# S S M M S S P P i i l

l o

o t t S S t t u

u d d y y / / G G a a p p A A n n a a l l y y s s i i s

s R R e e p p o o r r t

t

The Talladega Municipal Airport (TMA)

P P r r e

e p

p a

a r

r e

e d

d f f o

o r

r



# T T h h e e T T a a l l l

l a

a d d e e g g a a M M u u n n i i c

c i i p

p a a l l A

A i i r

r p

p o o r r t

t B B o o a a r r d

d

T T a a l l l

l a a d d e e g

g a

a

, , A

A l l a a b b a

a m m a a

P P r r e

e p

p a

a r

r e

e d

d b b y

y



# N N e e e e l l

-

- S

S c c h h a a f f f

f e

e r r

,

, I I n

n c c

. . E E S S I I S

S

, , I I n

n c c

. . B B i i r

r m

m i i n n g

g h h a

a m m

, , A

A L L A A n n n n a

a p p o

o l l i

i s s

,

, M

M a a r r y

y l l a a n n d

d



# S S e e p p t t e

e m m b b e e r r 2 2 0 0 0 0 9 9

# Table of Contents

Contents

EXECUTIVE SU MMARY................................................................................................. 1

INTRODUC TION............................................................................................................. 3

BACKGRO UND .............................................................................................................. 3

METHODOLOGY A ND APPROAC H .............................................................................. 6 Building the Gap Anal ysis..................................................................................... 6 Gap Analysis Process .......................................................................................... 7 Scoring Pr ocess ................................................................................................... 8 Perception Survey ................................................................................................ 9

GAP ANALYSIS FI NDINGS .......................................................................................... 10 Safety Policy and Objectiv es .............................................................................. 15 Safety Risk Management ................................................................................... 17 Safety Assu rance ............................................................................................... 19 Safety Prom otion................................................................................................ 21

Part 139 Obse rvations ........................................................................................ 22

Comparison of ACM to SMS Elements Require ments .................................................. 25

CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 28

Attachment 1 Perception Surv ey – Raw Data Analysi s.....................................................

Attachment 2 Perception Survey – Additional Comm ents Resu lts ....................................

Attachment 3 Perception Surv ey – Overview Report ........................................................

Attachment 4 Talladega Schedule (On- site)......................................................................

Attachment 5 Talladega – ESIS FAA SMS Profile TM..........................................................

Attachment 6 SMS Implement ation Cost Estimate............................................................

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 1 

# EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

In February 2007 the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued Advisory Circular, (AC) 150/5200-37, Introduction to Safety Management S ystems (SMS) for Airport Operators , to introduce the concepts of Safety Management Systems. The FAA has also opened a rulemaking project to consider formal requirements for SMS Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139 (Part 139) certificated airports. In support of this rulemaking effort, the FAA has initiated a pilot program to assist airports in evaluating the development of an SMS specific to their situation and operations, and to share their acquired experience on SMS development and implementation with other airports and the FAA.

The Talladega Municipal Airport (TMA or Talladega) decided to take a leadership role in the development and implementation of a SMS at Airpor ts by participating in the FAA pilot program. Thus, TMA was selected by the FAA to conduct an SMS pilot study. This document serves as the first deliverable to the FAA under the pilot study, outlining those areas of the SMS

benchmarks listed herein where Part 139 and the FAA required Airport Certification Manual (ACM) at Talladega has strengths, vulnerabilities or gaps as compared to the AC. This is not intended to represent all areas typically found in a fully-capable SMS program; rather it specifically addresses those areas of interest to the FAA. This airport is one (if not the only one) selected that does not have day-to-day air carrier service.

Neel-Schaffer, Inc. (NSI) was selected in 2005 to provide engineering and planning services while serving as the Consultant of Record for Talladega, through 2010. The work associated with the preparation of the SMS Plan has been assigned to NSI by the Talladega Municipal Airport Board, and NSI is responsible in charge for the successful completion. By contract, ESIS, Inc. was chosen to assist both Talladega and NSI in performing the pilot study.

