Advisory Circular (AC) No. 700-045

Subject: Exemption and Safety Case Process for Fatigue Risk Management Systems

Issuing Office:	Civil Aviation, Standards
Document No.:	AC 700-045
File Classification No.:	Z 5000-34
Issue No.:	04
RDIMS No.:	20552433-V9
Effective Date:	2025-05-01

Table of contents

• 1.0 Introduction
  • 1.1 Purpose
  • 1.2 Applicability
  • 1.3 Description of changes
• 2.0 References and requirements
  • 2.1 Reference documents
  • 2.2 Cancelled documents
  • 2.3 Definitions and abbreviations
• 3.0 Background
• 4.0 Applicability of FRMS exemptions
• 5.0 FRMS exemption regulatory requirements
  • 5.1 The initial and continuing exemptions
  • 5.2 Applying the continuing exemption to other flights
  • 5.3 Non-compliance
  • 5.4 The FRMS trial period
• 6.0 Preparation
  • 6.1 Review operations
  • 6.2 Establish and implement the fatigue risk management plan and process
  • 6.3 Define the flight subject to the exemption
  • 6.4 Analyze the predicted effect of the variance
  • 6.5 Conduct the fatigue risk assessment and apply risk controls
• 7.0 The notice of intent (NOI)
  • 7.1 Purpose
  • 7.2 Statement of implementation and intent (paragraph 700.206(1)(a) of the CARs)
  • 7.3 Description of the flight subject to the exemption (paragraph 700.206(1)(b) of the CARs)
  • 7.4 CARs provisions exempted (paragraph 700.206(1)(c) of the CARs)
  • 7.5 The manner in which the flight will vary from the regulations (paragraph 700.206(1)(d) of the CARs)
  • 7.6 The expected date of first flight and seasonal validity (paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs)
  • 7.7 Scientific studies (paragraph 700.206(1)(e) of the CARs)
  • 7.8 Description of the safety case to be developed (paragraph 700.206(1)(g) of the CARs)
  • 7.9 Statement of intent to validate the safety case and conduct the initial audit (paragraph 700.206(1)(h))of the CARs
  • 7.10 The name and contact information of the person who will be responsible for the implementation of the fatigue risk management system (paragraph 700.206(1)(i) of the CARs)
  • 7.11 More than one flight in an NOI (subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs)
  • 7.12 NOI submission
  • 7.13 Change in status of an NOI
• 8.0 Data collection
  • 8.1 Data collection methodology
  • 8.2 Data collection flights
• 9.0 Variance effect monitoring and reporting
  • 9.1 Determine the frequency of analysis
  • 9.2 Analyze the variance effect
  • 9.3 Adverse effect correction and monitoring
  • 9.4 Variance effect reporting
• 10.0 The safety case
  • 10.1 Purpose
  • 10.2 Validation
  • 10.3 Contents
• 11.0 Safety case submission and approval
  • 11.1 Remaining FRMS components
  • 11.2 The initial audit
  • 11.3 Documentation and submission
• 12.0 Time limitations
• 13.0 The continuing exemption
  • 13.1 Notification and applicability
  • 13.2 Continuing exemption and safety case monitoring
  • 13.3 Adverse effect correction and notification to the Minister
• 14.0 Exemptions for other flights and the letter of confirmation (LOC)
  • 14.1 Applying the approved safety case to other flights
  • 14.2 Letter of confirmation requirements
  • 14.3 Letter of confirmation submission
• 15.0 TCCA oversight
• 16.0 Information management
• 17.0 Document history
• 18.0 Contact us
• Appendix A – Notice of intent format
• Appendix B – Safety case format
• Appendix C – Letter of confirmation format 

1.0 Introduction

(1) This Advisory Circular (AC) is provided for information and guidance purposes. It describes an example of an acceptable means, but not the only means, of demonstrating compliance with regulations and standards. This AC on its own does not change, create, amend or permit deviations from regulatory requirements, nor does it establish minimum standards.

1.1 Purpose

(1) This document explains in plain language the process for an air operator to qualify for exemptions, as set out in subsection 700.200(1) of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs), from specific provisions of the flight, duty and rest requirements established under Part VII, Divisions III and IV; and, Subpart 2, Division X of the CARs as published in the Canada Gazette, Part II on 12 December 2018.

(2) This document does not provide guidance related to regulatory exemptions as set out under subsection 5.9(2) of the Aeronautics Act (AA). Exemptions under 700.200(1) of the CARs and exemptions under subsection 5.9(2) are two different regulatory instruments established under different authorities.

1.2 Applicability

(1) This document applies to air operators and flight crew members to whom sections 700.20 to 700.72, 700.101 to 700.135 or 702.91 to 702.98 of the CARs apply.

1.3 Description of changes

(1) This revision of AC 700-045 is in response to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) audit of Canada’s Fatigue Risk Management Systems (FRMS) exemption regulations and provides an opportunity to update the guidance with respect to lessons learned since the coming into force of the CARs Part VII Division V.

(2) The changes focus on the initial exemption and safety case and do not address the continuing exemption, except to relate to the common requirements of the continuing exemption, notice of intent, and safety case.

(3) These updates do not take into account the results of the recent preliminary issue and consultation assessment (PICA 2024-001 : Fatigue, NPA 2024-0076). Subsequent revisions will address the results of any further consultations with stakeholders.

(4) In general, this revision achieves the following:

• (a) Recommends that an operator successfully complete their first safety case prior to submitting subsequent notices of intent in keeping with the ICAO requirement for a trial period prior to expanding an FRMS to other parts of the operation.
• (b) Requires a maximum flight duty period and flight time as well as minimum rest periods with respect to a flight subject to the exemption in the notice of intent and safety case.
• (c) Improves TCCA oversight of the FRMS and the trial period through increased data and information submission requirements in the notice of intent, safety case and 90-day analysis notification.
• (d) Clarifies TCCA’s expectations with respect to the number of regulations included in a notice of intent.
• (e) Clarifies TCCA’s expectations with respect to the definition of a flight that is subject to an exemption using FRMS.
• (f) Adds detailed requirements and CAR references to ensure that all elements of a safety case are suitably described in a notice of intent.
• (g) Adds introductory or explanatory text, where applicable.
• (h) Updates the recommended notice of intent and safety case templates in Appendices A and B.

(5) The following detailed list outlines most of the changes from Issue 03:

• (a) 2.3: Added definitions of “baseline level of fatigue and alertness” and “hazard”.
• (b) 3.0(1): Moved the in-force dates to this section.
• (c) 4.0: Minor editorial changes.
• (d) 4.0(4): Moved the CARs not available for exemption using FRMS from Regulatory requirements to Applicability.
• (e) 5.0 to 5.2: Added a description of the exemption process from initial exemption through to applying the continuing exemption to other flights.
• (f) 5.3: Added a description of the enforcement considerations for non-compliance.
• (g) 5.4: Added a recommendation for a trial period in accordance with ICAO standards.
• (h) 6.0 to 12.0: Section 6.0 of Issue 03 has been broken into multiple sections to describe (6.0) preparation, (7.0) the notice of intent, (8.0) data collection, (9.0) variance effect monitoring and reporting, (10.0) the safety case, and (11.0) safety case submission and approval. Explanatory text, CARs references or changes related to ICAO requirements have been added where applicable.
• (i) 6.0 (Note): Note added with explanation of the requirement to collaborate with employees on fatigue reporting.
• (j) 6.0(4): Recommendation to validate implementation of the FRMS components using Form 26-0851.
• (k) 6.2(1): Added text describing the requirement to implement components of the FRMS.
• (l) 6.2(2)(c): Added a recommendation to conduct a gap analysis of any existing FRMS components using Form 26-0851.
• (m) 6.3: Definition of the flight added to preparation activities. Further details with respect to definition of a flight and the use of series of flights added.
• (n) 6.4: Section 6.3.3 of AC 700-045 Issue 03 moved to Preparation. The methods are mostly unchanged.
• (o) 6.4(2)(d): Removed the note related to fatigue risk hazards for a flight conducted before the in-force date. (see Issue 03, Section 6.3.3(1))
• (p) 6.4(3): The analysis of the variance effect must be included in the notice of intent and the safety case.
• (q) 7.1: Explanatory text added.
• (r) 7.2: Additional explanation related to the statement of implementation.
• (s) 7.3: Significant changes made from Issue 03 section 6.2.1(1) such as:
  • (i) CARs references added for each required element of the description
  • (ii) Maximum and minimum FDP and flight time added in accordance with ICAO requirements
  • (iii) Minimum rest added in accordance with ICAO requirements
  • (iv) Requirement to include hazards as well as fatigue-related hazards
  • (v) Non-CAR-related information from Issue 03 section 6.2.1(1) grouped into 7.3(1)(n).
• (t) 7.4: “Provision(s)” of the CAR changed to singular “provision” and clarification on the number of provisions added
• (u) 7.7(a): Requirement for a description of the scientific basis for the safety case as well as the scientific studies.
• (v) 7.8: Extensive changes to ensure that each element of a safety case is described in the notice of intent.
• (w) 7.9: Additional explanation for paragraph 700.206(1)(h) of the CARs and a recommendation that a safety case validation plan be included in the notice of intent.
• (x) 7.10: Added additional text related to the responsibilities of the operations manager.
• (y) 7.11: Extensive changes to the considerations for more than one flight in a notice of intent.
• (z) 7.12(1): Added a list of supporting documentation to include with the NOI, a reminder that there is no service standard for review of a NOI and removed the statement that TCCA advises that the exemption is in effect; TCCA notification does not trigger the initial exemption.
• (aa) 9.1: Introductory text for variance effect analysis added.
• (bb) 9.2(1): “Recommended” added.
• (cc) 9.2(1)(b): Reminder of the requirement to take into account the FCM’s schedule added.
• (dd) 9.2(1)(c)(i): Conversion method “if required”.
• (ee) 9.4: Extensive changes from Issue 03 section 6.3.7 adding additional reporting requirements to ensure that TCCA is monitoring in accordance with ICAO.
• (ff) 9.4(3)(a): Example of non-progress (section 700.207 of the CARs) added.
• (gg) 10.1: Description of the purpose of the safety case.
• (hh) 10.2: clarified validation period and added instructions to notify TCCA in advance if an alternate method of compliance is required.
• (ii) 10.3: Contents of the safety case and CARs references.
• (jj) 11.2: CARs reference for the initial audit added.
• (kk) 11.3(c): Requirement to include data to support compliance with subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs with the safety case
• (ll) 14.2: Detailed requirements removed and replaced with a reference to the description of the flight section of the notice of intent. Distinction between hazard and fatigue-related hazard added.
• (mm) Appendix A: Added a requirement to submit a form 26-0851, a notice of intent compliance checklist and FRMS documentation, if applicable.

2.0 References and requirements

2.1 Reference documents

(1) Use the following reference materials in conjunction with this document:

• (a) Part VII, Divisions III, IV, and V; and Subpart 2, Division X of the Canadian Aviation Regulations — Commercial Air Services, published in the Canada Gazette, Part II Volume 152, No. 25 on 12 December 2018
• (b) Advisory Circular (AC) 700-046 – Fatigue Risk Management System Requirements
• (c) Advisory Circular (AC) 700-047 – Flight Crew Member Fatigue Management – Prescriptive Regulations
• (d) Advisory Circular (AC) SUR-001 – Development and Implementation of Fatigue Risk Management Systems in the Canadian Aviation Industry

2.2 Cancelled documents

(1) Not applicable.

(2) The publication of a new issue of a document automatically renders any earlier issues of the same document null and void.

2.3 Definitions and abbreviations

(1) The following definitions are used in this document:

