Click for next page ( 12


The National Academies | 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 11
11 for responses by airport type. Comments regarding meeting DATA SOURCES format and frequency indicated that many airports consoli- date safety meetings with other standing meetings such as Research relating to a comprehensive set of ramp safety acci- station manager meetings and anticipate that in some cases dent and incident data was difficult to find; indeed, according meeting frequency will change from monthly to quarterly to a report by the U.S. GAO on aviation runway and ramp and that urgent issues will be resolved as needed. safety, efforts to improve airport ramp safety are hindered by a lack of complete accident and incident data. Such data Airports were surveyed regarding collaborative FOD pro- could help the FAA and aviation industry to understand the grams with tenants to assess whether airlines and airports nature and extent of the problem as a first step to identifying worked together on ramp safety initiatives. "Does your air- what actions are needed to reduce ramp accidents and inci- port manage or collaborate with airlines and ground service dents. The GAO found no comprehensive nonfatal injury providers to inspect for FOD on the ramp/apron?" Nearly all data on ramp accidents or incidents. According to the GAO respondents (90%) replied "Yes" to the question. The 10% report, the federal government has generally taken an indirect who answered "No" are GA and small hub airports with no role overseeing ramp safety; airlines and airports typically commercial services. One of the GA airports commented that control the ramp areas using their own policies and proce- as part of the upcoming SMS implementation at his airport, a dures. Meanwhile, some airlines and airports have initiated their own efforts to address ramp safety and aviation organi- FOD program will be incorporated. Table 8 lists comments zations have begun collecting ramp accident and incident from airports regarding oversight and collaborative efforts of data (Dillingham 2007). FOD programs. In a 2002 Report to Congress regarding Injuries and Fatal- ities of Workers Struck by Vehicles on Airport Aprons, the GUIDES AND MANUALS FAA noted the difficulty of obtaining nonfatality data. "The lack of comprehensive nonfatal injury data makes it impos- Despite the lack of a national ramp operations standard or sible to determine accurately the number and severity of non- regulation, numerous guides, handbooks, and manuals exist fatal struck by injuries. The data suggest that airline industry that provide assistance with ramp operations especially with workers actually sustain significantly fewer struck by injuries regard to safety. A number of national and international orga- than workers in most other industries" (FAA 2002). Addi- nizations provide training in conjunction with ramp and safety tionally, the FSF noted the limited amount of data available documentation. Additionally, many offer magazines, online for its 2004 study of damage and injury on airport ramps resources, and blogs that provide up-to-date information and (Vandel 2004). According to a Flight International article evolving trends and tools. Table 9 provides a list of resources "Commercial aviation may be justifiably proud of its safety collected as part of this synthesis study; the list is not consid- in the air, but its industrial injury record on the ground is one ered comprehensive and is intended to reflect readily available of the worst among all businesses. According to a recent information regarding ramp operations, safety, and training study, the injury rate to employees of scheduled airlines is in industry. 3.5 times as bad as it is among miners, and the vast majority TABLE 8 COMMENTS ON FOD COLLABORATION WITH AIRLINES AND GSPS No. Type Comment 1 Large Hub Regular FOD events and occasional inspections by Operations 2 Small Hub We bring up this topic often in the monthly airline managers meeting. 3 Large Hub The airport does FOD walks at least twice a year. The tenants also are required to keep their lease space and rented space clear of FOD. Some tenants are doing a weekly FOD walk in their area which helps out greatly. 4 Non Hub Part of our driver/pedestrian training includes identification and disposal of various types of FOD. 5 Large Hub Our major stakeholder airline manages its own FOD program in the terminals they occupy. The airport conducts ramp inspections including FOD pick-up twice a month at the common use gates in Terminal D. The major airline also has a FOD day once a year in which the airport board participates. 6 Large Hub Assigned airside staff submits names of individuals observed conducting FOD inspections. At the monthly Partnership Meeting a drawing from the collected names is held and one individual is selected to receive a reward. Annually, the company that had the most monthly rewards receives a plaque from the airport. 7 Medium Hub We conduct monthly runway FOD walks. 8 Non Hub FOD control is a requirement of lease. Comments for: "Does your airport manage or collaborate with airlines and GSPs to inspect for FOD on the ramp/apron?"

