曝光臺 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

binding safety performance targets for Member States, NSAs and ANSPs. Monitoring of
safety performance will be carried out at national/FAB and EU levels, and alarm
mechanisms will be put in place to address safety concerns requiring immediate action.
3.5.2 At EU level, safety regulation will be enhanced by the emergence of EASA as the single
instrument for aviation safety rulemaking. The SES II legislation extends EASA’s
mandate for rulemaking and standardisation inspections from the existing areas
(airworthiness, environmental compatibility, air operations, air crew licensing and safety
of third country aircraft operating in Europe) to cover ATM/ANS and aerodromes .
3.5.3 EASA is expected to contribute, at EU level, to the development of uniform, common
rules for ATM/ANS and shall ensure a consistent and effective implementation of EC
aviation law by carrying out safety analysis, investigations of undertakings and
standardisation inspections of NSAs. The rulemaking, safety analysis and oversight
activities of EASA will fully support the achievement of safety performance monitoring
by promoting appropriate and efficient measures to improve safety rules and procedures
while ensuring consistent implementation of safety performance targets to be reached by
all EU States.
PRR 2009 Chapter 3: Safety
23
3.5.4 At national level, NSAs have an essential role in the implementation and enforcement of
EC safety legislation. NSAs are accountable for the safety supervision of the ANSPs in
their area of responsibility. This role is further reinforced by the SES II Performance
scheme that requires the NSAs to set local targets consistent with the European-wide
targets set by the European Commission and monitor safety performance at national/FAB
level. Thus, NSAs will set safety targets and ensure that the applicable safety
requirements are met by the ANSPs and they will also monitor safety performance and
require corrective actions if deviations from safety performance or nonconformities with
safety regulations are identified. NSAs will use all the national legislative and regulatory
power to enforce the implementation of the EC legislation. If requested, they will be
assisted by the Performance Review Body in setting up their performance monitoring
rules and procedures.
3.6 ICAO Continuous Monitoring and SES II Performance scheme
3.6.1 The objective of the ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) is to
promote global aviation safety through auditing States, on a regular basis, to determine
States’ capability for safety oversight. Safety oversight audit results are published on the
ICAO secure web site, which enhances the transparency in sharing of safety information
across all ICAO Contracting States.
3.6.2 Figure 33 shows the level of transparency reached by EUROCONTROL Member States
regarding the publication of USOAP results on the ICAO public web site
http://www.icao.int/fsix/, as decided by all ICAO Contracting States at the DGCA
Conference held in Montreal in March 2006.
Not audited - results pending
Chart & Report published
Only Chart published
Apr. 2010
Figure 33: Publication of USOAP audit results on ICAO public web site
3.6.3 The ICAO USOAP is now ten years old and has been a great incentive for States and
stakeholders to further improve the overall safety level of facilities and processes.
However, the application of USOAP without taking into account the analysis of risk
factors and its implementation under the comprehensive systems approach is very
challenging for both ICAO and Contracting States in terms of time and resources.
3.6.4 There is thus a need, according to ICAO, to reform and rationalise USOAP and make the
programme more cost-efficient and focused on safety-risk assessment rather than on
prescriptive regulatory compliance. In this respect ICAO Council adopted in 2009 a new
Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA) aiming at monitoring the safety performance of
all the ICAO Contracting States on an ongoing basis.
PRR 2009 Chapter 3: Safety
24
3.6.5 The traffic growth and the increasing requirements to lower costs and improve quality of
service make it difficult for international civil aviation to sustain an approach to the
management of safety exclusively based upon regulatory compliance. It is essential to
complement the prescriptive-based approach with a performance-based approach. An
initial example of this approach is the implementation of Safety Management Systems
(SMS), aimed at industry and service provision. It has now been extended to States
through the State Safety Programmes (SSPs) that require, among others, the identification
safety risk areas and corresponding mitigation measures, as well as the establishment of
　
中國航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Performance Review Report 2009(25)