European Union Aviation Safety Agency Notice of Proposed Amendment 2023-01 in accordance with Article 6(1) of MB Decision No 01-2022 Regular update of the air operations rules Training requirements for flight operations officers and flight dispatchers Amendments related to the fuel planning and management and all- weather operations regulatory packages RMT.0392 (suBTASK 18) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ‘The objective of this Notice of Proposed Amendment is to propose standards for the duties, responsibilities, ‘and training of personnel performing functions related to the operational control system of an aircraft operator. ‘This NPA proposes to mandate air operators to define the standards of their operational control system, identify the duties and responsibilities of the personnel (other than flight crew) responsible for the implementation of that system, and ensure that they are competent to perform their tasks. It also proposes new requirements on the training of operational control personnel, establishing a standard minimum flight operations officer (FOO) qualification and advanced qualification for flight dispatchers (FDs) and other roles associated with the operational control processes and procedures. It is proposed that the training programme for operational control personnel is developed and implemented based on the principles of the competency-based training and assessment (CBTA) compliant with ICAO Annex 1 and ICAO Docs 9868 and 10106. The NPA also includes proposed provisions on the qualification of instructors for the FOOs and FDs, based on the above-mentioned ICAO documents. ‘The proposed amendments are expected to improve safety by enhancing the competencies of operational control personnel and thus prepare them for present and future challenges posed by an increasingly complex technological and operational environment. They are also expected to standardise the training for operational control personnel across the EASA Member States and to ensure a level playing field fora safety-critical category of personnel whose duties are intrinsic to an air operator's system of operational control. The proposed amendments will ensure the alignment of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 and the related AMC and GM with ICAO Annex 6 Standards And Recommended Practices (SARPs) inthis regard, Finally, this NPA proposes some amendments to provisions on fuel planning and management and all-weather operations, to address some minor issues identified during implementation of the recent amendments made by Regulations. The proposed amendments are expected to increase clarity and have a neutral or positive safety and economic. impact. Domain: ‘Air operations Related rules: Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 and related AMC & GM Affected stakeholders: Air operators performing CAT operations with aeroplanes; NCC operators, SPO operators, NCO operators Driver: Efficiency/proportionality Rulemaking group: Yes Impact assessment: Detailed EASA rulemaking procedure milestones Start Public consultation Proposal to the Decision Terms of Reference ira 200306 esrasttont Accpinio Means 7.10,2020 24,4.2023, 2024 2025 2025 777, ] _TE.APRO.00024-012 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. llrightsreserved, IO 9001 certified. Proprietary document. Copies are not cntralled, Confirm revision status thraugh the EASA ntranevinernet, Page I of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01, Table of contents Table of contents 1. About this NPA. 1.2, How to comment on this NPA. 4 1.1. How this NPA was developed 4 4 13. Thenext steps 4 2. Insummary — why and what 5 2.1. Why we need to act — issue/rationale 5 2.2. What we want to achieve — objectives 8 2.3. How we want to achieve it — overview of the proposed amendments 8 2.4. Expected benefits and drawbacks of the proposed amendments... 9 3. Proposed amendments and rationale 3.1, Draft regulation (draft EASA opinion)... Annex I~ Definitions of terms..... ‘ORO.GEN.110 Operator responsibilities . ‘ORO.AOC.135 Personnel requirements... . (ORO.SPO.100 Common requirements for commercial specialised operators NCO.OP.143 Destination alternate aerodromes planning minima — aeroplanes... 3.2, Draft acceptable means of compliance and guidance material (draft EASA decision). AMC1 ORO.GEN.110(c) Operator responsibilities ...c.cncsennennnnennnnetnieeet GM1 ORO.GEN.110(c) Operator responsibilities ene AMC2 ORO.GEN.110(f) Operator responsibilities. ‘AMC32 ORO.GEN.110{f{e} Operator responsibilities G¥M2.ORO-GENA11019. Operatorresponsibiles, AMC1 ORO.FC.105(b)(2);(c) Designation as pilot-in-command / commander. AMC1 CAT.GEN.MPA.180(a)(18) Documents, manuals and information to be carried T=, ]_TERPRO.00034-013 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allrihts reserved SO 9001 certifies Proprietary dacument. Copies are not cantrolled. Confirm reison status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 20f 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01, Table of contents GM1 CAT.GEN.MPA.180(a)(18) Documents, manuals and information to be carried ....nnne 5S GM2 CAT.GEN.MPA.180(a)(18) Documents, manuals and information to be carried 56 GM3 CAT.GEN.MPA.180(a)(18) Documents, manuals and information to be carried 56 ‘AMC1 CAT.OP.MPA.175(a) Flight preparation 56 AMC4 SPA.LVO.100(¢) Low-visibility operations and operations with operational credits... 57 ‘AMC1 SPA.LVO.105(g) Specific approval criteria 58 58 ‘GM2 SPA.LVO.105(g) Specific approval criteria 58 GM1 SPA.LVO.120(b) Flight crew competence 59 AMC1 NCC.GEN.140(a)(17) Documents, manuals and information to be carried .... 59 GM1 NCC.GEN.140(2)(17) Documents, manuals; and information to be carried .n.s.nsnnnne 60 GM2 NCC.GEN.140{a)(17) Documents, manuals; and information to be carried 60 GM3 NCC.GEN.140{a)(17) Documents, manuals; and information to be carried 60 ‘AMC1 NCO.OP.142(b)(5) Destination alternate aerodromes — instrument approach operations 60 AMC1 SPO.GEN.140(a}(18) Documents, manuals and information to be CarTied.....ussmnnne 61 GM1 SPO.GEN.140(a)(18) Documents, manuals; and information to be Car fied. ...umnmnee 61 GM2 SPO.GEN.140(a)(18) Documents, manuals; and information to be carried. 61 GM3 SPO.GEN.140(a)(18) Documents, manuals; and information to be carried. 62 Impact assessment (IA). 63 4.1, Whatis the issue?. 63 4.2, What we want to achieve — objectives 83 4.3. How to achieve the objectives — options 83 4.4, Methodology and data. oe 8S 4.5. What are the impacts... oe 8S 4.6. CONCIUSION ernsnseennnne 4.7. Monitoring and evaluation Proposed actions to support implementation References. 6.1, Related EU regulations. 98 6.2, Related EASA decisions. nnn sensinttnnisseenness 98 6.3. Other references 98 Quality of the NPA 100 7.1. The regulatory proposal is of technically good/high quality... 100 7.2. The text is clear, readable and understandable 100 7.3, The regulatory proposal is well substantiated 100 7.4. The regulatory proposal is fit for purpose (capable of achieving the objectives set) 100 7.5. The impact assessment (IA), as well as its qualitative and quantitative data, is of high quality 100 7.6. The regulatory proposal applies the ‘better regulation’ principles ese soos 100 7.7. Any other comments on the quality of this NPA (please specify). 100 TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not cantrolled. Confirm reison status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 2 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01, 1. About this NPA 1. About this NPA 1.1, How this NPA was developed The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) developed this NPA in line with Regulation (EU) 2018/1139" (the ‘Basic Regulation’) and the Rulemaking Procedure”. This Rulemaking Task (RIMT).0392 is included in Volume Il of the European Plan for Aviation Safety (EPAS) for 2023-2025". ‘The scope and timescales of the task were defined in the related Terms of Reference (ToR}*. This activity is identified in the EPAS as Subtask 1b, covering the training of operations control personnel (F00s / FDs), considering the transposition of the related ICAO SARPs. EASA developed this NPA with the contribution of a rulemaking group representing all categories of affected stakeholders. The NPA is hereby submitted for consultation in accordance with Article 115 of the Basic Regulation, and Article 6(1) of the Rulemaking Procedure. 1.2, How to comment on this NPA Please submit your comments using the automated Comment-Response Tool (CRT) available at http://hub.easa.europa.eu/crt/’. ‘The deadiine for the submission of comments is 24 July 2023. 1.3. The next steps Following the public consultation, EASA will review all the comments received. Based on the comments received, EASA will revise, if necessary, the proposed amendments to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012° (the ‘Air OPS Regulation’) and issue an opinion. A summary of the comments received will be provided in the explanatory note to the opinion. The opinion will be submitted to the European Commission, which will decide whether to amend the Air OPS Regulation based on the opinion. If the European Commission decides to amend the Air OPS Regulation based on the opinion, EASA will publish a decision to amend the related acceptable means of compliance (AMC) and guidance material (GM) to support the implementation of the amendments to the Regulation. 