Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) EURO-MAASTRICHT

Transcription

1 EUROCONTROL Local Single Sky ImPlementation (LSSIP) EURO-MAASTRICHT Year Level 1

2

3

4

5 DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION SHEET LSSIP for Maastricht Infocentre Reference: 15/01/12-13 Document Identifier Edition: Year 2014 LSSIP Year 2014 Maastricht Edition Date: 17 April 2015 LSSIP Focal Point Frank GREVEN LSSIP Contact Person Adriatik KOKONA Status Intended for Maastricht UAC Unit DPS/PEPR Working Draft General Public Draft Agency Stakeholders Proposed Issue Restricted Audience Released Issue Accessible via: Internet ( Path: Y:\03 LSSIP\1. LSSIP States\MUAC (EU) - TK\Year 2014\Released\LSSIP Year 2014 MUAC_Released.docx LINKS TO REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 1 LSSIP Guidance Material 2 ESSIP Plan Edition ESSIP Report STATFOR Forecasts 5 Acronyms and abbreviations 6 European ATM Master Plan 7 LSSIP Documents 8 FAB Performance Plan LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht Released Issue

6

7

8

9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... 1 Introduction... 4 Chapter 1 - National ATM Environment Geographical Scope International Membership Geographical description of the FIR(s) Airspace Classification and Organisation National Stakeholders Civil Regulator(s) Supervision of service provision at Maastricht UAC Airports Military Authorities... 9 Chapter 2 - Traffic and Capacity Evolution of traffic in the Maastricht UAC MAASTRICHT UAC Traffic and en-route ATFM delays Summer 2014 performance Planning Period Chapter 3 - ESSIP Report recommendations Chapter 4 - National Projects Chapter 5 - Regional Co-ordination FAB Co-ordination FAB Projects Regional cooperation Regional Cooperation Initiatives Regional Projects Chapter 6 - ESSIP Objective Implementation ESSIP Objectives Implementation progress Alignment of PCP with ESSIP Objectives and related progress ANNEXES LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht Released Issue

10

11 Executive Summary National ATM Context The provision of ATS and operation of facilities by EUROCONTROL at Maastricht UAC is based on the Agreement relating to the Provision and Operation of Air Traffic Services and Facilities by EUROCONTROL at the Maastricht Area Control Centre (the Maastricht Agreement ), signed on 25 November 1986 by Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and EUROCONTROL. The EUROCONTROL Organisation provides ATS to GAT at Maastricht UAC in accordance with the national regulations in force on the territories and in the airspaces concerned. The regulators of the four national contracting parties in respect of ATS are represented by the respective Ministries of Transport. Each of the four States retains its competences and obligations in respect of aeronautical regulations, rulemaking, airspace organisation and relations with international organisations, e.g. ICAO, with the airspace users and other third parties, with regard to the airspace over its territory and within designated portions of airspace over the high seas, on the basis of the Air Navigation Plan European Region of ICAO. Further to the adoption of the (EC) SES framework regulation, each of the four States has established an NSA. For the Netherlands, this is the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport, ILT (CAA-NL)) of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (MoI&M, Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu ); for Belgium, the Belgian Supervising Authority for ANS (BSA- ANS); for Luxembourg, the Civil Aviation Authority CAA Luxembourg; and for Germany, Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung (BAF), established by Federal Law dated 29 July The four States NSAs have created two bodies for supporting the ongoing oversight of service provision at Maastricht UAC: The NSA-Committee, representing all four NSAs; and the Common Supervisory Team (CST), which has an executive role in performing document studies, audits and inspections. As regards SES designation of ATS providers, in the Netherlands, by amendment to the Aviation Act in Oct 2007, EUROCONTROL Maastricht UAC was designated as an ATS provider in accordance with Article 8 of the Service provision regulation. The other three States, Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg, consider the Maastricht Agreement as a valid means for their respective designations of EUROCONTROL as an ATS provider at Maastricht UAC. At its 74th meeting, the Maastricht Coordination Group agreed on the development of an adequate legal basis for the provision of cross-border ATS, on the basis of Article 10 of (EC) Regulation No. 550/2004. The Agreement between the FABEC ANSPs concerning the provision of ANS within the FABEC airspace, which was signed early 2013, will serve as a legal umbrella for the existing operational Letters of Agreement concluded between MUAC and the neighbouring ANSPs. Maastricht UAC does not encompass Military Authorities of its own or Airports within its area of responsibility. The LSSIP chapters and sections dealing with military authorities or with airports are not applicable to Maastricht UAC (see the LSSIP documents of the four States). The Maastricht UAC Area of Responsibility is surrounded by London UIR, Copenhagen FIR, Rhein UIR and France UIR. The only ATC unit of concern to this LSSIP is Maastricht UAC, currently configured for operating a maximum of 20 en-route sectors (Brussels: 6, DECO: 6, Hannover: 8). Traffic and Capacity Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by 2.1% during Summer 2014 (May to October inclusive), when compared to Summer For the coming years, expectation is to deliver close to the capacity required to meet the targets/reference values. The Brussels sector group could be challenged as a result of changes in the traffic patterns resulting in higher traffic growth. As a result the Brussels Sector Group 3rd layer is planned for implementation end of 2015 in order to provide additional capacity for the summer 2016 onwards. For the summer 2015 scenarios are being prepared in order to ensure balanced capacity delivery during the summer peak days. These scenarios may be used tactically if deemed feasible. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 1 Released Issue

12 ESSIP Objective Implementation AOM19 was completed in 2014, but further steps on Advanced Airspace Management will be taken, e.g. the implementation of the Belgian cluster and the connection of the Dutch cluster to the MUAC Flight Data Processing System. AOM21 was introduced in 2013 and is reported partly completed, awaiting the implementation of system changes, due for 2015, in support of cross-border direct routes without a coordination point. ATC02.5 remains partially completed, until the operational implementation of the connection between the LARA tool and the FDPS has been established. ATC12 also remains partially completed, as the full MTCD functionality although technically available is not yet operationally validated. While in some operational environments MTCD is a pre-requisite to transition from the old paper strip based planning concept this is not the case at MUAC, which operates in a full stripless environment for over twenty years. Other controller aid tools, such as multi-vera, manual MTCD and a tactical control tool called the NTCA (Near Time Conflict Alert) Probe are available. The latter has been augmented with the Mode S downlinked selected altitude. Full MTCD implementation is not considered a high priority, as it is only deemed required for future concepts like Multi and Meta-Sector Planning. ATC17 is planned for All messages are implemented in the MUAC system, but operational use is limited to PAC and COD. On the short term, there is no high priority for operational use of the relevant messages. COM10 has been completed, following the successful implementation with LVNL, DFS and Belgocontrol throughout COM11 will be completed with the operational implementation of the New Voice Communication System by the end of FCM01 has been completed in 2014 while FCM03 is planned for completion in FCM05 is planned for 2015, once the Belgian LARA cluster has been integrated with NM. ITY-ACID is completed, as MUAC was already compliant with the implementing rule at time of publication. LSSIP Maastricht UAC * FOC Date Planned implementation date (see legend at the bottom of the table) State-related ESSIP Objectives AOM13.1 Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling [IDP] [E] <= AOM19 Implement Advanced Airspace Management [IDP] [E] * AOM21 Implementation of Free Route Airspace [IDP] [E] * AOP03 Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions [IDP] * Implement ground based safety nets - Short Term Conflict ATC02.2 Alert (STCA) - level 2 [E] * Implement ground based safety nets - Area Proximity ATC02.5 Warning - level 2 [E] * Implement ground based safety nets - Minimum Safe ATC02.6 Altitude Warning - level 2 [E] Implement ground based safety nets - Approach Path ATC02.7 Monitor - level 2 [E] ATC07.1 Implement arrival management tools [E] Implement automated support for conflict detection and ATC12 [E] conformance monitoring * Implement, in En-Route operations, information exchange [IDP] ATC15 mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic [E] * AMAN operations ATC16 Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 * LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 2 Released Issue

13 LSSIP Maastricht UAC * FOC Date Planned implementation date (see legend at the bottom of the table) Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller [IDP] ATC17 during Coordination and Transfer [E] * Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks COM09 [IDP] or services to the Internet Protocol (IP) * COM10 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS * Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in COM11 ATM * FCM01 Implement enhanced tactical flow management services [E] * [IDP] FCM03 Implement collaborative flight planning [E] * [IDP] FCM04 Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures - phase 1 [E] [IDP] FCM05 Implementation of interactive rolling NOP [E] * INF04 Implement integrated briefing INF07 Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (TOD) ITY-ACID Aircraft identification Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical ITY-ADQ information [E] [IDP] ITY-AGDL Initial ATC air-ground data link services above FL-285 [E] * Implement air-ground voice channel spacing requirements ITY-AGVCS2 below FL195 Implementation of ground-ground automated co-ordination ITY-COTR processes [E] * ITY-FMTP Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) [IDP] * ITY-SPI Surveillance performance and interoperability * NAV03 Implementation of P-RNAV [E] [IDP] NAV10 Implement APV procedures [E] Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations SAF10 caused by airspace infringements * SAF11 Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions SRC-RLMK Implement the EUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory Requirements (ESARRs) SRC-SLRD Safety Levels and Resolution of Deficiencies Airport-related ESSIP Objectives <= Understanding the Table Objective Objective Partly Objective Planned No Plan Missing Data (Maastricht does not participate in this obj.) Late NOTE: The year where the coloured box is placed indicates the Implementation Completion Date as stated in the ESSIP for each objective. The colour-code indicates the Local progress with respect to this date. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 3 Released Issue

14

15 Introduction The Local Single Sky ImPlementation documents (LSSIPs), as an integral part of the ESSIP/LSSIP mechanism, constitute a short/medium term implementation plan containing ECAC States actions to achieve the Implementation Objectives as set out by the ESSIP and to improve the performance of their national ATM System. The LSSIP document Year 2014 describes the situation in the State at the end of December The LSSIP documents are structured into 6 chapters to better differentiate the Stakeholder(s) accountable for the information contained in each of them: Chapter 1 provides an overview of the ATM institutional arrangements within the State, the membership of the State in various international organizations, the organizational structure of the main ATM players - civil and military - and their responsibilities under the national legislation. In addition, an overview of the Airspace Organization and Classification, the ATC Units, the ATM systems operated by the main ANSP are also provided in this chapter. Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive picture of the situation of Air Traffic, Capacity and ATFM Delay per each ACC in the State. It shows the evolution of Air Traffic and Delay in the last five years and the forecast for the next five years. It gives also the achieved performance in terms of delay during the summer season period and the planned projects assumed to offer the required capacity which will match the foreseen traffic increase and keep the delay at the agreed performance level; Chapter 3 provides a set of recommendations extracted from the ESSIP Report which are relevant to the state/stakeholders concerned. The state reports how they have handled those recommendations and the actions taken during the year to address the concerns expressed by those recommendations; Chapter 4 provides a set of the main ATM national projects which contribute directly to the implementation of the ATM MP OIs and/or Enablers and ESSIP related Objectives. The description, timescale, progress made and expected contribution to the ATM Key Performance Areas are provided by the states per each project included in this chapter; Chapter 5 deals with the ATM Regional Coordination. It provides an overview of the FAB cooperation and Projects and also all other regional initiatives and Projects which are out of the FAB scope. The content of this chapter generally is developed and agreed in close cooperation between the states concerned; Chapter 6 contains high-level information on progress and plans of each ESSIP Objective. The information for each ESSIP Objective is presented in boxes giving a summary of the progress and plans of implementation for each Stakeholder. The conventions used are presented at the beginning of the section. Note: Chapter 6 is completed with a separate document called LSSIP Level 2. This document consists of a set of tables organised in line with the list of ESSIP Objectives. Each table contains all the actions planned by the four national stakeholders to achieve their respective Stakeholder Lines of Action (SLoAs) as established in the ESSIP. Note: The information contained in Chapter 6 is deemed sufficient to satisfy State reporting requirements towards ICAO in relation to ASBU (Aviation System Block Upgrades) monitoring. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 4 Released Issue

