< PreviousNEW UK CAA INTERNATIONAL GROUP DELIVERS TRAINING TO STATES WORLDWIDE As a mature aviation regulator, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (UK CAA) has a responsibility to support ICAO to ensure that all Member States have access to the benefits of safe and reliable air transport services. Since its formation in 1972, UK CAA has provided support to States around the world, sharing best practice in aviation regulation and raising global aviation standards. Over the years, the UK CAA has made key contributions to ICAO and EASA working groups and panels, helping shape international aviation legislation. Last year, the UK CAA established a new department, the International Group (IG), bringing all the CAA’s international work under a single umbrella. The IG is committed to supporting ICAO and the sustainable success of air transportation by raising the standards of aviation across the globe, to protect those who choose to fly, as well as those who don’t. As part of the International Group, CAA International (CAAi), the UK CAA’s technical cooperation and training arm, has been working with ICAO, industry and fellow aviation regulators around the world for many years, to help States improve their regulatory oversight and international compliance in accordance with ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices. In 2017, CAAi became a registered social enterprise and committed to reinvest any profits back into aviation development programmes across the globe. As defined by Social Enterprise UK, a social enterprise is a business set up to change the world. Like traditional businesses, they aim to make a profit but it’s what they do with their profits that sets them apart – reinvesting or donating it to create positive social change. Essentially, raising funds to inject investment back into global aviation is at the heart of everything CAAi does. Typically, the regions and developing countries that have the greatest need for outside support have the least funding available. By funding and deploying UK CAA expertise and resource to where it is needed most, the UK CAA is much better positioned to help develop those who will lead the aviation world of tomorrow, and ultimately, make the biggest positive, sustainable impact we can to global air transport regulatory development. Ms. Maria Rueda, Managing Director for CAAi, said, “A lot has changed in aviation since CAAi’s inception over 10 years ago. With more flights than ever leaving the UK and passenger demand expected to double over the next 20 years, it was important that CAAi evolved to make the biggest positive impact to global aviation standards. Becoming a social enterprise was the logical next step in our journey of raising aviation standards across the world and being a part of the UK CAA International Group”. HOW CAAI TRAINING SUPPORT WORKS Since becoming a social enterprise, CAAi has initiated and funded several aviation development programmes to support ICAO goals. In December 2017, ICAO signed a training cooperation agreement with the UK CAA to support its No Country Left Behind initiative. Under the agreement, CAAi is providing places on its training courses free-of-charge to aviation personnel from designated Member States, to help enhance the regulatory capability in developing countries. The agreement was signed during the GANIS / SANIS symposium at ICAO’s headquarters in Montréal by the ICAO Secretary General, Dr. Fang Liu, and the UK CAA’s International Director, Mr. Ben Alcott. During 2018-19, CAAi will host 29 fellowship places on its training courses, covering a wide range of regulatory oversight disciplines, including Airworthiness, Flight Operations, Dangerous Goods, Cabin Safety, EASA Part M Continuing Airworthiness and EASA Part 145. Dr. Fang Liu (seated left), ICAO Secretary General, and Mr. Ben Alcott (seated right), UK CAA International Director, sign a training cooperation agreement to support ICAO’s No Country Left Behind initiative. 38 | ICAO JOURNAL | ISSUE 2 | 2018 NO COUNTRY LEFT BEHINDAttendance is nominated by ICAO using intelligence from ICAO’s data sources, including the Universal Safety and Security Audit Programmes (USOAP and USAP). By using ICAO’s latest country-specific aviation intelligence, both organizations can provide targeted, high-impact aviation training, to help States overcome safety or security- related oversight deficiencies. Ms. Rueda said, “Increasingly, the regions and developing countries with the greatest demand for this type of training have the least funding available. As a mature aviation regulator and in accordance with ICAO’s No Country Left Behind programme, the UK has a responsibility to support ICAO in ensuring that all Member States have access to the benefits of safe and reliable air transport services. Through this programme, ICAO can now target UK CAA training where it is needed most, to equip fellow aviation Regulators with the necessary skills and competencies needed to provide “ … raising funds to inject investment back into global aviation is at