the current best practices that can be implemented now. Some years ago, I was managing a start-up flight operation overseas and, one day, we received in the weekly – and much anticipated – delivery of aircraft parts, something beautifully crafted in aircraft aluminium and brightly painted in company colours. It was not, however, an extra aircraft part, but a large bulletin board intended as the new company-wide standard for posting safety-critical information. It’s a nice touch, right? – and of course, being at ICAO, you will understand that I am a big believer in both safety and standardization – but there were some implementation challenges, which I’m a little embarrassed to share with you. Being on spotty dial-up internet – if you can remember how much slow that was – it took forever to download the graphic-heavy safety bulletins, only to discover that these pre-designed “safety theme of the week” posters had been formatted for 8.5” x 11” paper, the common format here in North America. It won’t be a surprise to you that the only paper we could source locally, A4, met that other, much more prevalent world standard – ISO 216. As well, this beautifully crafted aluminium safety bulletin board had been installed with - and you can probably guess where I’m going with this by now – not with the much more common international two-hole spacing standard (ISO 838 Standard of 80 mm for those who appreciate details), but with the unique North American spacing of 70 mm. Yes, it’s maybe only a paper saga, but sadly, with no compatible paper or two-hole punch locally, we had some implementation challenges if we were to live up to the company standard for the effective distribution of safety information. I only bring this up as an amusing story and I purposely stayed away from the many real aviation challenges we have all surely lived. For those, and for practical suggestions as to the real-world challenges of SMS implementation, I do want to point you towards the excellent ICAO safety management implementation website put together by the Secretariat which provides examples, tools and supporting educational material which you will surely find very useful. The point of my story though, is that even the most simple of initiatives, however well-intentioned, can come with unexpected obstacles to full implementation if we are not fully aware of the realities in the field. This theme of “From Development to Implementation” will inform all of our discussions during this, the ICAO Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference. Essentially, we hope to leverage your expertise of what the difficulties are outside these walls so that the proposals being developed by ICAO are based on a deeper understanding of the realities


for you, as States - and Industry - so that we together, can not only build a shared situational awareness of the problems themselves, but hopefully a consensus on the best paths to success going forward. In 2017, over 4 billion passengers safely took to the skies. If you are jetlagged and still up late tonight, you might reflect on that fact that before the clock strikes midnight tonight, like any typical October Tuesday, 12 million passengers will fly - today - on over 120,000 flights to close to 4,000 airports, watched over safely by 170 Air Navigation Service Providers. These flights will also carry over $20 billion dollars’ worth of goods (well, $20 billion Canadian dollars maybe, but you get the point…). That’s only in one day. By the end of this Conference, close to 150 million people – and some pets – will have flown, some for the first time. By 2030, forecasts are predicting that this traffic globally, will double, and with some regions seeing triple the traffic. With some States already experiencing 10 per cent annual growth, new commercial aircraft are being added to registry at a never-before-seen rate. As well, not only is traditional traffic increasing at an unprecedented pace, but we are also seeing the rapid growth of new entrants into the air navigation system. Technological innovations in unmanned aircraft systems, supersonic aircraft, operations above FL 600, and commercial space flights, to name but a few emerging sectors, will create wonderful new opportunities for the Next Generation of Aviation Professionals – and the travelling public they will serve - but will also bring with it significant challenges, as we together look for ways to safely integrate this new traffic into ever more congested airspace. This may result in the need for fundamental changes in how things are done and, as the President of the Council Dr. Aliu eloquently underlined, these changes can successfully be managed and the solutions can be globally harmonized. The international civil aviation community has successfully tackled significant change-management challenges before. For example, the evolution from a ground-based system of air traffic control to a satellite-based system of air traffic management is already bringing clear benefits. Many of you likely flew trans-polar routes coming into Montreal. They are long flights, eh? And, by a show of hands, maybe even long enough for you to read all 300 working papers being presented here this week? ... sure, I, for one, believe you! I really do, but for the sake of my story, let’s say all your readings were already done weeks ago, you could not sleep on the long flight over, and you were looking for a distraction as you awaited the next delicacy to come from the in-flight galley. If, by chance you were not catching up with what Tom Cruise was doing in sequel # 6 to the original (and best) Mission Impossible - if instead, you watched the moving map at any point during the four or five hours it took you to cross the arctic and transit back into inhabited territory, you may have reflected on Canada’s vast geography, much of which is not served by traditional ground-based, limited-range navaids like VORs and NDBs. As a younger man – which was not as long ago as my looks might suggest – I flew search and rescue in Canada’s Air Force.


Search and rescues, by their very nature, are not usually conveniently located below an airway and it won’t come as a surprise to any of you that IFR was somewhat unreliable for precise navigation off-airways, up North, before the age of GPS. Flying rescue missions up North was our own version of Mission Impossible, as for us, often IFR meant “I Follow Roads” or “Railroads”. And when the map ran out of those as we flew North, IFR became “I follow Rivers”. I joke. But the limitations of dead-reckoning over long distances in Northern Canada with few landmarks were such that even when Omega – a VLF-band radio-beacon system – was introduced, knowing where we were to plus or minus 15 miles in the frozen, feature-less tundra was a marked improvement. Later, we were equipped with LORAN-C, which improved navigation precision dramatically near the coasts, but much less so in the North. In practice, to successfully accomplish a SAR mission in Northern Canada in the early-90s meant that helicopter crews needed the occasional radio fixes to military patrol aircraft providing top-cover, as they were equipped with inertial navigation systems –and dedicated navigators. The alternative was to fly on clear nights and rely, like seafarers of old, on the constellations of Cassiopeia and Ursa Major to point to the North Star. Sadly, while I’m sure that many of you can still navigate by the stars, the only time it might come in useful this week would be to find your way back to your hotel after a late reception, should your phone’s map app not have figured out the ever changing construction detours in Montreal. The point is that we got the rescues done and those that could be saved were. But nowadays, with the advent of reliable precise positioning data, available to anyone with a GNSS receiver, being lost off-airways is no longer a thing and the decisions that enabled the widespread use of satellite-based system for navigation and air traffic management were made here and in the world’s capitals by our predecessors; something we, as a community, can be very proud of. This last July, the Air Navigation Commission had the rare opportunity to do a study trip to the ICAO-South America Region, including wonderful stops in both Peru and Colombia. We were impressed by how States in the region, such as Peru and Colombia are successfully managing significant growth in traffic. As one example, the use of performance-based navigation (or PBN) approaches to thread traffic into the difficult terrain surrounding the high-altitude airport at Cuzco, has enabled lower-minima approaches and longer operating hours, which in turn, helps the Cuzco airport manage increased traffic demand. Similarly, in technical discussions I have had with States in the ICAO Asia-Pacific Region, I was struck by the many examples of how the Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) that we discuss here, are being put to good use and successfully implemented. One example is how Malaysian industry stakeholders worked collaboratively with the State regulator to implement Required-Navigation Performance – Authorization Required (or RNP-AR) approaches across Malaysia’s major airports, which not only enabled better traffic flow and shorter leg times, but literally saves tons of fuel and brings with it significant environmental benefits. The point being that the decisions you will make here over the next few weeks can and surely will bring measurable improvements to aviation safety, efficiency, capacity, security and the environment, all the while managing emerging risks in a globally harmonized way.


Having had a chance to read those 300 working papers you have brought to the table, I applaud you for the efforts you have already made to prepare for this Conference. You are the leaders that will decide on and enable us all to manage, together, how best to adapt to not only massive increases in traditional traffic but also allowing new entrants – with the benefits that new technologies bring – into a shared airspace. So, let’s go far, together. Your work of the next two weeks will be consolidated into reports by the dedicated and talented professionals in the ICAO Secretariat. The results of your deliberations will be presented to the Air Navigation Commission, so that we, in our role as technical advisors to the ICAO Council, can best help advise on the organization’s agenda for next year’s Assembly. It is, perhaps, a good time to ask my fellow Commissioners to stand so that I can introduce you to the Air Navigation Commission – your Air Navigation Commission. As per Article 56 of the Chicago Convention, the Air Navigation Commission is composed of 19 members appointed by the Council, from among persons nominated by Contracting States. Article 56 goes on to say we are to have suitable qualifications and experience in the science and practice of aeronautics and if I were to list the many impressive skills and varied professional experience of my learned colleagues, I would not only go over my allotted time at the podium but I would have to also make the remark that occasionally exceptions are made, and a pilot or two slips in, even those of us with a fondness for helicopters. There are two points worth highlighting though about the Commission’s role as per the Convention (as my colleagues retake their seats), the first of which is that while we are nominated by States. You will see, if you come visit the ANC Chamber while you’re here which you’re most welcomed to, that we do not sit behind our flag but behind our individual names representing, therefore, not only our own individual expertise but also, most importantly, the interest of all 192 contracting States – all of you! The other point is that we do not work alone. There is a vibrant and active ANC Community made up, first of all, by panel members who devote countless hours working hand-in-hand with the Secretariat to bring proposals to the table. As well, in the Chamber itself, we are blessed with having dedicated, erudite and eloquent Observers from States and Industry such as those from accredited international organizations, like as our good friends in IATA, ACI, IFATCA, IFALPA, IBAC, IAOPA, and ICCAIA, all so that we do not discuss proposals for Standards and Recommended Practices in isolation without the benefit of fully understanding the impact on our stakeholders and any resulting implementation challenges. Throughout, we are supported by the professionals in the Secretariat who make it their life’s work to ensure that we, ourselves, fully understand the background and the many nuances of what is being proposed. We are truly blessed, so…let’s go far together. As such, I’m thrilled that you are all here, especially in this lovely weather, as your presence demonstrates the commitment you, your organizations, and your States have to this work. As a final thought, it should be noted that this Conference is an essential element in reaching out to you ahead of next year’s Assembly, to find ways that we can build a shared situational awareness of the challenges and opportunities ahead, and how best to prioritize our limited resources so as to build a better future, together, for aviation and our travelling public – and for that I again thank you for being here. Happy landings.

v – Agenda of the Conference v-1

AGENDA OF THE CONFERENCE

COMMITTEE A Agenda Item 1: Air navigation global strategy

1.1: Vision and overview of the sixth edition of the GANP 1.2: Air navigation performance improvement and measurement through the aviation

system block upgrades (ASBUs) and basic building blocks (BBBs) framework 1.3: Air navigation roadmaps 1.4: Air navigation business cases

Agenda Item 2: Enabling the global air navigation system

2.1: Aerodrome operations and capacity 2.2: Integrated CNS and spectrum strategy 2.3: Future provision of aeronautical meteorological service

Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system

3.1: System-wide information management (SWIM) 3.2: Flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE) and

trajectory-based operations (TBO) 3.3: Air traffic flow management (ATFM) 3.4: Civil/military cooperation 3.5: Other ATM issues

Agenda Item 4: Implementing the global air navigation system and the role of planning

and implementation regional groups (PIRGs)

4.1: The economic benefits brought by aviation 4.2: Implementing BBBs and minimum service Standards 4.3: Implementing ASBUs for performance improvement 4.4: Implementing search and rescue (SAR) processes and procedures

Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues

5.1: Operations above Flight Level 600 5.2: Operations below 1000 feet 5.3: Remotely piloted aircraft system (RPAS) 5.4: Cyber resilience 5.5: Other emerging issues impacting the global air navigation system including

unmanned aircraft systems (drones), and supersonic and commercial space operations

v-2 v – Agenda of the Conference

COMMITTEE B

Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues

6.1 Strategic plan

6.1.1: Vision and overview of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP), 2020-2022 edition

6.1.2: Enabling safety performance monitoring; goals, targets and indicators in the 2020-2022 edition of the GASP

6.1.3: Global Aviation Safety Oversight System (GASOS) 6.2 Implementation of safety management

6.2.1: State safety programmes (SSPs) 6.2.2: Safety management systems 6.2.3: Developing safety intelligence 6.3 Monitoring and Oversight

6.3.1: The evolution of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) continuous monitoring approach (CMA)

6.3.2: Support and the USOAP CMA Online Framework (OLF)

Agenda Item 7: Operational safety risks

7.1: Facilitation of data-driven decision-making in support of safety intelligence to support safety risk management

7.2: Operational safety risks at the global, regional and national levels, and the role of RSOOs and RASGs in achieving the GASP goals

7.3: Other implementation issues

Agenda Item 8: Emerging safety issues

8.1: Measures to proactively address emerging issues; 8.2: Emerging safety issues

vi – Glossary of Terms vi-1

GLOSSARY OF TERMS 5LNCs five letter name codes

A-CDM airport collaborative decision making

ACI Airports Council International

ACSA Agency on Aeronautical Safety for Central America

ADIZ air defence identification zone

ADSB automatic dependent surveillance — broadcast

AFCAC African Civil Aviation Commission

AFI Africa-Indian Ocean

AFPP African Flight Procedure Programme

AFTN aeronautical fixed telecommunication network

AGA aerodromes, air routes and ground aids

AGL above ground level

AI artificial intelligence

AIM aeronautical information management

AIS aeronautical information service

ALoSP acceptable level of safety performance

AMHS ATS message handling system

ANP air navigation plan

ANS air navigation services

ANSP air navigation services provider

APAC Asia and Pacific Office, Bangkok

APEX ACI Airport Excellence

AR authorization required

ARN aircraft registration network

ASBU aviation system block upgrade

ASIAP Aviation Safety Implementation Assistance Partnership

ASTs Abuja Safety Targets

ATC air traffic control

ATFM air traffic flow management

ATM air traffic management

ATS air traffic services

ATSEP air traffic safety electronics personnel

BBB basic building blocks

vi-2 vi – Glossary of Terms

BSTF Black Sea Task Force

CAA civil aviation authority

CANSO Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation

CBA cost-benefit analysis

CDM collaborative decision-making

CMA continuous monitoring approach

CNS communications, navigation, and surveillance

COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

CONOPS concept of operations

COSCAP Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programme

COCESNA Corporación Centroamericana de Servicios de Navegación Aérea

CPDLC controller-pilot data link communications

CST commercial space transport

DAA detect and avoid

DFMC dual frequency, multi-constellation

DPRK Democratic People's Republic of Korea

EANPG European Air Navigation Planning Group

ECAC European Civil Aviation Conference

EU European Union

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FF-ICE flight and flow information for a collaborative environment

FIR flight information region

FMS flight management system

FSF Flight Safety Foundation

FWT folding wing tip

GA general aviation

GADSS global aeronautical distress and safety system

GANP Global Air Navigation Plan

GASeP Global Aviation Security Plan

GASOS global aviation safety oversight system

GASP Global Aviation Safety Plan

GBAS ground-based augmentation system

GEUSR Group of Experts for a USOAP CMA Structured Review

GLONASS Global Navigation Satellite System


GNSS global navigation satellite system

GRSAP Global Runway Safety Action Plan

GSG GANP Study Group

GSI government safety inspector

GSI-AIR government safety inspector - airworthiness

GSI-OPS government safety inspector - operations

GSI-PEL government safety inspector - personnel licensing

IAC Interstate Aviation Committee

IAOPA International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations

IATA International Air Transport Association

IBAC International Business Aviation Council

ICARD International Codes and Routes Designators

ICCAIA International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations

IFAIMA International Federation of Aeronautical Information Management Associations

IFALDA International Federation of Airline Dispatchers Associations

IFALPA International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations

IFATCA International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations

IFATSEA International Federation of Air Traffic Safety Electronics Associations

IPS Internet Protocol Suite

IRis Integrated Risk Picture

ISAM Integrated Safety Assessment Model

ITF International Transport Workers’ Federation

ITU International Telecommunication Union

ITU-R International Telecommunication Union — Radio Communication Sector

IWXXM ICAO Meteorological Information Exchange Model

KPI key performance indicator

MET Meteorological

NCLB No Country Left Behind

NEXTT New Experience Travel Technologies

NGAP Next Generation of Aviation Professionals

NOPS network operations

OLF online framework

PANS Procedures for Air Navigation Services

PANS-TRG Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training

PASOC Central American Safety Events Analysis Programme

vi-4 vi – Glossary of Terms

PBN performance-based navigation

PIRGs planning and implementation regional group

POI project outcome indicators

PPP public-private partnership

PPT panel project team

PQ protocol question

RAIOs regional accident and incident investigation organizations

RASGs regional aviation safety groups

RNP required navigation performance

RPAS remotely piloted aircraft systems

RSP runway safety programme

SAM South American

SAR search and rescue

SARPs Standards and Recommended Practices

SBAS satellite-based augmentation system

SDCPS safety data collection and processing system

SIDS small island developing States

SIMS Safety Information Monitoring System

SMI safety management implementation

SMM Safety Management Manual (SMM) (Doc 9859)

SMS safety management system

SoD State of design

SoR State of registry

SPI special position identification safety performance indicators

SSP State safety programme

SSR secondary surveillance radar

SST supersonic transport

SWIM system-wide information management

TAC traditional alpha numeric code

TAM total airport management

TBO trajectory-based operations

UA unmanned aircraft

UAS Unmanned aircraft systems

UAV unmanned aerial vehicle


UN United Nations

UN SDG United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

USOAP Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme

UTM UAS traffic management

VHF very high frequency

WAKE wake turbulence

WMO world Meteorological Organization

— — — — — — — —

Report on Agenda Item 1 1-1

Agenda Item 1: Air navigation global strategy 1.1: Vision and overview of the sixth edition of the GANP 1.2: Air navigation performance improvement and measurement through the aviation

system block upgrades (ASBUs) and basic building blocks (BBBs) framework

1.1 This agenda item introduced the draft Sixth Edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP). To provide participants with a better overview and to facilitate discussion, Agenda Items 1.1 and 1.2 were addressed together. The Conference discussed and agreed with the proposed multilayer structure of the GANP, presented in AN-Conf/13-WP/18 by the Secretariat, which highlighted the importance of global, regional and national air navigation planning alignment through four different levels: a global strategic level, a global technical level, a regional level and a national level, which can be viewed on the web-based platform at https://www4.icao.int/ganpportal (GANP Portal).

1.2 New forms of demand, emerging technologies and innovative ways of doing business, together with human talent, were restoring a sense of wonder and excitement to aviation. Moreover, these aspects were bringing new opportunities for a transformation of the air navigation system, to boost social well-being worldwide. To steer and nurture this transformation, the Conference agreed that the global strategic level of the GANP was crucial to the evolution of the global air navigation system and should therefore provide strategic guidelines, as highlighted in AN-Conf/13-WP/35, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States1, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)2 and by the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL). The Conference therefore welcomed the vision, performance ambitions and conceptual roadmap presented in AN-Conf/13-WP/18. Furthermore, the Conference requested the amendment of the vision, performance ambitions and conceptual roadmap to reflect that commercial airspace vehicles are not aircraft.

1.3 Within this transformational context, special emphasis was placed on the conceptual roadmap as the solution to the need for a common transition strategy, identified in AN-Conf/13-WP/102 presented by Japan. In this regard, the Conference agreed that the conceptual roadmap should be the reference for the technical concepts within the GANP and that the global technical level should be mapped to the global strategic level within the GANP, through a conceptual roadmap with added detail . Furthermore, the Conference highlighted the importance of readability, transparency and stability of the web-based GANP and the ASBUs, as outlined in AN-Conf/13-WP/235, presented by the Republic of Korea. Regarding the relationship between the GANP and other relevant ICAO documentation, including regional documentation the Conference was informed that such work would be addressed as part of the completion of the global strategic level.

1.4 The Conference agreed to incorporate emerging air navigation concepts such as unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), UAS traffic management (UTM), global aeronautical distress and safety systems (GADSS), big data and a global aviation internet network into future versions of the GANP as proposed in AN-Conf/13-WP/265 presented by Saudi Arabia, AN-Conf/13-WP/92 presented by the United Arab Emirates, and AN-Conf/13-WP/64 presented by the United States. The Conference also agreed that the civil-military dimension would also be included in the GANP.

1 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,

Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.

2 Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Turkey and Ukraine.

https://www4.icao.int/ganpportal

1-2 Report on Agenda Item 1

1.5 The Conference was informed that due to the importance of the human role in the system, human factors considerations were already reflected in the ongoing work of future editions of the GANP. Likewise, work on the human role in any man-machine interaction was ongoing within ICAO and that a generic automation model would be considered as part of this work.

1.6 Two global frameworks were presented by the Secretariat as part of the global technical level in AN-Conf/13-WP/19: a revised draft of the aviation system block upgrades (ASBU) and the basic building blocks (BBB) frameworks. The Conference noted the process and guiding principles behind the ASBU framework update, in particular its relationship with the conceptual roadmap and future research and development activities. The Conference also noted the benefits of regional and national cooperation, supported by ICAO, for modernization programmes and encouraged the conduct of trials, as proposed in AN-Conf/13-WP/102, to improve the development and facilitate the implementation of the new air navigation concepts outlined in the ASBU framework, following a performance-based approach. In this regard, the Conference emphasized the importance of identifying qualitative and, when possible, quantitative benefits derived from the implementation of the operational improvements outlined in the ASBU framework and why substantial investments should be tied to their associated costs and benefits. The Conference also highlighted the importance to distinguish responsibilities and accountabilities among the different stakeholders when implementing the ASBUs, as well as the importance to monitor the progress on the implementation of the elements within the ASBU framework.

1.7 The Conference discussed the ASBU framework update and change management process in order to improve agility as proposed in AN-Conf/13-WP/19. The Conference also discussed the need to provide a more simplified construct of the change management process and agreed to its implementation as soon as possible, provided that transparency and stability are ensured. The Conference also reviewed the rationale presented in the working paper, for the development of the BBB framework and considered its initial version. The Conference discussed the proposed BBB framework concept and it was further informed that the services outlined in the proposed BBB framework were derived from the Standards and mandatory procedures for the provision of air navigation services, as specified in ICAO provisions, representing a baseline level of air navigation services. The Conference agreed that the relationship between ASBUs and proposed BBBs and their impact on the regional plans should be clear within the GANP. The Conference also agreed that ICAO should develop online training and organize regional events for the familiarization of all stakeholders with the Sixth Edition of the GANP.

1.8 As highlighted in the conceptual roadmap presented in AN-Conf/13-WP/18 and supported by AN-Conf/13-WP/102 and AN-Conf/13-WP/92, the Conference recognized that information management is a key enabler for the future of the air navigation system and, therefore, for important concepts within the ASBU framework such as trajectory-based operations (TBO), flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE) and airport collaborative decision-making (A-CDM). The Conference agreed that lacking automation and shortcomings in information exchange could limit the efficient use of capacity and capability within the system. In addition, the Conference highlighted the need for consensus on international policy regarding the ownership and use of data.