The gap analysis evaluates the gaps between Part 139 and the SMS expectations. The scores and comments are listed per the “Methodology” and FAA SMS proposed criteria. In some cases, Talladega exceeded their Part 139 requirements, further enhancing or closing the gap between Part 139 and SMS. In other cases, the SMS expectations were not fully realized when trying to implement Part 139 requirements. Refer to the Methodology section of this report for an explanation on the scoring and a reference to t he evaluation criteria. The results of the SMS Gap Analysis are listed in Table 1, “Gap Analysis” section. The scores and comments do not necessarily indicate that Talladega is not comply ing with Part 139 FAA certification elements. Although an evaluation of performance to the Part 139 requirements was not part of this scope of work we have listed some as indicators of where implementing the SMS may enhance the effectiveness of Part 139 compliance. To summar ize the Gap Analysis, the following represent

the scores of the four FAA SMS Sections:

a) Safety Policy and Objectives, = 20%

b) Safety Risk Management, = 28%

c) Safety Assurance = 22%

d) Safety Promotion. = 28%

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 2 As defined by the AC 150/5200-37, SMS expectations are at time clearly communicated (e.g., Responsibility for assigning a Safety Manager) and at other times vague; such as establishing Objectives to achieve SMS or Investigations in Policy and Objectives. As a result, you will see in Figure 1, Section Methodology and Approach, that additional Elements were added to the SMS outline, to reflect some of the industry standards (again, pls see Methodology and Approach, Building the Gap Analysis) in regard to SMS. In particular, we added an element on Incident Investigations under Risk Management and Recognition under Safety Promotion, Encouragement. We also defined Business Integration under Safety Assurance to include preventative Maintenance and Emergency Preparedness. Safety Committees under Safety Policy and Objectives was not assessed because the Talladega airport does not have a committee. Associated criteria were added to these elements, again, based on industry standards (see Methodology and Approach).

As part of the Gap Analysis, a Perception Survey was also performed, to gauge the perception of management commitment and safety program performance on the part of the workforce. The results of the gap analysis are presented below in Table 1, and represent and overall strong perception that safety is important; its importance is communicated and considered a value in terms of Talladega airport operations.



## Table 1. Perception Survey Results

Category Percent

Safety Policy and Objectives (SP&O) 68

Safety Risk Management (SRM) 60

Safety Assurance (SA) 88

Safety Promotion (SP) 74

There was only one question that did not rank as a strength and that was “Safety Suggestions” (vulnerability). There were no “gaps” identified by the Perception Survey.

Therefore, based on the above, the findings and scores indicate that there is about a 20-25% overall agreement between what is required by Part 139, and future SMS expectations (75-80%gap). However, one element in particular registered a score of 60% (Inspections and SelfAuditing) and along with Requirements, was the highest of any of the Elements. The remainder of the Elements and Sections all showed “Gaps” as defined by this pilot assessment process.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 3 

# INTRODUCTION

In 2007 the FAA launched an airport pilot program in which 22 airports eligible to receive Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Grants participated in developing a pilot SMS program. Findings from this research resulted in a second round of pilot studies for smaller Class II, III, and IV airports (the first study focused on Class I airports) to continue research in support of possible FAA Rulemaking.

The goal of the pilot study is to identify how well Part 139 meets or exceeds the requirements of an SMS program. This pilot study’s objectives are to review existing programs and processes for functioning elements of SMS. Other de liverables include developing a proposed Safety (Implementation) Plan to implement an SMS program.



# BACKGROUND

Talladega airport is located approximately 12 miles north of Talladega, Alabama. The Fixed Base Operator (FBO) is leased to North Amer ican Testing Company (NATC), owned by the city of Talladega and operated as a Class IV Airport. An Airport Advisory Board is appointed by the city council in an advisory capacity. Talladega has a general aviation (GA) terminal apron which is the only apron on the airfield available for unscheduled large air carrier aircraft (30 passengers or above).

