Aerodrome Certification and Compatibility Overview of … · Aerodrome Certification and...

Aerodrome Certification and Compatibility Overview of the Brazilian Experience Department of Airport Infrastructure - SIA

October 2017

Agenda

Aerodrome safety approach

Brazilian aerodrome certification program

Dealing with findings, deviations and “challenged rules”

Rules and guidance material

Case studies

Enforcement measures

Acceptable Level of Safety Performance

2 ANAC/Brazil October 2017

Aerodrome safety approach

Safeguarding

Aerodrome Certification

Wildlife management

Infrastructure (physical

characteristics and aids)

Aerodrome operator

management

Airport Operations

Aerodrome maintenance

SMS

Emergency response /

RFF

“The safety assurance process has evolved worldwide in the last decades, moving from a model focused on infrastructure compliance to a model based on the operator management system.”

Airport Certification - ANAC Website

ANAC/Brazil 3 October 2017

http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/setor-regulado/aerodromos/certificacao/certificacao-operacional-de-aeroportos







Brazilian aerodrome certification program

Nearly 100% of international passengers

transported in Brazil are processed at

certified airports.

With 27 certified airports, more than

73% of the total passengers in Brazil

are processed at certified airports.

World's largest passenger aircrafts (A380 and B747-8) operate in Brazil.

36.6

9.3

2.0

16.1

9.6

17.9

2.6

7.4 7.6 5.7

2.3 0.0

6.4 6.8

0.0 3.0

1.5 3.5

0.0 0.0 3.1

1.2 0.0 1.6

0.0

3.3 0.5

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

10

20

30

40

No

v/1

2

Jun

/13

Dec

/13

Au

g/1

4

Au

g/1

4

Sep

/14

Au

g/1

5

Dec

/15

Dec

/15

Dec

/15

Dec

/15

May

/16

Jun

/16

Jun

/16

Jun

/16

Jul/

16

Jul/

16

Jul/

16

Oct

/16

No

v/1

6

Dec

/16

Jan

/17

Mar

/17

Jul/

17

Jul/

17

Sep

/17

Sep

/17

SBGR SBKP SBMO SBGL SBCF SBBR SBEG SBSV SBPA SBFZ SBSG SBSO SBCT SBRF SBLJ SBGO SBCG SBFL SSZWSBBW SBVT SBAR SBNM SBPS SBJE SBBE SBPL

Mp

ax /

Mp

ax t

ota

l

Mp

ax (

do

m. +

intl

.)

13.5

0.5

4.3

0.3 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0

5

10

15

Nov/12 Jun/13 Aug/14 Aug/14 Sep/14 Aug/15 Dec/15 Dec/15 Dec/15 Dec/15 Jun/16 Jun/16 Jul/16 Sep/17 Sep/17

SBGR SBKP SBGL SBCF SBBR SBEG SBSV SBPA SBFZ SBSG SBCT SBRF SBFL SBBE SBPL

Mp

ax /

Mp

ax t

ota

l

Mp

ax (

intl

.)


Dealing with findings

Doc 9981 - PANS Aerodromes

2.3.5 Analysis of the findings and monitoring of the related corrective action plans

2.3.5.1 In case of findings, the State should require the operator to develop a corrective action plan proposing ways to eliminate or mitigate the findings, with deadlines for each subsequent action.

2.3.5.2 The State may impose immediate appropriate measures on the aerodrome operator, if necessary, until actions have been taken to remove or mitigate the findings.


Dealing with exemptions/exceptions

Doc 9734 - Safety Oversight Manual

3.3.7 Exemptions/exceptions

3.3.7.1 Compliance with requirements is not optional. Occasionally, however, particularly in the area of aerodrome infrastructure, there might be instances where there are insurmountable geographical or other physical problems. When there are appropriate, robust and documented regulatory mechanisms in place, and when not in conflict with the ICAO Annexes, the objective of a specific SARP, or a good accepted safety practice, it may be possible to resolve a discrepancy or shortcoming by the imposition of limiting conditions or compensatory measures/controls. (…)


