Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 81

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 80
80 Safety Management Systems for Airports 5.6 Treat and Monitor Risk This process should include a follow-up risk assessment to ensure that no new hazards are introduced by the selected mitigation control. Looking for Alternatives Risk treatment alternatives should address the risk probability, the risk severity, or both. The following examples were classified according to one of the categories, either reducing likelihood or reducing consequences; however, in most cases the effect is on both the likelihood and the severity simultaneously. Reducing Likelihood -- Implement the airport SMS -- Raise awareness and/or control (e.g., safety campaigns, NOTAMs, briefings, enforce air- port rules) -- Provide training (e.g., on-the-job training, recurrent training on SOPs, improve skills) -- Establishing procedures (e.g., avoid operations under certain conditions, develop or mod- ify SOPs, intensify frequency of sweeping areas subject to FOD) -- Avoid the risk by ceasing the activity (e.g., close taxiway for operations during mainte- nance activities) -- Increase supervision (e.g., escorting non-airport workers, monitor ramp activities, inten- sify inspections) -- Improve infrastructure and equipment (e.g., install a surface movement guidance and control system (SMGCS), improve signage, use magnetic bars and FOD containers) Reducing Severity -- Improve emergency response (e.g., reduce emergency response time, improve coordina- tion and capability) -- Improve infrastructure (e.g., extend runway safety areas, remove obstacles, cover drainage ditches) -- Establish SOPs (e.g., define procedures for strong wind conditions) -- Create special programs (e.g., wildlife programs to avoid presence of large birds, establish rules for reduced speed at the ramp) Going back to the example depicted in Figure 9 for the jet blast hazard, airport operations eval- uated two alternatives for treating the risk: 1. Close the taxiway to aircraft operations 2. Issue a NOTAM and request ATC to caution aircraft pilots to use idle power when entering the runway Option 1 was selected because there was no guarantee the pilots would remember the ATC and NOTAM requests. It is important to note that this option may require a formal process to obtain FAA authorization and close the taxiway. When possible, select and appoint a group of staff (task group or work group) who are knowl- edgeable on the airport sector or activity that you are targeting (i.e., where the hazard associated to the risk in question is located, be it maintenance, operations, etc.), to identify possible risk mitigation strategies. This is an ad hoc group assigned to evaluate a specific hazard associated with the activities with which this group is familiar. For example, if the hazard is related to emer- gency operations, the ARFF staff is probably the best group to identify mitigation controls because that is the activity with which they are most familiar.

OCR for page 80
Safety Risk Management 81 Risk Mitigation Strategies The ultimate purpose of hazard identification, risk determination, and analysis is to prepare for risk mitigation. Risk mitigation measures may work through reducing the probability of occurrence, the severity of the consequences, or both. This section discusses the importance of risk mitigation planning and describes approaches to mitigating safety risks. Some risks, once identified, can be eliminated or reduced readily, particularly those found during the daily self-inspections. However, other risks are much more difficult to mitigate, particularly high-impact, low-probability risks. Therefore, risk mitigation and control actions may require long-term efforts by the airport. When developing risk mitigating strategies, be careful with solutions that are based on human performance; this is the least reliable sort of "solution." The identification of appropriate risk mitigation measures requires a good understanding of why the hazard is likely to manifest and the factors contributing to the probability and/or the severity of its consequences. Achieving the desired level of risk reduction may require the implementation of more than one mitigation measure. The risk mitigation approach selected may include avoidance, transfer, assumption, or control. Risk Avoidance. prevent the occurrence by selecting a different approach or by not participating in the operation, procedure, or system development. For example, when reha- bilitating a runway, the airport can avoid many construction risks by closing the runway; however, if the airport has only one runway, the best option may be to go with off-peak con- struction and close the runway during certain periods of the day. An avoidance strategy is one that involves all the stakeholders associated with the proposed change. Ceasing opera- tions is always an avoidance alternative when timely mitigation actions are not available for unacceptable risks. Risk Transfer. shift the ownership of risk to another party. One transfers risk primarily to assign ownership to the organization or operation most capable of managing it. The receiving party must accept the risk, which should be documented (e.g., via a Letter of Agreement). Exam- ples of risk transfer in airport activities may include Issuing NOTAMs to warn pilots on hazardous conditions (e.g., low runway skid resistance). In this case the airport leaves the pilot to judge if the operation is safe. Transferring safety management of ramp areas to airlines exclusively using those areas of the airport. While transfer of risk is theoretically an acceptable means of dealing with risk, it cannot be the only method of mitigation used to treat high risk associated with a hazard. The stakeholder must still mitigate the safety risk to medium or low before it can be accepted. Moreover, when identi- fied hazards (and their corresponding risks) are outside the scope of the SMS (e.g., OSHA, phys- ical, and information security), you should transfer the management and mitigation of these risks to the appropriate airport organizational unit.