Talladega is a GA airport for 50 weeks out of the year, and the other 2 weeks each year (during those weeks when major NASCAR events take place at the Talladega Super Speedway) the airport transitions from a rural GA airport to one of the busiest in the southeast. The FBO manages the overall airport facility, as well as a few businesses on site that support aviation activities at the airport. Normal hours of operation are between 7:00 am and 5:00 pm. Outside of these hours, the airport is unattended.

Talladega has been identified as the number one busiest small airport in the state of Alabama due to the two week race events and the growth of the community. The airport has grown because of the planning and cooperation of individuals, industry and government. The City of Talladega has a functioning Airport Advisory Board. The Airport Advisory Board is responsible for the activities and transactions of the Municipal airport for the city. The City of Talladega was deeded the airport property from the General Service Administration (GSA), through the FAA. Both GSA and FAA sets stringent restrictions and sets what can and cannot be done with the property. FAA recommended leasing property at t he airport. The airport is approximately 1,100 acres; the runway, safety apron, taxiways, terminal, and hangers comprise the largest portion of the property. The airport board handles all the federal funds and makes recommendations as to the dispersion of the funds. All funds for t he airport board operations, safety, improvements, and repairs come from the leases and federal matching funds.

The airport board has control of the requirements set by the FAA, as to the landing and take off of the aircraft glide paths, safety aprons, runways lighting, aircraft support systems, taxi ports, parking areas and etc. The FBO, NATC, leases the airport and is responsible for all incoming and outgoing aircraft, refueling, safety, etc. During race weekend, an air traffic controller is required in the tower to direct air traffic. Some 600 planes land and take off during that time.

Even though Talladega is a Part 139 airport without air carrier service, by the end of calendar year 2009 it will have a FAA-installed Instrum ent Landing System (ILS) in place. The groundbased instrument approach system provides precision guidance to an aircraft approaching a

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 4 runway, using a combination of radio signals and high-intensity lighting arrays to enable a safe landing during instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), such as low ceilings or reduced visibility due to fog, rain, or other inclement weather. Work is progressing towards obtaining approval of the ILS project. Talladega has been notified by FAA Southern region that the ILS work will be taking place in 2009. It is anticipated that the ILS will be ready for flight testing

several months thereafter.

There is an expected transition from a Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operation to an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operation. The IFR will facilitate change in the airport mode of operation significantly, especially as it relates to air cargo operations. Currently, air cargo operations frequently occur at the airport in support of nearby industries such as: the Honda Motor Corporation’s Lincoln, Alabama assembly plant, as well as the Anniston Army Depot. With these types of operations occurring throughout the year and with limited tower operators, except for race events, this would be extremely beneficial to Talladega. In general, IFR is an alternative to VFR, where the pilot is ultimately responsible for navigation, obstacle clearance and traffic separation using the see-and-avoid concept.

The airport has an established short-term and l ong range Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) in place, and it expects to continue meeting the goals of the CIP as it has over the past decade. The FAA and Alabama Department of Transportation (Aeronautics Bureau) have been very supportive of the airport as it has recently transitioned from a B-II to a C-II airport; providing several million dollars of support to the airport in order to make those changes.

The airport annual CIP has included the FY2009 Grant application recently submitted to the FAA. The items included not only items scheduled for implementation this year, but also the work that is associated with construction for a heavy-duty concrete apron, taxiway and an access road on the northwest end of the airfield. As part of the first half of FY2009’s entitlement package (tentatively funded by FAA) plans are to complete the security fencing around the backside of the airport and remove the visual approach slope indicators systems (VASIS) and replace it with a precision approach path indica tor (PAPI) now located on the airfield (This replacement will help enhance both approaches which will be tied to the final design of the ILS project). Not included in the application, but has been requested, are new Lighted Wind Cones (Primary and Supplemental; one at each end of the runway) and relocation of the Segmented Circle around the primary wind cones. Neel-Schaffer, Inc (NSI) provides engineering and planning services while serving as the Consultant of Records for the Talladega Airport. NSI provides oversight and coordination on CIP projects relating to current active TMA projects.



