Flight Procedure Approval Guidance Material.pdf

European Aviation Safety Agency Strategy & Safety Management Directorate

International Cooperation Department

Guidance Material Flight Procedure Approval

SIASA Support to the Improvement of Aviation Safety in Africa

Grant Contract 2012/299-316

December 2015

This project is funded by the European Union and implemented by EASA

An agency of the European Union

Postal address: Postfach 10 12 53,

50452 Cologne, Germany

Visiting address: Ottoplatz 1,


Tel.: +49 221 8999 000

E-mail: [email protected]

Web: www.easa.europa.eu

ISO 9001:2008 Certified

Page ii

SIASA project Support to the Improvement of Aviation Safety in Africa

This project is funded by the European

Union and implemented by EASA.

Preamble The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) was awarded a grant contract by the Secretariat of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP Group) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) related to the “Support to the Improvement of Aviation Safety in Africa” (SIASA) in November 2012.

The beneficiaries are aviation authorities of Sub-Saharan Africa and more specifically the Regional Safety Oversight Organisations (RSOO) and Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programmes (COSCAP) of the region and national Civil Aviation Authorities (CAA).

The purposes of the SIASA project were as follows: • To ensure the development of common regional safety standards and procedures

meeting the international requirements in civil aviation (ICAO standards) and eventually the EU aviation safety rules;

• To contribute to the establishment of effective and sustainable RSOOs via institutional assistance and training of staff.

The following five categories of activities were identified during the inception report and was later validated by the project steering committee during its first meeting and constituted the structure of the project’s action plan:

• Assistance to States with SSCs • Regulation and guidance material • Workshop • Training • Organisational

Within the category “Regulation and guidance material”, a working group has been set up to develop Guidance Material for flight procedure approval by CAA personnel. Participants in this working group are delegates from Cameroon Civil Aviation Authority (CCAA), Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA), Mauritania Civil Aviation National Agency (ANAC) and the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) with the active contribution from ICAO African Flight Procedure Programme (AFPP) and some experts from the French DGCA and EASA. Disclaimer: This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document is the result of the working group in charge of the development of this guidance material and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.






Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page iii




TABLE OF CONTENT 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1

2. Prerequisite ............................................................................................................... 2

2.1. Creation of a law (order/circular) ........................................................................................... 2

2.2. Creation of a CAA procedure .................................................................................................. 2

2.3. Compliance with national regulations .................................................................................... 2

3. The ICAO Document 9906 ........................................................................................... 3

4. The ICAO IFP implementation process (Doc 9906) ....................................................... 4

4.1. Step 1: Initiation ...................................................................................................................... 4

4.2. Step 2: Collect and validate data ............................................................................................ 4

4.3. Step 3 : Create a conceptual design ........................................................................................ 5

4.4. Step 4: Review of the conceptual design by stakeholders ..................................................... 5

4.5. Step 5: Apply criteria ............................................................................................................... 6

4.6. Step 6: Document and store ................................................................................................... 6

4.7. Step 7: Conduct Safety Activities ............................................................................................ 6

4.8. Step 8: Conduct validation and criteria verification ............................................................... 7

4.9. Step 9 : Consultation with stakeholders ................................................................................. 8

4.10. Step 10 : approval of IFP by the CAA ...................................................................................... 9

4.11. Step 11 : create draft publication ......................................................................................... 10

4.12. Step 12 : Verify draft publication .......................................................................................... 10

4.13. Step 13: Publish IFP ............................................................................................................... 10

4.14. Step 14 : Obtain feedback from stakeholders ...................................................................... 10

4.15. Step 15 : Conduct continuous maintenance ......................................................................... 10

4.16. Step 16 : Conduct periodic review ........................................................................................ 11

5. Additional requirements of the regulatory framework .............................................. 12

5.1. Storage .................................................................................................................................. 12

5.2. Competency requirements ................................................................................................... 12

6. Oversight activities ................................................................................................... 13

6.1. PANS OPS inspectors qualification ........................................................................................ 13

