National Academies Press: OpenBook

Ramp Safety Practices (2011)

Chapter: Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety

« Previous: Chapter Two - Ramp Operations and Safety
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Ramp Safety Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14599.
×
Page 17
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Ramp Safety Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14599.
×
Page 18
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Ramp Safety Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14599.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Ramp Safety Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14599.
×
Page 20
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Ramp Safety Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14599.
×
Page 21
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Three - Current Practices in Ramp Safety." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Ramp Safety Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14599.
×
Page 22

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

17 This chapter focuses specifically on existing safety training practices including type and duration of training, recurring training, and frequency and re-training procedures for safety violations or infractions. GENERAL In a 1997 study by GSE Today, 35% of respondents (ramp operation managers around the world) reported that reasons for ramp accidents included inadequate training and inexperi- enced crews (Prill 1999). The GSE Today survey also indicated that these inadequacies in training and experience resulted from inconsistency in standards, operating practices, and manage- ment that can be overcome through initial and recurrent train- ing programs for employees. As part of this Ramp Safety Synthesis study, airports, airlines, and GSPs were asked a variety of questions regard- ing training formats, frequency, and strategies as part of the survey questionnaire. Based on the results of the survey, 37.9% of airport respondents indicated they require airside safety training for tenants [not including Air Operations Area (AOA) or Airport Movement Area (AMA) driving]. One hundred percent of reporting airlines and GSPs responded that all ground support staff are required to participate in safety training. Although the study findings may not provide a large representative sample, survey results may offer a baseline for analyzing the type of training required by the typical avia- tion organizations. See Figure 5 for a breakdown of training requirements by airport type and Table 13 for comments col- lected from the survey outlining airside safety requirements from airport respondents. Most of the airport-required train- ing relates to driving programs, FOD, construction, passen- ger loading bridges, and pedestrian safety including use of PPE (safety vests). Safety training that personnel receive is directly related to company policy and the day-to-day responsibilities of each individual. Variation on training is a result of airport, airline, GSP, FBO, and tenant policy and is typically subject to change dependent on job-specific duties. Supplementary or special- ized instruction for ground operations such as de-icing, aircraft towing and pushback, and marshalling is required to ensure that techniques, equipment, and safety operations are consis- tently maintained. The most common required training is fuel service, which is audited to verify that operators are meeting FAA 14 CFR section 139.321 (e)(1) requirements. A further breakdown of safety training based on airport type is provided in Table 14 and airport associated comments are presented in Table 15. Many of these training courses are delivered by general orientation sessions and video, classroom, and on-the- job training formats. An overview of training approaches is provided in Table 16 to demonstrate how personnel are trained on each required element. TRAINING REQUIREMENTS The ground service area is a complex network of vehicles and individuals operating together to accomplish the same under- lying goal. This goal however may be vulnerable, with loosely defined ramp procedures, poor communication, and disparity within ramp practices. Parallel safety training among airports, airlines, and GSPs helps close the gap in errors by the ground crew. The following paragraphs outline the training require- ments that airports, airlines, and GSPs provided as current practices. Airports The complexities within training begin with the type of instruc- tion that airports must offer to a variety of constituents. Tables 14, 15, and 16 in the previous section outline the vari- ation in training requirements for ground handlers at airports. Training is directly influenced by the type of service delivered at airports. Training components may include, but are not lim- ited to, general orientation, hands-on (supervised), video train- ing, classroom training, on-line training, and rules and regula- tions review. Of the surveyed airports, all agreed that it is important that a mixture of these practices be utilized to pro- vide training to tenants. Redundancy in fueling training is the most commonly reported practice that airports have employed. According the results of the survey, 36% of respondents com- bine both airport and tenant safety training. Recurrent or refresher training can be delivered after spe- cific periods of time have passed to promote safety standards and make changes in safety practices. The always changing landscapes of airport ramp areas introduce hazards that can- not always be recognized by initial training alone. In a study conducted by Prill (1999), 45% of respondents stated that a lack of motivation and knowledge among crew members were the primary reasons for ramp accidents. To ensure thorough CHAPTER THREE CURRENT PRACTICES IN RAMP SAFETY