4 Regulation (€U) 2018/1139 ofthe European Parliament and ofthe Council of 4 July 2018 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and amending Regulations (EC) No 2111/2005, (EC) No 1008/2008, (EU) No 996/2010, (EU) No 376/2014 and Directives 2014/30/EU and 2014/53/EU of the European Parllament ang of the Councl, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 552/204 and (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/81 (O! L 212, 22.8.2018, p. 1) (httos//eur. 535612 134845urisCELEX:3201881139 lexeuropa.cu/legal-content/EN/TXI/2 2 EASA is bound to follow a structured rulemaking process as required by Article 115(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139, Such a process has been adopted by the EASA Management Board (MB) andi referred to as the ‘Rulemaking Procedure’. ‘See MB Decision No 01-2022 of 2 May 2022 on the procedure to be applied by EASA for the issuing of opinions, Certification specifications and other detailed specifications, acceptable means of compliance and guidance material (Rulemaking Procedure’), and repealing Management Board Decision No 18-2015 (https:/Awww.casa.curopa.cu/the- agency/management.board/decisions/easa-mb decision 01-2022 rulemaking procedure-repealing mb) > httoss//winw.eas9.curopa,cu/en/documentieary/genera}-publiations/european plan aviation safety-epas-2023-2025 !tpsy//anww.2252.curopa.eu/en/document-lbrary/terms-of-eference-and.group-compositions/tor-rmt0392 5 In case of technical problems, please send an email to [email protected] witha short description © Commission Regulation (FU) No 965/2012 of 5 October 2012 laying down technical requirements and administrative procedures related to air operations pursuant to Regulation (FC) No 716/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (0) L 296, 25.10.2012, p. 1) _(httpsy//eur-lex.europa.eu/legal. ‘content/EN/TXT/2uri=CELEX%3A32012RO965&.gid=1680078326113), Te RPRO.00034: | Prepretarydocume European Union Aviation Safety Agency. llrightsreserved, IO S001 certifies Copies are not controled. Conf resign status through the EASA Intranetfnternet. Page 4 of 100,European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what 2. In summary — why and what 2.1. Why we need to act — issue/rationale 2.4.1. Training requirements for flight operations officers (FOOs) and flight dispatchers (FDs) The Air OPS Regulation establishes the technical requirements and administrative procedures applicable to air operations in the EU regulatory system, implementing the essential requirements for air operations established in Annex V to the Basic Regulation. Those essential requirements establish that commercial air transport operators must ‘use only suitably qualified and trained personnel and implement and maintain training and checking programmes for the crew members and other relevant personnel’ However, despite the fact that both industry and Member States acknowledge that operational control personnel are safety-critical, the Air OPS Regulation does not include requirements to identify the tasks and responsibilities of operational control personnel (e.g. FOOs, FDs and their instructors), nor training requirements for them ‘This lack of requirements has resulted in several issues. Lack of harmonisation with ICAO SARPs The lack of requirements on the tasks, responsibilities and training of operational control personne! has been marked by ICAO as a non-alignment with the SARPs of Chapters 4.6 and 10 of ICAO Annex 6 Part lat the ICAO audits performed in 2017 to the EU Member States and EASA. Lack of compliance with EU requirements According to point (e) of ORO.GEN.110, air operators ‘shall ensure that all personnel assigned to, or directly involved in, ground and flight operations are properly instructed, have demonstrated their abilities in their particular duties and are aware of their responsibilities and the relationship of such duties to the operation as a whole’. This provision implements point 8.1(b) of the Essential Requirements for air operations (Annex V to the Basic Regulation), which states that ‘the aircraft operator must use only suitably qualified and trained personnel and implement and maintain training, and checking programmes for the crew members and other relevant personnel... However, the current AMC1 ORO.GEN.110(c)&(e) does not fully cover operational control personnel. ‘The AMC covers only the theoretical knowledge content as per ICAO Annex 1 and industry best practices. It does not address the development of adequate skills or attitudes and does not provide enough flexibility to adapt the training to the specificities of the operator or to enhance personnel’s competencies required by more complex tasks. Moreover, the AMCis only applicable to CAT operators using the tools of flight monitoring or flight watch for the purpose of fuel planning and management. Furthermore, according to AMC3 ORO.MLR.100, commercial air transport (CAT) operators of aeroplanes should describe the training programmes for FOOs or FDs in their operations manual (OM- Dy’. Nevertheless, many air operators do not describe these training programmes in their OM-D because they argue that there are no standards for training and no identified duties and responsibilities for this category of personnel in the Air OPS Regulation. This has been identified as a 7 See point (a) D. 1 of AMC3 ORO.MIR.100: “Training syllabi and checking programmes for all operations personnel assigned to operational duties in connection with the preparation and/or conduct ofa fight” TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 S001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page Sof 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what non-compliance for several Member States though standardisation inspections in the OPS domain. Further analysis to identify the best way to address the ICAO finding has led to the identification of a harmonisation issue and a potential safety issue. These are further detailed in Chapter 4 of this NPA. Lack of level playing field Only a few Member States have national requirements for training of operational control personnel, but the degree to which they are compliant with ICAO SARPs varies. Some Member States refer to the ‘most recent ICAO documents, others to an obsolete ICAO document. Moreover, some Member States restrict the access to certain operational control tasks (e.g. load control, air navigation, or meteorological tasks) to licensed personnel only. However, these national licences are issued for different tasks, and the level of qualification acknowledged through a licence differs between Member States. This leads to a total lack of harmonisation and recognition of training and qualifications at European level. Refer to Section 4.5.3 for more details. Lack of adequate training standards As already stated, the current AMC1 ORO.GEN.110{c}&(e) does not fully cover operational control personnel. The reference to ICAO Annex 1 and ICAO Docs 9868 and 10106 in this AMC is insufficient to clearly distinguish between the training for entry level (FOOs) and an the one for intermediate to advanced levels (FDs). Furthermore, standardisation activities have shown that the training programmes developed by air operators for operational control personnel are inconsistently overseen across Europe. Thus, a minimum standard level of training is not consistently ensured throughout Europe. Quick decision-making and management of an overwhelming data flow under high time pressure, using sophisticated last-hour technology, describe today’s normal picture of an operations control centre (OCC) of an air operator. Additional factors such as interactions between the airport, OCC and air traffic control (ATC), come to change the decision output. As highlighted in ICAO Doc 10106, the software used by operational control personnel is becoming increasingly complex so as to enable processing of large amounts of available data. With more available operational data, better decisions can be reached, but this also enhances the risk that people become overloaded by data — both relevant and irrelevant in certain contexts. The risk of taking wrong decisions based on irrelevant data is higher. This triggers the need to filter the huge amount of data and better focus on the relevant bits. ‘As systems and technology evolve and become more complex, the people who are part of those systems should also keep pace with this development. ‘The science of training is also evolving; while teaching a person how to use a simple tool to do their job and providing them with some knowledge was enough 40 years ago, today this is no longer sufficient. Today, improved training processes can equip a person with life-long capabilities to find solutions to complex problems and better techniques to adapt to new challenges and the unknown. New training approaches help people to develop competencies to cope with both day-to-day challenges and longer-term changes. Such competencies ‘define what can be done versus what is, known, placing the emphasis on the individual to adapt and utilize their abilities in any scenario’ (ICAO Doc 10106). People are trained to understand the consequences of their actions in an extremely complex context rather than act without understanding what they do or why they do it. Considering the different standards applicable in the Member States for the minimum qualification and training of