Dealing with exemptions/exceptions



3.3.7.2 Furthermore, any exception should only be granted on the basis of a robust rationale. Therefore, risk analysis or aeronautical study techniques should be developed, as part of a Safety Management System (SMS), at the appropriate level. In such exceptional cases, the responsibility for justifying, either qualitatively or quantitatively, an alternative means of compliance lies with the Operator or Service Provider, before approval is sought from the regulator. The case must be fully documented and the outcome made public, for example in the Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP), as well as in safety assurance documents, such as the Aerodrome Manual, held by the regulator and Operator or Service Provider. Furthermore, the Operator or Service Provider must regularly review any exceptions with a view to removing the need for an exception where possible, as well as check the validity and robustness of any mitigating measures in place. (…)


Dealing with “challenged rules”

RMK: Terms in brackets represent EASA’s (*) or FAA’s (**) terminology

• Equivalent Level of Safety means the condition in which there is no literal fulfillment of provision, but compensatory factors are adopted to reach the purpose of the provision, ensuring an equivalent level of safety. Demonstration and acceptance of equivalent level of security does not involve exemption, alteration or requirement creation, but only makes project, procedure, or equipment accepted so that do not formally fall within the rule's literality.

Equivalent level of safety [ELOS*]

• Exemption is a temporary or permanent waiver of compliance with the rule, when it is proven that noncompliance does not affect the safety of operations or that there are actions by the interested parties to guarantee the public interest in a level of safety acceptable by ANAC.

Exemptions [Special Conditions* / Modification of Standards **]

• In order to decide favorably on the granting of the Airport Certificate, ANAC may require the applicant to submit a Corrective Action Plan proposing ways and deadlines to eliminate the findings not completely resolved during the process, as well as measures to mitigate the risk associated with each finding while it is not permanently remedied.

Corrective Action Plan – PAC [DAAD*]


Equivalent Level of Safety issued

RMK 1: Diameter of the circles is a proxy for capacity/efficiency constraints or increase in operating costs. RMK 2: The detailed list of Equivalent Level of Safety issued by ANAC is under construction.

Most of the Equivalent Level of Safety are related to the accommodation of more demanding aircraft. The aerodrome operator submitted Safety Assessment and Assurance Documentation, usually by a Compatibility Study.


Exemptions issued

RMK 1: For each line, diameter of the circles is a proxy for risk exposure. RMK 2: The detailed list of exemptions issued by ANAC is available at: http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/setor-regulado/aerodromos/publicacoes/listasiaisencoestac.pdf

Most of the exemptions are related to historical deviations, not completely assessed or documented in the past. The aerodrome operator submitted Safety Assessment and Assurance Documentation during the certification process.


http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/setor-regulado/aerodromos/publicacoes/listasiaisencoestac.pdf



Corrective Action Plans - active

RMK 1: By Dec/16. RMK 2: For each line, diameter of the circles is a proxy for CAPEX.


Decision workflow for “challenged rules”

Certification Process (Safety Assessment and Assurance – deviation from standards)

Doc 9981. PANS Aerodromes


Aerodrome certification framework: a journey towards compatibility

Aerodromes with OPS 121/129 Certification

Transitional provisions (139.601) (a) Aerodrome operators not previously included in the certification program (< 1 Mpax) are exempted from holding an Aerodrome Certificate until they request to:

(1) increase frequency of the critical aircraft; or (2) operate more demanding aircraft (ICAO ARC and/or approach/departures provisions).

Portaria nº 908/SIA, 13/04/2016. Critical aircraft and respective weekly frequencies for Brazilian public aerodromes.

The certification process allows to customize the application of the rules to the single equipment, making compatibility between operations and infrastructure possible.


Transitional provisions

Rationale (golden rule)

Do not increase risk exposure until the risk is assessed and accepted!

Proxy for risk exposure

more demanding requirements

Aircraft characteristics

Safety margin

Souls exposed

Tools available

Risk and compatibility are properly assessed and accepted using the certification process.