16 Chapter 1 - National ATM Environment 1.1 Geographical Scope International Membership This paragraph is not applicable to Maastricht UAC. This information as regards the four States concerned is made available in each of their respective LSSIP documents Geographical description of the FIR(s) The geographical scope of this document addresses the Maastricht UAC Area of Responsibility comprising the following Control Areas; Airspace Designation Vertical Limits ICAO Airspace Classification Belgium & Luxembourg - Brussels UIR FL245 to FL660 C Brussels The Netherlands - Amsterdam FIR FL245 to FL660 C DECO North West Germany - Hannover UIR FL245 to FL660 C Hannover Airspace sector group of Maastricht UAC The Maastricht UAC Area of Responsibility is surrounded by London UIR, Copenhagen FIR, Rhein UIR and France UIR. The map below shows the situation of Maastricht upper airspace in winter 2014 and its sectorisation. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 5 Released Issue

17 1.1.3 Airspace Classification and Organisation All the airspace serviced by Maastricht UAC is ICAO Class C (above FL 245); See chart under National Stakeholders Civil Regulator(s) General information The provision of ATS and operation of facilities at Maastricht UAC is based on the Agreement relating to the Provision and Operation of Air Traffic Services and Facilities by EUROCONTROL at the Maastricht Area Control Centre (the Maastricht Agreement ), signed on 25 November 1986 by Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and EUROCONTROL. The EUROCONTROL Organisation provides ATS to GAT at Maastricht UAC within the airspace entrusted to it by the four States, subject to the conditions defined in the Agreement. According to Article 15 of the Amended Convention, service provision is undertaken in accordance with the national regulations in force on the respective territories and airspaces concerned. The four States regulators in respect of ATS provided at Maastricht UAC are represented by the respective Ministries of Transport or equivalent ministries. The Maastricht Coordination Group (MCG) joins together senior officials of the four States. The high-level relationship between the entities dealing with Maastricht UAC is presented in the diagram below. More information on the relevant national stakeholders in each of the four concerned States is presented in the respective LSSIP Level 1 documents. EUROCONTROL Permanent Commission Ministers of Transport and Defence Audit board Provisional Council Directors General of Civil Aviation and their military counterparts Maastricht Coordination Group Senior officials from the Four States EUROCONTROL Agency Director General Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre Director MUAC Regulatory Activity ATS provision at Maastricht UAC is subject to four different national regulatory regimes, each specifically defining applicable rules and regulations. Regulation and oversight of service provision performed at Maastricht UAC is exercised in a coordinated manner among the four concerned States ATS provision at Maastricht UAC is subject to the Single European Sky (SES) legislation; SES certification as an Air Traffic Service Provider was obtained in November The four States regulators and their respective NSAs, which are institutionally separated from the EUROCONTROL Organisation of which MUAC is an integral part, have set-up appropriate arrangements to establish common rules for ATS provision at Maastricht UAC and to ensure adequate regulatory oversight. Meetings with MoT representatives take place on an ad-hoc basis. The table below summarises the main regulatory and supervisory responsibilities/ activities in respect of service provision performed at Maastricht UAC. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 6 Released Issue

18 Activity in ATM: Rule-making Safety Oversight Enforcement actions in case of non-compliance with safety regulatory requirements Airspace Organisation responsible The 4 States regulators (Ministries of Transport or equivalent) ILT (CAA-NL), in coordination with the other 3 States NSAs within the 4 States NSA Committee ILT (CAA-NL), in cooperation with the other 3 States NSAs, within the 4 States NSA Committee The 4 States relevant regulatory authorities, each per its own territory and concerned airspace Legal Basis Economic Same as above Same as above Environment Same as above Same as above Security Same as above Same as above Accident investigation Same as above Same as above The 4 States national laws, the EUROCONTROL Convention and the Maastricht Agreement The NL Aviation Act and other relevant NL national regulations empowering ILT (CAA-NL) as regards safety oversight. See details in LSSIP NL. The NL Aviation Act and other relevant national regulations empowering ILT (CAA-NL) as regards safety oversight of the NL-based ANS/ATM providers. The 4 States relevant national laws, the EUROCONTROL Convention and the Maastricht Agreement Annual Report published: Y For 2013 MoT published the Annual Report. For 2013 the ILT (CAA-NL) published the Annual Report Supervision of service provision at Maastricht UAC Subsequent to the enactment of the SES framework regulation (Regulation (EC) No. 549/2004), the four States have each established an NSA: for Belgium, the Belgian Supervising Authority for ANS (BSA-ANS); for Germany, Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung (BAF); for Luxembourg, the Civil Aviation Authority CAA Luxembourg; and for the Netherlands, this is the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport, ILT (CAA-NL) of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment (MoI&M, Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu ). The SES-certifying National Supervisory Authority, as per the service provision Regulation, is the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment of the Netherlands. EUROCONTROL for its service provision at Maastricht UAC located on Netherlands territory was certified as an ATS provider by the Netherlands NSA in accordance with (EC) Regulation 550/2004 and in cooperation with the other three States NSAs. Information on the organisation and relevant activities of ILT (CAA-NL) and of the other three States NSAs is available in the respective LSSIP documents. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 7 Released Issue

19 The 4 States NSAs have established two supporting bodies for ongoing oversight of service provision at Maastricht UAC: o The NSA Committee (NSA-C), representing all four NSAs and having a co-ordination and advisory role for the relevant decision making authorities on oversight issues; and o The Common Supervisory Team (CST), which is composed of staff of the co-operating NSAs and has an executive role in performing document studies, audits, inspections, etc. A manual for the oversight activities at Maastricht UAC has been developed and agreed upon, by the four NSAs, last updated in 2013 (version 5.0, dated ). The Belgian Civil Aviation Authority (Belgian CAA), acting on behalf of the four States NSAs, is responsible for issuing licenses for Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs) at Maastricht UAC. The following agreement was reached between the 4 States: o The Belgian CAA acts as the licensing authority for ATCOs and students ATCOs; o The Belgian CAA is the authority for certification of ATS training organisation at Maastricht UAC; o The licences are issued in accordance with the Commission Regulation (EU) No 805/2011 laying down detailed rules for air traffic controllers licenses. Maastricht UAC was certified as a Training Organisation by the Belgian CAA in Designation as an ANSP Provision and operation of ATS at Maastricht UAC is governed by the Maastricht Agreement. Subsequent to the SES certification of service provision at Maastricht UAC and in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No. 550/2004 (the service provision Regulation), each of the 4 signatory States to the Maastricht Agreement must designate a SES-certified ATS-provider for the airspace block(s) serviced by MUAC. In the Netherlands, by amendment to the Aviation Act in Oct 2007, EUROCONTROL for its service provision at Maastricht UAC has been designated as an ATS provider in accordance with Article 8 of the service provision Regulation. The other three States, Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg, consider the Maastricht Agreement as a valid means for their respective designations of EUROCONTROL as an ATS provider at Maastricht UAC. At its 74th meeting, the Maastricht Coordination Group agreed on the development of an adequate legal basis for the provision of cross-border ATS, on the basis of Article 10 of (EC) Regulation No. 550/2004. The Agreement between the FABEC ANSPs concerning the provision of ANS within the FABEC airspace, which was signed early 2013, will serve as a legal umbrella for the existing operational Letters of Agreement concluded between MUAC and the neighbouring ANSPs. Name of the ANSP: Maastricht UAC Governance: Four-States agreement Ownership: EUROCONTROL Member States Services provided Y/N Comment ATC en-route Y 4 States (BE, DE, LU, NL) Upper Airspace ATC approach N/A N/A ATC Aerodrome(s) N/A N/A AIS N - CNS N - MET N - ATCO training Y Initial training was done by IANS Luxemburg until In the future, initial training will be provided in FABEC context. Others - - Additional information: Provision of services in other State(s): Y Delegation is identified in section Annual Report published: Y LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 8 Released Issue

20 The public website of MUAC is: The MUAC organisation chart is available in Annex B ATC system in use Specify the manufacturer of the ATC system currently in use: Upgrade 1 of the ATC system is performed or planned? Replacement of the ATC system by the new one is planned? The major suppliers of the ATC systems are: For air traffic flow management: EUROCONTROL/NM For air traffic services: INDRA (FDPS) and Thales ATM (HMI) For communication systems: Frequentis (VCS) A replacement of the current VCS is due for the end of 2015 by Frequentis. No yet planned ATC units The only ATC unit of concern to this LSSIP is Maastricht UAC, currently configured for operating a maximum of 20 en-route sectors (Brussels: 6, DECO: 6, Hannover: 8). ATC Unit Number of sectors Associated FIR(s) Remarks En-route TMA MUAC 20 0 Brussels FIR/UIR Amsterdam FIR Hannover UIR Delegation in: France UIR Rhein UIR Airports Not applicable, as Maastricht UAC area of responsibility (upper airspace) does not contain any airports Military Authorities Maastricht UAC does not include any military authorities in its own management structure. However, details of civil-military coordination and FUA application within the airspace of Maastricht UAC are made available in Chapter 1 of LSSIP the Netherlands (as NL NSA is the certifying authority for Maastricht UAC, an NL-based ATS provider). More info may also be found in Chapter 1 of the LSSIP documents of the other three States concerned (DE, BE and LU), as regards specific civil-military coordination or FUA conditions which may apply only in the respective States. 1 Upgrade is defined as any modification that changes the operational characteristics of the system (SES Framework Regulation 549/2004, Article 2 (40)) LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 9 Released Issue

21 Chapter 2 - Traffic and Capacity 2.1 Evolution of traffic in the Maastricht UAC Maastricht - Annual IFR Movements IFR flights IFR movements - Actuals IFR movements - Baseline forecast IFR movements - High forecast IFR movements - Low forecast A 2010 A 2011 A 2012 A 2013 F 2014 F 2015 F 2016 F 2017 F 2018 F 2019 F Traffic in Maastricht UAC increased by 2.1% during Summer 2014 (May to October inclusive), when compared to Summer The October 2014 update of the STATFOR 7-Year Forecast calls for slightly lower growth than anticipated beginning of Over the 5 year period covered by the forecast, Maastricht UAC can expect growth of only 11% (Baseline Scenario). Given the traffic development during the past 2 years combined with the delay of some key FABEC airspace projects, it is expected that especially the MUAC Brussels Sectors will be under pressure from a capacity point of view in the (near) future. MUAC Annual High 3,2% 3,6% 2,9% 3,2% 3,1% Baseline 2,2% 2,3% 1,9% 2,0% 2,4% Low 0,5% 0,8% 0,4% 0,9% 1,0% MUAC Cumulative High 103,2% 106,9% 110,0% 113,5% 117,0% Baseline 102,2% 104,6% 106,5% 108,7% 111,2% Low 100,5% 101,3% 101,7% 102,6% 103,7% Based upon STATFOR 7-Year Forecast October LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 10 Released Issue

