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.
26 Importance of Expectations for Program Design There is no point in trying to create an airport-to-airport mutual aid program that will not work, and the single most important factor in the beginning is for the founders to have a clear sense of the mission and how the elements of the program will match the mission. A good match will promote the program in its early stages and help sustain it during and between activations. It is important to look at the key expectations for an airport-to-airport mutual aid program. This chapter most directly applies to intrastate, regional, and national programs, but each expectation should also be considered in the other categories of programs described in Table 2 and Chapter 2 of this Guidebook. Key Expectations Control of an Affected Airport Receiving Aid All airport-to-airport mutual aid must be based on the notion of the affected airportâs manager retaining full control. If he or she is unable to exercise control, that airportâs succession plan should operate to keep control local. All incoming volunteers must remember that they are present to assist and supplement, not to take control. They must respect local cultures and procedures. Incoming volunteers should be prepared to plug into the receiving airportâs organization in ways that are appropriate to that airport and to the nature of the disaster. Strong Support from Airport Senior Management and Owners For an effective and stable airport-to-airport mutual aid program to form and thrive, there must be strong support from airport senior management and the airport owners (e.g., cities, counties, states, and authorities). This support is essential not only in the exploratory and formative phases, but also in the sustaining and activation phases. Such necessary tools as relationships with local emergency management agencies and EOCs, standing budget authorizations, and ready-to-use contracts and agreements require the support of well-informed and willing senior managers. Aviation-Related Aid Airport-to-airport mutual aid should be limited to aviation-related functions. An affected airport should be able to get aid for non-aviation functions from other sourcesâeither through local or state (e.g., the National Guard) sources. Bringing in airport experts should happen when the assistance from such volunteers is necessary to reopen the airport or to maintain its operations during unusual operations relating to a regional disaster or incident. C h a p t e r 4 Mutual Aid Expectations
Mutual aid expectations 27 Disaster-Related Aid Mutual aid should only be requested and sent in connection with disasters. Exceptions could be made for equipment outages that affect airport index and for very large scheduled events that will put extraordinary operational stress on an airport. The main reason for this is that most airports are under heavy pressure to control costs, which means very lean staffing and thus reduced capability to send volunteers to work 5 to 30 days at another airport. Another way to look at this expectation is to examine the differences between non-routine operations and routine operations of airports. An airport-to-airport mutual aid program should only be activated to help an airport maintain non-routine operations or to transition from non-routine operations to routine operations. This is the COB aspect of mutual aid. It is important to note that it does not matter whether a disaster directly damages an airport or whether a regional disaster puts unusual stress on an airportâs operations; either way, airport-to-airport mutual aid is appropriate if requested. Pull Model of Assistance Airport-to-airport mutual aid will be most effective if it is requested by an affected airport (i.e., the pull model), and the program will fail if aid is imposed on an affected airport (i.e., the push model). Assistance must always begin with a request from an airport that has been damaged, is facing imminent damage, or expects unusual operations. This is not to say that an airport-to-airport mutual aid program coordinator or knowledgeable veteran might not reach out to that airportâs management to remind it of the availability of aid and the procedure for requesting it. The request is essential, not just for boots-on-the-ground relationships, but also as part of any reimbursement and liability coverage system. Voluntary Aid Any effective airport-to-airport mutual aid program must be completely voluntary. It cannot achieve the benefits of rapid response and cost savings if it is mandatory in nature. Although members of the aid teams will go as employees of the sending airport, they will also be volunteers. The voluntary nature of the aid deals with motivation of airports to participate and has no implications for reimbursement. NIMS/ICS Basis All airport mutual aid programs must be based on NIMS/ICS in order to comply with FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-31C Airport Emergency Plans. As most airports in the United States have worked hard since 2009 to become NIMS-compliant and to create AEPs that conform to NIMS procedures, there is now a greater standardization for disaster operations at airports than there was before. This means that incoming volunteers can plug into the NIMS disaster management structure at a damaged airport more easily, quickly, and productively. Furthermore, NIMS/ICS helps to create order within functions such as communications. Communications Plan Any airport-to-airport mutual aid program must have an effective communications plan in place prior to an activation. As with any plan, adjustments will inevitably be needed in an activation, but a starting basis is essential.