the heart of everything CAAi does. ” Risk-Based Surveillance: Earlier this year, ICAO held a series of Risk-Based Surveillance workshops in Lima, Kigali and Singapore. The workshops explored the implementation of Risk-Based Surveillance (RBS) as a tool that allows States to make more efficient use of their resources and achieve better results. As one of the world’s first aviation regulators to implement risk-based surveillance, UK CAA experts were invited as “event partners” to contribute to the workshops. In Lima, the UK CAA’s Mr. Mark Vincent delivered four presentations to ICAO SAM Member States that explored the UK’s approach to risk-based surveillance, the benefits the UK have seen, the limitations of prescriptive surveillance and the enablers for performance and risk-based surveillance. Thailand: In 2017 ICAO lifted a Significant Safety Concern (SSC) on Thailand that was issued in 2015 over inadequate safety oversight of Thai-registered international airlines. This led to restricting Thai carriers flying into the United States, Japan, South Korea and China. With more than 20 percent of Thailand’s GDP dependant on travel and tourism, it was crucial for Thailand to address the safety concerns. Furthermore, with over 800,000 people flying from the UK to Thailand each year, the UK CAA were committed to help raise the safety standards in Thailand for the interest of the travelling public. CAA International, the technical cooperation and training arm of the UK CAA, worked on the ground with the Thai authorities to lift the “red flag.” CAAi helped draft new procedures to address gaps in compliance. CAAi helped CAA Thailand recertify all Thai international carriers and provided on-the-job training for Thai inspectors to ensure future sustainability. Since the SSC removal, Thai airlines have been allowed to expand their international network, giving passengers more choice and value. In Q1 of 2018, Thai Airports reported a 21 percent profit increase, boosting the national and local economies that heavily rely on tourism. Dr. Chula Sukmanop, Director General of CAA Thailand, said, “CAAi has played a very big part in our success from the very beginning. The system they suggested for the recertification process and their assistance in its implementation paved the way for our completion of the actions to resolve the Significant Safety Concern, leading to the lifting of the red flag.” Lima Risk-Based Surveillance Workshop – (left to right) Representatives from Transport Canada, EASA, CAA Singapore, DGAC France, UK CAA and ICAO. effective safety oversight of their industry in accordance with ICAO standards.” This agreement has solidified the partnership between the two organizations and will result in the enhancement of the UK CAA’s provision of capacity-building in aviation safety and security areas in States requiring technical support. Noting the importance of encouraging the development of similar partnerships with other member States, ICAO thanked the UK CAA for its exemplary demonstration of generosity as formalized in the partnership agreement. The agreement is directly in line with ICAO’s No Country Left Behind initiative, the goal of which is to ensure all States have access to the significant socio-economic benefits offered by ICAO-compliant air connectivity. Enabling a more targeted and efficient way of delivering technical support to States in need, the partnership also supports the future sustainability of the international OTHER UK CAA INITIATIVES WITH ICAO civil aviation network as it prepares for a forecasted doubling of air traffic volumes within the next fifteen years. TRAINING DELIVERED TO DATE In April, CAAi and ICAO welcomed its first delegates to London under this programme from Azerbaijan, Albania and Togo to attend Airworthiness Inspector Theory and Advanced Safety Management – Evaluating for Effectiveness training courses. www.ICAO.int | 39 NO COUNTRY LEFT BEHINDTHE UK CAA RELATIONSHIP WITH ICAO Historically, the UK CAA has played an important part in the international regulatory system; key to this is the UK CAA’s engagement with ICAO. Over many years, the UK CAA has established excellent working relationships with ICAO that have contributed significantly to the development of many of the rules that govern global aviation. The UK has helped shape and influence the development of international standards and cooperative working arrangements. PARTICIPATION IN PANELS, STUDY GROUPS AND TASK FORCES – The UK CAA has and continues to be active in many ICAO Panels, Study Groups and Task Forces. Currently the UK CAA has representatives who actively contribute to Montréal-based Panels and their Working Groups, as well as on a multitude of Study Groups and Task Forces, exerting substantial influence at a global level on technical developments in their area of expertise. The UK CAA also actively engages at the regional level with the European PIRG, RASG and Planning groups run by the Paris Regional Office. In addition to representing the UK, CAA colleagues chair several Panels, Groups and