• (a) Adverse effect (of the variance): An increase in the level of fatigue and/or decrease in the level of alertness of the flight crew members conducting a flight that is subject to an exemption, in comparison to the baseline level of fatigue/alertness established for the flight.
• (b) Alertness: The extent to which a person is fully awake, aware, mentally responsive, and perceptive.
• (c) Baseline level of fatigue and alertness: A quantitative representation of the levels of fatigue and alertness associated with conducting a flight, that will be subject to the initial or continuing exemption, if that flight were to be conducted according to the prescriptive regulations.
• (d) “Black hole” approach: An approach to an aerodrome at night over featureless and unlit terrain where the only lights visible are the aerodrome lights.
• (e) Continuing exemption: An ongoing exemption that allows an air operator to continue to vary from specific prescriptive provisions provided certain conditions are met.
• (f) Corrective actions: Actions taken by an air operator to eliminate the cause(s) of an adverse effect of the variance on an ongoing basis.
• (g) Countermeasures: Temporary actions that flight crew members can take as a defense in response to unexpected fatigue.
• (h) Duty: Any task that a flight crew member is assigned by an air operator at a specific time, including but not limited to management, flight duty, administration, training, positioning, reserve, and standby (synonymous with hours of work).
• (i) Establish: Create, develop, set up, and document.
• (j) Fatigue: A physiological state of reduced mental or physical performance capability resulting from sleep loss, extended wakefulness, physical activity or any combination thereof, that may impair a flight crew member’s ability to safely operate an aircraft or perform safety-related duties.
• (k) Fatigue-related event: An error, contravention, occurrence, incident, or accident related to an undesired action or inaction by a flight crew member who was probably in a fatigued state.
• (l) Fatigue-related hazard: A work-related source of potential fatigue that could cause a fatigue-related error and contribute to an aircraft incident or accident.
• (m) Fatigue modelling: A method to predict an average level of flight crew member fatigue/alertness for a work schedule, based on scientific understanding of factors contributing to fatigue.
• (n) Fatigue risk: The assessed likelihood and severity of the consequence(s) that could result from a fatigue-related error caused by a fatigue-related hazard.
• (o) Fatigue risk controls: Actions taken by an air operator to prevent an adverse effect of the variance on an ongoing basis.
• (p) Fatigue risk management system: A scientifically-based, data-driven system to identify, control and monitor fatigue risks in flight operations to ensure that flight crew members are performing at adequate levels of alertness, and that the control processes are audited for effectiveness and compliance.
• (q) Hazard: A condition or an object with the potential to cause or contribute to an aircraft accident or incident.
• (r) Implement: Put into operation, consistently use, and carry out (what was established).
• (s) Initial exemption: An interim exemption that allows an air operator to temporarily vary from specific prescriptive provisions provided certain conditions are met.
• (t) Maintain: Upkeep (what was implemented), update, and ensure effectiveness in achieving intended results.
• (u) Method: A systematic way to collect and analyze data to identify fatigue-related hazards and risks.
• (v) Methodology: A description of the methods used to identify, analyze, and evaluate fatigue-related hazards and risks.
• (w) Mitigation measures: Actions taken by an air operator to remedy an adverse effect of the variance on an ongoing basis.
• (x) Plain language: Writing at a Grade 12 level that is clear, concise, and designed to be understandable to the intended audience.
• (y) Prescriptive requirements: The flight and duty time limitations and rest period requirements contained in Part VII, Divisions III and IV; and Subpart 2 Division X of the Canadian Aviation Regulations. Exemptions are possible from specific prescriptive provisions in sections 700.27 to 700.72, 700.103 to 700.135 and 702.92 to 702.98, except: paragraphs 700.27(1)(c), 700.29(1)(a), sections 700.36, 700.37, and paragraphs 700.103(1)(e) and 702.92(1)(a) of the CARs.
• (z) Preventive measures: Actions taken by an air operator to prevent further recurrence of an adverse effect of the variance on an ongoing basis.
• (aa) Regulatory requirements: The Canadian Aviation Regulations and standards.
• (bb) Safety case: An air operator’s structured written argument, validated by scientific and operational evidence, to justify that the variance from specific prescriptive provisions described in the notice of intent does not increase the level of fatigue or decrease the level of alertness of the flight crew members and that the fatigue risks associated with the flight are safely managed.
• (cc) Safety performance indicator: A data-based parameter used for monitoring and assessing safety performance and fatigue risk control effectiveness.
• (dd) Scientific studies: Original systematic research relating to fatigue and human performance that has been tested for validity through scientific method and has been published in a reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journal or by an accredited body.
• (ee) Unforeseen operational circumstances: An event, such as unforecasted adverse weather, an equipment malfunction, or air traffic control delay, which is beyond the control of an air operator.
• (ff) Variance: A deviation from specific prescriptive provisions permitted by an initial or continuing exemption.
• (gg) Work schedule: Planned hours of work within a defined period of time.
• (hh) Year-round: A flight that is conducted throughout the year.

(2) The following abbreviations are used in this document:

• (a) AC: Advisory Circular
• (b) CAR: Canadian Aviation Regulations
• (c) FCM: Flight crew member
• (d) FDP: Flight duty period
• (e) FRMS: Fatigue risk management system
• (f) LOC: Letter of confirmation
• (g) NOI: Notice of intent
• (h) POI: TCCA Principal Operations Inspector
• (i) SPI: Safety performance indicator
• (j) TCCA: Transport Canada Civil Aviation
• (k) UOC: Unforeseen operational circumstances

3.0 Background

(1) Updated requirements for managing flight crew fatigue were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II on 12 December 2018 and came into force for operators regulated under subpart 705 of the CARs on 12 December, 2020 and for operators and medevac flights regulated under subparts 702, 703 and 704 of the CARs on 12 December, 2022.

(2) The regulations contains two compliance regimes:

• (a) Prescriptive requirements that define maximum number of hours of flight and duty time, and minimum periods of rest and time free from duty; and
• (b) Performance-based requirements that allow an air operator to vary from specific prescriptive provisions to conduct a flight using an FRMS to ensure that the variance will not adversely affect the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness.

4.0 Applicability of FRMS exemptions

(1) The FRMS exemption provisions of CARs Part VII, Division V are available to all air operators regulated under Part VII of the CARs, including those conducting medical evacuation flights. The in force dates for all CARs Part VII operating rules are available on TCCA’s Fatigue risk management in aviation webpage, in the section Applying the new regulations.

(2) An FRMS is intended as a way to manage flight crew fatigue and alertness more effectively than the prescriptive requirements. FRMS implementation is mandatory only when an air operator wishes to use an exemption from specific prescriptive provisions to conduct a flight. Each air operator must decide if the costs to develop and implement an effective FRMS and safety case(s) are worth the benefits of an exemption from specific prescriptive provisions.

Note: Information for developing an FRMS can be found in AC 700-046 (Fatigue Risk Management System Requirements)

(3) FRMS exemptions are possible from any of the prescriptive provisions in sections 700.27 to 700.72, 700.103 to 700.135 and 702.92 to 702.98 of the CARs, except the following provisions:

• (a) Paragraph 700.27(1)(c) of the CARs– maximum annual flight time;
• (b) Paragraph 700.29(1)(a) of the CARs – maximum annual number of hours of work;
• (c) Section 700.36 of the CARs – designation of home base;
• (d) Section 700.37 of the CARs – nutrition break;
• (e) Paragraph 700.103(1)(e) of the CARs– maximum annual flight time–medical evacuation flights; and
• (f) Paragraph 702.92(1)(a) of the CARs – maximum annual flight time.

5.0 FRMS exemption regulatory requirements

5.1 The initial and continuing exemptions

(1) CARs Part VII, Division V provides a mechanism for an air operator, who has implemented an FRMS in accordance with this Division, to vary from specific prescriptive provisions and conduct a flight subject to a continuing exemption that is supported by an approved safety case. The safety case demonstrates that fatigue and alertness levels can be managed such that the variance does not adversely affect the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness when compared against the baseline levels of fatigue established for that flight.

(2) A continuing exemption for a flight is obtained in two stages:

• (a) Stage 1: The initial exemption and notice of intent (section 700.200 of the CARs):
  The initial exemption provides the operator up to two years to collect fatigue and alertness data from flight crew members and apply their FRMS processes such that the resulting safety case demonstrates that fatigue and alertness can be managed to within 5% of the baseline levels of fatigue and alertness for the flight described in the notice of intent.
  • (i) The initial exemption remains in effect for the flight and any similar flights included under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs for up to 3 years provided that the air operator remains compliant with the provisions of sections 700.213 through 700.215 and, in accordance with section 700.207 of the CARs, continues to demonstrate progress in the development of the associated safety case. The third year of the exemption allows time for administration associated with submission and approval of the safety case.
  • (ii) Validation of the safety case under CAR 700.225(3) should be initiated after the air operator has conducted the fatigue risk assessment, applied initial mitigations and has conducted data collection flights for at least one year so that all seasonal variations are taken into effect. During this period the air operator shall have monitored levels of fatigue through collection of fatigue and alertness data and used their FRMS processes to apply mitigations when data collected from flight crew members show levels of fatigue greater than the baseline or levels of alertness lower than the baseline (an adverse effect of the variance). Once the air operator is confident that the mitigations and any corrective actions are effective in managing levels of fatigue to be at or better than the baseline, they should conduct at least 20 consecutive data collection flights to verify that the levels of fatigue remain within 5% of baseline and satisfy the conditions of paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs.
  • (iii) If the safety case and FRMS processes are functioning effectively and sufficient data can be gathered, it is possible to submit the validated safety case for approval in as little as one year from the date of the first flight. Once approved, the continuing exemption is in effect and can be applied to other similar flights. Subsequent NOIs may then build upon the success of the first by adding additional complexity or addressing other types of flights within the operation.
  • (iv) Under section 700.246 of the CARs – Non-Availability of Exemption, if the air operator has not validated the safety case described in a notice of intent in the period set out in paragraph 700.200(3)(b) of the CARs, they shall not be exempted from the application of the same provisions and in respect of the same flight for a period of two years after the expiry of that period
• (b) Stage 2: The continuing exemption and monitoring (section 700.234 of the CARs):
  When the air operator receives approval of the safety case, the initial exemption ends and the flights described in the notice of intent may now be conducted in accordance with section 700.234 of the CARs, the Continuing Exemption. The continuing exemption remains in effect as long as the air operator remains compliant with the conditions of subsection 700.234(2) of the CARs which include:
  • (i) The FRMS must be maintained in accordance with the conditions of CARs Part VII, Division V;
  • (ii) Effectiveness of the safety case is monitored in accordance with section 700.248 of the CARs; and
  • (iii) Any adverse effect of the variance is remedied no later than 60 days after the adverse effect is identified in course of monitoring.

5.2 Applying the continuing exemption to other flights

(1) Under the continuing exemption, the safety case may now be applied to other, similar flights using section 700.240 of the CARs, Exemption for Other Flights. These other flights must meet the criteria of subsection 700.240(1) and the operator must provide the Minister with a Letter of Confirmation compliant with subsection 700.240(2) of the CARs.

• (a) The exemption for other flights continues to have effect as long as the operator meets the conditions of subsection 700.240(4) of the CARs which are the same as those of subsection 700.234(2) of the CARs summarized in paragraph 5.0(1)(b) above.

5.3 Non-compliance

(1) If an air operator or flight crew member breaches the conditions of the initial exemption, the exemption shall cease to apply. If the air operator does not wish to permanently revert to operating in accordance with all flight/duty/rest provisions, they may elect to submit an amended notice of intent that should include appropriate corrective actions to remedy the root cause of the non-compliance. The amended notice of intent shall include submission date of the original compliant notice of intent as well as the date of submission for the revision. Section 700.246 of the CARs will apply 3-years after submission of the original compliant notice of intent, not that of the amendment. An amendment to remedy non-compliance will not extend the period of the initial exemption.

(2) If an air operator breaches the FRMS continuing exemption, and if the air operator does not wish to permanently revert to operating in accordance with all flight/duty/rest provisions, they must start the Part 7 Division V FRMS exemption process again from the Notice of Intent stage. Therefore, it is in an air operator’s best interest to maintain FRMS compliance (assured through the Quality Assurance Program of their FRMS) to protect the operator’s investment in developing and validating a safety case to access a continuing exemption.

(3) In both cases, any flights exceeding the limits of the prescriptive regulations that were conducted in the period of time between the breach of exemption and submission of a new notice of intent will be considered in violation of the prescriptive regulations.

5.4 The FRMS trial period

(1) It is recommended that an air operator should successfully validate their first safety case before submitting new notices of intent. The first approved safety case demonstrates that the operator’s fully implemented FRMS processes are effective in managing levels of fatigue and alertness and satisfies the ICAO requirement to conduct a trial before applying an FRMS to other flights within the operation.

6.0 Preparation

6.1 Review operations

(1) When considering an exemption under CARs Part VII Division V – Exemptions – Fatigue Risk Management Systems, first review your flight operations to determine the extent to which they can be conducted or adapted to operate within the prescriptive requirements. If any flight will need to use an exemption from specific prescriptive provisions, follow the sections below.

6.2 Establish and implement the fatigue risk management plan and process

(1) Before submitting a notice of intent to the Minister, two of the components of the fatigue risk management system, the fatigue risk management plan and the fatigue risk management process must be established and implemented prior to submitting a notice of intent. Refer to section 2.3 of this AC for definitions of established and implemented.

(2) To prepare for implementation of an FRMS and the exemption:

• (a) Review Advisory Circular 700-046 for guidance with respect to implementation of an FRMS; and
• (b) Review sections 700.200 to 700.259 of the CARs to understand the requirements and obligations of an exemption using an FRMS.
• (c) Conduct an initial gap analysis of any existing FRMS-related processes using Form 26-0851 Fatigue Risk Management Gap Analysis Tool. The GAP Analysis Tool is available through the Transport Canada Forms Catalogue (Forms Search (tc.gc.ca))

(3) Establish and implement the following FRMS components as required by paragraphs 700.200(1)(b) and 700.200(2)(b) of the CARs:

• (a) The fatigue risk management plan (section 700.215 of the CARs); and
• (b) The fatigue risk management process (section 700.216 of the CARs).
• Note: When developing the internal fatigue reporting policies and procedures required by subsection 700.215(5) and paragraph 700.216(1)(a) of the CARs, it is a requirement to use the process implemented under section 700.217 of the CARs to collaborate with your employees in developing your internal fatigue reporting policy and procedures. Under section 700.259 of the CARs, records demonstrating this collaboration shall be made available for review upon request.

(4) Validate implementation of these components using the FRMS Gap Analysis Tool (Form 26-0851). The Fatigue Risk Management Plan and Fatigue Risk Management Process components of the FRMS must be assessed to the level of implemented before submitting an NOI. This form should be included with the notice of intent submitted to the Minister.

(5) The remaining FRMS components must be established and implemented prior to conducting the initial audit and submitting the validated safety case for approval. TCCA may review any FRMS documentation for compliance with the regulations at any time including:

• (a) Prior to submission of an NOI – if feedback that the proposed documentation is complete is desired by the operator.
• (b) With the NOI submission – although there is no regulatory requirement to submit the FRMS documentation with the NOI, to do so is likely to expedite the NOI review process.
• (c) When requested by TCCA - this may occur during or after the NOI review process. The FRMS is subject to planned or reactive surveillance by TCCA at any point in the initial or continuing exemption periods to assure successful implementation.
• (d) Any non-compliance may result in the exemption being no longer in effect. Refer to subsection 700.200(3), and paragraphs 700.234(2)(a) and 700.240(4)(a) of the CARs for more information.