6.2. Audits .................................................................................................................................... 13

6.3. Review of safety assessment ................................................................................................ 13

6.4. Criteria exemption requests examination ............................................................................ 13

6.5. Follow up of designers competency by the CAA .................................................................. 14






Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page iv




7. Useful Documentation ............................................................................................. 15

7.1. ICAO ...................................................................................................................................... 15

7.2. ICAO IFP Process Flow Diagram ............................................................................................ 16

7.3. Acronyms and abbreviations ................................................................................................ 17









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 1 of 15

1. Introduction

EASA has implemented SIASA Project in order to support the improvement of Aviation Safety in Africa.

The ICAO references for flight procedure design Doc 8168, has had a change of scope with the advent of PBN introduction (Doc 8168 Part III and Doc 9613). Moreover, due to its extension, its procedures are not always fully understood and transposed to the national AIP as required by Annex 15.

The aim of this activity is to setup a group that will develop simplified guidance material for the usage of CAA or regional bodies as required for the development, approval and implementation of instrument flight procedures, conventional and PBN, in accordance with the ICAO Document 9906.

The composition of the group is based on the economical bodies for Africa, with the expert support of the African Flight Procedure Programme. This programme is a not-for-profit programme of excellence in the field of performance-based navigation implementation developed by ICAO. The programme will utilize best practices in training, automation and quality assurance. The programme will foster all aspects of PBN implementation including training, procedure design, validation and quality assurance, airspace design, and operational approval.

Members of the group are experts in the domains concerned for instrument flight procedures regulatory approval.

The guidance material will be developed through meetings under EASA support.

The guidance material is recommended to African Civil Aviation Authorities in charge of instrument flight procedures regulatory approval.

Note: In this document, the term "must" is used in reference to a strong recommendation to implement ICAO requirements.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 2 of 15

2. Prerequisite

2.1. Creation of a law (order/circular)

The State must promulgate an order/circular to define the process to implement instrument flight procedures (IFP) in the State (regulatory framework), including development and approval steps.

This regulatory framework must reflect the obligations included in Annex 11, appendix 6, § 4.

2.2. Creation of a CAA procedure

The CAA must create a procedure describing means to set up the oversight of IFP implementation, including design, approval, review of safety assessment, audits, follow up of designer's competency and criteria exemption.

2.3. Compliance with national regulations

For those states that have already incorporated in their national regulations such a process, it is recommended to review them against the process defined in this document.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 3 of 15

3. The ICAO Document 9906

The documents and procedures created by the CAA should make use of the ICAO document 9906 on Quality Assurance for Instrument Flight Procedure Design. Each requirement created by the CAA or adapted from doc 9906 must be explained and should not be less restrictive than ICAO doc 9906.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 4 of 15

4. The ICAO IFP implementation process (Doc 9906)

4.1. Step 1: Initiation

The request would be initiated by an initiator stakeholder with clear statement of justification.

An initial briefing will be organised to facilitate preliminary discussions between the initiator stakeholder and the CAA regarding the high-level implications of a proposed IFP introduction or change. The initial briefing provides the CAA the opportunity to provide appropriate and tailored advice and guidance on the specific requirements of each IFP proposal.

It also provides the initiator stakeholder the opportunity to advise the CAA of outline IFP proposal requirements, any specific issues or concerns associated with these. It is advisable to involve the concerned ANSP/aerodrome operator in the initial briefing.

Possible affected stakeholders need to be identified. The following is a list of potential stakeholders to be involved in the Project development: CAA, ANSP, air operators, environmental bodies when relevant, IFP designer, airport management, general aviation, aerial work, military when relevant. The initiation meeting is organized by the initiator stakeholder in coordination with the CAA for all concerned stakeholders.

Prior to the initiation meeting, it is recommended that the initiator stakeholder and the CAA have prepared the documentation regarding the Project. It is recommended to choose an IFP design service provider among those designated by the State.

The output of the initiation meeting should be a Go/NoGo decision at managerial level to continue with the IFP development. The purpose of the initiation meeting is to identify possible issues with affected stakeholders, which the initiator stakeholder will have to consider in the IFP development.

