1. Brussels – 27 October 2005 ICAO-Eurocontrol seminar
Language Requirements in the Community licence for air traffic controllers
Brussels – 27 October 2005
ICAO-Eurocontrol seminar
Adoption SES package in conciliation : – formal adoption by EP and 3.02 by Council –publication
Reference to article 5 of Service provision regulation: as soon as possible after the entry into force of this regulation, the Commission shall present, if appropriate, a proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council on the licensing of controllers.
SES proposals: complete package, including social aspects
Implementation of Article 4 of framework: transpose ESARRs: This draft proposal intends to transpose all relevant (on ATCO licensing) and mandatory parts of ESARR5

2. The Community Directive
Community instrument addressed to Member States
Regulating all aspects with regard to skills of air traffic controllers
Age-education requirements
Technical skills
Language skills
Medical requirements
Institutional requirements: certification of training providers and supervision
Directive or Regulation: laying down obligations to member states or to public and private parties
Direct effect: Coummunity law is itself capable of creating rights and oblidations enforceable beofre national courts, at least if the provisions :
are clear and concise
are unconditional
leave no substantial discretion in its implementation
Deals with all requirements necessary to establish competence levels: age, education level, competence structure, training contents, medical requirements, language requirements, institutional arrangements, including supervision and auditing

3. Language requirements
Need for regulation
Safety critical
Community dimension
Very sensitive issue
Within a Community context:
International air navigation service provision should include any provisions.
Language requirements need to be addressed, in addition to safety-critical character, due to particular Community context: freedom of movement – mutual recognition of licences: language should be used as an obstacle to freedom of movement.
Discussions in Council and Parliament have been very difficult, until the very last moment: issue has been addressed at Ministerial level.

4. The Community Directive
ICAO requirements =
Community requirements? NO
False friends
Value added of Community licence is:
Institutional context
Regulation of full range of competencies
Reinforcing well accepted international standards
Not reinventing the hot water.
For language requirements: take ICAO as the source of legislation
And ICAO indeed has paved the way for the Community standards

5. Art. 8: Linguistic Requirements
ICAO: Annexes 1 –
PANS:
voice-voice
CPDLC-CPDLC
ATS: ground/ground
Recommendations:
Air-ground communication
Language of ground station
English on request
On designated airports and routes used by international air services
Regions may agree upon other language than EN
Operational level
Speak RT/C by D + 5
Assessments
Endorsement EU
Law:
air navigation service provision: ability to speak EN
Member State may require other language than EN
Operational level in principle – can be increased to extended level in specific circumstances
Assessments
Endorsement
ICAO requirements were quite limited as PANS, but mandatory requirements have been considerably extended in April 2003.
EN or language normally used by the station on the ground
EN must be available at request from any aircraft station
Availability of language form part of AIP
Appropriate level: ICAO level 4

6. Friends Identical Classification of levels
Operational level as principle
Indicated by endorsement
It might give the impression of identity
As stated earlier, the Community Directive has taken the approach to ensure compatibility with international standards and reinforce their acceptance.
So, at first sight, it seems that, when satisfying the ICAO requirements, automatically the Community requirements would be satisfied:
Here the similarities are shown –
However, this is only a very superficial analysis

7. FALSE Friends (1) Scope: Which language Level:
All air traffic services
All types of communication
Pilot – ATCO (annex 10)
ACC – ACC (annex 11)
Internal coordination
ATCO – external services
Which language
Knowledge English is imposed
Knowledge local language may be added
Level:
Operational in principle
Extended level in imperative safety conditions
There are significant differences between the ICAO and the Community standards

8. FALSE Friends Community standards go beyond ICAO Quality assurance
Approval of language training institutes
Genuine test and assessment
Certificate
Endorsement
Enforceable law
Directive
Complaint by any pilot
Community standards go beyond ICAO
As you see: we talk about a different beast:
Effective application of the language standards could be requested by any pilot, e.g. after a complaint by a pilot.

9. What is needed? Entrance test : subsidiarity
Language test when obtaining a (student) licence
Language test for maintaining validity of language endorsement
Determination of level requirements per type of communication
For EN and any local language
For all types of communications
What is needed to make the effective application come true?
Type of communications: not only pilot-ATCO communications, but also:
ATCO – ATCO: internal coordination
Centre – centre:
ATCO – external services, like fire brigade etc.
Language assessments must be adapted to catch all different situations for all languages.

10. By when/where will this be needed?
Formal adoption : end 2005
Entry into force: early 2006
Transposition: 4 years after entering into force
In EU + all countries which have concluded agreements with the EU
(at least 35 out of the 53 states of EU ICAO)

11. Mobility and Mutual Recognition
Principle: treat all EU citizens at equal footing
In practice:
Recognition of rating and endorsements
only local endorsement training
individual training plan approved, including language training
Complications: statute, working conditions, knowledge of local language
TRUST: member states must be able to trust each others’ system, hence ensurance that all play by the rule
Equivalence: notion stemming from case-law on general directives on mutual recognition:
Evolution in policy:
Recognition if national systems are identical
Recognition if national systems are equivalent:
shift of burden of proof
Possibility of getting complementary training – not start all over again!
Here: leap forwards: establishment of EU wide standards
This is also valid for language standards. Levels must be established: not too low: this could jeopardize effective communication not too high: this could jeopardize freedom of movement

12. Builds on and is compatible with ICAO requirements
Conclusions
Builds on and is compatible with ICAO requirements
Nature, scope, institutional context is substantially different
Will become European law by the end of 2005
How to help NSA/ANSPs in its implementation?
Thank you!