1.9 The Conference acknowledged the proposals in AN-Conf/13-WP/265 to maximize the potential of the GANP Portal regarding the broad sharing of relevant information related to the development and deployment of the GANP. The Conference then agreed that ICAO should enable, within the GANP Portal, the capability to share research results, developments and validations related to operational and technological matters, information on deployment and lessons learnt regarding the ASBU elements at the regional, State and industry levels. The Conference was informed that the listing of the Standards and technical specifications used in the definition, design and deployment of the ASBUs, as well as the supporting implementation guidance and operational approval, was part of the ongoing work related to the ASBU enablers for the GANP. The Conference acknowledged that, in addition to the web


portal, a concise, executive summary (printable) version of the GANP, which outlined its key policies, priorities and strategies, was needed to ensure that the GANP was easily accessible to all States and key decision makers.

1.10 The Conference highlighted the importance of strengthening the relationship between the GANP and the Global Aviation Safety Plan (Doc 10004, GASP) and recognized that the GASP supports the implementation of the GANP by promoting the effective implementation of safety oversight and a safety management approach to oversight, including safety risk management, to permit the evolution of the air navigation system in a safety-managed way.

1.11 The Conference requested that consideration be given to the establishment of a GANP Study Group (GSG) and suggested that nominations be sought from Member States from all regions, international organizations, and including some members from the GANP Multidisciplinary Vision Team and the ASBU Panel Project Team (PPT), to progress the work on future versions of the GANP. The Conference was informed that the ASBU PPT was a group composed of experts from relevant Air Navigation Commission panels, as advised by the respective panel Chairperson together with the Secretariat. This group consisted of experts from all regions.

1.12 Information papers provided by Japan (AN-Conf/13-WP/252), the United States and the European Union (AN-Conf/13-WP/273), the United States (AN-Conf/13-WP/274) and ICAO (AN-Conf/13-WP/34), were noted.

1.13 As a result of the discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendations:

Recommendation 1.1/1 — Vision and overview of the Sixth Edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP)

That States:

agree that the future Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP), based on the a)outcome of the Thirteenth Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/13), be available as a web-based platform, including a concise executive summary (printable) which outlined its key policies, priorities and strategies to ensure that the GANP was easily accessible to all States and key decision makers;

agree with the proposed multilayer structure for the Sixth Edition of the GANP; b)

welcome the proposed vision, performance ambitions and conceptual roadmap for the c)Sixth Edition of the GANP, with the inclusion of the civil-military dimension;

recognize the importance of a separate but aligned GANP and Global Aviation Safety d)Plan (Doc 10004, GASP);

That ICAO:

consider the establishment of a GANP Study Group comprised of Member States e)from all regions and industry to undertake work on future editions of the GANP;

make available the GANP global strategic level (printable) in the six ICAO f)languages;


develop online training and organize regional seminars in conjunction with the g)planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs), where possible, for the familiarization of the Sixth Edition of the GANP and support the deployment and implementation of regional and national air navigation plans;

develop a national air navigation plan template available for voluntary use by States, h)as part of the Sixth Edition of the GANP, aligned with the global and regional air navigation plans, and support States in developing their national air navigation plans while taking into consideration neighbouring requirements;

strengthen the relationship between the GASP, the GANP and the newly developed i)Global Aviation Security Plan (GASeP); and

continue to work with States, international organizations, air traffic management j)(ATM) modernization programmes and other stakeholders on the development of the Sixth Edition of the GANP, as required for subsequent endorsement at the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly.

Recommendation 1.2/1 — Global technical level of the Sixth Edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP)

That States:

agree with the proposed change management process to maintain an up-to-date a)aviation system block upgrade (ASBU) framework with the formal involvement of the ASBU Panel Project Team (ASBU PPT) to improve transparency, consistency and stability;

welcome the updated ASBU framework and consider the initial version of the basic b)building block (BBB) framework;

That ICAO:

map the global technical level of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) c)to the strategic level;

make available the ASBU and proposed BBB frameworks in an interactive and d)simplified format, as part of the web-based GANP Portal, emphasizing the relationship between both frameworks, and between the frameworks and the regional air navigation plan (ANP) elements;

enable the capability, within the GANP Portal, to upload relevant information related e)to the development and deployment of the ASBU and proposed BBB frameworks in order to allow States, regions and industry to share information;

incorporate a flexible framework for emerging air navigation concepts, such as f)unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), UAS traffic management (UTM), Big Data and the aviation Internet, into future editions of the GANP;

include a Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS) thread in the g)Sixth Edition of the GANP in line with ICAO provisions;


consider designing a thread for a Global Aviation Internet Network in the GANP, in h)coordination with aviation and non-aviation-related industries;

emphasize and enhance a human-centric approach to system design and processes for i)change management;

support the conducting of trials for new air navigation concepts as outlined in the j)ASBU framework within the GANP; and

continue to work with States, international organizations, air traffic management k)(ATM) modernization programmes and other stakeholders on the development of the global technical level of the Sixth Edition of the GANP for subsequent endorsement at the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly.

Agenda Item 1: Air navigation global strategy 1.3: Air navigation roadmaps

1.14 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/26, presented by the Secretariat, which proposed a new approach to the development of the roadmaps provided in the GANP. This approach would maintain the original objective of the roadmaps: to assist States and stakeholders in their planning and investment decisions. The new approach would also allow the civil aviation community to accommodate new classes of airspace users and to embrace and integrate new technology when it becomes available. The benefits of the new approach were recognized and agreed by the Conference. However, the Conference recognized the need to define the performance requirements for each ASBU element as early as possible as they are the basic input required to develop all operational, technical and regulatory provisions, as well as the need to maintain references to compliant technologies within this new approach.

1.15 The Conference then reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/55, presented by ARINC, EUROCAE, RTCA and SAE International and AN-Conf/13-WP/172 presented by the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO). These working papers reiterated the principles supporting AN-Conf/12 Recommendation 6/13, Development of Standards and Recommended Practices, procedures and guidance material and Assembly Resolution A39-22, Formulation and implementation of Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) and notification of differences and therefore encouraged ICAO to continue its efforts to place more reliance on industry standards to complement ICAO provisions. Incorporating industry standards by reference would allow better use of available resources and expertise with improvements in the quality and efficiency of the development and implementation of ICAO provisions. The Conference was informed that ICAO was already working closely with industry standards-making organizations in support of Assembly Resolution A39-22. Regarding the use of industry standards, the Conference highlighted the need for both a suitable validation and verification process and to ensure interoperability.

1.16 The Conference noted that AN-Conf/13-WP/26, AN-Conf/13-WP/55 and AN-Conf/13-WP/172 were complementary as they each supported the performance-based approach to the development of ICAO provisions and the need to define acceptable means of compliance through which interoperability and adherence to ICAO provisions can be assessed.


1.17 AN-Conf/13-WP/103, presented by Japan, proposed the development of a data link/internet protocol suite standardization roadmap to promote harmonization and overcome problems from a proliferation of data link standards and specifications. This development would be needed to support the effective implementation of key initiatives described in the GANP. The Conference was informed that this work was being progressed by the appropriate ICAO expert groups with the development of a Global Data Link Implementation Strategy and that the work would also benefit from the approaches outlined in AN-Conf/13-WP/26 and AN-Conf/13-WP/55. This working paper also proposed that ICAO conduct a data link/Internet Protocol Suite (IPS) seminar/symposium. The merits of this were accepted by the Conference and it was referred to ICAO for further consideration on the timing and content of this event.

1.18 An information paper provided by the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/260) was noted.

1.19 As a result of the discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendation:

Recommendation 1.3/1 — Air navigation roadmaps

That States:

provide ICAO with timely information on their modernization plans and the equipage a)plans of airspace users;

That States and ICAO:

work collaboratively to adopt a performance-based approach for developing b)performance requirements and acceptable means of compliance to support the implementation of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) while considering the need for global interoperability;

That ICAO:

provide air navigation roadmaps, linked to the aviation system block upgrade c)(ASBU) elements, within the GANP which support:

1) new airspace users and emerging technologies;

2) greater flexibility where possible in the choice of technologies, based on performance needs; and

3) earlier adoption of new technologies and operational capabilities as they emerge, linked to the performance needs;

continue to explore practical means to make use of international standards, in d)particular through the Standards Roundtable work with recognized standards-making organizations, to expedite the efficient development of ICAO provisions; and

expedite the work on the Global Data Link Implementation Strategy and develop e)harmonized solutions to support air-ground data link communications.


Agenda Item 1: Air navigation global strategy 1.4: Air navigation business cases

1.20 Under this item, the Conference discussed the importance of a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) during the decision-making process of air navigation improvements. A simplified CBA checklist to support the development of the air navigation infrastructure through the ASBU framework and to assist in securing funding and financing for asset deployment was provided in AN-Conf/13-WP/22 presented by the Secretariat. The Conference agreed on the importance of considering the cost and benefit aspects, as well as airspace user requirements and operational impacts, in any decision-making process. The Conference highlighted the importance of performing a full impact assessment that included human, social and environmental dimensions among others when defining optimum solutions for improvements in the performance of the air navigation system through the use of the ASBU framework. The Conference noted the information provided by the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC)3 in AN-Conf/13-WP/222 related to a study on the development of satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS)/global navigation satellite system (GNSS) in Africa, including an independent CBA and impact assessment for both aviation and non-aviation use. In this regard, the Conference encouraged ICAO and the Africa-Indian Ocean (AFI) States to support AFCAC in the evaluation of the deliverables associated with the study.


Recommendation 1.4/1 — Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in support of assets deployment

That States:

perform a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) as part of all required impact assessments, in a)coordination with air navigation services providers (ANSPs) and among other relevant stakeholders, when defining optimum solutions for improvements in the performance of the air navigation system through the use of the aviation system block upgrades (ASBU) framework;

use a simplified mechanism, if they do not have a process already in place, such as b)the checklist available on the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) Portal, for CBA of air navigation infrastructure investment projects to support improvements as described in the ASBU framework; and

That ICAO:

support the implementation of applicable CBA methodologies through dedicated c)workshops.

— — — — — — — —

3 Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cabo Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,

Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan ,Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe.


Agenda Item 2: Enabling the global air navigation system 2.1: Aerodrome operations and capacity

2.1 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/14, presented by the Secretariat, which discussed challenges and initiatives related to aerodrome capacity and efficiency in light of the significant traffic growth forecast for the next fifteen years in both passenger volume and aircraft movements at aerodromes serving international operations. ICAO long-term traffic forecasts indicated that global passenger traffic would almost double by 2032, reaching more than 6 billion passengers annually with over 60 million flights. With increasing air traffic, airport congestion remained one of the biggest constraints to enhancing capacity of the civil aviation system. The working paper highlighted areas in which both States and ICAO should increase their efforts to enhance aerodrome capacity and efficiency, including aerodrome certification, airport planning, aerodrome design and operations, and new initiatives such as airport collaborative decision-making (A-CDM), total airport management (TAM), joint civil-military aerodromes and use of new technologies such as folding wing tip (FWT). Acknowledging the challenges faced by States in the area of aerodrome certification, the Conference agreed that further support to States by ICAO was needed. The Conference also agreed that ICAO should continue to work with States, industry and international organizations to further enhance aerodrome capacity and efficiency.

2.2 AN-Conf/13-WP/36, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States4, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)5 and the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL), focused on the concept of TAM which combined and interfaced A-CDM with landside processes for greater efficiency and capacity enhancement. The paper called on ICAO to enhance the aviation system block upgrade (ASBU) modules related to A-CDM and TAM, wake turbulence (WAKE) and network operations (NOPS), which would bring performance benefits to airports and global air traffic management (ATM) system operations, and to develop further provisions in this area. The Conference was informed that work was ongoing within ICAO on provisions related to enhanced wake turbulence separation minima, and the Conference noted the performance to be gained by operating the proposed seven groups of wake separation minima. The Conference supported the TAM concept and its potential benefits.

2.3 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/100, presented by the United Arab Emirates, which provided an overview of the implementation of reduced runway separation minima outside daylight hours. The Conference noted wide support for this paper and that this implementation could provide significant added capacity gains and recalled the importance of a robust safety case. The Conference was also informed that development of provisions relating to this subject was currently under consideration by the relevant ICAO technical expert group.

2.4 The Conference discussed AN-Conf/13-WP/145, presented by China, which highlighted measures taken in the State related to the optimization of planning, design, operations, and management of airport capacity enhancement in a challenging environment of saturated airports and continued traffic growth. The Conference appreciated and supported the initiatives outlined in the working paper and was informed that the development by ICAO of further provisions to enhance aerodrome capacity had already commenced.



5 Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Republic of Moldova, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine.


2.5 The Conference discussed AN-Conf/13-WP/184, presented by Airports Council International (ACI), which dealt with aerodrome operations, capacity and efficiency, and noted the full support expressed in the array of ICAO activities and strategic objectives in these areas, as outlined in the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP), as well as the safe use of drones for aerodrome operations such as the inspection of movement areas and wildlife management. The Conference noted that aerodrome operators of States were encouraged to approach ACI for assistance to address issues of concern.

2.6 AN-Conf/13-WP/293 outlined the ACI and International Air Transport Association (IATA) initiative of “New Experience Travel Technologies” (NEXTT) which had been introduced to ensure that the transport of passengers, baggage and cargo would benefit from the latest technological developments related to, among others, enhancing aerodrome capacity through better efficiency and predictability of operations. The Conference noted the work being undertaken by IATA and ACI in this respect and that the emphasis of NEXTT was on automating the exchange of data which partly stemmed from A-CDM.

2.7 Information papers provided by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States6, the other Member States of ECAC7 and by EUROCONTROL (AN-Conf/13-WP/47 and AN-Conf/13-WP/48), China (AN-Conf/13-WP/199 and AN-Conf/13-WP/199), Japan (AN-Conf/13-WP/250), the Republic of Korea (AN-Conf/13-WP/241) and the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/255) were noted.


Recommendation 2.1/1 – Aerodrome capacity and efficiency enhancement That States:

review, as needed, all options to increase aerodrome capacity, including increasing a)the efficiency of existing aerodrome infrastructure, reviewing the need for investment in new infrastructure and mitigating restrictions in surrounding airspace;

establish a plan for the certification of aerodromes under their jurisdiction, in b)accordance with their national regulations, incorporating the identification of gaps and implementation of solutions to overcome those gaps, including the assessment and development of mitigation measures in areas of non-compliance;

That ICAO:

progress the work on the development of provisions related to aerodrome design and c)operations in support of aerodrome capacity and efficiency enhancement;





explore new areas for enhancing aerodrome capacity and efficiency, including total d)airport management (TAM), reduced separation Standards, joint civil-military aerodromes and other new initiatives and technologies such as folding wing tip (FWT);

continue to provide assistance to States in the area of aerodrome certification; and e)

monitor developments such as New Experience Travel Technologies (NEXTT) and f)consider the formulation of provisions, where necessary, to support their implementation.

Recommendation 2.1/2 — Total airport management (TAM) and airport throughput

That States:

implement airport collaborative decision-making (A-CDM) and, when appropriate, a)extend A-CDM to incorporate total airport management (TAM);

That ICAO:

update provisions and guidance on A-CDM by extending it to TAM with greater b)integration with air traffic flow management (ATFM);

update provisions on wake turbulence and time-based separation; and c)

update provisions on reduced runway separation minima. d)

Agenda Item 2: Enabling the global air navigation system 2.2: Integrated CNS and spectrum strategy

Long-term evolution of CNS systems and frequency spectrum access

2.9 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/20, presented by the Secretariat, which noted that frequency spectrum was a limited resource and that various sectors of industry, including aviation, competed for access to this resource for the provision of their expanding services. Existing aeronautical communications, navigation and surveillance (CNS) systems were well established, proven and with an exceptionally long active lifespan in comparison with any other industry. While new and ever more frequency-efficient system designs were evolved in some sectors of industry, the lifecycle of existing aeronautical CNS systems went beyond fifty years. As the pressure on the spectrum resource increased, it had become evident that aviation needed to find ways to keep up with the advances of technology. The Conference noted support in AN-Conf/13-WP/37, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States8, the other Member States of ECAC9 and EUROCONTROL, and AN-Conf/13-WP/113, presented by Canada, for the approach outlined in AN-Conf/13-WP/20.




2.10 The Conference further discussed AN-Conf/13-WP/37, which advocated a shift from the traditional technology-based, segregated CNS infrastructure to a cross-domain, integrated CNS architecture and performance-based framework, which would combine physical infrastructure and the delivery of CNS through services to enable key operational concepts such as trajectory-based operations (TBO) while maintaining and enhancing safety and security. The CNS enabling services and infrastructure evolution would need to strengthen civil-military cooperation and interoperability and the integration of new entrants such as unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and sub-orbital operations and would enable full cross-fertilization and synergies. The Conference noted that this should be through an efficient and effective ICAO-facilitated global collaboration with States and regional modernization programmes from research and development to deployment of interoperable systems. The realization of this new path would benefit all aviation stakeholders, while delivering performance-based and cost-efficient infrastructure services to support the expected traffic growth. Furthermore, it would allow for the development of a pro-active global aviation radio spectrum strategy for ensuring a safe and efficient use and long-term availability of adequate radio spectrum to embrace new opportunities in line with the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) and aviation system block upgrade (ASBU) evolution.

2.11 The Conference supported AN-Conf/13-WP/113, presented by Canada, which highlighted the concerns of the aviation industry regarding the ever-increasing pressures from non-aeronautical frequency spectrum users seeking to share aeronautical frequency bands and called for the active engagement of States in the spectrum regulatory process to ensure the protection of the safety-critical operation of CNS systems. The working paper also advocated that safety case assessments of the radio frequency environment be taken into account as part of a safety oversight programme by the designated competent authorities to protect the operational availability of CNS systems, which was also agreed by the Conference.

2.12 Information papers provided by China (AN-Conf/13-WP/198 and AN-Conf/13-WP/244) and Japan (AN-Conf/13-WP/247 and AN-Conf/13-WP/251) were noted.


Recommendation 2.2/1 — Long-term evolution of communication, navigation and surveillance systems and frequency spectrum access

That States:

engage in the spectrum regulatory process to ensure the continued necessary access a)to and protection of safety-critical aeronautical communications, navigation, and surveillance (CNS) systems;

ensure through the implementation of a safety oversight programme that the b)designated competent authorities are involved in safety case assessments of the radio frequency environment so as to adequately protect the operational availability of aeronautical CNS systems;

That ICAO:

launch a study, built on a multidisciplinary view of the C, N and S elements and c)frequency spectrum, to evolve the required CNS and frequency spectrum access

9 Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Republic of

Moldova, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine.


strategy and systems roadmap in the short, medium and long term, in a performance-based and service-oriented manner, to ensure that CNS systems remain efficient users of the spectrum resource; and

develop provisions, in collaboration with States and regional modernization d)programmes, to support increased civil-military interoperability and synergies with the optimum reutilization opportunities from State and military aviation technologies and to take advantage of opportunities arising from new entrants, such as unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and suborbital vehicles.

GNSS evolution

2.14 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/15, presented by the Secretariat, which discussed the evolution of the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) towards the introduction of dual-frequency, multi-constellation (DFMC) services. The working paper outlined the standardization process currently underway, the expected benefits, the long-term goal of seamless global acceptance of DFMC GNSS, and the challenges in achieving the goal, and presented a way forward for States and ICAO to meet those challenges.

2.15 The Conference then reviewed several papers that supported and complemented AN-Conf/13-WP/15, which included: AN-Conf/13-WP/150 and AN-Conf/13-WP/153, presented by the Russian Federation; AN-Conf/13-WP/190, presented by Uganda on behalf of the East African Community; AN-Conf/13-WP/283, presented by the Agency for Air Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar (ASECNA)10; AN-Conf/13-WP/111, presented by the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) and AN-Conf/13-WP/167, presented by IATA and the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA).

2.16 AN-Conf/13-WP/111 provided information on the current status of the ground-based augmentation system (GBAS) of the Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) satellite constellation in the Member States of the IAC and outlined proposals to amend ICAO provisions with regard to the use of GBAS in support of performance-based navigation (PBN) and the integration of GNSS signal monitoring systems in States with neighbouring airspace. The Conference noted the information provided, was apprised of the considerable administrative workload that the inclusion of GBAS approaches into the Performance-based Navigation (PBN) Manual (Doc 9613) would entail for unclear added value, and agreed that the paper be referred to the relevant ICAO technical expert groups for consideration.

2.17 AN-Conf/13-WP/150 proposed that a space-to-Earth return link in the 1559-1610 MHz band be incorporated into the ICAO concept of operations (CONOPS) for the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS) and that provisions enabling use of such a link be included in the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Radio Regulations. With regard to the first proposal, the Conference was informed that it would be in conflict with consensus achieved in the development of the related Annex provisions and with the non-technology-specific approach of the CONOPS itself. With regard to the second proposal, the Conference was informed that it had been already considered by the relevant ICAO technical expert group, which had concluded that aviation should not be an active proponent of such an action. In light of the information received, the Conference agreed that no further action was necessary.

10 Member States: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial

Guinea, France, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Togo.


2.18 AN-Conf/13-WP/153 discussed the current status of the GLONASS constellation in the Russian Federation and its future development and use in the evolution towards multi-frequency, multi-constellation GNSS to ensure flight safety and efficiency in international civil aviation, highlighting the positive experience of Russian operators with combined GLONASS/GPS receivers. The working paper requested ICAO to continue its work in addressing international regulatory issues and stressed the need to avoid prohibitions or exclusions of the use of any given GNSS element or constellations, both at the State and at the industry standardization level.

2.19 AN-Conf/13-WP/167 presented in greater depth the challenges associated with the introduction of DFMC GNSS as outlined in AN-Conf/13-WP/15, with particular regard to the undesirable consequences arising from mandates for equipage or use of specific GNSS elements, signals, and/or services, as well as from any State precluding the use of specific GNSS elements within its airspace. The Conference recognized the validity of the concerns expressed in the paper and the need to resolve them in order to achieve the long-term goal defined in AN-Conf/13-WP/15. The Conference also recognized the critical importance of industry support in enabling a practical way forward for the implementation of DFMC GNSS.

2.20 AN-Conf/13-WP/190 presented an overview of the GNSS monitoring system programme planned for the Eastern African Region and called for joint funds mobilization to support the programme. The Conference noted with appreciation that the plan was consistent with the relevant ICAO Recommended Practice and related guidance. Regarding joint funds mobilization, the Conference agreed that the request be brought to the attention of the ICAO Council.

2.21 AN-Conf/13-WP/283 provided information on the implementation status of the ASECNA satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) programme and supported the implementation of solutions to ensure that avionics used only the DFMC SBAS elements accepted by States for navigation purposes. The Conference noted with appreciation the ASECNA SBAS programme as a significant contribution to the growing global SBAS infrastructure. With regard to further work on avionics selection of specific DFMC SBAS advocated by the paper, the Conference agreed that the matter should be referred to the relevant ICAO technical expert groups for consideration.

2.22 In its consideration of GNSS evolution matters, the Conference extensively discussed the issue of mandates for equipage or use of specific GNSS elements and the issue of prohibition of use of specific GNSS elements. In this respect, it was noted that the lack of global uniformity in the acceptance of GNSS would increase equipment complexity and associated costs and would delay achievement of the potential benefits.