# Organizational Structure

The organizational structure at TMA is established by the size, complexity, and operation environment of a small general aviation organi zation. The Airport Manager has been designated as the focal point for implementation and maintenance of the SMS. While it is preferable with SMS for the airport manger to have no additional roles, this is not possible at Talladega Airport. The roles and responsibilities in the organizational structure for the safety at the Airport are presented in Exhibit 1.

The organizational responsibilities are disseminated throughout the airport personnel, thereby promoting a common understanding of everyone’s role at TMA. Safety procedures are laid out by which the airport staff identifies and remedi es safety risks during all activates at TMA.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 5 

# TMA Roles and Responsibilities

Management’s role, responsibilities and accountabilities for the airport are defined and the lines of authority understood. Exhibit 1 below displays the line of succession of key participants in Talladega airport aviation safety process.

The Airport manager is accountable for establishing and maintaining the airport.

• Designate the manager in charge of each functional area for airport operations, for example, identify who is responsible for the im plementation of safety within his functional
area; and

• Maintaining a list of designate functional manager in charge of identifying and correcting organizational deficiencies identified during day to day operations and the race weekend

events.

The Functional Agency representatives (i.e., fi re department, security, emergency response, etc) and airport staff personnel in the organization are responsible for safety.

• Designated functional agency managers’ has the responsible for managing safety of operations because he/she has the knowledge and expertise to recommend effective, corrective and preventive actions and has the authority to assign the appropriate resources where required.

• Airport staff assumes the responsibility for safety within their own area of responsibility (i.e., fueling, aircraft servicing, etc). In this way, he or she is involved in the “safety” process and is accountable for issues that arise in his or her functional area.

The TMA operational safety organizational structure is as follows:

Exhibit 1. TMA Operational Structure City of Talladega Talladega County, Alabama

North American Testing

Director of Operation Talladega Municipal Airport Board

Fire Department (Aircraft Rescue & Firefighter) Airport Manager Fixed Based Operator

Maintenance Department
(Lineman)

Airport Administrator (Secretary)

Emergency Management (Emergency Medical Services)

Department of Environmental Management Human Resources Risk Management

Law Enforcement / Security

Federal Aviation

Administration Tenant Hangar Leasing Agencies

Hazard Material Response
Management Engineering Consultants (Planning and Construction)

Race Events
Key Agencies

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 6 There are several Federal Government agencies that provide services to the Talladega Airport in case of an emergency, aviation incident and accident (especially during race events) or any other unforeseen event. The Regional Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), National Transportation Board (NTSB) and National Weather Agency.



# METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH

The FAA published SMS guidance (AC) states that the SMS Manual and program should “...identify which elements of the airport operator’s existing practices and guidance materials currently meet SMS requirements, which elements do not, and how these latter practices and documents will be revised in the future for consistency with an SMS Plan.” The FAA requires a Gap Analysis or benchmark study to determine gaps in (a) Safety Policy and Objectives, (b) Safety Risk Management, (c) Safety Assurance and (d) Safety Promotion.

The approach to conducting the Gap Analysis at Talladega was to measure the ACM Part 139 requirements against the FAA SMS expectations and best practices. To accomplish this, ESIS reviewed the existing FAA SMS AC and compared it against the established industry SMS references (see below) with the result being the Gap Analysis review criteria listed in the

SMS Profile TM ( Profile ). Thus, the Gap Analysis process included a document review, interviews with relevant staff and tenants and interactions and site visits within the airport itself. The document review focused on existing operations, organization documentation, and current ACM Part 139 procedures. The interactions during formal interviews, meetings, and discussions were to reach personnel at every level associated with the airport, including senior management, airport management staff, tenants and relevant city agencies associated with the airport operations during both race week and day-to-day operations. Some of the relevant department and agencies included:

• Talladega Airport Advisory Board

• Emergency Response including Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) staff

• Emergency Management Agency Representatives

• Public Safety and Security Staff

• Air Traffic Control Tower Representatives

Through the information gathered during the document review and personnel interviews we were able to assess the care of the airport’s safety, the procedures they used in day-to-day operations and coordination efforts with outside agencies to perform an uneventful special raceway event twice a year. The goal was to verify that efforts are consistent and fully integrated and communicated among personnel at all levels.



