DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evolution of Aviation Safety Regulations to cope with the concept of data-driven rulemaking - Safety Management System & Fatigue Risk Management System

  • Lee, Gun-Young (Dept. of Aeronautical Science & Flight Operation, the Korea National University of Transportation)
  • Received : 2018.11.30
  • Accepted : 2018.12.26
  • Published : 2018.12.30

Abstract

Article 37 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation requires that rules should be adopted to keep in compliance with international standards and recommended practices established by ICAO. As SARPs are revised annually, each ICAO Member State needs to reflect the new content in its national aviation Acts in a timely manner. In recent years, data-driven international standards have been developed because of the important roles of aviation safety data and information-based legislation in accident prevention based on human factors. The Safety Management System and crew Fatigue Risk Management Systems were reviewed as examples of the result of data-driven rulemaking. The safety management system was adopted in 2013 with the introduction of Annex 19 and Chapter 5 of the relevant manual describes safety data collection and analysis systems. Through analysis of safety data and information, decision makers can make informed data-driven decisions. The Republic of Korea introduced Safety Management System in accordance with Article 58 of the Aviation Safety Act for all airlines, maintenance companies, and airport corporations. To support the SMS, both mandatory reporting and voluntary safety reporting systems need to be in place. Up until now, the standard of administrative penal dispensation for violations of the safety management system has been very weak. Various regulations have been developed and implemented in the United States and Europe for the proper legislation of the safety management system. In the wake of the crash of the Colgan aircraft, the US Aviation Safety Committee recommended the US Federal Aviation Administration to establish a system that can identify and manage pilot fatigue hazards. In 2010, a notice of proposed rulemaking was issued by the Federal Aviation Administration and in 2011, the final rule was passed. The legislation was applied to help differentiate risk based on flight according to factors such as the pilot's duty starting time, the availability of the auxiliary crew, and the class of the rest facility. Numerous amounts data and information were analyzed during the rulemaking process, and reflected in the resultant regulations. A cost-benefit analysis, based on the data of the previous 10 year period, was conducted before the final legislation was reached and it was concluded that the cost benefits are positive. The Republic of Korea also currently has a clause on aviation safety legislation related to crew fatigue risk, where an airline can choose either to conform to the traditional flight time limitation standard or fatigue risk management system. In the United States, specifically for the purpose of data-driven rulemaking, the Airline Rulemaking Committee was formed, and operates in this capacity. Considering the advantageous results of the ARC in the US, and the D4S in Europe, this is a system that should definitely be introduced in Korea as well. A cost-benefit analysis is necessary, and can serve to strengthen the resulting legislation. In order to improve the effectiveness of data-based legislation, it is necessary to have reinforcement of experts and through them prepare a more detailed checklist of relevant variables.