Workshops. In particular, the UK Chaired the Safety Management Panel when the first edition of Annex 19 – Safety Management was being drafted, as well as the Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Panel when the SARPs, procedures and guidance material for remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) were being developed. The UK CAA is currently an active Member of the Global Aviation Safety Oversight System Study Group (GASOS SG), supporting the establishment of the GASOS framework as well as the Global Aviation Safety Plan Study Group (GASP SG). AIR NAVIGATION COMMISSION – For many years, a CAA employee has been the UK’s nomination on the Air Navigation Commission, and on several occasions our representative has subsequently been elected for a term as President of the Commission. The objective of the training was to provide a comprehensive overview of the processes and procedures established by ICAO and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Both courses aimed to enhance delegate’s skills and knowledge within the relevant subject area. Mr. Kokouvi Afelete N’ Bouke, Directeur Gestion de la Sécurité for Togo Civil Aviation Authority, said: “I would like to thank the UK CAA and ICAO for this opportunity. The course has covered all the expected objectives and has offered valuable knowledge about the evaluation of the four components of SMS including SRM and SPM. We have also discussed the Phase 2 tools that the UK CAA uses to evaluate the effectiveness of an operator’s or a services provider’s SMS. Some of my favourite moments were group discussions during the practical exercises when we were sharing our experience. I am definitely leaving with plenty of new skills and will use them in my role within our CAA.” In April, CAAi delivered an Aerodrome Certification course for 36 delegates from 14 African countries in Nairobi. The training was fully funded by CAAi. The training was delivered with the assistance and cooperation of the ICAO Eastern and Southern Regional Office and the support of the Government of Kenya and the Director General of the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority. As of December 2016, only 21 percent of aerodromes in Africa were certified to ICAO standards. Moreover, Aerodromes and Ground Aids in Africa represent the lowest level of the Effective Implementation out of all ICAO Critical Areas. The Chief Implementation and Planning Section of the ICAO Air Navigation Bureau proposed the project, and CAAi was delighted to support. Delivered by UK CAA Aerodrome Regulators Mr. David Macmillan and Mr. Tom Murney, the training covered the “Understanding of Aerodromes” contained in ICAO Annex 14, Safety Management Systems within Aerodrome Operations and Aerodrome Certification. The training aimed to improve regulatory oversight capability in the region. Ms. Kirsten Riensema, the Air Navigation Commissioner and UK Alternate Representative to ICAO said: “The ICAO Air Navigation Commission regularly reviews reports from the Regional Aviation Safety Groups (RASGs) and Planning and Implementation Regional Groups (PIRGs) and we note the need for aerodrome certification competence in regulators across the globe. It is forecasted that by 2036, Africa will see an extra 274 million passengers per year. It is therefore very important that we continue to support and create opportunities for development of aviation professionals in Africa, who can use their aviation skills to support this level of growth by creating and maintaining a safer aviation regulatory framework.” Working with ICAO, CAAi invited delegates from developing countries with the highest potential of creating a lasting impact on safety in African aviation. The course attracted delegates from Angola, Botswana, Chad, Comoros, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Namibia, Niger, Seychelles, South Africa, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Following the success of this initiative, ICAO and CAAi are planning a second fully funded course in Singapore in September 2018. With more than 12 million people flying from the UK to ICAO’s Asia-Pacific region in 2017 alone, this training presents a valuable opportunity to target training where aerodrome oversight deficiencies have been identified by ICAO. Delegates from 14 States at CAAi-delivered Aerodrome Certification course in Nairobi. 