**INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION**

**ASIA AND PACIFIC OFFICE**

![](media/image1.wmf)

**REPORT OF THE SIXTEENTH MEETING OF THE ICAO**

**REDUCED VERTICAL SEPARATION MINIMUM IMPLEMENTATION**

**TASK FORCE (RVSM/TF/16)**

BANGKOK, THAILAND

23 - 25 SEPTEMBER 2002

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The views expressed in this Report should be taken as those of the    |
|                                                                       |
| Task Force and not the Organization                                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

Published by the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, Bangkok

Page

**History of the Meeting**

Introduction i

Attendance i

Officers and Secretariat i

Opening of the Meeting i

Documentation and Working Language ii

#### 

#### **Summary Report of the Meeting**

Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Agenda 1

Agenda Item 2: Operational Considerations 1

Agenda Item 3: Issues Relating to Airworthiness and Approval of Aircraft
4

Agenda Item 4: Safety and Airspace Monitoring Considerations 5

Agenda Item 5: Implementation Management Considerations 7

Agenda Item 6: Review of Action Items 8

Agenda Item 7: Future Work -- Meeting Schedule 8

Agenda Item 8: Other Business 9

#### 

#### **Appendices**

Appendix A: Terms of Reference of the ICAO RVSM Implementation TF A-1

Appendix B: Terms of Reference of the ICAO RVSM TF Work Groups B-1

Appendix C: List of Participants C-1

Appendix D: List of Papers D-1

Appendix E: Agenda E-1

Appendix F: Operational Implementation Plan Tables F-1

Appendix G: List of AIC/AIP Supplements issued by States G-1

Appendix H: Status of Large Altitude Deviation Report, Including NIL
Report to the APARMO by States H-1

Appendix I: Task List I-1

Appendix J: Asia/Pacific Region RVSM Implementation Plans Status Report
J-1

......................................

1.1 **Introduction**

1.1.1 The Sixteenth Meeting of the Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum
Implementation Task Force (RVSM/TF/16) was held at the ICAO Asia and
Pacific Office in Bangkok, Thailand from 23 to 25 September 2002.

1.1.2 The Terms of Reference for the Task Force are contained in
Appendix A to this Report.

2.  **Attendance**

1.2.1 The meeting was attended by 60 participants from Australia,
Cambodia, China, Hong Kong China, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Nepal,
Philippines, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Thailand, United States, Viet
Nam, IATA, IFALPA, IFATCA and Jeppesen. A complete list of participants
is at Appendix C.

1.3 **Officers and Secretariat**

1.3.1 Mr. Sydney Maniam, Head (Standards), Civil Aviation Authority of
Singapore (CAAS), Singapore, continued as Chairman of the Task Force.
Mr. Hiroshi Inoguchi, Regional Officer, Air Traffic Management (ATM)
from the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, Bangkok served as the Secretary
for the meeting, assisted by Mr. John Richardson and Mr. David Moores,
Regional Officers, ATM from the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office.

1.3.2 Mr. Yusfandri Gona, Head of Performance & Flight Test Section,
Directorate General Air Communication (DGAC) Indonesia and Mr. Greg
Hood, FIR Manager, Airservices Australia, continued as Chairman of the
Aircraft Operations & Airworthiness Work Group (OPS/AIR/WG) and of the
ATC Operations Work Group (ATC/WG), respectively. Mr. Nopadol Sangngurn,
Vice-President, Business Development Bureau, AEROTHAI, chaired the
Safety & Airspace Monitoring Work Group (SAM/WG), with the assistance of
Mr. Brian Colamosca, Manager, NAS & International Airspace Analysis
Branch, FAA, Technical Center, United States.

1.4 **Opening of the Meeting**

1.4.1 Mr. Sydney Maniam welcomed the delegates and opened the meeting.
He highlighted the importance of completing all tasks relating to the
second phase implementation of RVSM in the Western Pacific/South China
Sea area on 31 October 2002. He stressed that the assignment of RVSM
levels and the application of ATC and contingency procedures should be
finalized in line with the operational plan that had been developed for
the first phase implementation in February 2002. He urged all concerned
to cooperate and work actively towards the second phase implementation,
so that the use of airspace and management of traffic in the region
could be further enhanced.