the FOOs and FDs, as well as the inconsistent oversight of that training programme, TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 S001 certifies {S| Proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Itranet/internet. Page 6 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what there is insufficient assurance that the level of qualification of this personnel is adequate to the complexity of the tasks allocated to them. This could constitute a potential safety concern, A survey conducted in April 2021 and further investigations in this area have provided a better view of the current situation across the EU. Refer to Section 4.1 for more details. Different meaning of the term ‘flight dispatcher’ used in flight operations versus ground handling operations ‘The Basic Regulation has extended the scope of EU aviation safety legislation to a new domain — ground handling, and ‘flight dispatch’ is included in the Basic Regulation definition of ground handling services (Article 3, definition (23)*). Several discussions with numerous experts from the air operations and ground handling domains have confirmed that the term ‘flight dispatcher’ is used in both domains and obviously with a different meaning, often leading to confusion in discussions, expected tasks and responsibilities. The confusion is maintained by the lack of a clear identification of the FO tasks in relation to the operational control system in the Air OPS rules on the one hand, and the lack of additional clarification of the term ‘flight dispatch’ in ground handling. This would have potential safety implications due to the numerous interfaces between air operations and ground handling for ground operational procedures. Related safety issues ‘The potential safety impact of the lack of adequate and harmonised training for operational control personnel is difficult to assess, because in the EU regulatory system the ultimate responsibility for the operational control of a flight remains solely with the commander/pilot-in-command. Consequently, when a reported event indicates, for example, ‘fuel starvation’ as the main cause of an event, this cause is rarely linked unequivocally to the inadequate training of the FD, nor is that inadequate training considered a systemic contributing cause. At the same time, many of the serious incidents and accidents caused by fuel starvation can be easily used to justify that the lack of proper training of operational control personnel was a contributing factor to those events, A full analysis of the issue is included in Chapter 4 ‘Impact assessment’. A detailed safety risk assessment is included in Section 4.1.2. ‘There are no related safety recommendations, no exemptions in accordance with Articles 70, 71 or 76 of the Basic Regulation, and no alternative means of compliance pertinent to the scope of this task. 2.1.2. Amendments related to the fuel planning and management and all-weather operat regulatory packages The technical requirements of the Air OPS Regulation on fuel planning and management and all- weather operations (AWOs) as well as the related AMC and GM were recently amended”. Since the * (23) grounchandling service’ means any service provided at aerodromes comprising safety -related activities in the areas of ground supervision, flight dispatch and load control, passenger handing, baggage handing, freight and mail handling, apron handling of aircraft, aircraft services, fuel and oll handling, and loading of catering; including the case where aircraft operators provide those groundhandling services to themselves (self-handling);” Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 was amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1296 of & August 2021 amending and correcting Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as regards the requirements for fue/energy planning and ‘management, and as regards requirements on support programmes and psychological assessment of fight crew, as well as testing of psychoactive substances (OJ L 282, 5.82021, p. 5) (hitps:/eur-lex.europa.eu/legal: content/EN/DCT/2uri=CELEX%3A3202181296&.gld=1680085244702) and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2237 of 15 December 2021 amending Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as regards the requirements for all-weather TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 S001 certifies {S| proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 7 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what new provisions have been applicable, experience with implementation has highlighted several small items that need to be amended to fully achieve the initial intent of the new provisions. 2.2. What we want to achieve — objectives ‘The overall objectives of the EASA system are defined in Article 1 of the Basic Regulation. This NPA will contribute to achieving the overall objectives by addressing the issues described in Section 2.1. ‘The specific objectives of this proposal are to: — ensure that tasks and responsibilities of an AOC holder's operational control personnel are clearly identified; — address the lack of EU training requirements for the AOC holder personnel involved in a system of operational control and their instructors; — clarify the confusion created by the term ‘flight dispatcher’ used with a different meaning in flight operations and ground handling operations; and — improve the clarity of some of the provisions on fuel planning and management and AWOs to fully achieve the intention behind their recent revision. A transition period will be proposed in the Opinion, to allow the affected stakeholders sufficient time to implement the proposed amendments. 2.3. How we want to achieve it — overview of the proposed amendments The proposed means to achieve objective (1) is by establishing a requirement for CAT operators to define the standards and roles required for the safe functioning of their system of operational control, based on the procedures described in their operations manual, as well as the tasks and responsibilities associated with those roles, This objective supports the implementation of the next objectives. ‘The proposed means to achieve objective (2) is by transposing the relevant ICAO SARPs of Annex 6 Part | into the Air OPS Regulation (EU) and providing guidelines for the development of a CBTA programme. ‘The proposed means to achieve objective (3) is by providing a definition of the term, adequate to the role and tasks in the operational control system of an air operator and in line with ICAO Annex 6. 2.3.1, Training requirements for flight operations officers (FOOs) and flight dispatchers (FDs) To address the level playing field and the potential safety issue, two options were compared and assessed to achieve the objectives mentioned in Section 2.2. Option 0, which proposes no changes to the rules, was considered the baseline for the comparison. The Option 1 proposal is to require the air operator to clearly identify the duties and tasks of operational control personnel, and the operator's operational control personnel to be competent to perform their tasks as per the required standards. This option also proposes a CBTA programme for operational control personnel, based on ICAO Docs 9868 and 10106. The proposed training programme covers the development of knowledge, skills and ‘operations and for fight crew training and checking (OJ L 450, 16:12.2021, p. 21) (httosi/feur. lex.europa.cu/search,htm|?scope=FURLEX&text=2071%2F2737&langeenfitype=quickRqid=1680085286395), The related AMC and GM were amended by ED Decisions 2022/005/R of 25 March 2022, 2022/032/R of 30 June 2022, and 2022/014/R of 19 August 2022 TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 S001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Itranet/internet. Page of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what attitude. Details about the qualification of trainers are also proposed with this option. These proposals ensure full alignment with the relevant ICAO standards of Annex 6 Part |. They also support further standardisation of training at European level, the definition of training targets and the assessment of the effectiveness of the training programme. Option 1 was identified as the preferred option, and this is the basis for the rules proposed in this NPA. For detailed information about the comparison of options, refer to Chapter 4. ‘The following principles have been applied to the proposed implementing rules, AMC & GM: — The identification of evidence by actual, relevant, adequate and realistic competence requirements is important for the CBTA process. The term ‘evidence’ has been established since. decades, at first in the medicine and public health sector. CBTA is full of evidence because a training that lacks evidence would not make sense. — The items where the operator must take responsibility have been added at implementing rule level — Define and continually re-define entry and exit competencies for each role- and operator- related training; — Define minimum training and assessment standards. — The ‘how to’ elements have been added at AMC and GM level. 