40 | ICAO JOURNAL | ISSUE 2 | 2018 NO COUNTRY LEFT BEHINDJoin us at the ICAO 5 th Global Aviation Training and TRAINAIR PLUS Symposium to be held in Doha, Qatar, from 10 to 12 December 2018. Hosted by the Qatar Aeronautical College, the Symposium will focus on building and managing Aviation Training Intelligence . The event will provide participants with an international forum to exchange best practices in aviation training and highlight the use of effective tools and opportunities offered by ICAO’s TRAINAIR PLUS Programme (TPP). For more information and registration, please visit www.gattps2018.qa Hosted by: Organized by:Supported by: REGISTER NOW! ICAO 5TH GLOBAL AVIATION TRAINING AND TRAINAIR PLUS SYMPOSIUM 10 - 12 December 2018 Doha, Qatar Building Aviation Training IntelligenceYes, pigs do fly. Turkeys, too. At least some have on commercial airlines. In the passenger cabin. Also marmoset monkeys, miniature Appaloosa horses, and Donald’s cousin, Daniel Duck. But no boarding pass for a peacock that wanted to preen in the premium section. Some species are in the category of “service animals,” dogs primarily, who are trained to help the blind and human passengers with other disabilities. In 2017, US passenger airlines reported carrying 281,000 qualified service animals. They also reported three times as many so-called “comfort animals,” often referred to as “emotional support animals (ESAs),” up more than 50 percent from fewer than 500,000 the year before. The category has spiked since carriers started charging fees of typically $125 one way for bringing an animal into the passenger cabin. Fees for shipping animals as cargo can be even higher. So the suspicion is that more than a few flyers are using bogus documents to sneak their dog, cat, ferret or bird on board. The US Department of Transportation (DoT) sought input this summer on possible changes to its Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) regulation on transportation of service animals. They received 4,500+ comments from the public, plus a 39-page document from Airlines for America (A4A), the Regional Airline Association (RAA), and the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which proposes, in effect, limiting onboard service animals to trained dogs. “It strikes most people as absurd that, under DOT’s current rules, airlines must consider allowing, for example, pigs and birds to travel in cabin on a case-by-case basis,” the airlines wrote. They complained about “an almost uncontrollable surge in passengers trying to travel with ‘wild and/or untrainable species’ that they claim as emotional support animals,” as well as a “surge in the number of incidents involving animals manifesting aggressive behavior (including barking, biting, nipping, growling, and fighting) and uncontrolled urinating and defecating ...)” The airlines alleged “the cheap and easy availability of fraudulent credentials ... via unscrupulous vendors,” let people with untrained and unsuitable animals claim they’re ‘medically necessary’ support animals. “DOT’s service animal regulations pertaining to ESAs are ‘not working,’” stated the airline document, “and could have unexpected safety consequences.” ANIMALS IN THE PASSENGER CABIN 42 | ICAO JOURNAL | ISSUE 2 | 2018 SAFETYThe airlines did affirm: “We fully support the right of qualified individuals with a disability who have a legitimate need to travel with a trained service animal in cabin. These include animals that guide … persons with visual impairments, notify persons who are deaf or hard of hearing of public announcements and/or possible hazards, warn persons with post-traumatic stress disorder or other mental or emotional disabilities at the onset of an emotional crisis, and retrieve items for passengers with mobility impairments.” The FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016 requires that the DoT issue a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking on service animals. However, two years ago, an Advisory Committee on Accessible Air Transportation, representing a cross-section of “significantly affected stakeholder interests,” could not reach consensus. Outside of the US, most airlines permit dogs in the passenger cabin, sometimes excluding “potentially dangerous” breeds or brachycephalic breeds such as French bulldogs because of potential respiratory trouble. Many permit cats. Air Europa seems the most liberal, accepting dogs, cats, some birds, fish, aquarium turtles, hamsters, guinea pigs and small rabbits. Most airlines do not accept pets in the cabin on flights between the US and Europe. ICAO RECOMMENDATIONS ON SERVICE ANIMALS ICAO ANNEX 9 Recommended Practice 8.37: “Service animals accompanying persons with disabilities should be carried free of charge in the cabin, on the floor at the person’s seat, subject to the application of any relevant national or aircraft operator regulations.” DEFINITIONS - DOC 9984 MANUAL ON ACCESS TO AIR TRANSPORT BY PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES Person with disabilities. Any person whose mobility is reduced due to a physical incapacity (sensory or locomotor), an intellectual deficiency, age, illness or any other cause of disability when using transport and whose situation needs special attention and the adaptation to the person’s needs of the services made available to all passengers. Service animals. Animals, normally being dogs or other animals, specified in national regulations, for the purpose of accompanying persons with disabilities with the objective of providing them with physical or/and emotional support, being under the control of the person with disabilities and provided that their presence on board an aircraft does not endanger the safety of flight operations; is