A056 project update

1. A056 project update OSWG Mark Patterson, ASI (ops), FAA 7 March 2018

2. Guidance material - status • AC 90-117 • 3 Oct 2017 (published) • Superseded AC 120-70C • Data Link Communications (A056) Compliance Guide (v2.18b) • 24 Oct 2017 (original version posted on web page) • Supersedes all previous Draft A056 job aids • Preferred application method – quickest processing time • https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afx/afs/afs400/afs470/datacomm/ • 8900.1 Inspector Guidance revision(change 565) • 12 Dec 2017 (published)

3. Guidance material - status • N8900.446 • 12 Dec 2017 (published) • Includes new A056 templates • 29 March 2018 – A056 mandatory revision date • N8900.XXX (cancels N8900.446) • Published in next 2 weeks • Part 91 mandatory revision date delayed until 30 Sep 2018 • Due to number of current authorizations • All other Parts date unchanged • InFO 18XXX • Published immediately after new Notice • General overview of domestic and PBCS implementations

4. FAA recommends… … closing OSWG item 2016-14

5. ICAO PBCS Implementation Airspace using or planning to use one or more of the above • PAC FIRs: Anchorage, Auckland, Brisbane, Fukuoka, Nadi, Oakland; Port Moresby, Santiago, Tahiti, • NAT FIRs: Gander, Shanwick, Reykjavik, New York, Santa Maria • Bay of Bengal routes: M300, N571, P570, P574; L301, L507, L510, L759,M770, N563, N877, N895, P628, P646 and P762 • South China Sea routes: N892, L625, N884, M767 Implementation date: 29 March, 2018 PBCS approval (RCP/RSP) required to be eligible to participate in the following horizontal separation minima in accordance with ICAO PANS-ATM (Doc 4444):

6. PBCS implementation

7. PBCS implementation vs NAT Datalink Mandate PBCS is not a mandate or “rule” -- it is not mandatory • You will not be denied entry into Datalink airspace if you do not have PBCS authorization 29 March 2018: • In the NAT region (OPS Bulletin 2018-01 Rev 01): • Three core OTS tracks designated as “PBCS only” for FL350-FL390 (inclusive) and will have reduced separation applied • Balance of OTS and remaining airspace will be mixed mode (some with / some without PBCS) and separated accordingly • Elsewhere: • ATC applies performance-based separations on a tactical basis to pairs of suitably-equipped / authorized aircraft • Operators may or may not have reduced separation applied during their flight and won’t know whether or not if they did 29 March 2019 or 90% flight plan filing (whichever occurs first): • NAT region – all NAT tracks FL350-390 (inclusive) will require PBCS

8. PBCS implementation vs NAT Datalink Mandate PBCS is not a mandate or “rule” -- it is not mandatory • You will not be denied entry into Datalink airspace if you do not have PBCS authorization NAT Region: • 29 March 2018 (OPS Bulletin 2018-01 Rev 01): • Three core OTS tracks designated as “PBCS only” for FL350-FL390 (inclusive) and will have reduced separation applied • Balance of OTS and remaining airspace will be mixed mode (some with / some without PBCS) and separated accordingly • 29 March 2019 or 90% flight plan filing (whichever occurs first): • NAT region – all NAT tracks FL350-390 (inclusive) will require PBCS Elsewhere: • ATC applies performance-based separations on a tactical basis to pairs of suitably-equipped / authorized aircraft • Operators may or may not have reduced separation applied during their flight and won’t know whether or not if they did

9. PBCS effect -- NAT Region Per NAT OPS Bulletin 2018-01 Rev 01, on 29 March 2018: Operators / aircraft not eligible for PBCS may be permitted to: • Infringe PBCS tracks at FL350-FL390 (inclusive) at only one point (including Oceanic Entry/Exit Point) (cross but not join an OTS PBCS track) • Climb or descend through levels FL350-FL390 on a PBCS track provided the climb or descent is continuous. Note: above clearances will only be permitted on a tactical basis

10. Aircraft eligibility Paradigm shift… Operator’s responsibility to determine eligibilitybased on: • Interoperability • Subnetwork • Aircraft Performance

11. Determine aircraft PBCS eligibility Does aircraft have a Statement of Compliance (SoC)? Documentation from the aircraft manufacturer, data link system manufacturer, or another party Indicates aircraft data link system meets aircraft-allocated requirements of Required Communication Performance (RCP) and Required Surveillance Performance (RSP) specifications Stated in the AFM, AFM Supplement, or other acceptable documentation (e.g. OEM capabilities document) SoCs are accomplished by the entity that owns the design approval for the aircraft data link installation.

