Updated Regulatory Environment John Clark & Jon Round Safety Programme Managers Performance Based Regulation 19 May 2015
Performance Based Regulation
As the Industry Continues to Evolve… How do we Continue to Provide Safety Assurance?
Our current system has worked very well The long term decline in safety incidents and events in the UK since 1945, which was driven by the expansion of compliance-based regulation, has levelled out. Generating further improvements requires a Risk and Performance based approach. Rate of Safety Incidents Significant reducing trend in incidents and events over past 50+ years driven by the expansion of prescriptive rule- Marginal rate of But further based regulation improvement has levelled over time improvements Short term trend is not require a new stable approach 1945 2014
These are the key drivers for our change in approach The operating environment The regulatory framework Delivery of the better regulation agenda The need to maximise opportunities from Industry’s SMS Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
The Delta in Safety Risk Assurance • Prescriptive rules can effectively address safety risks if : – The Regulator knows about the risk – The Regulator is convinced of the need to address the risk – The Regulator knows a solution for the risk – The Regulator has adopted a proposed solution to the risk – The Regulator has revised/updated the prescriptive rule to reflect any changes in safety risk – The Regulator has applied the rule only in a targeted manner to entities faced with such risks – The Regulator takes into account the impact which the prescriptive rule has on the entities being regulated – The Regulator understands the impact which the proposed mitigation has on the total system – Industry complies with the prescriptive rule targeted to address the risk – The Regulator enforces compliance with the prescriptive rule
The Delta in Safety Risk Assurance • But in reality: - Entities experience very different levels and types of risks - Compliance with prescriptive rules enables many areas of key risk to be addressed, but not all areas - There will always be a gap or delta in the actual risks encountered by an entity and those risks which are effectively addressed by prescriptive rules. - Something is needed to contextualise the prescriptive rules, ensuring that the mitigation is proportionate and targeted to effectively address specific risks
PERFORMANCE BASED REGULATION • A holistic, “entity”* based approach, in the context of unique sectors within the total system • Targeted, consistent, and proportionate oversight commensurate with the actual risks • New conversations based on risk and performance between the regulator and stakeholders as well as amongst stakeholders *Entity – a single approval, or group of approvals that can be overseen better in an integrated manner Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
Our Vision To transform the CAA into a Performance Based Regulator, working with industry to demonstrably reduce safety risk across the total aviation system and develop the capabilities required for future regulators. Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
The European Context EASA Pivot to Performance Based Regulation The PBR Programme and associated IT deployments are designed to provide the link between industry SMS and the requirements placed on National Authorities ARA/ARO.200: The competent authority shall establish and maintain a management system , including as a minimum: (1) documented policies and procedures to ... achieve compliance Competent Authority Management System with Regulation (EC) No 216/ 2008 (the driver) (2) a sufficient number of personnel to perform its tasks and discharge its responsibilities. Such personnel shall be qualified to perform their allocated tasks and have the necessary knowledge, experience, initial and recurrent training to ensure continuing competence. A system shall be in place to plan the availability of personnel , in order to ensure the proper completion of all tasks ARA/ARO.GEN.305: ….must be developed taking into account the specific nature of the Oversight Programme organisation , the complexity of its activities , the results of past certification and/or oversight activities (required by ARO.GEN and ARO.RAMP) and shall be based on the assessment of associated risks . ORx.GEN.200 (a) 3: Organisation Approved The identification of aviation safety hazards entailed by the activities Management System of the operator, their evaluation and management of associated risks, including the actions to mitigate the risk and verify the effectiveness ESP Briefing, December 2013 Page 1