The nominations of the Project Manager (Initiator stakeholder) and the CAA focal point are part of the process. They should be nominated at this point in the process.

Note: during this step, runway certification has to be checked against flight procedure project.

4.2. Step 2: Collect and validate data

4.2.1. Data collection

Data should be collected by the IFP designer. The IFP designer must ensure that specific ATS requirements related to local traffic patterns (altitude, direction and airspeed), feeder/transitions, arrival/departures, preferred routes, ATS routes, communication facilities, time, restrictions and any ATS needs, restrictions or constraints are provided by the ATS provider.

The IFP designer must collect the following data from recognized sources: • Terrain data: electronic raster and/or vector data or paper cartographic maps; • Obstacle data (man-made or natural) with their coordinates and elevation;









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 5 of 15

• Aerodrome/heliport data, e.g. ARP/HRP and runway(s) with their coordinates and elevation, lighting, magnetic variation and rate of change, weather statistics, altimeter source;

• Aeronautical data: airspace structure, airspace classifications (A, B, C, D, E, F, G), airways/air routes, altimeter transition altitudes/flight levels, neighbouring instrument procedures, area(s) of magnetic unreliability;

• NAVAIDS data: coordinates, elevation, service volume, frequency, identifier, magnetic variation;

• Existing significant points to local navigation

4.2.2. Validation of data

The IFP designer must use aeronautical data that meet the requirements of accuracy, resolution and integrity as required in Annex 4, Annex 14, and Annex 15.

It is recommended that IFP designer visits the airport to see obstacles and terrain and evaluate the validity of the data (accuracy, resolution, integrity, reference geodetic datum and effective dates) then incorporate them into the design documentation.

An additional data/survey on site would be requested by the IFP designer, if necessary.

Up to date data must be used. If not the case, conservatory margins have to be taken by the IFP designer. The technical study can begin with these margins.

4.3. Step 3 : Create a conceptual design

No need to involve the CAA.

The IFP designer responsible for the IFP design should develop a conceptual design for review by the stakeholders.

Coordination with interested/affected stakeholders should continue throughout the conceptual phase and the subsequent design phase of this process.

Complex design environment develop several design options in order to provide sufficient input for the review of the design concept.

4.4. Step 4: Review of the conceptual design by stakeholders

Conceptual design is sent to be reviewed by the stakeholders and validated.

The conceptual design should include a targeted implementation AIRAC date.

Militaries and environmental bodies have (in almost all cases) to be present.

The review should preferably be carried out in a face-to-face meeting, and CAA must be part of this meeting.

Conclusion of this meeting must be sent to the CAA for information (equivalent of a notification).









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 6 of 15

4.5. Step 5: Apply criteria

Actions for IFP designer

The flight procedure designer must design flight procedures according to criteria defined by the State. These criteria should take the ICAO PANS-OPS as the basis. The design criteria (PANS OPS criteria for instance) to be used in the State has to be written in the national regulation. In the event that the State decides to use the criteria of Doc 8168 PANS-OPS but with certain differences, this should be indicated in the State AIP in accordance with Annex 15.

In case of exemptions/deviations from PANS OPS criteria, formal approval by CAA is needed at this stage. To this end, the State must provide in its regulations the possibility to deviate from the current design criteria and the requirements and documentation to be provided for this purpose. The waiver request will be composed of at least:

• A clear statement of the need to deviate from the existing criteria; • A presentation of the various criteria whose use is envisaged; • Any aeronautical study to demonstrate that the procedures designed using these

criteria would achieve an equivalent level of safety.

Expertise of experienced pilot may be required.

The IFP design service provider must develop a training program according to the requirements in point 5.2.1, which ensure that designers have the mastery of the criteria used.

The design of flight procedures can be done manually or with software. However, to improve the quality of design (reducing errors by automating calculations) and to facilitate the traceability of data, designers must use design software validated by the State.