2.3.2. Amendments related to the fuel planning and management and AWO regulatory packages Several amendments related to destination alternate aerodrome in Part-NCO and specific approval criteria for low-visibility operations are proposed to support the implementation of the requirements on the following topics that were recently amended or introduced in the Air OPS Regulation: — AWos, — meteorological information, and — flight crew training, One proposed amendment affects NCO.OP.143; the other ones are at AMC and GM level. A detailed rationale for each of the changes proposed in this NPA is included in Chapter 3 below. 2.4. Expected benefits and drawbacks of the proposed amendments To address the issues identified in Section 2.1, rulemaking was deemed necessary, since the current requirements in the Air OPS Regulation need to be amended to achieve the objectives identified in Section 2.2. When developing the regulatory material, EASA attempted to find the simplest and least costly way to regulate the issue to achieve the greatest possible benefits. TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. All ihts reserved. 50 S001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 9of 200European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what 2.4.1. Training requirements for flight operations officers (FOOs) and flight dispatchers (FDs) ‘The expected benefits and drawbacks of the proposed amendments are summarised below. For the full impact assessment, please refer to Chapter 4. Expected benefits — Common training standards for operational control personnel across the EU, which will ensure allevel playing field — _ Ahigher level of safety in operations. Operational control personnel will be better prepared to understand and manage the risk of operations, take the right decision and use the right information at the right time, even in situations they have not already encountered. They will be better prepared to adequately manage the data flow and filter the relevant safety information for every flight. The training process will build, further develop and maintain competencies and allow for constant improvement to address the operational risk in the constantly developing technological and operational environment. The CBTA programme wil allow full customisation per operator's type of operation The expected drawbacks of the proposal Those Member States and AOC holders that currently do not apply a CBTA programme for operational control personnel or are implementing a different training model or different requirements will need additional resources (time, money, expertise) to develop or adjust their current training programme to implement the changes proposed in this NPA. However, the additional resources required are expected to be very low or low. — AOC holders will have to develop operator-specific requirements (if not already done) for job- specific competencies, which will also require additional resources that are though expected to be very low. — AOC holders will also have to dedicate resources to manage the changes needed to implement the proposals in this NPA; these resources are also expected to be very low. 2.4.2. Amendments related to the fuel planning and management and AWO regulatory packages The proposals in this NPA intend to clarify the existing requirements and thus facilitate their implementation. More details on the concrete impact of the changes proposed in this NPA are included in the rationale behind the changes in Chapter 3 below. 2.4.2. Further information relevant to the topic of this NPA FOO and FD licences ‘The scope of this RMT does not include requirements for a European licence for FOOs or FDs. There is 1no specific provision in the Basic Regulation to mandate an FD licence in the EU, and ICAO Annex 6 also does not mandate a licence for FOOs or FOs. This NPA does not propose a shared responsibility between the DF and the commander of a flight. There will be no change in the responsibility for the operational control of a flight, which will remain solely with the commander, as established today through the Air OPS Regulation and the Basic Regulation. In this aspect, the EU rules will not align with the corresponding Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules, where the responsibility for the operational control of a flight is shared between the pilot-in-command and the FD, TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. All ihts reserved 50 S001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 20 of 200European Union Aviation Safety Agency ‘NPA 2023-01 2. In summary — why and what To further harmonise the training standards for the operational control personnel, EASA intends to clarify the approach regarding the current licensing regime in the EU. For a more detailed analysis, refer to Sections 4.1.4 and 4.5. Non-commercial operations (NCC and NCO) For non-commercial operators (identified as general aviation operators per ICAO Annex 6 Part II), training and familiarisation with all features of the operation that are pertinent to the operational control duties are included in ICAO Annex 6 at the level of a recommendation. EASA does not propose any requirements for the training of operational control personnel for NCC® operators but intends to Prepare a safety promotion package with a CBTA programme for NCC operators, similar to that for CAT operators. Helicopter operations This NPA does not include a proposal for training of operational control personnel involved in helicopter operations. This means that the SARPs 8.1 to 8.5 of Section 3 of ICAO Annex 6 Part II! will not be transposed, and Member States will have to continue to notify a difference under the Chicago Convention on the transposition of those SARPs. Stakeholders are invited to submit comments on whether the implementing rules proposed in this NPA could be valid and suitable for commercial air transport operators of helicopters, with the caveat that additional AMC and GM may need to be developed to support the implementation of the requirements by helicopter operators. 3 NCC: non-commercial operations with complex motor-poweres aircraft TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 S001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 22 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale 3. Proposed amendments and rationale ‘The amendment is arranged to show deleted, new or amended, and unchanged text as follows: — deleted text is struck through; — new or amended text is highlighted in Blue; — anellipsis ..}' indicates that the rest of the text is unchanged, Where necessary, the rationale is provided in blue italics. 3.1. Draft regulation (draft EASA opinion) Draft regulation 3.1.1, Annex I (Defi CTS a lel LLL Co CULE (490) ‘High icer-of Hight dispatcher” <-by-th i Rationale Three new definitions are proposed for FOO, FD, and operational control personnel. T=, ]_TERPRO.00034-011 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Alright reserved, SO 9001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 12.0f 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency NPA 2023-01 43. Proposed amendments and rationale The definition of operational control personnel is more generic and includes both FOOs and FDs, while encompassing also other roles related to the implementation of the operational control system of an aircraft operator. ICAO Annex 6 and Annex 1 use ‘flight operations officer/flight dispatcher’ (FOO/FD) without making any distinction between the two terms. The current definition in the Air OPS Regulation, following the same approach, creates confusion and leads to the understanding that the two terms are synonyms nd therefore interchangeable, which in fact is not the case. The difference between FOO and FD is clarified in ICAO Doc 9868 (Section 3, Ch. 1) Ed. 2020. It consists in the level of training and depth of competencies, and the specificity and complexity of tasks associated with each of them. ICAO Doc 410106 specifies further: ‘The title “fight operations officer” distinguishes the individual of the basic qualification level from the higher role- and operator-related qualification level. [..] Flight dispatcher and all other functions and roles in operational control require a successful initial FOO qualification and an operator- and role-specific qualification.’ The purpose of the proposed new definitions of FOO and FD is therefore to distinguish between the two in order to better implement the proposed new rules regarding training. The proposed definitions link the operational control personnel to the specific operational control tasks and responsibilities for the preparation and execution of flights, as specified in the Basic Regulation (Annex V Essential requirements for air operations, point 1.1). 