12. Determine aircraft PBCS eligibility No SoC?Alternate means of compliance • Operators may provide a detailed submission validating the aircraft’s current data link system meets the RCP/RSP applicable requirements • As a minimum, meets RTCE DO-306/EUROCAE ED-122) and includes: • Information on avionics (M/M/S of avionics) • Continuity, Integrity, Availability • Safety & monitoring/alerting requirements • Equipment manufacturer support should be solicited to acquire suitable documentation Does demonstrated performance meet RCP/RSP allocations? • Latest PBCS monitoring reports can be found at: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/separation_standards/PBCS_Monitoring/ http://www.fans-cra.com/ • Minimum number of data points ensures statistical significance (data points determined by ICAO Doc 9869, PBCS Manual) • Not cumulative – each reporting period starts at zero • If not enough data available (or no data at all) - initial compliance may be based on the SoC • demonstrated performance monitored as data is collected

13. PBCS eligibility - performance monitoring YES= demonstrated performance meets requirements • Add screen capture to application showing “Pass” NO= demonstrated performance does not meet requirements • Follow directions on monitoring site; request more information • RCP/RSP authorization affected; failure reason dependent • Apply for revised LOA A056; no RCP/RSP until “fail” rectified Low data count= not enough data to be statistically significant • Add screen capture to application showing “low data count” • “SoC only” used for authorization No data (reg # not shown)= no data collected this reporting period • May have flown in the FIR; data may have been filtered out • Apply for revised LOA and explain “no data shown” • “SoC only” used for authorization

14. Determine operator PBCS eligibility Has operator established and documented the following for PBCS? • Normal and abnormal procedures, including contingency procedures • Flight crew qualification and proficiency requirements • Appropriate maintenance procedures to ensure continued airworthiness • Training program for relevant personnel consistent with the intended operations • A performance monitoring process • Establish process to review performance monitoring website each reporting period and address substandard performance whether the source of that report is from the operator’s own monitoring process, Communication Service Provider (CSP), or Civil Aviation Authority • A problem reporting process • Establish procedures to report data link communication problems to the FANS-Central Reporting Agency (CRA) • Ensures effective identification, tracking, and follow-up of data link-related events • Gets OEMs involved • Permits record-keeping of various problems and solutions http://www.fans-cra.com/

15. Determine operator PBCS eligibility Has operator established and documented the following for PBCS? • A contract/service agreement with Communication Service Provider (CSP) that includes: • Failure notifications (from CSP to operator and ANSPs) • Recording data link messages • CSP integrity • Compliance with CSP allocations for RCP/RSP • Adequate subnetwork coverage for the route flown OR Alternate means of compliance… – active PBCS Global Charter membership (operator/CSP)

16. PBCS Global Charter • Alternate means of compliance for operator/CSP contract and/or service agreements • Developed in response to CSP concerns: • Significant cost/effort to re-negotiate current individual contracts between operator/CSP and CSP/ANSP • Many contributors affecting performance outside of the CSP domain • Facilitates cooperation among all PBCS stakeholders to achieve PBCS objectives • Operators should consider whether they want a more “enforceable” approach in the event their aircraft data link performance is negatively impacted by CSP/SSP infrastructure (e.g. contract/service agreement) • Operators must remain as Charter members or notify their CAA of change of status • A change of charter membership status affects operational authorization http://www.fans-cra.com/

17. Domestic en route requirements • VDLM2 radio – tunable to multiple frequencies • TSO-C160a • ARINC 631 equivalent • Alternate means of compliance for non VDLM2 • Operators CSP must meet domestic performance requirements and be FAA accepted • “push-to-load” avionics • Integrated avionics that allow flight crew to automatically load uplinked messages into the FMS (UM79/80/83) • Operators using an alternate means of compliance for “push to load” will not be permitted once “Full Services” are implemented. “Full services” require fully integrated (“push to load”) avionics.