4.6. Step 6: Document and store

The IFP designer must document the IFP design activities (the technical report) in order to facilitate the validation and later maintenance. IFP designer has to document the following:

• Necessary data used as input in the IFP design; • IFP design file that includes design criteria (especially when the design criteria differ

from those in PANS OPS), calculations, parameters, publication drafts and the data to be published in AIP;

• Tools and software used; • Stakeholder feedback during the initiation review.

4.7. Step 7: Conduct Safety Activities

4.7.1. Determine level of safety impact

It is important to assess the level of the safety impact. The goal of the safety assessment is, at least, to study the integration of the flight procedure in the concerned airspace and assess its impact on safety. It should aim at demonstrating that no unacceptable safety risk are introduced in the system.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 7 of 15

To assess the impact on safety of the change, a preliminary hazard analysis should be conducted to determine the likely hazards that may arise from the change.

Determining this may be accomplished by measuring the impact in various domains, such as: • Operational consequences of the change ; • Operational consequences for external partners; • Level of new functionality introduced in contrast to the existing systems; • Number of technical systems affected by the change ; • Amount of training or amount of additional staffing needed; and • Complexity of the transition from the existing system.

Responsibility belongs to the project manager, but the assessment should be performed by those stakeholders that have managerial control over the risks posed by the IFP (e.g. ANSP, aerodrome, airspace users, CAA). The assessment has to be performed by competent and trained staff in safety assessment activities. Coordination between stakeholders and IFP designers during the safety assessment is paramount. Relevant stakeholders (at least ANSP and IFP designer) must participate in the safety assessment.

4.7.2. Develop safety documentation

Safety documentation should be provided for the approval of the IFP. The safety documentation must have a conclusion (saying that the level of safety is acceptable, otherwise the IFP should be modified or abandoned). A good practice is to have this document signed by 3 different people (“written by”, “verified by”, “approved1 by”) before submission for the CAA approval. The project manager has to be the person signing in the “approved by” box.

A list of persons who have participated to the realisation of the safety assessment should be included in the documentation.

4.8. Step 8: Conduct validation and criteria verification

The purpose of validation is to obtain an assessment of procedure design including obstacle, terrain and navigation data, and provides an assessment of flyability of the procedure. The full validation process includes ground validation and flight validation.

4.8.1. Ground Validation

Ground validation is a mandatory step for each new or modified flight procedure. Ground validation must always be undertaken. It encompasses a systematic review of the steps and calculations (IFP design review) involved in the procedure design as well as the impact on flight operations by the procedure (pre-flight validation).

IFP design review must be undertaken by an independent and qualified IFP designer. Once the IFP review is completed with no objections, the pre-flight validation activities must be carried out. The result of this validation must be documented to be submitted as part of the document package for the CAA approval of the IFP. Pre-flight validation (on ground) is aimed

1 This approval is not done by the CAA, but an internal approval.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 8 of 15

at determining the impact of IFP on flight operations. This validation is conducted by a person(s) with appropriate knowledge of flight validation issues, preferably by an experienced pilot, and the IFP designer. The goal of pre-flight validation is to familiarize and identify potential issues in the procedure design from a flight operational perspective and decide the further steps in the validation process (e.g. to decide if simulator evaluation and/or flight evaluation are needed). The result of this validation must be documented to be submitted as part of the document package for the CAA approval of the IFP.

4.8.2. Flight validation

Flight validation is a mandatory step only if the outcome of the pre-flight validation stipulates it has to be conducted. There are two types of activities in the flight validation: simulator evaluation and flight evaluation. It is recommended practice to undertake simulator evaluation prior to the flight evaluation, if possible.

4.8.3. Simulator evaluation

Recommended step for complex procedures or procedures requiring waiver/mitigation for deviations from design criteria. The aim is at verifying chart depictions, assess flyability and evaluate human factors issues.

Flight evaluation

The purpose of a Flight evaluation is to check the flyability of a procedure and needs in certain cases to be conducted by an adequate type of aircraft. This information is provided by the validation pilot. Flight evaluation is performed in order to verify data, charts and to assess obstacle infrastructure, flyability and human factors aspects, among others objectives.

