Cuestión 3.1 del Pan-América - Equipo Regional de Seguridad Operacional de la Aviación (PA-RAST)

Transcription

1 Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional Décimo Cuarta Reunión del Comité Directivo Ejecutivo del Grupo Regional de Seguridad Operacional de la Aviación Panamérica (RASG-PA ESC/14) Seattle, Estados Unidos, de agosto de 2012 RASG-PA ESC/14 NE/15 12/07/12 Cuestión 3.1 del Orden del Día: Pan-América - Equipo Regional de Seguridad Operacional de la Aviación (PA-RAST) Familiarización del Programa sobre Valoración de Aeropuertos Extranjeros de Seguridad Operacional (FASAP) de la FAA (Presentada por Estados Unidos) RESUMEN Esta metodología del programa propuesta para la valoración de seguridad operacional de aeropuertos no intenta remplazar la orientación de la OACI o de la CAA, con respecto a la seguridad operacional de aeropuertos y a su diseño. Más bien, tiene la intención de asistir a los evaluadores de seguridad operacional de aeropuertos (particularmente transportistas aéreos volando rutas internacionales), dándole sentido a la existencia de las guías existentes de seguridad operacional de aeropuertos OACI/CAA, operaciones y orientación del diseño, al intentar aplicar una evaluación de riesgo y metodología de mitigación a la evaluación de seguridad operacional de aeropuertos y diseño. Un transportista aéreo, o CAA, podría integrar esta metodología (o partes de la metodología) con una revisión del proceso actual para determinar estándares aceptables de aeropuertos. La selección de estándares críticos sobre seguridad operacional detallados en este programa debería de ser tema para la revisión y consideración para que el usuario de este programa antes de su aplicación para uso operacional. Esta propuesta de programa intentó seleccionar los estándares que reflejaban lo que se pudiera considerar como elementos críticos de un programa de certificación de aeródromo en función. Sin embargo, la selección de estos estándares debería de ser sujeta a los requerimientos locales y escrutinio profesional. Esta propuesta de programa estaba actualizada con los SARPs de la OACI y orientación técnica como ahí se indica (fecha y volumen). Las referencias detalladas en este documento pueden estar obsoletas y, por lo tanto, deber de ser actualizadas tan pronto como los cambios sean aplicables. Referencias: Anexo 14 de la OACI, Volumen 1, Operaciones y Diseño de Aeropuertos Serie de documentos de la OACI 9184, 9137, 9157 y Documentos 9776, 9476, 9859 y CFR, Parte 139, Certificación de Aeropuertos 150 Circulares Informativas de la FAA, relacionadas con la certificación y seguridad operacional de aeropuertos Objetivos Estratégicos Esta nota de estudio se relaciona con los Objetivos estratégicos A Seguridad operacional

2 RASG-PA ESC/14 NE/ Introducción 1.1 Los transportistas aéreos tienen la responsabilidad de la seguridad operacional de las personas que transportan. Esa tarea de asegurar el grado más alto de seguridad operacional pública aplica a los transportistas aéreos tanto en el área internacional, como en las operaciones nacionales. Un elemento esencial de esa responsabilidad es la necesidad de asegurar que todos los aeropuertos que los transportistas aéreos usan, cumplan con niveles de seguridad y estandarización reconocidos internacionalmente. 2. Discusión 2.1 El Volumen I del Anexo 14 de la OACI requiere que los Estados miembros desarrollen programas de certificación de aeropuertos. También define estándares mínimos operacionales de diseño y seguridad operacional para todos los aeropuertos internacionales. 2.2 La aplicación diligente de los estándares y disposiciones mínimos del Anexo 14 aseguraría un estándar aceptable de seguridad en cualquier aeródromo. Sin embargo, desafortunadamente ha encontrado que algunos Estados no han puesto la debida diligencia a la aplicación de los estándares y prácticas recomendadas del Anexo 14 y por lo tanto, aeropuertos en esos Estados puedan no cumplir con el nivel internacional reconocido de seguridad descrito en el Anexo. La mayoría de los aeropuertos extranjeros son seguros y operan en cumplimiento con la mayoría de los requerimientos de diseño y seguridad del Anexo 14. Sin embargo, la desafortunada realidad es que algunas ubicaciones de aeropuertos no están en cumplimiento con el Anexo 14 pues no cumplen con estándares básicos de seguridad de diseño de aeródromos y operación. 2.3 Para complicar los asuntos, el proceso que muchos transportistas aéreos usan para evaluar ubicaciones de aeropuertos internacionales no habla específicamente de los requerimientos del Anexo 14 y sus estándares fuera de hacer una referencia general a los requerimientos de la certificación de aeropuertos. Como resultado, al proceso de evaluación y de revisión de listas de verificación usado por algunos transportistas aéreos se ha encontrado en algunos momentos, que le falta la habilidad para evaluar efectivamente una nueva o existente ubicación de servicio de aeropuerto. 2.4 Para hacer el proceso actual aún más difícil, la edición más actualizada del Anexo 14, Volumen I, enlista más de 1,000 normas y métodos recomendados (SARPS), y eso no incluye las guías y directivas encontradas en los manuales asociados de la OACI de Aeródromos y Ayudas Terrestres (AGA). EL número de SARPS y guías de referencia AGA es demasiado grande para muchos transportistas aéreos para completar una revisión de un destino extranjero nuevo para un posible servicio. Como resultado, la revisión de los requerimientos del Anexo 14 pudo haberse convertido en tanta carga que se ignora entendiblemente. 2.5 También es lógico asumir que no todos los SARPS son iguales. Por lo tanto sería seguro asumir además que algunas SARPS son más críticas en el aspecto de seguridad que otras para un programa de certificación de aeródromo funcional y por lo tanto para un nivel de estandarización de seguridad de aeropuerto.