국제민간항공협약 37조는 ICAO에서 제정하는 국제표준 및 권고에 따라 각국의 사정에 맞는 입법을 할 것을 요구하고 있다. 국제표준 및 권고는 매년 개정되고 있으므로 각 회원국은 적기에 해당 내용을 자국 항공법규에 반영할 필요가 있다. 최근에는 데이터 기반 국제표준이 만들어지고 있으며 그 이유는 인적요소를 주축으로 하여 사고예방을 위해서는 항공안전 데이터와 정보에 기반한 입법이 중요하게 되었기 때문이다. 데이터 기반 입법의 예로 안전관리시스템과 승무원 피로위험관리시스템이 검토 되었다. 안전관리시스템은 부속서 19가 2013년 채택되었으며 관련 매뉴얼 제5장에는 안전데이터의 수집과 분석 시스템에 기술되어 있다. 안전데이터와 정보의 분석을 통하여 의사결정권자는 데이터에 기반한 결정을 할 수 있다. 대한민국은 항공안전법 제58조에 따라 모든 항공사, 정비업체, 공항공사 등이 안전관리시스템을 도입하고 이행하여야 한다. 이러한 안전관리시스템을 뒷받침하기 위해서는 의무보고와 자발적 안전보고 시스템이 활성화 될 필요가 있으며 현재까지는 안전관리시스템 도입 위반에 대한 행정처분 기준은 아주 미미한 상태이다. 미국과 유럽도 안전관리시스템의 적절한 입법을 위하여 다양한 규정이 개발되어 시행되고 있다. 피로위험관리시스템의 경우 2009년 Colgan 항공기 추락을 계기로 미국교통안전위원회는 미연방항공청에 조종사 피로위험을 확인하고 관리할 수 있는 시스템 구축을 권고하였으며 2010년 미연방항공청에서 발행한 입법예고에는 약 8,000여개의 제안이 있었다. 2011년 최종법안이 통과되었으며 조종사의 조종사가 업무를 시작한 시간, 보조 승무원의 탑승여부, 휴식시설의 등급 등에 따라 승무시간을 차등 적용하는 입법이 이루어지게 되었다. 이러한 입법과정에 수많은 데이터와 정보가 분석되었으며 그 내용이 승무시간에 반영되었다. 최종 입법이 이루어지기 이전에 비용 대비 효과 분석이 실시되었으며 10년간 운영할 경우 비용보다는 효과가 더 크다는 결론이 이루어졌다. 대한민국도 승무원 피로위험 관련 항공안전법 조항이 있으며 항공사는 전통적인 승무시간 제한 방법 또는 피로위험관리시스템 둘 중 하나를 선택할 수 있다. 데이터 기반 입법을 위하여 미국의 경우 항공입법위원회를 구성하여 운영하고 있는데 이는 대한민국에도 도입이 필요한 내용이며 유럽에서 시행하고 있는 D4S도 고려할 만한 시스템이다. 비용 대비 효과 분석은 입법을 견고하게 할 수 있어 필요하다고 판단되며 데이터 기반 입법의 실효성을 제고하기 위해서는 전문 인력의 보강, 보다 자세한 점검표 작성 등이 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. Aviation Safety Act, Act No. 14551, 17. Jan. 2017
  2. Flight Safety Regulations for Aeroplanes MOLIT AC No. 2017-1039, 29. Dec. 2017
  3. Ministerial Regulations for Aviation Safety Act, MOLIT No. 559, 22. Nov. 2018
  4. Lee, Koo-Hee, A Study on the Development of Crew's Fatigue Management Regulations, The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy Vol. 27, No 1, 2011
  5. Lee, Kwang-jun, Rearch on the Development Strategies for Korean Type Crew Fatigue Management, 2017
  6. Caldwell, John A. "Crew Schedules, Sleep Deprivation and Aviation Performance", Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2012
  7. EASA Report from the commission to the European Parliament and the Council -The European Aviation Safety Programme, 2015
  8. FAA Advisory Circular 120-100, Basics of Aviation Fatigue, 2010
  9. FAA Advisory Circular 120-103, Fatigue Risk Management Systems for Aviation Safety, 2010
  10. FAA Advisory Circular 120-103A, Fatigue Risk Management Systems for Aviation Safety, 2013
  11. FAA Aviation Rulemaking Committee Charter, Performance-Based Operations Aviation Rulemaking Committee, 2018
  12. Federal Register Vol.58, No. 190 Presidential Documents, Executive Order 12866, 1993
  13. Federal Register Vol.77 No.2 Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements; Final Rule, 2012
  14. Federal Register Vol 75 No.177 Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements; Proposed Rule, 2010
  15. Federal Register Vol.76, No.14 Presidential Documents, Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, 2011
  16. Gander PH, Merry A, Millar MM, Weller J. Hours of work and fatigue-related error : a survey of New Zealand anesthetists, Anaesth Intensive Care, 2000
  17. Graeber, R. C., Crew factors in flight operations: I. Effects of 9-hour time zone changes on fatigue and the circadian rhythms of sleep/wake and core temperature, 1985
  18. ICAO Annex 6 Operation of Aircraft, Part I - International Commercial Air Transport - Aeroplanes, Eleventh Edition, 2018
  19. ICAO Annex 19 Safety Management, First Edition, 2013
  20. ICAO Manual for the Oversight of Fatigue Management Approaches(Doc 9966), Second Edition, 2016
  21. ICAO Safety Management Manual (Doc 9859) - Fourth Edition, 2018 Jeffrey H. Goode, Are Pilots at risk of accidents due to fatigue?, Journal of Safety Research 34, 2003
  22. Mahon, G. & Cross, T. The Fatigue Management Program: Alternatives to Prescription. Queensland Transport: Queensland, Australia, 1999
  23. Mallis M.M., Banks S., & Dinges D.F. Aircrew fatigue, sleep need and circadian rhythmicity (Chapter). In Elsevier, E. Salas, T. Allard, & D. Maurino, (Eds), Human Factors in Aviation (2nd edition), in press, 2010
  24. NTSB Accident Report. Loss of Control on Approach Colgan Air, Operating as Continental Connection Flight 3407 Bombardier DHC-8-400, N200WQ Clarence Center, New York February 12, 2009, NTSB/AAR-10/01, PB2010-910401, 2010
  25. NTSB study 94/01
  26. Public LAW 111-216, Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension ACT, 2010
  27. Regulation (EU) No 376/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council - Reporting analysis and follow-up of occurrences in civil aviation, 2014
  28. WSHCOUNCIL, Workplace Safety & Health Guidelines : Fatigue Management, 2010