Verifying ELP compliance:

The SAFA perspective

Federico GRANDINI
SAFA Coordination Officer
24 May 2011

EASA Organisational Structure A&S Directorate

Content
Regulatory background
ICAO Resolution A36-11
SAFA approach (2009)
ICAO Resolution A37-10
ICAO State Letter AN 12/44.6-11/1
SAFA results on ELP
Implementation plans filed with
ICAO
State of play
SAFA approach (2011)
3

Regulatory background
With the amendment 164 to the Annex 1, published
on 5 March 2003, ICAO has introduced new
provisions requiring pilots to comply with language
proficiency requirements:
1.2.9.1 Aeroplane, airship, helicopter and powered-lift pilots
and those flight navigators who are required to use the
radio telephone aboard an aircraft shall demonstrate the
ability to speak and understand the language used for
radiotelephony communications.
1.2.9.4 As of 5 March 2008, aeroplane, airship, helicopter
and powered-lift pilots, air traffic controllers and
aeronautical station operators shall demonstrate the ability
to speak and understand the language used for
radiotelephony communications to the level specified in the
language proficiency requirements in Appendix 1.

Regulatory background
These standards are also reinforced by a standard in the
Annex 6, Part 1:
3.1.8 Operators shall ensure that flight crew members
demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the
language used for radiotelephony communications as
specified in Annex 1.

In addition to the above mentioned standards, the Annex 1

requires that the endorsement of the language proficiency
appears in the licence:
5.1.1.2 The following details shall appear on the licence: XIII)
Remarks, i.e. special endorsements relating to limitations and
endorsements for privileges, including from 5 March 2008 an
endorsement of language proficiency, and other information
required in pursuance to Article 39 of the Chicago Convention.
Similar requirements introduced in Europe with JAR-FCL 1, Amendment
7 and JAR-FCL 2 (Amendment 6) and are also included in the EASA
Opinion which is the basis of the future Part-FCL
5

ICAO Resolution A36-11

During the 36th ICAO Assembly (September 2007),
recognising that the Contracting States encounter
considerable difficulties in implementing the language
proficiency requirements, the Assembly adopted the
Resolution A36-11 urging the Contracting States to:
accept pilots who do not yet meet the ICAO language
requirements, for a period not exceeding 3 years after
the applicability date of 5th of March 2008, provided
that the licence issuing state has made its implementation
plan available to all other Contracting States;
those Contacting States which cannot meet the language
proficiency requirements are required to develop
implementation plans and publish them on the ICAO
website.
Resolution A36-11 should not be considered as an
amendment to Annex 1
6

SAFA approach (2009)

ESSG-6 meeting (Brussels, 9-10 March
2009):
pilots compliance with the ELP requirements shall
be verified during SAFA inspections;
non-compliances to be categorised taking due
account of the ICAO Resolution A36-11 and
whether the Licensing State complied with the
relevant obligation to file with ICAO an
implementation plan;
approach was agreed and subsequently included
in the EASA SAFA Guidance Material on Ramp
Inspections.
7

SAFA approach (2009)

Until 5 March 2011
No endorsement (or endorsement with a lower level) of the
required English language proficiency (but corrective action
plan filed by the licensing state to ICAO) should be
categorised as a category 1 finding.
No endorsement (or endorsement with a lower level) of the
required English language proficiency (and no corrective
action plan filed by the licensing state to ICAO) should be
categorised as a category 2 finding.

After 5 March 2011

A licence not meeting the ICAO language proficiency
requirements (either not endorsed or endorsed with a lower
level) should be categorised as a category 3 finding

ICAO Resolution A37-10

Since several states indicated they were still facing difficulties in
complying with ELP requirements by 5 March 2011, a new ICAO
Resolution (A37-10) was adopted, superseding the previous
Resolution A36-11. With this new Resolution (clauses 7, 8 and
9) the ICAO Assembly:
7.

8.

9.

