1 / 75

Industry Workshop Regulation 376/2014 - 27 April 2015 -

This workshop aims to provide guidance on the implementation of Regulation 376/2014 by addressing key principles, examples, best practices, and means of compliance. It covers reporting, analysis, and follow-up of occurrences in the aviation industry.

pnewton
Télécharger la présentation

Industry Workshop Regulation 376/2014 - 27 April 2015 -

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Industry Workshop Regulation 376/2014- 27 April 2015 - The European Commission and the European Aviation Safety Agency

  2. - Regulation (EU) 376/2014- Brussels - 27 April 2015

  3. Background • More proactive and evidence-based European Safety Policy • Fits in the context of existing safety management processes

  4. Main objectives: • Prevent accidents through reporting, analysis and follow-up of relevant safety information at industry, national and EU level • Ensure continued availability of safety information (enhanced Just Culture) • Improve information exchange within the EU • Applicable from 15 November 2015

  5. - 376/2014 Roadmap- Brussels - 27 April 2015

  6. Developed by Commission with EASA help • Aim to support MS and industry • Collaborative effort • Roadmap implementation started in Dec 2014 • End in Nov 2015 with application Regulation 376/2014

  7. List of occurrences to be reported under MOR • Guidance material • Workshops for the industry • EASA organisations - 4 December 2014 in Cologne • Entire industry - 27 April 2015 in Brussels • Workshops for the Member States • 30 March 2015 in Brussels • Autumn in Brussels

  8. EU risk classification scheme • Technical support • ECCAIRS/ADREP compatibility • Taxonomy • Standard reporting forms • European reporting portal • Technical means facilitating the implementation of the Regulation • Trainings

  9. Development of a Policy Model for the Internal Industry Just Culture Policy • 3 meetings (March/ May /June 2015) • Communication and promotion material • For CAT and for GA • To be develop Summer 2015 • High Level Conference • 1st October 2015 in Brussels • Presentation of deliverables

  10. Questions?

  11. - Guidance Material - Brussels - 27 April 2015

  12. Prepared by the Commission with the support of EASA • Objective • support common understanding and harmonised application of 376/2014 • Scope • covers entire Regulation 376/2014

  13. Addressed to: • Aviation professionals • Industry organisations • Aviation competent authorities • States

  14. Timeline • 1st draft circulated - 24 March • Discussion with the MS - 30 March • Revised draft circulated - 23 April • Discussion with the industry - 27 April • Revised draft circulated for comments - End May • Finalisation and dissemination - Summer 2015

  15. Final structure • Divided according to targeted stakeholders’ category • Format of questions • Include provisions interpretation, key principles, examples, best practices and means of compliance

  16. Questions?

  17. - Industry Workshop - Brussels - 27 April 2015

  18. Participation

  19. Reporting, analysis and follow-up of occurrences Brussels - 27 April 2015

  20. - Reporting - Main principles

  21. Clarification of reporters under MORS with examples • Clarification of occurrences to be reported under MORS: • Reportable occurrences are those contained in the IR • Report occurrences in relevant Annex not all in IR

  22. Clarification on reportable occurrences: • Judgment by reporter when required to assess if aircraft endangered • When doubt, should report • Possible assessment by organisations • Accountability

  23. Questions?

  24. Mandatory and Voluntary Reporting

  25. Clarification on differences between MORS and VORS Yes Occ. listed in the IR Yes MORS Person in Article 4(6) Occurrence No No VORS

  26. Questions?

  27. Reporting andInformation Flow- Timeline -

  28. Timeline Mandatory Report Authoritystoresthe report in theNational DB AuthorityReporting to ECR Authorityupdates report in ECR 1M Reporting to Organization Reporting to Authority Reportingfollow-up to Authority Reporting final report to Authority 72h 72h 72h Individuals 2M 1M 2M 3M T0 Timeline T0 1M 3M Individuals Voluntary Report Reporting to Organization Reporting to Authority

  29. Timeline • For Design and Production Organisations, given that: • The reportable occurrence is the unsafe condition (Part-21 definition), and • The person to report is the responsible of the identification of the unsafe condition, • The T0 starts when the unsafe condition is identified.