1.4.2 Mr. Hiroshi Inoguchi, on behalf of Mr. Lalit Shah, Regional
Director of the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, welcomed the participants.
He commented on the critical importance of this 16^th^ meeting which
will make a "Go or No-Go" decision, based on the updated information to
be provided by States and APARMO, in particular on the results of a
final safety assessment for the second phase implementation in the
Western Pacific/South China Sea area. He also referred to the issue
relating to the assignment of RVSM levels on A1/P901 and urged States
concerned to look at the matter closely with a view to arriving at a
mutually agreeable conclusion. In addition, he briefly advised the
meeting of recent progress on transition of responsibilities of the
APARMO for the Asia Region from FAA to AEROTHAI, and of FAA's agreement
for special assistance to be provided by their experts to the Task
Force.

1.4.3 The meeting was provided with an updated briefing on the progress
of the Revised ATS Route Structure -- Asia to Middle East/Europe,
South-of-the-Himalayas (EMARSSH), with the emphasis on the importance of
timely dissemination of accurate aeronautical information and data.

1.5 **Documentation and Working Language**

1.5.1 The working language of the meeting as well as all documentation
was in English.

1.5.2 Eleven Working Papers and eleven Information Papers were presented
to the meeting. A list of papers is included at Appendix D.

............................

**Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Agenda**

1.1 The meeting reviewed the provisional agenda presented by the
Chairperson and adopted it as the agenda for the meeting. This agenda is
at Appendix E to the Report.

**Agenda Item 2: Operational Considerations**

> **[Operational Implementation Plan -- 31 October 2002]{.underline}**

2.1 States involved in the second phase of the implementation of RVSM in
the Western Pacific/South China Sea area agreed to proceed with the
implementation on 31 October 2002, subject to a satisfactory result of
recalculation of the safety assessment described under Agenda Item 4.
They reported their readiness as described below:

2.1.1 China advised the meeting that preparations for the implementation
of RVSM from FL290 to FL410 in the oceanic airspace of the Sanya area of
responsibility (AOR) (excluding A202) were progressing well. There had
been some flight planning problems on the status of RVSM aircraft
originating outside the AOR whereby around 50 percent of flights
operating in the Sanya AOR did not file a flight plan message to the
Sanya ACC as required by the AIP China. This had resulted in increased
controller workload. China would remind operators and States of the
requirement to submit flight plans. China would also provide IATA with
more details on the problems encountered with the submission of flight
plans, to help improve the situation.

2.1.2 Hong Kong, China advised that preparations for RVSM implementation
from FL290 to FL410 in the Hong Kong FIR were progressing well. The
software upgrade of the ATC system had been completed such that the RVSM
status of aircraft (letter W) would be transferred onto flight progress
strips. In addition, the absence of the letter W would be highlighted on
the strips for controllers. The use of different color strip holders was
under consideration to further highlight the non-RVSM status of
aircraft. Hong Kong, China also advised that controller training was
underway and that the AIP Supplement on RVSM operations had been
published.

2.1.3 Hong Kong, China further advised the meeting that they were
considering adopting a policy whereby the decision to suspend RVSM
operation would be based on pilot reports of encounters of greater than
moderate turbulence. The meeting reconfirmed the agreement of the Task
Force that suspension of RVSM operation in the Asia/Pacific Region
should be considered only when actual reports of turbulence greater than
moderate were received from pilots.

2.1.4 In addition, Hong Kong, China raised an issue of the practice
implemented in another State whereby FL100, FL200, FL300 and FL400 were
transmitted as "flight level (number) hundred". For example, FL300 is
transmitted as "flight level three hundred". In this regard, it was
pointed out that such practice is in conflict with the Standard in ICAO
Annex 10, Vol II, Chapter 5, paragraph 5.2.1.4.1 which specifies how to
transmit numbers in voice communications. In the case of \"flight
level\", each digit of all numbers shall be pronounced separately
(paragraph 5.2.1.4.1.1); for example, FL300 must be pronounced as
\"flight level three zero zero\". In case of \"altitude\", the word
\"hundred\" can be used (paragraph 5.2.1.4.1.2). The meeting emphasized
the importance of complying with ICAO SARPs.

2.1.5 Indonesia reported that preparations for the implementation of
RVSM were progressing well. RVSM would initially be implemented from
FL350 to FL390 in Jakarta/ Bali/Ujung Pandang FIRs due to domestic fleet
limitations. The band of RVSM levels would be extended from FL290 to
FL410 at a future date. Indonesia advised that controller training which
included sending Indonesian controllers to Australia was near completion
and that the AIP Supplement had been published.

