REPORT OF THE SECOND MEETING OF ASIA PACIFIC CIVIL AVIATION

COMMISSION TASK FORCE EXPERT GROUP

ICAO APAC OFFICE

23 March 2017

1. Introduction

1.1 The Second Meeting of the Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission Task Force

Expert Group was held in Bangkok, Thailand on 23 March 2017 at the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office.

1.2 Attendance

1.2.1 The meeting was attended by 14 participants from 6 Member States/Adminstrations.

1.2.2 A list of participants is given at Attachment 1 to the Report.

1.3 Opening of the meeting

1.3.1 Mr. Arun Mishra, Regional Director, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office welcomed the

participants and recalled background information of Task Force and the Expert Group. He also

thanked Australia for coordinating the work of Expert Group.

1.4 Officers and Secretariat

1.4.1 Mr. Arun Mishra, Regional Director, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, Mr. Li Peng,

Regional Officer/CNS and Mr. Punya Raj Shakya, Regional Officer/AGA supported the meeting.

2. Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Agenda

2.1 The meeting adopted the following Agenda:

Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Provisional Agenda

Agenda Item 2: Presentations of Phase I Tasks by Expert Group

members and discussion of results

Agenda Item 3: Preparation of the Report on Completion of Phase I

Agenda Item 4: Discussion on proposed progression of Phase II

Agenda Item 5: Future Work Programme including preparation of

advice to Task Force and next DGCA Conference in

August 2017

Agenda Item 6: Other Business

Agenda Item 7: Date and venue for the next Expert Group/Task

Force Meeting

-2-

3. Agenda Item 2: Presentations of Phase I Tasks by Expert Group members and

discussion of results

3.1 Mr. Jim Wolfe, Chairman of APCACTF Expert Group recalled the background on the

establishment of APCACTF and APCACTF Expert Group. He highlighted the Phase I tasks assigned

to the Members of Expert Group at its first meeting held on 11 November 2015, which were as

follows:

Task 1 – Endorsement of Key Regional Priorities including Survey of Asia-Pacific

States (action by Malaysia).

Task 2 – Summarising existing coordinating forums in the region (action by China

and India).

Task 3 – Mapping the endorsed issues to the existing framework (Action by

Coordinator).

Task 4 – Explore options in which existing forums may be enhanced (Action by

Singapore).

Task 5 – Examine the role, operations, benefits and challenges of other Civil Aviation

Commissions (Action by Australia and New Zealand).

Task 6 – Assessing the Findings and Determining the Next Steps (Action by Expert

Group).

3.2 The Chairman informed that Tasks 1, 2,3 and 5 had been completed by the Members

of respective States who had been assigned those tasks. Singapore as lead of Task 4, could only

commence its work on completion of Tasks 1, 2 and 3.

3.3 Singapore presented an interim report on Task 4 that reflected the findings of a survey

of regional coordinating groups and platforms identified by the Expert Group under Task 2. However,

of the 47 groups identified, Singapore was only able to reach out to 26 Chairs/Vice-chairs of these

regional contributory bodies, of which 16 provided responses. The survey questionnaire was classified

into 5 sections. The report prepared by Singapore consolidated findings and analysis, assessments,

recommendation and conclusion of Section 1, which is provided in Appendix 1 to this Report.

3.4 The Chairman complimented Singapore on the impressive and comprehensive

interim work done on Task 4, which provided tangible findings on how existing frameworks could

potentially be enhanced. Mr Arun Mishra, Regional Director, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, also

suggested for Singapore to consider including the Montreal Group in the survey, as it is an informal

coordination platform for the Asia-Pacific Region.

3.5 The Chairman noted that it was always difficulty to get a high response rate to

completing this type of survey and that in getting 16 responses Singapore had done well and that these

responses would provide more than adequate information to identify options in which existing forums

can be enhanced and complete Task 4. Singapore agreed that the substantive inputs and

recommendations/proposals from Chairs of the WG/TFs on the enhancements of existing platforms

will provide a valuable input to the APCAC Task Force and it will continue to reach out to WG/TFs

that have not responded and urged Expert Group Members and the Regional Office to likewise assist

to reach out to the Chairs, especially those from their State.

3.6 Singapore requested the ICAO Asia and Pacific Regional Office to circulate the interim

Task 4 report to all Expert Group Members to seek their inputs and comments (see Appendix 1).

-3-

4. Agenda Item 3: Preparation of the Report on Completion of Phase I

4.1 The Chairman informed that the Expert Group’s draft report on the completion of

Phase I will be prepared by Australia and sent to all Members for comments through ICAO APAC

Office before submission to the Chairman, APCACTF in May 2017.

5. Agenda Item 4: Discussion on proposed progression of Phase II

5.1 The Chairman outlined that the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the APCAC Taskforce,

as well as Expert Group, requires that the Taskforce/Expert Group study the feasibility of the

establishment of an APCAC and alternative and complementary solutions. Therefore, the Chairman

proposed that this meeting might initially discuss an outline of the sort of options that might be

progressed, consistent with the TOR. However Singapore and Hong Kong China proposed that outlining

the options should await the APCAC Task Force’s consideration of the Expert Group’s findings on

Phase 1. The meeting agreed the Expert Group complete the Phase 1 report for the Task Force’s

consideration and then the Task Force could consider progression of the remaining parts of the TOR.

6. Agenda Item 5: Future Work Programme including preparation of advice to

Task Force and next DGCA Conference in August 2017

6.1 The meeting adopted the next steps as below:

APCAC Feasibility Study Responsible Date

1 Complete Task 4 of Phase I works and submit

the report to the Chairman, APCACTF Expert

Group and ICAO APAC Office

Singapore May 2017

2 Finalize the draft report of Phase I tasks Share

the draft report with all Members of Expert

Group for comments.

Chairman,

APCACTF

Expert

Group

May 2017

3 Submit the Final Report of Phase I Tasks to the

Chairman, APCACTF for consideration by the

Taskforce

Chairman,

APCACTF

Expert

Group

May 2017

4 Draft a WP for consideration by the Chairman,

APCACTF to use as the basis of a progress

report the 54th DGCA Conference (7 – 11

August 2017)

Chairman,

APCACTF

Expert

Group

July 2017

5 Third Face to Face Meeting of Expert Group Expert

Group

After DGCA

7. Agenda Item 6: Other Business

7.1 No discussion was took place under this Agenda Item.

8. Agenda Item 7: Date and venue for the next Expert Group/Task Force Meeting

8.1 The next face to face meeting of the Expert Group will be held after consideration of

the Report of Phase I by the 54th DGCA Conference. The venue of the meeting will be decided in

consultation with Members of the Expert Group and ICAO APAC Office.

9. In closing, the Chairman of the Expert Group thanked the Members for coming to the

meeting, their contribution to Phase I Tasks and active participation in the Meeting.

— — — — — — — —

CONFIDENTIAL

1

CONFIDENTIAL

REPORT OF THE APCAC TASK FORCE EXPERT GROUP ON EXPLORING

ENHANCEMENTS TO EXISTING REGIONAL FRAMEWORKS

(PART 1)

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission (APCAC) Task Force Expert

Group, developed an action plan to progress the Feasibility Study of an APCAC. Phase 1

examines the priorities of the region and identifies areas of improvement in existing

arrangements. The tasks identified are as follows:

a) Task 1: Endorsement of key regional priorities, including a survey of Asia

Pacific States;

b) Task 2: Summarising the existing coordinating forums in the Asia Pacific

collaboration framework, including a brief description of the role

of each forum;

c) Task 3: Mapping the endorsed issues to the existing framework;

d) Task 4: Exploring options to enhance the existing framework to better

address the endorsed issues;

e) Task 5: Examining the role, operations, benefits and challenges of other

Civil Aviation Commissions; and

f) Task 6: Assessing the findings and determining the next steps.

1.2 Task 4 depended on the outcomes of Tasks 1, 2 and 3:

a) Task 1 outcomes provide the Asia Pacific States/Administration ranking of

the regional key priorities and showed the two regional key priorities as (i)

for assistance to build their capabilities to improve safety and security

(including implementation of USOAP and USAP corrective action plans);

and (ii) additional capacity building to develop the next generation of

aviation professionals and address emerging regional and global challenges;

b) Task 2 provides the list of coordinating forums in the Asia Pacific region of

a total of 47 comprising 20 groups, with a further 27 sub-groups (see Annex

A for the listing of ICAO regional coordinating forums); and

c) Task 3 provides a mapping of the endorsed issues to the existing framework.

2. METHODOLOGY FOR TASK 4

2.1 Singapore developed a survey to solicit feedback and recommendations on the

effectiveness and limitations of regional WG/TFs, the possible areas of enhancement, areas of

support required, and synergies with other groups, in addressing the regional priorities

identified by Asia-Pacific States under Task 1. The survey was divided into 5 main sections:

a) Section 1: Effectiveness of WG/TF in meeting the established priorities for

the region;

b) Section 2: Monitoring progress of WG/TF;

c) Section 3: Resourcing;

d) Section 4: Information sharing; and

e) Section 5: Additional qualitative comments on how existing WG/TFs can

be enhanced.

A copy of the survey sent to WG/TFs is at Annex B.