18 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 General Aviation Large Hub Medium Hub Non Hub Small Hub Co un t Airport Ramp Safety Training Required by Type No Yes FIGURE 5 Airport ramp safety training required. [Does your airport require airside safety training for tenants (not including AOA or AMA driving)?] TABLE 13 AIRPORT RAMP SAFETY TRAINING COMMENTS Type Response Comment General Aviation No Staff is required to complete general safety training as an organization and specific safety training based on their job requirements. Large Hub No Basic safety training is part of driver training. Also, airport tenants expected to provide ramp safety training to employees. Large Hub No Cal OSHA requires safety training and tenants are held to their own internal policies and procedures as well as compliance with Cal OSHA requirements. Large Hub No We hope to develop this as a separate training module to our existing AOA/AMA driving class under our on-going SMS implementation plan. Medium Hub No The airport requires tenants to have a safety program and to follow the airport’s rules and regulations. The airport requires contractors to go through safety training prior to starting a job. FOD is required safety training for tenants. Safety vest requirements are trained to tenants. Medium Hub Yes Under SMS we will Non Hub No Atlanta Fire Department requires training for fuelers. Non Hub No Everyone with AOA access receives Driver/Pedestrian Training to obtain airport access. Small Hub No Required—Only related to fueling—receiving, handling, and dispensing. Airport does offer an optional class for Aircraft Maintenance Technicians who are involved with towing aircraft. Small Hub No We only require airside safety training for those with ramp or movement area drivers privileges. Tenants often have required safety training for their employees who work around aircraft. Small Hub No Only for jet bridge operations. Comments for: “Does your airport require airside safety training for tenants (not including AOA or AMA driving)?” TABLE 14 SAFETY TRAINING REQUIRED OF GSPS (BY AIRPORTS) Airport Type None Fueling Baggage Handling A/C Handling and Loading A/C Ground Movement Passenger Handling A/C Maintenance Lav and Water Catering Cargo and Mail Handling A/C Load Control Other Services General Aviation 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Large Hub 2 5 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 Medium Hub 0 4 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 0 0 Non Hub 0 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 Small Hub 1 4 4 4 4 3 2 4 2 2 3 1 Total Count 4 20 10 10 11 7 6 10 6 6 4 4 “What types of service providers at your airport are required to have safety training?”

19 understanding of responsibilities, recurrent training programs that aimed to reduce complacency might be used. As outlined in the results of the participating airports in this study, 62.1% do not require airside refresher safety training for tenants (18 of 29 participants). Just over 24% (7 of 29 par- ticipants) of survey respondents stated that they are currently engaged in refresher training during annual recurrent fueling examinations and access control badge renewal processes. If recurrent training is practiced, it is delivered by either the air- port or the tenant 66.7% of the time. Annual recurrent training is the most common timeframe for refresher courses and is used 58.3% of the time. According to the results of this synthesis survey, 85.2% (23 of 27 airport respondents) believe that additional safety training would benefit their airport, its tenants, and GSPs (two airport respondents skipped this question). A common suggestion from the survey respondents was to control training variables by relying on airline safety training programs, but enhance out- comes with monthly safety meetings to address key issues. The major gap within the current state of enhanced safety training is that a high rate of respondents understands the benefits of increased training, but only 57.1% (16 of 28 participants) are planning to increase the amount of safety training. In contrast, 28.6% of respondents stated they had no plans in the foresee- able future to increase the amount of safety training. TABLE 15 AIRPORT TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR GROUND HANDLER COMMENTS Comments for: “What types of service providers at your airport are required to have safety training? Select all that apply.” Type Comment General Aviation All general aviation line services including fueling, marshalling, and towing General Aviation The airport provides for all of the listed service except A/C maintenance and catering. We do have our own internal safety training for these functions. Large Hub All companies are required to have safety training programs. Fueling is one that the airport ensures is done by train the trainer and by conducting audits. In general the tenants train their own employees on the rules of the company and what is best practice for the industry. Safety vests is another aspect of required safety training for all people who work on the airfield; vestsare to be worn when 15 feet or more from the building. Medium Hub We do not control what the air carriers do in terms of training. We do know that air carriers conduct training with their employees and contractors for the abovementioned. Since we do provide fueling and lav/water services, safety training is required for those services. Medium Hub Any safety training provided is the responsibility of the tenant company. Medium Hub No safety training is governed by the airport authority for these types of services. Safety training is per individual company policy. Non Hub Bangor Airport is the FBO for the airport and provides all ground services so airport employees perform the above services and receive airport safety training. Non Hub NATA Safety 1st Program is used by the airport FBOs and meets FAA Part 139 requirements. Specific safety training for airlines, ground handlers, and aircraft maintenance is provided by each carrier separately. Non Hub Anyone with a badge must have security and airport safety training. The airport only requires fuelers to have job-specific training. TABLE 16 SERVICE PROVIDERS AND SAFETY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (BY AIRPORTS) Training Types All Service Providers Fueling Baggage Handling A/C Handling and Loading A/C Ground Movement Passenger Handling A/C Maintenance Lav and Water Catering Cargo and Mail Handling A/C Load Control General Orientation 9 12 5 4 4 3 0 4 1 1 2 Hands-on/ Supervised 3 11 5 4 4 4 0 4 1 1 2 Video Training 4 11 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 0 1 Classroom Training 2 10 4 3 3 2 1 2 1 0 1 On-line Training 2 8 2 3 3 2 1 1 0 0 1 Rules and Regulations Review 7 13 2 3 3 2 1 2 0 0 0 Other 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Count 29 66 20 19 19 15 4 15 4 2 7 “If yes, what type of safety training is required? Are training requirements different by service? Select all that apply.”