not reasonably considered as a threat to other passengers; and does not cause health concerns related to hygiene. For more information on the carriage of service animals please refer to section 8.10. SAFETY www.ICAO.int | 43Standardized European Rules of the Air (SERA Part C) required EU States to rule on the benefit of the implementation of English as the only language for radio communications before the end of 2017. France carried out an extensive study on this issue across one year and decided to maintain bilingualism in its airspace for safety reasons. Now, has the international aviation community to consider whether it is safe to abandon the other local languages wherever they are spoken? BILINGUALISM, A SAFE WAY IN ATC COMMUNICATIONS … until demonstrated otherwise © Richard METZGER / DGAC - STAC Lyon-Saint-Exupéry (LYS) 44 | ICAO JOURNAL | ISSUE 2 | 2018 AVIATION ENGLISHWhile air traffic is growing faster in other parts of the world than in Europe and America, particularly Asia, the Middle East or Russia, it may be time to thoroughly consider the question of having (or not) a single language for radio communications for larger airports. That is what the European Union did with its Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1185 of 20 July 2016. This regulation (SERA C) provides in paragraph 14015 that the English language shall be used for communications between the air traffic service (ATS) unit and the aircraft at aerodromes with more than 50,000 international instrument flight rules (IFR) movements per year. Nevertheless, the regulation text authorizes Member States, in which English is not the only language used for communications between the ATS unit and aircraft at such aerodromes, to decide not to apply the requirement to use the English language. These States were thus required to conduct a study by the end of 2017. The main scope of the study for France was to investigate if there were proven safety benefits for English only and any precursor elements that would indicate a safety problem in the coexistence of control instructions given in French and in English by the air traffic controller. The Director General of Civil Aviation (Direction générale de l’aviation civile) entrusted the Service Technique de l’Aviation Civile (STAC) with the study required in paragraph 14015 for France to support this decision, which targets the six aerodromes concerned by SERA Part C regulation in France: Paris-Charles-de-Gaulle (CDG), Paris-Orly (ORY), Nice-Côte d’Azur (NCE), Bâle-Mulhouse (BSL), Lyon-Saint-Exupéry (LYS) and Marseille-Provence (MRS). The study highlights that the assumption behind the drafting of this paragraph is that the sharing of information via the exclusive use of English in radio communications would improve safety through better pilot situation awareness which would help detect abnormal situations, in particular runway incursion risks. The report noted, in contradiction to this assumption, the commonly accepted finding among experts in human factors that pilots’ situational awareness is very far from being based on radio communications alone. Tools available to pilots such as RWSL (runway status lights) or even moving airport maps play a safety net role. Above all, situational awareness within the flight crew of the aircraft has a large scope, in particular the safe operation of the aircraft applying flight procedures, and it is also fed through multiple sensors and data, not only vocal communications. For the air traffic situation, only the air traffic controller, also assisted by a number of tools and safety nets, has a full understanding of the dynamic evolution of the situation. The study further emphasises that the search for situational awareness through radio communications is an issue that is called into question now that selective pilot-controller dialogue is becoming more widespread, thanks to digital data links. Besides, in the last two decades, the aerodromes concerned by SERA Part C obviously achieved outstanding safety gains by equipping with advanced control assistance tools and implementing runway incursion prevention plans. Most of the previous expectations on the sole use of the English language include the recommendation to carry out a prior study on the desirability of, and conditions for, implementing before making it mandatory. These recommendations feature in both the European Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions and a study on communication issues launched in 2006 by Eurocontrol. The latter initiative was triggered because the Eurocontrol agency had noted that ATC communication problems were well documented for the US and that their results would not necessarily apply to the ATC situation in Europe. But it turns out that no specific study or preliminary impact assessment on the advantages of monolingualism has been found in Europe since then. The example of Canada shows, on the contrary, that by relying on an effective safety study and real-time simulations, this country moved the province of Québec from a monolingual