CONFIDENTIAL

2

CONFIDENTIAL

2.2 As contact details of Chairs/Vice Chairs of 26 Regional WG/TFs were

available, the survey was sent to these first. Of these, 16 WG/TFs responded, while the others

have asked for more time and clarification.

3. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

3.1 As the inputs and data received are extensive, this report summarises the

findings and analysis only for Section 1 of the survey on “Effectiveness of Working

Group/Task Force in meeting the established priorities for the region”, from the 16 WG/TFs

who responded. Detailed inputs from the 16 WG/TFs are at Annex C.

3.2 Section 1a) Effectiveness of WG/TF in meeting at least the top two regional

priorities established by States under Task 1: (i) for assistance to build their capabilities to

improve safety and security (including implementation of USOAP, and USAP corrective action

plans); and (ii) additional capacity building to develop the next generation of aviation

professionals and address emerging regional and global challenges.

Figure 1: Effectiveness of WG/TF in meeting at least the top two regional priorities

3.2.1 Out of the 16 WG/TFs that responded to this question, 13 said their groups were

effective or somewhat effective in addressing at least the top two priorities identified by the

Expert Group, suggesting that while the current regional framework was sufficient in meeting

the region’s priorities, there was still room for further improvement. Some respondents cited

direct proactive actions by their WG/TF to assist States in building their capabilities. For

instance, the ICAO AP Regional Search and Rescue Working Group (APSAR WG) helped

States identify areas of improvements in their Search and Rescue preparedness and planning,

while the Asia Pacific Regional Aviation Safety Team (APRAST) has assisted a few

States/Administrations and Industry with the implementation of several Safety Enhancement

Initiatives (SEIs) within the Regional Aviation Safety Group-Asia Pacific (RASG-APAC)

Work Programmes. Some WG/TFs such as APRAST have also conducted capacity-building

initiatives, through conducting training to improve regulatory oversight and accident

investigation, while others such as the Asia Pacific Safety Reporting and Programme Working

Group (AP-SRP) and the Ionospheric Studies Task Force (ISTF) employ information sharing,

discussions and technical seminars held in conjunction with formal meetings and the sharing

of experiences by experts respectively, as forms of capacity building.

3.2.2 Some WG/TFs said they primarily provided a platform for information

exchange and learning/sharing. The ISTF, for example, provided information on ionospheric

anomalies to regulators, Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), and industries for use for

the implementation of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) based air navigation

systems. Meanwhile, groups such as the Asia Pacific Accident Investigation Group (APAC-

2 1 9 4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

No. WG/TFs

Ineffective somewhat ineffective neutral somewhat effective effective

CONFIDENTIAL

3

CONFIDENTIAL

AIG) and AP-SRP serve this function through awareness building – the APAC-AIG has

promulgated awareness among members in the region to implement ICAO’s requirement to set

up an independent accident investigation agency and had seen more States doing so and

sending their officials to attend investigation-related training, while AP-SRP has similarly

proactively raised awareness on the mechanism for implementation of Universal Safety

Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) and shared data-based information on safety issues and

recommendations to prevent accidents. Likewise, the Surveillance Implementation

Coordination Group (SURICG)1 encourages the use of ADS-B and Mode S technologies and

data sharing between states to enhance surveillance capabilities, as well as providing “out-of-

session” advice and assistance.

3.2.3 Many WG/TFs provided States with a structured regional approach to identify

and fulfil safety, regulatory and security priorities, including the implementation of GANP and

GASP, and developing guidance materials and tools to assist States with implementation of

ICAO requirements, as well as compliance with Annexes. For example, the Regional ATM

Contingency Plan Task Force (RACP/TF) cited the development of APAC ATM Contingency

Plan to help States fulfil the ICAO Annex 11 requirements. Similarly, the Air Traffic

Management Sub-Group (ATM SG) developed implementation initiatives for

States/Administration to enhance ATM efficiency, airspace capacity and to address ATM-

related deficiencies in the region, while APRAST had developed an online monitoring portal

for greater efficiency and transparency to encourage timely updates from

States/Administrations on their progress in achieving APAC Regional Aviation Safety

Priorities and Targets to effectively and economically mitigate regional safety risks identified

by AP-SRP. In the same vein, the Asia Pacific ATS Inter-Facility Data Communication (AIDC)

Implementation Task Force (ATA TF/2) of APANPIRG has also reported the development of

an AIDC Implementation Guidance Document for States/Administrations. In addition, groups

such as the Regional Aviation Security Coordination Forum (RASCF) has served to provide

States/Administration with areas of common concerns in aviation security as part of their work.

3.3 Section 1b) Examples of how the WG/TF helps the Region meet one or both

of the top two regional priorities

3.3.1 Overall, the majority of examples provided by respondents were complimentary

and aligned with the groups’ responses to question 1a). The examples provided by WG/TFs

were essentially in the three key areas of providing assistance to States to build their technical

and operational capabilities; providing a platform for information exchange and learning; and

developing guidance materials to assist States with implementation of ICAO requirements,

including compliance with Annexes.

3.3.2 In terms of building State’s capabilities, RASG/APRAST cited the organization

of regular workshops at APRAST meetings to facilitate sharing of best practices among

States/Administrations and Industry, assisting with the implementation of Safety Enhancement

Initiatives (SEIs), and building capabilities in safety oversight and management. SEI WG has

also established Go-Teams which provide technical assistance to requesting

States/Administrations and Industry, in the areas of runway safety and safety management

system implementation. SURICG also offers out-of-session provision of advice and assistance

between States and individuals.

3.3.3 With regard to creating guidance materials and tools, Aeronautical

Communication Services Implementation Coordination Group (ACSICG) cited the

1 Formerly known as the ADS-B Study and Implementation Task Force (ADS-B SITF)

CONFIDENTIAL

4

CONFIDENTIAL

development of a safety case to help ANSPs perform safety analysis when a common regional

IP network is implemented in the future (Common Regional Virtual Private Network-CRV).

The Asia Pacific Accident Investigation Group (APAC-AIG) developed an Asia Pacific Code

of Conduct on Cooperation Relating to Civil Aviation Accident/Incident Investigation. The

ATM Sub-Group (ATM SG) also developed the South China Sea Operational Concept to

provide planning guidance to States, to harmonise ATM procedures in accordance with the

Regional Seamless ATM Plan. The Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Sub-Group

(CNS-SG) developed guidance materials and roadmaps including the GBAS and SBAS safety

assessments. SEI WG cited that a number of model Advisory Circulars and guidance materials

were also developed and approved / endorsed by RASG-APAC to address the operational risks

in Loss of Control, Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT) and Runway Safety in the Asia Pacific

region. The Asia Pacific Search and Rescue Group (APAC-SAR) developed a SAR self-

assessment matrix, which seeks to enable States to better identify and monitor their SAR

capabilities and deficiencies.

3.3.4 In terms of information sharing, AIDC uses mutual discussions and focused

bilateral side meetings to resolve many pending issues that have been resolved giving way to

implementation of AIDC between many ATSU pairs. AP-SRP is also developing an Annual

Safety Report which highlights key safety trends and challenges to enable States to priorities

their efforts and allocate their resources efficiently. Likewise, the ATM SG established the

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Task Force to provide a forum for regional discussion on

managing UAS within the ATM system.

3.3.5 It is worth noting that the examples cited by the WG/TFs are more geared

towards the first priority on building current State capabilities, with less emphasis on the second

priority of developing the next generation of aviation professionals.

3.4 Section 1c) Other regional priorities that the ICAO WG/TFs seek to address

3.4.1 The remaining 18 regional priorities identified under Task 1 cover diverse areas

ranging from generic priorities like training and regional cooperation to specific areas like

ATM modernization and air services liberalization. As WG/TFs are by nature specific in their

roles, Singapore had further grouped the priorities with similar nature ranked based on the

responses of States under Task 1 and the mapping of endorsed issues to each WG/TF under

Task 3, as a reference document in the survey to facilitate the WG/TFs.

3.4.2 The table below provides the list of the remaining 18 priorities grouped by their

nature of coverage and the number of WG/TFs that are currently addressing these in their work

programme.