3 3 RASG-PA ESC/13 NE/ Este programa propuesto ha intentado tratar el problema al seleccionar de las SARPS del Anexo 14 solo las normas más destacadas y relevantes, aquellas que son esenciales para un nivel mínimo de seguridad aeroportuaria y aquellas que son un gran indicativo de un programa de certificación de Aeródromos funcional. Están identificadas en este programa como Puntos de Cumplimiento de Seguridad (SCI), Nivel I (designado como Críticos para la Seguridad, SCI-I) a Nivel II y Nivel III (designados como de Seguridad Significativa SSI-II/III), y son identificados en la lista de verificación e información de programa provistos aquí. 2.7 El análisis del estatus de los 35 puntos críticos crítico para la seguridad del Nivel I (SCI) en aeropuertos, y la consideración de los SSI s restantes de niveles II y III identificados en este programa, pueden asegurar que un transportista aéreo esté enterado de todas las áreas de no cumplimiento del Anexo 14 de un aeropuerto, la aplicación de este programa ayudaría en asegurar el nivel de estandarización de la seguridad para las operaciones de transportistas aéreos en todas las locaciones de aeródromos con operaciones. 2.8 La propuesta del programa en su totalidad está adjunta para su revisión. (Apéndice), sólo en inglés. 3. Acción sugerida 3.1 La Reunión está invitada a: a) notar la información en esta nota de estudio; b) solicitar que RASG-PA 14 promueva el programa de Evaluación de Seguridad de Aeropuertos Extranjeros; y c) que RASG-PA por medio de sus miembros promueva la revisión de elementos voluntarios del programa de la FASAP.

4 Page 1 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 International Airport Review IASR Program Proposal (DRAFT/PROPOSED) Note/Disclaimer: This proposed program methodology for airport safety assessments is for consideration only. It is not intended to replace existing CAA or ICAO guidance regarding airport safety and design. But rather, it is intended to assist airport safety evaluators (particularly air carriers flying international routes) in making sense of existing ICAO/CAA airport safety, operations and design guidance, while attempting to apply a risk evaluation and mitigation methodology to the assessment of airport safety and design. An air carrier, or CAA, could integrate this methodology (or parts of this methodology) with existing review processes to determine acceptable airport standards. The selection of safety critical standards detailed in this program should be subject to review and consideration by the user of this program before applying it to operational use. This program proposal attempted to select the standards that reflected what might be considered the critical elements of a functioning aerodrome certification program. However, the selection of these standards should be subject to local requirements and professional scrutiny. This program proposal was current with ICAO SARPs and technical guidance as indicated (date and volume) within. The references detailed in this document may be outdated and thus must be updated as changes become applicable.

5 Page 2 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Purpose/Introduction Air carriers have a responsibility for the safety of the persons that they transport. That duty to ensure the highest degree of public safety applies to air carrier operations in the international arena as well as during domestic operations. An essential element of that responsibility is the need to ensure that the all airports that air carriers use meet internationally recognized levels of safety and standardization. ICAO Annex 14, Volume I, requires that member states develop aerodrome certification programs. It also defines minimum operational, design and safety standards for all international airports. Diligent application of the minimum standards and provisions of Annex 14 would ensure an acceptable standard of safety at any aerodrome. However, it has unfortunately been found that certain States have not applied due diligence to the application of the standards and recommended practices of Annex 14, and thus airports in those States may not meet the internationally recognized level of safety described in the annex. Most foreign airports are safe and operate in compliance with the majority of Annex 14 design and safety requirements. However, the unfortunate reality is that some airport locations are not in compliance with Annex 14 and thus do not meet basic safety standards of airport design and operation. To complicate matters, the process that many air carriers use to assess international airport locations does not specifically address Annex 14 requirements and standards other than to make general reference to the requirements of airport certification. As a result, the assessment process and review checklists used by some air carriers have been found at times to be lacking in their ability to effectively assess a new or existing airport service location. To make the current process even more difficult, the most current edition of Annex 14, Volume I, lists over 1000 standards and recommended practices (SARPS) and that does not include the guidance and directives found in the associated ICAO Aerodrome and Ground Aids (AGA) manuals. The number of SARPS and AGA guidance references is far too large for many air carriers to address while completing a review of a new foreign destination for possible service. As a result, the review of Annex 14 requirements may have become so burdensome that is understandably ignored. It is also logical to assume that not all SARPS are equal. It would thus be safe to further assume that some SARPS are more safety critical than others to a functioning aerodrome certification program and therefore to a standardized level of airport safety. This program proposal has attempted to address that problem by culling the Annex 14 SARPS to select only the most salient and relevant standards those are essential to a minimum level of airport safety and those that are by and large indicative of a functioning airport certification program. They are identified in this program as Compliance s (SCI), Level I (designated as, SCI-I) to Level II and Level III (designated as safety significant, SSI-II/III), and are identified in the checklists and program information provided here. Analysis of the status of the 35 Level I safety critical (SCI) elements at an airport, and consideration of the remaining Level II and Level III SSI s identified in this program, would help to ensure that an air carrier is aware of all areas of airport non-compliance with Annex 14. Combined with the development of appropriate risk mitigation strategies for areas of airport non-compliance, application of this program would aid in ensuring a standardized level of safety for air carrier operations at all airport operating locations.