6.3 Define the flight subject to the exemption

(1) Exemptions using FRMS are in respect of a flight. Under section 700.201 of the CARs, reference to a “flight” in this Division,

• (a) is not limited to:
  • (i) one take-off and landing;
  • (ii) one sector; or
  • (iii) one FDP;
• (b) and includes a series of flights if:
  • (i) the flights in the series are consecutive;
  • (ii) the flights in the series are conducted by the same flight crew members; and
  • (iii) the flight crew members operate the flight during a single flight duty period or consecutive flight duty periods.
• (c) The use of section 700.201 of the CARs is intended to accommodate a series of consecutive flights within a defined period that may or may not require a crew layover. When the aircraft returns to a point of origin or to a final destination where the flight duty period ends and the crew are released from their duties for rest or to return to home base, the series of flights, for the purpose of the exemption, ends.

(2) If it is determined that a flight will need to use an exemption from specific prescriptive provisions. Define the flight subject to the exemption and include all of the information that would be required under sections 700.206 or 700.240 of the CARs to apply this definition to other flights subject to the initial or continuing exemptions. More details are provided in the Notice of intent section of this Advisory Circular.

(3) A flight must have an origin, destination, and route. The origin and destination must be stated in the description of the flight. For local flights, the route may be local and for on-demand operations, it may be required to define the route as a radius of operations (e.g. Within 250NM of XYZ). Note that if considering a radius of operations, the criteria for similar hazards and operating environment must continue to be met. For example, the route could not consider offshore operations or flights in mountainous terrain and flights in less challenging conditions within the same NOI even if they fell within a defined radius of operations.

6.4 Analyze the predicted effect of the variance

(1) Conduct an analysis of the predicted effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of flight crew members. The results of the analysis should be included in the notice of intent to demonstrate that the proposed exemption will not result in an adverse effect on the levels of fatigue and alertness of flight crew members.

(2) A recommended method of conducting the analysis is as follows:

• (a) Use the fatigue modelling method you implemented for paragraph 700.216(1)(f) of the CARs. Set threshold values to assess the results of scoring fatigue/alertness levels in work schedules. These thresholds may be recommended by the developer of your fatigue modelling system based on validation studies from prior application.
  • (i) Figure 1 shows example thresholds for a hypothetical fatigue modelling system with a score range of 1 to 100 (where the predicted level of alertness decreases/fatigue increases as the score goes up).

Figure 1

Text Description

Figure 1: Diagram based on a traffic light, showing next to the red light "Scores above 55, High Risk, Unacceptable"; next to the yellow light "Scores 45-55, Moderate Risk, Action Required"; and next to the green light "Scores below 45, Low Risk, Acceptable".

• (b) Use your fatigue modelling method to score the predicted level of FCM fatigue/alertness for the work schedule associated with conducting the flight in compliance with all prescriptive requirements. For example, a flight with multiple sectors may need to factor in a crew change, split flight duty, or overnight stop. Take into account all of the duties performed in your operations by FCMs assigned to conduct the flight [subsection 700.214(2) of the CARs].
  • (i) If the result is within the Acceptable zone set for your fatigue modelling method, this becomes the baseline level of FCM fatigue/alertness for the flight.
  • (ii) If the result is not within the Acceptable zone set for your fatigue modelling method:
  • (iii) Adjust the work schedule associated with the flight (e.g. increase length of rest periods, provide suitable accommodation before/after the flight, etc.) until the predicted level of FCM fatigue/alertness is within the Acceptable zone.
  • (iv) The resulting score establishes the baseline level of FCM fatigue/alertness for the flight. (Hereinafter referred to as the ‘baseline level’.)
• (c) Use your fatigue modelling method to score the predicted level of FCM fatigue/alertness for the work schedule associated with conducting the flight based on the variance from specific prescriptive provisions. Take into account all of the duties performed in your operations by FCMs assigned to conduct the flight [subsection 700.214(2) of the CARs].
• (d) Compare the baseline level to the predicted level of FCM fatigue/alertness based on the variance from specific prescriptive provisions.
• (e) Identify the causes of the fatigue-related hazards produced by the variance. Use the procedures you implemented for paragraph 700.216(2)(a) of the CARs.
• Note: Information on factors that are likely to cause FCM fatigue can be found in 6.6.1 of AC 700-046.

(3) Include in the safety case and the notice of intent a complete description of the analysis of the predicted variance effect and include:

• (a) An explanation of the justification for and a description of the assumptions used for modelling the work schedule associated with the flight, including all of the following that apply:
  • (i) Average time needed upon waking for personal hygiene and nutrition;
  • (ii) Estimated time to and from the location where the FDP begins and ends (e.g. commute time, travel time to/from suitable accommodation, etc.);
  • (iii) Frequency and length of scheduled breaks;
  • (iv) Time zone changes and estimated rate of acclimatization;
  • (v) Time of day variations in alertness from circadian rhythm effects;
  • (vi) Timing and estimated length of napping opportunities (e.g. pre-flight in suitable accommodation, in-flight in a Class 1, 2, or 3 rest facility);
  • (vii) Timing and estimated length of sleep opportunity, considering circadian sleep/wake influences;
  • (viii) Biological limits on recovery sleep; and
  • (ix) Any other assumptions used for modelling the work schedule associated with the flight.
• (b) The outputs produced from modelling the work schedule associated with the flight, including the outcomes of (2)(b), (c), and (d) above.

6.5 Conduct the fatigue risk assessment and apply risk controls

(1) Conduct a fatigue risk assessment of the fatigue-related hazards produced by the variance. Use the procedures you implemented for paragraphs 700.216(2)(b) and (c) of the CARs.

(2) Analyze the fatigue risk assessment findings, considering the risk context:

• (a) When, during the work schedule associated with the flight, scores outside the Acceptable zone are predicted to occur;
• (b) At those times, what the flight crew performance implications are (e.g. complexity of duty being performed and intensity of vigilance needed).
  • (i) For example, if fatigue/alertness levels outside the Acceptable zone are predicted only during positioning to home base to begin a period of time free from duty, the risk would be different than if those levels are predicted during critical phases of flight for each FDP in the work schedule associated with the flight.

(3) For paragraph 700.225(2)(h) of the CARs, document in the notice of intent and the safety case the fatigue risk controls you implemented to address the risk assessment findings, before conducting the flight that is subject to the exemption.

• (a) Using the procedures you implemented for paragraph 700.216(2)(e) of the CARs, develop and apply fatigue risk controls to the work schedule associated with the flight in order to bring the predicted level of fatigue/alertness equivalent to or better than the baseline level.
  • (i) If there is no fatigue risk control that can achieve this, the air operator cannot use an exemption to conduct the flight because their fatigue risk management process is unable to address the findings of the fatigue risk assessment.
• (b) Identify mitigation measures that can be implemented for the work schedule associated with the flight, if needed, to remedy any adverse effect of the variance on an ongoing basis.
• (c) The opportunity for FCMs to take controlled rest on the flight deck cannot be guaranteed; therefore, it cannot be planned by an air operator as an ongoing fatigue risk control or mitigation measure to address the causes of the fatigue-related hazards produced by the variance.
• Note: See explanation of sections 700.72 and 700.135 in the context of section 700.26 of the CARs fitness for duty requirements in AC 700-047 (Flight Crew Member Fatigue Management - Prescriptive Regulations) as well as the section on Controlled rest on the flight deck for explanation of use of controlled rest in response to unanticipated low levels of alertness, not as a mitigation for commencing duty when fatigued or as a substitute for effective fatigue risk controls to address the causes of the fatigue-related hazards produced by the variance.

(4) Set SPIs to measure the effectiveness of the fatigue risk controls, using the procedure you implemented for paragraph 700.216(2)(f) of the CARs. Focus these SPIs on proactive monitoring of actual levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight. The collection and analysis of this data will verify whether the fatigue risk control is working.

Note: Information on the fatigue risk assessment and evaluating effectiveness of fatigue risk controls can be found in 6.6.5 of AC 700-046.

7.0 The notice of intent (NOI)

7.1 Purpose

(1) The notice of intent outlines the framework for the initial exemption and for the safety case that will be developed. It describes the flight subject to the exemption, the regulations exempted and the manner in which they will be varied from. It describes the scientific basis for the exemption, provides supporting studies, and outlines how the safety case will be developed and monitored. The NOI also contains statements by the operator certifying that the required components of the FRMS have been established and implemented and that the safety case will be validated in accordance with the requirements of the CARs.

(2) For paragraphs 700.200(1)(a) or, for aerial work, (2)(a) of the CARs, prepare a NOI for each exemption needed. Separate NOIs may be required for different aircraft type, different operating environments, or where the operator requires relief from more than one regulation.

(3) A compliant notice of intent will address all applicable elements of section 700.206 of the CARs.

(4) Appendix A provides a recommended format for the notice of intent to the Minister. The NOI needs to be detailed and specific in order to provide a complete explanation to TCCA of:

• (a) the nature and scope of the variance from specific prescriptive provisions;
• (b) the scientific basis of your proposal; and
• (c) how you will develop and validate the safety case.

(5) The following sections provide further guidance with respect to the requirements of each provision.

7.2 Statement of implementation and intent (paragraph 700.206(1)(a) of the CARs)

(1) Before submitting a notice of intent, the fatigue risk management plan and process components must be established (exist) and be implemented (in operation). By including this statement in the notice of intent, the operator is certifying that the condition of paragraph 700.200(1)(b) or, for aerial work paragraph 700.200(2)(b) of the CARs has been met.

(2) This statement of intent also certifies that the operator will maintain the FRMS in accordance with the Division such as but not limited to:

• (a) the requirement to update the FRMS under subsection 700.214(3) of the CARs;
• (b) the data and documentation requirements of sections 700.256 and 700.257 of the CARs;
• (c) preservation of information as required by section 700.258 of the CARs; and
• (d) the procedures defined under the Quality Assurance components of the FRMS, once developed.
• Note: If an air operator has already established and implemented all components of the FRMS under a previously approved safety case and that FRMS is being applied to this safety case, the statement should reflect this.

7.3 Description of the flight subject to the exemption (paragraph 700.206(1)(b) of the CARs)

(1) Include in the notice of intent a complete description of the flight that includes all of the information below. Specify in the NOI if a requirement does not apply.

• (a) Sections 602.73 and 602.74 of the CARs:
  • (i) The point of departure, destination, route; and
  • (ii) The flight numbers for each segment.
    • (A) If no flight numbers are assigned, provide the aircraft registration numbers or the radio call sign for the proposed flight.
• (b) Paragraph 700.240(1)(b)/700.206(2)(a) of the CARs:
  • (i) The planned and maximum duration of each FDP associated with the flight; and
  • (ii) The NOI should also include the planned and maximum flight time for each FDP associated with the flight.
• (c) Paragraph 700.240(1)(c)/ 700.206(2)(b) of the CARs:
  • (i) The number of consecutive FDPs.
• (d) Paragraph 700.240(1)(d)/700.206(2)(c) of the CARs:
  • (i) The planned, minimum, and maximum start and end time of each FDP where,
    • (A) the minimum and maximum start times are within 60 minutes of the planned start time and do not encroach upon another line in the associated FDP table or into the WOCL unless the planned start time lies within the WOCL.
• (e) Paragraph 700.240(1)(e)/ 700.206(2)(h) of the CARs:
  • (i) The number of time zones the flight will cross and the direction of travel; and
  • (ii) The time zone in which all FCMs will be acclimatized at the start of the flight.
• (f) Paragraph 700.240(1)(f)/ 700.206(2)(d) of the CARs:
  • (i) The duration of any part of an FDP that occurs within the FCMs’ window of circadian low.
• (g) Paragraph 700.240(1)(g)/700.206(2)(i) of the CARs:
  • (i) The aircraft type with which the flight will be conducted.
• (h) Paragraph 700.240(1)(h)/700.206(2)(j) of the CARs:
  • (i) The number of FCMs who will conduct the flight.
• (i) Paragraph 700.240(1)(i)/ 700.206(2)(k) of the CARs:
  • (i) A description of the operating environment for the flight. Refer to section 7.11 (3)(c) of this AC for recommended details.
• (j) Paragraph 700.240(1)(j)/ 700.206(2)(l) of the CARs:
  • (i) A summary of the hazards and risk associated with the flight.
  • Note: Sections 700.240 and 700.206 of the CARs refer to hazards vs fatigue-related hazards as stated in other sections. Provide a summary of all hazards, including the fatigue-related hazards associated with the flight. If the non-fatigue related hazards are minimal, include a statement to this effect.
• (k) Paragraph 700.240(1)(k)/ 700.206(2)(f) of the CARs:
  • (i) The minimum duration of each rest period
    • (A) Before each flight duty period; and
    • (B) After each flight duty period.
• (l) Paragraph 700.240(1)(l)/ 700.206(2)(g) of the CARs:
  • (i) The time of day that each of the above rest periods is taken.
• (m) Paragraph 700.240(1)(m)/ 700.206(2)(e) of the CARs:
  • (i) The number of consecutive flight duty periods occurring during any part of the flight crew member’s window of circadian low.
• (n) Any other information relevant to the flight’s context in the work schedule of the FCMs who will conduct the flight such as:
  • (i) the frequency that the flight subject to the exemption will be conducted;
  • (ii) the class of any in-flight rest facility;
  • (iii) the start and end times of any additional duty (assigned by an air operator) immediately following each FDP
  • (iv) positioning and dead-heading times where not part of a flight duty period;
  • (v) use of split flight duty;
  • (vi) use of crew members on reserve or standby;
  • (vii) a description of any suitable accommodation provided between flight segments including travel time to and from.

7.4 CARs provisions exempted (paragraph 700.206(1)(c) of the CARs)

(1) The expectation for the number of regulations included in a notice of intent is that the operator will identify one, primary regulation, such as the duration of a flight duty period and any other regulations that may be affected by an exemption to that regulation. Once the operator has demonstrated, through an approved safety case, that the variance does not have an adverse effect on the levels of fatigue and alertness of flight crew members, when compared to the baseline level of fatigue established for that flight, the operator may increase the complexity of the exemption by adding additional regulations in subsequent notices of intent. The subsequent safety cases will be validated against the original baseline to ensure that levels of fatigue and alertness are not affected.