Grouping Priority No. of WG/TFs

addressing

priority

1 (i) Implementation of USOAP and USAP Corrective Action

Plans

3

(ii) Adequate infrastructure investment in aviation safety

facilities and technology

6

CONFIDENTIAL

5

CONFIDENTIAL

Grouping Priority No. of WG/TFs

addressing

priority

(iii) Specific technical assistance/cooperation from APRO and

States to implement USOAP and USAP Corrective Action

Plans to improve regional safety and security standards

6

(iv) Improve aviation regulatory performance by Developing

State specific National Civil Aviation Policy and Strategic

Plan

1

2 Funding and provision of fundamental training and

honing skill sets of technical and operational staff on the

ICAO safety and security requirements to equip them to

be effective regulators, including on-site training, to

support their respective aviation operations and systems

2

3 (i) Optimise/Improve existing regional platforms for

coordination on technical and operational matters

10

(ii) ATM Modernisation and harmonization 9

4 Information Sharing 14

5 Air Services Liberalisation 1

6 (i) Harmonize civil aviation policies and practices 6

(ii) Enhance regional cooperation 12

(iii) Eliminate differences between data transmission systems,

used in Air navigation operation of Asia Pacific Region

and Europe (i.e. AIDC – OLDI : Foot - Meter)

5

(iv) Considering the fact that airways are set up in direct

roads, States of Asia Pacific Region should decrease

unnecessary round flights, and in order to provide

economic and environmental efficiency, re-establish

coordinates of entry ‘exit’ points and predetermine air

navigation fees

2

7 Consensus building on key aviation issues 6

8 Identify matters of common interest 8

9 Opportunity to provide an Asia Pacific position in

international fora

5

1

0

(i) Enhance regional search and rescue 3

(ii) Environmental impacts 2

3.4.3 The table demonstrates that all remaining18 priorities are being addressed by

the WG/TFs one way or another. Some priorities such as 1(iv) on improving aviation regulatory

performance by Developing State specific National Civil Aviation Policy has only one WG/TF

addressing it, as one of the WG/TF explained, that it is taken that the State would make its own

effort to develop these as an internal matter, although other areas of assistance such as specific

technical assistance/cooperation from the ICAO Regional Office and States to implement

USOAP and USAP Corrective Action Plans to improve regional safety and security standards

were among the top responses. Likewise, priorities like Air Services Liberalisation, decreasing

CONFIDENTIAL

6

CONFIDENTIAL

unnecessary round flights and environmental impacts have 1-2 States responding as the

priorities are not relevant to most of the WG/TFs.

3.4.4 Priorities that are generic and apply to all if not most WG/TFs are being

addressed quite diligently with information sharing, enhanced regional cooperation and

optimise/Improve existing regional platforms for coordination on technical and operational matters as the top three priorities that are addressed by majority of the WG/TFs.

3.4.5 Interestingly, Funding and provision of fundamental training and honing

skill sets of technical and operational staff on the ICAO safety and security requirements

to equip them to be effective regulators, including on-site training, to support their

respective aviation operations and systems (2), although a generic priority, had only 2

WG/TFs addressing this. This reflects the challenges raised in some of the responses to Section

1(b) with the lack of suitable experts in the WG/TFs.

3.5 Limitations to the effectiveness and achievement of deliverables of the

Working Group/Task Force

Figure 2: Key Limitations to effectiveness of WG/TFs

3.5.1 Almost 50% of the respondents noted that the availability of subject matter

expertise within the WGs/TFs was lacking and was a key impediment in fulfilling the

objectives of the WGs/TFs and delivering on initiatives. ISTF cited the inter-disciplinary nature

of its work that required experts with engineering (air navigation, GNSS) and science

(ionosphere) backgrounds to participate meaningfully. Respondents also highlighted the lack

of involvement and commitment of Member States beyond attendance at coordination meetings

resulting in poor follow through on key initiatives. RASCF highlighted that “while a small

number of States are regularly prepared to contribute in this manner too many APAC States

although willing to attend seem unwilling to fully participate or contribute to the forum”. SEI

WG cited low response rates to ICAO correspondences and State Letters as possible limitations

to the effectiveness of their forums.

3.5.2 It is assessed that these instances of insufficient participation coupled with the

lack of technical expertise could be attributed to resource constraints on the part of States. The

responses suggest that not all States have the resources to attend multiple meetings or may only

be able to send one expert but who may not have expertise in all areas of the work of the

WGs/TFs. Coupled with frequent representational changes, member States participating in the

7, 44%

5, 31%

4, 25%

Lack of technical and subject matter

experts at meetings

Lack of participation/irregular

attendance/inactiveness

Lack of resources to attend WGs/TFs

meetings, training and implement

initiatives

CONFIDENTIAL

7

CONFIDENTIAL

WG/TF may be uninformed or uncoordinated on the developments of the

initiatives/deliverables of the WG/TF.

4. ASSESSMENT AND PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 This interim report on Section 1 of Task 4 is encouraging in showing the

alignment of the priorities and efforts of WG/TFs to the region’s priorities. Some WG/TFs have

also provided useful insights on the initiatives and programmes to address these priorities,

which would serve as useful references to other WG/TFs. Some challenges were highlighted,

including common ones like the lack of available and appropriate technical experts and

resources to attend the meetings.

4.2 It is apparent from this Task 4 exercise so far, that there is room to enhance

and strengthen existing regional platforms. The region does not lack platforms for

information-sharing and regional cooperation, but the efficacy and reach of the WG/TFs and

the technical and capacity development programmes and initiatives that they develop, have

potential for improvement. There is also caution from WG/TFs that such efforts need to be

calibrated and measured, in order not to put additional burden on States, especially in terms of

financial and manpower resourcing.

4.3 For purposes of further discussion, and to assist WG/TFs Chairs/Vice-Chairs to

use these preliminary insights for their enhancement efforts for the WG/TF, the following

recommendations drawn from Section 1 are:

a) Provide greater clarity and guidance on the roles of the WG/TFs to more

directly address regional priorities into work programmes;

b) Address the issues of the lack of expertise in key fields and financial

resources to support the WG/TFs;

c) Commit experts with the right technical expertise and to ensure they attend

WG/TFs meetings regularly and participate effectively, minimizing the

change of Experts to provide continuity and to consider increasing industry

participation to make their WG/TFs more effective;

d) Continue providing direct assistance programmes to States for the

implementation of initiatives from the WG/TFs such as through the use of

“Go-Teams” like those for SMS, Runway among others;

e) Continue or consider the provision of Guidance material, and tools to assist

States with implementation;

f) Outreach/awareness programmes to assist States to focus on the key ICAO

SARPs;

g) Address emerging issues such as developing a standard for information

security for implementation across ANSPs to protect Internet Protocol (IP)

access and address new areas of coverage including cyber security;

h) Address limited focus by WG/TFs towards developing the Next Generation

of Aviation Professionals (NGAP); and

i) Explore greater cross-WG/TF integration and coordination to provide a

more pragmatic system-wide coverage to regional issues rather than be

service-centric.

CONFIDENTIAL

8

CONFIDENTIAL

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 In summary, the majority of the 16 WG/TFs who responded to the survey on

Task 4, provided a positive indication that their groups have been addressing the regional

priorities as identified under Task 1. None of the WG/TF indicated that the groups were

ineffective in addressing the priorities. Only two indicated that they were somewhat in effect

but clarified that this is because for one, the WG/TF was working on the assumption that States

have the basic fundamentals and capacity to implement regional initiatives and the scope of the

WG/TF is narrowly defined and does not quite extend into addressing States’ national CAA

structure; and for the other, the lack of standards that can be used for implementation.

5.2 All see opportunities to enhance and improve on existing platforms and have

made some recommendations. In order to obtain a holistic and comprehensive understanding

of existing frameworks, it is recommended that efforts be put to consult the remaining

WGs/TFs that have yet to respond, and where possible, for the ICAO Regional Office and other

members of the Expert Group to assist in reaching out to these groups and encourage responses.

5.3 Singapore will provide the report for the remaining responses to the survey for

Task 4 which will cover detailed qualitative and quantitative findings on the effectiveness of

participation at WG/TFs meetings and how it can be improved, effective modes of

communication among WG/TFs and the kinds of resources WG/TFs want in meeting their

objectives, among others.

6. ACTION BY THE MEETING

6.1 The meeting is invited to:

a) Note the Section 1 findings of the Task 4 survey, with responses from 16

Regional WG/TFs;

b) Seek the assistance of the ICAO Regional Office and other members of the

Expert Group to reach out to the remaining regional WG/TFs to encourage

responses from WG/TFs that have not responded;

c) Continue with Phase 1 of the Feasibility Study to provide a comprehensive

review of existing regional frameworks; and

d) Share the findings from the survey with the ICAO Regional Office for

further review and consider the suggestions proposed for ICAO Regional

Office’s and States’ consideration.

9

CONFIDENTIAL

Annex A

List of WG/TFs that were considered for the survey and status

S/No Name Remarks

1 ICAO APRO To be approached

2 RSO To be approached

3 DGCA Conference To be approached

4 APANPIRG Responded

4i Air Traffic Management Sub-Group (ATM/SG) Responded

4i(a) Regional ATM Contingency Plan Task Force (RACP/TF) Responded

4i(b) Air Traffic Flow Management Steering Group (ATFM/SG) Responded

4(i)(c) AIS - AIM Implementation Task Force (AAITF) Pending response

4(i)(d) South-East Asia ATS Coordination Group (SEACG) Responded

4(i)(e) South Asia/Indian Ocean ATM Coordination Group (SAIOACG)

Responded

4(i)(f) Asia Pacific Search And Rescue Task Force (APSAR TF) Responded

4(i)(g) Aerodromes Operations and Planning Working Group (AOP

WG)

Pending response

4(ii) Communications Navigation and Surveillance Sub-Group Responded

4ii(a) ADS-B Study and Implementation Task Force (ADS-B SITF)

*Replaced with SURICG

Responded

4(ii)(b)

Aeronautical Communication Services Implementation

Coordination Group (ACSICG)

Responded

4(ii)(c)

Common Regional Virtual Private Network (VPN) Task Force

(CRV TF)

Pending response

4(ii)(d)