3.1.2. Annex Ill (Part-ORO) ORO.GEN.110 Operator responsi ies (l (c)__ The operator shall establish and maintain a system for exercising operational control over any flight operated under the terms of its certificate, SPO authorisation or declaration Which/Shall (1 (e) The operator shall ensure that all personnel assigned to, or directly involved in, ground and flight operations are properly instructed, ffained OF qualified, have demonstrated their abilities in their particular duties) Femain current in them, and are aware of their responsibilities and the relationship of such duties to the operation as a whole. (1 Rationale The new text in point (c) proposes a requirement for the air operator to establish the standards of its operational control activities (who does what, why and when), defines the tasks and procedures to indicate how standards would be achieved, and finally describes the responsibilities of the operational T=, ] _ TERPRO.00034.013 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allrights reserved SO 9001 cere. SO" | proprietary dacument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 22 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01 3. Proposed amendments and rationale control personnel. The standards are expected to reflect the specificities of the operation and therefore should be based on the procedures included in the operator's operations manual. The proposed new requirement creates the basis for the implementation of the FD tasks described in ICAO Annex 6 Port | Chapter 4.6 and respectively Part ill Chapter 2.6 for helicopter operators. The proposed requirement applies to all the operators to which Part-ORO applies; this includes, besides AOC holders performing CAT operations, also NCC and SPO operators. The new text does not require operators to use operational control personnel for the implementation of its operational control system. This rule allows for a scalable application: when, for example, an operator only uses pilots for the implementation of the operational control tasks, they may do so without having to hire or use any operational control personnel. In such cases, their operations manual will adapt the description of their operational standards and tasks only to pilots. The use of the word ‘authority’ added in point (c) refers to the right and responsibility to take operational control decisions and to execute (manage) the operation as a whole, according to the delegated authority referenced in OM-A Chapter 1 or/and 2. See also the proposed AMC1 ‘ORO.GEN.110(c). The new text also facilitates the implementation of the proposed amendments to ORO.AOC.135 ‘Personnel requirements’. When operational standards are established, the personnel’s roles and tasks can also be established clearly. This way, the operator can adapt the training targets for operational control personnel to ensure their competence and enhance the effectiveness of training. The requirement that the operational control system of the operator needs to be included in the operations manual has been moved from the current AMC1 ORO.GEN.110(c). The additions in point (e) are to align the requirement for training with the provisions of Annex V to the Basic Regulation in point 8.1(b), and to provide a link to the proposed new requirements for the training of operational control personnel in points ORO.AOC.135 (b)(3) and (b)(4). It is also proposed to delete the word ‘instructed’ to avoid any confusion between the scope of point (e), which refers to training, and the scope of point (f) of ORO.GEN.110, which refers to the way in which operations are expected to be performed. ORO.AOC.135 Personnel requirements td (b) Adequacy and competency of personnel td [7] TERPRO.a0024.013 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency Alright reserve 50 9001 certified. °° | proprietary documest. copies ae not controle, Conf evtn status trough the EASAInrone/neret, Page 24 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale (i) develop and implement an initial and recurrent training and assessment programme for its operational control personnel, based on a competency-based training and assessment (CBTA) method, to ensure they achieve the required competencies and maintain those competencies at the necessary level to perform their tasks as per the standards and assigned roles established in accordance with ‘ORO.GEN.110(c). ‘The CBTA programme shall include: (A) Training standards and objectives based on the specificities of the operation and the assigned roles in the operator's operational control system; (8) A basic competence level and an advanced competence level for the operational control personnel. The basic competence level for flight operations officers shall cover knowledge, skills, and attitudes commensurate with the generic flight operations officer tasks. The knowledge component shall cover air law, aircraft general knowledge, flight performance calculation, planning procedures, loading, human performance, meteorology, navigation, operational procedures, principles of flight, and radio communication. The skill component shall address both technical and human skills, to allow the individual to prepare a flight and provide the expected support to the operation of the flight as defined by the tasks established by the operator. The attitude component shall aim at preparing the personnel to address the complexities of the operational control tasks safely and efficiently. The training for the advanced competence level shall include operator- specific elements and role-specific elements, commensurate with the complexities of the assigned roles. (©) Forthe basic competence level, on-the job training to cover practical aspects and ensure that competence standards appropriate to the exercise of duty are consistently achieved. The on-the-job training shall include observing one familiarisation flight in the flight crew compartment of an aircraft over one of the areas or route segments for which that individual is authorised to exercise their operational control tasks and duties. Under exceptional circumstances, duly identified and justified by the operator as part of the training programme, the familiarisation flight may be replaced by observing a line operational simulation (LOS) profile in a representative flight simulator approved by the competent authority for this purpose. Such profile shall address areas or route segments where the assigned role related to the operational control will be exercised; TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 25 of 10European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01 3, Proposed amendments and rationale (ii) establish criteria for the training and qualifications of instructors and assessors of the operational control personnel; and (ii) include all these elements in its operations manual. Ld Rationale The proposed new requirements transpose the SARPs of ICAO Annex 6 Part |, on the training of operational control personnel, in the EU regulatory framework, and are expected to ensure a level playing field across the EU. They also create a link between the training standards and the operational standards established by the operator, in compliance with ORO.GEN.110(c). The proposed new requirement allows for the establishment of different qualification levels, with appropriate training for each, including the minimum FOO qualification as an entry level, as well as the advanced training adjusted to different roles in the operational control system. Further description of the training programme is provided at AMC and GM level. The new point (b)(3) establishes an important condition - that of the minimum competence level necessary for any job in the operational control (the basic FOO qualification). Furthermore, it establishes that only those individuals who have completed additional training (specific to the role and the operational context of the air operator), and consequently have achieved an enhanced competence level, may perform complex tasks without supervision. The proposed new point (b)(4) establishes training requirements for operational control personnel used by an AOC holder (either employed directly or as @ contracted service) for its operational control system. Point (b)(4) requires that the training is customised, and its objectives reflect the specificities of the operation. It also requires that the training programme is described in the operator's manual; this requirement addresses the non-compliance of some operators identified through the oversight activities. Point (b)(4) establishes that the training programme is developed as a CBTA programme, as required by ICAO Annex 1 and detailed in ICAO Docs 9868 PANS-TRG and 10106 Manual on Flight Operations Officers/Flight Dispatchers Competency-based Training and Assessment. It also addresses the ICAO finding to EASA and several Member States, as it requires the operator to include in its training programme criteria for the training and qualification of instructors and assessors of operational control personnel. Only the relevant elements of ICAO Annex 1, i.e. the knowledge component of Standard 4.1.6.2 are proposed to be included at implementing rule level. The skills and attitudes components are proposed to be included at AMC level, as being an integral part of the training as a whole. The advanced role-specific training must also be developed using the CBTA method, similarly to the initial FOO training. As ICAO Doc 10106 describes the CBTA method for FOO level but does not develop additional instructions for the development of advanced competencies specific to different roles in the operational control, the proposed new GMS ORO.AQC.135(b)(4)(i) provides an example of how the operator can enhance the competence level from FOO entry level to advanced role-specific level through training. Tay] TERPRO,00034.013 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allright reserve. 