(2) Consider all the prescriptive requirements that affect the planned work schedule for the FCMs who will conduct the flight (or series of flights if they meet section 700.201 of the CARs) that will be subject to the initial exemption, and:

• (a) identify the specific prescriptive provision to which the initial exemption will apply; and
  • (i) any related provisions affected. For example, a longer FDP or an increase in consecutive night duties may also affect requirements for rest periods and time free from duty.

7.5 The manner in which the flight will vary from the regulations (paragraph 700.206(1)(d) of the CARs)

(1) Describe in detail how the flight varies from those prescriptive provisions specified above. The description must be accurate and understandable.

7.6 The expected date of first flight and seasonal validity (paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs)

(1) State the date when you expect to start conducting the flight under the initial exemption;

(2) State whether the flight will be conducted year-round.

• (a) If the flight will not be conducted year-round, identify the period in each calendar year when you expect to conduct the flight. This is the period of validity of the exemption so the description should be specific. For example, winter operations may be described as: Winter (01 November to 31 March). It will be expected that the safety case includes data collected from this entire period.
• Note: A safety case proven in year-round conditions justifies the basis for a year-round continuing exemption, whereas a safety case for a flight not conducted year-round is proven only during the period of the year specified in the NOI, in compliance with paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs, and therefore the continuing exemption will apply only for that period in each calendar year.

7.7 Scientific studies (paragraph 700.206(1)(e) of the CARs)

(1) Use the procedure for developing a list of the safety data and scientific studies that was implemented for paragraph 700.216(1)(d) of the CARs to identify scientific studies which support the safety case and:

• (a) the notice of intent should include a description of the scientific basis for the safety case and how each of the referenced scientific studies demonstrate that the variance is not likely to have an adverse effect on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs who will conduct the flight;
  • (i) When these scientific studies provide fatigue management recommendations, the notice of intent should describe how these will be applied in development of the safety case.

(2) Attach copies of the scientific studies to the NOI; If links are provided vs attaching copies, the studies must be publicly available at no cost with no subscription required.

7.8 Description of the safety case to be developed (paragraph 700.206(1)(g) of the CARs)

(1) The safety case established under subsection 700.225(1) of the CARs and submitted to the Minister shall demonstrate that the variance described in the notice of intent does not increase the level of fatigue or decrease the level of alertness of flight crew members. It needs to be detailed and methodical in order to demonstrate that:

• (a) there is a scientific basis for the premise, scope and effect of the variance from specific prescriptive provisions;
• (b) the assumptions regarding the flight’s fatigue-related hazards, risks, controls and mitigation measures are substantiated by comprehensive and relevant evidence;
• (c) the fatigue risks associated with the flight are fully understood and safely managed; and
• (d) fatigue and alertness levels of the FCMs conducting the flight are not adversely affected by the variance from specific prescriptive provisions.

(2) Provide a complete description of how the safety case will be developed and how it will apply the procedures implemented in your FRMS risk management process for section 700.216 of the CARs to the flight that is subject to the exemption.

(3) The contents of a safety case are defined under subsection 700.225(2) of the CARs and the description of the safety case in the notice of intent must address each element of the safety case as follows:

• (a) Paragraphs 700.225(2)(a), (b), (c) and (f) of the CARs are described above. Each of these requirements can be addressed in the description of the safety case with a reference to the corresponding section of the notice of intent.
• (b) Paragraph 700.225(2)(d) of the CARs: The description of the baseline level of fatigue and alertness must include the following:
  • (i) The data collection methodology;
  • (ii) The data used to establish the baseline levels of fatigue; and
  • (iii) A description as to how the baseline was used to identify fatigue-related hazards and risks.
• (c) Paragraph 700.225(2)(e) of the CARs: This requirement for the data collection methods that will be used on an ongoing basis relates to two regulations that are listed below. Include a description for each of the following that describes, at minimum, the type of information and when, where and how it will be collected. Refer to section 8.0 Data Collection of this AC for further information.
  • (i) Paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs: the data collection methods that will be used over the course of the initial exemption.
  • (ii) Subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs: how data will be collected in respect of a representative number of flights for monitoring the effects of the variance under the continuing exemption. Provide justification for the sampling and collection methods that will be used.
• (d) Paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs: Paragraphs 700.200(1)(c) and 700.200(2)(c) of the CARs require that the air operator, every 90 days from the date of the first flight, notify the Minister that the analysis required by paragraph 700.225(2(g) is available for review. Refer to Section 9 Variance effect monitoring and reporting in this AC, and
  • (i) Describe the analysis that will be conducted ensuring that the description includes how the analysis will take into account:
    • (A) the flight crew members’ schedule before and after the flight in respect of the exemption; and
    • (B) the findings of the fatigue risk assessment.
• (e) Paragraph 700.225(2)(h) of the CARs: The description of the fatigue risk controls that will be implemented to address the findings of the risk assessment should include:
  • (i) the findings of the initial fatigue risk assessment that was conducted in accordance with the processes defined under subsection 700.216(2) of the CARs including the analysis of the predicted variance effect;
  • (ii) the actions to be taken to manage the risks including the preventive and corrective actions; and
  • (iii) the safety performance indicators that were developed for each in accordance with paragraph 700.216(2)(f) of the CARs.
  • (iv) Refer to section 6.5 Conduct the fatigue risk assessment and apply risk controls in this AC.
• (f) Paragraph 700.225(2)(i) of the CARs: Describe the procedures that will be used to measure the effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the flight crew members. Refer to section 8.0 Data collection in this AC.
• (g) Paragraph 700.225(2)(j) of the CARs: Describe the procedures that will be used to determine the preventive measures or corrective actions that will be taken to remedy any adverse effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the flight crew members. Refer to section 9.3 Adverse effect correction and monitoring in this AC.
• (h) Paragraph 700.225(2)(k) of the CARs: Refer to Section 13.2 Continuing exemption and safety case monitoring in this AC and subsection 700.219(3), and sections 700.248 and 700.249 of the CARs and describe the means that will be used to monitor the effectiveness of the fatigue risk management system in managing the safety case including:
  • (i) the effectiveness of the fatigue risk management process as required by paragraph 700.249(2)(a) of the CARs;
  • (ii) the reliability of the safety performance indicators as required by paragraph 700.249(2)(b) of the CARs;
  • (iii) the procedures that will be used to monitor the effects of the variance required under subsections 700.248(1) and 700.219(3) of the CARs including:
    • (A) the method of determining the representative number of flights as required by subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs;
    • (B) the methods that will be used under subsection 700.248(3) of the CARs to develop corrective actions to remedy an adverse effect of the variance;
    • (C) the methods that will be used under subsection 700.248(4) of the CARs to assess the effectiveness of the corrective actions.
• Note: AC 700-046 sections 5, 6 and 8 provide guidance on monitoring the effectiveness of safety performance indicators and of the FRMS.

(4) Where modelling is used in the safety case and FRMS, the description of the safety case should include the data used to create the model, any assumptions that were used and the rationale behind these assumptions. If the model is used to establish the baseline level of fatigue as described under paragraph 700.225(2)(b) of the CARs, the data must be provided.

• (a) This information could include:
  • (i) average time needed upon waking for personal hygiene and nutrition;
  • (ii) estimated time to and from the location where the FDP begins and ends (e.g. commute time, travel time to/from suitable accommodation, etc.);
  • (iii) timing and estimated length of napping opportunities (e.g. pre-flight in suitable accommodation, in-flight in a Class 1, 2, or 3 rest facility);
  • (iv) timing and estimated length of sleep opportunity prior to and / or after the FDP.
• Note: It is acceptable for the operator to make a specific reference to their enterprise’s FRMS documentation in lieu of detailing processes that are already documented, provided the documentation is submitted prior to or with the NOI.

7.9 Statement of intent to validate the safety case and conduct the initial audit (paragraph 700.206(1)(h))of the CARs

(1) By including the statement that the safety case will be validated in accordance with subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs and that the initial audit will be conducted in accordance with subsection 700.231(1) of the CARs, the air operator is certifying that they understand and will comply with the requirement of these regulations. Considerations for validation of the safety case are described in section 10.2 and for the initial audit in section 11.2 of this AC.

(2) When the safety case is submitted under section 700.232 of the CARs it must have been validated in accordance with the above regulation and the initial audit must have been conducted in accordance with section 700.231 of the CARs.

(3) It is recommended that the air operator include a detailed safety case validation plan in the notice of intent and safety case.

(4) Under section 700.233 of the CARs, the Minister shall only approve the safety case if, based on the information provided by the operator, the Minister has determined that the subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs has been met and that the initial audit has been conducted.

7.10 The name and contact information of the person who will be responsible for the implementation of the fatigue risk management system (paragraph 700.206(1)(i) of the CARs)

(1) Under subsection 700.213(2) of the CARs the operations manager shall ensure that the fatigue risk management system complies with the requirements of the Division.

(2) The operations manager may assign the management of the fatigue risk management system to another person (subsection 700.213(4) of the CARs) however, the responsibility of the operations manager is not affected by the assignment of management functions to another person.

(3) Regardless of the name and contact information provided in the notice of intent, the responsibility for the fatigue risk management system remains with the operations manager.

7.11 More than one flight in an NOI (subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs)

(1) An NOI can include more than one flight if each additional flight meets the requirements of subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs. Under the initial exemption, these flights are subject to the FRMS and safety case processes that have been established and implemented to manage levels of fatigue and, under the continuing exemption, must be monitored and mitigated under section 700.248 of the CARs.

(2) When determining whether to include more than one flight in one NOI, consider:

• (a) if an NOI is used for one flight and its safety case is validated and approved, the continuing exemption may be applied to another flight if the requirements of section 700.240 of the CARs are met.
• (b) no exemption fee applies, regardless of whether more than one flight is included in one NOI or a separate NOI is used for each flight.
• (c) if the flight described under subsection 700.206(1) of the CARs cannot be validated in the period set out under paragraph 700.200(3)(b) of the CARs, the prohibition of section 700.246 of the CARs also applied to those additional flights included in the notice of intent under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs.
• (d) if the operator does not show progress in the development of the safety case for the flight described under subsection 700.206(1) of the CARs, the exemption is no longer in effect for all flights included in the notice of intent.
• (e) data for flights included under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs must be collected in accordance with the procedures defined in the fatigue risk management process under paragraph 700.216(1)(c) and record kept in accordance with paragraph 700.257(1)(b) of the CARs.
• (f) under the continuing exemption, all flights must be monitored in accordance with section 700.248 of the CARs, any adverse effect corrected, and the Minister informed and:
• (g) for a similar flight to be included in the notice of intent it must:
  • (i) vary from the same prescriptive provision in the same manner, in order to comply with paragraph 700.206(1)(c) and (d) of the CARs;
  • (ii) be conducted over the same period in each calendar year, in order to comply with paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs; and
  • (iii) have the same predicted baseline level of FCM fatigue/alertness, in order for the safety case to comply with paragraph 700.225(2)(d) of the CARs.

(3) For each additional flight included under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs include in the notice of intent the following items:

• (a) All the information required under section 7.3 above.
• (b) For paragraph 700.206(2)(i) of the CARs, explain how the aircraft are similar in design, including similar level of automation and same class of in-flight rest facility if applicable. The purpose of this requirement is because aircraft differences can affect flight crew workload, which can impact FCM fatigue and alertness levels and have performance implications.
  • (i) For example, a B737-300 is not similar in level of automation to a B737 MAX.
• (c) For paragraph 700.206(2)(k) of the CARs, describe how the following factors are similar in the operating environment for all flights you include in one NOI:
  • (i) IFR vs. VFR operations;
  • (ii) day vs. night operations (including “black hole” approaches);
  • (iii) controlled vs. uncontrolled airspace and airports;
  • (iv) airspace and airport complexity and traffic density;
  • (v) presence vs. absence of approach aids;
  • (vi) seasonal variations (e.g. weather and wind conditions, de-icing and low-visibility operations, time changes between Standard Time and Daylight Saving Time, onset of darkness), as such factors can affect flight duration and delays as well as FCM fatigue and alertness levels;
  • (vii) take-offs/landings in hazardous terrain (e.g. mountainous, offshore, remote/ad hoc sites);
  • (viii) flight crew workload;
  • (ix) availability of flight crew support facilities (e.g. suitable accommodation, nutrition opportunities); and
  • (x) any other factors relevant to the operating environment of the flights.
• (d) For paragraph 700.206(2)(l) of the CARs, describe how the hazards associated with the flight are similar and
  • (i) see the note in section 7.3 with respect to hazards. Include a description as to how all hazards are similar.
  • (ii) for the fatigue-related hazards, use the fatigue risk assessment procedures you implemented for subsection 700.216(2) of the CARs to determine whether the fatigue-related hazards and risks are similar for each of the flights you include in one NOI.
  • (iii) include in your NOI the risk level determined from each likelihood and severity evaluation. Fatigue risk evaluation is explained in 6.6.2 of AC 700-046.