Ionospheric Studies Task Force (IS TF) Responded

4(ii)(e) Spectrum Review Working Group (SR WG) Pending response

4(iii) MET SG No contact details

4(iii)(a) Meteorological Requirement TaskForce (MET-R/TF) Pending response

10

CONFIDENTIAL

S/No Name Remarks

4(iii)(b)

MET Hazards Taskforce (MET – H/TF) No contact details

4(iii)(c)

ROBEX Working Group [Regional Operational Meteorological

(OPMET) Bulletin Exchange]

No contact details

4(iii)(d)

World Area Forecast System Task Force (WAFS TF) No contact details

4(iv) Regional Airspace Safety Monitoring Advisory Group -

RASMAG

No contact details

4(iv)(a)

FANS Interoperability Team-Asia (FIT-ASIA) Pending response

5 Regional Aviation Safety Group APAC (RASG-APAC) Pending response

5(i) Asia Pacific Regional Safety Team (APRAST) Responded

5(i)(a) Accident Investigation Group (APAC AIG) Responded

5(i)(b) Asia Pacific Safety Reporting and Programme AWG (AP-SRP)

Responded

5(i)(c) Safety Enhancement Initiatives Ad hoc WG (SEI AWG) Responded

5(i)(d) Information Analysis Team (IAT) No contact details

6 Regional Aviation Security Coordination Forum (RASCF) Responded

7 Cooperative Aviation Security Programme (CASP –AP) No contact details

7(i) Cooperative Aviation Security Programme (CASP-AP) Annual

Technical Operational Meeting (ATOM)

No contact details

8 Collaborative Arrangement For The Prevention And

Management Of Public Health Events In Civil Aviation - Asia

Pacific (CAPSCA-AP)

No contact details

9 Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing

Airworthiness Programmes (COSCAP) -SEA

Pending response

10 PASO Pending response

11 Flight Procedure Programme (FPP) No contact details

12 AIDC Implementation Task Force (APA TF) Responded

13 Performance Based Navigation Implementation Coordination

Group (PBNICG)

No contact details

14 SEA/BOB ADS-B Working Group No contact details

15 Flight Plan and ATS Messages Implementation Task Force No contact details

11

CONFIDENTIAL

S/No Name Remarks

16 Asia Pacific Global Aviation Dialogues (GLADs) To be approached

17 ICAO Training Platforms To be approached

18 APACDGCA.com

To be approached

19 ICAO Global and APRO website To be approached

20 DGCA Conference websites by individual host

States/Administrations

To be approached

List of Point of Contacts to the survey

No. Working Group/ Task Force Name of Chairman

Organization

State

1 Aeronautical Communication Service

Implementation Coordination Group

(ACSICG)

Hoang Tran

Federal Aviation Administration

USA

2 Asia Pacific Accident Investigation

Group

(APAC-AIG)

Chan Wing Keong

Transport Safety Investigation Bureau

Singapore

3 Asia Pacific Safety Reporting and

Programme Working Group (APAC

SRP WG)

Co Chair-Industry - Gunter Ertel;

Co Chair-States - Capt Salahuddin M Rahmatullah

4 Asia Pacific ATS Inter-Facility Data

Communication (AIDC)

Implementation Task Force (ATA

TF/2) of APANPIRG

Co-Chair - Anurag Sharma/ Airports Authority of

India;

Co Chair - Kwek Chin Lin/ Civil Aviation Authority

of Singapore

5 Asia Pacific Air Navigation Planning

and Implementation Regional Group

(APANPIRG)

Graeme Harris

DCA/CE New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority

6 Asia Pacific Regional Aviation

Safety Team (APRAST)

Tay Tiang Guan

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

7 ICAO Asia Pacific Region Search

and Rescue Working Group

Tai Kit

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

8 ATM Sub-Group (ATM SG) Kuah Kong Beng

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

12

CONFIDENTIAL

No. Working Group/ Task Force Name of Chairman

Organization

State

9 Communications, Navigation and

Surveillance Sub-Group (CNS SG)

Lo Weng Kee

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

10 Ionospheric Studies Task Force Susumu Saito

Electronic Navigation Research Institute

Japan

11 Regional Air Traffic Management

Contingency Plan Task Force

(RACP/TF)

Rosly Saad

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

12 Regional Aviation Security

Coordination Forum (RASCF)

Hugo Porter

Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand

13 South Asia/ Indian Ocean ATM

Coordination Group (SAIOAC)

Ibrahim Thoha

Maldives Civil Aviation Authority

14 The South Asia/Indian Ocean ATM

Coordination Group (SAIOACG/6)

and Twenty-third meeting of the

South-East Asia ATS Coordination

Group (SEACG/23)

Chhun Sivorn

State Secretariat of Civil Aviation of Cambodia

15 Safety Enhancement Initiatives

Working Group (SEI WG)

Stanley Pun

Civil Aviation Authority of Macao - China

16 Surveillance Implementation

Coordination Group (SURICG)

Alex Milns

ATM Systems Specialist

Airservices Australia

13

CONFIDENTIAL

Annex B

Questionnaire on

Enhancing Existing Asia Pacific Regional Frameworks to Address Aviation Priorities

Name of ICAO Working Group/Task Force

Name of Chairman/

Organisation/State

Respondent’s Contact (Name; Designation;

email address; phone number)

A. Background

1. The Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission Task Force (APCACTF) was formed to

explore the feasibility of establishing an Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission (see

Attachment A1 for Terms of References). The Task Force formed an Expert Group to carry

out a series of tasks as part of the study (see Attachment A2 for list of tasks).

2. Singapore is undertaking Task 4 of Phase 1 of the APCAC Feasibility Study, to explore

options for enhancing the existing frameworks in the region to better address the regional

priorities identified. In this regard, Singapore would like to seek your inputs as Chairperson

of one of the ICAO regional Working Groups/Task Forces on areas of enhancement, areas

of support required, and synergies with other groups to deliver the list of regional priorities

identified.

3. A copy of the survey of Asia Pacific States/Administrations on their key priorities using

the raw data of the Expert Group’s survey, is at Attachment B1. The results show that there

are significant differences in States’ ranking of priority areas – this is not surprising given

the diversity of the region and its varying levels of development and different challenges

and opportunities. While there was some support for developing an Asia Pacific voice on

international aviation matters, there was no consensus. There is however, a clear consensus

for the top two priorities for the region in technical and operational assistance:

a. The need for assistance to build capabilities to improve safety and security (including

implementation of USOAP and USAP corrective action plans); and

b. The need for additional capacity building to develop the next generation of aviation

professionals and address emerging regional and global challenges.

4. We seek your assistance to provide inputs in the questionnaire attached. Your inputs will

be compiled into a report to help the ICAO Regional Office identify resourcing needs,

synergise and find areas of cooperation, collaboration and streamlining of work within and

among the various frameworks, to better address at least the top two priorities of the region.

5. Please answer the questions in Part C of this document, in the boxes provided to the best

of your ability. Please email the soft copy of your completed forms to Mr Kelvin Caleb and

14

CONFIDENTIAL

Ms Pamela Teo (email: kelvin_caleb@caas.gov.sg; pamela_teo@caas.gov.sg) by Friday,

16 December 2016. Please also contact us should you require any further clarifications.

B. Instructions on completing the Questionnaire

1. Thank you for participating in this survey. Your answers will help the APCACTF Expert

Group to better understand how the ICAO Working Groups and Task Forces in the region

operate, the possible areas of enhancement, areas of support required, and synergies with

other groups so as to deliver the regional priorities. Your inputs will be critical in helping

the ICAO Asia Pacific Regional Office and Asia Pacific States support a safe, efficient,

secure, economically sustainable and environmentally responsible civil aviation sector.

2. This survey consists of 5 Sections, each with a number of questions or statements about

some key aspects of your Working Group/Task Force, and may require responding

according to a scale.

3. Please tick the corresponding value on the scale to register your response. Each section will

also have a number of open-ended questions for which you can provide your responses in

the comment box.

4. In answering each question, we invite you to think critically about how your Working

Group/Task Force can be enhanced in order to meet the priorities identified for the region.

Questionnaire for completion

Section 1: Effectiveness of Working Group/Task Force

a) How effective has your Working Group/Task Force been in meeting at least the top 2

priorities identified by the Expert Group (i.e. (i) Assist States to build their capabilities to

improve safety and security, regulatory oversight, and effectively implement ICAO

mandated requirements, in particular the GASP and the GANP2; (ii) Additional capacity

building to develop the next generation of aviation professionals, particularly in the areas

of regulatory oversight, accident investigation, pilot training, air navigation, maintenance,

cyber security, Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS); utilising train the trainer

principles where appropriate)?

[Please tick accordingly]

Effective Somewhat

effective

Neutral Somewhat

ineffective

Ineffective

Please elaborate on your response in (a)

2 We understand that not all Working Groups/Task Forces address both safety and security issues. In which

case, please let us know how effective your Working Group/Task Force has been in meeting the need for

assistance to build capabilities to improve regional safety or security.