Regulatory Agenda Aerodrome Certification (RBAC 139)

Aerodrome SMS, operation, maintenance and emergency response (RBAC 153)

Aerodrome Design (RBAC 154)

Aerodrome Rescue and Firefighting Services (Res. 279)

Aerodrome Wildlife Management (RBAC 164)

Guidance Material (website) Aerodrome Certification

Runway Safety (Runway Safety Team Manual)

Aerodrome Operators Alerts and Guidance

SMS in aerodromes

Aerodrome Pavement Management System Manual

Emergency Response System Toolkit

...

Endeavor to provide better rules and guidance material

Clear and more objective rules, followed by transition mechanisms, ensuring safety and creating better incentives for investment


http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/setor-regulado/aerodromos/certificacao/publicacoes/publicacoes

Inspector’s guidance material


Methodology for Evaluation of TWY / RWY Separation

Methodology for Evaluation of Runway End Safety Areas (RESA)


a) Rejection Tests (method type “C”)

Indicates that "exposure to risk" is unacceptable

Test fail more robust assessment is needed

b) Acceptance Test (methods “A” and “B”)

ANAC/Brazil October 2017 17

Methodology for Evaluation of TWY / RWY Separation

Rejection

region

Non

rejection

region

More robust test, with specific physical data, operations and meteorological records

Test fail ALARP or restriction is needed

Non

acceptance

region (undefined)

Acceptance

region

RMK: For “Method types”, see PANS Aerodromes, Attachment B to Chapter 3 - Safety Assessment Methodologies for Aerodromes

Rejection Tests



1) OFZ violation

2) FAA violation

3) Graded portion 4) Wingtip separation


a) Mitigation Measure (temporary)

Declared distances are reduced

Protects overrun only

b) Alternative Mean of Compliance

ANAC/Brazil October 2017 19

Displaced threshold and reduced declared distances

Protects overrun and undershoot

RMK: “Mitigation measure” is the minimum to be provided in order to certify the aerodrome, upon corrective action plan to provide undershoot protection.

Methodology for Evaluation of Runway End Safety Areas (RESA)

Case Studies rwy-twy separation (sbfz) | a380 compatibility (sbgl) | B747-8 compatibility (sbkp, sbeg) | resa (sbkp) | runway centre line lights (sbcy)


RWY-TWY separation (SBFZ)


ILS CAT I - violation of Codes 4E (A332), 4D (B763 and B752) and 4C (A320, B738, E190…) RWY and TWY J – 169,04m apart RWY and TWY A – 162,08m apart



Segregating meteorological conditions VMC is OK for any code (rationale for

RWY strip is 75m) IMC is subject to operating limitations

What is the impact on IMC? Average IMC incidence: 2,89% Worst month: 7,91%



Segregating aircraft by wingspan Code D and E (less than 2%) can be

handled during IMC Code C (more than 75%) would be

adversely impacted in IMC



The aerodrome operator also presented risk assessment results based on the “ACRP Report 51 – Risk Assessment Method to Support Modification of Airfield Separation Standards”

All Codes combinations OK Operations requested by the aerodrome operator All codes combination, except D & E Exemption

(based on safety assurance documentation)



Using the tools… Codes C & D combinations ELOS

(operating agreement) Codes D & E combinations Exemption

(based on safety assurance docs)

Operations requested All codes combination, except D & E

Exemption (based on safety assurance documentation)



(…) regularly review any exceptions with a view to removing the need for an exception where possible, as well as check the validity and robustness of any mitigating measures in place (…) [Doc 9734 - Safety Oversight Manual]

I. When the 5 years moving average occurrence of IMC increase by 5%, compared to the average from 2010 to 2014 [increase in complexity to manage the operating agreement for Codes D & E];

II. When Code C aircraft conducting schedule flights increase by 5% in the traffic partition mix [increase in risk exposure for Code C]; or

III. Every 5 years.



Aerodrome Manual update and AIP promulgation

Providing RESA (SBKP)




THR 33



THR 15 Embankment fill extension

(Full Compliance)

THR 33 Displaced threshold (Alternative Mean

of Compliance – Equivalent Level of

Safety)

THR 15

THR 33

TORA = 3240m / LDA = 3240m

THR 15

TORA = 3150m / LDA = 3150m

TORA = 3240m / LDA = 3240m

THR 33

TORA = 3240m / LDA = 3150m

A380 compatibility (SBGL)


