1

AIS-AIMSG/7-SN/12
/
International Civil Aviation Organization / AIS-AIMSG/7 SN/12
Revised
14/01/2013

AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION SERVICES-AERONAUTICAL

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT STUDY GROUP (AIS-AIMSG)

SEVENTH MEETING

Montreal, 14 to 18January 2013

Agenda Item 5: Temporality and Distribution

NOTAM PROLIFERATION ANALYSIS

(Presented by Stéphane Dubet, DGAC France)

SUMMARY
The purpose of this paper is to share France AIS analysis on the increase of NOTAM in circulation, as a follow-up of SN 9 presented by UK CAA at AIS AIM SG6 in Buenos Aires and of the ANC12 conclusions on NOTAM proliferation. It is expected that this analysis is used to determine propositions and recommendations aiming at addressing the NOTAM proliferation issue.

1.INTRODUCTION

1.1During AIS AIM SG 6 inBuenos Aires, UK presented Study Note 9, highlighting a steady increase in NOTAM publicationworldwide. The Study Note reviewed the various provisions which govern NOTAM issuance as well as an analysis that indicated that the number of international NOTAM distributed annually between 2000 and 2011 has tripled and is predicted to continually increase.

1.2At AIS AIM SG6, action items were then taken to get detailed statistics on international NOTAM volumes so that the Study Group can investigate NOTAM proliferation increase and share with the group at the next meeting. The statistics of NOTAM distribution based on 3.5 years of data (provided during the AIS AIM SG ad-hoc group on AIM development in Silver Spring in August 2012) for France were subject to matter expert analysis within the French Aeronautical Information Service (SIA).

1.3At the 12th Air Navigation Conference in November 2012, the NOTAM proliferation issue was discussed and the Conference concluded that States should “review their NOTAM publication procedures, provide appropriate guidance to NOTAM originators and ensure adequate oversight of the NOTAM publication process is conducted.”

2.DISCUSSION

2.1The statistics of NOTAM distribution for France show that the number of NOTAM issued by the French NOTAM Office has been increasing by 10% per year since 2004 (16 000 in 2004 compared to 30 000 in 2011).This increase causes concerns as far as PIB are concerned (information overload) and has a direct impact on the NOTAM officer workload.

2.2Since 2008, several cases have shown that there are recurrent misunderstandings between NOTAM requestors and the NOTAM Office as far as the relevance of some NOTAM is concerned.

2.3The statistics provided by Eurocontrol at AIS AIM SG 6 are deemed much useful to further investigate the issue. Yet, some comments have been made to improve their usability:

  • Because of the high season dependance of some actvities (mainly general aviation), comparisons of two 6-month periods makes little sense
  • Some columns show too many percentages which in turn are difficult to interpret
  • Some code groupings are not appropriate for a straight analysis. For instance, NOTAM affecting the service hours belong to various Q codes (FU, FF, SF, SB, SE, ST, AC, AT). It is suggested to provide a row per code so that further groupings can be made depending on the intended theme.
  • The analysis clearly shows that the number of NOTAM is not directly linked to the air traffic figures, but is dependent of the number of air navigation facilities and activities.
  • To assess the figures provided by Eurocontrol, it is important to keep in mind some key figures about air navigation in France:

424 aerodromes (127 IFR, 297 VFR only - 59 aerodromes in AD2 with international traffic)

ATS services : 48 AFIS, 93 TWR/AFIS or TWR/APP

247 helistations outside aerodromes

33 NDB, 114 Locators, 99 VOR, 106 ILS (11 cat III ones)

2.6The table below shows the main causes for the NOTAM increase (factors contributing to increase by more than 5%)

2.7The analysis highlighted a number of contextual (and supposedly temporary) increase causes for which no remedy action exists:

  • Increase in the range and the number of aeronautical activities (light aviation, UAVs, balloons, etc.)
  • Increase in the range of navigation procedures (PBN)
  • Increase in the range and flexibility of some ATS services (activation times, etc.)
  • Wide variety and flexibility of air traffic (eg low cost flights) with direct consequence on the aerodrome infrastructure (eg new parking areas)
  • Better awareness about the importance of aeronautical data (quality, liability) among data providers
  • Change in roles and responsibilities between the French DGAC and the aerodromes
  • Fewer renewals of the infrastructure means (thus requiring recurrent maintenance) due to PBN implementation
  1. It also stressed a number of causes for which a remedy action can be planned
  • Missing standards or standards subject to interpretation (especially as far as the list of subjects NOT leading to NOTAM issuance is concerned). Of particular concern are topics leading to a high number of NOTAMs with few or no operational significance, e.g. some obstacle NOTAM or various reminders about applicable national regulatory material
  • Abuse of the insurance thinking principle to cover liability
  • Creation of areas for some activities byNOTAM instead of the regular (and regulated) process
  • Absence of process for NOTAM Offices to deal with NOTAM requests falling outside the regulated (Annex 15) scope
  • Workload increase and its impact on data quality, potentially leading to replacement NOTAM

3.CONCLUSION

3.1The statistics that were made available confirm the significant increase of NOTAM in France. They were useful to investigate and identifysome of the causes.

3.2While this analysis is just an illustrative example for one State, it could be used as input for the action requested by ANC12 regarding the NOTAM proliferation issue.

4.ACTION BY THE AIS-AIMSG

4.1The AIS-AIMSG is invited to:

a) consider the material in this paper as input for the discussion about NOTAM proliferation;

b)encourage further similar analysis to consolidate the causes and the corresponding potential remedy actions.

— END —