1. ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
ICAO – EUROCONTROL EUROPEAN SEMINAR ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY FOR AERONAUTICALCOMMUNICATIONS Brussels, October 2005
ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
Paul Lamy Chief, Flight Safety Section – ICAO 1 1

2. ICAO Aviation Language Proficiency requirements
Why
The safety concern
How
The work of the PRICE Study Group
What
The ICAO Language proficiency requirements

3. Aviation Language Proficiency
Why
What is the safety concern(s) in international civil aviation for which the ICAO language proficiency requirements might provide an answer?

4. A review of 28,000 safety reports
Over 70% of problems cited involved message exchange.
Communication errors still represent largest category of problems.
However, only 1% of communications are compromised by inaccuracy.

5. The Trail of Wreckage … The common element: Communication
Trident/DC-9 mid-air collision, Zagreb -1976
Double B747 runway collision, Tenerife
B707 fuel exhaustation, JFK
B757 CFIT, Cali
IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India
MD83/Shorts 330 runway collision, Paris/CDG -2000
MD80/Citation runway collision, Milan – 2001
Helios Airways – Greece August 2005 (?)
… The common element: Communication
Helios Airways: No official report yet – Caution is necessary

6. Air-Ground Communications
Has been a safety concern for decades
Action up to the 90s
Standardized Phraseologies
Hope of development of a radiotelephony speech based on a simplified English
Realization that it was not sufficient

7. A Systemic Perspective
Design
Reason Model
Management
Training
Supervision
Kept under control in
normal system conditions…
Operations
Sources: Docs 9683; 9806

8. A Systemic Perspective (cont.)
Design
Management
Training
Supervision
Operations
…surface in unstable system conditions (with great damaging potential)
Sources: Docs 9683; 9806

9. A Training PerspectiveH L S L E
SHELL Model L
Mismatches at the operational interfaces = breeding grounds for operational errors
Source: Doc 9683

10. An Operational Perspective
Threats
Threat Management
Strategies
Error Management
Errors
Undesired State
Threat and Error
Management (TEM)
Model
Source: Doc 9803

11. Language Proficiency: A Threat
Passenger management
Language Proficiency
ATC
Cabin Crew
Terrain
Weather
Similar call signs
Maintenance
Time pressure
Ground Crew
Flight diversions
Slide will appear with the cockpit and title only.
ONE MOUSE CLICK will start the animation and automatically show many of the LOSA observer threats.
This is a good opportunity to compare the list that the class developed with those that were specifically looked for on the observations.
Heavy traffic
System
malfunctions
Unfamiliar airports
Automation events
Missed approaches
Source: Doc 9803

12. Therefore, as Safety Practitioners…
Language proficiency is
NOT a cultural issue
NOT a case of cultural imperialism
From a safety management perspective
A latent condition with safety damaging potential
From a training management perspective
A technical skill acquired through conventional training
From an operational management perspective
A threat that increases complexity of aviation operations

13. Aviation Language Proficiency
Managing language proficiency in aviation safety:
A risk management exercise
Denial: defensive attitude
Repair: cosmetic acceptance
Reform: tackle the safety concern

14. IICAO Aviation Language Proficiency requirements
How to tackle the safety concern?
IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India – Nov. 1996
32nd ICAO Assembly 1998

15. RESOLUTION A-32 by 32nd Assembly of ICAO 1998
“…steps to ensure that air traffic controllers and flight crews involved in flight operations in airspace where the use of the English language is required, are proficient
in conducting and
comprehending
radiotelephony
communications in
the English language”

16. PRICE STUDY GROUP
Proficiency Requirement In Common English Study Group
Comprised aviation and linguistic experts from Argentina, Canada, China, France, Russia, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, the United States, EUROCONTROL, IATA, IFATCA, IFALPA and ICAO.
Mandated to
Review all aspects of air-ground and ground-ground voice communication
Develop requirements concerning English language testing
Develop language proficiency requirements

17. The Issues Existing provisions at the time
Phraseology vs. plain language
English only or English and other languages
Means to assess language proficiency reliably

18. Previous Annex 10 requirements
Phraseologies to be used when specified
Language
Language of the ground station
Hope of developing a universal radiotelephony speech
English should be made available pending the development of such universal radiotelephony speech
Use of interpreters

19. Previous ICAO language requirements
For controllers:
“… speak the languages designated for use in air traffic control without accent or impediment which could adversely affect communication”;
For pilots:
Strangely quiet!