6 Page 3 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Index Program Instructions and Guidance Page 04 Abbreviated safety checklist ( s, SCI, Level I only) Page 06 Full compliance checklist (Level I, II and III safety compliance items) Page 07 Misc. Annex 14 tables Page 28 Risk mitigation principles and strategies Page 31 Mitigation Strategy Tracking Form Page 34 References and database recommendations Page 39 Notes pages Page 40

7 Page 4 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Instructions - Application of this program is entirely voluntary. However, to ensure a reasonable and structured safety assessment of a new airport service location, air carriers are strongly encouraged to apply the provisions detailed here. - The ultimate responsibility for the completion of a proper safety assessment of an airport rests solely with the air carrier making application to fly into a foreign destination. - The standards listed in the checklists below are representative of those standards and recommended practices (SARPS) found in ICAO Annex 14, Volume I, through Amendment 10. They are not all inclusive but rather have been identified as the most safety critical and identified as those whose application of and compliance with has been determined to be indicative of a working/viable aerodrome certification program. Additional review of Annex 14 and the associated AGA manuals would at times be prudent and necessary during any foreign airport assessment. - Assessment process steps: o Air carriers when considering a new foreign location service should start their analysis process with a complete review of all published data concerning the new location. IASA, IFALPA, IATA, ICAO and others may have available copies of written audits and assessments that they may have completed. Checking IASA/IATA/IFALPA/ICAO reports, reviewing the required Annex 15 AIP data for the location, and possibly acquiring proprietary data that may have been developed for the location, will help to focus the assessment of a location s compliance with Annex 14 safety provisions. An initial call to the airport manager to ask if he/she is aware of any audits/inspections/assessments that may have been completed by other carriers, by aircraft manufacturers, or by other organizations, would then help you as you may be able to call the organization and request any safety data that they may have developed. o Air carriers should complete their existing review process and associated checklist(s) in compliance with their existing internal procedures. o At a minimum air carriers should verify (preferably on-site and in-person) each of the 35 Level I ( Issues, SCIs) identified in this program. At locations with a proven positive safety record and an established record of dependability, much of the assessment can be done third party through interviews and records checks. At other locations, nothing will substitute for a physical check of runways, aprons, RFF, and other areas as allowed by the airport and CAA. o Although not required for compliance with the program proposal, as time and situation permit, air carriers should verify all Level II and Level III SSI s. o A report of non-compliance in any of the 35 (Level I) safety critical items identified in this program should prompt the air carrier to develop an appropriate risk mitigation strategy for that specific issue (see page 21 for additional guidance). Any risk mitigation strategy proposed should be coordinated with the airport and the CAA regulating office. - It is recommended that air carriers apply this checklist review to all existing foreign airport service locations to establish a safety baseline for each airport. - It is recommended that periodic safety assessment reviews be completed for all existing service locations to ensure airport/caa continued compliance with the provisions of Annex Most critical, is the recommendation for air carriers to apply the checklist safety review to each new location being considered for service before route-change approvals are requested from the certificating office.

8 Page 5 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Definitions: - Category I airports (Compliant): At locations with a proven record of safety compliance the air carrier, and the regulating office, may feel comfortable with the assessment being performed entirely by the air carrier in coordination with the airport authority and the CAA. This will be the case in the majority of situations. - Category II airports (Questionable): At locations where there is less confidence in the airport staff and structure, the air carrier may request assistance from the CAA regulating office. Assistance from the CAA regulating office may run the gamut from technical guidance to physical assistance during the station site visit. Discuss the airport, its requirements, and your concerns with your regulating office. - Category III airports (Noncompliant): Finally at locations where there is intense concern regarding the level of airport safety provided or with an identified lack of Annex 14 compliance, the air carrier may ask the regulating CAA office for professional assistance from other resources. If you have concerns, express them early and begin a dialogue with your regulating office. - s (Level I, SCI): Those safety items, related to non-compliance with established Annex 14, Volume I, provisions that if allowed to remain unmitigated would pose a substantial hazard and which could cause grave damage to aircraft or persons operating at the airport in question. s designated as SCI Level I must be addressed through a mitigation strategy developed in coordination between the air carrier, the CAA and airport management. - s (Level II/III, SSI): Those Level II and Level III safety items, related to non-compliance with established Annex 14, Volume I, provisions that if allowed to remain unmitigated, would pose a hazard and which could cause serious damage to aircraft or persons operating at the airport in question. Air carriers should consider addressing Level II and III SSIs through the use of a mitigation plan especially if there are multiple Level II and III discrepancies noted during completion of the assessment.