15

CONFIDENTIAL

b) Please provide some examples of how your Working Group/Task Force helps the Region

meet one or both of the top two regional priorities.

c) Besides the top two regional priorities identified, which other priorities does the Working

Group/Task Force seek to address? Other priorities identified by the Expert Group are:

No. Other Priorities Please tick

accordingly

1 Implementation of USOAP and USAP Corrective Action Plans

2 Adequate infrastructure investment in aviation safety facilities

and technology

3 Specific technical assistance/cooperation from Asia Pacific

Regional Office and States to implement USOAP and USAP

Corrective Action Plans to improve regional safety and security

standards

4 Improve aviation regulatory performance by Developing State

specific National Civil Aviation Policy and Strategic Plan

5 Funding and provision of fundamental training and honing skill

sets of technical and operational staff on the ICAO safety and

security requirements to equip them to be effective regulators,

including on-site training, to support their respective aviation

operations and systems

6 Optimise/Improve existing regional platforms for coordination

on technical and operational matters

7 ATM Modernisation and harmonization

16

CONFIDENTIAL

No. Other Priorities Please tick

accordingly

8 Information Sharing

9 Air Services Liberalisation

10 Harmonize civil aviation policies and practices

11 Enhance regional cooperation

12 Eliminate differences between data transmission systems, used

in Air navigation operation of Asia Pacific Region and Europe

(i.e. AIDC – OLDI : Foot - Meter)

13 Considering the fact that airways are set up in direct roads,

States of Asia Pacific Region should decrease unnecessary

round flights, and in order to provide economic and

environmental efficiency, re-establish coordinates of entry

‘exit’ points and predetermine air navigation fees

14 Consensus building on key aviation issues

15 Identify matters of common interest

16 Opportunity to provide an Asia Pacific position in international

fora

17 Enhance regional search and rescue

18 Environmental impacts

19 Others: please provide details

17

CONFIDENTIAL

d) What limits the effectiveness and achievement of deliverables of the Working Group/Task

Force?

Section 2: Monitoring progress

a) How often does the ICAO Working Group/Task Force meet in a year?

[Please tick accordingly]

Once a year Once in 6 months Once a quarter Other frequency (please

provide details)

b) Is the stated frequency of meetings sufficient? If not, how often should the Working

Group/Task Force meet?

c) Is there sufficient participation from States/Administrations (and if applicable, the

Industry) in your Working Group/Task Force? If not, how can the level of participation be

improved?

d) What modes of communications does the Working Group/Task Force use to update or

discuss in-between meetings? How effective are these modes to your Working Group/Task

Force?

18

CONFIDENTIAL

[Please tick accordingly]

Mode Effective Somewhat

effective

Neutral Somewhat

ineffective

Ineffective

Teleconferencing

Video conferencing

Emails

ICAO Regional Office

Website

Face to face meetings

Others: please provide

details

e) How does the Working Group/Task Force track and monitor the progress of deliverables?

Section 3: Resourcing

a) Does your ICAO Working Group/Task Force have sufficient administrative and project

management support?

[Please tick accordingly]

Sufficient Somewhat

sufficient

No opinion Somewhat

insufficient

Insufficient

19

CONFIDENTIAL

b) Who provides this support?

[Please tick accordingly]

ICAO Regional

Office

Chairperson’s State Member States of

the Working Group

Others [Please

provide details]

c) In what forms do they provide this support?

[Please tick accordingly]

Types of support ICAO

Regional

Office

Chairperson’s

State

Member States

of the Working

Group

Others [Please

provide info]

Guidance support

Financial support

Technical expertise

and support

Administrative and

Logistical support

(e.g. Secretariat

support, booking of

meeting space)

Others: please

provide details

d) In which areas does your Working Group/Task Force need more focused support to execute

its work?

[Please tick accordingly]

Secretariat

20

CONFIDENTIAL

Guidance

Financial

Technical expertise

Administrative and Logistics (e.g. scheduling meetings,

provision of meeting space)

Others: please provide details

e) Does the Working Group/Task Force need to synergise with other groups to achieve its

deliverables? If so, how is this done and what resources are required?

Section 4: Sharing of information

a) [If applicable] How do the sub-groups3 within your ICAO Working Group/Task Force

share information with each other?

[Please tick accordingly]

Email

3Sub-groups refer to Working groups/Task Forces that report into a main Working Group/Task Force. For

example, the Air Traffic Management Sub Group (ATM/SG) reports to the Main Working Group/Task Force

which is APANPIRG. Similarly, the Air Traffic Flow Management Steering Group (ATFM SG) is a sub-group

of ATM/SG and reports to the ATM/SG, which subsequently reports to APANPIRG.

21

CONFIDENTIAL

ICAO Regional Office website

Face to face meetings

Via audio/video conferences

Others: please provide details

b) How can the sharing of information between groups be enhanced?

c) Would the sharing of information between groups on an online platform be useful?

[Please tick accordingly]

Yes No Unsure

d) If you answered yes to (c), what are the features of the online platform that are important

to your Working Group/Task Force?

[Please tick accordingly]

A secure platform for sharing of confidential information

Features discussion forums

22

CONFIDENTIAL

Allows users to upload documents of varying sizes and formats,

photos and others information

Integrated with the ICAO Regional Office website

Contains archives for storage of documents and information

Has advanced search functions

Others: please provide details

e) How does the Working Group/Task Force share the achievements and progress with the

rest of the Asia Pacific Member States including those not in the Working Group/Task

Force?

[Please tick accordingly]

Email

ICAO Regional Office website

Face to face meetings

Via audio/video conferences

Reports presented at the DGCA Conference

Through the ICAO Asia Pacific Office

23

CONFIDENTIAL

Others: please provide details

Section 5: Additional Comments

a) Please provide us any other information or comments that will contribute towards

enhancing existing frameworks in the region to meet at least the top two identified regional

priorities.

Thank you for your time.

-End of survey-

24

CONFIDENTIAL

Attachment A1

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission Task Force (APCACTF)

Deliverable(s)

Report to the DGCA Conference the outcomes of the study on the feasibility of the

Establishment of Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission (APCAC).

Scope of work 1) Establish the objectives, interests, opportunities, challenges and priorities of the Asia Pacific

and Asia Pacific States/Administrations in the area of civil aviation, in particular cooperation,

coordination and assistance on operational and technical matters.

2) Study the feasibility of the establishment of an Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission,

including:

a. Examining current regional cooperation, coordination and assistance

arrangements;

b. Identifying areas of improvements in the existing arrangements;

c. Examining the scope, objectives and priorities, governance arrangements,

structure, resources and finances related to the Commission, and relationships

with ICAO and other bodies, taking reference from existing Civil Aviation

Commissions/Conference.

3) Examine alternative and complementary solutions to improve regional aviation cooperation,

coordination and assistance on operational and technical matters, including strengthening the

current arrangements.

4) Identify and compare the benefits and costs of these options.

5) Any other related matter which the Task Force considers necessary for furthering its work.

Composition

The Task Force would be composed of APAC States/Director Generals of Civil Aviation and

aviation experts nominated by the States/Administrations. Observers from other Aviation

Commissions may be invited.

Expert Group

The Task Force may establish Expert Groups to assist with its work including the conduct of a

survey on the feasibility study.

Conduct of the work and schedule

The Task Force shall report the work progress to the 52nd DGCA Conference (2015). It

would submit the outcomes of the feasibility study to 53rd DGCA Conference (2016) for

endorsement.

25

CONFIDENTIAL

Attachment A2

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission Task Force (APCACTF) Expert Group

Deliverable(s)

Report to the APCACTF the outcomes of the study on the feasibility of the Establishment of

Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission (APCAC). Assist with its work including the

conduct of a survey on the feasibility study.

Scope of work

1) Establish the objectives, interests, opportunities, challenges and priorities of the Asia

Pacific and Asia Pacific States/Administrations in the area of civil aviation, in particular

cooperation, coordination and assistance on operational and technical matters.

2) Study the feasibility of the establishment of an Asia Pacific Civil Aviation Commission,

including:

a. Examining current regional cooperation, coordination and assistance arrangements;

b. Identifying areas of improvements in the existing arrangements;

c. Examining the scope, objectives and priorities, governance arrangements, structure,

resources and finances related to the Commission, and relationships with ICAO and

other bodies, taking reference from existing Civil Aviation Commissions/Conference.

3) Examine alternative and complementary solutions to improve regional aviation

cooperation, coordination and assistance on operational and technical matters, including

strengthening the current arrangements.

4) Identify and compare the benefits and costs of these options.

5) Any other related matter which the Task Force considers necessary for furthering its work.

Composition

The Expert Group would be composed of the Experts nominated by the 18 APAC

States/Director Generals of Civil Aviation who attended the First Meeting of APCACTF.

Observers from other Aviation Commissions may be invited.

Conduct of the work and schedule

The Expert Group shall report the work progress to the APCACTF/2.