20. Pre-eminent R/T communication problems:
frequency congestion,
poor microphone technique,
ambiguity,
phonetic similarity,
incomplete call-signs,
confused sequence of numbers in messages,
strings of instructions,
truncated phraseologies,
inadequate acknowledgements,
readback errors,
hearback errors.

21. How compliant are pilots and controllers?
“In spite of the efforts made to achieve compliance with agreed international standard procedures, violations are commonplace. It is probably the case that the gap between theory and practice is wider in communication procedures than in any other facet of aviation” (Wiener and Nagel, 1988).

22. Standardized Phraseology
… is insufficient to deal with the full range of situations requiring R/T exchange.
… but how to complement standardized phraseologies?

23. English vs. universal speech
More recent research established that….
There is no more effective form of speech than natural languages, and
Plain language is the only medium of communication sufficiently reliable, comprehensive and adaptable for international aviation operations.
English for aviation ..
does not belong to a culture;
is a tool, used by controllers & pilots as a matter of convenience;
has no special inherent qualities;
is the most accessible of all second languages.

24. English: Sole universal aviation language?
Would it eradicate all possibility of misapprehension?
No!
Would it greatly aid situational awareness?
Yes, but it assumes that everyone has proper English proficiency
Yes; but it would not make it complete!
Some transmissions are blocked;
Not all aircraft transmit on frequency;
Controllers hand-over blocks of airspace to third parties;
Crews’ workload disallows constant monitoring.
An erroneous assumption of situational awareness could be prejudicial to safe operations.

25. PRICE SG conclusions (1)
Phraseologies shall be used whenever possible but …
… there is no practical alternative to the use of plain language for the full range of aeronautical R/T communication, and
The use of plain language in the exchange of critical operational information requires:
an understanding of the fundamentals of linguistics,
an appreciation of the susceptibility of language to misapprehension, and
a commitment to the highest standards of discipline and care.

26. PRICE SG conclusions (2)
The universal availability of at least one medium of radiotelephony communication is important for safety and efficiency in international air navigation;
The lack of a language common to the aircrew and the ground station could lead to an accident;
There is a need to retain the language used by the station on the ground.

27. PRICE SG conclusions (3)
Parity must exist between pilots and controllers in language proficiency requirements; thus
A single minimum standard is the best solution for the entire target group; but ..
.. it does not mean that the test shall be the same
Responsibility shall also be vested in airline operators and ATS providers for ensuring that staff meet proficiency requirements

28. PRICE SG conclusions (4)
The new provisions will impact heavily the aviation community but with:
Extensive guidance material,
Education & awareness programs worldwide,
Staff support activities by operators,
Increased compliance with ICAO standardized phraseology, and
Highest standards of discipline,
We need and can improve the 1% figure!

29. What
Annex 10
Annex 1
General concept
Review of the provisions
Implementation timeline
Annex 6
Annex 11
PANS-ATM

30. Annex 10 – Volume II
Chapter 5 addresses voice communications in the aeronautical communication service linking ground stations and aircraft.

31. Phraseology and Plain Language
Annex 10 – Volume II
Phraseology and Plain Language
Para ICAO phraseology shall be used in all situations for which it has been specified. Only when standardized phraseology cannot serve an intended transmission, plain language shall be used
“ In all communications, the highest standard of discipline shall be observed at all times.”
Pilots and controllers are a risk to safety if they are careless and disregard fundamental technique.
Para Was a recommendation

32. Language(s) to be used Annex 10 – Volume II
Para : The air-ground radiotelephony communications shall be conducted in the language normally used by the station on the ground or in the English language
Para The English language shall be available, on request from any aircraft station, at all stations on the ground serving designated airports and routes used by international air services
“ In all communications, the highest standard of discipline shall be observed at all times.”
Pilots and controllers are a risk to safety if they are careless and disregard fundamental technique.
Para Was a recommendation

33. Provisions no longer in force
Annex 10 – Volume II
Provisions no longer in force
Interpreters are no longer authorized
The Attachment on the development of Radiotelephony speech for international aviation has been withdrawn
“ In all communications, the highest standard of discipline shall be observed at all times.”
Pilots and controllers are a risk to safety if they are careless and disregard fundamental technique.
Para Was a recommendation

34. Licences with language proficiency requirements
Annex 1
Licences with language proficiency requirements
Aeroplane and helicopter pilots
Glider and free balloon pilots
Flight Engineers and Flight Navigators
Air Traffic Controllers
Aeronautical Station Operators
Licences without language proficiency requirements
Flight Dispatcher
Aircraft Maintenance Engineer