2.23 The Conference recognized that DFMC GNSS could provide operational benefits by improving performance and robustness for all CNS applications based on GNSS. The benefits would be gained progressively as aircraft became equipped with DFMC avionics. In particular, the Conference stressed that the long-term goal to be achieved was seamless global acceptance of ICAO-standardized GNSS elements for lateral navigation.

2.24 It was recognized that there were technical and regulatory challenges to be overcome, as evidenced by the discussion. As a way forward towards overcoming those challenges, the Conference identified a number of actions to be taken as part of a collective effort involving States, ICAO and GNSS service providers towards achieving the agreed long-term goal (Recommendation 2.2/2 refers).

2.25 Information papers provided by China (AN-Conf/13-WP/200 and AN-Conf/13-201), Japan (AN-Conf/13-WP/246 and AN-Conf/13-WP/249), the Republic of Korea (AN-Conf/13-WP/240) and South Africa (AN-Conf/13-WP/290) were noted.



Recommendation 2.2/2 — Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) evolution That States:

when defining their air navigation strategic plans, take advantage of the improved a)robustness and performance offered by dual-frequency, multi constellation (DFMC) global navigation satellite system (GNSS) to deliver incremental operational benefits and encourage related industry developments;

avoid, in principle, prohibiting the use of available GNSS elements if they perform b)according to ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and can meet all safety and regulatory requirements for the intended operations;

avoid mandating equipage or use of any particular GNSS core constellation or c)augmentation system unless clear operational benefits are offered in return and appropriate consultations have been made with the relevant airspace users;

ensure implementation of ICAO provisions for publication of information related to d)the use of GNSS elements in aeronautical information publications (AIP);

take timely action to meet the long-term goal whereby every State accepts for lateral e)navigation use all GNSS elements that are compliant with SARPs, thus creating a positive environment for DFMC GNSS.

That ICAO:

continue the development of SARPs and guidance material for existing and future f)GNSS elements in coordination with recognized standards-making organizations;

further develop provisions intended for States and organizations that provide GNSS g)services regarding publication of service performance standards, regular performance assessment and timely notification of events that may affect the service; and

develop additional guidance addressing technical and regulatory aspects to assist h)States in their acceptance and use of existing and future GNSS elements.

Agenda Item 2: Enabling the global air navigation system 2.3: Future provision of aeronautical meteorological service

2.27 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/3, presented by the Secretariat, which provided an overview of the development of the global requirements for aeronautical meteorology, in progress since the Meteorology (MET) Divisional Meeting (2014), and highlighted those aspects that needed specific emphasis and resources to maximize the benefits for the aviation community as a whole. The Conference noted new aeronautical meteorology initiatives, including, inter alia: space weather information; the provision of information relating to en-route hazardous meteorological conditions, with a focus on meteorological phenomena rather than the current practice of information constrained to individual flight information regions (FIR); development of a cost-recovery mechanism, taking into


account the complexity of the provision of services by global and regional systems; and the impact of climate change on aviation.

2.28 The Conference supported the need, highlighted in AN-Conf/13-WP/57, presented by the United States, for the provision of globally harmonized, phenomena-based, hazardous weather information since users had expressed a clear need for information about hazardous meteorological conditions unconstrained by FIR boundaries to improve the safety and efficiency of international air navigation. The Conference recognized that aeronautical meteorology was an important enabler of international air navigation in the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP, Doc 9750). The Conference agreed that ICAO should continue to develop provisions related to aeronautical meteorology as described in the GANP and place emphasis on assisting States in the implementation of new initiatives. The Conference supported AN-Conf/13-WP/183, presented by New Zealand, which highlighted that aeronautical meteorology was critical to the safe and sustainable operation of the global aviation system and that in terms of cost and investment, it brought a net benefit to aviation. The Conference agreed that aeronautical meteorology was undergoing a revolutionary change in the nature of the information it provided, how it was provided and the atmospheric environment with which it was concerned. These changes would have a direct global impact on the provision of seamless aeronautical meteorological information. It was also recognized that to properly develop and implement existing and new global aeronautical meteorology capabilities, ICAO, States and users needed to ensure the sufficient provision of expert capacity to underpin the global development already underway and future developments currently envisaged.

2.29 Following discussion of AN-Conf/13-WP/230 presented by Singapore, which provided an overview of the roles and challenges faced by local and sub-regional meteorological services in the tropics in the provision of meteorological services to air traffic management (ATM) in the context of increased tropical convections and their potential future impact due to climate change, the Conference agreed to give due consideration to the foreseen aviation impact when refining the relevant operational and meteorology components of the aviation system block upgrades (ASBU) in the GANP.

2.30 The proposal in AN-Conf/13-WP/60, presented by the United States, to address transition from the exchange of aeronautical meteorological information in traditional alpha-numeric code (TAC) format to the ICAO Information Meteorological Exchange Model (IWXXM) format consistent with Amendment 78 to Annex 3 — Meteorological Service for International Air Navigation, was supported by the Conference. AN-Conf/13-WP/287, presented by the International Federation of Airline Dispatchers Associations (IFALDA), highlighted the issue of the rapid deployment of said transition and the need for airline dispatch offices worldwide to fully understand the impending changes and the adaptation process required. The working paper also raised issues related to the lack of implementation in some States and their associated MET offices which could add complexity by the continued use of domestic TAC products on the one hand and the use of IWXXM for international flights on the other. In addition, the paper raised a number of implementation concerns that were being addressed by relevant ICAO technical expert groups. The Conference agreed that to ensure the harmonization of aeronautical meteorological information and its accessibility via system-wide information management (SWIM)-enabled systems by aviation users, ICAO should encourage States to transition to the exchange of aeronautical meteorological information only in the IWXXM format by 2026, enabling further integration into SWIM.

2.31 AN-Conf/13-WP/101, presented by Japan, co-sponsored by Australia, Canada and France, discussed global needs for the promotion of further utilization of space weather information service (Amendment 78 to Annex 3), taking into account operational needs by aeronautical users. The working paper, which was supported by the Conference, stressed that close coordination between space weather information service providers and aeronautical users was essential for the establishment of operationally useful space weather information service. The working paper also raised the need for further


training and education on the impacts of space weather on international air navigation, which was supported by the Conference.

2.32 AN-Conf/13-WP/128, presented by the United States, requested support for the provision of updated guidelines and guidance on cost recovery for aeronautical meteorological service and that relevant expert group(s) taking on this work should be provided with the necessary assistance in the areas of airport and air navigation services economics. The Conference agreed that the provision of aeronautical meteorological information for civil aviation was expected to undergo a critically fundamental transformation over the next decade and that it was important that any change in how the associated costs were recovered remain consistent with the ICAO policy on cost recovery.

2.33 AN-Conf/13-WP/275, presented by Indonesia, provided the procedures and contingency action on the facilitation of air traffic services (ATS) routes in a volcanic ash situation for the relevant service providers and airspace users in Indonesia, and the system used there to facilitate the various parties in managing the volcanic ash impact on aviation, namely the Integrated Web-based Information System Handling (IWISH). The Conference noted the information provided in the working paper by Indonesia and supported the collaborative decision-making (CDM) mechanism and the information system in the framework of volcanic ash developed to ensure the safety of flight operations.

2.34 Information papers provided by China (AN-Conf/13-WP/196), Japan (AN-Conf/13-WP/248 and AN-Conf/13-WP/253), the Russian Federation (AN-Conf/13-WP/163), Saudi Arabia (AN-Conf/13-WP/269) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) (AN-Conf/13-WP/180) were noted.


Recommendation 2.3/1: Future provision of aeronautical meteorological service

That States:

and international user organizations ensure that adequate expert capacity is applied in a)the collaborative management and development of aeronautical meteorological services for international air navigation;

That ICAO:

ensure it has sufficient capacity and expertise to progress the work on the b)development of provisions related to aeronautical meteorology, including the foreseen impact on international air navigation due to climate change, to be described in the Sixth Edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP); and

develop implementation assistance, including guidance material, for space weather c)information service, the provision of globally consistent, phenomena-based hazardous meteorological information, the meteorological component of system-wide information management (SWIM), cost-recovery solutions for regional and global systems, and potential new initiatives to address issues such as the impact of climate change on aviation, including provision of meteorological services to the air traffic management (ATM) community in the context of increased tropical convective systems.


Recommendation 2.3/2 — Further Development of IWXXM for the Exchange of Aeronautical Meteorological Information

That States:

provide ICAO with their ICAO Meteorological Information Exchange Model a)(IWXXM) implementation plans before 2020;

That ICAO:

b) promote the importance of exchanging meteorological information for aeronautical purposes in compliance with the IWXXM;

c) in close coordination with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO),

1) ensure that the IWXXM format is the only standard exchange format by 2026;

2) develop the policies and procedures necessary to ensure a smooth transition from traditional alpha numeric code (TAC) format to IWXXM format for the purpose of data exchange to support international air navigation, as an interim step toward full IWXXM implementation;

3) promote awareness of the changes brought about by the IWXXM data format, production, dissemination and data exchange among operators; and

4) monitor the status of implementation of IWXXM at State and regional levels.

Recommendation 2.3/3 — Provision of space weather information service meeting the operational needs of users

That States:

a) encourage the research into operational impacts of space weather phenomena on civil aviation using performance-based approaches and establish requirements for the use of space weather information for civil aviation;

That ICAO:

b) continue to facilitate coordination between the space weather information service providers and aeronautical users to clarify the needs and solutions for improved safety and efficiency of civil aviation through the provision of space weather information and training on the use of the information; and

c) coordinate with other international organizations, such as the International Telecommunication Union - Radio communication Sector (ITU-R) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), to facilitate research into operational impacts of space weather phenomena on civil aviation using performance-based approaches and develop requirements and/or guidance for the use of space weather information for civil aviation.


Recommendation 2.3/4 — Development of cost-recovery mechanisms for the provision of aeronautical meteorological information

That ICAO:

support the need to expeditiously identify how aeronautical meteorological service a)provision has changed, how it will continue to evolve, and how these changes (including those arising from the impact of climate change on aviation) may affect the recovery of relevant costs associated with service provision on a global, multi-regional, regional, and sub-regional basis; and

in close coordination with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), b)

1) review deficiencies in the current cost-recovery systems;

2) identify new cost-recovery challenges that have arisen (taking into consideration the issues described in a) above); and

3) identify possible mechanisms to recover these costs in a manner consistent with ICAO’s Policies on Charges for Airports and Air Navigation Services (Doc 9082).

— — — — — — — —


Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system 3.1: System-wide information management (SWIM)

3.1 The Conference discussed AN-Conf/13-WP/4, presented by the Secretariat, which focused on developments regarding system-wide information management (SWIM). It outlined the work still to be achieved to improve the efficiency and safety of the aviation system through the application of globally harmonized information management enabling a seamless system. It emphasized the importance of a robust foundation of provisions, together with relevant industry standards and detailed guidance material. AN-Conf/13-WP/4 further mentioned some of the elements of what may constitute SWIM-compliant solutions, including an implementation toolbox to ensure the global interoperability of systems and the harmonization of procedures for the exchange of information.

3.2 AN-Conf/13-WP/236 presented by the Republic of Korea and AN-Conf/13-WP/291 presented by South Africa highlighted the role of ICAO in supporting the establishment of a regulatory framework for global information exchange. The Conference was informed that the future SWIM global platform would provide information to the users via internet protocols and would need to ensure global interoperability including, in particular, the harmonization of information exchange models. The Conference noted that it will be necessary, when there is a major change or update to the exchange models, that the international communities which maintain information exchange models provide mapping guidance for the implementation of a converter when required.

3.3 AN-Conf/13-WP/73, presented by the United States, informed the Conference that a global and secure SWIM framework was necessary to provide the information exchange capabilities needed to support, for example, air traffic flow management (ATFM), unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) traffic management (UTM) and high-level operations, while noting that today’s point-to-point legacy system would not meet future performance requirements. It was highlighted that to foster innovation, both aviation and non-aviation industries should be consulted for the development of global SWIM Standards. The Conference recognized that SWIM laid out the digital foundation for future aviation concepts, thereby increasing predictability, efficiency and system automation.

3.4 AN-Conf/13-WP/75, presented by Australia and New Zealand, reminded the Conference of the interoperability challenges to be overcome in order to achieve a globally harmonized SWIM, including cyber resilience, controlled user access and authentication, federated architecture for registries, SWIM compliance, definition of common information services, transition from aeronautical fixed telecommunication network (AFTN)/ATS message handling system (AMHS) to SWIM, and coordination of multiple SWIM efforts around the world. The Conference recognized the need to keep the transition period from AFTN/AMHS to Internet Protocol-based SWIM as short as practical. In this context, the Conference was informed on the notion of a single SWIM access point via interconnected registries including the view that this could be considered as an important mechanism of global SWIM governance to facilitate compliance with SWIM Standards and policies.

3.5 AN-Conf/13-WP/106, presented by Kenya, discussed the programme for establishing a seamless upper airspace in the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) region requiring a strong foundation of global Standards to ensure interoperability of different system implementations. Specific examples were mentioned related to the aeronautical information management (AIM) domain of how interoperability needed to be improved to facilitate cross-border information exchange. The benefits of defining basic information services and adhering to the principles of service-oriented architecture were stressed. AN-Conf/13-WP/70, presented by New Zealand, highlighted that SWIM solutions should be of the appropriate scale, cost and effectiveness for the benefits to be obtained. SWIM solutions would therefore respond to the operational and economic needs of small States. It was acknowledged that SWIM also needed to accommodate new entrants such as UAS and


high-altitude balloons. In addition, it was discussed that harmonization and the definition of data content would foster interoperability.

3.6 AN-Conf/13-WP/98, presented by the United Arab Emirates, informed the Conference that pioneering pilot implementations bear the risk of creating technology islands which may cause interoperability challenges with other regional implementation initiatives. The need to align SWIM national implementation plans with regional strategies and priorities was also highlighted. AN-Conf/13-WP/85, presented by Brazil, recognized the important role of ICAO regional groups in SWIM implementation and discussed how regional SWIM demonstrations are a valuable means to encourage collaboration and showcase SWIM benefits to Member States. The Conference, recognizing that advanced collaborative decision-making (CDM) processes require quality information, noted that SWIM demonstrations could support States in making decisions to invest in SWIM technologies and to identify potential synergies.

3.7 AN-Conf/13-WP/107 Revision No. 1, submitted by the International Federation of Aeronautical Information Management Associations (IFAIMA), underscored the need for support in the implementation of Annex 15 — Aeronautical Information Services and the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Aeronautical Information Management (Doc 10066, PANS-AIM). The Conference recognized that the impact of the new provisions was significant and States required assistance through guidance material, training activities, workshops, seminars, go-teams, etc. The Conference agreed that ICAO continue the work in the AIM domain, including on alignment of the aeronautical information service (AIS) to AIM roadmap with the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP), and was informed that the subject would be progressed by the appropriate ICAO technical expert group.

3.8 Information papers provided by India (AN-Conf/13-WP/208), the Republic of Korea (AN-Conf/13-WP/242), Singapore, Thailand and United States (AN-Conf/13-WP/110) and the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/263) were noted.


Recommendation 3.1/1 — System-wide information management (SWIM) That States:

a) support developments and implementation of system-wide information management;

b) via the mechanism of the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs), showcase regional system-wide information management (SWIM) demonstrations, highlighting the operational and economic benefits of SWIM, and evaluate possible transition and mixed-mode scenarios;

c) share information, lessons learned and observations regarding SWIM development and implementation;

d) develop national implementation plans in alignment with regional strategies and priorities and in accordance with the strategy outlined in the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) which would include SWIM;


That ICAO:

e) while making use of already developed Standards and best practices, continue the development of provisions related to information services, while including relevant guidance, governance aspects, information content and related information exchange models and supporting technical infrastructure and governance for SWIM in sufficient detail to ensure safe, efficient and secure globally seamless operations;

f) consider the concept of a global SWIM framework as part of the GANP and the aviation system block upgrades (ASBUs);

g) consider security-by-design principles when developing interconnected trusted global SWIM frameworks;

h) develop provisions related to the harmonization of information exchange models and globally interconnected registries;

i) through regional events, and in collaboration with States and industry, promote SWIM and its benefits, as described in the Manual on System-wide Information Management (Doc 10039), as well as implementation best practices to the aviation community; and

j) provide assistance to States to support the implementation of Annex 15 — Aeronautical Information Services and Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Aeronautical Information Management (Doc 10066, PANS-AIM).

Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system 3.2: Flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE) and

trajectory-based operations (TBO)

3.10 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/7, presented by the Secretariat, which outlined the ongoing efforts and planned work of ICAO concerning the development of a global concept and ICAO provisions to support an evolutionary transformation into a trajectory-based operation (TBO) environment which was one of the key conceptual changes envisaged in the Global Air Traffic Management Operational Concept. The paper also highlighted multidisciplinary issues that needed to be addressed to ensure that TBO delivers anticipated performance benefits.

3.11 The Conference noted the broad support for the proposed actions contained in AN-Conf/13-WP/7 and reinforced by AN-Conf/13-WP/38 presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States11, the other Members States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)12 and the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL), AN-Conf/13-WP/87 presented by Brazil, AN-Conf/13-WP/191 presented by China, AN-Conf/13-WP/271 presented by Singapore and Thailand and AN-Conf/13-WP/52 presented by the United States.





3.12 The Conference recognized the need for an increased level of automation to enable TBO, taking into account the role of the human, and noted the potential performance benefits that TBO could bring to all operational environments, integrating new types of operations and bridging gaps between existing air traffic management (ATM) operations (e.g. A-CDM, ATFM and air traffic control (ATC)). The Conference recognized the importance of a global concept and transitional path towards the TBO environment to ensure that all stakeholders have a common understanding of TBO in its entirety, and required interactions among the supporting capabilities and processes. In this respect, the Conference agreed that the global TBO concept and transitional path integrated in the updated GANP and ASBU framework would provide high-level direction and guidance for the harmonized development and deployment of key TBO enablers.

3.13 The Conference also noted the need for additional guidance on a TBO transition roadmap, in the context of ongoing ATM initiatives, to address all domains of the ATM system and to take into consideration the new types of airspace users. The Conference recognized the importance of involving non-traditional aviation community (e.g. manufacturers of UAS) in the discussions to identify and address issues for a successful TBO development and implementation. Also highlighted by the Conference for inclusion in the future work to support the further development of TBO was: improved global ATFM through a global network-centric approach; increased level of automation; and enhanced airspace management.

3.14 With respect to the development and deployment of key TBO enablers, the Conference was presented with the validation, testing and transition activities of several States, regions and subregions concerning flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE), SWIM, ATFM and air-ground data link communications. Noting that the development of ICAO provisions on these key enablers was well underway as part of the approved work programmes, the Conference reiterated the importance of timely feedback from these activities for consideration by the appropriate ICAO technical expert groups.

3.15 The Conference acknowledged that the varying levels of maturity in the implementation of key TBO enablers would continue, resulting in mixed mode operations for a prolonged period of time. In this connection, a critical role of the ICAO planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs) would be the integration of multiple and interrelated initiatives into a regional plan in accordance with the relevant global concepts and associated ICAO provisions. Also emphasized was the need for global guidance on a transition strategy that minimizes any potential negative impacts during the mixed mode operations.


Recommendation 3.2/1 —Trajectory-based operations (TBO)

That States:

a) along with stakeholders, continue to provide ICAO with the developments and lessons learned from air traffic management (ATM) modernization programmes;

b) along with stakeholders, work through ICAO to identify and address, not only potential issues, but also opportunities such as the improved management of global traffic flows through a global network-centric approach to ensure the successful development and implementation of trajectory-based operations (TBO);


c) along with stakeholders, through the mechanism of the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs), integrate current implementation efforts with regional transition plans for flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE), system-wide information management (SWIM) and TBO;

That ICAO:

d) finalize the global TBO concept and its elements in the Sixth edition of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) and the aviation systems block upgrade (ASBU) framework; and

e) develop guidance on transitioning to a globally interoperable TBO environment in the context of ongoing ATM initiatives while addressing all domains of ATM systems and taking into consideration existing and new types of airspace users.

Recommendation 3.2/2 — Flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE)

That States:

a) along with stakeholders, work through ICAO to finalize ICAO provisions and guidance material, in support of the initial implementation of flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE) by providing the results of operational and technical performance validation and cost-benefit analysis (CBA);

That ICAO:

b) develop a robust transition strategy to minimize any potential negative impacts during the mixed mode operations of current ICAO flight plan processing and FF-ICE; and

c) continue its work concerning the investigation of necessary information exchange content and supporting processes for the next evolution of FF-ICE.

Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system 3.3: Air traffic flow management (ATFM)

3.17 AN-Conf/13-WP/8, presented by the Secretariat, recalled the importance of CDM and of regional cooperation to implement ATFM and efficient capacity management. With broad support for this paper, the Conference emphasized, in the context of international cooperation, the importance of information exchanges between airspace users and ground-based stakeholders to support trajectory-based operations (TBO).

3.18 AN-Conf/13-WP/207, presented by India, outlined a method for capacity determination for the facilitation of ATFM. The Conference, in noting the importance of airspace and aerodrome capacities as an acknowledged enabler for ATFM, agreed that the information would be brought to the attention of the appropriate ICAO technical expert group.


3.19 AN-Conf/13-WP/40 presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States13, the other Member States of ECAC14 and EUROCONTROL, AN-Conf/13-WP/86 presented by Brazil, AN-Conf/13-WP/109 presented by China, Thailand and Singapore, AN-Conf/13-WP/237 presented by the Republic of Korea, China and Japan, presented examples of State cooperation in providing ATFM. The Conference acknowledged that such collaboration would enable the rapid implementation of cooperative network solutions. The Conference agreed on the importance of regional cooperation, including the need to share best practices. The Conference further agreed on the importance of interconnectivity between regions to achieve a global network.

3.20 The Conference also agreed that ATFM initiatives increased the efficiency of the network in normal operations, but were also instrumental to the effective management of large-scale crises.

3.21 Recalling the importance of the current work programme in the development of ATFM-related provisions and guidance material, the Conference recognized the need to focus on the wider issue of airspace sectorization.

3.22 In concluding its discussion, the Conference, bearing in mind the SWIM framework, agreed that information exchange would be essential to further improve communication capabilities and enable States to manage flows in a collaborative manner, both within and across ICAO regions, thereby providing opportunities for the further enhancement of efficient air traffic services.

3.23 Information papers provided by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States13 and the other Member States of ECAC14 and EUROCONTROL (AN-Conf/13-WP/50), China (AN-Conf/13-WP/202), India (AN-Conf/13-WP/209 and AN-Conf/13-WP/210), and the Republic of Korea (AN-Conf/13-WP/243), were noted.