# Building the Gap Analysis Review Criteria (Profile)

These four areas or Sections of the SMS were developed using the list of 25 elements referenced in the FAA (AC) 150/5200-37, Introduction to SMS for Airport Operators, dated February 28, 2007. The Gap analysis criteria was designed to cover all relevant SMS elements as described in FAA AC 150/5200-37. At the same time, the following are the referenced documentation used to build the gap analysis criteria:

• Airport Corporate Research Program (ACRP) Report 1, Volume 1, March 2007

• International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) SMM, Doc 9859, First edition-2006

• ICAO SMM, Doc 9859, Second Edition-2008 (Draft)

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 7 • ACRP Project 04-05, Volume 2, October 2008 (Draft)

• 14 CFR Part 139 Certification of Airports; Final Rule, February 2004

• Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Directive CSP 03-01-003 TED 8.4,
VPP Policies and Procedure Manual, March 2003

• OSHA Program Management Guidelines (PMG), Federal Register Notice 54:3904-3916, January 1989

• Occupational Health and Safety Assessment System (OHSAS) 18001, published by BSI,

2000 and 2007

• Occupational Health and Safety Ma nagement Systems ANSI Z10, Published 2005

Figure 1 presents the Sections and Elements of the Gap Analysis. Elements in Red were added to better align the International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO) Safety Management Manual (SMM) with the above referenced industry standards.

SAFETY RISK

MANAGEMENT SAFETY

ASSURANCE SAFETY

PROMOTION

Policy Objectives Responsibility and

Authority Accountability

Resources Top Management

Support

Documentation

Committees Requirements

Hazard

Identification Hazard Analysis

Risk Assessment Risk Management Investigations Training and

Education Design and

Delivery Competency

Lessons Learned Recognition /

Encouragement 

## FAA – SMS (Safety Management Systems) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)

POLICY AND

OBJECTIVES

InspectionsReporting Systems – nonpunitive Tracking Systems Safety Performance

Indicators and Metrics Trend Analysis Integration of

Preventive Maintenance Emergency Preparedness Integration

SMS Evaluation



## Figure 1: Gap Analysis Sections and Elements



# Gap Analysis Process:

The initial Gap Analysis undertook an assessment of the organizational capabilities at Talladega as it pertains to the guiding principals of SMS. The method of determining the existent capabilities considered a combination of stakeholder interviews, document search and review, and a preliminary operational review (observation). This process included review of over a hundred documents (record, forms, reports, inspection checklist, etc), interviews of key staff at

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 8 Talladega and on-site observations of several days on the ground at the airport monitoring operations, procedures, equipment and facilities.

ESIS also conducted a perception survey as part of the analysis. The survey was designed to help us better understand the effectiveness of the safety program and identify opportunities for improvement. It was entirely anonymous; we ask ed about individual’s roles (e.g., front line leader/supervisor, manager, hourly paid employee or contractor) as well as safety process. See Attachments 1 – 3 for the Perception survey questions and results.

When referencing the airport ACM, it includes the Airport Emergency Plan (AEP) and the Security Plan. The team reviewed the following documents at Talladega:

• Part 139 Inspection Reports

• Airport Certification Manual (ACM)

• Airport Emergency Plan (AEP)

• Environmental Report

• Operations Daily Surveillance

• Emergency Response Reports

• Airfield Inspection Reports

• Talladega Organizational Chart

• Airport Security Plan

• Safety Incident Reports

• Airport Staff Training Records

• Airport Staff Performance Reports (extracts)

• Preventative Maintenance Records

Upon initial completion of the document review, the team met with the following staff and agency specific personnel to survey (see Attachment 4 - Schedule) current safety program

status.



