April 6, 2

VIA Elec

Mr. Robe

Office of

Federal A

800 Inde

Washing

rob.hawk

RE: C

C

Dear Mr.

Airports 

clarifying

Systems f

these que

in the Fe

ACI-NA 

airports i

enplane m

passenge

members

Several o

also subm

organized

questions

Docket. 

also been

TECHN

T-1. C

th

2011 

ctronic Mail 

ert Hawks 

f the Chief C

Aviation Adm

pendence Av

gton, DC 205

ks@faa.gov

Clarifying Qu

Certificated A

. Hawks: 

Council Inte

g questions r

for Certifica

estions in acc

ederal Regist

represents l

in the United

more than 95

er and cargo 

s of ACI-NA

of our memb

mitted questi

d these ques

s, and (3) be

Please note 

n sent to Ker

ICAL QUE

Can the FAA

he NPRM? 

Counsel, Reg

ministration 

venue, SW 

591 

uestions, Pro

Airports, Doc

ernational—

regarding the

ated Airports

cordance wi

ter that exten

local, region

d States and 

5 percent of 

traffic in No

A, providing 

bers provided

ions indepen

tions into th

nefit-cost qu

that separate

ri Spencer, y

ESTIONS 

A provide its 

gulations Div

oposed Rule 

cket No. FA

—North Amer

e Notice of P

s, which was

ith FAA requ

nded the com

al and state g

Canada. As 

the domestic

orth America

goods and s

d input to thi

ndently of AC

hree broad to

uestions. Th

e letters rega

yourself, and

definition of

vision 

Regarding S

AA-2010-099

rica (ACI-NA

Proposed Ru

s issued on O

uest included

mment perio

governing b

you may kn

c and virtual

a. Over 330 

ervices to ai

is attached li

CI-NA. As 

opic areas: (1

his letter is o

arding each o

d Nicole Nan

f the term “p

Safety Mana

97 

A) is pleased

ulemaking (N

October 7, 20

d with the FA

d associated

odies that ow

now, ACI-NA

lly all of the

 aviation-rel

irports. 

ist of questio

requested by

1) general tec

our consolida

of the three 

nce, respectiv

phased imple

agement Sys

d to submit t

NPRM), Saf

010. ACI-N

AA’s March

d with the NP

wn and oper

A’s 366 mem

e internationa

lated busines

ons and som

y the FAA, w

chnical ques

ated posting 

individual to

vely also per

ementation” 

tems for 

this set of 

fety Managem

NA has prepa

h 4, 2011, no

PRM. 

rate commer

mber airport

al airline 

sses are also

me of them ha

we have 

stions, (2) leg

to the NPRM

opic areas ha

r FAA’s requ

as it is used

ment 

ared 

otice 

rcial 

s 

o

ave 

gal 

M

ave 

uest. 

d in 
 2 

T-2. How soon after approval of an airport’s SMS manual does the airport’s program need to 

be operational? 

T-3. Would the FAA entertain phasing in the operational components of and airport SMS? 

T-4. Will FAA provide guidelines for developing SMS risk matrices? 

T-5. How does the FAA intend to integrate individual airport SMS programs with those 

promulgated by the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization, FAA Aviation Safety, FAA Office 

of Airports, and individual airline programs? Please clarify the hierarchy that FAA 

expects to implement when multiple programs overlap and describe how various 

involved parties will exercise control over areas where multiple SMS programs are 

operational (e.g., within airline exclusively leased areas). 

T-6. How did the FAA determine the deadlines for development of SMS implementation plans 

and SMS manuals/Airport Certification Manual revisions? Do these deadlines consider 

(1) the time airports need to program SMS programs into their budgets, (2) the time 

required to solicit consultant support competitively in accordance with FAA 

requirements, (3) whether sufficient qualified individuals are available sufficient 

qualified individuals/consultants available to develop prescribed SMS documents 

simultaneously at all Part 139 certificated airports? If not, how does the FAA know 

whether these deadlines are reasonable? 

T-7. Has the FAA conducted any analyses to determine whether there will be sufficient 

trained staff resources available to review SMS Implementation Plans and SMS 

Manuals/Airport Certification Manual updates incorporating SMS? If so, can these be 

posted to the docket? If not, how does the FAA plan to ensure adequate government 

resources are available to review and approve SMS program submittals, and participate in 

all SRM processes? 