OCR for page 11
12 TABLE 9 INDUSTRY RAMP OPERATIONS AND SAFETY RESOURCES Organization Acronym Handbooks, Guides, Website Brief Description Standards Air Charter Safety ACSF ACSF Industry http://www.acsf.aero/ Provides safety standards that cover aircraft ground Foundation Audit Standard handling and servicing. The intent of this standard is to Operator Documents raise the level of safety during ground operations by reviewing a ground operator's organization and management, manuals and related documentation, applicable training programs, contract ground handling, auditing, and quality assurance. The standards also focus on specific ground operator's programs including parking of aircraft, towing and taxiing of aircraft, fueling and servicing, baggage loading, and others. Air Transport Association ATA Recommended https://publications.airlines.org/ Multiple documents including those related to safety and Guidelines for ramp operations Preventing and Investigating Aircraft Ground Damage Airports Council ACI Airside Safety http://www.airports.org/cda/aci_ Provides airside managers with a comprehensive set of International Handbook and Apron common/display/main/aci_conte guidelines for safety and markings. Markings and Signs nt07_banners.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1- Handbook 6-5733_725_2 Australasian Aviation AAGSC Ground safety http://www.aagsc.org/rips.htm AAGSC has developed both video and computer-based Ground Safety Council practices and and resources, including standard practices for ramp safety. training material http://www.aagsc.org/training. htm Boeing Boeing Ramp Error http://www.atec.or.jp/SMS_WS_ Structured process used to investigate errors made by Decision Aid Boeing_REDA%20Users%20 ramp personnel. (REDA) Users Guide.pdf Guide (one of many sites providing this document) Civil Aviation Authority CAA CAP 642 Airside http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ U.K. ramp safety operations and practices including risk Safety Management Cap642.pdf analysis Flight Safety Foundation FSF Ground Accident http://flightsafety.org/archives- A set of e-tools on ramp operations and safety practices Prevention (GAP) and-resources including but not limited to Ramp Operational Safety Procedures. International Air IATA IATA Safety Audit http://www.iata.org/ps/certificati Ground Services Audit program documentation including Transport Association for Ground on/isago/Pages/index.aspx an audit checklist. Operators (ISAGO) Field reference publication containing recommended Airport Handling http://www.iata.org/ps/publicatio industry standards and procedures on airside safety; load Manual (AHM) ns/Pages/ahm.aspx control; baggage, cargo, and mail handling; aircraft movement control; aircraft loading; and departure control systems. International Civil ICAO Annexes http://store1.icao.int/mainpage. A variety of documents including Annex 14 for Aviation Organization ch2 (costs vary by document) Aerodrome operations and Annex 13 for accident incident investigation. Safety Management http://www.icao.int/anb/safetym Manual (SMM) anagement/DOC_9859_FULL_ EN.pdf (publication is free) National Air NATA Safety 1st and http://www.nata.aero/web/page/ Program promotes safety for ground operations that Transportation Fueling 557/sectionid/557/pagelevel/1/ provides a number of training programs and best Association module/toggle/interior.aspx management practices to enhance safety for general aviation service providers. Occupational Safety and OSHA Safety management http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/vpp/ VPP sets performance-based criteria for a managed safety Health Administration VPP program and health system, invites sites to apply, and then Voluntary Protection assesses applicants against these criteria. Program U.S. National Safety NSC Aviation Ground http://shop.nsc.org/Aviation- The handbook sets forth the guidelines for safely Council Operations Safety Ground-Operation-Safety- accomplishing most ground operations associated with Handbook Handbook-6th-Ed-P1753.aspx aircraft and applicable to aviation ground operations. VPP = Voluntary Protection Program.