7.12 NOI submission

(1) Before conducting the flights included in the notice of intent, send your NOI to the POI assigned to your organization

• (a) Include in your notice of intent submission the following documentation:
  • (i) A signed notice of intent.
  • (ii) A Notice of Intent - Submission and Reviewer's Checklist (Form # 26-0883).
  • (iii) A completed Form 26-0851 Fatigue Risk Management Gap Analysis Tool.
  • (iv) The scientific studies associated in accordance with paragraph 700.206(2)(e) of the CARs or links to documents available online to the public at no cost and with no requirement for subscription.
  • (v) Any FRMS documentation available for the Minister to review.
  • (vi) A copy of fatigue risk assessment or records of its completion (date, attendees, and results).
  • (vii) Any data sets, in a format that allows a parallel analysis (if applicable) of any calculations to support the baseline level of fatigue established for the safety case (paragraph 700.225(2)(d) of the CARs).
  • (viii) Any other documentation or records to support the notice of intent and safety case.
• (b) TCCA will review the NOI to verify compliance with sections 700.200 to 700.206 of the CARs. If any requirements are not met, TCCA will notify the air operator that the initial exemption is not in effect and the air operator must comply with the prescriptive requirements until the NOI is made compliant.
• (c) There is no service standard associated with review of a notice of intent so allow at least 10 working days after the date of NOI submission to the planned start date of the variance flight, to avoid possible delays.
• (d) If a non-compliance is identified, correct the NOI to comply with regulatory requirements and send it back to your POI.
• (e) When all the requirements of sections 700.200 to 700.206 of the CARs are met, TCCA will notify the air operator that the notice of intent has been reviewed and a non-compliance was not noted.
• (f) For a flight that is not conducted year-round, the initial exemption applies to the period of each calendar year identified in the NOI in compliance with paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs.
• (g) Notify (in writing) your FCMs who will conduct the flight that the initial exemption is in effect.

7.13 Change in status of an NOI

(1) Any change in the status of an NOI must be communicated in writing to the POI. This includes, e.g.:

• (a) Withdrawal of an NOI – which means an NOI that was submitted but for which a variance flight was never conducted under an initial exemption, and the operator chooses to retract their intent.
  • (i) Following withdrawal of an NOI, the operator can submit a (new) NOI at any time and be exempt from the same provision and in respect of the same flight as the withdrawn NOI. The two-year prohibition in section 700.246 of the CARs does not apply.
• (b) Cancellation of an NOI – which means an NOI for which an operator voluntarily ceases conducting a variance flight under an initial exemption.
  • (i) An NOI that has been cancelled by the operator and for which they have declared no further intent to pursue a safety case, is subject to the prohibition in section 700.246 of the CARs, whereby they are not eligible to be exempt from the same provision and in respect of the same flight for two years from the cancellation of the NOI.
• (c) Adjustment to an NOI – which means changes made to information provided in an existing NOI, such as the operating period or frequency of flight. This may result in a re-submission of the NOI.

8.0 Data collection

8.1 Data collection methodology

(1) For paragraphs 700.225(2)(e) and (i) of the CARs, describe the methodology used to collect data to measure the effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight that is subject to the exemption.

(2) The methodology described in the notice of intent should be detailed and include at minimum:

• (a) the type of fatigue-related data collected (e.g. psychomotor vigilance task scores, Karolinkska sleepiness survey results etc.);
• (b) why the measure if appropriate to the safety case (e.g. quality and duration of sleep on-board or vigilance prior to a critical phase of flight may be the most suitable and practical measure for a type of variance);
• (c) when measurements will be taken;
• (d) why the timing of measurement supports the safety case;
• (e) who will be providing the data (e.g. pilot flying and pilot monitoring, pilot on in-flight rest etc.);
• (f) what tools are being used to collect the data (e.g. paper forms, custom applications or scientific equipment); and
• (g) Evidence that any scientific measuring device has been certified or independently verified and calibrated.

(3) Align your fatigue and alertness testing methods to your fatigue modelling method so the scores from each will correlate. For example, a common fatigue scale, sleepiness scale or alertness scale may be used to convert testing results to inputs for retrospective analysis. Some fatigue modelling systems integrate this function to facilitate retrospective analysis.

Note: Information on fatigue or alertness scales integrated with seven fatigue modelling programs can be found on pages 35 to 48 of the Biomathematical Fatigue Model Guidance Document (icao.int)

8.2 Data collection flights

(1) Start conducting the flight that is subject to the exemption.

• (a) In accordance with sections 602.02, 700.21, 700.218 and 700.255 of the CARs, assign FCMs to conduct the flight:
  • (i) whose work schedule enables them to be adequately rested and likely to be fit for all assigned duties associated with the flight/series of flights; and
  • (ii) who have been trained for their FRMS responsibilities.
  • Note: This also applies when replacing any FCM who was previously assigned duties associated with the flight/series of flights.

(2) Collect comprehensive fatigue and alertness data pertaining to each flight and the FCMs conducting the flight, using the procedures you implemented for paragraph 700.216(1)(c) and subsection 700.257(1) of the CARs.

Note: Guidance on data collection can be found in Common Protocol for Minimum Data Collection Variables in Aviation Operations and Fatigue SPIs: A Key Component of Proactive Fatigue Hazard Identification. See Controlled Rest on the Flight Deck (page 15 section 4.9) for explanation of reporting use of controlled rest to enable evaluation of the effectiveness of fatigue risk controls on the work schedule associated with the flight.

(3) Scores that result from fatigue and alertness data should not be averaged for a flight. Each FCM’s score should be treated as a separate data point, and not be invalidated through averaging.

(4) Any score above the acceptable level for each type of fatigue / alertness test conducted is of concern. An individual with a fatigue level in excess of the upper threshold is not fit for duty and should not be conducting safety-sensitive tasks (flying, driving, etc.).

(5) If a single value is required, take the worst of the FCM scores.

(6) Consider in the analysis how many times fatigue scores are above the acceptable level, and over how much of the duration of the flight.

9.0 Variance effect monitoring and reporting

9.1 Determine the frequency of analysis

(1) Paragraph 700.200(1)(c) or (2)(c) of the CARs require that the air operator notify the minister each 90 days from the date of the first flight is conducted under the initial exemption, that the analysis required by paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs is available for review.

(2) Within the reporting interval above, determine how often to analyze the variance effect using the procedures you implemented for paragraph 700.216(1)(c) and (g). The frequency of variance effect analysis is expected to be commensurate with the flight frequency, fatigue risk, and results of FCM performance data collection, and be conducted within a timeframe such that it is available for review by the Minister every 90 days.

9.2 Analyze the variance effect

(1) Conduct the analysis of the variance effect in accordance with the procedures described in the notice of intent for paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs. It is recommended that that the analysis include the following steps:

• (a) Compare planned and actual time worked for the FCMs conducting the flight that is subject to the exemption using the procedure you implemented for paragraph 700.216(1)(g) of the CARs.
  • (i) Inputs include subsection 700.20(2) of the CARs, monitoring records, subsection 700.20(3) of the CARs, reports of UOC use, and subsections 700.21(2) of the CARs, FDP exceedances. For example, extending a FDP in the event of UOC may correlate to higher fatigue than predicted for the variance.
• (b) Take into account the flight crew members schedule before and after the flight by including in the analysis:
  • (i) For subsection 700.214(2) of the CARs, all of the duties performed in your operations by FCMs assigned to conduct the flight; and
  • (ii) For paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs, the actual hours worked by those FCMs before and after the flight/series of flights subject to the exemption.
    • (A) For example, if those FCMs conduct flights under subparts 604 and 704 of the CARs, and perform other duties such as deliver training, your analysis needs to take into account all those duties as well as the length of rest periods and time free from duty in their schedule before and after the flight/series of flights.
    • (B) The purpose of factoring in actual periods of work and rest by the FCMs before and after the flight/series of flights is to identify cumulative fatigue and its causes (e.g. consecutive duties; adequacy of breaks, rest opportunities, crew facilities and suitable accommodation).
• (c) Use the fatigue and alertness data you collected to measure the effect of the variance on the FCMs (per section 8.0 of this AC) as inputs for retrospective data analysis.
  • (i) Use your conversion method, if required, (per section 8.1 of this AC) to correlate the fatigue and alertness data results with your fatigue modelling predictions to determine the actual levels of FCM fatigue and alertness produced by the variance.
• (d) Compare the baseline level to the actual level of FCM fatigue/alertness, to determine the effect of the variance and whether the fatigue risk controls are working.
• Note: If FCMs used controlled rest on the flight deck during the flight that is subject to the exemption, their performance data after use of controlled rest should be excluded because the results could imply higher alertness levels than can be assured for the variance on an ongoing basis.

9.3 Adverse effect correction and monitoring

(1) For paragraphs 700.225(3)(c) and (d) of the CARs, upon each analysis of the variance effect, if there is an increase in the level of FCM fatigue or a decrease in the level of FCM alertness from the baseline level:

• (a) implement mitigation measures to remedy the adverse effect of the variance; and
• (b) monitor the mitigation measures to determine their effect on the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness.
• Note: Do this by repeating your procedures for data collection and analysis of the variance effect.

(2) For paragraphs 700.225(3)(e) and (f) of the CARs, if the mitigation measures do not remedy the adverse effect of the variance on the fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight:

• (a) re-evaluate the fatigue-related hazards produced by the variance;
• (b) take corrective actions; and
• (c) verify the effectiveness of the corrective actions in maintaining the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness at or better than the baseline level.
• Note: Do this by repeating your procedures for the fatigue risk assessment and risk controls, data collection and analysis of the variance effect.

(3) For paragraph 700.225(2)(j) of the CARs, document in the safety case each mitigation measure and corrective action taken to remedy any adverse effect of the variance.

(4) If the fatigue risk controls, mitigation measures, and corrective actions are ineffective in remedying the adverse effects of the variance, the air operator cannot continue to use the exemption to conduct the flight and must comply with the prescriptive requirements.

9.4 Variance effect reporting

(1) For paragraph 700.200(1)(c) or (2)(c) of the CARs, starting on the date on which the flight is first conducted under the exemption, and throughout the period that the initial exemption is in effect, notify your POI in writing every 90 days, or at the end of each period during which the flight is conducted if that period is shorter than 90 days, that the analysis required under paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs is available for review and the location at which the review may take place.

(2) In the notification, provide a summary of the analysis that includes:

• (a) all data collected from all flights conducted under the exemption during the reporting period;
• (b) the values of the safety performance indicators required by paragraphs 700.215(c) and 700.216(2)(f) of the CARs;
• (c) a written summary of the progress towards the development the safety case elements of paragraphs 700.225(2)(a) to (k) of the CARs;
• (d) a written summary of the progress towards validation of the safety case under paragraphs 700.225(3)(a) to (f) of the CARs;
• (e) notification of any changes to the FRMS as required by section 700.256 of the CARs;
• (f) an updated Fatigue Risk Management Gap Analysis (Form 26-0851) or a statement indicating no changes from the last version submitted;
• (g) a summary of any changes to the associated risks and mitigations associated with the flight and recorded as required by paragraphs 700.216(2)(e) and 700.225(3)(b) to (f) of the CARs.

(3) TCCA will review these notices and inspect as necessary to verify progress in developing the safety case. In accordance with section 700.207 of the CARs, if the analysis does not show progress in developing the safety case, TCCA will notify the air operator that the exemption is not in effect and they must comply with the prescriptive requirements, including the specific prescriptive provisions from which they had been exempted.

• (a) For example, where the data collection period has expired and the data collected shows that it is not be possible to validate the safety case in accordance with paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs, the Minister will notify the air operator that, in accordance with section 700.207 of the CARs, the initial exemption ceases to apply.

10.0 The safety case

10.1 Purpose

(1) The safety case is the framework for the continuing exemption. It describes the variance flight, the regulations subject to the exemption and the manner in which the exemption flight varies from those regulations. It describes the scientific basis for the exemption and the methods that were used to establish a baseline level of fatigue and collect and analyze data to demonstrate that the levels of fatigue associated with the variance are not significantly greater than those associated with conducting the flight under the prescriptive regulations.

(2) The safety case also describes the preventive actions and mitigations that were applied to ensure that the levels of fatigue were managed to within the required tolerance of 5% of baseline and demonstrates that the effectiveness of these were monitored and corrective actions applied where necessary.

(3) Finally, the safety case describes the methods that will be used to monitor the effects of the variance on an ongoing basis under the continuing exemption. It describes how data will be collected, the sampling methods and the processes that will be used monitor the effectiveness of the FRMS. The safety case is a living document and, under subsection 700.248(1) of the CARs, shall be modified, and the minister notified, when corrective actions are applied to remedy any adverse effect of the variance under the continuing exemption.

(4) The safety case submitted to the Minister for approval must provide enough information for the Minister to determine, based on that information, that the safety case has been validated in accordance with the CARs.

10.2 Validation

(1) This section describes an acceptable method of compliance to validate a safety case in accordance with paragraph 700.200(3)(a) of the CARs.

(2) If an air operator foresees challenges with the methods described below or with compliance with the requirements of paragraph 700.200(3)(a) of the CARs, an alternate method of compliance may be explored. In advance of submitting a notice of intent, submit a proposal for the alternate method of compliance to your POI for review by subject matter experts. TCCA will advise if the proposal is acceptable and if additional exemption to the CARs would be required to accommodate the methodology. Commencing variance flights without first obtaining the additional approvals or exemptions certifies that the safety case will be validated in accordance with the conditions of subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs.

(3) The validation period is distinct from the period of the initial exemption. It begins once the air operator and flight crew members commence variance flights under the initial exemption and ends once the safety case has been validated in accordance with subsection 700.200(3) or the two-year data collection period allowed under paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs has expired. Where this advisory circular refers to the final 20 flights, it is referring to the last 20 flights in the validation period.

(4) To validate the safety case, collect fatigue and alertness data using the methods described in the notice of intent pertaining to each time the flight is conducted during a period of not less than one year and not more than two years, starting when the flight is first conducted under the initial exemption.

(5) When the FRMS processes, safety performance indicators and data demonstrate that levels of fatigue are being managed to within 5% of the baseline, conduct 20 consecutive data collection flights to validate the safety case. The validation period ends with a successful outcome as described below.

(6) Table 1 shows examples of how paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs applies to flights conducted year-round and flights conducted during a specified period each year.