20 Airlines As previously mentioned, all seven reporting airlines (two respondents from one airline) require all ground support staff to participate in safety training. In addition, six of the seven respondents require the same safety training for contracted company staff providing ground support services. The remain- ing airline elaborated on its training requirements by stating that all training is not the same, but standard training covers all Part 121 regulatory requirements. Furthermore, any required OSHA training and development is the responsibility of the vendor and is stated in the contract. Depicted in Figure 6 are the types of safety training prac- tices required by airlines. Specific training ranges from every individual receiving a general safety orientation to only half of airline personnel receiving training in push back and com- munication practices. The airlines reported using both on- the-job and instructional training delivery methods to pro- mote the most thorough guidance as possible. The amount of time dedicated to training varies from respondent to respondent. Three of the six responding airlines reported that their duration period for training was three or more days. Each of the two categories, one day or less and one to two days, had one respondent each. All reporting air- lines also required refresher training for ground services. The common practice within respondents was initial safety train- ing upon hire, with annual recurrent training on the anniver- sary of employment (five of seven respondents). Training is conducted twice a year or every two years for the remaining two airlines, with each option having one response. Every participating airline provides the same level of ground han- dling safety training at all locations. To further facilitate consistent safe operations, all seven of the participating airlines audit their safety training require- ments to identify gaps and trends to be addressed in future training. Part of identifying these hazards is increasing train- ing. Based on the results, five of the seven responding air- lines believe that additional safety training would benefit air- line ground handling services. As with airport respondents, only three of the surveyed airlines are planning to increase the amount of safety training to personnel and/or GSPs. The other four airlines responded that they have no plans to increase safety training or that it does not apply because safety is a daily expectation. Ground Service Providers Without examining statistics and previous studies, a common misconception within the industry is that there is an even dis- tribution of incidents during arrivals and departures. It is important to note that 58% of the time incidents occur during aircraft arrival and 35% during departure (Chamberlin et al. n.d.). Standardized procedures may account for this dispar- ity; however, training aimed at overcoming inconsistency has proven useful. Four GSPs participated in this synthesis study. All four stated they train 100% of employees on general safety, OSHA standards, ramp operations, and airfield driving. Only two of the participating agencies went on to say they required training in push back operations, marshalling, communica- tion, and “other” (other was explained by participants as air- craft servicing and transportation of dangerous goods). Train- ing was conducted using a mixture of classroom and on-the-job instruction by all four respondents. Figure 7 illustrates the required training elements used by GSPs. All four GSPs stated that they conduct in-house training to control variables and external training gaps. The minimum training duration provided to employees was two to three days (one of four reporting GSPs), whereas the remaining three GSPs answered three or more days. One survey participant 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 General Safety Orientation OSHA Ramp Operations Push Back Driving Marshalling Communication (phraseology) Co un t Airline Types of Ground Handling Training FIGURE 6 Airlines ground handling safety training. (If yes, what type of safety training is required? Select all that apply.)

21 provided further insight into its training duration requirements: “We have a 30-day classroom training program in CSR Certi- fication for our drivers that operate front-loads, then they par- ticipate in a ramp experimental component working with an experienced mentor. The trainee is monitored and assessed three times during training and must be certified by a manager before release for full duty.” Another major practice executed by the participants was standardized training at all locations. Requirements are set within company policy and carried out in initial and refresher training courses. To combat changes made in training require- ments, all four respondents reported they require safety refresher training. Refresher training is provided annually by three of the respondents and biannually by one. Based on the survey results, the refresher training courses were conducted by airports 25% of the time, by the GSPs 50% of the time, and by both airport and GSPs the remaining 25% of the time. To further maximize the results of their training, all four of the respondents stated they audit the programs and measure outcomes against procedures. This practice helps identify gaps within the training program and provides the necessary information for management to shape training requirements. In doing so, two of the GSPs identify the benefit of additional safety training, whereas one believes its current training pro- cedures are adequate. No matter the perceived benefit, none of the participating providers have plans to increase the amount of training given to their employees. STANDARDIZED SAFETY TRAINING PROGRAM The survey contained a uniform question asking if the partic- ipants would be interested in a standardized safety training program. A total of 39 answers by airports, airlines, and GSPs were given to the choices of “Yes,” “No,” and “Other.” A combined rate from all reporting survey participants indicated that 74.4% of respondents would like to see a standardized safety training program, whereas 7.7% are against such a prac- tice. The remaining 17.9% were “Other” and stated various rea- sons why such a practice may or may not work at every loca- tion. Comments regarding the standardization included airport uniqueness, inclusion of specific features that are commonly omitted from standardized material, specific training require- ments, the amount and type of training is a corporate decision, and consistency of IATA processes and procedures vary depending on clientele therefore training may vary. Depicted in Tables 17 and 18 are the responses and comments from all participants on standardized safety training. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 General safety orientation OSHA Ramp Operations Push Back Driving Marshalling Communication (phraseology) Other Co un t GSP Safety Training FIGURE 7 GSP safety training. (If yes, what types of safety training are required? Select all that apply.) TABLE 17 STANDARDIZED TRAINING Respondent Total Surveyed Yes No Other No Reply Airport 29 24 1 4 0 Airline 7 3 1 2 1 GSP 4 2 1 1 0 Total Count 40 29 3 7 1 “Would you like to see a standardized safety training program used by airports, airlines, and ground service providers, similar to the NATA fuel service training program?”