OCR for page 11
13 of airline workers' injuries occur on the airside of airports" ACI surveys its members on an annual basis to document (Learmount 2005). and produce the ACI Survey on Apron Incidents/Accidents. In the most recent survey, which was conducted in 2007, the total The U.S. GAO reviewed ramp fatality data from 2001 number of respondents reflected 158 airports, representing only through 2006 from FAA, OSHA, and the NTSB, and found a portion of U.S. airport accident and incident statistics. Data that these agencies had investigated 29 fatal ramp accidents from the 2006/2007 report were compiled and published in during that time. The majority of the fatalities in these acci- 2009 and are presented in Tables 10 and 11. In Table 10, the dents were ground workers (17). The results of the GAO sur- rate is based on accidents and incidents per 1,000 departures. vey indicated that the action FAA, OSHA, airport, or airlines could take with the greatest potential for preventing ramp Based on ACI member airports worldwide reporting to accidents was promoting a safety culture in the ramp area ACI in the annual Survey of Apron Incidents and Accidents, (Dillingham 2007). the following category percentages (assessed from the total data collected) of damage were determined for the time period Chamberlin et al. (1996) examined 182 ramp operation 20062007: equipment to equipment damage (45.3%); equip- incident reports from the U.S. Aviation Safety Reporting Sys- ment to property damage (24.6%); damage to stationary air- tem for the period 19841994 and found that incidents on the craft by apron equipment (22.2%); damage to moving aircraft ramps tend to occur more for arriving flights than for depart- (6.7%); and property or equipment damage by jet blast (1.2%). ing flights, more so at the parking area than at the entry/exit Total injuries to personnel on the ramp for the year 2007 was points to the ramp, and that there are fewer incidents or acci- 251 (1 fatal; 35 severe; 215 minor), whereas injuries to pas- dents when more ground crew were present. They went on to sengers totaled 222 (0 fatal; 25 severe; 197 minor). suggest a number of actions that could be taken to mitigate accidents, such as providing better training of marshallers Comparison of 2006 and 2007 ACI Data and wingwalkers to include scenario-based training, main- taining highly visible pavement markings, and establishing and The total number of incidents and accidents reported in 2007, enforcing vehicle speed limits on the ramp. 3,026, was a 15% increase from the 2,623 recorded in 2006. The number of aircraft movements documented in the ACI Additionally, in a recent study, FSF discovered that the survey increased by one million. This resulted in a higher rate largest proportion--43%--of ramp accidents happen in the of incidents and accidents per 1,000 movements from 0.230 "gate stop" area. Next is the gate entry and exit area with 39%, in 2006 to 0.245 in 2007. The rate of incidents and accidents and the remaining 18% happen between the gate entry/exit involving aircraft increased from 0.073 in 2006 to 0.078 in and the runway. There are far more incidents involving 2007; similarly, the rate of incidents and accidents not in- damage to stationary aircraft than to moving ones, and even volving aircraft increased from 0.157 to 0.167. The rate of more incidents--in simple numbers rather than value--are injury to personnel and passengers decreased in 2007 to "equipment-to-equipment" damage (Learmount 2005). 0.038, a 13% decrease from 2006 when the rate was 0.043. TABLE 10 ACI RAMP INCIDENT AND ACCIDENT DATA CAUSES OF INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS (I&A) (2007) Number of participating airports: 158 Number of aircraft movements: 12,360,425 Incidents and Accidents Number % Total Rate I&A involving aircraft 966 31.92 0.078 I&A involving equipment and property 2,060 68.08 0.167 Total 3,026 100.0 0.245 Incidents and Accidents Involving Aircraft Damage to stationary aircraft by equipment 725 75.05 0.059 Damage to moving aircraft 241 24.95 0.019 Total 966 100.0 0.078 Incidents and Accidents Involving Equipment and Property Caused by jet blast 27 1.31 0.002 Equipment to equipment damage 1,393 67.62 0.113 Equipment to property damage 640 31.07 0.052 Total 2,060 100.0 0.167 Injuries Fatal 1 0.21 0.000 Severe 60 12.68 0.005 Minor 412 87.10 0.033 Total 473 100.0 0.038 Source: ACI Survey on Apron Incidents/Accidents (2009).