26

Attachment B1

Table 1: Survey Results Ranked by Priority

(Additional priorities provided by States in bold)

Rank Priority Average No. of States by Ranking of Priorities

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Assist States to build their capabilities to improve safety and security,

regulatory oversight, and effectively implement ICAO mandated

requirements, in particular the GASP and the GANP

1 11 3 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Implementation of USOAP and USAP Corrective Action Plans

Adequate infrastructure investment in aviation safety facilities and

technology

Specific technical assistance/cooperation from APRO and States to

implement USOAP and USAP Corrective Action Plans to improve

regional safety and security standards

Improve aviation regulatory performance by Developing State

specific National Civil Aviation Policy and Strategic Plan

2 Additional capacity building to develop the next generation of aviation

professionals, particularly in the areas of regulatory oversight, accident

investigation, pilot training, air navigation, maintenance, cyber security,

Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS); utilising train the trainer

principles where appropriate

2 7 6 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Funding and provision of fundamental training and honing skill sets

of technical and operational staff on the ICAO safety and security

requirements to equip them to be effective regulators, including on-

site training, to support their respective aviation operations and

systems

27

Rank Priority Average No. of States by Ranking of Priorities

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

3 Optimise/Improve existing regional platforms for coordination on

technical and operational matters

5 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

ATM Modernisation and harmonization

3 Information Sharing 5 1 2 0 1 1 2 4 1 1 0 0

5 Air Services Liberalisation 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

5 Harmonize civil aviation policies and practices 6 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 3 1 2

Enhance regional cooperation

Eliminate differences between data transmission systems, used in Air

navigation operation of Asia Pacific Region and Europe (i.e. AIDC –

OLDI : Foot - Meter)

Considering the fact that airways are set up in direct roads, States of

Asia Pacific Region should decrease unnecessary round flights, and in

order to provide economic and environmental efficiency, re-establish

coordinates of entry ‘exit’ points and predetermine air navigation fees

5 Consensus building on key aviation issues 6 0 2 1 0 3 2 1 3 0 1 0

5 Identify matters of common interest 6 1 0 3 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 1

5 Opportunity to provide an Asia Pacific position in international for a 6 0 2 3 0 0 1 1 0 4 1 1

10 Enhance regional search and rescue 7 1 1 0 0 0 1 4 2 4 0 0

Environmental impacts 7 1 0 1 0 1 2 2 1 2 3 0

28

Annex C

Detailed responses to Section 1 of the survey

Question Responses

Section 1: Effectiveness of Working Group/Task Force

1(a) How effective has your Working

Group/Task Force been in meeting at least the

top 2 priorities identified by the Expert Group

(i.e. (i) Assist States to build their capabilities

to improve safety and security, regulatory

oversight, and effectively implement ICAO

mandated requirements, in particular the

GASP and the GANP; (ii) Additional

capacity building to develop the next

generation of aviation professionals,

particularly in the areas of regulatory

oversight, accident investigation, pilot

training, air navigation, maintenance, cyber

security, Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems

(RPAS); utilising train the trainer principles

where appropriate)?

Effective – 4

Somewhat effective – 8

Neutral – 1

Somewhat ineffective – 2

Ineffective – 0

Effective – 4

1. APAC-AIG:

The APAC-AIG has been focusing on encouraging APAC States/Administrations to:

- Consider setting up independent accident investigation agency (as required by ICAO);

and

- Improve their accident investigation capabilities.

The APAC-AIG is happy to see more States/Administrations becoming aware of the need to

set up an independent accident investigation agency, beginning to set up some form of

accident investigation unit (although maybe still part of a CAA), and sending officials to

attend investigation-related training.

2. ICAO AP Region Search and Rescue WG:

Assist States within Asia Pacific Region to identify areas where SAR preparedness and

planning requires improvements.

3. ATM SG:

The SG implements initiatives for the Asia Pacific region to enhance ATM efficiency,

airspace capacity and address ATM related deficiencies in the Asia Pacific region to ensure

air navigation safety.

4. RACP TF:

29

The TF developed the APAC ATM Contingency Plan as the guidance material for the APAC

region to enhance ATM efficiency, airspace capacity and address ATM related deficiencies

to ensure air navigation safety.

The objectives of the APAC ATM Contingency Plan are to

- provide a contingency response framework for APAC States to ensure the managed

continuation of aircraft operations in affected FIRs, including transiting between

unaffected FIRs, during contingency events;

- ensure timely, harmonized and appropriate responses to all events resulting in disruption

to the provision of ATS for smooth and efficiency aircraft movement; and

- provide a greater degree of certainty for airspace and aerodrome users during

contingency operations.

Somewhat effective – 8

1. AIDC ATA TF/2 of APANPIRG:

During RASMAG/18 and RASMAG/20 meetings, AIDC was considered as an important

means of mitigating Large Height Deviation

The task force has been able to gather feedback from almost all the participant states and

administrations regarding implementation of AIDC in the APAC region. The meeting

supported by web-enabled teleconference, paved way for development of AIDC

Implementation Guidance Document; still in progress.

2. APAC SRP WG:

a. On the need for assistance to build capabilities to improve safety and security (including

implementation of USOAP and USAP corrective action plans) - The SRP WG preaches

the mechanism for the implementation of USOAP through ‘proactive means;

b. On the need for additional capacity building to develop the next generation of aviation

professionals and address emerging regional and global challenges – The knowledge

gained through the extraction of Safety related data and Safety recommendations

30

promote additional capacity building to develop the next generation of aviation

professionals in data sharing and accident prevention.

3. APRAST: RASG-APAC was set up in 2011 to implement the Global Aviation Safety Plan

(GASP) to enhance safety in the Asia and Pacific Region. RASG-APAC develops and

implements work programmes based on the GASP.

The roles of APRAST are to assist RASG-APAC to implement the GASP; develop the Work

Programmes for RASG-APAC; and assist RASG-APAC, States/Administrations and

Industry in achieving APAC Regional Aviation Safety Priorities and Targets. The APAC

Regional Aviation Safety Priorities and Targets are aligned with the ICAO Global Aviation

Safety Priorities and Targets, outlined in the GASP.

Within the short span of APRAST’s establishment, APRAST has been assisting

States/Administrations and Industry to improve safety with the completion of several Safety

Enhancement Initiatives (SEIs) within the RASG-APAC Work Programmes and the conduct

of additional capacity-building initiatives towards improving regulatory oversight and

accident investigation.

Necessary building blocks have been put in place to strengthen APRAST’s effectiveness as

a regional body. APRAST was restructured in 2014 to create a dedicated SEI working group

which develops and monitors SEIs for better delivery and monitoring. APRAST also recently

established an online portal in 2016 to encourage timely updates from States/

Administrations on their progress in achieving APAC Regional Aviation Safety Priorities

and Targets. It is expected that the improvement in administrative efficiency and

transparency would encourage States to proactively achieve the priorities and targets.

4. CNS SG: Priority (ii), namely additional capacity building to develop the next generation of

aviation professionals, is relatively new especially with respect to maintenance and cyber

security (which are relevant to my Sub-Group). Hence there is not much discussion and work

that had been done by my Sub-Group on this priority (ii).

31

5. ISTF: The main goal of ISTF is to facilitate GNSS implementation in APAC region by

characterizing the ionospheric anomalies. The outcomes will be used by regulators, ANSPs,

as well as industries to implement GNSS-based air navigation systems. Therefore, the

activities of ISTF are effective in (i). Although it provides good references to APAC

States/Administrations, however, it is still up to the States/Administrations how they utilize

them in the real implementations. Therefore, follow-up activities in a real implementation

phase would be desirable. (Note: ISTF was dissolved by its successful completion of their

tasks in September 2016). Regarding (ii), Experiences gained by experts contributing ISTF

would contribute to regulators, ANSPs, and industries in each States/Administrations.

6. RASCF: The RASCF has proven to be a useful forum to identify areas of common concern

for many APAC States with regard to aviation security.

7. SAIOAC: This has partly to do with the participation of some of the States and consistency

of the delegates. Some states are irregular in their attendance and consistency of delegation

is not maintained by some states.

8. SEI WG: SEI WG will assist APRAST in development of SEIs within the Asia Pacific

Region which are aligned with the regional priorities and targets. The focus of those SEIs is

to effectively and economically mitigate regional safety risks identified by the SRP WG.

(The main focus now are those operational risks – Loss of Control, CFIT and Runway Safety)

9. SURICG: My response here and throughout reflects the achievements of the previous ADS-

B Study and Implementation Task Force (ADS-B SITF), which was active until 2016, when

it was “replaced” by the SURICG. For future actions and plans, the responses reflect the

intent of SURICG.

The ADS-B SITF and SURICG are encouraging the expansion of surveillance capabilities,

through ADS-B and Mode S technologies, and data sharing between states. This is noted as

a safety performance enabler in the GASP. Progress in this area across the APAC states is

variable.

32

The ADS-B SITF has provided opportunity for information exchange and sharing between

states and individuals during the implementation phases of ADS-B in the APAC region. This

includes capability development of individual aviation professionals through information

sharing, presentation and discussion of working and information papers, and technical

seminars held in conjunction with the formal meetings. This methodology will continue with

SURICG.

Neutral – 1

1. SAIOACG/6 and SEACG/23: SAIOACG/6 and SEACG/23 meeting were not clearly

concerned with the top 2 priorities. However, meeting mainly focused on the cooperation

and coordination for the provision of Air Traffic Service and Airspace Planning within the

region, it also partially concerned 1 of the top 2 priorities on the effectively implement ICAO

mandated requirements, in particular the GASP and the GANP1.