EXAMPLES OF STANDARDIZED SAFETY TRAINING A number of organizations provide literature and training mod- ules to promote safe ramp operations. They include IATA, FSF, ACI, National Air Transportation Association (NATA), Air Charter Safety Foundation, and Australasian Aviation Ground Safety Council (AAGSC). As previously presented, a commonplace activity to gauge what type of training is war- ranted begins with program auditing. Many of the participants stated they currently audit their safety training program to iden- tify gaps in training procedures. Two examples of common safety training practices are the safety audit for ground opera- tions (ISAGO) developed by IATA and the Ground Accident Prevention (GAP) program developed by the FSF. ISAGO The implementation of ISAGO aims to improve safety and cut airline costs by drastically reducing ground accidents and injuries. Refer to chapter six for additional information regard- ing the ISAGO program. Flight Safety Foundation The FSF launched the GAP program in 2003 to address the increasing number and cost of ramp incidents and accidents on airport ramps and adjacent taxiways, and during the movement of aircraft into and out of hangars (retrieved from FSF.org 2011). GAP contains a number of electronic and online train- ing modules and is built on considerable work conducted by the ACI, AAGSC, European Regions Airline Association, IATA, ICAO, NATA, National Business Aviation Associa- tion, Regional Airline Association, and other organizations. One part of the GAP program is a three-part video on tow- ing corporate/business aircraft that provides best practices for the safe use of aircraft-tow vehicles, safely towing aircraft, and general ramp safety. FSF Ramp Operational Safety Procedures is a standard operating procedures (SOPs) template that includes industry best practices and guidelines for a wide range of ramp proce- dures. The document is intended to assist ramp supervisors in the development or improvement of their organizations’ writ- ten SOPs. The template is presented in Microsoft Word for- mat (doc) to facilitate customization by the user, including revision, deletion, and addition of information as necessary to tailor the document to the organization’s ramp activities. The FSF Ramp Operational Safety Procedures template is a product of the GAP program that includes industry best prac- tices and guidelines for a wide range of ramp procedures and is intended to assist individual users in the development of unique written SOPs. According to the FSF, the guidelines presented in the document are not intended to supersede gov- ernment regulations or to replace manufacturers’ or operators’ policies, practices, or requirements. TABLE 18 STANDARDIZED TRAINING COMMENTS Type Response Comment General Aviation No No comment provided General Aviation Other No comment provided General Aviation Other No comment provided General Aviation Other Like to develop more airport-specific training, but industry standard training provides for great supplemental material, such as the American Association of Airport Executives/ANTN series. Large Hub Other This would be a significant improvement, especially if this training was automated and easily accessible. GSP No There is too much variation for an overall generic training program. GSP Other I am not sure if that is possible as not every one of our customers is consistent with processes and procedures, so training is different by client and location. Airline Yes Simply because of the close proximity of our work to some of the other airlines operating at our location Airline Other It depends upon the program and the specific requirements. If every aircraft were the same and all of the equipment was the same and the airlines and the airport authorities could mutually agree on those procedures involved, the answer would be yes. Airline Other Corporate decision Comments for “Would you like to see a standardized safety training program used by airports, airlines, and ground service providers, similar to the NATA fuel service training program?” 22

Next: Chapter Four - Duties, Roles, Responsibilities, and Oversight »
Ramp Safety Practices Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Synthesis 29: Ramp Safety Practices addresses the current state of ground handling practices, focusing on safety measures and training.

Issues addressed in the report include ramp safety operations, staff roles and responsibilities, safety training, audit and inspection programs, safety violation programs, and collaborative safety initiatives, such as foreign object debris programs.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!