2.1.6 Lao PDR advised that preparations for RVSM implementation were
progressing well. The modified single alternate flight level orientation
scheme would be used from FL290 to FL410 in the Vientiane FIR. Seminars
had been conducted and the training of operational personnel had been
completed. The relevant regulatory documentation had been promulgated
and the AIC and AIP Supplement had been published. Lao PDR suggested
that the flight level orientation scheme for the region should be
reviewed at a later date, following the implementation of RVSM.

2.1.7 Cambodia reported that under the second phase implementation the
modified single alternate flight level orientation scheme would be used
from FL290 to FL410.

2.1.8 Malaysia, Philippines and Singapore reported that under the second
phase implementation, RVSM would be applied from FL290 to FL410 in their
respective FIRs. In addition, FL300 and FL400 would be used as No-PDC
levels.

2.1.9 Thailand informed the meeting of issues relating to the assignment
of levels for aircraft operating on A1 and P901. There were difficulties
associated with transitions from the modified single alternate flight
level orientation scheme to the single alternate flight level
orientation scheme. Thailand advised that the second phase
implementation of RVSM in the Bangkok FIR would be deferred until 27
November 2003, which will coincide with the planned implementation of
RVSM in the Bay of Bengal and beyond. In the meantime, the modified
single alternate flight level orientation scheme would be used for
traffic operating on A1 and P901.

2.1.10 Viet Nam advised that preparations for the implementation of RVSM
on the remaining routes in the Ho Chi Minh FIR and specific routes in
the Ha Noi FIR were progressing well. RVSM would be applied from FL290
to FL410 in the respective FIRs. Concurrently, FL300 and FL400 would be
used as No-PDC levels.

2.2 The meeting agreed that on 31 October 2002, States concerned would
adopt the revised procedures for the transit of non RVSM-approved
aircraft within RVSM airspace, in accordance with the AIP Supplement or
AIP Amendment published for the second phase implementation.

2.3 The meeting finalized the operational plan for the implementation of
RVSM in the Western Pacific/South China Sea area as shown in Table 2.1
of Appendix F to the Report.

> **[Assignment of RVSM Levels]{.underline}**

2.4 The meeting reaffirmed that the modified single alternate flight
level orientation scheme would continue to be applied in the Western
Pacific/South China Sea area. In addition, priority in the assignment of
levels would be accorded to RVSM aircraft operating on the six major
RNAV routes.

> **[Harmonization of Flight Level Orientation Schemes (FLOS) applicable
> on ATS/RNAV Routes A1/P901/A202]{.underline}**

2.5 A sub-group was formed to discuss issues relating to the assignment
of levels to aircraft operating on A1, P901 and A202. The sub-group,
comprising China, Hong Kong China, Lao PDR, and Thailand discussed the
need to harmonize the flight level orientation scheme with States
outside of the South China Sea area. It was considered that a single
alternate flight level orientation scheme should be adopted for these
routes, and to the possible extent, other routes for the purpose of
harmonization. The sub-group recommended that each State should assess
the situation and prepare a Working Paper for discussion at a
post-implementation review meeting of the Task Force (RVSM/TF/18) in
March 2003, taking into account the following:

a)  Uni-directional and parallel route segments;

b)  Transition schemes by use of radar and procedural methods;

c)  Three options for westbound traffic based on the single alternate
    flight level orientation scheme:

> i\) FL300, FL320, FL340, FL360, FL380, and FL400;
>
> ii\) FL300, FL340 and FL380; and
>
> iii\) FL320, FL360 and FL400.

d)  The impact of the level transition process on other aspects of their
    ATS systems.

> **[Publication of AIC/AIP Supplement and Trigger NOTAM]{.underline}**

2.6 The meeting noted that all States had published the AIP Supplement
on RVSM operations. The meeting agreed that States would publish a
Trigger NOTAM on 21 October 2002 to remind operators of the
implementation of RVSM. A table showing the status of publication of the
AIC and AIP Supplement is at Appendix G to this Report.