# Scoring Process

ESIS uses a qualitative and quantitative evaluation process. The four Sections consist of a number of elements, which we evaluated, scored with findings described with the Profile itself. The scoring process is consistent with a methodology used for over 15 years, which helps benchmark safety processes and efforts agains t equivalent level programs. Thus, for each criterion, there are five possible answers and points awarded:

• Does Not Meet 0 points = Not found

• Under Development 1 point = Beginning, documented but not implemented

• Partially Meets 2 points = implemented but missing in either documentation, consistency, thoroughness or effectiveness

• Meets 3 points, and

• Not Applicable null

Findings are recorded, as are Responses (R), Poin ts Received (PR), and Points Available (PA). The points received are divided by the points available to yield a percentage score, based on a

0-100 scale.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 9 Within each Element, points are totaled, and com pared to the total points available, yielding a score from 0-100%. Based on over 300 surveys per formed over the last 18 years, the scoring methodology is:

Scoring Methodology

0-50% Gaps exist in the program, process, or effectiveness

51-79% The program or process has some vulnerabilities in providing consistent,

sustainable results

80-100% While there still may be some recommendations for improvement, the overall program or process is effective in design and implementation.

By combining a qualitative and quantitative gap analysis, relative strengths and weaknesses are not only better communicated, but better measured if true continuous improvement is made. This information is extremely valuable for the Implementation Plan deliverable.



# Perception Survey

The perception survey measures management’s and employee’s attitude towards safety at the airport and the level of motivation with regards to safety and health performance. Positive performance is based on key factors such as: 1) Safety Culture – which requires effective safety management and a commitment to safety on part of senior management; 2) Policy and Objectives – are employees familiar with th e safety objectives and how to achieve the established targeted safety goals. These are only a couple of examples of the key factors focused on as part of the perception survey.

Prior to the on-site gap analysis, ESIS performed a “perception survey”, to help collect grass roots indications of safety program im plementation and management commitment and communication. This survey was offered to all employees, service personnel and others associated with the Talladega Municipal Airport, including the part time personnel that work race week, as well as airport tenants.

ESIS coordinated with the airport management staff to customize the perception survey to Talladega’s organization and programs. ESIS tallied the information, analyzed the results and developed a report as well as assisted to interpret the data and make recommendations for improvement. The information gathered and reported included:

• Methodology, identification of management system strengths

• Overview summary of results

• Analysis by key sections, questions and/or demographics

• Recommendations based on combined statistics

• List of comments from participants

The team sent questionnaires (survey primers) to other key stakeholders, outside the airport organization, to gauge the level of SMS related activity outside the immediate domain of the airport (see attached survey form). For exam ple, while tenant SMS capabilities are outside the scope, it is indeed useful to understand their work practices as it pertains to operations on the Talladega ramp, a key element of this study.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 10 The Talladega FAA Safety Perception Survey was developed using the FAA guidelines (AC 150/5200-37) and standard SMS Components. Each question was developed and scores were compiled into the 4 main Components:

• 

## Safety Policy and Objectives (SP&O)

• 

## Safety Risk Management (SRM)

• 

## Safety Assurance (SA)

• 

## Safety Promotion (SP)

Questions are categorized to yield a better understanding of Talladega’s Safety strengths and weaknesses. Participants rated each question ranging from 1 (weakness) – 5 (strength). An average of all responses was calculated along with the standard deviation for each questions response. Survey results are listed in Attachments 1-3.



# GAP ANALYSIS FINDINGS

As agreed upon, ESIS evaluated twenty-five (25) elements within the four (4) SMS components.

ESIS’ Profile is listed in Attachment 5, which includes the evaluation criteria, findings, scoring instructions, and summary score sheet. As the FAA SMS expectations are not yet established, it is not expected that TMA’s safety program meet the SMS expectations.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 11 Table 2 summarizes the findings:

Table 2 Gap Assessment SMS

–Section/

Element Assessment Comments

Safety Policy & Objectives (7) 20 %

Policy 3 % Part 139 does not require a safety policy. Airport does not have a formal written safety policy statement.

Objectives 19 % Part 139 objectives are to ensure aircraft can safety land and depart without incident or accident, but do not require formal documented objectives. There are no formal safety objectives or targets wri tten for the special race event or regular operations, even though safety is a primar y concern of all parties. TMA uses a pre-race checklist as a guide to ensure that the airport is setup safely and operationally ready to handle aircraft at the race time.