'S0 9001 certifies, SO" | proprietary dacument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 26 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency NPA 2023-01 3, Proposed amendments and rationale Point (b)(4)(i)(C) includes the on-the-job training component, which is an ICAO SARP. The rule also contains the possibility to replace the familiarisation flight in the cockpit with a simulator flight in exceptional circumstances (which the operator must describe in its training programme). Introducing the possibility to apply exceptions is based on the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic when the flights were drastically reduced and thus it was sometimes impossible to comply with the training requirements; or the cases when a trainee cannot perform a flight due to physical or medical considerations. These examples are provided in the proposed GM8 ORO.AOC.135(b)(4)(i). Point (b)(4) also aims at ensuring that the operational control personnel are competent at the end of the training. Moreover, its purpose is to ensure that the effectiveness of the training is measured against the defined standards and the roles that the operator must establish and describe in its operations manual. It also aims at ensuring the completeness of the training, covering the full preparation of the operational control personnel. A list of possible additional training, operator- specific, is provided in AMIC3 ORO.AOC.135(b)(4)i) and it includes, but is not limited to, dangerous goods, security, and SMS training. The new points (b)(3) and (4) have been added under Subpart ORO.AOC to ensure that the requirement applies to AOC holders only. The Agency considered including it under ORO.GEN.100, but this would ‘mean that the proposed requirements would also apply to NCC and SPO operators, and this is not intended. Point ORO.SPO.100 is also proposed to be amended to ensure that SPO operators are not affected by this proposal. Furthermore, the scope of this proposal is limited to AOC holders performing CAT operations with aeroplanes. Stakeholders are invited to comment on whether this proposed amendment in points (b)(3) and (4) could be extended also to AOC holders performing CAT operations with helicopters. ORO.SPO.100 Common requirements for commercial specialised Cee {a) A commercial specialised operator shalll in addition to ORO.DEC.100) alse comply with ‘ORO.AOC.135, except for points (b)(3) and (B)(4), ORO.AOC.140 and ORO.AOC.150. {1 Rationale This change is proposed to clarify that the applicability of ORO.AOC.135 to SPO operators excludes points (b)(3) and (b)(4), which should apply only to AOC holders performing CAT operations with aeroplanes. The requirement related to the operational control personnel is not intended to be applicable to SPO operators. ‘TE RPRO,00034-012 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allright reserve. 180 8001 certifies, Proprietary dacument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm reisan status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 27 0f 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01 43. Proposed amendments and rationale 3.1.3. Annex VI (Part-NCO) NCO.OP.143 Destination alternate aerodromes planning minima — aeroplanes ‘An aerodrome shall not be specified as a destination alternate aerodrome unless the available current meteorological information indicates, for the period from 1 hour before until 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival, or from the actual time of departure to 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival, whichever is the shorter period: | I | Rationale Regulation (EU) 2021/1296, applicable since 30 October 2022, introduced in Part-NCO minimum weather conditions to allow the nomination of an aerodrome as a destination alternate aerodrome (also called ‘destination alternate aerodrome planning minima’), which did not exist before. This change affects the aircrew approved training organisations (ATOs). Some ATOs have requested approval by their competent authority to apply planning minima similar to those applicable to CAT operations under CAT.OP.MPA.182. The argument was that having planning ‘minima aligned with CAT helps the learning process of students that want to become commercial pilots (CPL) and/or ‘frozen’ ATPL pilots, and proves useful for their skills as future commercial pilots. Pilots will apply the same planning minima at their schools and in their future jobs. Therefore, this NPA proposes the decrease of the planning minima applicable to ATOs in comparison with what applies to the remaining operations covered by Part-NCO. This decrease is mitigated by the fact that ATOs are required to have a management system in accordance with ORA.GEN.200 and that CAT.OP.MPA,182 and point (d) of NCO.OP.143 consider crosswind limits, while the current provisions in Part-NCO do not consider this weather phenomenon. Tay] TERPRO.00034.01% © European Union Aviation Safety Agency lights reserved, IO 9001 certified EOF | proprietary document. copes are not contralled. Confirm revision satus through the EASA ntranet/internet, Page 28 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale The proposed amendment is expected to have a positive impact in terms of safety, as well as a positive economic impact for ATOs. 3.2. Draft acceptable means of com I (draft EASA decision) ince and guidance mate 3.2.1. Draft AMC & GM to Part-ORO AMC1 ORO.GEN.110(c) Operator responsi OPERATIONAL CONTROL ‘The SYStEM organisation and methods established to exercise operational control should-beinchided Ja the-operstions manuatand cover the following: @)__atteasta description of ButhOrity/ahd responsibilities concerning the initiation, continuation) and termination or diversion of each flight} Rationale The proposed new text clarifies the content of the processes and procedures, which should remain scalable to the operation. Once the structure of the operational control system is clarified, the operator can further detail the procedures into tasks and duties, which would streamline the identification of the necessary roles for the implementation of the operational control system. The defined operational control tasks will be used by the operator to set up the training programme for the operational control personne! with the most adequate role-specific competency targets, establish realistic and achievable training target descriptions, and develop realistic and adequate Once those tasks, duties and roles are clearly established, they can be used as checkpoints to assess the performance of operational control personnel against those standards and role-specific tasks. This is how the CBTA programme can be built and implemented in a gradual approach Point (b)(5) has been added to cover the ICAO Annex 6 Part | SARPs of 4.6, in a more general wording. Point (b)(6) covers the in-flight situation when the commander/pilot-in-command has the final say if safety is affected. TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved. 50 S001 certifies {S| proprietary dacument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 29.f 200European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 43. Proposed amendments and rationale |GM1 ORO.GEN.110(c) Operator responsibil OPERATIONAL CONTROL ies {a) Point ORO.GEN.110(c) does not imply a requirement for licensed flight operations officers) “Aig clapatchers or personnel performing other operational contro tasks or functions. (b) If te operators thanlaCATIOpEraROH] uses flight operations officers (FOOs)/ight dispatchers (Fs) in conjunction with a method of operational control ES\rSeominienided at training for BBithat personnel should be based on relevant parts of ICAO Annex 1 and ICAO Documents 10106 and 9868. Thistraining should bedescribedin the OM Rationale This GM has been amended to illustrate the difference between FOOs and FOs. The additional text in point (a) refers to various other jobs or roles that may exist in conjunction with the operational contro! system. These other roles have been identified and described in the proposed new GM3 ORO.GEN.110(c). In point (b) the ICAO references have been maintained as a recommendation for aircraft operators to which ORO.GEN.110 applies, regardless of the type of operation. However, this has been kept at GM level as a recommendation, to ensure proportionality of rules for NCC or SPO operators compared to AOC holders. ‘New point (c) specifies where the proposed new requirements applicable to AOC holders performing CAT operations can be found. T=] TERPRO.00034-011 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allrihts reserved, SO 9001 certifies | Proprietary document. copies are not controlled Confim reson status through the EASA ntranet/nternet. Page 2000,European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale {A} principles of eperation of aeroplane engines/systemsfinstruments; TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. All ihts reserved. 