Table 1

Flight frequency	Example	# of flights in 1-year period	Validation period		Outcome
			Year 1	Year 2
Flights conducted <20 times in 1 year	Monthly flight operated year-round	12	All 12 flights +...	All subsequent flights UNTIL...	...not >1 of the 20 consecutive data collection flights in the data set had an adverse effect of >5% over baseline level
	Arctic aerial survey flight operated every July	14	All 14 flights +...	All subsequent flights UNTIL...
Flights conducted ≥20 times in 1 year	Daily flight operated year-round	365	All 365 flights +...	If necessary, all subsequent flights UNTIL...
	Snowbird flight operated twice/week October - March inclusive	52	All 52 flights +...	If necessary, all subsequent flights UNTIL...

(7) At the end of the validation period, the final 20 consecutive data collection flights in the data set have to show that:

• (a) not more than 19 of those flights had an adverse effect up to but not greater than 5% over baseline level; and
• (b) not more than 1 of those flights had an adverse effect greater than 5% over baseline level.
  • (i) For example, if the baseline level has a score of 100, and you use a fatigue modelling method where a higher score reflects increased fatigue/decreased alertness, only 1 of the 20 consecutive flights in the data set at the end of the one-to-two year validation period can result in a score higher than 105.
  • (ii) As soon as a second flight of the 20 consecutive flights in the data set has an adverse effect greater than 5% over the baseline level, and the maximum two-year validation period has not ended:
    • (A) Repeat your procedures for adverse effect correction and monitoring (refer to section 9.3).
    • (B) Collect additional fatigue and alertness data in order to achieve the set of 20 consecutive flights; and
    • (C) Update your FRMS in accordance with paragraph 700.214(3)(c) of the CARs.

Note: Any adverse effect of the variance must be remedied in the flights conducted throughout the one-to-two year validation period before the 20 consecutive flights in the data set.

Note: If the data collection to validate a safety case is not completed within the time period required by paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs, the air operator cannot continue to use the initial exemption and must comply with the prescriptive requirements, including the specific prescriptive provisions from which they had been exempted

10.3 Contents

(1) The safety case documentation that is submitted for approval should Include an introduction or abstract that summarizes the aims and outcomes of the safety case and how it demonstrates that the variance described in the notice of intent does not increase the level of fatigue or decrease the level of alertness of the flight crew members who conducted the flight subject to the exemption.

(2) In accordance with subsection 700.225(2) of the CARs, the safety case shall address all the elements (a) to (k) of that regulation as follows:

• (a) Paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs: The description of the flight subject to the exemption should include all of the items described in the notice of intent and must be sufficient to apply the flight to other flights under the continuing exemption under section 700.240 of the CARs. Refer to section 7.3 Description of the flight subject to the exemption.
  • (i) Where an NOI includes similar flights under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs, include a description, with supporting data or records such as FDP start/end times and duration, to demonstrate that the flights are compliant with the requirements of subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs and may be included under the continuing exemption.
• (b) Paragraph 700.225(2)(b) of the CARs: the provisions of the regulations from which the air operator and flight crew are exempt as described in the notice of intent.
• (c) Paragraph 700.225(2)(c) of the CARs: Provide a complete description, with supporting data, of the manner in which the flight, as flown during the data collection period varied from the regulations.
  • (i) Include confirmation that all associated flight conducted under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs varied from the exemption in the same manner and include data and records to support this.
• (d) Paragraph 700.225(2)(d) of the CARs: Include a detailed description of the methodology that was used to establish the baseline levels of fatigue and alertness established for the safety case and include:
  • (i) The baseline levels of fatigue and alertness established using the above methodology;
  • (ii) All associated data and calculations and software output, if applicable; and
  • (iii) A description as to how this data was used to identify fatigue-related hazards and risks.
• (e) Paragraph 700.225(2)(e) of the CARs: Describe the data collection methods
  • (i) that were used during the development and validation of the safety case; and
  • (ii) that will be used for the purposes of subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs for the ongoing monitoring of the safety case.
  • (iii) Include a file with all data collected over the one-to-two-year data collection period. The data should be in a format that can be sorted or read by statistical software. Coordinate with your POI with respect to the best format to provide data in advance of submitting the safety case to the Minister.
• (f) Paragraph 700.225(2)(f) of the CARs: Provide a summary of the scientific basis of the safety case and how the associated scientific studies support it (include reference paragraphs or quotes). Attach copies or excerpts of the associated scientific studies. If links are provided, they must be publicly available at no cost and with no requirements for a subscription for access.
• (g) Paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs: Describe the procedures used to analyze the data throughout the data collection period and include a final summary of the effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of flight crew members and include both the predicted variance effect as described in the notice of intent and the actual effect of the variance as determined for the safety case.
  • (i) Attach or include in the safety case all documentation associated with each analysis that was conducted in accordance with subsection 700.200(1) or paragraph(2)(c) of the CARs during the one to two-year data collection period.
• (h) Paragraph 700.225(2)(h) of the CARs: Include a summary of the risk assessment, the methodology used, and the findings. List the fatigue risk controls that were applied to address the findings of the risk assessment and the associated safety performance indicators to measure their effectiveness as required by paragraph 700.216(2)(f) of the CARs.
  • (i) Include the values of each safety performance indicator at the end of the data validation period and
  • (ii) A copy of the fatigue risk assessments or, at minimum records of each occurrence of a fatigue risk assessment for the flight including the date the assessment took place, the participants and the results.
• (i) Paragraph 700.225(2)(i) of the CARs: Describe the procedures that were used to measure the effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the flight crew members.
  • (i) Include the results of this comparison for all flights conducted during the data validation period.
• (j) Paragraph 700.225(2)(j) of the CARs: List the preventive measures or corrective actions that were applied, the circumstances that prompted their application and the methods that were used to monitor their effectiveness.
• (k) Paragraph 700.225(2)(k) of the CARs: Describe the means that will be used to monitor the effectiveness of the fatigue risk management system in managing the safety case including the following:
  • (i) The effectiveness of the fatigue risk management process as required by paragraph 700.249(2)(a) of the CARs;
  • (ii) The reliability of the safety performance indicators as required by paragraph 700.249(2)(b) of the CARs;
  • (iii) The procedures that will be used to monitor the effects of the variance required under subsection 700.248(1) and 700.219(3) of the CARs including:
    • (A) The method of determining the representative number of flights as required by subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs.
  • (iv) The methods that will be used under subsection 700.248(3) of the CARs to develop corrective actions to remedy an adverse effect of the variance; and
  • (v) The methods that will be used under subsection 700.248(4) of the CARs to assess the effectiveness of the corrective actions.

11.0 Safety case submission and approval

11.1 Remaining FRMS components

(1) For paragraphs 700.214(1)(c) and (d), and sections 700.218, and 700.219 of the CARs, establish and implement the following FRMS components:

• (a) Fatigue risk management promotion program; and
• (b) Fatigue risk management system quality assurance program.

Note: This can be done while the safety case is being developed and validated.

Note: Guidance with respect to development and implementation of FRMS components is found in Advisory Circular 700-046.

11.2 The initial audit

(1) For section 700.231 of the CARs, after the safety case is validated, conduct an initial audit to confirm whether the FRMS is fully implemented and functioning as intended.

(2) Compliance with the FRMS requirements is a condition of the exemption so it is essential that the initial audit verify that all regulatory requirements are met. The FRMS gap analysis form (26-0851) may be a valuable input to the audit process.

(3) As required by subsection 700.231(1) of the CARS, the audit must be conducted in accordance with the process established under subsection 700.219(1) of the CARs.

• (a) If there are findings:
  • (i) determine the cause and contributing factors of the deficiencies;
  • (ii) implement preventive measures and corrective actions to address the findings;
  • (iii) assess their effectiveness; and
  • (iv) update your FRMS documentation to incorporate these actions [paragraph 700.214(3)(b) of the CARs].
• (b) Advisory Circular AC 700-046 Section 8 provides guidance and resources for FRMS audit and evaluation.
• Note: Per subsection 700.231(4) of the CARs, this step does not apply if the exemption and safety case process was completed for a previous variance and an audit has already verified that the FRMS is compliant.

11.3 Documentation and submission

(1) Once the safety case has been validated and the initial audit completed, complete the safety case documentation by stating clear conclusions to the safety case, confirming that:

• (a) the safety case has been validated in compliance with subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs; and
• (b) the fatigue risk controls, mitigation measures and corrective actions you implemented are effective in maintaining the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight at or better than the baseline level.

(2) If a safety case is not validated, it is not eligible for submission to the Minister for approval in accordance with section 700.232 of the CARs.

(3) Include in the safety case:

• (a) The fatigue and alertness data set from the one-to-two year validation period, to prove that paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs has been met.
• (b) The percentage of times the flight as conducted varied, by how much and why, from the description you provided in accordance with paragraph 700.225(2)(c) of the CARs:
  • (i) During the one-to-two year validation period; and
  • (ii) During the final 20 consecutive flights of the data set.
• (c) Data to support that any flights conducted under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs remained in compliance.
• (d) Any other supporting data and information.

(4) For section 700.232 of the CARs, submit the completed safety case to your POI, when you are satisfied that the safety case:

• (a) Has been validated, and the data collection and analysis provides evidence of this; and
• (b) Contains the information required by section 700.225 of the CARs, using the format in Appendix B which confirms:
  • (i) The FRMS has been audited in accordance with section 700.231 of the CARs;
  • (ii) The FRMS meets the requirements of Subpart 700 Division V of the CARs; and
  • (iii) The variance does not have an adverse effect on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight that is subject to the exemption.

(5) TCCA will review the submission to verify compliance with sections 700.225, 700.232 and 700.233 of the CARs. If any requirements are not met, TCCA will return the submission to the air operator.

• (a) Correct the submission to comply with regulatory requirements and send it back to your POI.

(6) TCCA will approve the safety case when it is compliant with section 700.225 of the CARs and the submission is compliant with sections 700.232 and 700.233 of the CARs (if within three years of the date on which the air operator sent the compliant NOI to TCCA), and will notify the air operator that the continuing exemption is in effect.

Note: If the safety case is not made compliant with section 700.225 of the CARs and/or the submission is not compliant with sections 700.232 and 700.233 of the CARs within three years of the date on which the air operator sent the NOI to TCCA, TCCA will notify the air operator that the exemption is not in effect and they must comply with the prescriptive requirements, including the specific prescriptive provisions from which they had been exempted.

12.0 Time limitations

(1) The time limits in subsection 700.200(3), section 700.207, paragraph 700.225(3)(a), and section 700.246 of the CARs affect how long an air operator can use an initial exemption to validate a safety case and have it approved by TCCA

(2) Subsection 700.200(3) and section 700.207 of the CARs – The initial exemption ends on the earliest of the following:

• (a) Analysis of the effect of the variance on the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness does not show any progress in developing the safety case;
• (b) Three years after the air operator sent a compliant NOI to TCCA; or
• (c) The date the continuing exemption comes into effect.

(3) Paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs – Fatigue and alertness data collection to validate the safety case must be done for not less than one year and not more than two years after the flight was first conducted under the initial exemption.

(4) Section 700.246 of the CARs – An air operator who has not submitted their validated safety case for approval within three years of sending a compliant NOI to TCCA cannot be exempted from the same provisions for the same flight(s) for two years afterwards. Table 2 shows an example situation.

Table 2

Date	Status
April 1, 2021	Air operator sends a compliant NOI to TCCA.
March 31, 2024	Air operator has not finished validating the safety case and had it approved by TCCA.
April 1, 2024	Air operator’s initial exemption expires.
April 1, 2026	Earliest date that air operator would be eligible to send TCCA an NOI to use an initial exemption from the same provision(s) for the same flight(s) in order to try again to validate a safety case.

(5) The difference between the two-year maximum validation period and the three-year maximum initial exemption period allows for time between:

• (a) Submitting the NOI and receiving TCCA’s verification of NOI compliance, before starting to conduct the flight; and
• (b) Submitting the validated safety case and receiving TC approval.

13.0 The continuing exemption

13.1 Notification and applicability

(1) Once a safety case has been approved, the air operator and flight crew members who have been exempt, in respect of a flight subject to the initial exemption continue to be exempt from the application of the same provisions for that flight and for any similar flights described in the notice of intent under subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs.

(2) When notification of approval is received from TCCA, inform (in writing) your FCMs conducting the flight that the continuing exemption is in effect.

(3) For subsection 700.234(1) of the CARs, the continuing exemption for a flight that is not conducted year-round applies to the period identified in the NOI in compliance with paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs.

(4) The exemption is limited to the period in each calendar year in which fatigue and alertness data was collected and the safety case was validated.

(5) If your operations change such that you need to conduct the flight at a different time of year, develop and validate a safety case to support operating the flight at that time of year.

13.2 Continuing exemption and safety case monitoring

(1) For subsections 700.234(2), 700.240(4) and section 700.248 of the CARs, monitor the effectiveness of the approved safety case to ensure that the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness are not adversely affected by the ongoing variance from specific prescriptive provisions. Use the procedures you implemented for subsection 700.219(3) of the CARs.

• (a) For each six-month period during which the flight is conducted under the continuing exemption, collect and analyze fatigue and alertness data pertaining to a representative number of those flights. Use the methodology you included in the approved safety case for paragraph 700.225(2)(e) and subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs.

(2) The six-month period starts when the flight is first conducted under the continuing exemption after the safety case is approved.

(3) Select a representative number of the flights conducted in each six-month period. Sample size generators which explain considerations such as population size, confidence level, and margin of error can be found at

• (a) http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html
• (b) https://www.calculator.net/sample-size-calculator.html

(4) Population size is the number of times the flight is conducted in each six-month period. The generator produces the sample size, which is the number of those flights to select for data collection and analysis to monitor the effects of the variance.

(5) For a flight that operates over a period of less than six months, collect and analyze fatigue and alertness data pertaining to a representative number of the flights conducted during the period when the flight operates.

(6) Table 3 shows an example for a flight that operates weekly for 12 weeks from June through August each year.