T-8. How did the FAA determine 18 months was an appropriate implementation timeline for 

Class I airports when implementation pilot programs have yet to be completed? Pilot 

airports, consultants, and the FAA pilot program website indicate implementation will 

likely take 3 years, and some program participants, based on their experience, indicate 5 

years is more likely and reasonable. 

T-9. How did the FAA come to the conclusion that a phased implementation is not appropriate 

for this program? The industry finds significant benefit from first implementing the 

program in movement areas to work through implementation challenges and issues, and 

then phasing implementation into non-movement areas and other areas of the airport 

where more complex stakeholder relationships and SMS program overlap exist. 

T-10. The FAA commits not to second guess airport SMS decisions in the NPRM preamble. 

Can this commitment be included more explicitly in the rule itself? 

T-11. In a similar vein, does the FAA intend only to regulate the framework of a SMS program 

and SRM processes to ensure it is functioning in accordance with the submitted and 

approved SMS program? Or will the FAA reserve the right to overturn collaborative 
 3 

SRM processes and modify the program components through the 139 certification 

inspection process? 

T-12. How will the FAA ensure consistency in program regulation throughout all regions? 

T-13. Please clarify whether the airport’s SMS program is to be approved or accepted by the 

FAA and describe any expected changes to the annual certification inspection related to 

SMS implementation. 

T-14. Will the airport’s SMS program be “accepted” by the FAA or more formally “approved” 

by the FAA? 

T-15. Will SMS apply to non-Part 139 areas of an airport that has both certificated and noncertificated areas, such as GA runways, taxiways, aprons and exclusively leased areas? 

T-16. Does the non-movement area definition/description delineate between exclusive use, 

leased ramps and airport operated ramp areas? Shouldn’t it? Will the FAA hold airports 

responsible for implementing SMS in areas leased to others? 

T-17. Will the FAA establish a data repository for airport SMS decisions to track trends, data 

and/or issue guidance based upon data collected? 

T-18. Will the FAA provide a means for airports to manage frivolous or inappropriate risk 

reports that are submitted? 

T-19. Please describe the FAA’s expected timelines for SMS implementation following FAA 

approval of an airport’s SMS manual/Airport Certification Manual update incorporating 

SMS? 

T-20. In the airport SMS NPRM, the FAA extends the scope of Part 139 to the non-Movement 

Areas. In the more recent NPRM regarding Part 139 safety enhancements, the FAA 

addresses non-movement area training programs. Is it the FAA’s intent to continue to 

expand its regulatory authority into the non-movement area and setting other standards? 

T-21. On page 62011, in the paragraphs relating to Flexibility, “the FAA proposes that 

amending 139.203 to require the FAA approved ACM contain the policies and 

procedures for development, implementation, operation and maintenance of the 

certificate holder’s SMS.” In paragraph 139.203 is a table of Required 

Airport Certification Manual Elements. The table calls out the requirements to maintain 

or to describe specific elements. It does not specifically describe the specifics of 

procedures for development, implementation, operation and maintenance of those 

elements. If it is a requirement of SMS to incorporate an SMS within the next few 

months, why is it not appropriate to simply state as an element in the table the 

requirement to maintain a Safety Management System? 

T-22. On the same page, in the discussion of Minimum Elements of SMS, it is suggested that 

the SMS is “scalable to the size and complexity of the certificate holder.” It is clear that 

it is not the intent that an airport of smaller size or less complexity could leave out certain 
 4 

elements of the SMS. How then is the program scalable? Further, if the SMS is scalable, 

why can’t the program be phased in as opposed to implemented all at once? 

T-23. Would the FAA consider implementing SMS for employees of the airport operator first 

and, once the system is running smoothly, incorporate airport employees of tenants and 

airlines at a later date? 

T-24. In addition, the actual implementation and operation of the SMS program requires 

additional operating money. Depending on an airport budget process, the funding of 

additional labor necessary may need to be made up to one year in advance. Would the 

FAA consider a phased implementation using current budgeted available labor hours 

until additional positions could be funded and filled? 