22 2.2 MAASTRICHT UAC Traffic and en-route ATFM delays EDYYUAC - Traffic and en-route ATFM delays IFR flights (Daily Average) Enroute Delay (minutes per flight) Peak Day Traffic Summer Traffic Yearly Traffic Summer Traffic Forecast High Traffic Forecast - Summer Low Traffic Forecast - Summer Summer enroute delay (all causes) Yearly enroute delay (all causes) * Summer 2014 performance Traffic Evolution 2014 Capacity Baseline En-route Delay (min/flight) - Summer Ref value Actual Capacity gap +2.1 % 329 (-2%) No The average en-route delay per flight increased from 0.07 minutes per flight in Summer 2013 to 0.25 minutes per flight in % of the delays were for the reason ATC Capacity, 30% for Weather, and 19% for Other. Capacity Plan 2% Achieved Comments Stepped implementation of MARS2 (including Dynamic Sectorisation) No Stopped Traffic Management System (TMS) Level 2 No Renamed ifmp planned for 2015 CPDLC monitoring concept & reduction in verbal coordination Improved ATFCM including STAM LUX High Implementation VDFL DECO Sectors Maximum configuration: 20 sectors (Possible if required according to traffic levels) Summer 2014 performance assessment The capacity baseline was measured with ACCESS at 329. During the same period, the peak 3 hour demand was 335 and the peak 1 hour was 317. No Yes Yes Yes Yes LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 11 Released Issue

23 2.2.3 Planning Period EDYYUTA Annual Summer En-route ATFM delay breakdown - Reference Values ACC EDYY 2014 baseline 329 Capacity Profiles Profiles (hourly movements and % increase over previous year) H 340 3% 354 4% 366 3% 376 3% 391 4% Ref % 345 2% 352 2% 359 2% 370 3% L 332 1% 334 1% 336 1% 340 1% 343 1% Open 337 2% 345 2% 352 2% 359 2% 370 3% C/R 334 2% 340 2% 346 2% 352 2% 358 2% Free Route Airspace Airspace Management Advanced FUA Airport & TMA Network Integration Cooperative Traffic Management Airspace Procedures Staffing Technical Capacity Significant Events Max sectors Capacity Plan FABEC AD South-East Phase 1 : EUC25 Brussels UIR 3 rd Layer FABEC AD South-East Phase 2 : EUC22 Step 1 & SWAP FABEC FRA Step 2: H24 DCTs with military activity Improved ATFCM including STAM FABEC AD CBA Land / Central-West Step 1 : New & Changed sectorisation FABEC ATFCM/ASM Step 2 : CDM procedures FABEC AD CBA Land / Central-West Step 2 : Full release TRA12 Advanced tactical ATFCM measures Cross training of ATCOs ifmp (integrated Flow Management Position) NVCS Stepped implementation of XMAN (possible negative impact on capacity) FABEC FRA Step 3: Final goal FRA Volume FABEC AD South-East Phase 3 : Full EUC Capacity increase p.a. 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Reference profile 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% Additional information A transition plan will be developed for the implementation of Brussels Sector Group 3 rd Layer and the implementation of the New Voice Communication System (NVCS) planned for end of LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 12 Released Issue

24 EDYYUAC - Reference capacity profile and alternative scenarios Capacity profile (movements per hour) Reference Capacity Profile Capacity Profile Shortest Routes (Open) Capacity Profile Current Routes Capacity Profile High Capacity Profile Low Capacity Baseline Plan Planning Period Outlook Expectation is to deliver close to the capacity required to meet the targets/reference values. The Brussels sector group could be challenged as a result of changes in the traffic patterns resulting in higher traffic growth. As a result the Brussels Sector Group 3 rd layer is planned for implementation end of 2015 in order to provide additional capacity for the summer 2016 onwards. For the summer 2015 scenarios are being prepared in order to ensure balanced capacity delivery during the summer peak days. These scenarios may be used tactically if deemed feasible. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 13 Released Issue

25 Chapter 3 - ESSIP Report recommendations Recommendations issued from the ESSIP Report for 2013 applicable to Maastricht for all items that require corrective actions and improvements. Reference number Recommendation Ownership REC (1) Local Stakeholders that declared delays in implementation of FCM01 to take corrective measures to reduce the implementation delays. State feedback: In the current edition of the LSSIP, FCM01 has been reported as. DK, EE, MAS, BE, LV, MK, CZ, CY, NO, AM, PT, BA, UA, TR, UK REC Ensure better planning reliability at local level. All States State feedback: Planning is done as accurate as possible, but nevertheless changes can occur, triggered by internal and/or external events. REC The ANSPs should ensure synchronised system evolution between neighbouring States. All ECAC ANSPs State feedback: System evolution is synchronised with neighbouring States when necessary, e.g. through FABEC or bi-lateral. The ANSPs within a FAB should coordinate their REC system renewal and capability evolution more FAB ANSPs closely in order to deliver larger scale performance improvements to customers. State feedback: The FABEC ANSP Strategic Agenda contains, amongst others, all agreed planned and ongoing FABEC activities. Based on this Strategic Agenda, the FABEC 5-Year-Work-Plan (5YWP) detailing all the activities, the time schedule and the required budget is developed. Both the Strategic Agenda and the 5YWP are revised twice a year. Besides, the OPS and TECH domains have jointly developed the FABEC roadmap containing the FABEC projects/activities and the ANSP local studies/projects that have a direct/indirect impact on the FABEC project implementation timeframe. This roadmap is also revised twice a year. In this way, it is made sure that an agreed ANSP work plan and roadmap is available, including the main system renewals. Within FABEC, dedicated Standing Committees address all operational, technical and SESAR matters and make sure that proper coordination is done among FABEC ANSPs to ensure proper interoperability between stakeholders. Even if common procurement is investigated, ANSPs should not be constrained on the how to implement functionalities and reach the performance objectives. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 14 Released Issue

26 Chapter 4 - National Projects Name / Code Description - Scope Schedule Status Link with ATM Master Plan / Other references ifmp The aim of the ifmp project is to address shortcomings of the currently used tools (CHMI, NOP) and information used by the Flow Management Position (FMP) and Tactical Capacity Management (TCM) process by integrating traffic prediction tools, sector configuration management, manpower planning tools and other (analysis) tools into one coherent system with a single, customized and user friendly HMI. ATFCM/ ASM The ATFCM/ASM Project aims at establishing a coherent and maintainable set of tools meeting the operational requirements focused on system support for Strategic, Pre-Tactical and Tactical ATFCM/ASM phases and the ATCO Human Resources planning processes. It is a complement to the ifmp project which focuses on tactical ATFCM. FDPS 2.0 This project includes the technical upgrade of the current NFDPS in terms of COTS, operating system (Linux) and hardware consolidation (virtualisation) The ifmp tool has been deployed for a trial use in Dec-14, Initial Operational Capability (IOC) has been declared in Feb-15. The further evolution of the ifmp tool and related infrastructure is planned to align with the ATFCM/ASM Project trying to establish and strengthen the ATM layer The project will be implemented in incremental steps and concerns several tools, e.g.: LARA for civ/mil airspace management, manpower planning tools, statistical analysis tools, traffic and airspace prediction and modelling tools, etc The project is ongoing and will be completed by the end of ESSIP:FCM04 OI-Steps: DCB-0205 Other: - ESSIP:AOM19 OI-Steps: AOM- 0201, AOM-0202, AOM-0205, AOM- 0401, DCB-0203 Other: - Capacity: The ATFCM/ASM projects will deliver improvement in efficiency and capacity by better planning of available resources (human and airspace) starting from the strategic ATFCM phase (months in advance) up to the day-ofoperations. ESSIP:- OI-Steps: - Other: - Expected Contribution to the Key Performance Areas * Capacity: The ifmp project will deliver improvements in efficiency and capacity by better planning of available resources (human and airspace) in the tactical ATFCM phase (day of operations). It will as well support the implementation of advanced STAM (Short Term ATFCM Measures) and improve the interoperability with NM systems via B2B services. Safety: - Environment: - Cost-Efficiency: - Safety: - Environment: It will also deliver tools to support the achievement of MUAC environmental KPIs. Cost-Efficiency: - Capacity: - Safety: - Environment: - Cost-Efficiency: - LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 15 Released Issue

27 Name / Code Description - Scope Schedule Status Link with ATM Master Plan / Other references RDFS (Radio Direction Finder System) In 2012 a feasibility study was undertaken to investigate whether an array of state-ofthe art RDF equipment could provide the position information of aircraft radio transmissions to the controller working positions. As the outcome of the study a project to implement such solution has been initiated with an operational capability expected by the end of VCS Replacement of the Voice Communications System The call for tenders was launched in 2014 and the contract signature is expected in Q The new system will be ready for operational deployment by end 2015/early ESSIP:- OI-Steps: - Other: - ESSIP:COM11 OI-Steps: - Other: - Expected Contribution to the Key Performance Areas * Capacity: - Safety: The project will contribute in reducing the number of operational incidents generated by call sign confusion, read-backs from wrong aircraft or crossed transmissions. Environment: - Cost-Efficiency: - Capacity: The new VCS will continue to provide reliable Ground-to-Ground and Air-to-Ground communications, providing capability for expandability, flexible reconfiguration and different switching technologies, necessary to support emerging operational concepts and technical standards (e.g. Voice over IP). Safety: - Environment: - Cost-Efficiency: - LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 16 Released Issue

28 Chapter 5 - Regional Co-ordination 5.1 FAB Co-ordination FAB Europe Central (FABEC) consists of the following states: Belgium, France, Germany, Luxemburg, the Netherlands and Switzerland. The FABEC Feasibility Phase ( ) led to the conclusion that FABEC is feasible. The Implementation Phase ( ) demonstrated that the FABEC structure was compliant with SES regulations. After the ratification of the FABEC Treaty by all FABEC States, FABEC formally entered into force on the 1st of June This means that FABEC is now operational. FABEC will deliver on the goals set by SES II and as laid down in the FABEC Performance Plan to provide capacity, avoid bottlenecks, reduce costs and emissions, make flying more efficient and ensure military mission effectiveness, while maintaining the high safety standards that exist over Europe. It will do so by developing a set of projects which are described in the next section. 5.2 FAB Projects On the following pages, tables detail for each ongoing main FABEC project: which ANSPs and military partners are participating a description, the scope and objectives the schedule and implementation planning the status end 2014 the link to the ESSIP, if any the expected performance contributions to the SES KPAs capacity, safety, environment and cost efficiency LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 17 Released Issue

