Improving Stakeholder Engagement in Aircraft Accident Response Planning (2017)

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.

ACRP 10-22 Improving Stakeholder Engagement in Aircraft Accident Response Planning 18 • Workshop 3: Chesterfield County, VA; Richmond Executive Airport (FCI) o Date: October 11, 2016 o Location: Richmond Executive Airport Conference Room o 3 Participants Workshops 2 and 3 were held at locations different from the proposed plan. LSE volunteered at the last minute to replace the CWA when CWA had to cancel due to an FAA inspection conflicting with the proposed time. MCO had a change in personnel and declined to assist with the project. The research team contacted the Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB) in an attempt to take advantage of the region’s emergency management expertise. After initial positive overtures from SFB, the airport declined to continue the planning process. Thus, the final workshop was scheduled and held with a small audience at FCI where the final version of the AAMG Tool was demonstrated. A sample Phase 3 workshop agenda and survey offered to the participants is included as Appendix G. Task 16 – Deliver Draft Final Contractor’s Report and Draft Final AAMG Tool Immediately following the FCI workshop, the final feedback and minor changes were made to the AAMG Tool. The draft final version of the Guidance Tool (Version 11) is delivered via electronic means for panel review along with the Contractor’s Draft Final Report. Screenshots of representative pages of the final draft version of the AAMG Tool are included as Appendix H. Task 17 – Deliver Final Contractor’s Report and Final AAMG Tool The Contractor’s Final Report and the final version of the AAMG Tool were delivered on January 13, 2017. Conclusions At the conclusion of the project, the research team delivered a computer based Tool that airports of any size can use to assist in recruiting and educating stakeholders as members of planning teams for aircraft accident response. The AAMG Tool was seen during the Phase 3 workshops by those in the field as a very usable and useful Tool with great potential for expansion downstream. Apart from airports interested in proactively advancing their preparation efforts for accident response, it is highly likely that emergency management agencies will be users of the AAMG

ACRP 10-22 Improving Stakeholder Engagement in Aircraft Accident Response Planning 19 Tool. The potential exists that airports will acquire the Tool and then turn it over to their local emergency managers (particularly small airports) for either standalone or joint airport/emergency management use. Larger airports will likely use the Tool to assist in their planning for exercises to test their AEP, as a resource to educate their response partners, and as guidance for recruiting and educating new members of the planning team. All airports participating in the project saw the potential to expand the capabilities of the AAMG Tool into a mobile tool that could enhance response and real-time management of an emergency situation. Follow-on research to explore those possibilities would be welcomed by the airport community.