Ramp Safety Practices (2011)

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.

3BACKGROUND In the United States, the ramp/apron area is typically managed by both airports and airlines. (Note: ramp and apron will be used interchangeably within this document.) The airport pro- vides facilities for passenger and cargo access to air trans- portation such as gates, cargo hard stands, passenger loading bridges, and fueling systems to support aircraft servicing at the terminal. Airlines establish agreements with airports for gate usage and access to facilities. Ground service operations can be managed directly by airlines or outsourced to subcontractors. These ground operations occur in the ramp areas and include a variety of services, as listed in chapter two. Airport oversight of the ramp includes development and deployment of rules and regulations and airfield driving training programs to ensure staff, tenants, and service providers adhere to standards such as complying with speed limits, wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) such as safety vests, and properly disposing of hazardous waste. Airlines and ground handlers require operational and safety training of all staff to support aircraft servicing, including use of ground service equipment (GSE) such as belt loaders, tugs, transporters, unit load devices, baggage carts, pallet loaders, and portable ground power units. Often, ground handlers require customized staff training that supports individual air- line operations or procedures. Airlines and GSPs comply with CFR 14 Part 121 training including the following: Mandated Training • Dangerous Goods • Blast and Suction • Ramp Safety—(operators typically combine ramp safety in the ramp basic training, which is not mandatory) • Annual Recurrent • Passengers with Disability. Operational/Task Training (Note: The FAA inspects and audits the completion of Operational/Task Training consid- ering it mandated by the operator and therefore resulting in ‘mandated training’). • Ramp Safety—ramp markings, operation of motorized vehicles, approaching an aircraft. • Aircraft Familiarization—typically specific to the air- craft type serviced at the specific airport location – Aircraft loading (weight and balance introduction) – Aircraft limitations (size of acceptable packages and floor weight) – Cargo compartment limitations (stacking height, bin webbing, etc.). • Aircraft Servicing—lavatory and potable water servicing – Cabin service and cabin search (now mandated by the TSA). • Receipt and Dispatch—marshaling of aircraft into the gate, chocking, off load and up load, push back, and disconnect. Typically Mandated Training requires approximately 8 hours for ramp and cargo operation personnel. Operational/ Task Training includes approximately 32 hours of classroom and on the job training (OJT). Most GSP and airlines have an extended period of OJT where a new employee works with another more experienced person before the new staff can begin operating equipment. Also airlines and GSPs comply with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) required training for PPE, etc. Airports, airlines, and ground handlers all function inde- pendently to support passenger and cargo operations through a variety of skills and services; however, in the United States no single standard or regulation exists that integrates these operations into a comprehensive ramp safety program. The FAA’s Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 139 requires safety measures such as lighting, pavement management, ice and snow removal, and foreign object debris (FOD) management for an airport operator’s ramp area. Currently, Part 139 does not mandate airport oversight of ramp operations. Recently, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) conducted an audit of the FAA as an ICAO member state, and presented a Corrective Action Plan relating to the fact that the “FAA does not regulate apron management ser- vices at aerodromes.” The audit proposed the following cor- rective actions: “1) Initiate an Airport Cooperative Research study of best practices for managing ramp safety; 2) Form a Work Group with Airports, Air Traffic, Aviation Safety, and associations to study ramp safety; and 3) Review Work Group and research studies and determine next action” (ICAO 2007). These efforts are currently underway. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objective of this synthesis project is to identify and describe the current state of ground handling practices focus- ing on safety and training measures used at airports. The tar- get audience for this report is airport operators, airlines, and ground service providers (GSPs). The synthesis report pro- vides a compilation of common practices. STUDY ELEMENTS The study approach for this project included: • Investigating the available literature on ramp safety oper- ations and training to assess the state of current practices in the United States. • Reviewing past ramp safety surveys. • Conducting new surveys and interviews of a range of commercial service and general aviation (GA) airports, airlines, and GSPs to determine current practices and gaps. • Identifying duties and responsibilities of the various air- ports, airlines, and GSPs. • Providing an overview of the airport, airline, and GSP roles in ground handling safety oversight. • Presenting a discussion of current baseline and future trends [e.g., technology, safety management systems (SMS), International Air Transport Association (IATA) Safety Audit for Ground Operations (ISAGO), ramp towers, and changing business relationships such as air- ports offering ground services.] LITERATURE AND DATA SEARCH A considerable amount of literature exists for ground han- dling practices and operations both nationally and interna- tionally. Most of the literature is directed at airline and GSP operations and includes a variety of manuals that provide guidance to and standards for ramp operations, markings, pro- cedures, accident and incident reporting, and general safety practices. Many aviation organizations such as the Flight Safety Foundation (FSF), Airports Council International (ACI), National Safety Council, ICAO, and IATA produce documents and reports on current ramp operations, practices, trends, and activities. A number of these resources were used as a foundation for this study, are described throughout this document, and are presented in the References. SURVEY As part of the Ramp Safety Practices Synthesis study data col- lection process, three electronic synthesis study surveys were sent to airports, airlines, and GSPs. The surveys focused on existing safety practices including ramp oversight; manage- ment and individual responsibilities; ramp safety; staff initial 4 and refresher safety training; standardizations in safety train- ing; safety violation practices including fines, safety audits, and inspections; and hazard reporting. A total of 48 surveys were distributed and 40 responses were collected, including 29 air- ports, 6 airlines/7 airline representatives, and 4 GSPs. Table 1 presents the total and percent responses by industry. The over- all survey response rate result was 83%. The range of airports responding to the survey included large (8), medium (7), small (6), non hub (4), and GA (4) as shown in Figure 1. Geographically, airports represented diverse areas across the nation including the states of Arkansas, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Massa- chusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Utah, and Washington State. Airline respondents included representatives from large commercial and small regional air carriers including: (1) Air Wisconsin, (2) Alaska Airlines, (3) Continental Airlines— two replies, (4) Delta Airlines, (5) Horizon Air, and (6) United Airlines. Four GSPs completed the survey including repre- sentatives of Aircraft Service International Group, Delta Global Services, Gate Gourmet, and Menzies Aviation. Survey respondents included vice presidents; directors; managers; risk, safety, and compliance officers; and opera- tions and training staff. The diverse level of technical exper- tise and managerial positions from respondents is reflected Airport Reps. Airline Reps.* GSP Reps. Total Sent 33 7 8 48 Responses 29 7 4 40 % Total 87 100 50 83 *Note: Six airlines reported with two respondents from one airline representing different organizational positions. Reps. = representatives. TABLE 1 SURVEY RESPONSES BY INDUSTRY TYPE 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 General Aviation Large Hub Medium Hub Non Hub Small Hub Co un t Airport Type FIGURE 1 Total respondents by airport type. (Which category of airport do you represent?)