29 Project Name: Airspace Design CBA Land/Central West Organisation(s) DFS LVNL MUAC Military partners of: D and NL Project Code: AD CBALCW Description/Scope/Objectives The objective of the CBA Land/Central West project is to design and implement an optimised ATS structure of the FABEC Central West area and of the North area which also includes a CBA Land. Based on known constraints in current airspace design, the objectives of the project are to: Release military airspace in the south of the Netherlands, to create increased civil capacity and more direct civil routes for the hub airports London, Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam. To compensate the military airspace users, to implement a larger consolidated Cross-border exercise area to accommodate legacy as well as fifth generation fighter training operations. Schedule/Implementation planning The work of CBA Land / Central West will be implemented in two steps: Step 1 implemented by Q This step implements the new and changed sectorisation and ATS route structures related to the Northern area and the core area of CBA Land military cross-border area over Northern Netherlands and Germany. The implementation also requires improved ASM arrangements and initial GAT route network improvements in the southern part and it will also implement the required cross-border ATM legislation, rules and procedures. Step 2 implemented by Q This step completes the full implementation of CBA Land/Central West project. It will implement the restructuring of the airspace structure in the southern part and allow full release of a MIL training area (TRA12) in the South- East of the Netherlands and the implementation of the 4 th IAF for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, resulting in direct routings in the lower and upper airspace. At the same time the end state of the CBA will be implemented. Status The airspace and route design has been developed and successfully validated. Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: n/a Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Capacity KPI Average en-route ATFM delay per controlled flight: 0.5 min./ flight or less from 2017 onwards. Safety Approved safety case. Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency KPI Percentage of route extension represented in distance flown compared to the great circle distance: no change until 2018, 5% reduction from 2019 onwards. Total economic cost per flight hour: unchanged until 2019, improvement afterwards. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 18 Released Issue

30 Project Name: Airspace Design South-East Project Code: AD SE Organisation(s) ANA LUX Belgocontrol DFS Description/Scope/Objectives DSNA MUAC Skyguide Military partners of: B, CH, D, F and NL The scope of the South East airspace project consists of 2 main airspace changes: 1. SWAP In the current situation, the flows of traffic on UN852 and UN853 cross twice, once in Brussels UIR at the DIK waypoint, and again to the north of Geneva. The SWAP concept intends to remove this dual crossing to improve safety and increase the capacity of the network by: De-conflicting upper air routes UN852 and UN853 by swapping the direction of the traffic flows Creating duplicate parallel routes to allow for segregation of over flights from climbing and descending flights The boundaries of the EUC 25 (French-Swiss Cross Border Area) have to be redefined to ensure sufficient civil airspace for the new Geneva SIDs & STARs that will be implemented to join the SWAP network. 2. EUC22 Establish a new Cross Border Area (CBA) EUC22 for use by the French, German and United States Air Forces. This EUC 22 will increase the amount of airspace available for civilian use in the LUX area. This additional airspace will allow for optimisation of the civil route network (SWAP) and will assist the various Airspace Projects around the LUX area to achieve their performance targets. A stepwise approach was chosen for the implementation of the EUC22. Schedule/Implementation planning To facilitate the implementation, the project has been divided into three phases: Status Phase 1 EUC25 (March 2015) Phase 2 SWAP and new EUC22 step 1 (March 2016) Phase 3 FULL EUC22 (March 2018) Phase 1 implementation is planned for the 5th of March Phase 2 solution design (SWAP and EUC22 step 1) has been finalized by end of December Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: - AOM20: Implement ATS Route Network (ARN) Version 7. (Objective set to Achieved and removed from ESSIP ed.2014) Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Capacity Mixture of positive and negative impact on capacity, with an overall neutral effect. Safety Operationally, the change will be capable of handling a higher capacity than today with the same or improved level of safety. Additionally, a reduction in the number of serious separation minima infringement incidents is expected due to the removal of the upper level crossing points on UN852 and UN853. Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency The overall horizontal flight efficiency is improved. Annually, a total reduction of 800,000 NM is expected, resulting in cost savings to the airlines of 7.5 million. This will also result in a reduction of CO2 emissions. No impact. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 19 Released Issue

31 Project Name: AIM Expert Task Force Project Code: AIM Organisation(s) Belgocontrol DFS DSNA LVNL Description/Scope/Objectives MUAC Skyguide Military partners of B Mid 2014, the AIM Steering Group decided to merge the two former subgroups AIM Harmonisation and AIM Publication into one Task Force in order to make better use of the scarce resources. The AIM Task Force has four areas of activities: Harmonisation of Aeronautical Information (Common AIS Reference Data set) Alignment of National Aeronautical Information Publications Development of a Common FABEC AIM Data Package for the initiation of an airspace design project Early contribution to the implementation of an airspace design project (upload the specific AIM data to EAD as early as possible). Schedule/Implementation planning The Task Force started its activities in September 2014 and plans to finalize by end Status Work has been started in September Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: - ITY-ADQ: Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information. PCP: - AF5: Initial System Wide Information Management. Preliminary Deployment Programme: - FT 5.3.3: Interface to NMS Centralised Services: - CS5: European ATM Information Management Service (EAIMS) Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Capacity N/A Safety Harmonised aeronautical information, avoiding duplications or ambiguities, significantly contributes to ATM safety. Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency FABEC wide harmonised data sets available from a single source will allow for improved flight planning. Expected: A significant positive impact on the cost efficiency of e.g. Airspace Design Projects as cross-border data becomes readily and seamlessly available. Project Name: FABEC ATFCM/ASM Project Project Code: FAAP Organisation(s) ANA LUX Belgocontrol DFS DSNA LVNL MUAC Skyguide Military partners of: B, CH, D, F and NL Description/Scope/Objectives The aim of this project is to develop and implement a FABEC ASM function addressing both civil and military airspace user s needs. The FABEC ASM function will rely on CDM only. AMC responsibilities are remaining as they currently are but LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 20 Released Issue

32 AMCs should use interoperable tools and updated operational procedures to enhance data exchange/sharing and coordination between stakeholders. The project will: Contribute to and follow the general initiative to establish common principles of ASM for FABEC countries Refine a concept of operation for a FABEC ASM function and develop associated procedures and requirements Consider the findings from the FUA harmonization Task Carry out a thorough analysis of the existing tools (STANLY, DIANE, LARA, MICAMS,...) This project will achieve the following objectives in a stepped approach: Enable a FABEC Airspace Status Overview Create a set of harmonized ASM procedures (data sharing) across FABEC States Define CDM coordination procedures to provide ASM solutions Schedule/Implementation planning Step 1: Provide a FABEC airspace overview and enhance the cooperation between AMCs by Q1 2015: Benchmark ASM daily practices that are currently in place Take into account the recommendations contained in the D7.1 document, aiming at establishing harmonized Booking Principles and Priority Rules, and to use this as a basis for the establishment of harmonized procedures to enhance the current ASM, as presently contained in the current ASM Handbook Initiate a FABEC wide coordination process between AMCs Introduce FABEC wide data sharing to enable a FABEC Airspace overview Step 2: Define CDM coordination procedures to provide ASM solutions by end 2016: Take on board lessons learnt from step1. Establish processes of cross-border coordination to provide ASM solutions. Status In November 2014, Step 1 has been implemented. Step 2 will start begin Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: - AOM19 : Implement Advanced Airspace Management PCP: - AF3.1: Airspace Management and Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace Preliminary Deployment Programme: - FT 3.1.1: Implement initial ASM tool Centralised Services: - CS4: Advanced Flexible Use of Airspace Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Step 1 Step 2 Capacity Safety Step 1 consists mainly in an organisational change and ASM data sharing with the data only used to enhance the AMC s situational awareness. As such Step 1 will not deliver any performance benefits as far as it concerns the 5 KPAs contained in the FABEC Performance Plan. A collaborative decision-making process and cooperation between AMCs should result in an improvement due to better use of additional capacity provided through released airspace/cdr2. The airspace management will be based on civil and military needs. Benefits are expected. Step 2 which implies the operational use of the shared ASM data on cross-border basis may have a safety impact and therefore will require a Safety Case. Environment (including flight efficiency) For the moment there is not sufficient visibility to estimate the impact on safety and the necessary mitigation means. A safety assessment will be conducted following the most adequate methodology option. Through better information sharing and improved planning, there will be more opportunities for CDR2 openings and tactical re-routings resulting in a possible reduction of fuel burn and reduction of gaseous and noise emissions. Benefits are expected. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 21 Released Issue

33 Cost efficiency Financial benefits are expected for users through a better management of available capacity as well as a better network efficiency notably with an increased rate of CDR2 use and a balance to be found in Cost Efficiency between costs generation to man the function and a better management of airspace which reduces traffic complexity. Project Name: Free Route Airspace Project Code: FRA Organisation(s) Belgocontrol DFS DSNA LVNL MUAC Skyguide Military partners of: B, D, F and NL Description/Scope/Objectives The FRA programme aims at developing and implementing a Free Route Airspace FABEC wide. The objective of the FRA implementation is to give users opportunities to improve the horizontal flight efficiency through both plan-able direct routes and at a later stage defined volume/s of Free Route Airspace within FABEC airspace. The FRA programme defines a stepped and gradual implementation approach where FABEC ACCs will develop and implement various iterations of Free Route Airspace cross-border and FABEC wide. Schedule/Implementation planning The FRA roadmap defines three major implementation steps. The project s current main focus is on the first two steps. The concept of Step 3 is not sufficiently mature to implement; however planning has begun to launch this activity. Step 1: Planning of DCTs available during night and weekends when military areas are not active Step 2: Implementation of DCTs H24 including potential military activities. This step has been divided in three levels: Level 1 concerns H24 DCTs which don t impact military areas, level 2 aims at implementing H24 DCTs impacting military zones which could be available according to military activity. Level 3 targets FABEC wide DCTs but also, further optimizes the use of DCTs through military areas supported by an advanced FUA concept above FL 365. Step 3: FABEC Airspace or portion thereof above specific level(s) within which users may freely plan a route between a defined entry point and a defined exit point, with the possibility to route via intermediate (published or unpublished) way points, without reference to the ATS route network, subject to airspace availability. Within this airspace, flights remain subject to air traffic control. Steps 2 and 3 need a close coordination on FUA requirements with the ATFCM/ASM project that is in charge of the interface with the Airspace Committee FUA TF. Status For all ANSP s, step 1 implementations have begun and are on-going. For MUAC and DFS Step 2 Levels 1 and 2 have begun and are on-going. Planning for Step 2 Level 3 and Step 3 implementation is currently underway to be consistent as much as possible with the PCP Requirements. Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: - AOM21: Implementation of Free Route Airspace PCP: - AF3.2: Free Route Preliminary Deployment Programme: - FT 3.2.1: Upgrade ATM Systems - FT 3.2.3: Implement Direct Routes Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 22 Released Issue