50 S001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status thraugh the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 22 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale operator: RECURRENT TRAINING the previous assessment: fy Js-and-adjusted-to-the-neads identified ea 2 needs-conducted by the operator: centre persenset shoul: Rationale AMC1 ORO.GEN.110(c)&(e) is proposed to be deleted, as it was introduced as a temporary measure for the training of a CAT operator’s operational control personnel performing flight monitoring and flight watch, for the purpose of fuel planning and management. This temporary measure with a reduced scope was intended to cover the training gap until the topic of training for operational control personnel would be developed through a dedicated rulemaking task. TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies 5: | proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 22 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 43. Proposed amendments and rationale Its content has been transferred to point (d) of the new AMC1 ORO.AOC.135(b)(4)(i) and included in a BTA programme, which is applicable to AOC holders only. The part referring to the advanced operator training has been included and expanded in AMC2 ORO.AOC.135(b)(4)(i). The recurrent training part has been included and rendered more flexible and efficient with the continuous assessment proposal included in AMC4 and AMCS to ORO.AOC.135(b)(4)(). The instructor part has been included in the new AMC1 ORO.AQC.135(b)(4)(i). For operators other than AOC holders, the more generic reference to ICAO Annex 1 is kept in GM1 ORO.GEN.110(c). AMC2 ORO.GEN.110(c) Operator respon: | ene T=] TERPRO.00034-013 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allrihts reserved SO 9001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status thraugh the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 22 of 10European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale Assessment of airline market and product definitions, success and risk factors for customer experience ‘Assessment of areas of responsibility in the operational control environment: CAMO, MRO ‘Assessment of areas of responsibility in the operational control environment: crew planning and crew scheduling Assessment of the data flow and data quality in the OCC ‘Assessment of the route profitability and the factor of influence on the operational risk and the commercial result Assessment of communication standards and risk factors Assessment of the decision-making process in the OCC Assessment of safety management aspects in the OCC ‘Assessment of the air operator certificates, standards and approvals DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF OPERATIONAL CONTROL PERSONNEL — EXAMPLES OF TASK FAMILIES ‘The operational control personnel employed by the aircraft operator are expected to execute operational control tasks for a time interval specified in the operator's operations manual Part A, but at least within the day of operation. The following are examples of task families in operational control, to be executed for all flights in the time interval of operational control responsibility. Depending on the complexity and type of the operation performed by an operator (e.g. domestic fights versus regional flights versus long-haul flights; or frequency of operation; or fleet complexity and size; hub operation versus point-to-point flights, direct flights versus multi-segment flights), some tasks of these families can be assigned to FOOs, while others can be assigned only to FDs or the operations controller or another advanced operational control role with an advanced qualification: (2) Evaluate the operational risks identified through the analysis of weather reports and forecasts in context with traffic regions, airports, runways and specific approach procedures. Coordinate with meteorological experts and units for the selection of optimum heights and routes. (b) Evaluate the operational risks in view of: (2) ATM infrastructure and availability, (2) airport and airspace capacities, (3) flight permits, and a potential control mechanism initiated by appropriate air traffic control (ATC) units, (5) _ restrictions published in the aeronautical information publication (AIP) ()__ Evaluate the operational risks in view of actual or expected aircraft technical status, aircraft equipment, deferred items, and operational or performance limitations. TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies Proprietary dacument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status thraugh the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 2¢ of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale (d) Evaluate the influence of specific requirements for required navigation performance (RNP), extended diversion time operations (EDTO), cold-weather operations, all-weather operations (AWOs) in relation to the type of operation and condition, the assignment of fleet or aircraft and flight crew qualifications; check and apply aircraft and aircrew restrictions. (f) Evaluate the relation of payload forecasted or booked versus the available/planned capacity and develop solutions if required, e.g. adjusted aircraft/fleet assignment, rebooking, application of fuel policy schemes, technical landing, rescheduling for improved conditions. (g) _ Evaluate the probability of flight delays and diversions in specific regions, airports, and time intervals. (h) Evaluate the capacity of reserve/standby aircraft and aircrews in relation to the expected risks of delays and diversions. (i) Evaluate the operational risks deriving from passenger flow, ground handling, strikes, security, direct operating costs, delay costs, passenger satisfaction, and other factors of influence. (i) Perform flight crew briefing. Prepare the operational flight plan, provide support to the commander in preparing the preliminary flight plan, if applicable. Prepare, coordinate, file and re-file ATS flight plan with ATC. (k) Develop and evaluate proactive countermeasures, including proactive aircraft reassignments, flight delays and cancellations, adjustment of MRO-downtimes, reallocation of aircrew reserves/standby. ()___ Initiate and perform proactive and reactive problem-solving and decision-making in view of risk predictions and in line with the standard operating procedures described in the operations manual. Develop alternative scenarios based on the available information, the operational procedures and limitations published in the operations manual. (m) Coordinate with the stakeholders involved (ATC, CAMO/MRO, ground handling, aircrew) and support during in-flight incidents/medicals. (n) Execute the flight planning process in view of selection of aerodromes, alternates, route selection, fuel policy and fuel calculation, landing and planning minima, MEL items, configuration deviation list (CDL), NOTAMs, weather, payload, aircraft/payload handling and delay forecast. Calculate the fuel required to consider minimum reserve fuel components, ic. contingency fuel, final reserve fuel, minimum additional fuel Both the flight planner and the commander/PIC are responsible for the completion of the flight planning process. A significant amount of intelligence may go into the planning ofa flight, which is not necessarily always communicated to the commander/PIC during a flight crew briefing. For example, a particular route to be flown may be planned (for specific ATM reasons) without the commander/PIC knowing the different limitations, resulting in FMS usage to try to ‘optimise’ the flight route, which may cause an ATC sector overload and a potential safety issue as such (0) Monitor active flights (aircraft moving under their own power) in relation to flight planning and flight safety risks and variables (including flight following, flight monitoring and flight watch). Continually monitor and verify weather, airport conditions, navigation facilities and NOTAMs that may affect operational safety in the area of operation and take necessary action. Coordinate and communicate, provide data and recommendations. Perform rescheduling TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 25 of 10European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 43. Proposed amendments and rationale and/or rerouting. During in-flight scenarios, the final decision about appropriate course of action rests with the commander/PIC. (p) Monitor the data flow of flight planning data and briefing packages to ground handling, ATC and crew briefing, initiate problem-solving and decision-making if required. (a) Provide support and advice at request to any stakeholder, eg. last weather reports, NOTAM reports, navigation facilities, security issues, emergency situations, CAMO/MRO, any other flight and ground operations. (r) Provide support and take the necessary decision to launch the operator's emergency response plan. (2) Depending on the size and complexity of its operation, the aircraft operator may establish several different roles for the execution of its operational control system. Operators use ROLES OF OPERATIONAL CONTROL PERSONNEL different names for these roles (or ‘jobs’), but it is recommended to use the terminology established by ICAO whenever possible. The clarification provided below of the levels of qualification between the FOO and the other operational control roles and functions uses the material from ICAO Doc 9868 PANS-TRG and Doc 10106 Manual on Flight Operations Officers/Flight Dispatchers Competency-based Training and Assessment. (b) The FOO qualification is the mandatory basic qualification that a person should have successfully achieved prior to undergoing further operator-specific and role-specific training, As stated in point (b)(3) of ORO.AOC.135, a FOO may not perform complex tasks without operator- and advanced role-specific training ()_ The various intermediary and advanced-level roles used in an aircraft operator's operational control system are assigned to individuals who have successfully completed operator-specific and role-specific training. This role-specific qualification gives them the authority to perform complex operational control tasks without any supervision. The operator also needs to