Table 3

Confidence Level	95%
Margin of Error	5%
Population Size	12
Sample Size	12

13.3 Adverse effect correction and notification to the Minister

(1) For subsections 700.248(3), (4) and (5) of the CARs, if an adverse effect is found through monitoring:

• (a) remedy the adverse effect of the variance within 60 days of identifying the adverse effect, for paragraphs 700.234(2)(c) and 700.240(4)(c) of the CARs;
• (b) assess the effectiveness of the corrective actions;
• (c) repeat the actions in (a) and (b) if necessary, until the adverse effect is remedied;
• (d) modify the safety case to take the corrective actions into account; and
• (e) notify your POI in writing of the safety case modification within 60 days after the modification is made.

(2) TCCA will review the changes to the safety case and inspect as necessary to verify that the modified safety case continues to comply with regulatory requirements. If any requirements are not met, TCCA will return the safety case to the air operator.

• (a) Correct the modified safety case to comply with regulatory requirements and send it back to your POI.
• (b) If the modified safety case is not made compliant with regulatory requirements, TCCA will notify the air operator that the exemption is not in effect and they must comply with the prescriptive requirements, including the specific prescriptive provisions from which they had been exempted.

(3) For paragraphs 700.234(2)(a) and 700.240(4)(a) of the CARs, maintain and continuously improve your FRMS as long as exemptions remain in effect.

• (a) Update the FRMS for any of the reasons set out in subsections 700.214(3) and 700.256(1) of the CARs.
• (b) For subsection 700.256(2) of the CARs, notify your POI in writing of the FRMS changes within 60 days after the change is made.

14.0 Exemptions for other flights and the letter of confirmation (LOC)

14.1 Applying the approved safety case to other flights

(1) Your approved safety case can be used as the basis to conduct another flight using the same continuing exemption if the other flight meets all the conditions of section 700.240 of the CARs and:

• (a) varies from the same prescriptive provision in the same manner;
• (b) is conducted over the same period in each calendar year; and
• (c) has the same baseline level.
• Note: An approved safety case that was proven in year-round conditions justified the basis for a year-round continuing exemption, whereas an approved safety case for a flight not conducted year-round was proven only during the period of the year that was specified in the NOI in compliance with paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs and therefore the continuing exemption applies only for that period in each calendar year.

14.2 Letter of confirmation requirements

(1) For subsection 700.240(2) of the CARs, prepare a Letter of Confirmation (LOC). Use the format in Appendix C to ensure your LOC contains all the information required by section 700.240 of the CARs.

(2) Consider all the prescriptive requirements that affect the planned work schedule for the FCMs who will conduct the other flight.

(3) For paragraph 700.240(2)(a) of the CARs: provide a description of the other flight that will be subject to the exemption. The description must include all of the detail outlined in section 7.3 Description of the flight subject to the exemption.

• (a) Any other information relevant to the other flight’s context in the work schedule of the FCMs who will conduct the other flight.

(4) For paragraph 700.240(2)(b) of the CARs: Identify the specific prescriptive provisions from which the other flight will vary. These must be the same as those described in the safety case.

(5) For paragraph 700.240(2)(c) of the CARs: Describe in detail how the other flight will vary from those prescriptive provisions. This must be the same as the manner described in the safety case.

(6) For paragraph 700.240(2)(d) of the CARs, include a statement that the conditions of paragraphs 700.240(1)(a) to (m) of the CARs are met including and provide the following information in your LOC:

• (a) Documentation of how the baseline level was established for the work schedule associated with the other flight you intend to conduct using the same continuing exemption.
• (b) For paragraph 700.240(1)(g), explain how the aircraft are similar in design, including similar level of automation and same class of in-flight rest facility if applicable. The purpose of this requirement is because aircraft differences can affect flight crew workload, which can impact FCM fatigue and alertness levels and have performance implications.
  • (i) For example, a B737-300 is not similar in level of automation to a B737 MAX.
• (c) For paragraph 700.240(1)(i), describe how the following factors are similar in the operating environment for the other flight you intend to conduct using the same continuing exemption:
  • (i) IFR vs. VFR operations;
  • (ii) Day vs. night operations (including “black hole” approaches);
  • (iii) Controlled vs. uncontrolled airspace and airports;
  • (iv) Airspace and airport complexity and traffic density;
  • (v) Presence vs. absence of approach aids;
  • (vi) Seasonal variations (e.g. weather and wind conditions, de-icing and low-visibility operations, time changes between Standard Time and Daylight Saving Time, onset of darkness), as such factors can affect flight duration and delays as well as FCM fatigue and alertness levels;
  • (vii) Take-offs/landings in hazardous terrain (e.g. mountainous, offshore, remote/ad hoc sites);
  • (viii) Flight crew workload;
  • (ix) Availability of flight crew support facilities (e.g. suitable accommodation, nutrition opportunities); and
  • (x) Any other factors relevant to the operating environment of the other flight.
• (d) For paragraph 700.240(1)(j): describe the hazards associated with the other flight including the fatigue-related hazards:
  • (i) For fatigue-related hazards, use the fatigue risk assessment procedures you implemented for subsection 700.216(2) of the CARs to determine whether the fatigue-related hazards and risks are similar for the other flight you intend to conduct using the same continuing exemption. Include in your LOC the risk level determined from each likelihood and severity evaluation.
• Note: Fatigue risk evaluation is explained in 6.6.2 of AC 700-046.

(7) For paragraph 700.240(2)(e) of the CARs, state the following:

• (a) The date when you expect to start conducting the other flight using the same continuing exemption; and
• (b) Whether the other flight will be conducted year-round.
  • (i) If the other flight will not be conducted year-round, identify the period in each calendar year when you expect to conduct the other flight.

14.3 Letter of confirmation submission

(1) Before conducting the other flight, send the letter of confirmation (LOC) to your POI.

(2) TCCA will review the LOC and inspect as necessary to verify that the air operator is compliant with the requirements of section 700.240 of the CARs. If any requirements are not met, TCCA will return the LOC to the air operator.

• (a) Correct the LOC to comply with regulatory requirements and send it back to your POI.

(3) When all the requirements of section 700.240 of the CARs are met, TCCA will notify the air operator that the continuing exemption is in effect for the other flight.

(4) Notify (in writing) your FCMs who will conduct the other flight that the continuing exemption is in effect for that flight.

(5) For subsection 700.240(4) and section 700.248 of the CARs, follow the procedures for monitoring the continuing exemption and safety case to ensure the effectiveness of the approved safety case in managing the fatigue and alertness levels of FCMs conducting the other flight using the same continuing exemption.

Note: If the LOC is not made compliant with section 700.240 of the CARs or the other flight does not meet the requirements of section 700.240, TCCA will notify the air operator that they cannot use the continuing exemption for the other flight and that other flight must comply with the prescriptive requirements.

15.0 TCCA oversight

(1) TCCA will inspect FRMS compliance during surveillance activities. At any time during and after the FRMS exemption process explained in this AC, TCCA may:

• (a) review your FRMS, notice(s) of intent, safety case(s), letter(s) of confirmation, and any related data, documentation and FRMS outputs;
• (b) identify non-compliance and require corrective actions to comply with regulatory requirements; and
• (c) verify that these actions have taken place.

(2) For section 700.259 of the CARs, upon request make available to TCCA your FRMS documentation and all related records and outputs of the FRMS. This will usually be reviewed during TCCA’s surveillance activities.

16.0 Information management

(1) Not applicable.

17.0 Document history

(1) Advisory Circular (AC) 700-045 Issue 03, RDIMS 17466949 (E), 17649310 (F), dated 2022-05-02, (2024-02-12 update) – Exemption and Safety Case Process for Fatigue Risk Management Systems

(2) AC 700-045 Issue 02, RDIMS 14424725 (E), 14628023 (F), dated 2020-12-12 – Exemption and Safety Case Process for Fatigue Risk Management Systems

(3) AC 700-045 Issue 01, RDIMS 12589289 (E), 13038934 (F), dated 2017-07-21 – Fatigue Risk Management System Implementation Procedures.

18.0 Contact us

For more information, please contact:

Commercial Flight Standards Division (AARTF)
E-mail: TC.FCFM-GFEC.TC@tc.gc.ca

We invite suggestions for amendment to this document. Submit your comments to:

Standards Branch Documentation Services
E-mail: AARTDocServices-ServicesdocAART@tc.gc.ca

Original signed by

Linda Kovacic
Director, Standards Branch
Civil Aviation, Transport Canada

Appendix A – Notice of intent format

[Review section 7 of this AC and section 700.206 of the CARs to ensure that the notice of intent is complete]

Date: [day/month/year]

To the attention of: [name of TCCA principal operations inspector]

Transport Canada Civil Aviation
[address of office where POI is located]

Subject: Notice of Intent pursuant to section 700.206 of the Canadian Aviation Regulations

This Notice of Intent (NOI) notifies Transport Canada that [legal name of air operator] intends to conduct a flight using an initial exemption as provided in section 700.200 of the CARs to vary from specific flight, duty and/or rest period provisions identified in this NOI.

In accordance with section 700.206 of the CARs, this NOI sets out the following:

1. Commitment statement for the FRMS [paragraph 700.206(1)(a) of the CARs]:

This NOI confirms that [legal name of air operator]:

• a. Has established, implemented and is maintaining the fatigue risk management plan and fatigue risk management process required by sections 700.215 to 700.217 of the CARs; and
• b. Commits to establish, implement and maintain a program for fatigue risk management promotion and a quality assurance program for the FRMS in accordance with sections 700.218, 700.219 and paragraph 700.214(3) of the CARs before submitting the safety case described in Section 7 below to Transport Canada for approval.

A completed form 26-0851, Fatigue Risk Management Gap Analysis Tool, is included with this submission and demonstrates that the components listed in (a) above have been assessed to the level of implemented or greater.

2. Description of flight subject to the initial exemption [paragraph 700.206(1)(b) of the CARs]:

Following is a detailed description of the flight and its context in the work schedule of the flight crew members (FCM) who will conduct the flight using the initial exemption:

[see section 7.3 of this AC]

[And if more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI]: Following is a detailed description of how each flight described above meets each of the requirements in subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs:

[see section 7.11 of this AC]

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI]: Attached to this NOI is documentation of the risk level determined from evaluation of the hazards and risks associated with each flight, including the fatigue-related hazards.

3. CAR provision(s) from which an initial exemption will be used [paragraph 700.206(1)(c) of the CARs]:

Listed below are the provision(s) in sections 700.27 to 700.72 or 700.101 to 700.135 or 702.92 to 702.98 of the CARs from which an initial exemption will be used to conduct the flight(s) while the safety case is validated:

[see section 7.4 of this AC]

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI]: [legal name of air operator] confirms that the provision(s) listed above are the same for all the flights that will be conducted using the same initial exemption.

4. Description of the variance [paragraph 700.206(1)(d) of the CARs]:

Following is a detailed description of how the flight(s) subject to the initial exemption varies from the requirements of the identified affected provision(s):

[see section 7.5 of this AC]

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI]: [legal name of air operator] confirms that the variance described above is the same for all the flights that will be conducted using the same initial exemption.

5. Scientific basis for the variance [paragraph 700.206(1)(e) of the CARs]:

Listed below is a description of the scientific basis and the scientific studies which demonstrate that the described variance is not likely to have an adverse effect on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs who conduct the flight(s) described in Section 2:

[see section 7.7 of this AC]

Attached to this NOI are copies of the scientific studies listed above.

6. Expected start date/period of flight subject to the initial exemption [paragraph 700.206(1)(f) of the CARs]:

[For a flight that is conducted year-round]: The expected date on which the flight(s) described in Section 2 will first be conducted is [day/month/year].

[For a flight that is not conducted year-round]: The expected period in each calendar year during which the initial exemption will apply to the flight(s) described in Section 2 begins on [day/month/year] and ends on [day/month/year].

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI]: [legal name of air operator] confirms that all the flights conducted using the same initial exemption operate over the same period in each calendar year.

Starting on the date on which the first flight is conducted under the initial exemption until the initial exemption no longer applies, [legal name of air operator] commits to notify Transport Canada at the frequency set out in paragraphs 700.200(1)(c) or (2)(c) of the CARs that an analysis of the variance effect on the levels of FCM fatigue and alertness is ready for review.

[see section 7.6 of this AC]

7. Description of the safety case that will be developed [paragraph 700.206(1)(g) of the CARs]:

Following (or attached) is a detailed description of the safety case that our organization will develop for the flight(s) subject to an initial exemption, to demonstrate that the described variance does not increase the level of fatigue or decrease the level of alertness of the FCMs who conduct the flight(s):

[see section 7.8 of this AC]

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI]: [legal name of air operator] confirms that all the flights that will be conducted using the same initial exemption have the same predicted baseline level of FCM fatigue/alertness, in order for the safety case to comply with paragraph 700.225(2)(d) of the CARs.

[see section 7.11 of this AC]

8. Commitment statement to validate the safety case [paragraph 700.206(1)(h) of the CARs]:

[legal name of air operator] commits to:

• a. Validate the safety case in accordance with subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs;
• b. Audit the FRMS in accordance with section 700.231 of the CARs; and
• c. Submit the validated safety case to Transport Canada for approval in accordance with section 700.232 of the CARs.

[see section 7.9 of this AC]

9. Name and contact details of person responsible for the FRMS [paragraph 700.206(1)(i) of the CARs]:

The person who is responsible for implementing our organization’s FRMS is:

[name]
[title]
[contact information]

[see section 7.10 of this AC]

Signed by the Accountable Executive for [legal name of air operator]:

Name

Signature

Title

Date

Air Operator address

Certificate Number:

 

Attachments

(1) A completed 26-0851, Fatigue Risk Management Gap Analysis Tool

(2) A Notice of Intent - Submission and Reviewer's Checklist (Form # 26-0883)

(3) [legal name of air operator’s] FRMS documentation [if applicable]

Appendix B – Safety case format

[Review section 10 of this Advisory Circular and section 700.225 of the CARs to ensure that all of the requirements of the safety case and the recommended method of compliance have been addressed.]