34 Capacity Safety Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency Capacity benefits could be foreseen since reduced average transit times may result in an increase in capacity. Capacity benefits may also be possible if there is proven to be a reduced number of conflicts, fewer redirects, and the resulting impact on controller tools. However it is also possible that in some cases conflicts may become more complex and other or new choke points may emerge. Hence the overall impact of FRA on sector capacity cannot be determined without simulations. No impact FRA allows airspace users to fly direct routes, thus reducing flight distance flown, with consequent savings in fuel and direct and strategic operating costs. There are environmental benefits from savings in CO2-emissions. Significant investments for all the involved ANSPs. The sensitivity analyses show that even with the most pessimistic scenarios of low traffic, lower benefits, delayed benefits, higher costs, low airline adoption and a low cost of distance flown, the NPV of the project remains positive. Project Name: Extended Arrival Management Project Code: XMAN Organisation(s) Belgocontrol DFS DSNA LVNL Description/Scope/Objectives MUAC Skyguide The XMAN/AMAN project will develop and implement a harmonised approach to arrival management in the core area of Europe because it has to rely on cross-centre and cross-border processes and procedures. The implementation of XMAN will improve and optimise arrival management operations for the major 5 airports/tmas as well as for other selected intermediate airports as defined by the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 716/2014. One of the main characteristics of the XMAN/AMAN project is the extension of the planning horizon of arrival management systems (AMAN) from the local TMA into the airspace of upstream control centres. The final extension of arrival management operations is expected to reach as far as 200 NM or even beyond, depending on the operational environment and the needs of the stakeholders. These extended planning horizons will cover almost the entire FABEC airspace and, as a consequence, most of the FABEC control centres will be affected by extended AMAN operations and some of them will need to feed several arrival streams for different airports/tmas. Schedule/Implementation planning The XMAN project envisages 3 development and implementation steps: Basic - from 2012 to 2017 The Basic Step uses the currently available systems and technologies in order to establish cross-centre arrival management in the airspace controlled by DFS, LVNL, MUAC, DSNA and NATS. Advanced - from 2013 to 2023 The Advanced Step will take into account validated SESAR results concerning Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) in order to improve the en-route part of cross-centre arrival management in the overall FABEC airspace. This step also requires enhanced data exchange between ACC/UAC in order to support a delay sharing strategy. Additional planning information related to departures and airborne flights will be used to be provided by Airport- CDM and/or Network Management. This step has potentially an impact on all FABEC ACCs. Optimised - from 2017 to 2023 The Optimised Step will take into account further validated SESAR results and will optimize the cooperation between arrival management and Airport-CDM, Aircraft Operators and Network Management in order to widely share Arrival Management (AM) information between all partners and to process and to apply Arrival Management information where needed. Status The Solution design of the Basic Step has been approved by the ASB in November The concept development of the Advanced Step has been approved by the ASB in November Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: - ATC07.1: Implement arrival management tools. - ATC15: Implement, in En-Route operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 23 Released Issue

35 PCP: - AF1: Extended AMAN and PBN in high density TMA Preliminary Deployment Programme: - FT 1.1.1: Basic AMAN - FT 1.1.2: AMAN upgrade to include Extended Horizon function Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Capacity Safety Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency Improved average punctuality: small positive effect. Better forecast for sector loads: small positive effect. Reduced controller workload: no significant effect. Improved situational awareness: small positive effect. Reduced tactical interventions: small positive effect. Reduction of: Track miles and holdings: small positive effect; Fuel burn: large positive effect; CO2/NOX emissions: large positive effect. From ANSP point of view: large negative effect (investment cost without financial return for ANSP). Project Name: Flow Optimisation Concept Scenario Study Code: FOCS Organisation(s) Belgocontrol DFS DSNA MUAC NATS Description/Scope/Objectives The main objective of the FOCS study is to develop an airspace design for the core area which is acceptable to all partners and contributes to FABEC Performance Targets of HFE and Capacity by: Optimising sectorisation regardless of national boundaries and existing Division Flight Levels within the core area Optimising the routing options for airspace users; Optimising the interfaces (UK, SE, CBA Land/CW); Taking into account the major local projects impacting FABEC (Paris Point Merge); The MOSEL study is considered to be part of FOCS, rather than a parallel activity. Additionally, the FOCS Feasibility Study shall: Develop an implementation plan reflecting the implementation timeframes of the different options; Make a clear distinction between options that could be implemented within the RP2 timeframe and those after the RP2 timeframe (i.e ). Developing, for the timeframe beyond RP2, an airspace strategy ( ) which need to be agreed by all ANSPs. Schedule/Implementation planning The study will be finalized by mid Should the study lead to an implementation project the envisaged implementation timeframe is towards the end of RP2 ( ). Implementation would be modular rather than a big bang approach. Status The FOCS study has been re-launched mid-september 2014 and the study plan has been updated. Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: n/a Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Capacity Safety First indication will be defined by the study Shall not deteriorate LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 24 Released Issue

36 Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency First indication will be defined by the study First indication will be defined by the study Implementation of Common Cost Project Name: Management level II Organisation(s) ANA LUX Belgocontrol DFS DSNA LVNL MUAC Skyguide Project Code: CCM level II Description/Scope/Objectives The common planning of financial aspects (investments, cost savings, etc.) between ANSPs is considered the next step towards an aligned financial framework. The project will analyse which cost items can commonly be planned, which synergies can be derived and which consequences can be derived from the obtained information. Schedule/Implementation planning Status Not started yet. Link to ESSIP (ATM Master Plan Level 3) / OI Steps (ATM Master Plan Level 2) / Other references ESSIP: n/a Expected Performance Contribution (specific to the participating organisation(s)) Capacity Safety Environment (including flight efficiency) Cost efficiency N/A N/A N/A The project is the baseline for future financial cooperation and hence an enabler for future benefits in Cost Efficiency without actually delivering own elements of cost saving. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 25 Released Issue

37 5.3 Regional cooperation Regional Cooperation Initiatives Maastricht UAC area of responsibility is a complex and dense airspace in the close vicinity of major airports such as London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Brussels, Düsseldorf and Copenhagen. Maastricht UAC interfaces with many civil and military ACCs and UACs. Regular co-ordination meetings are set up with adjacent/ subjacent partners within and outside the FABEC context - in order to improve airspace organisation and procedures such as to optimise the handling of traffic at the common interfaces. Following the initial and successful introduction, in 2011, of Free Route Airspace operations in the area controlled by Maastricht UAC and the DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung Karlsruhe Upper Area Control Centre, more than 700 direct routes have been implemented. At the same occasion, over 100 of these direct routes starting in MUAC airspace were linked with direct routes in the Karlsruhe area, creating a large-scale free routing airspace over Belgium, most of Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Next to these routes, 18 cross-border direct routes were implemented. Cross-border direct routes distinguish themselves from normal direct routes by the fact that they do not have a coordination point at the boundary between the two involved service providers. This milestone is the second tangible achievement of the Free Route Airspace Maastricht and Karlsruhe (FRAMaK) project, a programme under SESAR which aims to offer cross-border direct routes in the busy and complex core area of Europe. In collaboration with Lufthansa, FRAMaK investigated the possibility for aircraft operators to freely plan their flight on preferred business trajectories, thereby contributing to achieve the targets set in the flight efficiency plan. The study was successfully concluded Q To maximise benefits, Maastricht UAC is closely coordinating the implementation with adjacent partners. Alignment with the Danish and Swedish free route projects is realized in the framework of the North Sea Regional Focus Group (NSFRG), an ad-hoc coordination group under RNDSG. In 2012, work started in the context of FABEC with the objective to offer free route operations to aircraft operators across the FABEC area. This work is still ongoing. Nearly every month packages of carefully tuned DCTs are published, both locally or cross-border in close cooperation with DFS Karlsruhe. These implementation packages offer the Airline Operators numerous flightplan options dependent on the time of day. Further development is done with military partners in order to start implementing cross-border DCT s available through military training areas when not used during the day of operations. It is expected that this next step will offer Airline Operators major benefits with regard to route extensions. First implementations are expected in the course of The changes to the route network with the introduction of free routes during times of military activity required adaptation of OAT-GAT operating principles between MUAC and DFS Maastricht (Civ-Mil). Working practices that have evolved during many years of close cooperation were simplified, improving communication and optimising procedures for the benefit of both Civil and Military airspace users. An improved Concept of Operations was introduced in October 2012 and formally accepted in Q On 27 June 2012 MUAC started to use the LARA (Local And sub-regional ASM) system operationally. LARA is a support tool that encompasses all phases of airspace management - from long-term event planning to airspace management at level 2 and 3 - including real-time coordination of airspace activation. This is the first large-scale common civil and military deployment of LARA in Europe. MUAC has been integrated as the civil user in the first LARA cluster which is operational for the management of Belgian airspace. This cluster is composed of a number of workstations in MUAC, Brussels ACC, Belgian military airbases, CRC Glons, ATCC Semmerzake and the Belgian Airspace Management Cell. The LARA workstations are all connected over a network to the central LARA server, which is also installed at MUAC. As a further development, MUAC successfully connected the LARA Server to its ATC system (FDPS). This allowed a direct feed of military airspace planning data into the FDPS and an automatic display of active training areas on the radar screen. This feature was initially tested in a live environment between ATCC Semmerzake and MUAC in December 2012 and is due for operational implementation in LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 26 Released Issue

38 5.3.2 Regional Projects Provision of Military ATS in the Amsterdam FIR On 30 September 2013, the MUAC air traffic control system has been extended to be used remotely at the Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) Air Operations Control Centre at Nieuw Milligen and seven air bases: this was the first instantiation of the Shared ATS System (SAS). In the continuation of this project and in line with the Airspace Strategy for the Netherlands, a feasibility study was initiated in January 2014 to look at the possibility to either co-locate the military personnel of the Royal Netherlands Air force at the Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre or to transfer the provision of military ATS in the Amsterdam FIR above FL 245 to Maastricht. Due to a general shortage of RNLAF staff, the study concluded in January 2015 that MUAC Staff will provide the military ATS above FL 245, while RNLAF staff will keep providing military ATS below FL 245. The implementation of this provision of military ATS is managed through a joint MUAC RNLAF project called NLUM (Netherlands Upper in Maastricht). The project will use the functions developed for SAS and will adapt them to the MUAC civil controllers context. The Military ATS Services in the Amsterdam FIR above FL 245 will be provided by MUAC: Under GAT rules for all the On-Route Transit and Window Traffic with Civil Controller Working Positions. Under OAT rules for the other military traffic with specific Military Controller Working Positions: off-route flights, functional check flights, supersonic flights, regular military test flights and large scale exercises traffic. This project will increase the MUAC capacity in the DECO SG as the military areas above FL 245 outside the shared area will be always available for Maastricht. It is then expected that the service provision out of one hand will generate network capacity gains, thereby benefitting all users. The operational integration will have positive safety effects due to lesser co-ordination and accrued situational awareness of ATCOs. In addition, the project will optimise and simplify the airspace management in the Amsterdam FIR upper airspace as one provider will operate in this airspace. The provision of these military ATS services is planned to be fully implemented by Q1 2017, before the move of the RNLAF staff to Schiphol in order to integrate the RNLAF staff with the LVNL staff Integration of Lippe Radar The Federal Republic of Germany is considering entrusting MUAC with the service provision for operational air traffic (OAT) services in the Hannover UIR as a follow up of the study on new Institutional Model for Maastricht UAC - Phase 2 (MUAC IL Study). This would see a shift of responsibility for this service provision from DFSCC-UM to MUAC, and service provision would be done in an integrated civilmilitary set-up, which shall significantly optimize the cost effectiveness, all by preserving the current high levels of safety, service and performance SESAR Validation Maastricht UAC actively participates to the SESAR Programme and makes its Industrial Based Platform (IBP) available to conduct pre-operational validations in areas assessed as important performance enablers for the future. The MUAC IBP evolves continuously, taking the lesson learnt and maturing concepts and technology into account. Current SESAR activities as described in this chapter are all candidates to evolve further under the SESAR2020 programme ( ) in preparation of the mandated PCP deployments. A non-exhaustive list of validation activities, focusing on the major enablers is presented below. Interoperability-Air (IOP-A) / i4d The main objective is to perform a gradual validation of trajectory exchange with the aircraft (2D/3D moving towards 4D) and to validate the concept of a shared trajectory to ensure consistency of information between ground and airborne systems. This information will be used to improve ATM ground System Performance and flow/queue management, support enhanced early conflict detection and resolution and use of CTA/CTO (time based operations) as final objectives including the management of traffic towards TMAs. This Project will support in validating the required enhancements of Data Link capabilities and required navigation performance of the aircraft. LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 27 Released Issue