28 airport-to-airport Mutual aid programs Purpose and Scope An effective airport-to-airport mutual aid program must have a clearly defined purpose and scope. Each part of its mission, organization, plans, and procedures should be tailored to the other parts and to the desired purpose and scope. Furthermore, as more programs form and become active, those with different scopes and those with specialized or general purposes need to be mutually cognizant and shape themselves to cooperate or at least not interfere with each other. Self-Sustaining Teams Any aid teams sent to an airport in connection with a disaster area must be self-sustaining. They must not add to the burden of the local airport staff or local relief efforts. Costs and Funding Any airport that joins an airport-to-airport mutual aid program should act as if it will have to fund all of its own costs and never be reimbursed, while knowing that if it follows the procedures in Chapters 7 and 8 of this Guidebook, it will be fully or nearly fully reimbursed. With strong support from senior management and good planning by the potential leaders of aid teams, costs can be controlled, documented, and recouped; however, in every case, the sending airport will have to front the costs, and reimbursement may take months or years. An airportâs most important partner in reimbursement matters is its city or county emergency management agency, which is the connection to the state emergency management agency, EMAC, and FEMA. These connections are most important for interstate assistance. Liaison with Other Entities There are many stakeholders at airports who can affect the success of an airport-to-airport mutual aid program at any stage of the programâs formation, existence, and activation. Therefore, it is useful to consult with these stakeholders during the design of an airport-to-airport mutual aid program and the development of its operational doctrine. It is important to limit this liaison purely to matters dealing with the airport-to-airport mutual aid program. There are other appropriate avenues for dealing with each of the stakeholders on other types of airport business. Airlines Airlines need to understand the COB value of an airport-to-airport mutual aid program and its importance to the restoration of routine operations after a disaster. This will help avoid any misunderstanding about costs, rates, and charges if the airportâs employees are sent to another airport or if equipment is loaned, thus making the airport appear to be over-indexed. In addition, airlines sometimes help with the logistics and transportation of airport-to-airport mutual aid teams. Airlines have communications capabilities that could serve as backup to the airport-to-airport mutual aid programâs primary communications systems. Lastly, if an international airport-to-airport mutual aid program is ever developed, airlines are skilled at dealing with international differences in laws, customs, languages, and procedures. These are the usual factors that are stated as barriers to any international airport-to-airport mutual aid program. Government Agencies Good mutual understanding and working relationships are essential between an airport-to- airport mutual aid program and the government agencies that will encounter it at a damaged
Mutual aid expectations 29 airport. Some of these agencies will normally be present at the airport during routine opera- tions and continue to be present after a disaster. This includes the FAA, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), possibly the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and usually law enforcement agencies. In fact, the FAA, TSA, and CBP have created their own go-teams to augment the efforts of their local employees at an affected airport in dealing with operational, security, and immigration/customs issues, respectively. The agencies that are present during routine operations are typically joined by others during disasters. These include FEMA, U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), the National Guard, and state and local emergency management agencies. Other government agencies become involved, but do so indirectly (e.g., EMAC, state aviation officers, and aeronautical bureaus). Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) NGOs (e.g., the American Red Cross and Salvation Army) may also be on the scene and may possibly interact with the volunteers from the airport-to-airport mutual aid program. Professional Organizations The AAAE and ACI-NA have played an influential role in the development of airport-to-airport mutual aid programs in the United States and can continue to aid the programsâ development through education and exposure by using conferences and publications as channels. The specialized airport groupsâAirport Law Enforcement Agency Network (ALEAN), the ARFF Working Group, and the Index E ARFF Chiefs Organizationâcan similarly spread the word and communicate interest in their aspects of airport-to-airport mutual aid programs. Relationships with Stakeholders Although the airport-to-airport mutual aid programâs volunteers will have a specialized mis- sion, be self-sustaining, and be under the auspices of the local airport, it is wise for the program to build bridges and awareness among all of these other stakeholders. This will help avoid any mutual interference as the disaster response evolves and the types and number of players trying to use the airport changes. The relationships with local and state emergency management agencies are the most important, and each airport involved in an airport-to-airport mutual aid program should educate their local and state emergency management agencies about the mission and capabilities of the program, as well as the possible need for FEMA mission numbers in connection with a Presidentially declared emergency or major disaster. Summary of Expected Functions Table 3 is based on the findings of this study and the expert opinions of the airport managers interviewed and presents the functions of an airport-to-airport mutual aid program that may reasonably be expected, those that are not very feasible, and some that should absolutely be avoided. The columns represent the same categories of airport-to-airport mutual aid programs that were introduced in Chapter 2, and the rows represent a comprehensive list of historic and realistically projected functions for airport-to-airport mutual aid programs. The number in each cell of the matrix runs from 5 (demonstrated by an existing program) and 4 (highly feasible) to 0 (should be absolutely avoided). In shaping the expectations of any individual or group with an interest in starting an airport- to-airport mutual aid program, Table 3 offers a range of possibilities. It is not meant to imply that any given program should perform every function scored above a certain level in its column. The message throughout this Guidebook is that the program should choose its mission, state it clearly, and then match organization and procedures to the mission.
30 airport-to-airport Mutual aid programs Ty pical Cate gories of Aid Ty pe of Airport-to-Airport Mutual Aid Program Interstate Functions during Disasters One-on-One Partnership Single-O wn er Multi-Airport Nearby Multiple Airports Intrastate Concentrated Regional Widespread Regional Nationa l International Matching needs and resources 5 a 5 4 5 4 5 4 Ev ent management/common operating picture 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 3 Rapid engineering assessment 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 Liaison to state EOC 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Airport management replacement 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Operational supplement 2 3 3 4 4 5 4 4 Operational backfill 3 3 4 4 4 5 4 4 Maintenance and repair 3 3 3 4 4 5 4 3 Electrical 2 3 3 4 4 5 4 3 Information technolog y (IT) 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 Communications 2 3 3 4 4 5 4 3 HVAC 2 3 3 4 4 5 4 3 Jet wa ys /Airstairs 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 ARFF equipment 2 3 5 5 5 5 4 1 Fuel sy stems 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 1 Security 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 1 Law enforcement 3 5 4 4 4 5 4 1 Emergency generator 3 3 4 5 5 5 4 4 Emergency or temporary lighting 3 3 4 4 5 5 4 4 Debris removal 2 3 4 4 1 0 0 2 Functions during Emergencies Post-disaster planning and liaison 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 Regional disaster recovery 3 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 Backup EOC 5 4 4 4 5 4 2 1 Backup operations center 5 4 4 4 5 5 4 1 Functions during Non-Disasters Snow clearance 3 3 5 5 5 1 1 1 ARFF equipment 3 4 3 4 5 3 4 1 Aircraft recovery equipment 5 5 5 4 4 3 2 1 Shelter management 2 2 2 2 0 0 1 1 Special events 3 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 Other Functions Sharing lessons learned 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 Peer rev ie w 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 Exercise observ ers 3 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 a The coding system is as follows: 5âHighly suitable (existing), 4âHighly suitable (theoretical), 3âMedium feasibility, 2âLow feasibility, 1âNon-feasible, and 0âUndesirable. Table 3. Expected functions of an airport-to-airport mutual aid program.