B747-8 compatibility (SBKP)


Mitigation actions

First 20 operations rule

Pre and post OPS runway and taxiways inspection (FOD control)

Follow me vehicles

Jet blast assessment

Fillets observation

Oversteering procedure

Double check debut operation – apron towing in

…

B747-8 compatibility (SBKP)


B747-8F compatibility (SBEG)


RWY centre line lights (SBCY)


Annex 14 Vol. I - 7th edition

5.3.12 Runway centre line lights

5.3.12.1 Runway centre line lights shall be provided on a precision approach runway category II or III.

5.3.12.2 Recommendation.— Runway centre line lights should be provided on a precision approach runway category I, particularly when the runway is used by aircraft with high landing speeds or where the width between the runway edge lights is greater than 50 m.

5.3.9 Runway edge lights

5.3.9.4 Runway edge lights shall be placed along the edges of the area declared for use as the runway or outside the edges of the area at a distance of not more than 3 m.

Fourteenth Meeting of VAWG (VAWG/14) – Montreal, 2016 DP/14 - Runway Centre Line Lights Recommendations (Brasil) (…) “where the width between the runway edge lights is greater than 50 m 51 m.”



Conditions for exemption: IAC ILS minimums at 1200m Special maintenance for

RWY markings





3.3.7.2 (…) The regulator must also assess, before granting an exemption or exception, whether the exemptions or exceptions would lead to differences from SARPs and, if so, to the appropriate notification being made by the State.

Brazil declared difference (less protective) from Annex 14 Vol. I - 7th edition, while proposing to change the recommendation…

5.3.12.2 Recommendation.— Runway centre line lights should be provided on a precision approach runway category I, particularly when the runway is used by aircraft with high landing speeds or where the width between the runway edge lights is greater than 51 m.

Enforcement measures

139.111 [Immediate actions to prohibit or limit activities, due to significant non-compliance]* (a) In the event of a finding which lowers safety or seriously endangers safety, ANAC may adopt measures to mitigate the risk, including:

(1) prohibition of OPS 121 frequency increase;

(2) reduction of OPS 121 frequencies, starting with the critical aircraft;

(3) suspension of OPS 121, whereas the unacceptable risk exposure situation lasts.

(b) In the case of the certificate holder fails to comply with any of the conditions set forth in section 139.105 [certification requirements] shall result in a prohibition of OPS 121 frequency increase.

(c) Actions taken as laid in paragraph (a) and (b) shall have immediate effect, without prejudice to any additional sanctions.

* Similar to ADR.AR.C.055 - Findings, observations, corrective actions and enforcement measures


Acceptable Level of Safety Performance – Brazilian State

Performance Target (2015 a 2019) By 2019, the moving average of accident rate involving fatalities in Brazilian scheduled passenger air

transport should remain at a level equal to or lower than 50% of the corresponding global rate recorded at the end of 2011 (0.26 fatalities in scheduled passenger air transport per 10,000 departures)

Instrução Normativa nº 091 de 11/05/2015 http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/legislacao/ legislacao-1/instrucoes-normativas/instrucoes-normativas-2015/instrucao-normativa-no-091-de-11-05-2015

Relatório Anual de Segurança Operacional (RASO) - 2015 http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/paginas-tematicas/gerenciamento-da-seguranca-operacional/relatorios-anuais-de-seguranca-operacional-1


http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/legislacao/legislacao-1/instrucoes-normativas/instrucoes-normativas-2015/instrucao-normativa-no-091-de-11-05-2015
























http://www.anac.gov.br/assuntos/paginas-tematicas/gerenciamento-da-seguranca-operacional/relatorios-anuais-de-seguranca-operacional-1



















Rodrigo Flório Moser Civil Aviation Regulation Expert Airport Policy Division - GTNO Department of Airport Infrastructure - SIA [email protected] (61) 3314-4577

Aerodrome Certification and Compatibility Overview of … · Aerodrome Certification and...

Documents

Transcript of Aerodrome Certification and Compatibility Overview of … · Aerodrome Certification and...