  30. Questions?

  31. Interaction with regulation (EU) No 216/2008 and its IRs

  32. Interaction with BR216/2008 BR216/2008* R376/2014* Common Requirements * Not exhaustive list of requirements

  33. Interaction with BR216/2008 • Reporting requirements existing in other EU legislations are consistent with reporting requirements under Regulation 376/2014 • Both obligations should be discharged by one reporting channel avoiding the establishment of two parallel systems • Compliance with Regulation 216/2008 and its IRs should not exempt organisations from compliance with this Regulation, and vice versa

  34. Interaction with BR216/2008 • EASA is studying a dedicated RMT to update the Implementing Rules of BR216/2008 and related AMCs and GM to properly reflect requirements defined in Regulation 376/2014in view to: • Provide legal certainty on reporting obligations • Clarify the scope of competent authority oversight and • Support the promotion of a just culture

  35. Questions?

  36. Reporting to the Competent authority

  37. Initial notification* Information flow Report to ECR Report to organisation Report to Comp. Aut. Yes Occ. listed in the IR Yes Person in Article 4(6) Occurrence No Yes Possibility to report to organisation Occurrence involves safety risk No No No notification *Note: for the purpose of simplification, the scheme indicates that the reporting by individuals is made to the organisation while it is recognised by the Regulation that individuals may report directly to the competent authority.

  38. Analysis and follow-up notification* Information flow Report analysis results and action to the Comp. Aut. Yes Organisation analyses occurrence and adopt relevant action, if any Occurrence notified by the organisation to the Comp. Aut. Organisation identifies safety risk Transfer to ECR No No obligation to report but Comp. Aut. may ask the reporting *Note: for the purpose of simplification, the scheme only addresses the reporting through organisations while the competent authority may receive occurrences directly from individuals.

  39. Questions?

  40. Analysis and Follow-up

  41. Analysis and follow-up required under 376/2014 fits into existing processes • Management systems • SMS • Similar safety processes require by EU law or equivalent • Not intended to create a parallel system but ensure system exists and support it

  42. Questions?

  43. Reporting Format and related Requirements Brussels - 27 April 2015

  44. Support for Reporting • Free format (C.A. Forms) • Organisation Manual • ECCAIRS • Minimum Data Fields • EU Risk Classification • Data Quality checks • ECCAIRS/ADREP Compatibility • Reporting means • Minimum Data Fields • Risk Classification • Data Quality checks

  45. ADREP/ECCAIRS Compatibility • ADREP taxonomy compatibility means a reporting using a taxonomy compliant with the latest version of the ADREP taxonomy as integrated in ECCAIRS. This could be done by using the so-called RIT, defined and maintained at EU level • ECCAIRS software compatibility means using mean of reporting which uses technical means and data formats that enables a direct upload of information in an ECCAIRS database. Organisations are expected to agree this technical solution with their competent authority

  46. Compatible Reporting Means • Acceptable means available to facilitate compliance: • Off-line reporting form (mostly for individuals, small/med organisations) • On-line reporting form (mostly for individuals, small/med organisations) • E5X file format (mostly for large organisations) • Use of the ECCAIRS system • Organisations can agree with their Competent Authority any other means that provide similar levels of completeness and quality of data, and use the ADREP taxonomy

  47. Compatible Reporting Means Off-line report On-line report Data transfer file (E5X)

  48. What This Means • Reduced Interface Taxonomy - Subset of ADREP • We encourage organisations to use the RIT in their systems • Welcome feedback and support to improve taxonomy • E5X Data Transfer Format • EASA working with SMS Software Companies to enable compatibility for their user communities • Support available for organisations through EASA and NAAs • European Portal - On-line and off-line reporting • Standardises and simplifies reporting to competent authority • Reports offered: GA Report, Flight Operations, Aerodrome, ATM, Birdstrike, Dangerous Goods and Technical

More Related