ensure that those individuals have also acquired the necessary operational competencies to allow them to assess the operational impact and take appropriate steps, when necessary, to ensure that flight safety is protected during all phases of flight operation. TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm revision status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 26 of 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale Each of the following roles will be qualified to evaluate operational risks and take immediate decisions based on the operator’s standards and procedures. When an aircraft is moving under its own power and is thus under the ultimate control of the commander/PIC, the operational control roles will support, brief or assist the commander/PIC in the safe conduct of the flight. Depending on the complexity and size of the operation, the different tasks and responsibilities specific to various roles can be performed by one or more individuals. The aircraft operator could use an OCC as an organisational structure to encompass all the operational control activities, as well as additional functions that are only tangential or not at all related to the operational control activities (2) flight dispatcher (FD): provides flight planning services, dispatch release and in-flight support, flight- and area-specific operational risk analysis and area- and flight-specific problem-solving and decision-making; (2) _ operations (and network) controller: applies operational risk management processes to the network, specific areas and flights. The operations (and network) controller is responsible for the initiation of problem-solving and decision-making processes by integrating safety, operational risks, direct operating costs and customer experience; (3) operational data manager: integrates navigation and operator data and policies for the application of flight planning, performance calculations, electronic flight bag (EF8) and flight management systems. (€) The aircraft operator may establish other roles as well, which are not necessarily linked to operational control duties. For example, resource control for flight crews (crew control) or aircraft and maintenance resource (maintenance control) are not fully within the scope of the definition of operational control personnel. (d) Similarly, there may be other roles in an air operator's flight operations activities, which are tangential to the operational control system and are required to provide input on some tasks. For example, a performance engineer or an operational engineer, whose contribution to operational control activities could be the following: (2) performance engineer: provides technical support and calculations/evaluations in relation to aircraft performance, fuel consumption evaluations and general flight planning services; and (2) _ operational engineer: integrates AIP, operator, airport, airspace and aircraft data into a database to be used for performance calculations, flight planning and aircraft allocation. The operational engineer is responsible for data and policies integrated in flight planning applications, EFB and flight management systems These are generally referred to as flight operations performance engineering functions and are not typically OCC functions. However, when these persons are partially involved in operational control tasks, it is recommended that they receive minimum awareness training and are familiarised with the concept of operational control and the functioning of an OCC structure in order to understand how their input can be maximised to contribute to the safety of fights. TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Avition Safety Agency. All ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 27 f 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale Rationale This proposed new GM explains the terms used by ICAO Doc 10106 for various roles with associated tasks in the operational control which should be used by an air operator when defining the different roles of its operational control personnel. This would further enable an easier identification and description of the tasks associated with each of those roles, helping the operator to establish training targets associated with each of those roles. > = rel ie fe} FJ EN.110(e) Operator responsibilit Rationale This proposed new AMC covers ICAO Recommendation 10.5 of Annex 6 Part | AMC2 ORO.GEN.110(f) Operator responsibilities INSTRUCTIONS FORABOUT- DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES-OF OPERATIONAL CONTROL PERSONNEL — BRIEFING OF FLIGHT OPERATIONS OFHCERS/FLIGHT DISPATCHERS BEFORE ASSUMING DUTIES @ iw 7 fight following High oF fight-watch-activity, 00/60, bBefore assuming Operational Control duties, the’eperational contreljersoninel should be briefed) Upon Shifé Handover, on actial the-elements anid factors OFinfluentce celated-to 6h the safety of the operations the #00/FD-will-be-performing-as-part-of the-operational control, T=, ]_TERPRO.00034-013 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allrihts reserved SO 9001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm reison status thraugh the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 28 of 10European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 3. Proposed amendments and rationale Rationale This AMC is proposed to change its reference to the more specific point in the implementing rule, as its content is related to the instructions given to an operational control person upon starting their duty. Additionally, the content of GM2 ORO.GEN.110(f) is proposed to be included in this AMC as its related to the same topic. Consequently, GM2 ORO.GEN.110(f) is proposed to be deleted. Additional relevant elements have been added to the briefing. Operational control covers all flights within the time interval of responsibility. IAMC3_ ORO.GEN.110(f) | Operator responsibilities GROUND OPERATIONS WITH PASSENGERS ON BOARD IN THE ABSENCE OF FLIGHT CREW Ll Rationale This proposed amendment of the rule reference in the title is editorial, as the content of this AMC is related to the instructions and procedures rather than to training. The proposed amendment has no impact. ELEMENTS-OF THE BRIEFING -OF FLIGHT. CRERATIONS-OFFICERS/FLIGHT DISPATCHERS BEFORE Rationale This GM is proposed to be deleted and its content moved to AMC2 ORO.GEN.110(f). T=, ]_ TERPRO.00034-011 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Allrihts reserved, SO 9001 certifies Proprietary decument. Copies are not controlled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 290f 100European Union Aviation Safety Agency (NPA 2023-01, 43. Proposed amendments and rationale KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ATTITUDE COMPONENTS OF THE COMPETENCY-BASED TRAINING AND ASSESSMENT (CBTA) PROGRAMME FOR OPERATIONAL CONTROL PERSONNEL (a) The competencies of the operational control personnel should be trained and assessed with regard to knowledge, skills and attitudes through the execution of realistic tasks based on daily ‘operation and past situations or events. (b) The operator's CBTA programme should be based on Part Il Section 3 of ICAO Doc 9868 PANS- TRG and on ICAO Doc 10106 Manual on Flight Operations Officers/Flight Dispatchers Competency-based Training and Assessment. The CBTA programme should include the following elements: (1) a training needs analysis process; (2) defined competency targets and assessment standards for all the roles of its operational control personnel; (3) a training and assessment plan; (4) standards for training material, communication and progress monitoring; (5) a non-punitive staff competence evaluation observing the just culture principles and a training concept based on realistic elements; (6) a description of methods and intervals for the recurrent (continuing) assessment and subsequent retraining; (7) instructor and assessor selection criteria, to target their competencies and qualification; (8) a description of procedures for evaluation, feedback and improvement of the CBTA programme to ensure that the training meets its scope. ()_ The training and assessment programme should be flexible enough to cater for specific needs related to delivery methods such as distant learning, online training or part-time training, PREREQUISITE COMPONENTS OF THE CBTA PROGRAMME (d) The prerequisite competence knowledge component of the CBTA programme should be focused on knowledge and basic application skills. The competence component ‘attitude’ should be integrated as early as possible into the training process and trained along with the training and assessment of the skills and knowledge. The operator should use the prerequisite learning objectives of Appendix A to ICAO Doc 10106 to tailor the training to the specific duties assigned to each role and targeted competency: (2) Prerequisite learning objectives: Air Law (2) Prerequisite learning objectives: Flight performance (3) Prerequisite learning objectives: Navigation (4) Prerequisite learning objectives: Human factors in aviation (5) Prerequisite learning objectives: Aircraft general knowledge and instrumentation (6) Prerequisite learning objectives: Meteorology TE APRO.00034-011 © European Union Aviation Safety Agency. Al ihts reserved 50 $001 certifies {S| proprietary decument. Copies are not cntrolled. Confirm reson status through the EASA Intranet/internet. Page 20 of 100