English language situation for air-ground communications to French-English bilingualism. More than 30 years after this change, no event caused by bilingualism has been reported. The French study was inspired by the principles of safety management systems (SMS), by approaching various safety partners in the field in order to collect more than 340 events (which include all significant runway incursions on those six airports, controller incident reports, ASRs / aviation safety reports, and French AIB investigations reports) that were analysed as feedback from the viewpoint of the role of radio communication in situation awareness and in the occurrence at large. The study completed the factual safety elements presented in the report with the point of view of the stakeholders. The opinions of the air operators at the aerodromes concerned by SERA Part C were sought. Two French airlines, Air France and Hop!, and one foreign airline, EasyJet, were chosen. The views of the air navigation services at the aerodromes concerned by SERA Part C were also sought: the heads of Air operations and their respective Safety services were interviewed. In addition, the Paris Aéroport Director in charge of ground operations safety shared his concerns on requiring English for vehicle operations in the concerned aerodromes. In addition, some State authorities in France carry out missions of National Defence, inspection, protection “ … pilots’ situational awareness is very far from being based on radio communications alone. ” www.ICAO.int | 45 AVIATION ENGLISHserious enough for a safety investigation to be opened. In all other cases, when this situational awareness was possible through radio communications, it was not effective either in a monolingual or a bilingual situation. This outcome in itself questions the effectiveness of the benefits of the so-called party line in a controlled environment. Per se, paragraph SERA.14015 only refers to operations for air crew. But as the acceptable means of compliance suggest, the study was extended to take account of ground vehicle drivers in the manoeuvring area. The difficulty or even impossibility today for these ground staff to communicate in English was stressed. This lack of English language proficiency of vehicle drivers entails that an English only manoeuvring area would be a factor in reducing their understanding of pilot-controller communications, which they can catch at least in French today, and this would run counter to the claimed benefit of situational awareness. The solution of using several frequencies, including one between the controller and the pilots and a different one, possibly outside the aeronautic VHF band, between the controller and ground vehicle drivers during certain phases of their work, does not solve the issues of operational safety. It works rather in the opposite direction and the study points out that this has been overlooked. The interviews with the air operations safety services of the six concerned aerodromes and the events collected have also shown that the co-existence of Francophone VFR and Anglophone IFR has not been a risk factor in any safety event. The requirement for monolingualism, if it were imposed in the airspace parts managed by ATC units at the aerodromes concerned, would close the access to a large portion of airspace for a large number of VFR flights communicating exclusively in French. The study has found, in the strict scope of paragraph 14015, the absence of any demonstrated safety gain as a result of the exclusive use of English in radio communications between air traffic control and aircraft for the prevention of runway incursions in France, in particular at each of the six French aerodromes concerned. On the contrary, this implementation would lead to safety issues for ground vehicles and VFR pilots. Download the study report French aerodromes faced with the requirement to use the English language - Volume 1 in English at: http://www.stac.aviation- civile.gouv.fr/en/guides/french- aerodromes-faced-requirement-use- english-language-volume-1 and rescue and general public services. The pilots involved in these missions often have to contact the ATC in those aerodromes. As they would have had to comply with English only contrarily to their operational routine today, the military directorate in charge of the State Aviation Safety therefore recommended keeping the French language for their radio communications with ATC. The French AIB, the BEA (Le Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses), was also questioned about the language issue. The BEA representatives stated that, although their organisation does not carry out risk management analysis, which is the responsibility of those involved in the activity, the BEA is aware that the move to English monolingualism could introduce new risks. It was in this spirit that a recommendation was formulated in the report on the collision between F-GHED and G-SSWN, on 25 May 2000 at Paris-Charles-de-Gaulle, that the benefits and risks of such a transition should be