Context EASA Pivot to Performance Based Regulation Rules introduced by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) set the context for the UK’s transformation to Performance Based Regulation. Recognising that Risk and Performance Based Regulation is central to the EASA system, the UK is moving from: • Solely relying upon prescriptive rules to identify the safety risks and prescribed mitigation towards: • Exploiting our many sources of safety risks drawn from individual entities, sectors and the total aviation system • Targeting those areas in the total aviation system that represent actual and emerging major safety risks to UK passengers and the public • Using prescriptive rules within the context of addressing the actual risks • EASA Performance Based Environment (1 Aug 2014) Page 1
We will be focussed on Total Aviation System Risk in three Dimensions: The ‘Total Risk Picture’ covers both the complete aviation system in terms of the breadth of the aviation system (service providers, regulators, accident investigators), the depth of the system from the individual pilot/ engineer/ controller up to the system level, and the interfaces between sectors Crown CAA Total International Civil Dependencies Overseas Territories Military Oversight Aviation System Organisation EASA Regulatory Change Neighbouring Management States & FABs Ground/Non CAA System Foreign Accident Regulated Investigations Airlines UK system Airports Air Navigation UK Service Providers Non-UK Airlines in Sector Citizen UK Design & Production Entity Aircraft Maintainance UK Airlines Overseas Individual Training Organisations UK CAA Risk General Aviation Capability Breadth Depth
Primary components of Performance Based Regulation
PBR ENGAGEMENT • ICAO • European Commision • EASA • Neighbouring NAAs • PBRIG • Opportunities within industry Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
Linear Model Performance Based Oversight – Core Regulatory Decision Making INTELLIGENCE RISK OUTCOME ACTION CHECK FEEDBACK Data CAA Risk List Compliance CAA view Our Actions and Intelligence Performance Performance Comparison Agreed Rules Desired CAA Outcomes Proactive Risks/Issues: Governance of Entity Risk List Leading • What CAA knows Safety Actions (current • What others know Indicators & future) Identify Assessment International Planned changes Options for influence Action (cost/benefit) Incidents & Total System Actions Entity Accidents Actions Delivered & Unregulated view Measured Sectors Feedback (Sharing knowledge and lessons learnt – Internally & Externally) Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
OVERSIGHT (Visits, Desk etc) Milestone 1 Milestone 2 Entity set-up Prep phase Milestone 3 Milestone 5 OVERSIGHT CAA Internal Check & Feedback (visits, desktop, review meeting phone etc) Performance Based Milestone 4 Oversight Accountable Phases Manager meeting
From Internal Review Meeting to Accountable Manager Meeting Effective Accountable Collaborative Internal Manager Meeting Review Meeting Prepares the Oversight Manager Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
Q-Pulse • Standard audit and event planning tool • Standard findings and observations tracking tool • Powerful Management information • Implemented across all major capabilities Transforming the CAA to a performance based regulator
Output - The Triangle “Continual oversight” Monthly meetings FOI’s x 3 AA = desktop 37 Annual audit 4 days (FOI, IO, GS & CS) Check R x 2 (FOI +CSI) Complexity Check T 1 per fleet (FOI) Check F 1 per fleet (FOI) Matrix Rating Check M 2 days (FOI/IO) Check C x 2 (CSI) SAG >4 (FOI/IO) Cabin safety SAG x2 29 Red Annual audit 4 days (FOI, IO, GS & CS) Check T 1 per fleet (FOI) Check F, min 2 (FOI) Check M 1 day (FOI/IO) Check C x 2 (CSI) 23 SAG x 2 (FOI/IO) Cabin safety SAG x2 Annual audit 3 days (FOI & IO) Check T & F, 1 day each (FOI) Check M 1 day (FOI/IO) SAG x 1 (FOI/IO) 17 Amber Annual audit 2 days (FOI & IO) Check T & F, 1 day each (FOI) Check M 1 day (FOI/IO) SAG x 1 (FOI/IO) 13 Annual audit 2 days (FOI & IO) Check T & F, 1 day each (FOI) Check M ½ day (FOI/IO) SAG x 1 (FOI/IO) 8 Approval status Green 1 day audit per 24 months. (IO) 1 flight check per 24 months (FOI) ½ day desktop (IO)
Recommend
More recommend