39 In the period 2011 till March 2014 Maastricht participated in two live flight trials and real time validations in three steps. The Maastricht IBP evolved via these three steps to a maturity which is planned to be the baseline for further evolutions under SESAR2020 to get close to what can be a basis for the operational introductions under the mandated PCP ATM Functionality #6 (initial Trajectory Information Sharing). i4d is part of the overall Trajectory Management Framework (TMF) concept and covers the air-ground interoperability of TMF. Interoperability-Ground (IOP-G) The objective of this project is to perform operational validation of trajectory exchanges, using the Flight Object, in an IOP triangle (MUAC/Reims/Karlsruhe) initially and extended with NATS, LVNL, ENAV and the Network Manager (NM). The validations started in January 2013 but will continue for the rest of the SESAR 1 period up till In a number of annual steps the project will evolve from validating the non-regression compared to current operational practices towards adding new functionality will be added on top of the non-regression baseline. The MUAC prototype is based on adaptations of the MUAC N-FDPS to include an IOP application (a.k.a. Flight Object Server - FOS) and integration with a SWIM prototype. The Maastricht IBP is planned to evolve during SESAR1 towards a maturity which is planned to be the baseline for further evolutions under SESAR2020 to get close to what can be a basis for the operational introductions under the mandated PCP ATM Functionality #5 (iswim). Most of the IOP-G activities focus on the ATC-ATC aspects, but MUAC is the first ANSP partner for NM to ensure that also NM will be part of the Flight Object part of SWIM (a.k.a. SWIM Blue Profile). IOP-G is part of the overall Trajectory Management Framework (TMF) concept and covers the groundground interoperability of TMF. Flow and Complexity Management The MUAC ifmp tool will be integrated into the MUAC IBP and used in a SESAR development phase in En Route validation scenario (MUAC AoR) to continuously monitor and evaluate traffic complexity; a method of assessing traffic complexity based on an algorithmic approach using information from the live FDPS including conflict data from the MTCD tool will be used. This information will be used by Centre supervisors to assess the impact on upcoming congestions and decide on the optimum airspace configuration scheme (sectorisation) to be applied, including the use of dynamic sector configurations (e.g. vdfl). The tool will also offer support (through an advanced HMI) for decision making by providing what-if capabilities on flights, traffic flows and airspace configurations at centre level supporting future functions of Multi and Meta Sector Planners. Operational Trials were successfully performed at the beginning of 2012 with live data from CFMU and local data from the MUAC ATC system. Additional trials are planned in the timeframe of in the context of SESAR Step 2 Complexity Management validations and Dynamic Demand & Capacity Balancing (ddcb) validations. The ifmp platform will be modified to implement an exchange of information with the Network Manager Validation Platform (NMVP) via SWIM B2B services (e.g. definition of hot-spots and coordination of STAM measures). Also the HMI will be further enhanced to integrate trajectory and complexity/traffic load information and airspace planning data from the LARA airspace management tool. The Maastricht IBP is planned to evolve during SESAR1 towards a maturity which is planned to be the baseline for further evolutions under SESAR2020 to get close to what can be a basis for the operational introductions under the mandated PCP ATM Functionality #3 (Flexible Airspace Management and Free Route) and ATM Functionality #5 (Network Collaborative Management). LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 28 Released Issue

40 Chapter 6 - ESSIP Objective Implementation Conventions Two colour codes are used for each ESSIP Objective box : o o one colour code is used to show the Objective Scope in the Objective ID cell, and another colour code is used to show the Objective Progress in the State and for each national stakeholder. Obj. ID (*) Obj. Title (By mm/yyyy of overall objective, inc non-state SloAs) Obj. Progress (**) State s high level progress statement REG (By:mm-yyyy) (By:mm-yyyy) MIL (By:mm-yyyy) APO (By:mm-yyyy) REG high level progress statement high level progress statement MIL high level progress statement APO high level progress statement State Impl. Date APO. Progress (**) APO Impl. Date. Progress (**) Impl. Date MIL. Progress (**) MIL Impl. Date APO. Progress (**) APO Impl. Date (*) Objective Scope Code: (**) Objective/Stakeholder Progress Code: ECAC No Plan EU+ Partly Multi-N Planned Missing Data APT Late LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 29 Released Issue

41 6.1 ESSIP Objectives Implementation progress Harmonise Operational Air Traffic (OAT) and General Air Traffic (GAT) handling [IDP] AOM13.1 (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable OI Step(s): AOM0202 [E], AOM0301 Not applicable, since Maastricht UAC provides ATS only to GAT. The following additional explanations are provided: Currently, the handling of OAT by each of the 4 States is based on national regulations. Maastricht UAC does not service OAT flights, which are handled by other military or civil ANSPs. MUAC has interfaces and proper arrangements with these other ANSPs. An OAT flight may proceed with Maastricht ATC only if it has changed from OAT to GAT inflight. OAT/GAT flight transition and interfaces are currently handled by MUAC in accordance with ICAO. Information on the ANSPs which handle OAT in the Maastricht airspace is available in the 4 States' respective LSSIP documents. Maastricht UAC provided operational expertise to the HORGI TF for the development of guidance material. REG (By:12/2018) (By:12/2018) MIL (By:12/2018) See main comment. See main comment. Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress in this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. Implement Advanced Airspace Management [IDP] AOM19 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 OI Step(s): AOM0201, AOM0202 [E], AOM0205 [E], AOM0401 [E], DCB0203 [E] Maastricht UAC was involved in the FABEC ASM/ATFCM Field trial (2010) and the Live Trial (2010). The final goal is to make ASM Tools in FABEC interoperable (e.g. connection LARA STANLY ACOS). In April 2012, LARA was implemented operationally by the Belgian Air Force and in June 2012 in MUAC. The LARA to FDPS connection (Belgian cluster) is planned to be implemented operationally in Q1 2015; the first live trials have been executed in December 2012 and May Operational implementation of LARA by RNLAF is planned in The connection of the Dutch cluster to the MUAC FDPS will be implemented thereafter. (By:12/2016) See main comment. FABEC ATFCM/ASM Project 31/12/ /12/2014 AOM21 Implementation of Free Route Airspace Initial operational capability: 01/09/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 OI Step(s): AOM0401 [E], AOM0402 In 2011, FRAM was introduced operationally at MUAC via the implementation of direct routes between entry and exit points. Via a stepped approach, MUAC started in December 2012 with phase 4. Phase 5, cross border direct routes without a COP at the boundary, started in May Phase 6, consisting of full free route airspace where Airline Operators can freely plan above a certain flight level, is planned for (By:12/2017) All system changes have been implemented for direct routes starting and ending in the MUAC AoR. For crossborder direct routes without a coordination point between two centres, the implementation of system changes is planned for Q [IDP] Free Route Airspace Partly 31/03/2015 Partly 31/03/2015 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 30 Released Issue

42 AOP03 Improve runway safety by preventing runway incursions [IDP] Initial operational capability: 01/04/2003 Full operational capability: 31/12/2013 OI Step(s): AO0101 Maastricht UAC does not have any airports within its area of responsibility. REG (By:12/2013) (By:12/2013) APO (By:12/2013) N/A for Maastricht UAC. Progress in this objective by the REG authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. N/A N/A Implement ground based safety nets Short Term Conflict Alert (STCA) level 2 ATC02.2 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2008 Full operational capability: 31/01/2013 OI Step(s): CM0801 [E] A new STCA was introduced in the fallback ATC system in June 2006 and in the primary ATC system in January The implementation of this objective as an operational improvement is now completed. Following experience gained in operational usage and the associated safety monitoring processes, the STCA logic and controller input of the cleared flight level were modified in order to capture potential conflicts at an earlier stage. The STCA system has been verified against and found to be in compliance with the respective EUROCONTROL Specification. ATCOs have been trained on the new STCA. Consequently, integration of the EUROCONTROL Specification for STCA in the 4 States' national regulations and taking more appropriate regulatory actions to ensure the timely compliance with the EUROCONTROL Specification for STCA by Maastricht UAC is considered by MUAC as no longer necessary. (By:01/2013) See the overall comment. 31/12/ /12/2007 Implement ground based safety nets Area Proximity Warning level 2 ATC02.5 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2009 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 OI Step(s): CM0801 [E] The NFDPS (put into service in Dec 2008) incorporates conformance monitoring and provides alerts for deviations of track, as well as TSA crossing warnings in case of crossing of an active TSA. Controllers were properly trained prior to operational use. Partly The NFDPS provides the APW function to the extend this is needed in an enroute environment through the TSA Crossing Warnings, and the forcing on the CWP of (imminently) active TSA Contours in the (Warning) Alert Colour. In the course of 2013, the TSA Crossing Warning function was further enhanced by the implementation of "allowed" crossing tubes through active TSAs to reflect the concept of available CDRs through TSAs. In addition, the display of active TSA Contours will be further automated by linking the FDPS to the Air Space Management Tool (LARA). With the operational implementation of the link between the LARA tool and the FDPS (planned early 2015), this LSSIP objective will be considered as fully completed and no further dependency is made to the APW specification. As in the overall comment. (By:12/2016) 30/03/2015 Partly 30/03/2015 ATC02.6 Implement ground based safety nets Minimum Safe Altitude Warning level 2 (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable OI Step(s): CM0801 [E] This objective is N/A for Maastricht UAC as MUAC provides ATC only above FL245. (By:12/2016) N/A LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 31 Released Issue