9 Page 6 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Aerodrome s (Level I, SCI) in Compliance with Annex 14, Volume I, Aerodrome Design and Operations. Abbreviated List. SCI Number Abbreviated Description Level I s Comments 1 Is there a State regulation requiring aerodrome certification? 2 Is the aerodrome certificated by the State? 3 Is there an approved aerodrome manual? 4 Are the markings the correct color? 5 Are runway hold position markings provided? 6 Are correct approach lighting systems provided? 7 Are runway edge lights provided as required? 8 Are runway threshold and end lights provided as needed? 9 Are runway centerline/touchdown zone lights provided (Category II/III precision runways)? 10 Are stop-bar lights provided for low visibility operations? 11 Are runway guard lights provided as appropriate? 12 Is a sign system established? 13 Are mandatory sign systems installed? 14 Has an emergency plan been established? 15 Does the emergency plan address all required emergencies? 16 Does the emergency plan coordinate all involved parties? 17 Has the AEP been tested (full-scale, table-top)? 18 Are appropriate RFF services provided? 19 Is sufficient RFF agent (foam, dry chemical) available? 20 Can RFF vehicles meet discharge rate requirements? 21 Can RFF vehicles meet 3 minute response time? 22 Are firefighters adequately trained? 23 Are adequate runway strip and RESA areas provided? 24 Do the runway(s) provide adequate friction characteristics? 25 Is there a preventive maintenance program for visual aids? 26 Does the airport have a wind direction indicator? 27 Are visual approach slope indicators installed as required? 28 Are pavements kept clear of FOD? 29 Does the airport self-inspect and condition report? 30 Are items required to be in the strips/resa, frangible? 31 Does the airport have a system to assess wildlife hazards? 32 Does the airport take corrective action for wildlife hazards? 33 If needed, does the airport have a snow-plan? 34 Is adequate primary electrical power available? 35 Is adequate secondary electrical power available? Aerodrome Compliance Yes / No

10 Page 7 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Aerodrome Certification Standards Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 1 SCI 2 Has the State developed regulations/criteria for the certification of airports? Is the airport currently certificated by the regulating authority (CAA) of the State? If certificated by the State, has the airport been inspected by the State regulating authority (CAA)? If so, when, and are the inspection findings available? Has the State/Airport been audited by the ICAO USOAP audit program? Has the State filed Article 38 Notification of Differences to Annex 14, that affect this review of Annex 14, Volume I, critical safety compliance Note: Not all State Regulations for aerodrome certification are fully in compliance with Annex 14. Thus, it may be prudent (if feasible) to verify through the aerodrome or CAA that the certificating regulation drafted by the State fully meets the requirements of Annex 14, Volume I. 1.4 N/A N/A N/A Review audit reports at or request from State agency regulating aerodrome certification. Information regarding Article 38 filings can be obtained either from the AIP (Aeronautical Information Publication), the International Flight Information Manual (IFIM) or from the State regulator responsible for airport certification (CAA).

11 Page 8 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 What source documents/processes were used to conduct your assessment? N/A Source documents/processes used to conduct airport assessments range from physical inspection, discussion with airport officials, discussion with CAA officials, AIP review, review of proprietary service information (Jeppesen, private airport expeditor service, etc. etc.).

12 Page 9 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Aerodrome Operating Guidance Description of Standard Annex 14, and Recommended Practice Volume I, (SARP) SARP Reference Comments SCI 3 Does the airport have a current/approved aerodrome manual? Guidance for the development of the manual can be found in Annex 14, and in ICAO Document 9774, Manual on the Certification of Aerodromes.

13 Page 10 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Marking Systems Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 4 Are runway markings white, taxiway markings yellow and apron stand markings of a contrasting (conspicuous) color? Recommends that where operations take place at night, pavement markings should be enhanced with reflective materials. Additional guidance regarding reflectivity can be found in ICAO Document 9157, part 4, Visual aids. SCI 5 Are runway hold-position markings provided where necessary along all runway hold positions? Recommended Practice states that where enhanced conspicuity is required the dimensions of the markings should be doubled in size (Figure 5-7). x Are pattern A and pattern B hold position markings used appropriately? x Are the following markings provided where appropriate? Runway designation Runway centerline Threshold Aiming point Touchdown Runway side-stripe Taxiway centerline Runway turn-pad x Are road-holding position markings provided at all road entrances to a to

14 Page 11 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 runway? x If used, are surface painted mandatory instruction markings and/or surface painted information markings displayed IAW Annex 14 requirements and standards? x Are apron safety lines provided to define the areas for use by ground vehicles and other aircraft servicing equipment, to provide safe separation from aircraft? (RP) This is a recommended practice offered to provide markings on a paved apron delineating parking configurations and ground facilities (i.e. wing-tip clearance lines and service road boundary lines).