> **[Reports on Large Height Deviations]{.underline}**

2.7 The meeting reviewed the reports on large height deviations due to
operational errors that had been submitted by States to the APARMO. The
meeting expressed concern that some reports had not been received by the
APARMO. As the incomplete data could have some impact on the estimation
of operational risk and subsequent comparison to the Target Level of
Safety (TLS), States were requested to submit all reports of large
height deviations for the period of 12 months **from September 2001 to
August 2002** to the APARMO as soon as possible but **no later than
30 September 2002**. The submission of the data would enable the APARMO
to complete the safety assessments to ascertain that the TLS for the
second phase RVSM implementation would be met.

**[Letters of Agreement (LOAs)/Supplementary LOAs]{.underline}**

2.8 The meeting agreed that the relevant LOA/Supplementary LOA with
adjacent FIRs should be signed prior to the second phase implementation
on 31 October 2002. The meeting acknowledged that the majority of States
had finalized LOAs/SLOAs. Remaining States were reminded that this was a
priority item that should be given urgent attention.

**[RVSM Phraseologies]{.underline}**

2.9 The meeting was advised that RVSM-related phraseologies had been
adopted and widely in use in the Pacific and the South China Sea area as
well as in the North Atlantic and Europe, and the ATS/AIS/SAR/SG/12
meeting considered it appropriate to include the proposed phraseologies
in the RVSM Guidance Material for Asia/Pacific Region. Accordingly, the
ATS/AIS/SAR Sub-Group had proposed that APANPIRG adopt the RVSM related
phraseologies to be included in the RVSM Guidance Material. However,
ICAO HQ reviewed the report of ATS/AIS/SAR/SG12 and advised that the
RVSM phraseologies should be included in the ICAO *Regional
Supplementary Procedures* (Doc 7030) for the Asia and Pacific Region.
Taking into account the ICAO HQ comments, APANPIRG/13 considered it more
appropriate to have such phraseologies related to RVSM operations in the
Asia/Pacific Region in Doc 7030 as an interim solution until they were
included in the *Procedures for Air Navigation Services-Air Traffic
Management* (PANS-ATM, Doc 4444) for global application. With a view to
ensuring harmonization with other Regions, the APANPIRG/13 meeting
developed the following Conclusion:

**Conclusion 13/1** *--* **Inclusion of phraseologies related to RVSM
operations in the ICAO Regional Supplementary Procedures (Doc 7030) for
Asia and Pacific Region**

> That, the phraseologies related to RVSM operations contained at
> Appendix B to this Report on Agenda Item 2.1, be adopted for inclusion
> in the ICAO Regional Supplementary Procedures (Doc 7030) for
> application in the Asia and Pacific Region, subject to coordination
> and harmonization with other Regions.

The meeting was advised that ICAO would take a suitable follow-up action
in this regard.

**Agenda Item 3: Issues Relating to Airworthiness and Operation of
Aircraft**

> **[Assessment of Operator Readiness]{.underline}**

3.1 The OPS/AIR Work Group was attended by Cambodia, China, Indonesia,
IATA and 2 airlines (Korean Air and Vietnam Airlines).

3.2 The meeting noted that the Work Group reviewed the readiness of
aircraft and airlines for RVSM operations that operated on international
routes in the Western Pacific/South China Sea area, and confirmed that
98% of operators were RVSM-approved.

**[Monitoring Program for Height-Keeping Performance]{.underline}**

3.3 The Work Group reviewed the monitoring program for aircraft
height-keeping performance and noted the following:

> a\) Cambodia, China and Indonesia reported that there were no reports
> from operators on large height deviation due to aircraft system
> failure or pilot error since the implementation of RVSM in February
> 2002. IATA, Korean Air and Vietnam Airlines also reported that there
> were no reports of large height deviation due to aircraft system
> problems or pilot error; and
>
> b\) since the implementation of RVSM in February 2002 until August
> 2002, there were no reports of adverse typhoon effects on RVSM
> operations in the Western Pacific/South China Sea area.

**[Future OPS/AIR Work Program]{.underline}**

3.4 The meeting was advised that the Work Group reviewed the
preparations by operators on the implementation of ACAS II (TCAS V.7).
It was noted that only some operators had installed the new TCAS
software on their aircraft. It was expected that other operators would
install the software to meet the target date of implementation in
January 2003.