Somewhat ineffective – 2

10. ACSICG: The ICAO has not developed standard for information security that can be used

to develop and implement across ANSPs. Some ANSPs implement a security “fire wall” to

protect their Internet Protocol (IP) access and it is considered as a “local matter” as it does

not impact others.

The safety analysis is mostly based on type of service (e.g. flight plan, weather, surveillance,

etc.) not based on system. For example, AMHS is used to distribute flight plan/transfer,

weather, NOTAM, etc. The safety analysis is based on flight plan message that starts from

message generating system to AMHS to telecommunication network to another ANSPs.

Thus, it is difficult to develop safety case completely as ACSICG is responsible to AMHS

and associated telecommunication network only, not end-to-end message.

The future implementation plan of System Wide Information Management (SWIM) service

is prime example. Since there is no SWIM architecture nor information security policy,

ANSPs can implement SWIM service to an IP network without a “controlled” environment

that could compromise delivery and integrity if they choose to distribute time sensitive

message such as flight plan/clearance/transfer.

33

11. APANPIRG: The objectives of the PIRG, as set out in section 2.13 of the APANPIRG

Procedural Handbook appear quite narrow and appear to focus primarily on the

implementation of the Asia/Pacific Regional Air Nav Plan. As such it appears that the PIRG

has largely seen itself as a ‘technical’ body with a focus on regional implementation of the

GANP rather than the GASP. I should stress here, that I think it has great work in the NAV

field but when I look at the two priorities detailed in the question above, I am forced to

conclude that it has not addressed those matters in any substantive way.

If I take a very simplistic look at what a State requires to implement a robust and effective

Civil Aviation System it fundamentally needs:

1. Appropriate institutional/constitutional arrangements for the regulatory body or bodies

that provide the necessary impartial or independent powers for their proper operation.

2. The appropriate legislation (primary, secondary etc.) that implements in local law those

ICAO SARPS, and other national requirements, that the State has decided to adopt.

3. Adequate resources (funding and skilled technical and regulatory staff) to apply the laws

in 2. above. [Or those resources are provided by some other party through a robust legal

framework that provides the necessary clarity around where responsibilities and

accountabilities lie.]

4. Political commitment at the highest level to make 1-3 work as intended.

In my view the functioning of the PIRG assumes that all the above are in place and thus does

little to assist in creating – or supporting – it.

1(b) Please provide some examples of how

your Working Group/Task Force helps the

Region meet one or both of the top two

regional priorities.

1. ACSICG: ACSICG is developing a safety case to help ANSPs to perform safety analysis

when a common regional IP network is implemented in the future (Common Regional

Virtual Private Network-CRV)

ACSICG has coordinated the Air Traffic Service Message Handling System (AMHS)

address management with other region to maintain a global address management tool

managed by United Kingdom NATS on behalf of ICAO. This support safety of flight

plan/clearance/transfer and other messages delivery through AMHS.

34

ACSICG has develop an Aeronautical Telecommunication Network (ATN) Directory

Service (DIR) based on ICAO Doc. 9880 but unable to implement due to limit infrastructure

and various local security policy restriction.

2. APAC-AIG: Identified training opportunities/programmes.

Made suggestions on how to set up an independent State accident investigation agency.

Developed an Asia-Pacific Code of Conduct on Cooperation Relating to Civil Aviation

Accident/Incident Investigation.

3. APAC SRP WG: At present USA, Australia and Singapore are taking active role to analyze

data and develop the Annual Safety Report. Other States may be invited to learn the

techniques and ultimately assist the required priorities.

4. AIDC ATA TF/2 of APANPIRG: Through mutual discussions and focused bilateral side

meetings, many pending issues have been resolved giving way to implementation of AIDC

between many ATSU pairs.

5. APANPIRG: Monitoring and implementation of the GANP in the region.

6. APRAST:

• To assist States to improve safety

APRAST develops Safety Enhancement Initiatives (SEIs) which address key operational

safety risks in the APAC region in recent years.

Workshops are held regularly at APRAST meetings to facilitate sharing of best practices

among States/Administrations and Industry, to assist them in implementing the SEIs and

to build capabilities in safety oversight and management.

• To assist States to effectively implement GASP

The APAC Regional Aviation Safety Priorities and Targets are aligned with the GASP

along 5 main areas:

a. Reduction in Operational Risks

35

b. Improvements in Safety Oversight and Compliance

c. Consistent and effective Safety Management Systems (SMS) and State Safety

Programmes (SSP)

d. Predictive risk management and advanced regulatory oversight

e. Enhanced Aviation Infrastructure

As part of the RASG-APAC/APRAST Work Programme, RASG-APAC/APRAST

have established Go-Teams which could provide technical assistance to requesting

States/Administrations and Industry, in the areas of runway safety and safety

management system implementation.

• To provide additional capacity building

APRAST has established a Capacity Building Task Force to look into capacity building

in the area of regulatory oversight. This Task Force is developing a Standardised

Capacity Building Programme, to assist APAC States/ Administrations to build up

necessary safety oversight capabilities, which in turn could raise their USOAP

Effective Implementation (EI) of Critical Element (CE)-4 “qualified personnel”.

APRAST’s Asia Pacific Accident Investigation Group (APAC-AIG), is identifying

initiatives and developing a suite of training which improve low USOAP AIG rates in

the region. These efforts provide additional capacity building in the area of accident

investigation.

7. ICAO AP Region SAR WG: Assist States within Asia Pacific Region to implement self-

assessment for identifying and monitoring of SAR capabilities and deficiencies in the form

of SAR capability matrix.

8. ATM SG:

1. Implement Collaborative Air Traffic Flow Management to balance demand and capacity

to minimize operating costs and ensure safety in the airspace and airports concerned.

2. Implement corrective actions in an effective manner to address airspace safety concerns

raised by Regional Monitoring Agencies.

36

3. Develop the South China Sea Operational Concept for planning guidance to enhance

safety and harmonise ATM procedures in accordance with the Regional Seamless ATM

Plan taking advantage of the communications and surveillance capabilities in the region.

4. Establish the Unmanned Aircraft System Task Force to provide a forum for regional

discussion on how to safely and effectively manage these aircraft within the ATM system.

5. Develop the Afghanistan Contingency Plan to ensure safe and efficient air traffic flows

between Europe and Asia in event of non-availability of ATS in Kabul FIR.

6. Develop performance-based separation to enhance efficiency and airspace capacity.

7. Develop regional ATM contingency planning to help States fulfil ICAO Annex 11

requirements

9. CNS SG: My Sub-Group provides regional guidance material and roadmaps such as GBAS

and SBAS safety assessment guidance material related to anomalous ionospheric

conditions, APAC Flight Procedure Programme and RNP 2 Implementation Guidance.

10. ISTF: Regarding (i), ISTF delivered a common GBAS ionospheric threat model in APAC

region and guidance documents on safety assessment related to anomalous ionospheric

conditions for SBAS and GBAS. It will be useful in introducing GNSS-based navigation

systems in each air space. However, further follow-up on how to utilize them in real

implementation would be desirable. Regarding (ii), knowledge and experiences were

transferred to experts who participated in ISTF. It would have been more effective in

building capacities more widely in APAC region, if ISTF had participants from more

States/Administrations.

11. RACP/TF: Development of APAC ATM Contingency Plan to help States fulfil the ICAO

Annex 11 requirements. The TF reviewed the current status of the ATM Contingency Plan

and the contingency preparedness of APAC States and identified areas where ATM

contingency planning requires improvement, and made recommendations on those areas of

improvement.

12. RASCF: The RASCF has enabled States to present and discuss possible ways s which can

address such concerns. In doing so attending states are able to take the lessons learned and

37

consider to implement similar policies and measures within this own administrations to

enhance their avsec and avsec oversight systems.

13. SAIOAC: The workshops conducted together with the meetings are a great help in meeting

the regional priorities.

14. SAIOACG/6 and SEACG/23: SAIOACG/6 and SEACG/23 meeting discussed and

reviewed on the Current Operations and Problem Areas, the implementation of CNS/ATM

Systems, ATS Route Developments, ATM Contingency Plans and Search and Rescue,

ANSP Coordination and Civil/Military Cooperation which related to the Global Air

Navigation Plan.

15. SEI WG: A number of Model Advisory Circulars, Guidance Materials or safety tools from

international safety organizations were developed and approved / endorsed by RASG-

APAC to address the operational risks in Loss of Control, CFIT and Runway Safety in

APAC region. Also, SEI WG assisted ICAO Regional Office to develop the methodology

for establishing the Runway Safety Go-Team and SMS Go-Team in APAC Region.

16. SURICG: Development and continued updates to the ADS-B Implementation Guidance

Document (AIGD).

Out of session provision of advice and assistance, and information sharing, between states

and individuals.

1(c) Besides the top two regional priorities

identified, which other priorities does the

Working Group/Task Force seek to address?