15 Page 12 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Lighting Systems Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 6 Are approach lighting systems available that provide at a minimum a simple approach system for non-precision runways; Cat I systems for precision Cat I runways; and Cat II/III for Cat II/III precision runways? Annex 14 specifications for runway approach lighting systems are found at: Simple Approach Lighting Systems Cat I Precision Approach Systems Cat II/III Precision Approach Systems SCI 7 Are runway edge-lights provided for runways used at night or for precision runways used day or night? SCI 8 Are runway threshold and runway end lights provided on runways with runway edge lights? SCI 9 Are runway centerline and touchdown zone lights provided on Precision Cat II/III runways? SCI 10 Are Stop-Bar lights provided for low-visibility operations as required? Stop-bar lights are to be provided at every runway hold position used below 550M RVR unless appropriate aids and/or operational procedures exist to prevent runway

16 Page 13 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 incursions. SCI 11 Are runway guard lights (configuration A elevated) provided at each runway/taxiway intersection associated with runways used below 550M RVR except where a stop bar is installed? x Are taxiway centerline lights installed as required? Guard lights required below 550M RVR (all traffic levels) and between M RVR and where traffic density is heavy. Recommended practice (RP): Below 550M RVR install runway guard lights with stop-bars Recommended practice (RP): Install guard lights at all locations where enhanced conspicuity is desired IAW Configuration A lights shall consist of a pair of elevated unidirectional yellow lights set on each side of the taxiway at the runway hold position as specified in table Taxiway centerline lights shall be installed on rapid exit taxiways, taxiways, & aprons used below 350M RVR except where traffic is light and other guidance aids are sufficient. x Are taxiway edge lights provided for use at night as appropriate? Taxiway edge lights are not required where taxiway centerline lights are provided or where adequate guidance can be achieved through surface illumination or other means. x Where a high-intensity lighting system is installed is there a means of intensity control? System should allow for control of light intensities to meet prevailing conditions. Approach lighting, runway edge, runway threshold, runway end, runway centerline, runway touchdown zone, and taxiway centerline should be adjustable so as to be operated at compatible levels. x Are provisions taken to ensure that nonaeronautical ground lights are adequately shielded? Lights should be adequately shielded so as to eliminate the possibility of

17 Page 14 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Sign Systems Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 12 Is a sign system established across the aerodrome to provide mandatory, location, direction and/or destination information on a movement area or to meet the provisions of an established SMGCS plan? The requirement of a SMGCS plan will be determined by airport complexity and traffic volume IAW Annex 14, and ICAO Document 9476, Surface Movement Guidance and Control Systems (SMGCS). ICAO Document 9774, Manual on Certification of Aerodromes, states that information regarding taxiway control aids and visual guidance (i.e. signs) should be incorporated into the approved aerodrome manual. SCI 13 Are mandatory instruction signs (white inscriptions on a red background) provided to denote the location(s) beyond which aircraft/vehicles shall not proceed without authorization by the aerodrome control tower? Are they placed (unless geography precludes installation in such a manner) on each side of the hold position? to Note: Mandatory signs shall include: runway designation signs; category I, II, or III hold positions signs; runway holding position signs; road holding position signs; and no-entry signs to x Are signs illuminated on runways used below 800M RVR; at night on instrument runways; or at night on code-number to Signs on Code 1-2 runways used at night should at a minimum be retro-reflective ( ).

18 Page 15 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 non-instrument runways? x Are appropriate information signs (direction, location, destination, runway exit, runway vacated, and intersection signs) provided? Are they standard in terms of color, message, location and purpose? to to Note: Information signs are either black lettering on a yellow background (for destination, information, direction, runway exit, runway vacated, and intersection take-off signs) or are yellow lettering on a black background (for location signs). See Figure 5-29 of Annex 14.

19 Page 16 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Emergency Planning and Response Capabilities Description of Standard and Annex 14, Recommended Practice Volume I, (SARP) SARP Reference Comments SCI 14 Has a written emergency plan been established? Additional guidance can be found in ICAO Document 9137, part 7, Aerodrome Emergency Planning. Additional guidance states that at a minimum the AEP should address and provide information related to: types of emergencies, agencies involved, responsibilities, name and phone numbers, and provide a grid map for emergency response and should address the type emergencies listed below. Note: the AEP is often found as part of the aerodrome manual. SCI 15 At a minimum does the emergency plan address the following: aircraft emergencies, sabotage, unlawfully seized aircraft, dangerous goods, building fires, natural disasters, public health emergencies, and emergencies that are site specific (i.e. water, mountain, or difficult terrain rescue) and discusses the requirement for planning for emergencies in difficult environments such as mountains, swamps, and water. Amendment 10 to Annex 14 (when applicable) requires public health emergencies to be addressed in the AEP. Recommendations on the development of such a plan can be acquired from a joint ICAO/ACI document published April, The guidance can be acquired from the ACI-NA website. SCI 16 Does the emergency plan coordinate response/participation of all parties (i.e. address mutual aid involvement)? Examples of mutual aid agencies include air traffic, ambulance services, local fire departments, police, hospitals, military, coast guard, harbor patrol, and other resources from the surrounding community that could provide assistance necessary to properly respond to an airfield emergency.