35. Shall speak and understand Rating scale is applied
General Principles
Limited to radiotelephony communication
The “Speak and Understand” Standard
Cover all languages used in radio communication
Assessment using a rating scale (level 4)
Progressive implementation
Shall speak and understand
Rating scale is applied
27 Nov. 2003
5 March 2008

36. Annex 1 Aeroplane & Helicopter Pilots (PPL, CPL and ATPL)
Air Traffic Controllers and Aeronautical Station Operators
Flight Engineers
Free balloon and glider pilots
Flight Navigators

37. Language proficiency in Annex 1
Aeroplane & helicopter pilots (PPL, CPL and ATPL)
Air traffic controllers and aeronautical station operators
Language proficiency in Annex 1
shall demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications (Standard )
after 5 March 2008,
the “speak and understand” ability shall be demonstrated to level 4 of the ICAO rating scale (Standard and Appendix)
recurrent testing will be required for those below level 6 (recommendation: every 3 years for level 4 and every 6 years for level 5)
previous Standard on the use of radiotelephony procedures and phraseology still applies

38. Language proficiency in Annex 1
Free balloon and glider pilots
Flight engineers
Language proficiency in Annex 1
should demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications.
Previous Standard on the use of radiotelephony procedures and phraseology still applies for flight engineers

39. Language proficiency in Annex 1
Flight navigators
If required to use a radio telephone on-board, flight navigator shall demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications
Previous Standard on the use of radiotelephony procedures and phraseology still applies for all Flight Navigators

40. Implementation notes
Standard will apply only on 5 March 2008 for aeroplane and helicopter pilot who have a licence issued before 5 March 2004
No “grandfather” clause for Air Traffic Controllers and Aeronautical Station Operators
Language proficiency requirements applies to pilots who are engaged in international flights and ATCO/ASO providing services to international flights
Pilots shall demonstrate proficiency in at least one of the language(s) offered in the airspace that is used
ATCO/ASO shall demonstrate proficiency for each of the language(s) offered in the airspace in which they are providing service

41. Other Aspects
The Rating Scale and Holistic Descriptors are contained in the Appendix and the Attachment to Annex 1
Consequences of non-compliance with the language proficiency Standards
For pilots
For Air Traffic Controllers and aeronautical Station Operators
Guidance on the implementation of the Standards has been published in the Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements (Doc 9835)

42. Other Aspects
Some good reasons to start evaluating language proficiency using the ICAO rating scale before 5 March 2008:
for recruitment purposes
for benchmarking purposes
to be prepared for the 5 March 2008 deadline
ICAO will review the progress in the implementation of the Language proficiency Standard in 2006
While the formal evaluation of language proficiency is only required as of 5 March 2008, there are good reasons to start formal evaluation of language proficiency much earlier:
for recruitment purposes: It is likely that most air traffic service providers and airlines will want their new recruit to meet the language proficiency requirements as a prerequisite for recruitment;
for benchmarking purposes: The establishment of the training programme required to bring existing staff to the appropriate level would require an accurate assessment of the level of language proficiency of existing staff; and
to be prepared for the 5 March 2008 deadline.

43. Other Annexes
Annex 6: (Parts I and III) operators shall ensure that flight crew speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications
Annex 11: Air traffic service providers shall ensure that air traffic controllers speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications
English language shall be used for communications between air traffic control units except when another language is mutually agreed
PANS-ATM: ATS and other ground personnel will be expected to use plain language to the level specified in the ICAO language proficiency requirements contained in Annex 1
Standards related to Language proficiency in Annexe 6 and 11 are more limited in scope but are nevertheless important

44. Review by the Commission
The Air Navigation Commission will undertake a review of the implementation of the language proficiency provision in 2006:
Assessment of the level of implementation (actual and planned)
Review of the difficulties faced during the implementation
Corrective measures if necessary and assistance
No significant changes are to be expected in view of the safety concern
It is expected that the correctives

45. The ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme
The comprehensive audit programme starting in 2005 will cover all the language proficiency Standards of Annexes 1, 6, 10 and 11
Compliance Checklists: the State will have to identify the level of implementation of each provision contained in ICAO Annexes before the Audit. The ICAO auditor will validate the information submitted prior to the on-site audit
During the actual audit, the auditor will assess the steps States have taken to address the new language requirements using a standard protocol

46. ICAO – EUROCONTROL EUROPEAN SEMINAR ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY FOR AERONAUTICALCOMMUNICATIONS
End