Other priorities identified by the Expert

Group are:

1. Implementation of USOAP and USAP

Corrective Action Plans

3

2. Adequate infrastructure investment in

aviation safety facilities and technology

6

ACISCG: Provide network infrastructure

to monitor and correct failure

3. Specific technical assistance/cooperation

from Asia Pacific Regional Office and States to

implement USOAP and USAP Corrective

6

ACISCG: Develop Safety document for

CRV

38

Action Plans to improve regional safety and

security standards

4. Improve aviation regulatory performance by

Developing State specific National Civil

Aviation Policy and Strategic Plan

1

5. Funding and provision of fundamental

training and honing skill sets of technical and

operational staff on the ICAO safety and

security requirements to equip them to be

effective regulators, including on-site training,

to support their respective aviation operations

and systems

2

6. Optimise/Improve existing regional

platforms for coordination on technical and

operational matters

10

ACISCG: Establish CRV Operation

Group (OG) and regional AMHS

Address Management Center (AMC)

7. ATM Modernisation and harmonization 9

8. Information Sharing 14

ACISCG: AMHS coordination and CRV

OG

9. Air Services Liberalisation 1

10. Harmonize civil aviation policies and

practices

6

SURICG: We have a framework to

harmonize the ADS-B implementation

among States in AIGD covering the

regulations and practices

11. Enhance regional cooperation 12

39

12. Eliminate differences between data

transmission systems, used in Air navigation

operation of Asia Pacific Region and Europe

(i.e. AIDC – OLDI : Foot - Meter)

5

ACISCG: Implementing AMHS to phase

out Aeronautical Fixed

Telecommunication Network (AFTN)

that use variety of network protocols

13. Considering the fact that airways are set up

in direct roads, States of Asia Pacific Region

should decrease unnecessary round flights, and

in order to provide economic and

environmental efficiency, re-establish

coordinates of entry ‘exit’ points and

predetermine air navigation fees

2

14. Consensus building on key aviation issues 6

15. Identify matters of common interest 8

16. Opportunity to provide an Asia Pacific

position in international fora

5

17. Enhance regional search and rescue 3

18. Environmental impacts 2

19. Others: please provide details 1

AIDC, ATA TG/2: Enhance safety

1(d) What limits the effectiveness and

achievement of deliverables of the Working

Group/Task Force?

1. ACSICG: Does not have the right technical experts at the meeting.

2. APAC-AIG: Lack of resources on the part of APAC States/Administrations to attend

APAC-AIG meetings or training.

States/Administrations lacking personnel conversant with accident investigation matters.

40

3. APAC SRP WG: Perhaps lack of good planning

4. AIDC ATA TF/2 of APANPIRG: None in particular. But participation of all states and

administrations could enhance the effectiveness, through involvement.

5. APANPIRG: The scope of the Terms of Reference and the assumption (perhaps incorrect)

that other groups (e.g. DGCA and/or RASG) will deal with the wider scope of issues

outlined in my answer to the first question.

6. APRAST: A number of States/Administrations are not participating regularly, despite

repeated reminders through State Letters and at RASG-APAC meetings. As a result of

frequent representation changes, the commitment from States/Administrations and Industry

in completing initiatives is lower than optimal. Moreover, some participants lack aviation

safety technical expertise, hampering possible contributions towards delivering APRAST

initiatives.

Higher and more consistent participation, in particular participation with safety technical

expertise, from APAC States/Administrations and Industry at APRAST meetings could

increase the effectiveness of APRAST.

Safety initiatives can be championed by designated participants, ensuring the completion of

initiatives and enabling the build-up of safety technical expertise within the APAC region.

Industry participation should also step up, not just from industry organisations, but also from

the service providers of the States/Administrations. Some APRAST safety initiatives are

designed to be implemented by service providers. As users, service providers can develop

safety initiatives with outputs which are relevant and useful to themselves.

7. ICAO AP Region SAR WG: -

8. ATM SG: Lack of technical knowledge and Subject Matter Experts.

41

9. CNS SG: Lack of political will to implement; Lack of fund to implement; Lack of expertise

10. ISTF: The number of experts that could contribute to ISTF was one of the limiting factors,

because it is an inter-disciplinary subject between engineering (air navigation, GNSS) and

science (ionosphere). The other way around, ISTF worked to enhances experiences of

engineers who joined ISTF. Training of engineers in this field would make the outcomes of

ISTF effectively utilized in APAC region. For example, Japanese Government provided a

fund to invite engineers from developing countries to exchange research experiences. It was

utilized to transfer experiences and knowledge related to ISTF activities.

11. RACP/TF: Nil.

12. RASCF: The success of the RASCF relies heavily on the willingness of APAC States to

present papers and instigate and participate in discussions regarding their own experiences

in handling complex avsec matters. However, while a small number of States are regularly

prepared to contribute in this manner too many APAC States although willing to attend seem

unwilling to fully participate or contribute to the forum.

13. SAIOAC: It has a lot to do with the participation and commitment of some States in the

region. Follow-up actions and commitment of some States is limiting the effectiveness of

the WG.

14. SAIOACG/6 and SEACG/23: The limitation of the effectiveness and achievement of

deliverables of the SAIOACG/6 and SEACG/23 are the political barrier and the difference

of ATM potential resources of states which affects the ATS harmonization within the region.

15. SEI WG:

• Insufficient participation of Member States in APAC

• Inconsistence of participant(s) from attending Member States

- Insufficient volunteer experts to assist the development of SEIs

- Not having a very clear picture on what has been discussed and decided in the

previous meetings.

42

• Low response rate from Member States to ICAO Regional Office correspondences

16. SURICG: There remains some caution on the part of certain states in the adoption of new

technology.

Engagement of regulators in support of the adoption of new technology (ADS-B in

particular); this has been specifically identified and reported through CNS and

APANPIRG.

ATTACHMENT TO THE REPORT OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE APAC CIVIL AVIATION

COMMISSION TASK FORCE (APCACTF/2) EXPERT GROUP

Bangkok, Thailand, 23 to 24 March 2017

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

NAME TITLE TEL/FAX NUMBER E-MAIL

1. AUSTRALIA (2)

1. Mr. Jim Wolfe

General Manager, Air Traffic Policy

Department of Infrastructure and

Regional Development

Tel: +61 2 6274 7611

Fax: +61 2 6274 7804

Jim.wolfe@infrastructure.gov.au;

Karen.riddle@infrastructure.gov.au;

2. Ms. Melissa Cashman

Director Air Services Policy and

Governance, Department of

Infrastructure and Regional Development

Tel: +61 2 6274 6741

+61 2 4276 95486

Fax: +61 2

Melissa.Cashman@infrastructure

.gov.au

2. CHINA (1)

3. Ms. Yang Jiru

Director, Division of International

Organizations, Department of

International Affairs

Civil Aviation Administration of China

Tel: +86 10 6409 1247

Fax: +86 10 6401 6918

Jr_yang@caac.gov.cn;

3. HONG KONG, CHINA (1)

4. Mr. Alan Shum Assistant Director-General of Civil

Aviation, Civil Aviation Department

Headquarters 1 Tung Fai Road

Hong Kong Int’l Airport, Lantau

Tel: +852 2910 6616

Fax: +852 2877 8542

aylshum@cad.gov.hk;

4. REPUBLIC OF KOREA (2)

5. Ms. Crystal Soojeong Kim

Deputy Director, International Air

Transport Division, Ministry of Land,

Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT)

Tel: +82 44 201-4213

Fax: +82 44 201-5624

jewelry@korea.kr;

6. Ms. Jenny Heehyun Kim

Assistant Director, International Air

Transport Div., Ministry of Land,

Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT)

Tel: +82 44 201 4214

Fax: +82 44 201 5624

jenkim@korea.kr;

-2-

NAME TITLE TEL/FAX NUMBER E-MAIL

5. SINGAPORE (4)

7. Ms. Eileen Poh

Director (International Relations)

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

Singapore Changi Airport, PO Box 1

Singapore 918141

Tel: +6541 3087

Fax: +6546 5035

eileen_poh@caas.gov.sg;

8. Mr. Kelvin Caleb

Senior Manager (International Relations)

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

Singapore Changi Airport, PO Box 1

Singapore 918141

Tel: +6595 4090

Fax: +6546 5035

kelvin_caleb@caas.gov.sg

9. Ms. Farah Mohan Senior Manager (International Relations)

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

Singapore Changi Airport, PO Box 1

Singapore 918141

Tel: +6541 3086

Fax: +6546 5035

Farah_mohan@caas.gov.sg;

10. Ms. Jen Sim Executive (International Relations)

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore

Singapore Changi Airport, PO Box 1

Tel: +6541 3084

Fax: +6546 5035

Jen_sim@caas.gov.sg;

6. THAILAND (1)

11. Ms. Sudarat Jayakorn

Manager, Foreign Affairs Department

Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand

333/105 Lak Si Plaza, Bangkok 10210

Tel: +081 875 6243

Fax: +

sudarat_j@caat.or.th;

7. ICAO (3)

12. Mr. Arun Mishra Regional Director

International Civil Aviation Organization

Tel: +66 (2) 537 8189

Fax: +66 (2) 537 8199

apac@icao.int;

13. Mr. Li Peng Regional Officer, Communications,

Navigation and Surveillance,

International Civil Aviation Org.

Tel: +66 (2) 537 8189

Fax: +66 (2) 537 8199

pli@icao.int

14. Mr. Punya Raj Shakya Regional Officer, Technical Assistance

International Civil Aviation Organization

Tel: +66 (2) 537 8189

Fax: +66 (2) 537 8199

pshakya@icao.int