43 ATC02.7 Implement ground based safety nets Approach Path Monitor level 2 (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable OI Step(s): CM0801 [E] This objective is considered N/A for Maastricht UAC as MUAC provides ATC service only above FL245. (By:12/2016) N/A Implement arrival management tools (Outside Applicability Area) ATC07.1 not applicable OI Step(s): TS0102 [E] This objective does not apply directly to Maastricht UAC as it does not have any airports within its area of responsibility and provides ATC only above FL245. For the implementation in EnRoute operations of the information exchange with AMAN systems see ATC15. (By:12/2015) Same as the overall comment. Extended Arrival Management Implement automated support for conflict detection and conformance monitoring ATC12 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2008 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 OI Step(s): CM0202 [E], CM0203 [E] MTCD early trials in the frame of the ASA programme in 2003 and 2004 confirmed the difficulties of implementing MTCD in small sectors with a high proportion of traffic in vertical transition. An implementation of multivera was achieved, containing some MTCD requirements and providing a placeholder for further MTCD development. Full MTCD has become technically available with the successful operational implementation of the NFDPS in December MTCD has in the MUAC Operational Concept been linked to VERA creation; increased operational functionality will be gradually introduced, however this is not considered a high priority at this stage, as it is only deemed required for future concepts like Multi and MetaSector Planning. Conformance monitoring is fully operational with the NFDPS. MTCD validations were performed in close cooperation with the EUROCONTROL FASTI Programme. (By:12/2016) With the introduction of NFDPS, full MTCD became technically available. Validation and tuning activities took place during 2010, irrespective that MTCD has not been considered to be a high priority. Conformance monitoring is fully operational with the NFDPS. Local validations for a Probe function using Near Term Conflict Alert (NTCA) as Conflict Detection algorithm were conducted successfully during Probe with NTCA has been implemented in May MTCD using an extended timehorizon will be used in ifmp (integrated Flow Management Position) predicting Sector Workload. Implement, in EnRoute operations, information exchange mechanisms, tools and procedures in support of Basic AMAN operations [IDP] ATC15 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2017 OI Step(s): TS0305 [E] The interface with Amsterdam ACC was implemented in Implementation with additional partners (e.g. Frankfurt) is expected to take place depending on their readiness and operational needs. Due to its unique position, MUAC is piloting the integration with multiple AMAN implementations as input into the FABEC XMAN initiative. (By:12/2017) The interface with Amsterdam ACC was implemented in Implementation with additional partners (e.g. Frankfurt) is expected to take place depending on their readiness and operational needs. Due to its unique position, MUAC is piloting the integration with multiple AMAN implementations as input into the FABEC XMAN initiative. Extended Arrival Management 31/12/ /12/2010 Partly 31/12/2016 Partly 31/12/ /12/ /12/2011 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 32 Released Issue

44 Implement ACAS II compliant with TCAS II change 7.1 ATC16 Initial operational capability: 01/03/2012 Full operational capability: 31/12/2015 Enabler(s): CTES11a ATCOs are aware of the TCAS version upgrade and of the effect that the new "Level off, level off" RA will have on ATC operations through the Electronic Briefing. The awareness is further raised during the yearly Refresher Training Program. REG (By:12/2015) (By:03/2012) MIL (By:12/2015) The CAAs of the 4 States have evidence on the status of compliance with regulatory provisions for ACAS II (TCAS 7.1) for aircraft and aircraft operators in the State of Registry under the ILT(CAANL) oversight. Airworthiness certification can be provided upon application. ATCOs are aware of the TCAS version upgrade and of the effect that the new "Level off, level off" RA will have on ATC operations through the Electronic Briefing. The awareness is further raised during the yearly Refresher Training Program. Electronic Dialogue as Automated Assistance to Controller during Coordination and Transfer [IDP] ATC17 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2018 OI Step(s): CM0201 [E] All messages are implemented in the MUAC system, but operational use is currently limited. Prior to operational introduction, technical tuning will be required. The transmission of SDM as accepting unit is being discussed with Karlsruhe UAC. Operational use is planned for after the FDPS upgrade at Karlsruhe UAC. For the other messages, no operational use with other partners is currently planned. Safety significant changes to the ATM system are subject to safety oversight by ILT (CAANL) and the other 3 NSAs, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011. Changes will be implemented only provided that the safety review by the NSA accepts the safety arguments provided by the ANSP. (By:12/2018) See main comment. 31/12/ /06/ /12/2012 Planned 31/12/2017 Planned 31/12/2017 Migrate ground international or regional X.25 data networks or services to the Internet Protocol (IP) [IDP] COM09 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2006 Full operational capability: 31/12/2014 Enabler(s): CTEC11a, GGSWIM26a, GGSWIM52, NIMS02 The RAPNET system of MUAC is already IP capable. The majority of the services are migrated to IP, except some remaining OLDI connections (Reims, Paris, Semmerzake and Nieuw Milligen). The connections which are still on X.25 will gradually migrate to IP in accordance with each partner's planning. On RAPNET, the IPv6 is offered via CISCO routers at the edge. In this way compliance is effective with the FMTP implementing rule. With the 6 other RAPNET partners, MUAC has agreed to have RAPNET as local access network for PENS in the 4 States. The MUAC PENS gateway is operational since November The first IPv6 operational line was implemented in April (By:12/2014) See the State Comment. 30/04/ /12/2011 Migrate from AFTN to AMHS COM10 Initial operational capability: 01/12/2011 Full operational capability: 31/12/2014 Enabler(s): CTEC10 Maastricht UAC has replaced the DCFEP with a new ECGbased switch, which was a prerequisite for the introduction of AMHS. Implementation with LVNL was successfully concluded in March 2014, with DFS in May and with Belgocontrol in July (By:12/2014) See main comment. 31/12/ /03/2014 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 33 Released Issue

45 Implementation of Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) in ATM COM11 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2020 Enabler(s): CTEC8 MUAC will use VoIP for the first time with its New VCS system. Safety significant changes to the ATM system are subject to safety oversight by ILT (CAANL) and the other 3 NSAs, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011. Changes will be implemented only provided that the safety review by the NSA accepts the safety arguments provided by the ANSP. This change is notified 2012 and subject to formal acceptance and review based on the 4States manual. (By:12/2020) See main comment. Implement enhanced tactical flow management services FCM01 Initial operational capability: 01/08/2001 Full operational capability: 31/12/2006 OI Step(s): IS0102 [E] 1) ASTERIX Cat 62&65 support is available for external partners with the operational deployment of the ARTDACO radar gateway as from Q2/2006. Supply of Cat 062/065 to ETFMS was implemented in September ) EFD data is available to the local Traffic Management System (TMS) as from ) FSA was operationally implemented in (By:07/2014) See main comment. Implement collaborative flight planning [IDP] FCM03 Initial operational capability: 01/01/2000 Full operational capability: 31/12/2015 OI Step(s): DCB0302 [E], IS0101 [E], IS0102 [E] With the introduction of the NFDPS in 12/2008, APL and ACH messages are treated automatically. Automatic AFP has been tentatively implemented early 2011, but was not yet used in the CFMU operational system due to some technical incompatibilities. The target date is provisionally set to end Until FOC, data is only sent to the NMD test system by MUAC. (By:12/2015) See main comment. Implementation of Short Term ATFCM Measures phase 1 (Outside Applicability Area) [IDP] FCM04 not applicable OI Step(s): DCB0205 [E] MUAC uses CHMI for hot spot detection through TMV monitoring by TCM and provides the sectorization plans and associated TMVs/OTMVs daily to NM through CHMI. (By:12/2015) See main comment. Planned 30/11/2015 Planned 30/11/ /12/ /12/2014 Planned 31/12/2015 Planned 31/12/ /09/ /09/2013 Implementation of interactive rolling NOP [IDP] FCM05 Initial operational capability: 01/09/2013 Full operational capability: 31/12/2016 OI Step(s): AOM0202 [E], AOM0205 [E], DCB0102 [E] The responsibility for the Dutch ASM support system lies with the RNLAF, for the German system (based on STANLY) with the DFS. The Belgian LARA cluster is hosted and maintained by MUAC. The interface will be delivered with LARA V3, due for the second half of The Belgian LARA cluster will be integrated with NM depending on the availability and stability of the provided interface. Target integration is end (By:12/2016) APO (By:12/2016) Same as in the above comment. Planned 31/12/2015 Planned 31/12/2015 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 34 Released Issue

46 Implement integrated briefing (Outside Applicability Area) INF04 not applicable OI Step(s): IS0201 This objective is not applicable to Maastricht UAC as it has no airports within its area of responsibility. Also, Maastricht UAC is not an AIS provider. (By:12/2012) N/A INF07 Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (TOD) (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable Enabler(s): AIMS16 This objective is not applicable, as MUAC provides ATC only above FL245. REG (By:05/2018) (By:05/2018) APO (By:05/2018) ITYACID Aircraft identification Entry into force of the Regulation: 13/12/2011 System capability: 02/01/2020 Possible deferred compliance, only for services provided by military units or under military supervision, subject to conditions:: 02/01/2025 Enabler(s): GSURV0101 MUAC is compliant with the ACID regulation since /12/2014 (By:01/2020) See State comment. 31/12/2014 Ensure quality of aeronautical data and aeronautical information (Outside Applicability Area) ITYADQ not applicable OI Step(s): IS0202, IS0204 [E] Maastricht UAC is only a user and not a publisher/originator of aeronautical data and aeronautical information, subject of this regulation. As such, this objective is not applicable to Maastricht UAC. In particular cases when MUAC provides information to be published in the 4 States national AIPs (e.g: in the context of the Free Routes project) the provision of this type of information will be covered by SLAs currently being drafted with the corresponding Data Providers (DFS, Belgocontrol, LVNL already drafted, ANA). REG (By:06/2017) (By:06/2017) APO (By:06/2017) Because Maastricht UAC is only a user and not a publisher/originator of aeronautical data and aeronautical information this regulation is not applicable to Maastricht UAC. Maastricht UAC is only a user and not a publisher/originator of aeronautical data and aeronautical information, subject of this regulation. As such, this objective is not applicable to Maastricht UAC. AIM Expert Task Force LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 35 Released Issue

47 Initial ATC airground data link services above FL285 Entry into force of regulation: 06/02/2009 [IDP] ITYAGDL New aircraft capability: 31/12/2010 ATS unit operational capability Regulation (EC) 29/2009, Annex I, Part A: 06/02/2013 Retrofit aircraft capability: 04/02/2015 OI Step(s): AUO0301 [E] Maastricht UAC already complies with the requirements of this objective since several years. There is no particular issue to note or to report upon. REG (By:02/2016) (By:02/2016) MIL (By:01/2014) Safety significant changes to the ATM system are subject to safety oversight by ILT (CAANL) and the other 3 NSAs, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1034/2011. Changes will be implemented only provided that the safety review by the NSA accepts the safety arguments provided by the ANSP. Maastricht UAC implemented airground datalink communications in 12/2002, supporting CM, CPDLC, DLIC ACM, ACL and AMC services in the complete area of responsibility. Service level agreements have been established with the communication providers and monitoring of the service (external and internal segments) is in place. LOF and NAN have been available with the introduction of NFDPS in 12/2008 and has been implemented operationally with DFS Karlsruhe in September Both ATN/VDL2 and FANS communications are supported. Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress of this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. Implement airground voice channel spacing requirements below FL195 ITYAGVCS2 (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable Enabler(s): CTEC5 REG (By:12/2018) (By:12/2018) MIL (By:12/2020) APO (By:12/2018) 31/12/ /02/ /12/2008 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 36 Released Issue