3.5 The Work Group reviewed the ICAO proposed amendment to Annex
6-*Operation of Aircraft* on the threshold for the altimeter alert level
of 200 ft (previously at 300 ft). The Work Group noted that the
requirement of 200 ft altimeter alert level threshold could only be
complied with by newer aircraft such as Boeing 777, 737-900 and Airbus
330, 340 and 380. Existing aircraft would not be able to meet the
proposed requirement. Operators would notify the States concerned of
their objections to the proposed amendment. In this regard, States
involved would coordinate with ICAO accordingly.

**Agenda Item 4: Safety and Airspace Monitoring Considerations**

# [Review of Safety Assessment for the Implementation of RVSM in Western Pacific/South China Sea]{.underline}

1.  The meeting reviewed the presentation given by the APARMO on the
    large height deviation (LHD) reports. As discussed in IP/6 and WP/9
    presented at RVSM/TF/16 meeting, the most frequent cause of LHDs was
    an error in the ATC-unit-to-ATC-unit transfer of control
    responsibility for an aircraft. A typical case was the situation
    whereby an aircraft cleared and operating at a flight level was
    transferred by the ATC unit responsible for control to the receiving
    ATC unit at a flight level that differed from the one at which the
    aircraft was operating, for example, an aircraft cleared at FL350
    was transferred at FL310. This problem was discovered when the pilot
    first contacted the receiving ATC unit and reported at a different
    flight level than that coordinated between the ATC units concerned.
    The high frequency of these errors was reported at RVSM/TF/14.

2.  This type of event had been noted as occurring between two
    particular ATC units. The meeting noted that several actions had
    been taken in regard to these events. Among these was an agreement
    by ATC experts on the method of allocating the number of minutes
    that the aircraft was at an incorrect flight level in carrying out
    the calculations in the collision risk model. In addition, measures
    to reduce the causes of these operational errors were required to be
    put in place by States concerned.

3.  In regard to this latter action, the APARMO reported that no
    coordination errors between the facilities involved had been
    observed for the months of June through August 2002. August 2002 was
    the latest month for which LHD reports were available in advance of
    the information presented in this meeting (IP/6 refers).

4.  As determined by the APARMO, the technical risk estimated for Phase
    I, Phase II, and the combined Phase I and II RVSM implementation was
    4.18 x 10^-10^, 9.96 x 10^-10^, and 5.08 x 10^-10^ fatal accidents
    per flight hour, respectively. All of these estimates satisfy the
    agreed TLS value of no more than 2.5 x 10^-9^ fatal accidents per
    flight hour due to the loss of a correctly established vertical
    separation minimum of 1,000 ft.

5.  Meeting discussions associated with the use of the modified single
    alternate flight level orientation scheme in airspace where the RVSM
    will be implemented on 31 October clarified the use of FLs on route
    A1/P901 when the RVSM would be implemented. The APARMO informed the
    meeting that, in light of this clarification, the technical risk for
    the Phase II implementation will be in the order of half the value
    of 9.96 x 10^-10^ reported in its safety assessment contained in
    WP/9. Because of the important effect on total risk for Phase II
    which this change will have, the meeting requested the APARMO to
    recalculate the collision risk and republish WP/9 as a matter of
    urgency.

4.6 The meeting agreed that, if the estimated technical risk were to
decrease as expected, the TLS would be met for the Phase II
implementation in the airspace for which LHDs were complete for the
latest 12 months period.

4.7 The meeting recognized that it was not possible to reach a
conclusion about implementation in all of the airspace where the Phase
II implementation is planned, due to incomplete reporting of LHDs. The
meeting noted that the APARMO would recalculate the safety assessment
based on the complete data on large height deviations for the period of
12 months from September 2001 to August 2002.

4.8 The total risk estimated for the Phase I, Phase II, and the combined
Phase I and II RVSM implementation for the Western Pacific/South China
Sea airspace are 1.21 x 10^-9^, 5.02 x 10^-9^, and 4.51 x 10^-9^,
respectively. The total risk estimate associated with Phase I and the
combined Phase I and II RVSM implementation satisfy the agreed TLS value
of no more than 5.0 x 10^-9^ fatal accidents per flight hour due to all
causes. The total risk estimate associated with the Phase II RVSM
implementation is approximately equal to, but slightly above, the agreed
TLS value of no more than 5.0 x 10^-9^ fatal accidents per flight hour
due to all causes. However, the combined Phase I and II figure of 4.51 x
10^-9^ satisfies the agreed TLS.