Note: Periodic flight inspection can be used to perform flight evaluation depending on the aircraft category of the IFR procedure.

4.8.4. Flight inspection

Flight inspection (see ICAO Doc 9906 1.5.2) may be required for the purpose of calibrating ground-based NAVAIDS or monitoring/evaluating the performance of the GNSS (to make sure that there is no interference or permanent jamming of the GNSS signal). Flight inspection must be performed by a qualified flight inspector using a suitably equipped aircraft. The CAA has to decide if the flight inspection is a mandatory step in the IFP validation of specific procedures (e.g., for new PBN procedures).

4.8.5. Produce validation documentation (report)

This final step is to assure proper completeness of all forms and reports to validate the entire IFP package. The validation report should consist of individual reports of all steps performed in the validation process.

4.9. Step 9 : Consultation with stakeholders

At this stage of the development, all stakeholders should be consulted to get their opinion on the proposed procedure. Gathering their input at this stage allows the creation of a statement









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 9 of 15

on the fulfilment of the initially agreed requirements (the initiation meeting and the review of the conceptual design). Depending on environmental protection laws in each State, a consultation of environmental bodies has to be conducted.

The stakeholders competent in that domain should validate those areas of specific competency that the design office does not possess. A written statement from those entities will serve for the approval process of the IFP.

The stakeholders have to be the same as the ones present at the step 4 (review of the conceptual design), which include militaries and environmental bodies.

It is unlikely that any issue will be raised at this point of the process, but in the event of a significant safety issue being identified, the IFP may need to be reconsidered. The project manager has the possibility to allow a new modified design (back to step 1), in case of an objection from a stakeholder.

Stakeholders’ endorsement

The Stakeholders and users views and comments shall be documented and stored. Before stakeholders endorsement different opinions and feedback should be analysed and collated. This should form part of the documentation for the approval process of the IFP.

This consultation can takes place as a public meeting or with video conference, expert workshop or even just by e-mail.

4.10. Step 10 : approval of IFP by the CAA

Each new or modified flight procedure must be approved by the CAA before being published in the AIP2. The documentation needed to get the approval is provided by the Project Manager and it includes:

• Report of the Managerial decision (step 1) • Technical report of the instrument flight procedure design, including the instrument

flight procedure description and the draft publication • Report of the data validation (step 2); this report could be inserted in the technical

report • Report of the Safety assessment (step 7) • Report of the validation process (step 8) including ground validation report (IFP

reviewed by an independent designer and pre-flight review) and flight validation report (as relevant step: simulator evaluation, flight evaluation and flight inspection)

• Stakeholders endorsement from the consultation (step 9) • The designer’s competency documentation (including initial and recurrent training)

could be requested but it is recommended in Doc 9906 • The software validation would be provided. The framework of the document would be

shared with the provider

2 This has been proposed as amendment to Annex 11, Chapter 2, point 2.32 in the ICAO SL15.22 dated on the 13th May 2015









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 10 of 15

• A conformity certificate which indicates that the procedure has been designed in conformity with criteria accepted by the CAA (refer to national regulation) would be provided.

• Note: CAA has to check if the runway certification is compliant with the flight procedure intended to be published

• Upon completion of its evaluation of the IFP, the CAA must inform the Project manager of its decision to accept or reject the IFP without undue delay, including the rationale supporting its decision to approve or reject the IFP proposal. The CAA must publish its approval of the proposed IFP.

4.11. Step 11 : create draft publication

The AIS must develop the chart taking into account all relevant requirements of Annex 4 and Annex 15. Additional requirements valid for the State in which the procedure is to be implemented should also be considered.

IFP designer must provide all relevant information required for the AIP publication, including a coding table. Rules and standard for the coding table should be based on ARINC 424 requirements.

It is important that the AIS receives the entire IFP, supported by a graphical depiction, for regulatory approval and for the initiation of the AIRAC publication process.