20 Page 17 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 SCI 17 SCI 18 Has the AEP been tested by conducting a full scale emergency exercise every two years with a partial exercise in the intervening years? Are appropriate rescue firefighting (RFF) services provided? and Additional guidance in ICAO Document 9137, part 7, Airport Emergency Planning and in ICAO Document 9137, part 1, Rescue and Firefighting RFF coverage provided by Aerodrome category (1-10) and additional guidance found in Annex 14, Volume I, table provides recommendations on the minimum number of firefighting vehicles by aerodrome category. SCI 19 Is sufficient agent (foam and complementary agent) provided to meet the aerodrome category for RFF services? 9.2.8, 9.2.9, Annex 14, Volume I, provides guidance in table 9-2. SCI 20 SCI 21 SCI 22 Can RFF service vehicles meet agent discharge rates specified in table 9-2? Can the RFF vehicles meet a response time of three minutes to any point of each operational runway? Are all firefighters adequately trained to perform their duties? This table is provided as an appendix to this checklist Response times are based on optimum visibility and surface conditions. A two minute response time is recommended as an operational objective Training guidance for both initial and recurrent training found in ICAO Document 9137, Part 1. Minimum training subjects recommended are: airport familiarization, aircraft familiarization, RFF personnel safety, emergency communications and alarms, use of appliances, application of agent(s), aircraft evacuation, fore fighting operations, adapting structural equipment to RFF, dangerous goods, familiarization with the emergency plan, and protective and respiratory equipment.

21 Page 18 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 x Are fixed and mobile emergency operations centers available for use during an emergency? x Are responding firefighters provided with appropriate personnel protective equipment (PPE)? (RP) This is a recommended Practice Minimum PPE equipment recommendations of helmet, gloves, boots, proximity-suit, SCBA and SCBA mask are found in ICAO Document 9137, Part 1. x Is rescue equipment appropriate to the level of operations (including medical equipment) provided? x Is there a system of preventive maintenance established to ensure RFF vehicle availability? x Are there alerting systems between ATC and the fire station, and in the fire station to alert the assigned fire fighters? x Are RFF vehicles housed in a fire station and is the fire station located such as to provide direct and clear access to runway areas? (RP) (RP) (RP) (RP) (RP) (RP) Provided as a recommended practice with additional guidance in ICAO Document 9137, Part 1. Medical recommendations are detailed in ICAO Document 9137, Part 7, Aerodrome Emergency Planning. This is a recommended practice. This is a recommended practice. This is a recommended practice. x Is the alerting mechanism used to alert and activate mutual aid agencies/response N/A Recommended practice found in ICAO Document 9137, part 7, Airport Emergency Planning. Mutual aid activation however must be timely and duties associated with alerting them should be defined in

22 Page 19 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 sufficient? advance. Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Aerodrome Design Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 23 Are runway/taxiway strip and runway end safety areas (RESA) provided? A runway strip shall be 150M wide (on each side of runway) for code 3-4 and 75M for code 1-2 (required for all precision runways and recommended for nonprecision runways). Taxiway strips IAW table 3-1. RESAs required for all code 3-4 runways and for code 1-2 instrument runways. The RESA length shall be 90M with a recommendation (3.5.3) of 240M code 3-4 and 120M code 1-2. SCI 24 In your review of the runway surfaces do you see irregularities that would cause loss of friction characteristics and does the runway maintain good friction characteristics when wet? Guidance on friction enhancement and runway design is available in ICAO Document 9157, part 3, Pavements. Surface irregularities that would degrade friction characteristics would include smoothing, lack of friction enhancement such as runway grooving, rubber build-up, depressions in the surface that would cause the pooling of water in those depressions, etc. etc. x Are declared distance computations designated and reported for all runways intended for use by international air transport aircraft? 2.8 Declarations would be reported IAW the aeronautical information reporting requirements of Annex 15.

23 Page 20 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 x Do existing airport design characteristics comply to the greatest extent possible with Annex 14, Volume I, recommendations regarding runway/taxiway length, width, crosswind, longitudinal and/or transverse slope, sight distance, shoulders, and other pertinent design recommendations found in Chapter 3 x Is a fence, or other suitable barrier provided, capable of deterring animals and/or inadvertent or premeditated access by persons to areas vital to the safe operation of aircraft on the airport? 3.1 to to to Note: The majority of design specifications for runways and taxiways are presented in Annex 14 as recommended practices and the overarching consideration is that the airport be designed to safely accommodate aircraft types and traffic load using the airport. If warranted runway technical specification data may be obtained from a copy of the published airport layout plan. Request ALP data from the airport or from CAA/DASS. Recommended practice 9.11 states that consideration should be given to lighting the area surrounding the fence to a minimum essential level, particularly at access points. x Are fixed objects, except for required visual aids, kept from runway strip areas? x Are obstacle limitation surfaces (conical, innerhorizontal, approach and transitional) established and controlled for noninstrument runways, nonprecision runways, and for precision Cat I runways? Area to be kept clear (except for required visual aids) is: 77.5M each side of runway centerline Code 4F 60M each side of runway centerline for Code M each side of centerline for Code

24 Page 21 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 X Are obstacle limitation surfaces (conical, innerhorizontal, approach, inner-approach, transitional, innertransitional, and balked landing) established and controlled for precision Cat II/III runways? X Are taxiways, runway turnpads and parking aprons of sufficient design size to accommodate the size of aircraft intended? Runway turn pads are required on runways without a taxiway where the Code letter is D, E or F. Taxiway widths require (with the cockpit over the centerline) a minimum main outer wheel to taxiway edge distance (3.9.4).