Recommendation 3.3/1 — Network operations (NOPS):

That States:

a) implement collaborative decision-making (CDM) processes in support of effective airspace management in the provision of air navigation services, including cross-border operations and resource management;

b) plan and implement, according to their operational needs, operational improvements related to network operations in a coordinated manner within and across regions;

That ICAO:

c) develop further provisions and guidance material on air traffic flow management (ATFM), supporting a global collaborative network management in support of trajectory-based operations (TBO); and





d) support, through its Regional Offices, the sharing of best practices and the advancement of technical cooperation agreements between States in order to implement ATFM.

Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system 3.4: Civil/military cooperation

3.25 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/9, presented by the Secretariat, which underlined the need to enhance civil-military collaboration at the global, regional and national levels to reduce the need for segregation, improve safety, enable cost-efficient operations and provide States with the opportunity to protect their national security. AN-Conf/13-WP/39, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States15, the other Member States of ECAC16 and EUROCONTROL, and AN-Conf/13-WP/53, presented by the United States, also promoted the mutual benefits of civil and military aviation gradually moving from coordination to collaboration. A total systems approach to aviation, ensuring the consideration of all technical, organizational, procedural and human factors elements, was also promoted. The Conference recognized that ATM system performance would benefit when the opportunities associated with civil-military cooperation were maximized, and therefore supported the need to go beyond cooperation and embrace collaboration with military authorities at the global, regional and national levels. Civil-military consolidation was also recognized by the Conference as an effective means of supporting typical ATS, aerodrome, and search and rescue (SAR) operations, as well as disaster relief and humanitarian assistance.

3.26 The Conference noted that with the ongoing modernization of the air navigation system through new concepts such as TBO and SWIM, there was the potential for civil-military cooperation to decline. The Conference recognized that key areas for further collaboration with the military authorities included increased dependence on inter-connected ATM systems, UAS, information exchange and associated cyber vulnerabilities. The Conference recognized that it is paramount for military authorities to plan in advance of the evolution of their fleets, equipage or control systems, to consider global interoperability and airspace capacity and efficiency. In this regard, the Conference recognized that a performance-equivalence process for the military community could facilitate the demonstration of their systems performance.

3.27 The Conference also recognized that military authorities continued to be key partners with civil aviation and that ICAO should play a pivotal role in this collaboration with the military community at the global and regional levels. The Conference acknowledged that military requirements for civil-military cooperation are specific and should be considered through consultation at all levels, taking note that at the global level, efforts were underway to facilitate military attendance at ICAO meetings. The Conference reaffirmed that implementation support to States should remain an ICAO priority to increase the effective implementation of existing provisions and increase the awareness of civil-military cooperation guidance material for States. The Conference supported the incorporation of the military aviation dimension in future editions of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) and the involvement of the military community from the beginning when developing new ICAO provisions and guidance.





3.28 AN-Conf/13-WP/84, presented by Brazil, discussed the need to consider the regional specificities of civil-military cooperation, including the application of SWIM. The Conference recognized the importance of regional symposiums to exchange best practices and enable regional incentives such as resource pooling.

3.29 AN-Conf/13-WP/140 Revision No. 1, presented by China, discussed the national strategy of the State with regard to the implementation of civil-military cooperation and coordination at joint civil-military aerodromes and described the mechanism, components, and national documents pertaining to this cooperation. The Conference paid particular attention to the proposal that ICAO consider the development of guidance material concerning operations at joint civil-military aerodromes.

3.30 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/295, presented by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) and the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA), which discussed the challenges encountered by airlines to plan flights across and to obtain access through certain air defence identification zones (ADIZs). The Conference recognized the need for appropriately clear procedures for airspace access requirements and that ICAO should provide guidance in this regard.

3.31 An information paper provided by Austria on behalf of the European Union17 and its Member States, the other Member States of ECAC18 and by EUROCONTROL (AN-Conf/13-WP/49), was noted.


Recommendation 3.4/1 — Civil-military collaboration That States:

a) actively collaborate with their military authorities, including at the regional level, and encourage greater civil-military interoperability and appropriate use of performance equivalence;

b) continuously inform their military authorities of the improvements to air navigation capacity and efficiency, safety, cyber threats and system resilience put forth by ICAO and advocate collaboration with ICAO at the global and regional levels;

That ICAO:

c) identify potential opportunities for civil-military collaboration, develop a mechanism to collaborate with the military community early in the development of global provisions and guidance, and establish guidance for collaboration with the military community at global and regional levels;





d) incorporate the military dimension, including civil-military cooperation and collaboration, in future editions of the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP);

e) consider, with urgency and in collaboration with the military community, the interoperability and governance principles for the military community in system-wide information management (SWIM) and in the development of the ICAO trust framework; and

f) consider, where possible, the inclusion of civil-military cooperation and collaboration subjects at ICAO events, and highlight the participation of military authorities in relevant State letter invitations.

Recommendation 3.4/2 — Civil-military cooperation implementation

That States:

a) encourage their military authorities to cooperate and coordinate with civil aviation authorities and air navigation services providers (ANSPs) on airspace use, including airspace access requirements, to achieve the most efficient use of airspace based on actual needs and, when possible, avoid permanent airspace segregation;

That ICAO:

b) promote civil-military coordination and cooperation of best practices, and provide forums and other opportunities, such as regional symposiums, for States to exchange best practices; and

c) explore opportunities to provide guidance to enhance safety at joint civil-military aerodromes and to assist States in the promulgation of clear procedures for airspace access requirements.

Agenda Item 3: Enhancing the global air navigation system 3.5: Other ATM issues

3.33 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/31 and AN-Conf/13-WP/32 presented by Germany, and AN-Conf/13-WP/112 from Ireland, which identified limitations in both the ICAO location indicator system and the provisions governing the identification of significant points, as well as the pronounceability of the generated codes. The Conference, in noting that work was already in progress regarding the availability of codes in each region, requested ICAO to continue its current work relating to addressing the highlighted limitations in the short term and recommended regular reviews of the use of pronounceable codes to ensure these were available where they were needed. The Conference supported the proposal to develop a long-term solution which would consider the requirement for globally harmonized and interoperable solutions and the increasing need for machine-to-machine interactions. Such interactions, however, were also considered likely to alleviate the demand for codes due to the increasing use of solutions such as user preferred routes. The Conference further noted that many of the generated codes were not useable due to either the combinations of letters that could not be pronounced, or similarity of the codes to existing codes when spoken. Understanding that an accurate record of five letter name codes (5LNCs) currently in use was also vital in order to prevent ambiguity, the Conference requested States to ensure that the ICAO International Codes and Routes Designators (ICARD) database


was complete and encouraged ICAO to continue with efforts to raise awareness of the use of this tool, as well as to continue work towards the removal of duplicates and codes which sound alike. Further refinements to the ICARD database to improve the functionality were also proposed.

3.34 AN-Conf/13-WP/74, presented by China, AN-Conf/13-WP/206, presented by India and AN-Conf/13-WP/174, presented by the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA) and the International Federation of Air Traffic Safety Electronics Associations (IFATSEA), recalled that digital and remote technologies were increasingly used in air traffic control tower operations. The Conference noted that the variety of operational requirements made it challenging to ensure a harmonized approach to all implementations of digital or remote tower operations. The Conference further noted the importance of striking the right balance between a specification-based and a performance-based approach to ensure that innovation would not be stifled. The Conference, recalling that industry standards and guidance should be used where possible, agreed that the information in the working papers would be referred to the relevant ICAO technical expert group to continue the development of provisions and guidance material, as necessary. The Conference noted AN-Conf/13-WP/214, presented by the International Transport Federation (ITF), which suggested that ICAO carry out a study on the potential added value of remote towers. It was recalled that this was largely the task of the ATS provider in making specific investments based on individual cases. The Conference therefore agreed that ICAO would continue to monitor the progress of States in implementing digital and remote towers in the context of the existing work programme.

3.35 AN-Conf/13-WP/175, presented by CANSO, highlighted the importance of investments in the ATM infrastructure and encouraged States to support air navigation services providers (ANSPs) for more efficient and effective management of their investments. It was noted by the Conference that promoting the important role of the aviation industry and the necessary investment in the ATM infrastructure on a national and regional level was an ongoing effort of ICAO and that investment in ATM was fundamental to improvements to the global air navigation system. The Conference was informed that such effort would continue as part of various initiatives, including those described in AN-Conf/13-WP/24, presented by the Secretariat, under Agenda Item 4.1. AN-Conf/13-WP/176, also presented by CANSO, provided an update on global ATS surveillance technology. The Conference recognized the significant potential safety and operational benefits of introducing ATS surveillance services into areas where they have not previously been available and the need to continue the work of ICAO on the provision of space-based automatic dependent surveillance — broadcast (ADS-B) solutions. It was recalled by the Conference that various ATS surveillance technologies were key enablers of the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP, Doc 9750) and were being progressed by the appropriate ICAO technical expert groups.

3.36 AN-Conf/13-WP/82 presented by Brazil, provided the Conference with information on the successful completion of an airspace improvement project, enabled by collaborative decision-making (CDM), following the guidelines provided in the Manual on Global Performance of the Air Navigation System (Doc 9883). The Conference then reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/89, also presented by Brazil, which outlined challenges in the planning and implementation of controller-pilot data link communications (CPDLC) over very high frequency (VHF) data link in continental airspace and requested the development of additional guidance in this regard. The Conference was informed that the request was already being progressed by the appropriate ICAO technical expert group.

3.37 Upon the review of AN-Conf/13-WP/93, presented by the United Arab Emirates, which outlined the importance of establishing an air navigation services business continuity framework, the Conference was informed that different business continuity management best practices existed within the aviation community and noted that while Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services requires States to develop


contingency plans for implementation in the event of disruption of air traffic services and related supporting services, specific guidance by ICAO pertaining to business continuity was not available.

3.38 It was therefore considered that, while business continuity may be maintained by the establishment of a contingency plan in accordance with the various Annexes, States would benefit from additional ICAO guidance on this subject.

3.39 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/298, presented by IATA, which provided support for a sustainable and resilient aviation infrastructure and the value of post-contingency event reviews. The Conference also recalled AN-Conf/13-WP/40, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union, its Member States19, the other Member States of ECAC20 and by EUROCONTROL, under Agenda Item 3.3, which outlined the key role of ATFM in case of a major loss of capacity. The Conference recognized the importance of ATFM to support crisis management arrangements using data exchanges, processes and tools to deliver early warnings, situation awareness and effective recovery. The Conference also recognized the importance of enhanced preparedness for disasters and resilience after disasters. Recalling that crisis management could include, but was not limited to, contingency planning, the Conference acknowledged the benefits of the inclusion of all stakeholders, both within the aviation community and beyond, to ensure a regionally coordinated approach to the development and continued efficacy of contingency plans and post-crisis reviews. The Conference advocated that ICAO facilitate such an approach.

3.40 AN-Conf/13-WP/68 Revision No. 1, presented by South Africa, proposed that the Air Traffic Services Planning Manual (Doc 9426) be updated. The Conference noted that, while some sections of Doc 9426 remained useful, the 35-year old document had not kept pace with technological, institutional and infrastructure advancements. Consequently, it was agreed that for Doc 9426 to remain in the catalogue of current ICAO guidance, there was a need for a comprehensive amendment. The Conference was informed that this task was already on the work programme of the Organization and agreed that the contents of the working paper would be brought to the attention of the appropriate ICAO technical expert group.

3.41 The Conference discussed AN-Conf/13-WP/95, presented by the United Arab Emirates, which outlined the introduction of its certification of ANSPs and proposed that ICAO provisions be developed for certification of ANSPs, accompanied by guidance material. The Conference, while supporting that work was necessary in the area, acknowledged that many ATM systems and ANSPs were already well regulated and there was concern that with the implementation of global provisions costs might be incurred by those States. The Conference therefore agreed that a reasonable compromise might be needed, especially in the context of existing ICAO provisions, such as those in Annex 19 — Safety Management, which support aspects of safety, capacity and efficiency in ATS provision.

3.42 The Conference also agreed that ICAO should investigate the potential benefits from development of provisions and processes for certification of ANSPs while remaining mindful of the costs incurred in doing so. Furthermore, it was incumbent upon ICAO to balance the benefits achievable through effective implementation of existing ICAO provisions against any substantive need to develop harmonized certification provisions.



20 Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, San Marino, Republic of Moldova, Serbia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine.


3.43 AN-Conf/13-WP/229, presented by IFATSEA, proposed that the successful achievement of basic training objectives for all Air Traffic Safety Electronics Personnel (ATSEP) should be an ICAO requirement. In this respect, the increasing roles and responsibilities of ATSEP for maintaining a safe communications, navigation, and surveillance/ATM) infrastructure was recognized by the Conference. The Conference was reminded that ICAO had developed competency-based procedures for ATSEP in the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training (PANS-TRG, Doc 9868), along with supporting guidance in The Manual on Air Traffic Safety Electronics Personnel Competency-based Training and Assessment (Doc 10057), that would raise and harmonize the level of competencies while allowing States to implement a flexible approach to competency-based training. It was noted that, whilst Doc 10057 currently stated that all ATSEP should successfully complete basic training, defining this or any other element of ATSEP training as mandatory would remove such aforementioned flexibility. However, it was recalled that Doc 10057 was a relatively new document and, when developing guidance material, it may be the case that there is a need for additional training requirements. Consequently the Conference agreed that the contents of the working paper would be brought to the attention of the appropriate ICAO technical expert group.

3.44 AN-Conf/13-WP/114, presented by Canada, outlined a proposal regarding the adoption of “True North” as a reference for all operations, citing the ongoing costs of applying magnetic variation to both charts and aircraft systems. The Conference was informed that the Twelfth Air Navigation Conference (2012) had called upon States interested in the matter to conduct further studies on the technical and operational impact of the proposal, as well as on the expected costs and benefits to all aviation stakeholders. The Conference agreed that, in light of the lack of such studies being carried out or reported to ICAO, ICAO should investigate the technical and operational impact and/or merits, as well as the potential cost of the proposed change across the spectrum of aviation activities and across all regions prior to progressing on adoption of “True North” as a global reference.

3.45 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/115, also presented by Canada, which outlined the importance of the use of standardized phraseology and proposed that ICAO provisions would be strengthened, to ensure reliable operational communications. The Conference was informed that the development of guidance material on standardized phraseology was already included in the active work programme of ICAO. While some individual parts of the working paper did not meet universal appeal, the Conference agreed that the contents of AN-Conf/13-WP/115 would be brought to the attention of the appropriate ICAO technical expert group.

3.46 AN-Conf/13-WP/245, presented by Ukraine, provided an overview of ATM aspects within Dnipropetrovs’k and Simferopol flight information regions (FIRs), which are under the responsibility of Ukraine, relating to the safety of international civil flights. The working paper recalled the overarching need for all States to comply with the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Doc 7300, Chicago Convention) and the provisions of its Annexes. The Conference was informed of the ongoing work of the ICAO European Air Navigation Planning Group (EANPG) Black Sea Task Force (BSTF) being used to further explore potential solutions for the normalization of flight operations. This included a potential phased approach to help ease the traffic flows, capacity and ATC workload issues in the adjacent FIRs, especially in view of the ongoing airspace optimization projects in these areas and the opening of the new Istanbul Airport. The working paper also noted that the EANPG had issued a deficiency to the Russian Federation for aeronautical publications that were not compliant with ICAO provisions, in which the corrective action is the removal of these publications. In supporting this action, The Conference appreciated the commitment of all States to comply with the Chicago Convention and its Annexes, to cooperate to ensure the safety of flight operations in the high seas airspace over the Black Sea and to refrain from any actions that may directly or indirectly affect the safety of operations. The Conference expressed support for the EANPG Decision in the working paper and urged ICAO to step up efforts to work with all States to identify potential solutions. The Conference also noted that the EANPG


was scheduled to discuss the report of the most recent BSTF meeting, at its 60th meeting, in November 2018.

3.47 Information papers, provided by China (AN-Conf/13-WP/197), India (AN-Conf/13-WP/233), Indonesia (AN-Conf/13-WP/288), the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/256, AN-Conf/13-WP/257 AN-Conf/13-WP/259, AN-Conf/13-WP/261 and AN-Conf/13-WP/264) and Saudi Arabia (AN-Conf/13-WP/268) were noted.


Recommendation 3.5/1 — ICAO location indicator system and database of significant points

That States:

a) and industry stakeholders, urgently complete the population of the ICAO International Codes and Routes Designators (ICARD) database with all five-letter name codes (5LNC) used worldwide to ensure the accuracy of the database;

b) and industry stakeholders, ensure that whenever a 5LNC that is used for military purposes is published in an ICAO Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) and consequently coded into aircraft flight management system (FMS), such 5LNCs are coordinated through the ICARD process;

That ICAO:

c) continue to address the limitations of both location indicator and 5LNC availabilities in the short term and determine a long-term solution;

d) consider, when developing such solutions, the need for global harmonization and interoperability;

e) continue with its efforts to improve awareness and training on the use of ICARD in the regions that do not actively use ICARD;

f) continue to work towards removing duplicated 5LNCs and sound-like conflicts; and

g) implement improvements to the ICARD database functionality, including the use of maps depicting flight information regions (FIRs), more information regarding 5LNC history and sound-like proximity checks for codes held in reserve but not yet allocated to a region.


Recommendation 3.5/2 – Coordinated crisis management That States:

a) along with industry stakeholders, engage in an active and coordinated manner when dealing with crisis management, enhanced preparedness for disasters, contingency planning and post-crisis reviews; and

That ICAO:

b) develop guidance on a coordinated approach to crisis management, including subjects such as business continuity, the role of air traffic flow management (ATFM) in support of crisis management and the importance of post-crisis reviews.

Recommendation 3.5/3 — Certification of ANSPs

That ICAO investigate the potential benefits, balanced against the associated costs, of the development of provisions and guidance material for certification of air navigation services providers (ANSPs).

Recommendation 3.5/4 — True North

That ICAO conduct a detailed study into the technical, operational, and economic feasibility of changing to a “True North” reference system.

3.49 Statement by the Russian Federation

The Delegation of the Russian Federation regretfully states that paragraph 3.46 of the proposed draft report of Committee A on Agenda Item 3 did not reflect the course of the discussion. Namely, there is no mention of the statement of the Russian Federation, which did not support WP/245, presented by Ukraine, regarding the termination of Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) concerning the Simferopol flight information region (FIR). In such circumstances, the Russian Federation considers it necessary to make the following statement:

Since the Russian Federation is an active user of the Simferopol FIR airspace, the safety situation in the region is of serious concern to us, to which we have repeatedly drawn attention of all States participating in the work of the Black Sea Task Force. To date, the interaction between the air traffic control (ATC) authorities of the Russian Federation and Ukraine in servicing air traffic in the Simferopol FIR has been non-existent. In violation of Standards 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 of Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Doc 7300), the air traffic services for civil flights in the Simferopol FIR have been provided simultaneously by various ATC units for a long time. So, in parallel with the Simferopol regional ATC Centre, air traffic services are provided by Odessa and Dnepropetrovsk ATC Centres. Obviously, this situation poses a huge threat to the safety of international civil aviation in the area, and the absence of a constructive solution in the near future can lead to disastrous consequences.

In addition, the irresponsible actions by EUROCONTROL, confirming the possibility of ATC units of Ukraine to provide air traffic services for four routes within the Simferopol


FIR and authorizing flights by airlines on those routes, only exacerbate the complicated safety situation in the area.

Regretfully, for almost three years of its work, the Black Sea Task Force, which had been tasked to work out a technical solution enabling distribution of responsibility for air traffic services over the Black Sea, was not able to find a rational and mutually acceptable technical solution to this task. This is largely due to the politicized, rather than technical, nature of the work of this group. In this regard, in order to expeditiously eliminate the emerging threat to the safety of international civil aviation in the Simferopol FIR, the Russian Federation, without raising the issue of sovereignty of the Black Sea States over their airspace and without engaging in political debate thereon, states the need to make the following recommendations, in relation to paragraph 3.46 of the Report of Committee A:

That ICAO:

a) organize the conduct of an objective and independent technical audit (assessment) of all Black Sea States’ capabilities to provide full air navigation services for the Simferopol FIR, including search and rescue operations in this region;

b) request the Black Sea Task Force to develop proposals for amending the European Air Navigation Plan;

c) establish clear deadlines for completing the tasks mentioned in paragraphs a) and b) above; and

That States and industry stakeholders:

d) provide unrestricted access for conducting an objective and independent technical audit (assessment) of all Black Sea States’ capabilities to provide air navigation services for the Simferopol FIR.

It should be noted once again that the actions proposed above are aimed solely at ensuring the safety of international civil aviation, and any delay in their implementation can lead to tragic consequences.

— — — — — — — —


Agenda Item 4: Implementing the global air navigation system and the role of planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs)

4.1: The economic benefits brought by aviation

4.1 Investing in air transport is an enabler for sustainable development and the need for it to be afforded the appropriate level of importance in a State’s national planning framework was highlighted in AN-Conf/13-WP/24, presented by the Secretariat, AN-Conf/13-WP/138, presented by the Dominican Republic, and AN-Conf/13-WP/193, presented by the International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations (IAOPA). The Conference recognized the importance of global, regional and national plan alignment with the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs). Including aviation in a State’s national planning framework would facilitate and increase the possibility of aid and the flow of funding into the air transport sector. The Conference also highlighted the importance of reinvesting the resources generated by aviation in the modernization of the air navigation system to ensure its sustainability. 4.2 With the expected doubling of air traffic by 2030, the Conference recognized the importance of general aviation (GA) as an entry point and training ground for both GA and commercial operations to meet the expected demand as emphasized in AN-Conf/13-WP/193. The Conference recognized that regulation should be proportional to the risk and, consequently, commercial air transport regulations were not always best suited for GA. The Conference also noted that States could benefit from national consultative bodies on GA matters.

4.3 The Conference further recognized, as emphasized in AN-Conf/13-WP/24 and AN-Conf/13-WP/138, the need for ICAO to engage with States to promote the importance of aviation development taking into consideration environmental and socio-economic aspects and to develop the needed guidance and training for States.

4.4 Information paper AN-Conf/13-WP/58, provided by the United States, was noted.


Recommendation 4.1/1 — State National Development Plans

That States:

a) establish a defined connection between their air navigation and safety plans, as well as other relevant national plans;

b) include clear references to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) in their air navigation and safety plans, as well as in other relevant national plans, with the objective of showcasing the contribution of aviation to the UN SDGs and national economies;

That ICAO:

c) engage with States to promote the importance of aviation development, taking into consideration environmental and socio-economic aspects, and to include aviation within their relevant national plans and, as necessary, national budgeting, which might be vital to unlocking funding for aviation needs; and

d) develop guidance for States to include aviation within their relevant national plans taking into consideration global and regional planning.



4.2: Implementing BBBs and minimum service Standards

4.6 Civil aviation can continue to promote socio-economic development provided that there is a safe, secure, efficient and environmentally sustainable air navigation system in place. The Conference highlighted the importance of providing the essential air navigation services outlined in the draft basic building blocks (BBB) framework in AN-Conf/13-WP/25 presented by the Secretariat.