4.12. Step 12 : Verify draft publication

Actions for IFP designers (and possibly others stakeholders such as pilot, users of the procedure, etc.…). The final draft charts must be verified to check completeness and correctness.

Other stakeholders should also receive a copy of the draft State publication at this stage to check completeness.

4.13. Step 13: Publish IFP

Action for AIS: • Publish IFP as per Annex 4, Annex 15 and State requirements.

4.14. Step 14 : Obtain feedback from stakeholders

Action for ANSP/Aerodrome operator.

ANSP/Aerodrome operator should develop some mechanisms in order to get feedback from users of the new procedures published. This feedback should be forwarded to the IFP designers for information or necessary action.

4.15. Step 15 : Conduct continuous maintenance

It is a good practice to designate the ANSP and/or aerodrome operator as responsible for step 15 and 16, in collaboration with the CAA, when appropriate. When ATS is available on the









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 11 of 15

airport, the ANSP should be responsible for the maintenance and the periodic review. Otherwise, airport operator should be responsible.

The goal is to ensure that every change identified to obstacles, aerodrome, aeronautical data and criteria are assessed. If required, a modification of the flight procedure has to be initiated as soon as possible.

The designer must have access to these information, through the responsible nominated organisation.

The IFP designer will have to determine whether or not the change is significant or not. This should be reported to the ATS/Aerodrome operator for the decision of further steps, including the need of re-design part or all of the flight procedure following the complete process.

4.16. Step 16 : Conduct periodic review

The goal is to update the flight procedure on a periodic basis, determined by the CAA. All changes that occurred since the publication or the last review of the procedure have to be reviewed. If as a result of the review, the need of a redesign of part or all of the flight procedure is identified, the complete process should be followed.

This periodicity must not be greater than 5 years. This periodicity shall be written in the national regulations.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 12 of 15

5. Additional requirements of the regulatory framework

5.1. Storage

The IFP designer and the project manager must store the IFP documentation (technical report, safety assessment, software version …) as long as the flight procedure is in service. A paper version and an electronic version (.pdf preferred) should be stored.

5.2. Competency requirements

The CAA must establish requirements to ensure flight procedure designers' competency. The IFP design service provider must be responsible to ensure their designs are competent trained in IFP design. These requirements must be included in the national regulation.

The Training program for IFP designer consists of: • Initial training (theoretical and practical/OJT training). An initial training course should

be based as a minimum on: ICAO Doc. 8168 PANS-OPS; ICAO Doc 9613 PBN Manual; ICAO Doc 9906 Quality Assurance Manual for Flight Procedure Design; and Software tools used in the design. This may be acquired as part of the on-

the-job training.

• Continuous training: A designer who has been declared fit to design autonomously IFP must maintain its competency. To do this, the CAA can ask him to design a certain number of IFP per year or to verify a certain number of IFP per year. These figures have to be discussed between the CAA and the main IFP service provider in order to reach a sufficient level of safety without too stringent constraints.

• Refresher training: Refresher training is aimed at addressing changes in the available criteria (PANS-OPS) and regulations, recurrent to strengthen skills and knowledge due to their disuse.

If a designer wants to follow another initial procedure designers training, he will have to demonstrate to the CAA that a skill level at least equivalent is reached at the end of the course.

Any new information regarding IFP design must be distributed to the IFP design services. CAA must that this action is in place.

The IFP design provider should set up a mechanism to ensure that procedures designers have knowledge of the amendments of the design criteria and that the IFP are developed and reviewed in the light of these amendments.

Once the theoretical initial training is completed, the designer is considered as a designer "in training" and a good practice is to require the IFP designer to undertake practical application of theoretical knowledge with the assistance of an experienced designer before designing an IFP in real situations. This could be achieved, e.g. with minimum of 2 IFP designs completed over period of 1 year.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 13 of 15

6. Oversight activities

6.1. PANS OPS inspectors qualification

PANS OPS inspectors need to acquire competency about the design of a flight procedure and about the oversight methodology:

• Flight procedure design competency: In order to have a sufficient PANS OPS knowledge to deal with every issue that can be encountered during the flight procedure design process, CAA inspectors should follow the same qualification process as designers, except OJT. Each CAA has to decide what kind of training, PANS OPS inspectors have to follow in order to acquire the competency.