25 Page 22 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Visual Aid Systems Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 25 SCI 26 SCI 27 Is a system of preventive maintenance established to maintain visual aids? Is airport equipped with at least one wind direction indicator? Are visual approach slope indicator systems provided as required? Maintenance standards for visual aids are found in SARPS to and in ICAO Document 9137, part 9, Airport Maintenance Practices SARP recommends that at least one wind direction indicator be lighted for use at night Note: indicates that one of T-VASI/AT- VASI/PAPI systems shall be provided on a code 3-4 runway where (1) runway is used by turbojet aircraft (2) the pilot may have difficulty judging the approach (3) obstacles exist in the approach path (4) runway conditions would cause a overshoot/undershoot to be particularly dangerous (5) unusual turbulence may occur on approach.

26 Page 23 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Maintenance Management Description of Standard Annex 14, and Recommended Volume I, Practice (SARP) SARP Reference Comments SCI 28 Are the surfaces of pavements kept clear of debris (FOD) that could cause damage to aircraft and is the runway surface adequately maintained? Guidance regarding surface maintenance found in ICAO Document 9137, part 2, Pavement Surface Condition, and in ICAO Document 9137, part 8, Airport Operational Services. x Is a preventive maintenance program established to maintain all aerodrome facilities? x Are periodic runway friction measurements taken and is corrective action when measurements fall below the minimum friction level established by the State? (RP) This is a recommended practice that is differentiated from the standard requiring a system of preventive maintenance for airport visual aids.

27 Page 24 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Aerodrome Programs Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 29 Is an appropriate selfinspection and condition reporting program in place? Is information on the condition of the movement area and the operational status of facilities reported to the aeronautical information service units as required? Note: Amendment 10 to Annex 14 requires in 2.9.3, inspection of the movement area once/day for code 1-2 and twice /day for code 3-4. Guidance for the conduct of daily inspections is found in ICAO Document 9137, Part 8, Airport Operational Services. x Are vehicle drivers appropriately trained for the tasks to be performed? x Has a Surface Movement Ground Control System been established based on airport complexity and traffic volume? x Are only essential/approved vehicles/pedestrians allowed on the movement area of the airport? x Has the airport instituted a safety management system? Additional guidance found in ICAO Document 9476, Manual of Surface Movement Guidance and Control Systems At a minimum an airport SMS should identify safety hazards, ensure remedial action is implemented, provide for continuous monitoring and assessment, and strive for continuous improvement in the overall level of safety.

28 Page 25 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Frangibility Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 30 Are signs, markers, lights, and visual aids located in the runway/taxiway strip/runway end safety area (RESA) frangible such as to distort or yield on impact so as to present the minimum hazard to aircraft? 1.1 Each item listed here (signs, markers, lights, and visual aids) has a corresponding standard requiring it to be constructed to meet the SARP 1.1 definition of frangibility. Further guidance is available in ICAO Document 9157, Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 6, Frangibility.

29 Page 26 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Wildlife Control Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 31 SCI 32 Does the airport take action to assess wildlife hazards when appropriate? Does the airport take immediate action to mitigate wildlife hazards when determined necessary? Additional reference guidance is found in ICAO Document 9137, part 3, Bird Control and Reduction, and in ICAO Document 9137, part 8, Airport Operational Services x Does the airport forward wildlife strike data to ICAO (IBIS database)? x Does the airport or regulator apply appropriate land-use controls to prevent wildlife attractants?

30 Page 27 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Level I Level II Level III Issue (SCI) Description of Standard and Recommended Practice (SARP) Miscellaneous Annex 14, Volume I, SARP Reference Comments SCI 33 SCI 34 SCI 35 If applicable by location, does the airport have a plan, and the capability, to rapidly remove snow, ice, slush, standing water, and other contaminants so as to provide good friction characteristics and/or low rolling resistance? Is adequate primary electrical power available for all air navigation facilities? Is adequate secondary power available for precision approach runways? Does the system provide for an automatic connection and does it meet the switchover times of table 8-1? Recommendation concerning the development and application of a snow/ice control plan can be found in ICAO Document 9137, part 8, Airport Operational Services Recommendations on system design can be found in ICAO Document 9157, part 5, Electrical Systems Table 8-1 provides a changeover time requirement of 1-15 seconds based on equipment, type of approach and RVR conditions.