4.9 The meeting noted that, with the change in the technical risk
estimate for Phase II indicated in the paragraph 4.5 and the LHD reports
that had to be submitted by September 2002, the estimate of total risk
was expected to be less than the TLS value of 5 fatal accidents per
10^-9^ flying hours and, thus, would also satisfy the agreed TLS. The
meeting urged States that have not submitted the LHD reports, including
"NIL" reports, between September 2001 and August 2002, as shown in
Appendix H to submit their reports to the APARMO as soon as possible but
**no later than 30 September 2002.**

4.10 The meeting noted that LHD reports, including NIL reports, should
be sent to the email contact addresses of the APARMO either at
[**aparmo@faa.gov**](mailto:aparmo@faa.gov) or **9-ACT-APARMO@faa.gov.**
In addition, the APARMO would send a confirmation to the sender of each
LHD report indicating that the report was successfully received.

> **[Transition Plan of AEROTHAI in Supporting the RVSM Implementation
> in the Asia Region]{.underline}**

4.11 The meeting was advised that APANPIRG/13 meeting expressed its
support for the arrangement for the transition of APARMO
responsibilities for the Asia Region from the FAA to AEROTHAI.

4.12 The meeting was informed that AEROTHAI had signed the Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) with the FAA Technical Center for the regional
monitoring agency (RMA) training. The training program consists of four
phases as follows:

-   **Phase 1**: Providing guidance on the functions of the APARMO;

-   **Phase 2**: Conducting side-by-side apprenticeships to review and
    test the application of the specialized tasks for the safe conduct
    of APARMO duties and responsibilities;

-   **Phase 3**: Providing advanced guidance, and addressing issues as a
    result of the side-by-side apprenticeships;

-   **Phase 4**: Finalizing the transfer of services of the APARMO for
    the specified flight information regions.

The first phase of the training was conducted between 3 to 11 September
2002. All phases are expected to be completed by January 2003.

4.13 AEROTHAI had also prepared the infrastructure of the monitoring
agency for the RVSM implementation, including the RMA website, required
system hardware, and software tools. The infrastructure is expected to
be in place by the end of October 2002.

4.14 Recognizing the difficulty for AEROTHAI to be fully functional as
the RVSM monitoring agency after October 2002, the FAA has kindly
offered to continue to support the monitoring for the Asia Region until
AEROTHAI's RVSM monitoring infrastructure is assured.

4.15 Once AEROTHAI's infrastructure is established and the transfer is
completed, AEROTHAI would assume the duties and responsibilities of the
APARMO for the Asia Region. The area of responsibility for AEROTHAI as a
regional monitoring agency contains the area of Western Pacific/South
China Sea and Bay of Bengal, which include the following FIRs/AOR:

  --------------------------------- -------------------------------------
  FIRs/AOR in Western Pacific/South FIRs in Bay of Bengal
  China Sea                         

  Bangkok                           Calcutta

  Hanoi                             Chennai

  Ho Chi Minh                       Delhi

  Hong Kong                         Colombo

  Jakarta                           Dhaka

  Kota Kinabalu                     Karachi

  Kuala Lumpur                      Kathmandu

  Manila                            Lahore

  Phnom Penh                        Male

  Sanya                             Mumbai

  Singapore                         Yangon

  Taipei                            

  Ujung Pandang                     

  Vientiane                         
  --------------------------------- -------------------------------------

4.16 In addition, the meeting noted that a special coordination meeting
for regional RVSM monitoring agencies responsible for height monitoring
and associated activities in airspace where RVSM is applied, is
scheduled to be held at ICAO HQ from 4 to 6 November 2002. This meeting
will be held in conjunction with the SASP Working Group of the Whole
meeting. In this regard, both FAA and AEROTHAI would participate at this
meeting.

### 

### **[Collection of Post-Implementation Traffic Data in the Western Pacific/South China Sea Area]{.underline}**

### 

### 4.17 The meeting agreed to the need of a collection of post-implementation traffic data in the FIRs/AOR where RVSM is being applied for a period of one month **from 1 to 31 January 2003** for a follow-up assessment. States should forward the traffic data to the APARMO in an electronic form **by 15 February 2003**. Results of the assessment would be presented at RVSM/TF.18.

