Skip to content
SkyRosterBook a working session

Regulation · Part-ATS

ATS.OR.315, the article that requires a fatigue policy, not a feature

This is the shorter, less quoted of the two ATCO fatigue articles, and it is often assumed to be about software. It is not. It is about a document, a signature, and a training programme. Read it carefully and you can see exactly where it hands off to the article that is about a system.

The instrument

Regulation
(EU) 2017/373
Annex
IV, Part-ATS
Subpart
A, Section 3
Article
ATS.OR.315
Title
Fatigue
In force
Applied from January 2020

The article, verbatim

In accordance with point ATS.OR.200 (Safety Management System), an air traffic control service provider shall:

(a) develop and maintain a policy for the management of air traffic controllers' fatigue;

(b) provide air traffic controllers with information programmes on the prevention of fatigue, complementing human factors training provided in accordance with Sections 3 and 4 of Subpart D of Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2015/340.

ATS.OR.315, Regulation (EU) 2017/373, Annex IV (Part-ATS)

AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a), Fatigue Management Policy, verbatim

(a) The air traffic controllers' fatigue management policy should:

  1. declare the commitment to proactively and systematically monitor and manage fatigue and describe the expected benefits for the safety of operations;
  2. be signed by the accountable manager;
  3. address the mitigation of the operational impact of air traffic controllers' fatigue;
  4. be communicated, with visible endorsement, throughout the air traffic control service provider;
  5. include a commitment to:
    1. consider the best practices;
    2. provide appropriate resources; and
    3. enforce fatigue management as a responsibility of managers, staff involved in fatigue management procedures and air traffic controllers;
  6. be periodically reviewed to ensure it remains relevant and appropriate.

(b) In accordance with the policy in point (a), the air traffic control service provider should establish and implement:

  1. principles and procedures to enable fatigue reporting;
  2. principles and procedures for occurrence investigation and analysis to consider fatigue as contributing factor;
  3. procedures for the identification and management of the effect of fatigue on the safety of operations.
AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a), Acceptable Means of Compliance to Part-ATS

How this shows up in a rostering system

Nine policy elements. Four connect to a system. Five plainly do not.

Kept separate from the article above on purpose. Where a rostering system genuinely does something for one of these elements, we link to it. Where it does not, we say so instead of stretching a feature to fit.

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(1)

    Declare the commitment and describe the expected safety benefits

    A narrative commitment written into a policy document. A rostering system does not write it and is not the place it lives.

    Not a rostering-system function

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(2)

    Signed by the accountable manager

    Signature and accountability sit with a named person in the organisation, not with any system.

    Not a rostering-system function

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(3)

    Address the mitigation of the operational impact of fatigue

    This is the one policy element with a direct operational lever: the eight numeric limits in ATS.OR.320 are how mitigation actually happens shift by shift, not merely how it is declared.

    configured ATS.OR.320, the eight elements →

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(4)

    Be communicated, with visible endorsement, throughout the organisation

    Internal communication and management endorsement. Not a system function.

    Not a rostering-system function

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(5)

    Commit to best practice, resources, and enforcement as a shared responsibility

    The closest a rostering system gets to “enforcement” is refusing to let a shift swap stand if it would break a configured rule, enforcement of the numbers, not of the policy commitment itself.

    configured Shift swaps, checked automatically →

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(6)

    Be periodically reviewed to stay relevant and appropriate

    A policy revision is only real once it changes what the roster actually allows. Scoring an existing roster against a revised rule set, before publishing the change, is how a review gets tested rather than just filed.

    configured Check Solution →

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(b)(1)

    Principles and procedures to enable fatigue reporting

    A safety-reporting workflow. SkyRoster does not claim to be an occurrence-reporting tool, and this page will not pretend otherwise.

    Not a rostering-system function

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(b)(2)

    Occurrence investigation and analysis considering fatigue as a factor

    An investigation needs the actual duty history, not the intended one: who was on duty, on what pattern, with how much rest, before the event.

    configured Reporting, what the roster actually did →

  • AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(b)(3)

    Procedures for identifying and managing the effect of fatigue on safety

    A safety-management-system process that sits above any single roster. Out of scope for a rostering system, and stated as such rather than stretched to fit.

    Not a rostering-system function

FAQ

Questions this article actually answers

Is a rostering system enough, on its own, to satisfy ATS.OR.315?

No. ATS.OR.315 is mostly a policy and training obligation on the ANSP: a documented fatigue management policy signed by the accountable manager, plus information programmes on fatigue prevention. A rostering system does not produce a policy document or deliver training. What it operationalises is the numeric side of the policy, which lives in ATS.OR.320.

What is the relationship between ATS.OR.315 and ATS.OR.320?

ATS.OR.315 requires the fatigue management policy. ATS.OR.320 requires the rostering system that gives that policy operational teeth, in the form of eight elements the ANSP must define and enforce.

Does ATS.OR.315 require fatigue-reporting software?

It requires principles and procedures to enable fatigue reporting, under AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a)(b)(1). That is a process requirement, not a named piece of software. How the ANSP tools that process is left open.

Who has to sign the fatigue management policy?

AMC1 ATS.OR.315(a) states the policy should be signed by the accountable manager.

Does fatigue-prevention training happen under ATS.OR.315 or under the ATCO licensing regulation?

Both are linked. ATS.OR.315(b) requires ATCO fatigue information programmes complementing human factors training provided in accordance with Sections 3 and 4 of Subpart D of Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2015/340, the licensing regulation.

Ask us which four elements we actually help with.

Nine policy elements sit under ATS.OR.315. We will tell you plainly which four a rostering system touches and which five stay yours, before you sign anything.