studied. Unfortunately, this accident has been improperly used as an illustration of negative impacts of bilingualism on situational awareness and safety. As a result among the studied occurrences, in only two cases, one of the two crew involved in the event became aware of the conflicting situation through the communications: one in a situation when French was used on the frequency by both crew, the other one in a situation when English was the language for both crew. In neither case did the situation appear “ … the move to English monolingualism could introduce new risks. ” STÉPHANE LY Head of Navigation Service at the French Aviation Technical Center (STAC). A former Deputy Head of Paris Charles de Gaulle airport control and approach center. Also served as a senior Investigator at the French Accident Investigation Bureau (AIB) on major air crash investigations. © Richard METZGER / DGAC - STAC Paris-Charles-de-Gaulle (CDG) 46 | ICAO JOURNAL | ISSUE 2 | 2018 AVIATION ENGLISH FAST-GROWING GEORGIA AVIATION CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVING SAFETY Georgia has been called the “Eden of the Caucasus” with its snow-covered mountains and Black Sea beaches. It is a surprisingly diverse country featuring traditional celebrations and jazz festivals, the ancient Vardzia cave monastery and a thriving modern fashion industry, intriguing architecture, a variety of mouth-watering food and the world’s first winemaking dating to 6000 years B.C. Since the mid-2000s, the ICAO Member State has been expanding its tourist structure substantially and the number of visitors has increased several-fold. Last year alone, air carrier passenger traffic increased by 43 percent, making Georgia one of the fastest-growing aviation markets globally. More than four million passengers were handled by Georgia’s three international airports in 2017, compared to only two million in 2014 and fewer than one million in 2010. The main gateway, Tbilisi Airport, grew by 41 percent in 2017, and Georgia’s two other international airports, Batumi and Kutaisi, grew at even faster rates, albeit from a smaller base. As the State seeks to keep up with the rapid pace of growth, they have also been dramatically improving safety through adherence to ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs). “For the first time in the history of Georgian aviation the country has shown 87.5 percent in terms of compliance with ICAO standards. This is the highest indicator in the region,” announced the Minister of Economy, Mr. Dimitry Kumsishvili, at a meeting earlier this year with a delegation from ICAO. Georgia moved from 106th to 30th position in the ICAO rating according to the preliminary data. Under the ICAO USOAP CSA (Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program – Comprehensive System Approach), Georgia progressed from an Effective Implementation (EI) score of 32.14 percent in 2007 to 55.89 percent in 2013 to 64.76 percent in April 2016, including resolving a Significant Safety Concern (SSC) in the air operator certification process. Preliminary results of an ICAO Coordinated Validation Mission (ICVM) in March 2018 “showed substantial further improvements, reflecting the strong emphasis that Georgia has placed on improving the quality and capacity of its air transportation system,” according to evaluators. During a mission to Georgia in 2017, the President of the ICAO Council, Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu, expressed the agency’s deep appreciation for the proactive actions being taken by the Government of Georgia. “Today the overall situation in Georgia is more stable, with positive trends prevailing,” Dr. Aliu commented. “Georgia is poised to achieve even greater progress towards the development of its capacity within the global civil aviation network, and ICAO is ready to provide all support necessary to help it along that path.” Dr. Aliu assured the country’s leadership that ICAO is deeply committed to its No Country Left Behind initiative, and to providing further assistance to Georgia as its progress continues. Georgia has also made excellent progress in aviation security (AVSEC). Their most recent audit, in December 2015, under the USAP-CMA program (Universal Security Audit Program – Continuous Monitoring Approach), registered an average implementation of critical elements of 87.80 percent and an average compliance of 88.16 percent of Annex 17 Standards. Georgia is one of the most active States in the ICAO Europe/North Atlantic (EUR/NAT) Region in the field of AVSEC, regularly hosting events, providing support for meetings, and ensuring availability of resources for assistance projects. Georgia is also chair of the ICAO Project Team on Implementation of Meteorological Services in the Eastern part of the region, and is a strong supporter of ICAO environmental protection actions, including CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation). Popular tourist destination Georgia is growing its air traffic while improving safety and security. www.ICAO.int | 47 SAFETY AND SECURITYNext >