T-25. On the same page the NPRM refers to the use of a safety information system that 

provides an accessible and efficient means to retrieve information. Earlier references 

contained in the Safety Assurance paragraphs imply that airports would build a database 

to track trends and the results of mitigations. The database envisioned would be useful 

but limited to experiences of employees at the local airport. There appears no mechanism 

to consider hazards identified at other locations that might apply elsewhere. Does the 

FAA foresee a central data base containing identified hazards and their remediation 

across the country? If not, does the FAA foresee another mechanism to notify airports of 

hazards identified by other airports? 

T-26. SRM methodology requires a detailed process of hazard identification, analysis of 

hazards and mitigation process. It implies a high standard of rigor in the use of five steps 

required by the FAA even forcing the “certificate holder to use SRM processes to 

analyze risk associated with hazards discovered during daily operations and changes to 

operations”. Description of the system, hazard identification, analysis of risk associated 

with the hazard, assessing the risk association with the hazard and mitigation steps may 

not always be necessary and may require a lengthy process that prevents a more 

immediate hazard remediation. While a Safety Risk Assessment may be appropriate 

when dealing with more complex safety issues that involve several stakeholders, it may 

be inappropriate in addressing simple challenges. Is it the FAA’s intent to employ this 

process to address every hazard? Furthermore, is it the intent that the “accountable 

executive” be aware of and approve all efforts to address a hazard observation or report? 

T-27. On page 62015, of the NPRM, the first sentence under Safety Assurance, states, “this 

proposal would require a certificate holder to ensure safety risk mitigations developed 

through the airport’s SRM process are adequate and the airport’s SMS is functioning 

effectively.” The sentence strongly suggests that the FAA intends to go beyond just 

verifying whether a SMS is in place and effective. Does the FAA intend to develop 

specific criteria by which it would determine whether specific risk mitigations are 

adequate? 

T-28. How will the FAA make necessary funding available to immediately implement 

corrective actions of identified hazards through this program? By regulating this 

program, the FAA will be placing airports in a position where they must satisfactorily 
 5 

mitigate hazards to an acceptable level, and documentation identifying the hazard and 

planned actions to mitigate the hazard will be made available to the public. Airports will 

not be able to delay mitigation of known hazards due to increased legal exposure through 

this process. 

T-29. How will FAA prioritize funding for airports that have identified hazards that must be 

mitigated to an acceptable level? Does the FAA get to second guess or change the results 

of the collaborative process if an airport seeks federal assistance to fund risk mitigation 

projects identified through its SMS program? Will the FAA fund concerns identified by 

an airport’s SMS? If so, will major concerns be given priority? 

LEGAL QUESTIONS 

L-1. FAA has stressed the need for data protections with respect to other critical safety data 

systems. Why doesn’t the NPRM put forward such protections – or at a minimum – 

indicate the need for them? 

L-2. What consideration has FAA given to protecting airport SMS data given numerous local 

and state sunshine laws? 

L-3. Has the FAA conducted any evaluations of the liability implications associated with 

naming an “Accountable Executive”? 

L-4. Has the FAA conducted any evaluations of how liability issues may impact the way 

airports structure their SMSs? 

L-5. Has FAA considered the impact on SMS if the data collected under the auspices of an 

SMS program is not kept confidential? What has been the FAA’s prior experience when 

previously confidential safety data has been made public? If negative, how does the FAA 

propose to limit these negative experiences within the context of airport SMS programs? 

L-6. How does the FAA intend to protect confidentiality of program data to promote 

participation and minimize litigation for the airport industry and any third party 

participants? 

L-7. What level of participation does the FAA expect from 3rd party stakeholders who will no 

longer be able to protect their data from public records requests when submitted to a 

public entity such as an airport? 

L-8. If the FAA chooses not to fund airport-identified risk mitigation projects as a result of a 

safety risk assessment, does the FAA they share liability in the event of an incident or 

accident associated with the identified hazard? 

L-9. How does the FAA anticipate managing differing SRM outcomes as a result of differing 

tolerances for acceptable risk throughout the industry? It is clearly possible, and 

probably very likely that multiple airports may SRM the same types of hazards and 

mitigate those hazards differently based on their attitude and tolerance toward acceptable 
 6 

risk. This methodology will result in increased exposure to litigation throughout the 

industry. 