18. Part 129 Operators – U.S. domestic data comm • Requires OpSpec A003 • Mandatory revision by 1 Sep 2018 • Authorizes all data communications (DCL, en route) • Apply with your IFO • Submit ASAP - ensure you can immediately participate

19. Submitting applications Data Link Communications Compliance Guide • Organized way to submit application • Replaces all previous A056 job aids • Includes AC 90-117 references • Preferred method, supports fastest processing time Do not submit entire AFM, AFM Supp, IOM, etc. • Only include applicable excerpts proving compliance in each section Latest version can be found at: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afx/afs/afs400/afs470/datacomm/media/A056_Compliance_Guide.pdf

20. Q & A

21. Do I have to update my A056? Yes Per Notice 8900.446, the new A056 template is required to be completed by 29 March 2018, or data link operations should be suspended until updated template is received. When applying for the revised A056 template, the columns pertaining to PBCS are optional. If an operator decides RCP240 and RSP180 approvals are not needed, the operator only needs to complete Table 1 with the new required information and select "Not Applicable" in the RCP/RSP columns. A new LOA A056 will then be issued. Template renewals without PBCS should require less lead time for issuance than those including PBCS. An A056 Data Link Communications Compliance Guide can be found at: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afx/afs/afs400/afs470/datacomm/

22. Do I need RCP240 and RSP180 approvals to continue using my ADS-C and CPDLC equipment? No RCP240 and RSP180 approvals simply indicate the you are eligible for performance-based separation (23NM/30NM Lateral, 23NM/30 NM/50NM Longitudinal) in the airspace where they are applicable. The separation standards being applied to a pair of aircraft are transparent to the pilot but performance-based separation standards allow air traffic controllers additional flexibility in separating aircraft that are appropriately qualified.

23. Do I need an RCP240 or RSP180 approval for use of CPDLC in domestic airspace? No There are currently no CPDLC applications in domestic/continental airspace that require RCP240. RCP for use in specific domestic applications is coming soon and is being considered in European & Brazilian airspaces, and some States within Asia-Pacific region. At this time, the FAA has no plans to prescribe an RCP/RSP in U.S. domestic airspace.

24. Will I be excluded from any airspace if I do not have RCP240 and RSP180 approvals? The only airspace currently planning to implement tracks that will require PBCS is in the NAT OTS. There will still initially be non-PBCS tracks in the OTS for which PBCS approvals will not be required. All other airspace in which performance-based separation minima are currently applied will allow aircraft with and without RCP240 and RSP180 approvals to enter and use the airspace in a mixed-mode operation after 29 March 2018, similar to the current approach. If you do not have RCP240/RSP180 approvals you will always have the larger separations, e.g. 10-min, applied, and not be eligible for the lower standards in cases where it may be beneficial.

25. Do I need RCP240 and RSP180 approvals to be eligible for the climb and descend procedure (CDP)? No CDP is an approved procedure that is used by some air traffic service providers to enable clearance of climb and descent requests at down to a minimum of 15 nm longitudinal separation when conditions are met, as defined in ICAO PANS-ATM.

26. Will I be penalized if I do not obtain RCP240/RSP180 approvals? Not necessarily While it may be easier for RCP240/RSP180 approved aircraft to obtain optimal flight profiles, especially during high traffic periods, and particularly for NAT flights using the OTS, the application of these standards is generally tactical in nature for ATC. An aircraft may not have performance-based separation applied at all on an individual, or possibly may never have had it applied to any of its flights. In addition, the separation standards applied to a flight at a given time depend on the qualifications of that aircraft as well as the aircraft around it. Even if a you have an RCP240/RSP180 approvals, if the aircraft nearby does not also have the approvals, the separation standards cannot be applied.

27. How do I know if I can file “P2” in item 10a and “SUR/RSP180” in item 18 of my flight plan? You must obtain an approval for RCP240 to file “P2” and for RSP180 to file “SUR/RSP180” from your State regulatory authority, certifying that your operation meets all of the aircraft and operator requirements. The performance monitoring statistics, which measure the ability of your aircraft to meet the RCP240/RSP180 latency requirements only, provide one small part of the full set of requirements for an initial approval.

28. Are there any airspace or operations that require an approval for RCP400 or RSP400? No At this time, there are no separations based on RCP400/RSP400 and none are being considered. Currently, ANSP ground automation is not searching for “P1”, “P3”, or “SUR/RSP400”

29. Do I have to sign the “PBCS Global Charter” if I am not seeking RCP240/RSP180 approvals? No The Charter is currently only intended to support approvals for RCP240/RSP180. It is still a good idea for operators using data link to sign up for an account on the FANS-CRA website to monitor performance data for the airspace in which they are flying and to report and monitor status on data link problems.

30. How do I provide proof to my regulator that I have signed the “PBCS Global Charter” (in lieu of contract update, if accepted by regulator as means of compliance)? Ensure your CSP has also signed and is shown in the snapshot in addition to your company name. No letter of proof will be provided by the FANS-CRA website. Save or print a snapshot of the “CHARTER STAKEHOLDERS” on the FANS-CRA website after you have signed (ticked the box).