48 Implementation of groundground automated coordination processes Entry into force of regulation: 27/07/2006 For putting into service of EATMN systems in respect of notification and initial coordination processes: 27/07/2006 ITYCOTR For putting into service of EATMN systems in respect of Revision of Coordination, Abrogation of Coordination, Basic Flight Data and Change to Basic Flight Data: 01/01/2009 To all EATMN systems in operation by 12/2012 : 31/12/2012 Systems serving ACCs providing services above FL 285 in the airspace in Annex I, Part A of Regulation (EC) 29/2009: 06/02/2013 OI Step(s): CM0201 [E] The requirements of this objective are fulfilled by Maastricht UAC since the introduction into service of N FDPS. MADAP, and in particular the NFDPS, ensure the following functions: display, processing and compilation receive, store, process, extract, and deliver issue a warning when failures are detected provide warnings related to the working positions modify flight information status of relevant system information exchanges Implementation of groundground automated coordination processes is technically completed since the operational introduction of the MUAC NFDPS system in December ABI and ACT messages are exchanged with all partners and REV messages with Paris, Reims and Karlsruhe. LOF/NAN messages are already exchanged with DFS Karlsruhe. MAC messages are exchanged with Paris and Reims. (By:02/2016) MIL (By:12/2012) Maastricht UAC has implemented the OLDI 2.3 standard (and additional messages). Additional Information exchanged between CIVMIL, are defined in INTNET (Belgium Mil) and CIMACT/ADMAR (German remote Mil) interfaces. DFSCCUM is colocated with MUAC and uses the same system. AOCS NM also uses the same system (SAS). Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress of this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. Apply a common flight message transfer protocol (FMTP) Entry into force of regulation: 28/06/2007 All EATMN systems put into service after 01/01/09: 01/01/2009 [IDP] ITYFMTP All EATMN systems in operation by 20/04/11: 20/04/2011 Transitional arrangements: 31/12/2012 Transitional arrangements when bilaterally agreed between ANSPs: 31/12/2014 OI Step(s): CM0201A Maastricht UAC has migrated the majority of connections to FMTP in close coordination with its adjacent partners. Details of the various implementation plans are provided below. From a regulatory perspective, the relevant (EC) SES regulations apply directly and mandatory in each of the 4 States. Details of progress and of the actions undertaken by each of the 4 States regulators to ensure that FMTP is used between the ATS units and controlling military units and also to supervise compliance with the respective regulations are in each of the respective LSSIP documents. The 4 States NSA Committee will further consider establishing supervisory action in this respect. The transition to IPv6 is gradually progressing. Same as in the overall comment. (By:12/2014) MIL (By:12/2014) Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress of this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. 30/04/ /04/ /01/ /04/2011 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 37 Released Issue

49 Surveillance performance and interoperability Entry intro force of regulation: 13/12/2011 ATS unit operational capability: 12/12/2013 ITYSPI New aircraft capability: 08/06/2016 ELS in transporttype State aircraft : 07/12/2017 EHS and ADSB Out in transporttype State aircraft : 07/06/2020 Ensure training of MIL personnel: 07/06/2020 Retrofit aircraft capability: 07/06/2020 Enabler(s): GSURV0101 The changes to the local MUAC systems are conducted in accordance with agreed MUAC safety processes. In addition, the performance verification requirements of the surveillance data processing systems has been fulfilled in accordance with EC Regulation 1207/2011 and the ESASSP. REG (By:02/2015) (By:02/2015) MIL (By:06/2020) For this implementation, procedures according the 4States Manual have been followed. In line with these procedures, there was no need for a formal acceptance. See State comment. Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress of this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. Implementation of PRNAV (Outside Applicability Area) NAV03 not applicable OI Step(s): AOM0601 [E], AOM0602 [E] Most SLoAs are the responsibility of each of the four States. Progress of these SLoAs is rendered in the respective LSSIP documents. However, Maastricht UAC is concerned with 4 SLoAs. Maastricht UAC will train ATCOs in PRNAV procedures (03) and implement PRNAV routes (05) in accordance with the 4 States' plans of introducing PRNAV. This is also the case as regards the adaptation of corresponding ATS automated systems (07) and the development of a local PRNAV safety case (11). (By:12/2012) Same as overall comment. 31/12/ /12/ /12/2013 NAV10 Implement APV procedures (Outside Applicability Area) [IDP] not applicable OI Step(s): AOM0602 [E], AOM0604 [E] There are no airports within the area of responsibility of Maastricht UAC. REG (By:04/2016) (By:12/2016) SAF10 Implement measures to reduce the risk to aircraft operations caused by airspace infringements Initial operational capability: 01/06/2008 Full operational capability: 31/12/2011 LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 38 Released Issue

50 The European Action Plan for Airspace Infringement Risk Reduction (June 2009) has been reviewed and is mainly concerned with infringements in the context of lower airspace, focused on General Aviation. As regards the Upper Airspace, considering the particular type of airspace concerned (Class C), the plan has no effective application. There is no General Aviation VFR flying at such levels and it is prohibited in this class of airspace. Infringements regarding military reserved airspace have limited application infringements by civil aircraft into military reserved airspace are extremely rare and, if any, coordination procedures prevail. The only relevant action concerning Maastricht UAC is the planned introduction of the Local and Sub Regional ASM Support System (LARA) Tool. LARA was implemented in June 2012 with the Belgian Airforce. Implementation with the RNLAF is due for /12/2012 However when in the event of an infringement either by GAT or OAT (Leaving a reserved airspace and causing an infringement with GAT), risk reduction measures and corrective action will be taken within the context of the mandatory reporting system. The Maastricht UAC is therefore compliant with SAF10 although through constant vigilance and review, improvements will where necessary be applied. IVW (CAANL) reported having assessed the European action plan and consulting with the relevant stakeholders. Airspace infringements are being monitored by ILT (CAANL) and most items of the European Action Plan REG were found to be implemented, while regulatory action is being taken for (By:12/2011) the remaining items. Risk reduction measures will be monitored and assessed onwards. Enforcement based on national regulations is already ongoing. (By:12/2011) MIL (By:12/2011) The EAPAIRR toolkit has been reviewed and a local action plan generated and implemented. Maastricht UAC does not have a military authority of its own. Progress of this objective by the military authorities of each of the 4 States is presented in their respective LSSIP documents. 31/12/ /12/2011 SAF11 REG (By:01/2018) (By:12/2014) APO (By:12/2014) SRCRLMK REG (By:12/2010) Improve runway safety by preventing runway excursions (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable Implement the EUROCONTROL Safety Regulatory Requirements (ESARRs) (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable SRCSLRD REG (By:12/2010) Safety Levels and Resolution of Deficiencies (Outside Applicability Area) not applicable LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 39 Released Issue

51 6.2 Alignment of PCP with ESSIP Objectives and related progress Note that the above picture is based on the Preliminary Deployment Programme V0, published in December 2014 by the Deployment Manager. The full Deployment Programme is foreseen by end June LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 40 Released Issue

52

53 Annexes Annex A Specialists involved in the LSSIP Process LSSIP Co-ordination LSSIP Focal Point for Maastricht UAC LSSIP Focal Point for ILT (CAA-NL), the SES-certifying authority LSSIP Focal Point for the 4 States NSA Committee LSSIP Contact Person for Maastricht UAC Frank GREVEN Marcel HARTMAN (NL) Marcel HARTMAN EUROCONTROL ATM/CNS Strategy, ASD (MUAC) Advisor, ILT (CAA-NL) Advisor, ILT (CAA-NL) Adriatik KOKONA ESSIP Objective Implementation ESSIP Objective EUROCONTROL Objective Owners AOM13.1 R. BUCUROIU, O. MROWICKI, C. LUCCIOLI (E. REUBER till 02/2015) AOM19 G. ACAMPORA, O. MROWICKI EUROCONTROL PEPR Objective Coordinator A. DYBOWSKA N/A A. DYBOWSKA Dirk DE HERDT Robert PARYS National Stakeholder Specialist(s) AOM21 R. BUCUROIU A. DYBOWSKA Herbert KOPPE AOP03 T. LICU P. VRANJKOVIC N/A AOP04.1 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC N/A AOP04.2 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC N/A AOP05 P. ADAMSON P. VRANJKOVIC N/A ATC02.2 ATC02.5 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT Volker STUHLSATZ Peter HENDRICKX I. FEIJT Volker STUHLSATZ Peter HENDRICKX ATC02.6 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT N/A ATC02.7 B. BAKKER, S. DROZDOWSKI I. FEIJT N/A ATC07.1 P. CONROY, P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL ORTO N/A ATC12 ATC15 P. TERZIOSKI P. CONROY, P. TERZIOSKI L. DELL ORTO Kris VERMEIREN Peter HENDRICKX L. DELL ORTO Vincent TAVERNIERS Peter HENDRICKX ATC16 S. DROZDOWSKI L. DELL ORTO Luc STAUDT ATC17 S. MORTON L. DELL ORTO Vincent TAVERNIERS Peter HENDRICKX COM09 L. POPESCU O. ALFARO Gustaaf JANSSENS COM10 Y. EYUBOGLU A. KOKONA Gustaaf JANSSENS COM11 L. POPESCU A. KOKONA Gustaaf JANSSENS ENV01 C. FABER B. HILL N/A ENV02 S. MAHONY, A. WATT B. HILL N/A LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 41 Released Issue

54 ESSIP Objective FCM01 FCM03 FCM04 FCM05 EUROCONTROL Objective Owners H. KOOLEN S. SMIDT M. RICHARD P. MATERN EUROCONTROL PEPR Objective Coordinator National Stakeholder Specialist(s) O. CIOARA Roel HUURDEMAN Peter HENDRICKX O. CIOARA Roel HUURDEMAN Peter HENDRICKX O. CIOARA Roel HUURDEMAN Peter HENDRICKX O. CIOARA Roel HUURDEMAN Peter HENDRICKX INF04 P. MATERN A-P. FRANGOLHO N/A INF07 A. PETROVSKY A-P. FRANGOLHO N/A ITY-ACID A. DESMOND-KENNEDY O. CIOARA Torsten Dörnbach ITY-ADQ M. UNTERREINER A-P. FRANGOLHO N/A ITY-AGDL S. DISSING A. KOKONA Volker STUHLSATZ ITY-AGVCS2 J. POUZET O. ALFARO N/A ITY-COTR S. MORTON L. DELL ORTO Vincent TAVERNIERS ITY-FMTP L. POPESCU O. ALFARO Gustaaf JANSSENS ITY-SPI M. BORELY, R. STEWART O. CIOARA Torsten DOERNBACH NAV03 F. PAVLICEVIC A. KOKONA N/A NAV10 R. FARNWORTH A. KOKONA N/A SAF10 T. LICU I. FEIJT Keith CARTMALE SAF11 S. LAWRENCE I. FEIJT N/A SRC-RLMK M. DEBOECK A. DYBOWSKA N/A SRC-SLRD M. DEBOECK A. DYBOWSKA N/A LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 42 Released Issue

55 Annex B National Stakeholders Organisation Charts LSSIP Year 2014 Euro-Maastricht 43 Released Issue