4.7 The Conference noted the relationship between the proposed BBBs and the aviation system block upgrades (ASBUs) and their relationship with the regional air navigation plans. In this regard, while the proposed BBBs were the mandatory services to be provided for international civil aviation according to ICAO Standards and Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS), the ASBUs were a group of operational improvements to improve the performance of the air navigation system on a voluntary basis. Accordingly, the provision of the proposed BBBs was aligned with Volumes I and II of the Regional Air Navigation Plans while the planning and implementation of the ASBUs were addressed in Volume III. Therefore, at the national level, States should verify the provision of the proposed BBBs before implementing the operational improvements within the ASBUs.

4.8 In this regard, the Conference agreed that the essential services outlined in the proposed BBB framework should be the foundation of any robust air navigation system and therefore, States and ICAO should provide the necessary technical assistance and establish an effective process, in cooperation with the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs) and by making use of existing regional reporting mechanisms, to verify the provision of these services at a regional and national level. To this end, the Conference requested ICAO to develop the necessary tools to support the PIRGs.

4.9 The Conference also encouraged the use of advanced technologies for the provision of these essential services and agreed that ICAO should work closely with the industry to ensure global interoperability and compliance with local requirements, as proposed in AN-Conf/13-WP/149 presented by the Dominican Republic.

4.10 Finally, the Conference highlighted the importance of reflecting the planning for implementation of the essential services outlined in the BBB framework in national air navigation plans to obtain the required funding, if necessary.


Recommendation 4.2/1 — Implementation of essential air navigation services That States:

consider the use of more advanced technologies and procedures, in coordination with a)international organizations and industry stakeholders, to provide the essential air navigation services for international civil aviation, taking into account the principles of global interoperability and performance specification compliance;

include planning for the implementation of the essential services outlined in the b)proposed basic building blocks (BBB) framework within their national air navigation plans;


That ICAO:

in coordination with the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs) and c)by making use of existing reporting mechanisms, verify the provision of the essential air navigation services for international civil aviation, as outlined in the proposed BBB framework, through the methodology for the identification of air navigation deficiencies against the regional air navigation plans;

develop the necessary tools to support the PIRGs in the verification of the provision d)of the proposed basic building block (BBB) services at the regional and national levels;

coordinate the interoperability of systems and harmonization of procedures at a e)regional level, through the PIRGs, in relation to the use of advanced technologies and concepts of operations, taking into account global requirements;

in line with the No Country Left Behind (NCLB) initiative, provide the necessary f)technical assistance to States for the provision of essential air navigation services as identified by the PIRGs and as reflected in State national air navigation plans; and

urge the aviation manufacturing industry to create a testing environment for States to g)justify procurement decisions which guarantee interoperability and system functionality within local specific environments as a follow-up to the provision of essential air navigation services.


4.3: Implementing ASBUs for performance improvement

Performance-based approach for implementation

4.12 The Conference noted that, to prioritize future investments and to improve system performance, the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP) encouraged the adoption of a globally harmonized performance management process for the modernization of the air navigation system and the implementation of operational improvements within the aviation system block upgrade (ASBU) framework, as presented in AN-Conf/13-WP/11 presented by the Secretariat and supported by AN-Conf/13-WP/137 presented by Colombia, AN-Conf/13-WP/108 presented by Japan, Singapore and the United States, AN-Conf/13-WP/238 presented by the Republic of Korea and AN-Conf/13-WP/91 presented by the United Arab Emirates. In this regard, the Conference welcomed the reminder of the six-step performance management process described in the Manual on Global Performance of the Air Navigation System (Doc 9883), as well as the clarification of the difference between implementation and performance metrics described in AN-Conf/13-WP/11.

4.13 A list of potential key performance indicators (KPIs), proven to allow for meaningful performance assessments, had been published as part of previous editions of the GANP and allowed air navigation services providers (ANSPs) with differing maturity in their performance management processes, to measure their performance in differing resolution. The Conference acknowledged the varied levels of maturity in ANSPs’ data management processes and noted that, for this reason, the development of SARPs and Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) to define global performance-based requirements for the provision of air navigation services was not possible at the moment. The Conference highlighted, however, the benefits of defining performance-based requirements at regional and national


levels according to available resources and specific needs as emphasized in AN-Conf/13-WP/11, AN-Conf/13-WP/157 presented by Colombia, AN-Conf/13-WP/156 presented by the Dominican Republic, AN-Conf/13-WP/108, AN-Conf/13-WP/69 presented by South Africa, AN-Conf/13-WP/91, and AN-Conf/13-WP/281 presented by the Member States of the Central American Corporation of Air Navigation Services (COCESNA).

4.14 The Conference also recognized that many challenges could arise from the establishment and implementation of KPI measures and performance management processes. Therefore, to address these challenges, ensure global harmonization, promote collaboration among all stakeholders and join efforts on implementation, the Conference agreed that ICAO should assist States in the understanding and application of a simplified ASBU methodology, through the six-steps performance management process.

4.15 Pressing work to be done on performance included: the development of implementation indicators and new key performance indicators and review the current key performance indicators (KPIs) based on actual and relevant data; the definition of their interdependencies; the analysis of the costs associated with data collection; the development and update, if necessary, of relevant ICAO guidance material related to performance management processes; as well as the consideration of other input provided to the Conference on this subject. To continue and expedite this work, the Conference requested ICAO to consider the establishment of a group of performance experts under the GANP Study Group. The Conference requested the use of the GANP Portal to make the performance information available.

4.16 The proposal to list possible operational incentives during the development of new air traffic management (ATM) concepts in AN-Conf/13-WP/165, presented by the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA) and the International Air Transport Association (IATA), was also agreed by the Conference.

4.17 To attain a globally harmonized performance management process, the Conference agreed on the importance of collaboration at all levels and among all stakeholders for the collection of data and global, regional and national planning alignment as emphasized in AN-Conf/13-WP/99, presented by the United Arab Emirates, and AN-Conf/13-WP/11 and AN-Conf/13-WP/91.

Regional and national implementation initiatives and processes

4.18 The Conference acknowledged the efforts and applauded the regional initiatives outlined in AN-Conf/13-WP/156 presented by the Dominican Republic, AN-Conf/13-WP/218, AN-Conf/13-WP/219, AN-Conf/13-WP/220, AN-Conf/13-WP/223, all presented by the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC)21, AN-Conf/13-WP/284 presented by the Agency for Air Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar (ASECNA)22 and AN-Conf/13-WP/281. The Conference acknowledged the improvement on the performance of the air navigation system made by these initiatives.

4.19 In particular, the Conference encouraged ICAO’s support to regional initiatives, cooperation among States, collaboration with the industry, initiatives to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of regional processes and the participation of high level authorities in the process of decision-making for planning and implementation. The Conference also acknowledged the benefits of a


Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

22 Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, France, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Togo


peer review process in improving the provision of regional air navigation services, as well as regional instrument flight procedure design programmes.

4.20 The Conference encouraged the sharing of surveillance data and highlighted the importance of investing in surveillance systems. At the same time, the Conference acknowledged the need for States and services providers to consider the development of all required communications, navigation, and surveillance (CNS) infrastructure for these systems, in support of agreed operational and safety requirements.

4.21 At the national level, AN-Conf/13-WP/143, presented by China, outlined a method of managing approvals for required navigation performance (RNP) authorization required (AR) approaches which aimed to minimize additional workload by developing public RNP AR procedures available for all approved operators. The Conference was informed that work related to this topic was ongoing within the appropriate expert groups and, noting the strong support for this initiative, agreed that ICAO should finalize this work considering the method outlined in the working paper.

From development to implementation of SARPs

4.22 The Conference was informed that, following AN-Conf/12 Recommendation 6/13, Development of Standards and Recommended Practices, procedures and guidance material, ICAO implemented a project-based approach, which took into account the GANP, to better support the development and implementation of SARPs. The Conference was also informed that the recommendations such as the States’ readiness to implement the SARPs in AN-Conf/13-WP/292, presented by the International Business Aviation Council (IBAC), would be considered in the improvement of this approach.

4.23 The Conference acknowledged that the development and implementation of performance-based SARPS is challenging and agreed that, prior to the adoption of provisions, guidance material should be available, impact assessment should have been performed and a structured regional approach to support implementation, through the PIRGs, should be in place as outlined in AN-Conf/13-WP/297 presented by IATA.

4.24 Information papers AN-Conf/13-WP/215 provided by Algeria, AN-Conf/13-WP/195 provided by China, AN-Conf/13-WP/267 provided by Saudi Arabia, AN-Conf/13-WP/261 provided by the United Arab Emirates and AN-Conf/13-WP/285 provided by ASECNA were noted.


Recommendation 4.3/1 — Improving the performance of the air navigation system

That States:

a) adopt and adapt as needed the six-step performance management process for the planning and implementation of air navigation improvements and reflect this process in their national air navigation plans;

b) align their national air navigation plans with regional plans to attain a globally harmonized performance management process and support the achievement of global performance objectives;


c) support ICAO in promoting the No Country Left Behind (NCLB) initiative and reaffirm their commitment to the development of timely and accurate national air navigation plans aligned with regional and global plans;

That ICAO:

d) encourage the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs) to embrace a performance-based approach for implementation and adopt the six-step performance management process, as described in the Manual on Global Performance of the Air Navigation System (Doc 9883), by reflecting the process in Volume III of all regional air navigation plans;

e) continue to expedite the work on performance indicators related to the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750, GANP), including their review by an appropriate group of performance experts, and consider establishing such an expert group under the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) Study Group; and

f) examine possible operational incentives in the development of new air traffic management (ATM) concepts.

Recommendation 4.3/2 — Regional and national collaboration and implementation initiatives

That States:

a) adhere to the implementation commitments agreed at the regional level, and reflected in the regional air navigation plans, in order to effectively deploy regional initiatives;

b) cooperate among themselves and with the industry to strengthen State implementation provisions within the framework of the No Country Left Behind (NCLB) initiative;

c) plan the modernization of their air navigation system together with all stakeholders, based on local needs and available resources, taking into account regional and global commitments;

d) recognize the important contribution being provided by the Africa-Indian Ocean (AFI) Plan towards the implementation of an effective regional framework for the African Air Navigation Services Provider (ANSP) Peer Review Programme to enhance the safety and efficiency of air transport operations in Africa;

e) support the implementation of ICAO initiatives to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of regional processes;

f) encourage the participation of high-level authorities in the decision-making process for planning and implementation;

That ICAO:


g) encourage States, regions and international organizations to support cross-border, interregional and intra-regional collaborative planning, activities and projects, supporting effective, efficient and expeditious harmonization;

h) continue to provide support to the African air navigation services provider (ANSP) Peer Review Programme;

i) urge States, in coordination with the industry, to support the implementation of regional priorities;

j) support the implementation of an action plan for the development of aviation infrastructure in Africa under the Comprehensive Regional Implementation for Aviation Safety in Africa (AFI Plan);

k) encourage States and organizations to continue sharing surveillance data to improve safety and efficiency in air traffic management;

l) encourage regional collaboration and coordination as well as the use of incentives when planning the implementation of operational improvements to enable all stakeholders to achieve the benefits expected from the implementation; and

m) encourage African States and industry to continue to work together within the African Flight Procedure Programme (AFPP).


4.4: Implementing search and rescue (SAR) processes and procedures

4.26 AN-Conf/13-WP/10, presented by the Secretariat, recalled the importance of regional cooperation and collaboration to improve search and rescue (SAR). It underscored that the implementation of the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS) would improve the effectiveness of SAR, while providing an opportunity to review and enhance existing SAR procedures. The Conference, noting the existence of critical deficiencies in the provision of SAR services in various parts of the world, agreed on the importance of enhancing SAR services. The point was also raised that as helpful as the GADSS CONOPS was in providing valuable information on the direction that ICAO had taken and was likely to take in the future, there was still an important role for States to fully assess the impact of these provisions and to have the opportunity to formally comment on them. In that regard, the Conference recognized that more ICAO provisions would be necessary to support the current Annex 6 — Operation of Aircraft GADSS-related Standards, and address, in particular, issues related to the exchange of automatic distress tracking information between aircraft operators, ANSPs, rescue coordination centres (RCC), military authorities and others.

4.27 The Conference noted that numerous initiatives had been developed in ICAO regions to support the implementation of effective SAR services. AN-Conf/13-WP/226, presented by the 54 Contracting States of AFCAC23 recalled that, in the wake of a ministerial conference held in


Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania,


April 2017, States in the region had decided to resolve their SAR deficiencies and were engaged in a SAR project involving workshops, surveys and the production of a template for SAR documentation. The Conference further noted in AN-Conf/13-WP/144 presented by Colombia, that States from the Central and South American Regions had established a multilateral SAR agreement and had ensured that letters of agreement were signed between their respective RCCs. The Conference noted that such arrangements could allow for a group of States to pool their resources to best use their respective capabilities in a given environment (i.e. at sea, over mountains, in the jungle). In the context of the importance States and Regions were placing on SAR services, the Conference recalled the support given to including a GADSS thread in the GANP, in line with ICAO provisions (Recommendation 1.2/1 refers).

4.28 AN-Conf/13-WP/59, presented by the United States, recalled the importance of cooperation agreements concluded at the State level but also at the level of the operational units traditionally involved in SAR operations and highlighted that the implementation of GADSS in support of SAR would offer an opportunity for all PIRGs to re-evaluate SAR-related regional agreements and cooperation mechanisms. In supporting this paper, the Conference also acknowledged that the evolution of GADSS would facilitate discussions on overcoming the shortcomings of SAR organization in the regions. The Conference also noted the availability of various expert groups to assist ICAO with the further development of Standards and PANS, supporting GADSS, and this was seen by the Conference as an important part of the development process.

4.29 The Conference noted the importance of accurate localization of wreckage and survivors after an accident over terrain as highlighted in AN-Conf/13-WP/212, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States24 and the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)25 and by EUROCONTROL. The Conference also noted the work undertaken by ICAO to adopt performance-based Standards for the location of an aircraft in distress, and that the purpose of Article 41 of the Convention was to provide States and industry a degree of certainty of the requirements in time to develop appropriate solutions. The Conference agreed that, without hindering the implementation of existing provisions related to the GADSS, a review be conducted regarding a performance-based means to accurately determine the location of the end of flight and that provisions be developed as required.

4.30 Information papers provided by Saudi Arabia (AN-Conf/13-WP/266) and ASECNA (AN-Conf/13-WP/286) were noted.


Recommendation 4.4/1 – Search and rescue (SAR) and the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS)

That States:

a) through the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs), examine the possibilities of combining their respective capabilities to improve search and rescue (SAR) effectiveness;

Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

24 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.



b) take advantage of the PIRGs to actively promote the establishment of bilateral or multilateral SAR agreements;

c) support regional initiatives to implement SAR by organizing high-level conferences in coordination with ICAO, industry and international partners;

That ICAO:

d) complete the development of Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) provisions related to GADSS, as necessary, and support their implementation;

e) organize regional SAR seminars and/or workshops to facilitate implementation of the Global Aeronautical Distress and Safety System (GADSS);

f) emphasize to States the importance of implementing Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) provisions which support GADSS, related to aircraft tracking and to the location of an aeroplane in distress;

g) invite the appropriate expert groups to provide advice on the implementation of GADSS;

h) review the need for a requirement for a performance-based Standard to accurately determine the location of the end of flight, particularly over terrain, in the scope of efficient SAR operations; and

i) include the general organization of SAR in future editions of the GANP.

— — — — — — — —


Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues 5.1: Operations above Flight Level 600

5.1 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/16, presented by the Secretariat, which provided an overview of operations generally above flight level 600 including status of operations and details relevant to their safe and orderly growth. It underlined the need to develop initial guidance material to address regulatory aspects and that, beyond the near term, the global community should review the extent to which operational and technical issues need to be resolved to safely accommodate significantly higher density traffic levels. The Conference noted the suggestion that the term “higher airspace operations” be used to refer to this subject, however, concern was raised that this term “higher” could be confusing and noted the need to review the terminology in all official languages of the Organization.

5.2 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/41, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States26, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)27; and EUROCONTROL, which highlighted some of the challenges that high-altitude, long-endurance operations could introduce into the air traffic management (ATM) system. The Conference recognized the importance of ICAO taking advantage of the considerable relevant operational experience in some States on this issue.

5.3 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/96, presented by the United Arab Emirates, which identified issues that should be addressed to enable efficient and harmonious space operations in cooperation with the existing ATM system. The Conference also called on ICAO to provide guidance material and to collaborate with other applicable organizations to develop a harmonized regulatory and operating environment above traditional ‘airspace’.

5.4 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/105, presented by Kenya, and AN-Conf/13-WP/136, presented by Peru, on the practical experience related to higher airspace operations above their States. The Conference noted that the number of higher airspace operations has increased over recent years and recognized the significant experience gained by Member States and industry in that regard.

5.5 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/162, presented by the United States, which outlined a way for Member States and industry to create a global framework that leverages performance-based criteria and approaches to management of operations. The Conference recognized the need to establish clear responsibilities for operators and service providers, and to define the information needed to create strategic and tactical planning as well as situational awareness.

5.6 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/166, presented by the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA), on some of the key principles that may be considered to help ensure the safe and orderly expansion of higher airspace operations. The Conference agreed with the need for ICAO and the global community to begin work on the development of near-term guidance material to manage the growth of the sector in a safe and orderly manner. The Conference also noted the set of guiding principles presented in the working paper as a possible way to move forward on this shared endeavour. 26 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,




5.7 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/173, presented by the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), which provided an overview of issues experienced by CANSO member organizations in relation to higher airspace operations. It highlighted the need to address some of these in order to support the predicted growth of the sector. The Conference recognized the need to further study the impact of travel through controlled airspace for higher airspace operators as proposed.

5.8 The Conference agreed that the development of technical work in support of this sector should be consistent with the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP). The Conference agreed that it was too early for ICAO to develop Standards and that ICAO should study the issues raised during the discussion. In that regard, the Conference highlighted the need for clarity in the scope of the work to be undertaken by ICAO on this subject and agreed that a multidisciplinary approach should be taken.

5.9 The Conference recognized that the sector was still in its early stages and developing rapidly, and that a significant amount of the technical experience and knowledge was held by the industry. To that end, the Conference encouraged States and ICAO to work closely with those States directly involved in higher airspace operations and with industry to ensure the validity of any guidance material.

5.10 The Conference noted that States that have relevant experience in higher airspace operations should be encouraged to provide draft guidance material to ICAO in order to validate it through established processes to ensure consistency with ICAO provisions with a view to finalizing and publishing it as ICAO guidance material.

5.11 The Conference agreed that higher airspace operations should not have disproportionate impact on the existing traffic, and should comply with applicable environmental Standards. An objection by the United States noted that an environmental matter had been discussed in a technical meeting that had not explicitly listed environment in its agenda.


Recommendation 5.1/1 — Operations above flight level 600

That States:

a) with relevant experience in higher airspace operations share, through ICAO where appropriate, their experience and expertise with other States and provide assistance to other States on the regulatory aspects of these operations;

b) expected to benefit from higher airspace operations agree to consider risk-based operational trials in their airspace;

That ICAO:

c) support ongoing higher airspace operations by providing guidance and, as necessary, other provisions on the regulatory aspects of these operations;

d) work with States and industry to share information on current and forecasted needs for higher airspace operations, to identify issues affecting the global air navigation system and to proactively address harmonization for these operations;

e) consider establishing a multidisciplinary group of experts to consider needed criteria, operational issues, and operator and provider responsibilities for operations in higher airspace;


f) develop a performance-based global framework for higher airspace operations considering current and future work in emerging technologies, for example, in the areas of information management and sharing, strategic planning, separation and environmental Standards, situational awareness and security; and

g) ensure that the framework includes flights transitioning through controlled airspace and to and through airspace above FL600, as necessary.

Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues 5.2: Operations below 1000 feet

5.13 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/5, presented by the Secretariat, outlining the opportunities and challenges related to the emergence of a range of aviation activities in very low altitude airspace, typically at 1 000 feet above ground level (AGL) and below, in particular in urban or suburban environments. These activities include the operation of small unmanned aircraft (UA), commonly referred to as “drones”, as well as new developments referred to as “flying taxis”.

5.14 The Conference expressed broad support for ICAO’s activities regarding the formulation and implementation of technical and regulatory solutions for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operations that remain outside of the international instrument flight rules (IFR) framework. The Conference urged ICAO to continue its efforts towards the safe and coordinated development of aviation activities at very low altitudes, including in the vicinity of, and into, aerodromes.

5.15 The Conference in particular outlined ICAO’s key role as a forum and facilitator for the definition and development of the UAS traffic management (UTM) system, bringing together States and industry stakeholders, at both the global and regional levels. The Conference agreed on the need for States, academia, regional organizations and industry stakeholders to proactively cooperate for the deployment of necessary UTM infrastructure.

5.16 AN-Conf/13-WP/88, presented by Brazil on UTM and autonomous operations, and AN-Conf/13-WP/97, presented by the United Arab Emirates, on tactical risk management of unauthorized unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) intrusions, highlighted the need for ICAO to continue facilitating the exchange of knowledge and best practices between States, with the active participation of UAS industry stakeholders. The Conference acknowledged that sufficient time should be given to States and regions to test and validate UTM concepts and solutions before developing SARPs. The Conference also expressed wide support for ICAO’s awareness and education activities, as well as for the continuous enhancement of its tools for information exchange, in particular on States’ UAS regulations.

5.17 AN-Conf/13-WP/170, presented by the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), highlighted the importance of ensuring interoperability of UTM systems with existing air traffic management (ATM). The Conference urged States to ensure that approved UTM systems are interoperable with existing ATM infrastructure.

5.18 Following its review of AN-Conf/13-WP/168, presented by the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA), International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA) and International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) outlining some foundational issues to be examined to enable UAS integration, the Conference agreed that integration of UAS into national airspace systems would be facilitated by the definition and implementation of core airspace management services.


5.19 The Conference noted the value of a digital interface to facilitate the exchange of information between national aircraft registries to support identification of UAS. However, concerns were expressed by several States regarding the potential impact of such interface on the sovereignty of national registration systems. ICAO clarified that the aircraft registration network (ARN) being developed would allow connectivity between national registries on a voluntary basis within parameters set by each participating State regarding data to be shared and with whom it may be shared.

5.20 Following its review of AN-Conf/13-WP/54, presented by the United States, the Conference acknowledged the significant work already accomplished by ICAO, and requested that consideration be given to incorporating the material on the UTM framework into the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP). Broad support was expressed for developing future work through the GANP process and it was agreed that ongoing work should continue with redefined terms of reference on future activities.

5.21 AN-Conf/13-WP/56, presented by the United States, highlighted the need for ICAO to address increasing operations conducted over the high seas by non-certificated UAS involved in commercial activities such as fish spotting, atmospheric research and oil platform inspections; as well as in government operations including in situ weather measurement, fishery compliance, search and rescue, and security. The Conference requested ICAO to develop a solution to enable States to authorize operations of non-certificated UAS over the high seas, using parameters to be developed in a transparent manner, including investigating the maximum altitude at which these operations would be allowed.