### 

### 

## Agenda Item 5: Implementation Management Considerations

### 

**[Task Force Work Groups]{.underline}**

5.1 The meeting continued with the arrangement that in order to
accomplish the tasks in the action plan, the Task Force should be
divided into smaller Work Groups as follows:

a)  Safety & Airspace Monitoring (SAM/WG);

b)  ATC Operations (ATC/WG); and

c)  Aircraft Operations & Airworthiness (OPS/AIR/WG).

5.2 The Terms of Reference of the Work Groups were reviewed as at
Appendix B to the Report. A summary of discussions of the Work Groups is
contained under Agenda Items 2, 3 and 4.

**[Review of the Preparations for RVSM Implementation]{.underline}**

5.3 Updates on the readiness to implement RVSM on 31 October 2002 were
provided by China (Sanya AOR), Hong Kong China, Indonesia, Lao PDR and
Viet Nam (Hanoi FIR). Cambodia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore,
Thailand and Viet Nam (Ho Chi Minh FIR) also reported their readiness to
expand the application of RVSM from FL290 to FL410 in their respective
FIRs from 31 October 2002. These reports were further taken into account
during the work of the ATC/WG.

5.4 In light of the discussions under Agenda Items 2, 3 and 4, the
meeting recognized that all tasks relating to the second phase of RVSM
implementation on 31 October 2002 had been completed. However, the
meeting agreed that the safety assessments would be recalculated
following the collation of the complete data on large height deviations
for the period of 12 months from September 2001 to August 2002. The
APARMO will advise the ICAO Asia and Pacific Regional Office on the
results of the safety assessments by 3 October 2002, so that appropriate
follow-up actions can be undertaken by States, international
organizations and ICAO.

**Agenda Item 6: Review of Action Items**

6.1 The meeting reviewed and updated the task list relating to the
implementation of RVSM as shown at Appendix I to the Report.

## 

## Agenda Item 7: Future Work -- Meeting Schedule

7.1 The meeting noted with appreciation the offer by Viet Nam to host
the RVSM/TF/18 meeting in either Ha Noi or Ho Chi Minh. The dates for
this meeting were agreed tentatively as 26-28 March 2003.

7.2 The meeting agreed on the future work of the Task Force as follows:

Joint Co-ordination Meeting between Asia/Pacific and Middle East RVSM
Task Forces: 19-20 October 2002 in Abu Dhabi, UAE

> (Target Implementation in Bali, Hanoi, Hong Kong, Jakarta, Ujung
> Pandang and Vientiane FIRs and Sanya AOR AIRAC date 31 October 2002)
>
> RVSM Seminar/5: 15 - 17 January 2003 (tentative) and location TBD
>
> (Bay of Bengal and Beyond focus)
>
> RVSM/TF/17: 20 - 24 January 2003 (tentative) and location TBD

(Bay of Bengal and Beyond focus)

> RVSM/TF/18: 26 - 28 March 2003 (tentative) in Ha Noi or Ho Chi Minh

(90-day and 1-year follow up review on Western Pacific/South China Sea
focus)

> RVSM/TF/19: 5 days May 2003 and location TBD

(Bay of Bengal and Beyond focus)

> RVSM/TF/20: 5 days October 2003 and location TBD
>
> (Bay of Bengal and Beyond focus)
>
> (Target Implementation Bay of Bengal and Beyond AIRAC date 27 November
> 2003)
>
> RVSM/TF/21: 3 days February 2004 and location TBD
>
> (90-day follow up review on Bay of Bengal and Beyond focus)
>
> RVSM/TF/22: 2 days November 2004 and location TBD
>
> (1-year follow up review on Bay of Bengal and Beyond focus)

**[RVSM Implementation Status]{.underline}**

### 

### 7.2 The meeting updated the status of RVSM implementation in the Asia/Pacific Region as shown in Appendix J.

### 

### 

## Agenda Item 8: Other Business

8.1 Jeppesen provided the meeting with a presentation on the process
associated with the scheduling and production of aeronautical charting
and flight data. The meeting was reminded that aircraft navigation
systems and commercial navigation charts were dependent on the timely
publication of accurate information and data.

8.2 There was no other business discussed.

9\. **Closing of the Meeting**

9.1 Mr. Sydney Maniam expressed sincere appreciation to the ICAO
Asia/Pacific Regional Office for the excellent conduct of the meeting.
He thanked all staff concerned for their warm hospitality and
cooperation that contributed significantly to the successful completion
of the meeting.

..................................