31 Page 28 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Miscellaneous Annex 14 Tables/Notes Notes: Note: (RP) = Recommended Practice (Differentiated from an Annex 14 Standard as defined in the Foreword of the Annex). Note: Aeronautical information reporting requirements found in ICAO Annex 15 (such as AIP publication requirements) are not repeated in this checklist. Note: The standards indicated here may be modified by local State regulation if a Notification of Difference has been filed by the State with ICAO as required by the International Convention on Civil Aviation (1944), Article 38. Carriers should be aware of any modifications to Annex 14 requirements that may exist in the State regulations and standards. Discern differences through discussion with the airport and/or CAA to identify Article 38 NODs. Note: Those that have been determined to be critical for the safety of flight are highlighted in the text in red and indicated as Level I Issues (SCI). Note: Code 1, 2, 3, 4 refer to the aerodrome reference code found in table 1-1 of Annex 14. The second element of the aerodrome reference code (ARC) is not discussed here. Additional guidance regarding the second code element of the ARC can be obtained from Table 1-1 and reference 1.7 of the Annex. Aerodrome Reference Code Table (Code Element 1: Code 1-4) Code Number Airplane Reference Field Length (ICAO Doc 9157, parts 1 and 2) 1 Less than 800m 2 800m up to, but not including 1200m m up to but not including 1800m m and over Minimum Separation Distance Runway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline Table 3-1 Instrument Runways Non-Instrument Runways Taxiway CL to Taxiway CL Code Code 1-4 A 82.5m 82.5m 37.5m 47.5m 23.75m B 87m 87m 42m 52m 33.5m C 168m 93m 44m D 176m 176m 101m 101m 66.5m E 182.5m 107.5m 80m F 190m 115m 97.5m

32 Page 29 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Rescue Firefighting Table 9-1: Aerodrome Category for RFF Aerodrome Category Airplane Overall Length Maximum Fuselage Width 1 0m-9m 2m 2 9m-12m 2m 3 12m-18m 3m 4 18m-24m 4m 5 24m-28m 4m 6 28m-39m 5m 7 39m-49m 5m 8 49m-61m 7m 9 61m-76m 7m 10 76m-90m 8m Rescue Firefighting Table 9-2: Minimum Usable Amounts of Extinguishing Agent Aerodrome Category Water (L) A Foam Discharge (L/min) Water (L) B Foam Discharge (L/min) Dry Chemical (kg)

33 Page 30 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 SARP recommendation regarding minimum number of RFF vehicles by aerodrome category: Aerodrome Category RFF Vehicles Recommended

34 Page 31 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 Risk Mitigation Strategies and Recommendations A properly functioning safety management system includes processes by which hazards are identified and risks are assessed. risk management (SRM) as part of a functioning SMS identifies and controls hazards and manages resources according to accepted risk-based priorities. This function is accomplished through systematic risk assessments of the operating environment. Once hazards are identified, they are then defined in terms of their potential consequences of severity and likelihood of occurrence. Generally accepted SMS guidance describes SRM in five general phases. They often include: Phase 1. Describe the system Phase 2. Identify the hazards Phase 3. Determine the risk Phase 4. Assess and analyze the risk Phase 5. Treat the risk (i.e., mitigate, monitor and track) Severity Likelihood No Effect Minor Major Hazardous Catastrophic Frequent Probable Remote Extremely Remote Extremely Im probable HIGH RISK MEDIUM RISK LOW RISK The junction of likelihood and severity of risk determines actual risk, and is usually determined through use of a risk matrix diagram, such as the one offered above as an example

35 Page 32 APPENDIX RASG-PA - WP/15 NE/15 SMS tells us that once risk is identified a mitigation strategy should be developed to transfer the risk to someone or somewhere else, eliminate the risk, mitigate its deleterious effects, or accept the risk as it currently exists. Normally these mitigation strategies are developed as a safety action plan that contains strategies to transfer, eliminate, accept, or mitigate. To summarize, risk assessments in the context of the airport safety assessment program proposal allows air carriers to develop an objective assessment of the critical risks involved with operations into an airport, specifically in terms of an airport s compliance or non-compliance with Annex 14 provisions. However, as the program has already identified the safety compliance items (SCI s) in terms of compliance/non-compliance with Annex 14 provisions, there is no need for air carriers to conduct a full risk assessment. The program has determined that non-compliance with Level I s (SCI-I) has been determined to be a high-risk item and that these items must be addressed through an appropriate mitigation strategy. After completing the safety assessment checklist at an airport location, an air carrier may elect to subject all identified areas of non-compliance with Annex 14 (Level I, II and III, and Sensitive items) to an SRM review IAW internal SMS procedures. The review of Level II and Level III SSI s, and other safety issues or hazards identified at the airport, could be of benefit and the determination of the cumulative effects of multiple Level II/III discrepancies may warrant consideration. This advanced analysis and safety review would be entirely at the discretion of the carrier.. To determine a mitigation strategy for areas of Level I non-compliance a carrier may consider the items of Annex 14 non-compliance in four general categories: Equipment Personnel Environment Procedures A mitigation strategy could be developed by addressing each discrepancy individually (using Table 1: Mitigation Strategy Tracking Form) (this is the preferred method), or by combining discrepancies found into the four general categories listed above (Table 2: General Categories of Annex 14 Noncompliance). Regardless, the critical issue is that the carrier must perform an appropriate mitigation analysis and develop a strategy they does one of the following: Avoid the risk: select a different approach or do not participate in, or allow, the operation or procedure. Assume the risk: accept the likelihood, probability, and consequences associated with the risk. Control the risk: develop options and alternatives that minimize or eliminate the risk. Transfer the risk: shift the risk to another area. The mitigation strategy then should be detailed on one of the following mitigation tracking forms (Table 1 or Table 2) (or internal air carrier forms) for formal reference. With the identification and formalization of identified risk comes the responsibility to continue to monitor the mitigation effort until such time as it is determined that the risk no longer exists.