Date: [day/month/year]

To the attention of: [name of TCCA principal operations inspector]

Transport Canada Civil Aviation
[address of office where POI is located]

Subject: Safety case submission pursuant to sections 700.225 and 700.232 of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)

This submission notifies Transport Canada that [legal name of air operator] established and validated a safety case using an initial exemption provided in section 700.200 of the CARs to conduct the flight described in the Notice of Intent (NOI) dated [day/ month/year], in order to demonstrate that the variance described in that NOI does not increase the level of fatigue or decrease the level of alertness of the flight crew members (FCM) conducting the flight.

In accordance with sections 700.225 and 700.232 of the CARs, this submission sets out the following:

1. Introduction

[see section 10.3(1) of this AC]

2. Commitment statement for FRMS compliance [section 700.232 of the CARs]

[See section 6.2 and 11 of this AC]

[legal name of air operator] confirms:

• a. The initial audit of our organization’s FRMS has been conducted in compliance with section 700.231 of the CARs; and
• b. Our FRMS meets the requirements of Part VII, Division V of the CARs and
  • i. A completed form 26-8051, FRMS Gap Analysis Tool has been submitted for the Minister’s review.

3. Description of flight subject to the exemption [paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs]:

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

Following is a detailed description of the flight and its context in the work schedule of the FCMs conducting the flight using the exemption:

And if more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI and safety case: Following is a detailed description, with supporting data, of how each flight described above continues to meet the requirements of subsection 700.206(2) of the CARs:

4. CAR provision(s) exempted [paragraph 700.225(2)(b) of the CARs]:

[See section 10.3 of this AC]

Listed below are the provision(s) in sections 700.27 to 700.72 or 700.101 to 700.135 or 702.92 to 702.98 of the CARs from which the continuing exemption will be used to conduct the flight(s) described under paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs :

For example: subparagraph 700.29(1)(d)(iii) of the CARs.

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI and safety case]: [legal name of air operator] confirms that the provision(s) listed above are the same for all the flights conducted using the same exemption, in compliance with subsection 700.234(1) of the CARs.

5. Description of the variance [paragraph 700.225(2)(c) of the CARs]:

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

Following is a detailed description of how the flight(s) described under paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs varied from the requirements of the provision(s) listed in accordance with paragraph 700.225(2)(b) of the CARs:

The following data and information has been included to support this description:

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI and safety case]: [legal name of air operator] confirms that the variance described above is the same for all the flights conducted using the same exemption and has included the following supporting data:

6. Scientific basis for the safety case [paragraph 700.225(2)(f)of the CARs]

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

Provide a detailed description of explanation of the scientific basis of the safety case with supporting references and documentation

Listed below are the scientific studies which demonstrate that the variance described under paragraph 700.225(2)(c) of the CARs is not likely to have an adverse effect on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight(s) described under paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs:

Attached are copies of the scientific studies listed above.

7. Baseline level of fatigue and predicted variance effect

[see section 6.4 of this AC]

• a. Baseline level of FCM fatigue/alertness [paragraph 700.225(2)(d) of the CARs]:

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

Following is a description of the methods our organization used to establish the baseline level for the flight and to identify fatigue-related hazards produced by the variance described in Section 2.3:

[The following information must be included in the description or as attachments to the safety case:]

• a. The baseline levels of fatigue and alertness established using the above methodology
• b. All associated data and software output, if applicable and
• c. A description as to how this data was used to identify fatigue-related hazards and risks

[If more than one flight is encompassed by the NOI and safety case]: [legal name of air operator] certifies that the baseline level is the same for all the flights conducted using the same exemption.

• b. Variance level of FCM fatigue/alertness and comparison to the baseline

[See section 6.4 of this AC]

The predicted effect of the variance, for the purposes of the notice of intent, was determined as follows: [Describe how the variance level of FCM fatigue/alertness was determined the results of the comparison and include all supporting data]

The comparison between the predicted effect of the variance and the baseline for the purposes of the notice of intent was follows:

8. Data collection methods and data [paragraph 700.225(2)(e) of the CARs]

[see section 10.3 and section 13 of this AC]

The procedures and methods used to collect data to measure the effect of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight(s) for the safety case were as follows:

The data collection methods to be used on an ongoing basis under the continuing exemption will be as follows:

9. Procedures used to measure the effect of the variance [paragraph 700.225(2)(i) of the CARs]

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

The effect of the variance of the levels of fatigue and alertness was measured in accordance with the methods described in the notice of intent and included below. The results of each comparison are included. Including: [attach or include the following]

All data fatigue-related data collected from flight crew members in accordance with the methods described under paragraph 700.225(2)(h) of the CARs and the results of the comparison in accordance with the procedures established for paragraph 700.225(2)(i) of the CARs.

10. Variance effect analysis [paragraph 700.225(2)(g) of the CARs]

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

The fatigue and alertness data collected from flight crew members was analyzed in accordance with the procedures described in the notice of intent and included below [include the methods used to analyze the data – clearly describe any differences from the methods described in the notice of intent].

The following is a summary of the findings of the analysis, including the predicted effect of the variance as determined for the notice of intent, and the actual effect of the variance as determined through data collection and analysis.

Attached to the safety is a copy of each analysis our organization performed of the effects of the variance on the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight(s) described under paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs.

11. Fatigue risk assessment and risk controls [paragraph 700.225(2)(h) / 700.225(3)(b) of the CARs]

[see section 6.5 and 10.3 of this AC]

The fatigue risk assessments were conducted as follows [include a summary of each risk assessment conducted for the flight] in accordance with the following procedures [describe the procedures used to conduct the FRMS].

In compliance with paragraph 700.225(3)(b) of the CARs, the safety case includes:

• a. Records of all risk assessment(s) conducted
• b. The findings of the fatigue risk assessment, the fatigue-related hazards and their causes
• c. The fatigue risk controls that were implemented to mitigate the hazards and risks and the associated safety performance indicators used to measure their effectiveness.

12. Adverse effect correction and monitoring [paragraph 700.225(2)(j) of the CARs]

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

Listed below are all the mitigation measures and corrective actions our organization implemented to remedy on an ongoing basis any increase in the level of fatigue and decrease in the level of alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight(s) flights described under paragraph 700.225(2)(a) of the CARs and their associated safety performance indicators.

13. Ongoing evaluation and monitoring [paragraph 700.225(2)(k) and subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs]

[see section 10.3 of this AC]

[legal name of the air operator] will collect data in accordance with the methods described under paragraph 700.225(2)(e) of the CARs and will continue to monitor the safety case and the effectiveness of the fatigue risk management as follows:

[include, at minimum] The procedures that will be used to monitor:

• a. the effectiveness of the fatigue risk management process as required by paragraph 700.249(2)(a) of the CARs;
• b. the reliability of the safety performance indicators as required by paragraph 700.249(2)(b) of the CARs; and
• c. the procedures that will be used to monitor the effects of the variance required under section 700.248 and subsection 700.219(3) of the CARs including:
  • i. The method of determining the representative number of flights as required by subsection 700.248(2) of the CARs
  • ii. The methods that will be used under subsection 700.248(3) of the CARs to develop corrective actions to remedy an adverse effect of the variance and
  • iii. The methods that will be used under subsection 700.248(4) of the CARs to assess the effectiveness of the corrective actions and
  • iv. The procedures that will be used to modify the safety case in accordance with subsection 700.248(5) of the CARs and a commitment to notify the Minister within 60 days of that modification.

14. Safety case validation [paragraph 700.225(3)(a) of the CARs]

[see section 10.2 of this AC]:

The safety case has been validated in accordance with the requirements of subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs as follows: [Provide a detailed description of the validation of the safety case and include all supporting data]

Attached are:

• a. All fatigue and alertness data collected pertaining to each time the flight was conducted during a period of not less than one year and not more than two years, starting when the flight was first conducted under the initial exemption; and
• b. Analysis of the percentage of times the flight as conducted varied from the variance described in Section 2.3:
  • i. During the one-to-two year validation period; and
  • ii. During the final 20 consecutive flights in the data set.

[legal name of air operator] confirms that this data shows that not more than 5% of the 20 consecutive flights in the data set at the end of the one-to-two year validation period had an adverse effect greater than 5% over the baseline level.

15. Conclusions

[legal name of air operator] confirms:

• a. This safety case has been validated in compliance with subsection 700.225(3) of the CARs; and
• b. The fatigue risk controls, mitigation measures and corrective actions our organization implemented are effective in maintaining the levels of fatigue and alertness of the FCMs conducting the flight(s) described in Section 2.1 equivalent to or better than the baseline level established in accordance with Section 4.1.

16. Commitment statement for continuing exemption [subsection 700.234(2) of the CARs]:

[legal name of air operator] confirms the following:

• a. In compliance with paragraph 700.234(2)(a) of the CARs, our organization continues to maintain the FRMS in accordance with sections 700.200 to 700.259 of the CARs;
• b. In compliance with paragraph 700.234(2)(b) of the CARs, our organization continues to monitor the effectiveness of the safety case in managing the fatigue and alertness levels of FCMs conducting the flight(s) using the exemption; and
• c. In compliance with paragraph 700.234(2)(c) of the CARs, our organization will remedy any adverse effects of the variance on the fatigue and alertness levels of FCMs conducting the flight(s) using the exemption, no later than 60 days after the date on which the adverse effect is identified. 

17. Submission of safety case for approval [section 700.232 of the CARs]

[legal name of air operator] submits this validated safety case to Transport Canada for approval.

On receipt of Transport Canada’s approval of the safety case, [legal name of air operator] intends to conduct the flight(s) described in Section 2.1 using a continuing exemption in compliance with section 700.234 of the CARs to vary from the provisions identified in Section 2.2.

Signed by the Accountable Executive for [legal name of air operator]:

Name

Signature

Title

Date

Air Operator address

Certificate Number

Attachments

Appendix C – Letter of confirmation format

Date: [day/month/year]

To the attention of: [name of TCCA principal operations inspector]

Transport Canada Civil Aviation
[address of office where POI is located]

Subject: Letter of Confirmation pursuant to section 700.240 of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)

This Letter of Confirmation (LOC) notifies Transport Canada that [legal name of air operator] intends to conduct another flight that meets the conditions of section 700.240 of the CARs using the same continuing exemption from the specific flight, duty and/or rest period provisions identified in our organization’s safety case approved by Transport Canada on [day/ month/year].

In accordance with section 700.240 of the CARs, this LOC sets out the following:

1. Description of other flight subject to the same exemption [paragraph 700.240(2)(a) of the CARs]:

Following is a detailed description of the other flight and its context in the work schedule of the flight crew members (FCM) who will conduct the other flight using the same continuing exemption on the basis of the approved safety case:

[see 14.2 of this AC]

etc.

2. CAR provision(s) exempted [paragraph 700.240(2)(b) of the CARs]:

Listed below are the provision(s) in sections 700.27 to 700.72 or 700.101 to 700.135 or 702.92 to 702.98 of the CARs from which the same continuing exemption will be used to conduct the other flight described in Section 1:

For example: CAR 700.29(1)(d)(ii)

[legal name of air operator] confirms that the provision(s) listed above are the same for all the flights conducted using the same continuing exemption, in compliance with paragraph 700.240(3)(a) of the CARs.

3. Description of the variance [paragraph 700.240(2)(c) of the CARs]:

Following is a detailed description of how the other flight described in Section 1 varies from the requirements of the provision(s) listed in Section 2:

[see 14.2 of this AC]

[legal name of air operator] confirms that the variance described above is the same for all the flights conducted using the same continuing exemption, in compliance with paragraph 700.240(3)(b) of the CARs.

4. Commitment statement for other flight subject to the same exemption [paragraph 700.240(2)(d) of the CARs]

Following is a detailed description of how the other flight described in Section 1 meets each of the requirements in paragraphs 700.240(1)(b) to (m) of the CARs:

[see 14.2 of this AC]

etc.

[legal name of air operator] confirms that:

• a. The other flight described in Section 1 meets all the conditions in paragraphs 700.240(1)(a) to (m) of the CARs; and
• b. The baseline level is the same for all the flights conducted using the same continuing exemption.

Attached to this LOC is documentation of:

• a. How the baseline level was established for the work schedule associated with the other flight described in Section 1; and
• b. The risk level determined from evaluation of the fatigue-related hazards and risks associated with the other flight described in Section 1.

5. Start date/period of other flight subject to the same exemption [paragraph 700.240(2)(e) of the CARs]:

[For a flight that is conducted year-round]: The date on which the continuing exemption will apply to the other flight described in Section 1 for the first time is [day/month/year].

[For a flight that is not conducted year-round]: The period during which the continuing exemption will apply to the other flight described in Section 1 begins on [day/month/year] and ends on [day/month/year]. [See 8.1(4) of this AC]

[legal name of air operator] confirms that all the flights conducted using the same continuing exemption operate over the same period in each calendar year.

6. Commitment statement for continuing exemption [subsection 700.240(4) of the CARs]:

[legal name of air operator] confirms the following:

• a. In compliance with paragraph 700.240(4)(a) of the CARs, our organization continues to maintain the FRMS in accordance with sections 700.200 to 700.259 of the CARs;
• b. In compliance with paragraph 700.240(4)(b) of the CARs, our organization will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the approved safety case in managing the fatigue and alertness levels of FCMs conducting the other flight described in Section 1; and
• c. In compliance with paragraph 700.240(4)(c) of the CARs, our organization will remedy any adverse effects of the variance on the fatigue and alertness levels of FCMs conducting the other flight described in Section 1, no later than 60 days after the date on which the adverse effect is identified.

Signed by the Accountable Executive for [legal name of air operator]:

Name

Signature

Title

Date

Air Operator address

Certificate Number:

Attachments