• Oversight competency: In order to carry out oversight function, PANS OPS inspector must follow a training which includes auditing technique, safety assessment review technique, follow-up of designers' competency and criteria exemption request examination.

6.2. Audits

The CAA may carry out audits in accordance with local procedures.

6.3. Review of safety assessment

This action has to be done according to standards.

6.4. Criteria exemption requests examination

The national regulation (law/order) must include a paragraph dealing with exemption request for design criteria.

• The CAA should establish a process to manage the exemption requests. As a minimum, it is advised to include that:

• A deviation request notification is sent as soon as possible to the CAA; • A CAA contact is clearly identified; • Documentation needed by the CAA in order to provide the exemption; • Once the CAA has been notified and has received the full deviation request case, as

specified above, the CAA must analyse the demand and the argument to decide whether this is acceptable or not.

• To achieve a satisfactory level of confidence, the CAA should get support and advice from Expert organization if independent from flight procedure design services, foreign CAA advisers if partnership is signed with them, operations department from the CAA in case of flyability issue, etc.

• Archiving the complete case with the final exemption request granted and signed by the CAA.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 14 of 15

6.5. Follow up of designers competency by the CAA

A good practice to check the competency of IFP designers is for the CAA to receive the competency certificates from the hierarchy of the IFP designer. A list of people authorized to design for the State airspace may be kept updated by the CAA. This list may be used each time an approval request is asked.









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 15 of 15

7. Useful Documentation

7.1. ICAO

• Annex 4 - Aeronautical Charts • Annex 11 - Air Traffic Services • Annex 14 - Aerodromes • Annex 15 - Aeronautical information services • Doc 4444 - PANS-ATM • Doc 8071 - Manual on Testing of Radio Navigation Air, vol I, vol II • Doc 8168 - Aircraft Operations, vol II • Doc 8697 - Aeronautical Chart Manual • Doc 9137 - Airport Service Manual – Control of Obstacles • Doc 9150 - Stolport Manual • Doc 9274 - AN/904 Manual on the Use of the Collision Risk Model (CRM) for ILS

operations • Doc 9365 - All Weather Operation manual • Doc 9368 - AN/911 Instrument Flight Procedure Construction Manual • Doc 9613 - PBN Manual • Doc 9674 - WGS Manual • Doc 9859 - Safety Management Manual • Doc 9881 - Guidelines for Electronic Terrain, Obstacle and Aerodrome Mapping

Information • Doc 9905 - Manual for RNP-AR procedure design • Doc 9906 - Quality Assurance Manual for FPD, vol I, vol II, vol III, vol V and vol VI, • Doc 9931 - Continuous Descent Operations Manual (CDO) • Doc 9992 - Manual on Use of PBN in Airspace Design • Doc 9993 - Continuous Climb operations Manual (CCO) • Doc 9997 - PBN Operational Approval Manual









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 16 of 15

7.2. ICAO IFP Process Flow Diagram









Tel.: +49 221 8999 000




Page 17 of 15

7.3. Acronyms and abbreviations

AIS Aeronautical Information Services AIRAC Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider ARINC 424 A Specified Navigation System Data Base standard ARP Aerodrome Reference Point ATS Air Traffic Services CAA Civil Aviation Authority Doc Document EASA European Aviation Safety Agency GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System HRP Heliport Reference Point ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization IFP Instrument Flight Procedure OJT On The Job Training MOC Minimum Obstacle Clearance NAVAIDS Navigation Aids PANS OPS Procedure for Air Navigation Services-Operations PBN Performance Based Navigation SIASA Support the Improvement of Aviation Safety in Africa

Flight Procedure Approval Guidance Material.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Flight Procedure Approval Guidance Material.pdf