5.22 Information papers provided by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States28, the other Member States of ECAC29; and EUROCONTROL (AN-Conf/13-WP/51), Canada (AN-Conf/13-WP/118) and the United States (AN-Conf/13-WP/181) were noted.


Recommendation 5.2/1 — Very low altitude operations

That States:

a) collect and share information regarding very low altitude operations, including on unmanned aircraft systems traffic management (UTM) systems, autonomous operations initiatives and tactical risk assessment models;

b) ensure that UTM systems are interoperable with existing air traffic management (ATM) systems;





That ICAO:

c) contribute to the development of operational solutions and guidance, including on UTM systems, autonomous operations and tactical risk assessment models, to support the safe and coordinated implementation of aviation activities at very low altitude, particularly in urban and suburban environments, including in the vicinity of, and into, aerodromes;

d) continue serving as the global and regional facilitator and forum for States, industry, academia and other interested stakeholders in the development of UTM systems, including developing guidance for the identification, structuring and implementation of necessary financing mechanisms such as public-private partnerships (PPPs);

e) continue developing provisions and guidance material for the development, harmonization and implementation of UAS regulations, consistent with the key policy principles set forth in the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP);

f) develop a solution to enable States to authorize operations of non-certificated UAS over the high seas, using parameters to be defined in a transparent manner, including investigating the maximum altitude at which these operations would be allowed;

g) develop Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), guidance or “best practices” related to UTM, including autonomous operations, after States and regions have had sufficient time to test and validate concepts;

h) encourage UTM providers to implement the highest level of cyber security standards that are consistent with aviation community expectations and guidelines for very low altitude airspace operations;

i) support and coordinate the implementation of core airspace management services including, but not limited to, geofencing and geo-referencing, as well as ensuring ATM and UTM interfaces;

j) actively cooperate with States at the regional level for the development and implementation of UTM;

k) continue the development of a global aircraft registration network (ARN); and

l) continue conducting awareness and educational activities amongst users, and facilitate the exchange of information amongst States regarding their UAS regulations.

Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues 5.3: Remotely piloted aircraft system (RPAS)

5.24 AN-Conf/13-WP/6, presented by the Secretariat, outlined the opportunities and challenges related to the operation of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) and described ICAO’s activities in the development of the regulatory framework to support the integration of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) into non-segregated airspace and aerodromes. The Conference expressed broad support for these activities. To support the development of RPAS-related provisions, the Conference agreed on the need for collection of technical and operational data, in particular on detect and avoid (DAA) and C2 Link, and encouraged States to invite industry stakeholders to provide such data to ICAO.


5.25 The Conference noted that although the current focus of work underway is on SARPs, PANS and guidance material related to airworthiness, C2 Link, flight operations, DAA and ATM, it is expected that RPAS-related provisions will ultimately be required in all ICAO Annexes. In this context, the Conference agreed, as suggested in AN-Conf/13-WP/61 Revision No. 1, presented by the United States, on the need for States to support the cross-disciplinary development of RPAS-related SARPs and guidance material across all relevant ICAO technical expert groups. There was also support for the development by ICAO of additional training activities and guidance material to assist States in implementing RPAS-related SARPs.

5.26 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/41, presented by Spain on behalf of the European Union and its Member States30, the other Member States of ECAC31; and EUROCONTROL and acknowledged the importance of standardizing DAA capabilities.

5.27 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/177, presented by CANSO, which requested ICAO to establish secondary surveillance radar (SSR) code 7400 for lost C2 Link events within appropriate Annexes, PANS, regional air navigation plans and other relevant documents. While the need for a specific code was broadly recognized by the Conference, it was agreed that ICAO should review the potential ramifications of the establishment of code 7400, or other alternative code, including for military stakeholders, as the dedicated SSR code for lost C2 Link events prior to progressing this matter.

5.28 AN-Conf/13-WP/121, presented by Canada, requested that ICAO reconsider the use of the term “unmanned” to describe aviation without an on-board crew and its replacement by gender-neutral terminology. Broad support was expressed for AN-Conf/13-WP/121 and the Conference requested ICAO to consider the use of gender-neutral RPAS-related terminology, following appropriate research.

5.29 Information papers provided by Brazil (AN-Conf/13-WP/192), the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/258 and Indonesia (AN-Conf/13-WP/276) were noted.

5.30 As a result of the discussions, the Conference approved the following recommendation:

Recommendation 5.3/1 — Remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS)

That States:

a) collect and share information on remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) operations;

b) actively engage industry stakeholders to collect and provide technical data to ICAO on RPAS operations needed to support the development of SARPs for RPAS, including those SARPs required for detect and avoid (DAA) and C2 Link;

c) support the cross-disciplinary development of RPAS-related SARPs and guidance material across expert groups of ICAO;

That ICAO: 30 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,




d) continue development of the regulatory framework necessary to support the integration of RPAS into non-segregated airspace and aerodromes, and facilitate related implementation roll-out activities;

e) continue developing guidance material to support safe RPAS operations, to facilitate implementation through regional training activities, to conduct awareness and educational activities amongst users, and to facilitate the collection and sharing of information amongst States regarding their RPAS operations and regulations;

f) assess the work underway in its expert groups and identify additional activities required to implement RPAS-related SARPs and guidance such as DAA and C2 Link;

g) provide an update on a fully integrated approach for ICAO’s RPAS-related work programme to the 40th Session of the Assembly in 2019;

h) in coordination with States and military stakeholders, propose the best selection for the establishment of a secondary surveillance radar (SSR) code for lost C2 Link events within appropriate Annexes, Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS), regional air navigation plans and other relevant documents; and

i) consider the use of gender-neutral RPAS-related terminology, following appropriate research.

Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues 5.4: Cyber resilience

5.31 AN-Conf/13-WP/27, presented by the Secretariat, highlighted the need for a globally coordinated trust framework for successfully managing cyber resilience and ensuring interoperability in an increasingly connected aviation system. The Conference recognized the importance of a globally coordinated aviation trust framework, reflected in AN-Conf/13-WP/67 presented by the United States, AN-Conf/13-WP/83 presented by Brazil, AN-Conf/13-WP/187 presented by Airports Council International (ACI) and AN-Conf/13-WP/169 presented by CANSO, ICCAIA, IFATCA and IFALPA.

5.32 The Conference agreed on the urgent need for the development of a trust framework for a digitally connected and interoperable aviation system and that this work should be pursued in full transparency by ICAO through a group of experts. The Conference agreed that coordination with both aviation stakeholders and non-aviation technical experts, particularly the internet governing bodies, is necessary for the development of this trust framework to address risks and ensure the cyber resilience and interoperability of the aviation system. Furthermore, the Conference recognized that the trust framework should be included as a subject in the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) to improve its visibility, and that the expert group should examine how this could be accomplished. The Conference also recognized the recommendation of AN-Conf/13-WP/187 that the expert group should develop a trust framework that should be practical, efficient, flexible and effective for all parties.


5.33 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/270, presented by Canada, Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States32, and the other Member States of ECAC33, and EUROCONTROL, and Singapore, and co-sponsored by Australia and New Zealand, on the system-of-systems notion of cybersecurity in aviation and AN-Conf/13-WP/171 presented by CANSO on cyber resilience in the system-wide information management (SWIM) concept.

5.34 The Conference recognized the topic of cyber resilience as a multi-disciplinary, cross-cutting issue that affects all aviation stakeholders, and that aviation systems are becoming increasingly connected and mutually dependent for the exchange of digital data and information. This requires globally harmonized policies and requirements recognizing the diverse levels of maturity in the global aviation system. It should equally allow States to accord for their essential aeronautical infrastructure with their national or regional obligations. A global aviation framework should not be detrimental to fair competition between aviation stakeholders. The Conference recognized that this complex system of systems requires collaboration and coordination amongst different stakeholders when developing, integrating, operating and maintaining subsystems that should be secured by design as referenced in AN-Conf/13-WP/270, and supported by AN-Conf/13-WP/171.

5.35 The Conference considered the need for high-level management frameworks and associated policies at the State level as discussed in AN-Conf/13-WP/42 presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States32, and the other Member States of ECAC33, and EUROCONTROL on strengthening concepts for cybersecurity in aviation and AN-Conf/13-WP/270 and supported by AN-Conf/13-WP/279, presented by Member States of Corporación Centroamericana de Servicios de Navegación Aérea (COCESNA)34, and AN-Conf/13-WP/282, presented by the Agency for Air Navigation Safety in Africa and Madagascar (ASECNA). The Conference highlighted that ICAO should develop and promote policies and frameworks related to cyber resilience, and that these should be evaluated in the context of existing management systems and be considerate of international industry standards. The Conference reflected on the need for future SARPs to address cyber resiliency and agreed that a discussion on cyber resilience SARPs should be pursued in the future by ICAO technical expert groups along with development of guidance material on the subject. The Conference underscored the need for the aviation community to be prepared for cyber events and that effective cyber incident response plans were required for continued resilience, and took note of actions put in place by some States to face the challenges of protecting aviation systems against cyber threats.

5.36 The Conference noted the need for cyber-related information sharing, specifically highlighted in AN-Conf/13-WP/62, presented by the United States, and AN-Conf/13-WP/90, presented by the United Arab Emirates. Both papers expressed the need for sharing of cyber-related threat information through appropriate channels, and the Conference encouraged States and international organizations to facilitate information sharing through appropriately designated channels. The Conference noted the importance of tabletop exercises to increase awareness of cyber threats and vulnerabilities and acknowledged the need for ICAO to maintain a repository of scenarios and lessons learned to aid in the development of tabletop exercises.

5.37 The Conference acknowledged the importance of a transparent, coordinated and balanced approach to cyber resilience in civil aviation at the global level, including the urgent need for the trust 32 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,



34 Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua.


framework, and that successfully managing cyber resilience in an increasingly interconnected aviation system requires a globally harmonized approach amongst all stakeholders to reduce the vulnerabilities potentially introduced by connecting systems. The Conference recognized the need for a multidisciplinary approach to this work and the adoption of secure-by-design principles, especially recognizing the diverse needs of current and future aviation system participants including system-wide information management (SWIM) users (civil and military) and new entrants to the aviation system such as RPAS.

5.38 Information papers provided by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States35, and the other Member States of ECAC36 and EUROCONTROL (AN-Conf/13-WP/160) and the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/262) were noted.


Recommendation 5.4/1 – Cyber resilience

That States:

a) in coordination with stakeholders, provide the necessary support for ICAO to evolve the global trust framework as an enabler of flight operations in a digitally connected environment;

b) recognize that the cyber resilience of the aviation system depends on continued coordination amongst all relevant aviation and non-aviation stakeholders;

c) recognize the need to be prepared to respond to cyber events;

d) in coordination with industry and international organizations, work with ICAO to increase awareness of cyber threats and system resilience processes, and coordinate cyber-related incident information sharing and training activities;

e) recognize the need to share information related to cyber events with other States and international organizations through appropriately designated channels;

That ICAO:

f) establish a formal project involving States, international organizations and relevant stakeholders for the urgent and transparent development of a globally harmonized aviation trust framework through a group of experts. Priority should be given to governance principles;

g) coordinate with both aviation and non-aviation technical experts in the development of the trust framework, and in particular with the governing bodies of the Internet;

h) incorporate the trust framework into the Global Air Navigation Plan (Doc 9750) in an appropriate manner to highlight its urgent need, its importance and to improve its visibility;



36 Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Republic of Moldova, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine


i) develop, as a matter of priority, and promote high-level policies and management frameworks for cyber resilience to help mitigate cyber threats and risks to civil aviation based on international industry standards and preferably aligned or integrated with existing management systems;

j) recognize the need for the aviation community to be prepared for and be able to respond to cyber events;

k) encourage States and international organizations to facilitate information sharing through appropriately designated channels at the global and regional levels;

l) promote multidisciplinary State and relevant aviation and non-aviation stakeholder collaboration on cyber information sharing;

m) promote tabletop exercises and maintain a repository of lessons learned and scenarios available to Member States; and

n) promote a unified framework for an integrated risk management approach (safety, security, environment, financial, etc.) to cyber resilience, taking into account all hazards and threats to the air navigation system.

Agenda Item 5: Emerging issues 5.5: Other emerging issues impacting the global air navigation system including

unmanned aircraft systems (drones), and supersonic and commercial space operations

5.40 AN-Conf/13-WP/13, presented by the Secretariat, provided an overview of emerging issues that may impact the global air navigation system. It highlighted details on two new types of operations: commercial space transport (CST); and the reintroduction of supersonic transport (SST) for civil use. The Conference noted that while they are not yet fully operational, it is important to consider and monitor their development as these operations may become routine before the next Air Navigation Conference.

5.41 AN-Conf/13-WP/178, presented by CANSO, outlined the case for inclusion of commercial space and near space operators within the scope of Amendment 1 to Annex 19 — Safety Management in a manner similar to RPAS. The Conference recognized, however, that the commercial space sector was not yet mature enough to be considered under Annex 19.

5.42 However, the Conference acknowledged that relevant safety management principles should be applicable to the transition of sub-orbital flights through airspace. To raise awareness of these principles, the Conference recognized the need to enhance efforts to bring the space and aviation communities together.

5.43 AN-Conf/13-WP/299, presented by IATA, IFALPA and IFATCA, highlighted issues related to the impact on civil aviation of the emergence of commercial space. It identified the need for ICAO to begin developing guidance material related to the safe and orderly operation of spacecraft transiting airspace.

5.44 The Conference noted the developments in the commercial space and supersonic transport sectors. The Conference recognized the impact that these developments can potentially have on existing airspace users.


5.45 The Conference agreed that SST operations should comply with applicable environmental Standards. An objection by the United States noted that an environmental matter had been discussed in a technical meeting that had not explicitly listed environment in its agenda.

5.46 AN-Conf/13-WP/232, presented by Singapore, highlighted the potential of digital technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) to accelerate achievement of the ATM enhancement goals of the GANP.

5.47 The Conference agreed with the potential positive impact of new digital technologies for the global air navigation system. The Conference noted that some sectors were already engaging AI to support the work of aviation professionals and recognized the need to closely monitor these developments.

5.48 The Conference noted the intention of ICAO to provide a means to facilitate the sharing of information and research by the aviation community.

5.49 The Conference recognized the need to enhance the Standard-making processes to keep up with the rapid pace of technological developments.

5.50 Information papers provided by Brazil (AN-Conf/13-WP/192), Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States37, and the other Member States of ECAC38, and EUROCONTROL (AN-Conf/13-WP/211) were noted.


Recommendation 5.5/1 — Supersonic transport (SST) That States:

a) monitor the developments related to the re-emergence of the supersonic transport (SST) sector and, when necessary, engage their regulatory mechanisms to ensure that the necessary policies are in place before supersonic operations become routine;

That ICAO:

b) note the developments related to the re-emergence of the SST sector, including the work related to Appendix G of Assembly Resolution A39-1, Consolidated statement of continuing ICAO policies and practices related to environmental protection — General provisions, noise and local air quality; and

c) monitor the developments and, when necessary, engage regulatory mechanisms to ensure that the necessary policies are in place before supersonic operations become routine.





Recommendation 5.5/2 — Commercial space transport (CST)

In recognizing the issues related to commercial space transport (CST) operations potentially affecting international civil aviation, including the safe accommodation of CST operations in airspace and the joint use of aerodromes and other aviation infrastructure:

That States

a) and stakeholders support ICAO activities in the CST field through the sharing of relevant expertise;

b) share guidance material, best practices and national provisions related to commercial space operations through controlled airspace, including risk models and the application of relevant safety management principles;

That ICAO:

c) coordinate its work related to CST operations with the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs; and

d) establish a means to facilitate the sharing of information as applicable to the interaction between aviation and commercial space transport.

Recommendation 5.5/3 — Standard-making processes

ICAO should review and enhance its Standard-making processes in order to meet the requirements of the rapid pace of technological developments.

— — — — — — — —


Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.1 Strategic Plan 6.1.1 Vision and Overview of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP), 2020-2022

Edition 6.1.2 Enabling Safety Performance Monitoring; Goals, Targets and Indicators in

the 2020-2022 Edition of the GASP

6.1.1 This agenda item introduced the draft 2020-2022 edition of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP, Doc 10004). To provide the participants with a better overview and to facilitate the discussion, working papers submitted under sub-agenda items 6.1, 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 were addressed together.

6.1.2 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/29 Revision No. 1, presented by the Secretariat, containing a comprehensive strategy for aviation safety. The working paper presented the third edition of the revised Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP, Doc 10004) for agreement, in principle, by the Conference. The draft 2020-2022 edition of the GASP sets forth ICAO’s Safety Strategy in support of the prioritization and continuous improvement of aviation. The plan guides the implementation of regional and national aviation safety plans. The global aviation safety roadmap, presented in the draft 2020-2022 edition of the GASP, serves as an action plan to assist the aviation community in achieving the GASP goals.

6.1.3 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/123, presented by the United States, AN-Conf/13-WP/43, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States39, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference40; and by EUROCONTROL, AN-Conf/13-WP/135, presented by Brazil on behalf of the South American (SAM) States41, AN-Conf/13-WP/139, presented by the People’s Republic of China, AN-Conf/13-WP/66, presented by Uruguay, and supported by SAM States (except Chile), AN-Conf/13-WP/65, presented by the United States, and AN-Conf/13-WP/186, presented by the Airports Council International (ACI) regarding comments on the draft 2020-2022 edition of the GASP. The Conference agreed on the need to continue implementation efforts under the umbrella of the GASP, focusing on safety performance, regional mechanisms, safety risk management and national/regional safety planning. The Conference expressed wide support for the draft 2020-2022 edition of the GASP and agreed on the need for the GASP Study Group to re-examine the appropriate use of the safety oversight margin, in preparation for subsequent endorsement of the GASP at the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly. The Conference noted the progress of the ACI Airport Excellence (APEX) in Safety programme, along with the need for national airport operators to participate in the programme, and expressed support for States providing peer-to-peer assistance to airports on operational safety management and facilitating compliance with regulations.

6.1.4 The Conference noted the need to promote improved integration and coordination between planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs) and regional aviation safety groups (RASGs) while ensuring that the working arrangements at the regional level reflect the needs and priorities of each region. The Conference also agreed that the Council should be requested to continue the development of performance-based Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) to complement prescriptive requirements, as appropriate, taking into account the budgetary implications. 39 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,



41 Supported by 13 Contracting States (Argentina, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)).


6.1.5 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/142, presented by the People’s Republic of China, on the experience gained in China with implementing global aircraft tracking and operating surveillance. The Conference also reviewed two papers presented by Trinidad and Tobago: AN-Conf/13-WP/227 on considerations for revisiting the Chicago Convention with a focus on domestic aviation and a review of the ICAO Annexes and AN-Conf/13-WP/228 on alternative means for States struggling to meet ICAO requirements in Annex 13 — Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation, Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) and Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA). The Conference acknowledged that existing ICAO provisions in Annex 13 and related guidance material on regional investigation systems already provide the tools necessary for States, lacking sufficient resources to carry out investigations, to delegate their investigation function to other States or regional accident and incident investigation organizations (RAIOs).

6.1.6 As a result of the discussions, the Conference approved the following recommendation:

Recommendation 6.1/1 — Draft 2020-2022 Edition of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (Doc 10004, GASP)

That States:

a) agree in principle with the draft 2020-2022 edition of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP, Doc 10004), with the inclusion of GASP goals and targets; and

That ICAO:

b) take into consideration input from the Conference, the questionnaire and the future work of the GASP Study Group for subsequent endorsement of the 2020-2022 edition of the GASP at the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly.

Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.1.3 Global Aviation Safety Oversight System (GASOS)

6.1.7 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/17, presented by the Secretariat, describing the new global aviation safety oversight system (GASOS). The working paper sets forth ICAO’s objective of strengthening State safety oversight and safety management capabilities by enabling the delegation of safety oversight functions, as needed, by States to competent Regional Safety Oversight Organizations that have been assessed and recognized by ICAO; and by strengthening existing RSOOs to make them more effective and efficient in supporting States. The paper describes GASOS as a voluntary standardized assessment and recognition mechanism for State civil aviation authorities (CAAs), regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs) and other regional State-based mechanisms. The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/78 presented by Australia with the support of New Zealand and Singapore, AN-Conf/13-WP/188 presented by Bolivia with the support of the SAM States42, AN-Conf/13-WP/124 presented by the United States and AN-Conf/13-WP/224 presented by 54 Contracting States, Members of the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC)43 and agreed on the need to address the challenges and issues expressed therein as a matter of priority.

42 Supported by thirteen Contracting States (Argentina, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador,

Guyana, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)). 43 Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cabo Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,

Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe.


6.1.8 The Conference acknowledged the specific concern regarding the commercialization of safety oversight, emphasizing that private and for-profit organizations should not be used, and agreed on the need to limit the scope of the GASOS Programme to States, RSOOs, and Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programmes (COSCAPs). The Conference requested ICAO to address concerns in three main areas including liability, governance and cost-benefit analysis to support progression of the programme and noted the request for the ICAO Legal Bureau to be involved in finding the solutions for the legal issues and possible risk related to the transfer of tasks and competencies. The Conference also recommended to ensure that the current membership of the GASOS–Study Group (SG) will be reviewed to ensure access to the expertise and regional perspectives needed to progress the programme. The Conference also recognized the need to ensure that adequate guidance material is developed, supporting the implementation of GASOS. The Conference also recognized the need to align the GASOS programme with related tools and initiatives, to avoid duplication of efforts.

6.1.9 The Conference noted the support for GASOS by Agency on Aeronautical Safety for Central America (ACSA) and Transport Canada as the first RSOO and State involved in the GASOS pilot projects, highlighting the importance of this assessment in strengthening their safety oversight capabilities, enabling improvement of their performance and recommended that other similar organizations apply for an assessment as part of the GASOS trial period.


Recommendation 6.1.3/1 — The global aviation safety oversight system (GASOS)

That States: a) support the development of a global aviation safety oversight system (GASOS);

That ICAO: b) continue developing an ICAO GASOS comprised of voluntary and standardized

competency assessments of safety oversight organizations for recognition of safety oversight functions provided to States, including its legal framework and assessment mechanisms while ensuring those States maintain their obligations and responsibilities under the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Doc 7300);

c) develop appropriate guidance for States to support the delegation of safety oversight functions and monitoring of safety oversight organizations accepting delegations;

d) design adequate interfaces between GASOS and other ICAO programmes and to avoid duplication of activities between GASOS and the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA);

e) present GASOS for endorsement at the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly if the liability, governance and cost-benefit analysis issues and other concerns raised by the Conference have been addressed; and

f) encourage safety oversight organizations, including regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs), State civil aviation authorities (CAAs) and other regional State-based mechanisms, to participate in GASOS in order to expand and enhance the safety oversight support provided to States.


Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.2 Implementation of safety management

6.2.1 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/28, presented by the Secretariat, summarizing some important recent ICAO initiatives including the launch of the safety management implementation (SMI) website, which complements the fourth edition of the Safety Management Manual (SMM) (Doc 9859) and the delivery of four Regional Safety Management Symposia and Workshops. The working paper also suggests some areas where further work is needed to support the implementation of effective State safety programmes (SSPs) and safety management systems (SMSs). The Conference expressed support for the recommendations identified in the Secretariat working paper. Additional emphasis was made and supported by the Conference on the need to develop robust hazard identification and risk management processes taking into account the evolution, sometimes rapid, of the industry and operating environments.

6.2.2 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/117, presented by Canada, which promoted increased visibility and use of the SMI website and noted wide support for continued development, promotion and maintenance of the website, including support for all ICAO working languages, and encouraged States to contribute their practical examples and supporting rationales.


Recommendation 6.2/1 — Supporting effective safety management implementation

That States:

a) and international organizations identify focal points for the submission of practical examples and tools to be reviewed, validated and posted on the ICAO safety management implementation (SMI) website as a means of sharing successful experiences with the aviation community;

b) and international organizations support the ICAO SMI website by providing practical examples of their respective safety management practices, methodologies and tools for the purpose of sharing with other Member States;

That ICAO:

c) commit to the ongoing development, promotion and maintenance of the safety management implementation (SMI) website in order to ensure active use of the tool and relevance of content to the aviation community;

d) devise strategies to support the submission and validation of practical examples for the SMI website in the six ICAO working languages (English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Spanish, and Russian ) and ensure the translation of the content posted on the website into the six ICAO working languages;


e) develop initiatives tailored to each region with inputs from the regional aviation safety groups (RASGs) in support of the goals and targets of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) and Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) with a focus on the effective implementation of State safety programmes (SSPs) and safety management systems (SMSs) at the State and service provider levels, respectively, including the development of the required safety management competencies and/or the delegation to States, regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs) and regional accident and incident investigation organizations (RAIOs);

f) further support the development of appropriate harmonized safety performance indicators (SPIs) at the regional, State and service provider levels and explore the development of means to monitor the effectiveness of SSP and SMS on a more real-time basis;

g) in collaboration with States, RSOOs and industry explore more powerful methods of identifying hazards and managing risk, suitable for complex socio-technical systems such as aviation and adaptable, regardless of the type of risk;

h) in collaboration with States, RSOOs and industry explore the benefits of a unified framework for integrated risk management (safety, security, environment, etc…) taking into account the evolution of ISO management standards; and

i) update, for adoption by the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly, Assembly Resolutions related to safety management to reflect Amendment 1 to Annex 19 — Safety Management, as well as Amendment 15 to Annex 13 — Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation, with consideration given to an overarching safety management Assembly Resolution to complement Assembly Resolution A39-12, Appendices A and B, related to the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) and Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) in order to focus the attention of States on key aspects of achieving effective SSP implementation.

Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.2.1 State safety programmes (SSPs)

6.2.4 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/77 Revision No. 1, presented by Australia and New Zealand, and AN-Conf/13-WP/134, presented by Brazil, related to the process for the development and implementation of ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and the benefits of using a risk-based approach to achieve a target level of safety. In addition, AN-Conf/13-WP/134 suggested States share studies or data that could be used to conduct risk assessments in support of this approach. The Conference agreed that the Council should be requested to explore the use of a risk-based approach based on a target level of safety performance in the SARPs development and implementation process, where appropriate, taking into account budgetary implications.


6.2.5 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/116 Revision No. 1, presented by Australia, Austria on behalf of the European Union44 and its Member States45, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference46 and by EUROCONTROL, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Dominican Republic, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa and International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA), outlining challenges faced by States in interpreting the concept of acceptable level of safety performance (ALoSP) and suggesting further work is required in this area. The Conference expressed strong support for ICAO to further review this concept taking into consideration the experience of States.

6.2.6 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf-WP/147, presented by the Dominican Republic, highlighting the importance of change management which was also mentioned and supported in AN-Conf/13-WP/28. The Conference agreed on the need for capacity building at the State level in this regard to ensure the successful implementation of the global plans.

6.2.7 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/155, presented by the Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and supported by SAM States47, which presented the status of a pilot project including eleven South American (SAM) States, with the support of the ICAO SAM Regional Office, for the implementation of SSP. The Conference noted the benefits of this project in addressing the goal of No Country Left Behind (NCLB) and agreed that other regions could benefit from a similar approach.

6.2.8 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/239, presented by Republic of Korea, which addressed the need for ICAO to consider civil-military coordination and cooperation in the effective implementation of safety management. The Conference noted the work done by ICAO during the past decade with regard to civil-military cooperation to enhance air navigation safety capacity and efficiency. The attention of the Conference was brought to the ongoing work to update Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services relating to the conduct of safety risk assessments for activities potentially hazardous to civil aircraft, and its relationship to the Safety Management Manual (Doc 9859). The Conference agreed that civil-military cooperation should be addressed as part of the implementation of SSP.

6.2.9 Information papers presented by Algeria (AN-Conf/13-WP/216), Brazil (AN-Conf/13-WP/132), Indonesia (AN-Conf/13-WP/277 and AN-Conf/13-WP/278), the People’s Republic of China (AN-Conf/13-WP/204) and the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/164), were noted.


44 In the European Union, State obligations are discharged to a large extent on the basis of EU law and as such States refer to EU

legislation in their State safety programmes 45 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,



47 Supported by 13 Contracting States (Argentina, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)).


Recommendation 6.2.1/1 — State safety programmes (SSPs)

That States:

a) identify and address the need to build capacity at the State level for the management of change; and

b) share their experiences in civil-military cooperation for State safety programmes (SSPs) implementation in conferences, meetings and/or on the safety management implementation (SMI) website;

That ICAO:

c) review the acceptable level of safety performance (ALoSP) concept taking into consideration the experience of States;

d) review the need for additional guidance on the management of change at the State level; and

e) ensure that appropriate emphasis is placed on safety management in the update of Appendix I, Coordination and cooperation of civil and military air traffic, of Assembly Resolution A38/12, Consolidated Statement of continuing ICAO policies and associated practices related specifically to air navigation.

Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.2.2 Safety management systems

6.2.11 The Conference noted the progress made by People’s Republic of China in implementing SMS and in developing methods for their assessment and performance evaluation reflected in AN-Conf/13-WP/146.

6.2.12 AN-Conf/13-WP/152, presented by the Dominican Republic, highlighted the benefits of requiring the air navigation service provider (ANSP) in the Dominican Republic to complete a formal SMS acceptance process, including the sharing of experiences on how to measure different safety performance indicators and the use of the collected safety information to validate the reports of other service providers as part of the SSP. The Conference was reminded that SARPs for air traffic services providers to implement SMS were initially introduced in Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services and became applicable in November 2006. The Conference agreed that States should ensure that the latest SMS SARPs for air traffic services providers, as indicated in Amendment 1 to Annex 19 — Safety Management, have been implemented.

6.2.13 An information paper presented by the United Republic of Tanzania (AN-Conf/13-WP/289) was noted.

Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.2.3 Developing safety intelligence

6.2.14 With respect to the development of safety intelligence, AN-Conf/13-WP/300 was presented by International Air Transport Association (IATA), International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) and IFATCA. The paper expressed support for States to use industry/State


collaboration models for the exchange of safety data and safety information in establishing a safety data collection and processing system (SDCPS) as required by Amendment 1 to Annex 19 to capture, store, aggregate and enable the analysis of the safety data and safety information. The Conference expressed strong support for the actions contained in the paper, which reiterated the provisions in Amendment 1 to Annex 19 and highlighted that there may be some specific circumstances where the safety data may be used by States, in specific contexts and where appropriate, as long as the protection principles are applied. The Conference also recognized that implementation of the protective provisions in Appendix 3 to Annex 19 is challenging for States with right-to-know laws. Additional discussions related to the development of safety intelligence can be found under Agenda Item 7.1.

6.2.15 An information paper presented by the People’s Republic of China (AN-Conf/13-WP/203) was noted.


Recommendation 6.2.3/1 — Developing safety intelligence That States:

a) and international organizations collaborate on the development of trust sharing networks and adhere to the protective provisions as provided in Amendment 1 to Annex 19 — Safety Management; and

That ICAO:

b) support States with right-to-know laws in addressing the provisions for the protection of safety data, safety information and related sources in Amendment 1 to Annex 19.


Agenda Item 6: Organizational safety issues 6.3 Monitoring and oversight 6.3.1 The evolution of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP)

continuous approach (CMA) 6.3.2 Support and the USOAP CMA Online Framework (OLF)

6.3.1 This agenda item addressed ICAO’s continuous monitoring activities under the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP), and specifically the evolution of the USOAP Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA) to meet the needs of States and ICAO. In order to provide the participants with a better overview and to facilitate the discussion, sub-agenda items 6.3, 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 were addressed together.

6.3.2 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/21 Revision No. 1, presented by the Secretariat, addressing the evolution of the USOAP CMA methodology, processes and tools based on the work undertaken by the Group of Experts for a USOAP CMA Structured Review (GEUSR). The Conference supported the evolution of the USOAP CMA based on the GEUSR recommendations as well as the allocation of the necessary financial and human resources for their implementation. The Conference also agreed that pertinent information should not be lost when reducing the total number of USOAP CMA Protocol Questions (PQs), especially with respect to PQs not directly related to safety oversight, which should be included in the appropriate ICAO audit mechanism.

6.3.3 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/79 Revision No. 1, presented by Australia, supporting all GEUSR recommendations and calling for the accelerated implementation of the recommendations regarding the structured revision of the PQs. The Conference noted that the implementation of such recommendations implied the concurrent implementation of the recommendations regarding the identification of ‘Priority PQs’. Thus, the Conference supported the accelerated implementation of both sets of recommendations and agreed to request that the Council consider these proposals, taking into account the budgetary implications.

6.3.4 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/44, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States48, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference49 and by EUROCONTROL, proposing the measures to increase the efficiency of the USOAP CMA. The Conference discussed the proposal to delegate some ICAO functions and responsibilities under the USOAP CMA to ‘safety partners’. Concerns were expressed regarding the lack of definition of ‘safety partners’ and ‘designees’ in the ICAO framework. Concerns were also expressed that safety partners might include commercial entities, and that the delegation of some ICAO functions and responsibilities under the USOAP CMA might impact the necessary independence of the programme and the standardization and global acceptance of its results. Poland, speaking on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, clarified that the proposal in AN-Conf/13-WP/44 did not include delegation to commercial entities. The Conference discussed the recommendation in paragraph 3.1.c) of AN-Conf/13-WP/44 which was not fully supported. Therefore, the Conference agreed that the delegation of some functions and responsibilities should be addressed as part of the further evolution of the USOAP CMA beyond the GEUSR recommendations as a matter of priority and suggested that ICAO gives consideration in referring the issue to a study group. With respect to State safety risk profiles, the Conference noted that ICAO used a set of indicators to determine risk profiles of States for the





prioritization of USOAP CMA activities and that the GEUSR had already recognized the need to strengthen this area, making a number of recommendations for the expansion and enhancement of the indicators used by ICAO. Some concerns were raised regarding the public dissemination of the indicators forming the State safety risk profile. Clarifications were made by the Secretariat that the indicators forming part of the State safety risk profile would be shared with all States through the USOAP CMA Online Framework (OLF).

6.3.5 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/122, presented by Canada, addressing USOAP CMA simulated audits through self-assessments and peer assessments. The Conference recognized the importance of having reliable and up-to-date self-assessments of the USOAP CMA PQs by States and therefore agreed to strongly encourage States to complete their self-assessment of the USOAP CMA PQs in a detailed and reliable manner and to keep them up-to-date, taking benefit of cooperation with other States whenever possible. In addition, the Conference discussed the possibility of giving credit to experts having participated in peer assessments of other States to enhance the timeliness of USOAP auditor training.

6.3.6 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/189, presented by Uruguay, proposing the inclusion of questions regarding fatigue management in air traffic services within the air navigation services (ANS) PQs used in the USOAP CMA to reflect Amendment 50-B of Annex 11 — Air Traffic Services. The Conference acknowledged that the review of recent applicable amendments to the ICAO Annexes was a normal part of the process followed by ICAO for the periodic amendment of the USOAP CMA PQs. The Conference therefore agreed to refer the proposal to the Secretariat for assessment as part of the next applicable PQ amendment cycle.

6.3.7 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/217, presented by the 54 Contracting States, Members of the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC)50, proposing actions to enhance the implementation of USOAP CMA activities in Africa. The Conference recognized the benefits of enhanced cooperation and sharing of experience between States, in particular at regional level. In addition, the Conference recognized that the conduct of an additional number of USOAP CMA activities each year would require the allocation of additional financial as well as human resources, which was already addressed as part of the GEUSR recommendations.

6.3.8 With respect to the future evolution of the USOAP CMA beyond the GEUSR recommendations, the Conference agreed to recommend that ICAO establish a study group to address means to avoid duplication of efforts and find synergies to enhance the efficiency of the USOAP CMA, while maintaining safeguards to guarantee the independence, universality, standardization and global acceptance in the implementation of the programme.


Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic Of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe.


6.3.9 As a result of the discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendation:

Recommendation 6.3/1 — Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA)

That States:

a) continue to engage fully in the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA);

b) complete their self-assessments of the USOAP Protocol Questions (PQs) in a detailed and reliable manner and keep them up to date as needed;

c) enhance cooperation and sharing of experiences in the implementation of USOAP CMA, in particular at the regional level;

That ICAO:

d) continue to evolve the USOAP CMA methodology, processes and tools;

e) as a matter of priority, implement the recommendations and observations of the Group of Experts for USOAP CMA Structured Review (GEUSR) and, in particular, make available to States the set of indicators forming part of the State safety risk profile;

f) ensure that pertinent information is not lost when reducing the total number of USOAP CMA PQs, especially with respect to PQs not directly related to safety oversight, which should be included in the appropriate ICAO audit mechanism;

g) implement as a matter of priority the GEUSR recommendations regarding the structured revision of the PQs (Group A recommendations) and the identification of ‘Priority PQs’ (Group B recommendations);

h) ensure the continuous monitoring of the States remains robust, relevant and up to date; and

i) establish a study group before the 40th Session of the ICAO Assembly for the further evolution of the USOAP CMA, beyond the GEUSR recommendations, to address means to avoid duplication of efforts and find synergies to enhance the efficiency of the USOAP CMA while maintaining safeguards to guarantee the independence, universality, standardization and global acceptance in the implementation of the programme.

— — — — — — — —


Agenda Item 7: Operational safety risks 7.1: Facilitation of data-driven decision-making in support of safety intelligence

to support safety risk management

Facilitation of data-driven decision-making

7.1 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/23, presented by the Secretariat, which presented analysis solutions developed or proposed by ICAO that facilitate data-driven decision-making and assist stakeholders in identifying and managing safety risks in support of the development and dissemination of safety information and the implementation of State safety programmes (SSPs) and safety management systems (SMSs). The Conference acknowledged that those solutions, including data, tools, methodologies and training, facilitated data-driven decision-making and helped stakeholders identify and manage safety risks. The tools and methodologies also contributed to the development of safety information, supported the implementation of predictive risk management measures based on the objectives of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) and allowed ICAO to monitor the achievement of targets outlined in the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP).

7.2 The Conference discussed AN-Conf/13-WP/125, presented by the United States, on facilitating international safety data sharing for effective risk management. The Conference noted that many type design holders had robust risk management processes used in their continued airworthiness systems. However, it was likely that a majority of a certain type of fleet were operated outside of the States of Design (SoD) and that could lead to a significant amount of operational data that was not made available to the type design holder and manufacturer of the aircraft. Lacking that critical safety data, the type design holder would not be able to access a full view of the safety issues that could affect a product. The Conference acknowledged the need for further development of safety data sharing guidance among users of the aviation system. Specifically, the sharing of safety data with organizations responsible for the type design and manufacture of aircraft, to facilitate effective risk management.

7.3 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/126, presented by the United States, which discussed the lack of guiding principles to assist the States of Registry (SoR) when validating design approvals that would provide for better recognition of the SoD safety systems and demonstrated technical capabilities and competence. The Conference emphasized the importance and the broad benefits of developing standardized risk-based decision-making policies and best practices for the validation of foreign products. The Conference noted the information presented and agreed with the proposed recommendations. Furthermore, the Conference agreed that the development of ICAO provisions, as necessary, would encourage Member States to adopt a standardized approach for importing products that another State had certified. This would benefit the aviation industry by having globally harmonized safety Standards to design products and reduced costs, and by having certifying authorities share best practices in addressing import requirements by SoR.

7.4 The Conference also reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/129, presented by the United States, which discussed international collaboration on integrated safety assessment models and the cooperation between the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and EUROCONTROL in the development of a shared web-platform providing an integrated aviation risk model for safety performance evaluation. The Conference noted that the harmonized models – Integrated Safety Assessment Model (ISAM) for FAA and Integrated Risk Picture (IRiS) for EUROCONTROL, recognized the importance of global concepts, implementation of safety risk assessment regionally and locally, and cost-effective development of robust safety analysis tools.


7.5 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/148, presented by the Dominican Republic, on a methodology for gathering and analysing safety data. Namely, the first steps in gathering and analysing safety data for decision-making and safety risk assessment in a context of increasingly complex and automated programmes and applications, in support of State safety programme (SSP) implementation. The Conference recognized the need for more awareness in States about change in organizational culture, as well as guidance and uniform yet simple processes in States that promote the sharing of safety data in support of SSP and SMS implementation.

7.6 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/231 Revision No. 1, presented by China, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, International Air Transport Association (IATA) and Flight Safety Foundation (FSF), highlighting the progress of an initiative in the Asia Pacific Region to establish a collaborative regional data sharing mechanism in support of safety risk management also known as the AP-SHARE Demonstration Project. This initiative integrated and analysed operational data from various sources in support of safety awareness and improvements and demonstrated the value of data-driven analysis to address a particular safety issue. The Conference acknowledged the governance, cost-sharing and safety analysis modalities of the AP-SHARE and called for regional groups to share their experience in regional data sharing mechanisms in support of the regional aviation safety groups (RASGs).

Other safety intelligence initiatives

7.7 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/141 Revision No. 1, presented by China, and noted the positive result of the application of risk management systems for air carriers in China. Those systems were applied either as a reminder and assistance to first-line operational control personnel or to provide data support and the basis for decision-making in other work. The Conference agreed that China’s experience in building an operational risk management system should be shared with other regions and took into consideration the recommendation for this working concept for incorporation into Annex 6 ― Operation of Aircraft to be forwarded to the appropriate technical panel.

7.8 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/185, presented by Airports Council International (ACI), which provided an overview of the array of ACI activities and initiatives related to aerodrome safety, including runway safety, safety data, SMS implementation and aerodrome certification, some of them in collaboration with ICAO. The paper, which expressed support for ICAO activities and strategic objectives in this area, also discussed emerging issues in relation to aerodrome safety, notably the use of lasers and drones in the vicinity of aerodromes. The Conference noted and supported the information highlighted in the paper and acknowledged the valuable contribution of the presented activities to aerodrome safety.

7.9 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/280, presented by Nicaragua on behalf of Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras which highlighted the progress made by the Central American Safety Agency (ACSA) on implementing the Central American Safety Events Analysis Programme (PASOC). The Conference noted the value of PASOC in assisting the Central American States in implementing SSP by addressing the requirement for establishment of safety data collection and processing systems (SDCPS), in establishing alliances to improve the quantity and quality of data collected, in acquiring tools to support safety data analysis and safety risk management, and in working to put a mechanism in place for the protection of the data and its related sources. The Conference recognized the valuable role regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs) could play in supporting States to address their capacity needs in regard to safety data collection and analysis to achieve effective SSP implementation.


7.10 Information papers provided by Brazil (AN-Conf/13-WP/130 and AN-Conf/13-WP/131) were noted.

7.11 Based on the discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendations:

Recommendation 7.1/1 — Data-driven decision-making

That States:

a) implement data-driven decision-making processes, taking into account the ICAO safety and air navigation indicators, within their safety and air navigation activities to build data analysis capacity;

b) consider using ICAO’s air navigation analysis solutions, especially during the initial development of their State safety programmes (SSPs), and joining the ICAO Safety Information Monitoring System (SIMS) project to better utilize their stored data;

c) exchange safety and air navigation information with other Member States through data analysis tools such as SIMS in support of safety risk management;

d) continue joint development of safety risk assessment models that support and enable baseline risk quantification, safety risk assessment and forecasting to support risk-based decision-making, accident and incident modeling, barrier analysis, sensitivity, and “what if?” analyses to ensure that primary safety considerations are addressed within the integrated safety risk assessment models;

e) together with industry stakeholders, support regional mechanisms and platforms for greater data sharing and alignment of safety priorities;

That ICAO:

f) further develop and promote iSTARS and SIMS and other analysis solutions, and conduct regular iSTARS User Group Meetings so as to continually adapt to the changing safety environment;

g) encourage activities that facilitate global reporting of safety events and vulnerabilities to assure that the necessary safety data is available;

h) review and develop guidance to further facilitate the sharing of safety data between operators and those responsible for the type design and manufacture of aircraft;

i) raise awareness in States on the importance of initiating SSP and SMS implementation with simple processes that optimize resources to demonstrate benefits and develop momentum required to achieve the needed change in the organizational culture;

j) take action to foster the creation of uniform processes in States that promote the sharing of safety data;


k) encourage States to use the ICAO safety management implementation website as an information sharing platform to facilitate the exchange of experience in regional data sharing among regional groups; and

l) support regional mechanisms and platforms that enable States and industry stakeholders to share and align safety priorities in support of the RASGs.

Recommendation 7.1/2 — Standardized risk-based decision-making policies and best practices for validation of foreign products

That States:

a) support ICAO’s work, through the appropriate group of experts to determine the need for developing new materials to support further reduction in duplicated certification activity, by conducting a feasibility study for developing common standards and recommended best practices for recognizing the capabilities of States of Design (SoD) certification systems (including design approvals/design organization recognition);

b) support the development of ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), guidance material and manuals that Member States use to issue certificates for products, and complement them with guidance for best practices in conducting validation activities;

That ICAO:

c) continue to encourage the reduction of duplicate certification action conducted by Member States that offers no commensurate increase in safety; and

d) review and develop materials for inclusion in the Airworthiness Manual (Doc 9760), Safety Management Manual (SMM) (Doc 9859), Annex 8 — Airworthiness of Aircraft , and/or Annex 19 — Safety Management, for States of Registry (SoR) to determine the appropriate level of involvement in validation/recognition principles for States of Design (SoD) approvals.