L-10. On page 62016 of the NPRM in its discussion of Safety Assurance “the FAA proposes 

that airports develop a confidential hazard reporting system. ICAO’s SMS model 

envisions a non-punitive reporting system. Based on information obtained during the 

pilot studies, a U.S airport may be unable to prevent punishment of non-airport 

employees (for example, tenant employees). Therefore, the FAA has concluded that 

requiring a confidential hazard reporting system will protect the reporter’s identity and 

achieve the goal of protection.” While confidentiality of a hazard reporting system 

would certainly support a more open environment for reporting hazards, particularly for 

employees reporting on their own actions, overcoming current federal Freedom of 

Information and state and local Open Records Act requirements is difficult. The concept 

of confidential reporting is important not just for tenant and airline employees but for 

airport operator employees who choose to voluntarily disclose information within the 

SMS. Is it the expectation of the FAA that airports seek to exempt voluntary hazard 

reporting disclosures from these current legal provisions? Will the FAA seek to exempt 

such disclosure requirements from the Freedom of Information Act at the federal level? 

L-11. How does the FAA propose to protect the Accountable Executive from litigation 

associated with responsibilities the FAA is assigning them under the NPRM? 

L-12. Will the FAA provide a legal right for an airport to audit tenant records and safety 

programs? 

L-13. On page 62011, the NPRM requires the appointment of an accountable executive “who 

can influence safety-related decisions and has authority to approve operational decisions 

and has authority to approve operational decision and changes because an effective SMS 

requires high level management involvement in safety decision-making.” The NPRM 

goes on to propose an international standard for an accountable executive as “an 

individual with ultimate responsibility and accountability, full control of the human and 

financial resources required to maintain SMS, and final authority over operations and 

safety issues.” Can the FAA offer suggestions as to how this could be achieved at a 

publically owned airport whose budget and human resource policies are controlled by 

publically elected officials such as the mayor and council? 

L-14. On page 62012, the NPRM mandates that the SMS Policy Statement include “the 

encouragement for employees to report safety issues without fear of reprisal.” Does the 

FAA intend that the SMS be instituted to exempt employees from reprisal for conduct 

that was reckless or an intentional violation of a standard or regulation? 

BENEFIT-COST QUESTIONS 

BC-1. What criteria were used to select the accidents included in the FAAs benefit-cost 

analysis? 

BC-2. How do the results of the FAA’s analysis change if non-movement areas are excluded 

from consideration? 
 7 

BC-3. How did the FAA estimate SMS implementation costs when few if any airport SMS 

programs have been fully implemented in the US? In a similar vein, has the FAA 

received thorough feedback from pilot airports about their implementation and O&M 

costs to substantiate their cost-benefit analysis? 

BC-4. Why hasn’t the FAA considered international SMS implementations in its regulatory 

assessment, where empirical cost data are available? 

BC-5. Has the FAA identified funding mechanisms to support both the program 

implementation costs and the ongoing system operating and maintenance costs? 

BC-6. The NPRM refers to the financial benefits associated with the implementation of a 

Safety Management System such as reduced insurance benefits but does not quantify 

the upside opportunity. In the Federal Register, Volume 75, No. 194, dated October 7, 

2010, page 62010 the document states that overtime the identification of previously 

unknown hazards and risks “should prevent accidents and incidents, thereby reducing 

the direct and indirect costs and risks of airport operations.” Can the FAA provide data 

that substantiates the claim? For example, what percent of an insurance premium has 

been saved by implementing the SMS program and what has been the direct and 

indirect cost of SMS implementation? 

* * * * * * 

Again, ACI-NA appreciates the opportunity to provide these questions regarding the NPRM and 

looks forward to your response to them. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at 

202.293.4539 should you need additional information or clarification regarding this submittal. 

Sincerely, 

Christopher Oswald 

Vice President, Safety & Technical Operations 

cc: Mr. Michael O’Donnell, Manager, FAA Office of Airports Safety & Standards 

(michael.o’donnell@faa.gov) 

Ms. Keri Spencer, FAA Office of Airports Safety & Standards (keri.spencer@faa.gov)