Responsibility and Authority 26 % Part 139, Line of Succession of Airport operational responsibilities are required to be identified in the ACM. Talladega Municipal Airport Board has defined written responsibilities for the airport manager and key personnel. During race events, safety is supported and executed as a priority by NATC stakeholders (i.e., Talladega Speedway, NASCAR, etc) and Public Safety Agencies which provides fire rescue, medical care, security, environmental management, etc.

Accountability 22 % Part 139, Talladega ACM requires accountability of airport staff and key agencies to adhere to safety requirements. Accountability and authority are addressed in the ACM, Airport Emergency Plan and Security Plan which are coordinated and reviewed by all airport agency personnel. Airport Management has not established written procedures to hold staff accountable to any safety metrics, targets, or objectives.

Resources 48 % Part 139 and the airport ACM identify the resources required to operate the airfield to FAA requirements; such as aircraft rescue and line services equipment, personnel, and training. Funds are requested and allocated as needed for construction or maintenance on hangars by the Airport Board. Some resources are provided to maintain FAA standards. Resources are allocated to address race event expenses by NATC. Operational cost and airfield maintenance costs are the responsibility of the FBO. Airport staffing is increased dramatically (from 4 to over 50) for ra ces. There are two elements of the Part 139 that have not been full implemented; recent Class IV requirements for ARFF live-fire training and an approved AEP.

Documentation 22 % Part 139 requires the airport ACM, whic h is a description of the system for maintaining records such as daily airfield self-inspections, training, quarterly fuel farm and mobile fuel truck inspections. Talladega has a manual (hard copy) system for recordkeeping of documentation. In addition, pre-event checklists are established for planning race events. The ACM is the documentation.

Committees 0 % Part 139 and ACM does not mandate a safety committee to be established. There is no designated or appointed co mmittee that functions as a safety committee at the airport.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 12 Table 2 Gap Assessment SMS

–Section/

Element –Section/

Element –Section/ Element

Safety Risk Management (6) 28 %

Requirements 67 % Part 139 and the airport ACM is the r equirement for airport operation through daily airside surveillances. These are the primary regulatory drivers for an airport, however

Hazard

Identification 33 % Part 139 and the ACM pre-identify a number of hazards and identify required controls. It does not prescribe a proce ss to identify other hazards through an internal and external process. However, 1) Internally, the airport performs daily surveys (i.e., runway and taxiway markin gs, NAVAIDs, directi onal signs, lighting and fuel services operations to identify hazards associated with the airfield; 2)

External hazard iden tification occurs annually by the FAA. For race weeks there are additional informal processes establishe d; such as, a Pre-Race checklist that has been developed to identify potential hazards and areas of concerns prior to the event. The checklist is used as a proa ctive tool to ensure that the airport is set up safely and operationally to handl e aircraft at the ra ce time. No formal hazard identification written process is established.

Hazard Analysis 13 % Part 139 and the airport ACM does not require a hazard analysis to be performed beyond assessing emergency response activities. Race week provides experienced personnel to perform informal analysis process of airfield operations. Public safety and security, and emergency management performs worksite analyses specific to their oper ations prior to the race events. For example, emergency management and the fire department perform an analysis for the staging of vehicles to meet response time and personnel availability in case of an emergency. However, ther e is no documentation maintained at the airport.

Risk

Assessment 14 % Part 139 and the ACM require undocum ented risk assessments of airfield operations. For example; wildlife haz ard management, airside obstructions, and foreign object debris (FOD). There is no formal written risk assessment procedures developed to risk rank hazar d tasks or operations for subsequent

risk reduction and control verification. Pa rt 139 requirements are evaluated and performed by the FBO and the FAA. Rain water runoff and fuel spills are evaluated periodically by the Alab ama Department of Environmental management (ADEM).