Agenda Item 7: Operational safety risks 7.2: Operational safety risks at the global, regional and national levels, and the

role of RSOOs and RASGs in achieving the GASP goals

7.12 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/127, presented by the United States, on the importance of maintaining the regional aviation safety groups (RASGs) safety framework in support of the GASP. The Conference highlighted the need to proceed with caution in considering the restructuring of the RASGs and the planning and implementation regional groups (PIRGs), and the importance of consulting States to ensure that the RASGs remain focused on building upon their successes in improving safety within their respective regions.


7.13 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/158, presented by the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC)51, on the importance of reinforcing and recognizing RSOOs. The Conference acknowledged that RSOOs had a key role to play at the regional and global level to support States with the challenges they were facing to discharge their safety responsibilities, provided they were adequately empowered and resourced. The Conference agreed that States and RSOOs should actively continue to pursue their efforts for the strengthening of RSOOs and for their recognition within the ICAO safety system.

7.14 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/63 Revision No. 2, presented by the United States on behalf of Airports Council International (ACI), Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), Flight Safety Foundation (FSF), International Air Transport Association (IATA), International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations (IAOPA), International Business Aviation Council (IBAC), International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA), International Federation of Airline Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA), and International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA), which expressed concerns with runway safety events, particularly runway excursions and incursions, which remain among civil aviation’s top safety risk categories. Since 2011, ICAO and the runway safety programme (RSP) partners had been working together to minimize and mitigate the risks of runway excursions, runway incursions and other events linked to runway safety. The Conference supported the activities of the ICAO-led RSP and the launch of the Global Runway Safety Action Plan (GRSAP).

7.15 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/179, presented by Colombia and supported by the SAM States52, on the need to address the issue of bird strikes and their impact on operational safety. The Conference agreed on the need to include safety enhancement initiatives aimed at preventing bird strikes in the draft 2020-2022 edition of the GASP, which was captured in Recommendation 6.1/1: Draft 2020-2022 Edition of the Global Aviation Safety Plan (Doc 10004, GASP). The Conference also agreed on the need to integrate statistics related to bird hazards in iSTARS and to explore potential tools to support safety information analysis by States as part of the revision of the GASP.

7.16 Information papers provided by IAC (AN-Conf/13-WP/81 and AN-Conf/13-WP/159) were noted.

7.17 Based on the discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendation:

Recommendation 7.2/1 — Strengthening RSOOs

That States:

a) further support the strengthening of regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs) by engaging actively in the development of their RSOOs, by securing adequate and sustainable RSOO funding mechanisms, and, as appropriate, by further delegating safety oversight functions to the RSOO;

51 On behalf of Autorités Africaines et Malgache de l’Aviation Civile (AAMAC), Agencia Centroamericana para la Seguridad Aeronáutica (ACSA), Agence Communautaire de Supervision de la Sécurité et de la Sureté de l’Aviation Civile (ACSAC), Agence de Supervision de la Sécurité Aérienne en Afrique Centrale (ASSA-AC), Banjul Accord Group Aviation Safety Oversight Organization (BAGASOO), East African Community Civil Aviation Safety and Security Agency (CASSOA), Civil Aviation Safety and Security Oversight System (CASSOS), Eastern Caribbean Civil Aviation Authority (ECCAA), the European Union (EU), Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC), Interim Southern African Development Community Aviation Safety Organization (iSASO), Pacific Aviation Safety Office (PASO), Regional Safety Oversight Cooperation System (SRVSOP)) 52 Supported by 13 Contracting States (Argentina, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana,

Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)).


That ICAO:

b) recognize that RSOOs have an important role to play in carrying out safety oversight functions on behalf of their Member States and, within the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) framework, in addressing safety issues at the regional level;

c) further support the strengthening of RSOOs and their recognition within the ICAO safety system by facilitating access to technical support, facilitating the sharing of experience and knowledge between RSOOs through the RSOO Cooperative Platform, establishing the proposed Global Aviation Safety Oversight System (GASOS) and by reinforcing direct cooperation between ICAO and RSOOs in the framework of the GASP; and

That RSOOs:

d) continue to engage in the RSOO Cooperative Platform and engage actively in the establishment of the proposed GASOS by supporting its implementation and, where applicable, by taking steps towards recognition and in strengthening their safety oversight capabilities.

Recommendation 7.2/2 — ICAO Runway Safety Programme — Global Runway Safety Action Plan

That States:

a) recognize that runway safety-related accident categories, particularly runway excursions and incursions, continue to be a global safety priority for aviation stakeholders as determined by a risk-based analysis;

b) urge runway safety stakeholders, including aircraft operators, air navigation service providers, aerodrome operators, aerospace industry, and regional aviation safety groups, to implement the actions in the Global Runway Safety Action Plan (GRSAP) to reduce the global rate of runway excursions and runway incursions;

c) continue to establish requirements and activities aimed at improving runway safety through State runway safety programmes;

d) encourage aerodrome operators to establish effective runway safety teams and encourage all runway safety stakeholders to actively participate in established runway safety teams; and

That ICAO:

e) continue to lead and coordinate the runway safety programme with its partner organizations to work together to mitigate runway safety-related risks.


Agenda Item 7: Operational safety risks 7.3: Other implementation issues

Global and regional initiatives

7.18 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/30, presented by the Secretariat, which underlined the global and regional implementation strategies for enhancing the implementation of ICAO air navigation and safety provisions and alignment of the States’ national planning frameworks with the regional and global plans (Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) and Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP)). The paper described how the complexity of worldwide air navigation systems called for dynamic and multidisciplinary project management processes to address the development and timely implementation of ICAO provisions. The Conference supported the paper and acknowledged the value of the global and regional implementation strategies to address State and regional implementation goals, targets and performance objectives. The Conference also agreed that linkage should not be limited to the GANP and GASP but should also include the Global Aviation Security Plan (GASeP). The Conference furthermore agreed that RSOOs should also be involved in the provision development process, provided that RSOOs were further improved.

7.19 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/76 (Revision No. 1 in English only), presented by Australia and co-sponsored by Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Marshall Islands, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Singapore, and Timor Leste, and discussed challenges the ICAO Asia Pacific Regional Office (APAC) was facing in delivering its mandate of providing assistance to the accredited thirty-nine Member States53. The Conference noted that it was particularly true considering the limited connectivity and accessibility to States, largely due to its geographical spread, as well as a large number of developing States, including small island developing States (SIDS). That spread put APAC States at a disadvantage in regard to timely assistance from the Regional Office. The Conference emphasized the need to strengthen the ongoing engagement within the region and emphasized that due consideration should be given in the allocation of resources.

7.20 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/213 (Revision No. 1 in English only), presented by the United Kingdom on behalf of Canada, China, France, Japan, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore, Togo, African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC), European Union (EU)54, Airports Council International (ACI), Civil Air Navigation Services Organization (CANSO), International Air Transport Association (IATA) and World Bank, which highlighted the work of the Aviation Safety Implementation Assistance Partnership (ASIAP) to facilitate coordination and cooperation on technical assistance activities in order to further advance aviation safety implementation assistance capacity in the aviation community. The Conference widely supported the working paper, in particular the greater involvement and participation of States in ASIAP. The Conference noted the extensive work of the ASIAP partners to foster coordination and collaboration of assistance activities, promoting transparency and the reduction in the duplication of efforts and resources. The Conference acknowledged the importance of coordinating and cooperating on technical assistance activities and encouraged States, international organizations, industry, financial institutions and ICAO to continue to actively share information and resources in order to promote greater efficiency in the implementation of

53 Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Cook Islands, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kiribati, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Viet Nam 54 The EU body involved in the work of ASIAP is the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).


technical assistance. The Conference urged the partners to strive for greater commitment and participation in the ASIAP Programme and to invite other States and international organizations that could provide technical assistance to States to join the partnership.

7.21 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/221, presented by 54 Contracting States, Members of AFCAC55, which supported the continuation of the Africa-Indian Ocean (AFI) Plan. In light of a successful implementation of the Plan and, as a result, achieving a great safety improvement in the region since its onset, the Conference, in principle, agreed on the way forward with a view to maintaining the momentum of improvement in the coming years.

7.22 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/225, presented by 54 Contracting States, Members of AFCAC56, which described the revised approach and strategies for monitoring and measurement of implementation of the Abuja Safety Targets (ASTs) and air navigation services (ANS) performance indicators. The Conference noted that AFCAC had developed a monitoring and measuring mechanism for implementation of the ASTs by Member States. The mechanism was an information gathering, sharing and feedback system to encourage Member States to implement the ASTs and provision of technical assistance to ensure implementation where there was limited capacity. The Conference agreed that initiatives such as the aforementioned should be encouraged and other data collection, collation, analysis methods should be shared by stakeholders.

Other implementation issues

7.23 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/45 (Revision No. 1 in English only), presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union and its Member States57, other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference;58 and EUROCONTROL, and supported by Australia and Malaysia, which acknowledged and supported the ICAO work programme on conflict zones. The working paper received wide support from the Conference. It highlighted the need to devote increasing efforts to further develop risk management capabilities for Member States, operators, air navigation service providers (ANSPs) and industry parties, as well as multilateral arrangements for the sharing of risk information and (regional) contingency planning related to civil aircraft operations over or near conflict zones and implementation. The Conference agreed that for the sharing of conflict zone information, full advantage should be taken of developing provisions for system-wide information management (SWIM), flight and flow information for a collaborative environment (FF-ICE), air traffic flow management (ATFM) and civil-military cooperation. The Conference noted that the definition of conflict zone in the Risk Assessment Manual for Civil Aircraft Operations Over or Near Conflict Zones (Doc 10084) only captured the areas of armed conflict. The Conference also agreed that efforts and items related to conflict zones affecting multiple domains be included in the GASP, GANP and Global Aviation Security Plan (GASeP).

55 Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cabo Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe. 56 Same as footnote No. 6. 57 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,




7.24 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/72, presented by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), which described operational and safety impacts caused by the suspension of commercial aviation services (SADIS, SITA, Jeppesen and Collins). The Conference was informed that a continuing dialogue had taken place between ICAO, the DPRK and other parties to support safe operation of international civil aviation, and the progress on any significant developments on this matter had been reported to the Council of ICAO. The Conference was also informed that ICAO maintained coordination with the United Nations (UN) to ensure that any assistance to DPRK rendered by ICAO would not be in violation of relevant UN Security Council resolutions.

7.25 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/94, presented by the United Arab Emirates, which outlined the anticipated shortage of air traffic control officers and the need to develop strategies to promote more productive recruitment, training and retention programmes. The Conference was informed that a State letter (AN 12/59.1-18/77) with a proposal for the amendment of the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training (PANS-TRG, Doc 9868) had been circulated to Contracting States and international organizations for comments on 29 August 2018. The proposal included new enhanced provisions related to ANS personnel training. The proposed amendment to the PANS-TRG was envisaged for applicability on 5 November 2020. The participants were encouraged to review and provide their comments on the amendment proposal by 29 November 2018. The Conference also noted that a State Letter (SL 2018/95) had been issued in September this year, informing of the expanded scope of ICAO’s Next Generation of Aviation Professionals (NGAP) Programme and encouraged the engagement of States and all partners in the programme.

7.26 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/120, presented by Australia and Canada, which described the important progress made by the global civil aviation community to implement Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and reiterated the need to continue improving the SARPs process. The Conference noted the challenges faced by States in implementing SARPs, including the increasing rates of adopted SARPs; short timelines provided to Member States to implement SARPs; and barriers faced by States, industry and others seeking to access SARPs and other ICAO guidance materials. The Conference agreed with the actions proposed in the working paper and supported the need to continue improving the process of SARPs development and implementation. The Conference reiterated the importance of having guidance material in all working languages of ICAO in a timely manner. With respect to the proposal to provide free public web access to ICAO documents, as provided in action 3.2 d), the Conference was informed that, as per decision of the ICAO Assembly (A39-WP/501, paragraph 28.14 refers) the proposal was currently under consideration by the Council. It was agreed that the outcome of the Council decision would be reported to the 40th Session of the Assembly.

7.27 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/133, presented by Brazil, which proposed an alternative model to Article 83 bis of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Doc 7300) in order to allow airlines from different States to carry out aircraft interchange operations in which both civil aviation authorities, from the States of primary and secondary operators, had similar responsibilities. It was noted that in accordance with Annex 8 — Airworthiness of Aircraft, the State of Registry, unless otherwise transferred under Article 83 bis, was responsible for ensuring that the aircraft, and any modification to it, complied with an approved design. Furthermore, Annex 6 — Operation of Aircraft stated that the State of the Operator should ensure that its actions were consistent with the approvals and acceptances of the State of Registry. Therefore, the Conference recommended that ICAO refer the proposal outlined in this working paper to an appropriate group of experts for further careful review and consideration.

7.28 Information papers provided by the Secretariat (AN-Conf/13-WP/33) and by the United Arab Emirates (AN-Conf/13-WP/264) were noted.


7.29 Based on the discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendations:

Recommendation 7.3/1 – ICAO implementation strategies That ICAO:

strengthen the linkage between the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP), the Global a)Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) and the Global Aviation Security Plan (GASeP) to achieve an integrated implementation approach;

take into account implementation support needs when developing provisions; b)

support better alignment and harmonization between planning and implementation c)regional groups (PIRGs) and regional aviation safety groups (RASGs) while maintaining the safety framework of the RASGs through consultation with Member States;

further improve the PIRG and RASG mechanisms to enhance the coordination and d)alignment of implementation between regions;

consider the development of a global collaboration mechanism to facilitate e)interregional alignment, harmonization, and sharing of best practices and lessons learned;

support the development of a flexible, progressive and risk-based strategy to improve f)global implementation of Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs);

request an appropriate group of experts to further review and explore a process that g)would facilitate short-term (successive) aircraft interchange operations; and

further develop risk management capabilities and facilitate implementation of h)multilateral arrangements for the sharing of risk information and (regional) contingency planning related with civil aircraft operations over or near conflict zones.

Recommendation 7.3/2 — Aviation Safety Implementation Assistance Partnership (ASIAP)

That ICAO:

a) continue to develop the prioritization of States and areas of technical assistance criteria in order to achieve appropriate and transparent prioritization;

That ASIAP Partners:

b) strive for greater commitment to, and participation in, the Aviation Safety Implementation Assistance Partnership (ASIAP) Programme, and invite other States and international organizations that can provide technical assistance to States to join ASIAP;

c) and other stakeholders providing technical assistance (including States, regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs), international organizations, industry and


financial institutions) coordinate their technical assistance activities and make use of the online Project Database (https://www.icao.int/safety/ASIAP/Pages/Tools.aspx) in order to reduce duplication of activities and effort;

d) apply the project outcome indicators (POIs) to their projects and review the measurable results in coordination with each other; and

e) including ICAO, States, international organizations, industry and financial institutions, provide funding to support technical assistance activities.

Recommendation 7.3/3 — State national planning framework That States:

a) reaffirm support for the fundamental roles and responsibilities of Contracting States, Council and the Air Navigation Commission, as provided in the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Doc 7300), for the development of quality and timely Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs);

b) enhance their involvement in all stages of the provision development process and encourage RSOOs and other aviation stakeholders to do the same;

c) support the ICAO Next Generation of Aviation Professionals (NGAP) Programme in light of the international need to address the existing aviation personnel shortages and to ensure a competent workforce capable of meeting the needs and challenges of the global aviation community into the future; and

d) share best practices on applied strategies to promote more productive recruitment, training and education, development and retention programmes.

Recommendation 7.3/4 – Regional office resources for implementation activities That ICAO:

a) give due consideration in the allocation of resources to regional offices for the support of implementation activities;

b) recognize, and take appropriate measures to address, the particular challenges and growing workload of the Asia Pacific (APAC) Region; and

c) support the APAC Region in the implementation of the Beijing Declaration and progress towards ICAO global targets.

Recommendation 7.3/5 — Support for the continuation of the Comprehensive Regional Implementation Plan for Aviation Safety in Africa (AFI Plan)

That States:

a) support the continuation of AFI Plan activities and the project-based approach;

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icao.int_safety_ASIAP_Pages_Tools.aspx&d=DwMFAg&c=ZRCp4zVR6PSEtgc20cBY2PMQsRv3ZpDKe_6lsaOLgBk&r=nroaIrFF2E3x077KNlpa8um46xWVJ-iKm_kJIItC6NY&m=s7Soa_tkzvAmYakAnC7Af8BeSD5U3yw0w9V5A1jFABs&s=d7ZSRvp3rQTFg_hWr8wsqiGhVsfzmNv0rZ0GMMtrLUM&e=


b) request ICAO, international organizations and industry partners to support the AFI Plan and its associated projects;

c) consider adopting an approach similar to the AFI Plan to address safety deficiencies and challenges in their region; and

That ICAO:

d) extend the AFI Plan in order to enable it to accomplish its objectives.

— — — — — — — —


Agenda Item 8: Emerging safety issues 8.1: Measures to proactively address emerging issues

8.1 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/12, presented by the Secretariat, which addressed emerging safety issues, as set forth in the 2017-2019 Global Aviation Safety Plan (Doc 10004, GASP). It was discussed that ICAO worked with stakeholders to identify emerging safety issues and supported States, regions, industry and other stakeholders to ensure that the work programme of the Organization and its safety strategy addressed both current and future issues. The participation of States in regional and sub-regional studies on emerging safety issues conducted by the regional aviation safety groups (RASGs), as well as the sharing of relevant information on the subject amongst States and with ICAO, remained key to identifying such issues. The Conference agreed on the need for ICAO to inform States of existing guidance on identifying and addressing emerging safety issues and for the RASGs or other regional organizations, including regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs), to play an active role in the process to address emerging safety issues. The Conference also agreed on the need to review the terminology used to describe emerging safety issues as part of the revision of the 2020-2022 edition of the GASP.

8.2 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/104 Revision No. 1, presented by Japan, regarding measures to prevent objects falling off aeroplanes. The Conference agreed to request that the Council, based on data from regional aviation safety groups, consider developing a study on the subject together with related guidance material on preventive measures.

8.3 Information papers provided by Canada (AN-Conf/13-WP/119), India (AN-Conf/13-WP/234) and the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) (AN-Conf/13-WP/80) were noted.

8.4 In light of the above discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendations:

Recommendation 8.1/1 — Measures to proactively address emerging issues That ICAO:

a) raise awareness and inform States of existing guidance on identifying and addressing emerging safety issues, including mitigation actions and balancing the integrated management of distinct risks (existing/emerging);

b) urge the regional aviation safety groups (RASGs) or other regional organizations, including regional safety oversight organizations (RSOOs), to institute a process for addressing emerging safety issues based on a data-driven analysis;

c) urge States, regional entities and industry to participate actively in regional and sub-regional studies on emerging safety issues conducted by the RASGs;

d) urge States, regional entities and industry to share information on emerging safety issues with other States and ICAO through the dedicated website;

e) systematically collect information from States and regional organizations, for the purpose of assessing and monitoring their global safety impact, on the following: new concepts of operations and new technologies; new risk management concepts and methods for coping with the dynamics and complexity of the aviation system; as well as the initial implementation of such new concepts, methods and technologies;


f) establish a holistic, performance-based process for the development of ICAO provisions in response to these emerging issues and risks to assess if the established provisions achieve the objectives for which they were designed;

g) provide guidance for the implementation of risk- and performance-based assessment and oversight at both State and regional levels;

h) provide a global, inclusive civil-military cooperation mechanism to move from a reactive situation to a proactive one by applying predictive, holistic risk management to emerging issues; and

i) based on data from regional aviation safety groups and risk analysis, consider developing a study on the subject of objects falling from aeroplanes and guidance material on preventive measures.

Agenda Item 8: Emerging safety issues 8.2: Emerging safety issues

8.5 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/46, presented by Austria on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States59, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference60 and by EUROCONTROL, regarding the need for ICAO and the international aviation community to cooperate and manage in a proactive manner the emerging issues in aviation. The Conference agreed on the need to develop further tools, guidance and training materials to assist States and stakeholders manage emerging issues, as addressed under Recommendation 8.1/1.

8.6 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/254, presented by Japan, which outlined the need for a regulatory framework for sub-orbital flights and requested clarification on the issue of liability, the applicability of aviation law, and the harmonization of technical standards. In light of the discussion, the Conference noted that the work in this area would be considered through the process for adding work to the Air Navigation Work Programme. The Conference further noted that the issue of commercial space was more thoroughly considered under Agenda Item 5.5.

8.7 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/154, presented by Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), requesting additional training activities and guidance material to assist States in implementing remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS)-related Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), acknowledging that ICAO’s ongoing activities for the development of RPAS-related SARPs, Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) and guidance material, as well as training activities to facilitate their implementation, were beneficial to States and regions. The Conference noted that the aforementioned activities were ongoing within ICAO and that the subject was further considered under Agenda Item 5.3.

8.8 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/294, presented by South Africa, which highlighted the need to develop government safety inspector (GSI) courses for safety oversight technical personnel in all ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) audit areas. The working paper noted that ICAO had developed three GSI courses in the areas of airworthiness (GSI-AIR), aircraft operations (GSI-OPS) and personnel licensing (GSI-PEL). The Conference noted that, based on available 59 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,

Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.



resources including in-kind support from some States, ICAO was developing courses using the competency-based training and assessment framework for aerodromes and ground aids (AGA), and air navigation services (ANS). The Conference was informed that other courses for training safety oversight personnel were available such as safety management (SMS), safety management for practitioners, and civil aviation authority (CAA) senior and middle managers. The Conference also noted that further training courses in other ICAO USOAP audit areas would be developed as resources became available.

8.9 The Conference reviewed AN-Conf/13-WP/194, presented by the International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations (IAOPA), regarding the development of a new medical Standard for pilots flying light aircraft, which was well supported by States. The Conference noted that the proposal was in line with the ICAO No Country Left Behind initiative and welcomed the positive experiences of States in implementing national licensing practices. It was acknowledged that it would be necessary to maintain a balance between aviation safety and costs by means of a data-driven process. In order to harmonize national policies and ensure clear and uniform implementation globally, it would be necessary to define the term “light aircraft” and to assess the impact of a possible new medical Standard on other existing operational SARPs. Recognizing that aviation medicine is a medical specialty, there would be a need for development of detailed educational and guidance material to support the initiative. It was agreed that ICAO, with the assistance of States and regional aviation safety groups (RASGs), review existing national practices and conduct a data analysis to determine the feasibility of developing a new medical Standard for pilots flying light aircraft, taking into account resources and budgetary implications.

8.10 In light of the above discussion, the Conference approved the following recommendations:

Recommendation 8.2/1 — Remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) operations

That ICAO continue developing Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) and guidance material to support safe remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) operations, and continue facilitating implementation of RPAS-related provisions through regional training activities.

Recommendation 8.2/2 — Medical Standard for pilots of light aircraft That ICAO:

review national medical certification protocols currently used by a number of States a)in order to identify commonalities; and

based on this review of commonalities among the various States’ national medical b)certification protocols, develop a Standard specifically addressing pilots flying light aircraft.

— END —

thirteenth air navigation conferenceicscc.org.cn/upload/file/20200603/20200603135246_36312.pdf ·...

Documents