Urges Contracting States not yet fully compliant on 5 March 2011 to

continue to provide ICAO with regularly updated implementation plans
including progress achieved in meeting their timelines for full
compliance;
Urges Contracting States after 5 March 2011 to take a flexible approach
towards States that do not yet meet the Language Proficiency
Requirements, yet are making progress as evidenced in their
implementation plans. Decisions concerning operations should be made
on a non-discriminatory basis and not be made for the purpose of
gaining economic advantage;
Directs the Council to monitor the status of implementation of the
Language Proficiency Requirements and take necessary actions to
advance safety and maintain the regularity of international civil aviation;
9

ICAO State Letter AN 12/44.6-11/1

Sent on 21 January 2011 by the ICAO
Secretariat
Drawing attention on the Resolution A37-10
Providing additional information on clauses 7-9.
Inter alia, ICAO states for clause 8 If you are a
State reviewing the plans of other States, the
resolution urges you to make operational
decisions that do not discriminate or create
unfair economic advantages

10

SAFA results on ELP

A review of SAFA inspections carried out between 1 January
2010 and 31 January 2011 (13 months) indicated the following
results:
the item A20 (Flight Crew Licence) was inspected 11,719 times (out of
a total number of inspections of 12,375);
in 5.8% of the cases the inspections identified findings concerning the
language proficiency of the pilots (no ELP endorsement or endorsement
with level lower than required);
in certain cases it was identified that, although pilots have the ELP
endorsed in their licence with the required level, the communication
between inspectors and crew was very difficult, raising doubts about
the effectiveness of the ELP examination;
The percentage of ELP related findings is significantly higher for certain
states, some of which having an important volume of operations to
Europe (even with a ratio higher than 40%);
the monthly incidence of ELP findings did not indicate a gradual
decrease of such findings likely to be expected when approaching the
original cut-off date of 5 March 2011
11

Implementation plans filed with ICAO

A review of the implementation plans filed with ICAO
by the contracting states (status as of 31 January
2011) shows the following:
70 states notified ICAO about their full compliance with the
ELP requirements 27 of those states are SAFA Participating
states;
77 states and territories have filed implementation plans
covering the period 2008-2010 including 9 SAFA states;
16 states filed an implementation plan for 2011 including 5
SAFA states;
32 states and territories have not notified ICAO of their
status of compliance with ELP requirements (no information
at all).

12

State of play
Almost 8 years after the introduction of the requirements
and after a 3 years moratorium introduced by the ICAO
Assembly in 2007, compliance with the ELP is not yet fully
achieved as acknowledged in the Assembly Resolution
A37-10 and as observed by means of SAFA inspections.
The Assembly Resolution A37-10 urges the contacting
states to take a flexible approach towards States not fully
compliant but which are making progress in implementing
the ELP requirements. Moreover, the Assembly is urging
the contracting states to take operational decisions on a
non-discriminatory basis and not for the purpose of
gaining economic advantage

13

SAFA approach (2011)

The Air Safety Committee, during its last meeting which
took place from 5 to 7 April 2011, endorsed EASAs
proposal for a new categorisation of non-compliances
with ICAO English Language Proficiency (ELP)
requirements for pilots
ref. recital (8) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EC)
No 390/2011 of 19 April 2011
EASAs proposal detailed in a Working Paper presented at
the 12th ESSG meeting in Lisbon, 2-3 March 2011, and
endorsed by the Steering Group
Purpose is to guarantee full compliance with ELP standards
without further delay

14

SAFA approach (2011)

Practical consequences:
a category 3 finding should be raised in case of no ELP
compliance (no or expired ELP endorsement, or having an with
a level lower than the minimum required level 4) and where
the licensing state has not filed an action plan with ICAO for
2011, or has notified full compliance without effectively
respecting this requirement;
ii. a category 2 finding should be raised in case of no ELP
compliance but where the licensing state has filed an action
plan with ICAO for 2011 to bring itself to compliance;
iii. a general remark (category G) should be recorded where
formal ELP compliance can be attested even though actual
communication during the ramp inspection process is very
difficult because of the clear lack of English command of the
pilots
i.

15

SAFA approach (2011)

General principles of EASAs proposal:
SAFA participating states are invited to continue to inspect pilots
compliance with the required ELP requirements;
SAFA participating states are invited to establish functional links with
their Air Navigation Service Providers with the aim of identifying unsafe
situations which may have occurred due to insufficient command of the
English Language, and to report without delay such situation by
inserting a Standard Report in the EASA Centralised SAFA database;
A cut-off date should be agreed and established after which all ELP
findings (no endorsement or endorsement with a lower level) should be
categorised as a major (cat. 3) finding.
SAFA participating states are invited to ensure that their own SAFA
inspectors also possess a good command of the English Language, and
as far as practicable this could be attested by demonstrating their
proficiency at the same level as the one required for pilots (Level 4).

16

EASA SAFA Contacts

SAFA Coordination:
Mr Eduard Ciofu Section manager SAFA Coordination
Mr Jeroen Jansen SAFA Coordination Officer
Mr Federico Grandini SAFA Coordination Officer
e-mail: safa@easa.europa.eu

www.easa.eu
17

Thank you
for your attention