5in the survey data; responses collected included insights from individuals affiliated with local, regional, and national orga- nizations. A list of survey respondent titles from airports, airlines, and GSPs is presented here. • Airfield Manager • Airport Manager—Operations • Airport Manager (2) • Airport Operations • Airport Safety Officer • Assistant Aviation Director • Assistant Director of Aviation • Assistant Terminal Manager • Compliance Officer • Deputy Director Aviation Operations • Director of Operations (4) • Director of Safety Programs • Director of Operations, Security & Environmental Compliance • Director, Ground Safety • Field Director • Graduate Associate • Ground Service Supervisor, Quality Assurance • HSE & Training Supervisor • International Regional Manager Safety & Regulatory Compliance • Manager of Operations and Maintenance • Manager Seattle Operations • Manager, Airside Operations • Manager, Occupational Safety • Manager, Safety Compliance • Operations Officer • Operations Supervisor • Regional Airport Safety and Security Officer • Regional Director • Risk Management (2) • Senior Airfield Manager • SMS Manager • Superintendent Airport Operations • System Manager, Safety & Compliance • Vice President, NW Ground Handling • Vice President, Safety, Security, and Compliance. INTERVIEWS One respondent from each of the three aviation industry groups was interviewed using an additional set of questions to further clarify and discuss survey answers. The interviewees included an Airfield Operations Manager from Seattle–Tacoma Interna- tional Airport, a Safety and Regulatory Compliance Director from Delta Airlines Global Services, and a Field Director from Delta Airlines. Interviews were approximately 20 to 40 min- utes in duration and were conducted in person or by phone. The questions and documented responses can be found in Appendix C.