Risk Management 17 % Part 139 and the ACM does not requir e a formalize risk management process. Risk management concepts and processes are performed through daily and quarterly inspections that monitor compliance with Part 139 requirements. When a hazard or risk to an aircraft or facility is identified, procedures are in place to

eliminate recurrence of hazards. For ex ample; an unsatisfactory condition or hazard to an aircraft relating to the airfield may require a Notice to Airmen (NOTAMS) /Condition report to be transmi tted and available to pilots. During race week, pre-checklists are communicated and close coordination between the stakeholders help improve the safe work procedures. The improvement of or addition to controls is not a documented target or objective.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 13 Table 2 Gap Assessment SMS

–Section/

Element –Section/

Element –Section/ Element

Investigations 20 % Part 139 and the airport ACM address forma l investigation procedures. As part of the AEP, actions are identified to be taken in case of an inci dent at the airport (i.e., aircraft accident, bomb incident, stru ctural fire, nature disaster, etc.) Race event, incidents are investigated and docum ented when airport staff is informed. Accident reports are filed at the Inter national speedway corporation in Daytona, Florida. Aircraft accidents are investigated and reports maintained by NTSB and FAA. Injuries and incidents are investigated and records are maintained by International speedway corporation (ISC) in Daytona, Florida. No formal written program is established for the airport.

Safety Assurance (7) 23 %

Inspections and Self-Auditing 60 % Part 139 and the ACM require procedures for conducting a self-inspection program. Daily inspections are conduct ed on the airfield and when an unusual condition is present, such as construction activities or meteorological conditions, which may affect safe aircraft operati ons. In addition, inspections occur immediately after an accident or inciden t. Daily ACM inspections are completed and documented. Terminal facility inspections are performed monthly. Findings are reviewed by the airport manager and followed-up to completion. No documented tracking system is establ ished for terminal inspections. Nonregulatory controls identified by t he Risk Assessment process have not yet been integrated into the inspection process.

Non-Punitive Safety Reporting 11 % Part 139 and the airport ACM do not address non-punitive safety or near-miss reporting. A work order system is in place during races; hazards are reported verbally. The airport submits work orders for carpentry, electrical and plumbing to NATC. Personnel are encouraged to report unsafe conditions. No formal mechanism exists for encouraging near-miss reporting.

Tracking Systems 21 % Part 139 and the airport ACM requires airside inspection to be performed and

documented. The hazards identified by maintenance and operations are reported. Discrepancies or deficiencies ar e corrected on the spot or annotated to be tracked until completion. The airport maintains records for personnel training (emergency, fueling, and movement safetyarea), fueling agent inspections, selfinspection, accident and incidents, and airp ort conditions. During the race event,

hazards are identified and corrected but no t formally tracked unless placed in the work order system.

Performance

Indicators 0 % Part 139 and the airport ACM identify per formance by success of meeting the basic FAA goal – no accidents or incidents. No established system is in place to check leading performance indicators and targets or to address significant hazards, possible risks or lack of control implementation. Data is not collected for trending or establishing targeted goals or objectives.

Trend Analysis 23 % Part 139 and the airport ACM do not dire ctly identify or require a trending process; however, the airport performs a ssessments of airfield operations. For example; wildlife hazard abatement for bird strikes (seasonal migrations) or aircraft accident reporting. Informall y, management recognizes problem areas over time and implements preventativ e measures. Documented trending is not performed. Daily activity hazards are not fully identified or tracked where hazards are corrected on the spot. However for the SMS process, a system for trending to determine a logical approach to counteract the any change in risk to safe operations is not developed.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 14 Table 2 Gap Assessment SMS

–Section/

Element –Section/

Element –Section/ Element

Integration (Maintenance / Emergency) 37 % Part 139 and the airport ACM identifies maintenance requirements of airfield equipment; both FAA and airport owned. Emergency procedures are addressed in the AEP. Safety critical equipment is inspected da ily (i.e., fuel farm, fuel trucks, etc.) as identified by the ACM. Fire Extinguishers ar e inspect ed monthly by airport staff and every 6 months by an outside company prior to each race event. Emergency response activities, the FBO, and public safety agencies (medical, fire marshal, local police, etc) were involved in a recent airport emergency plan table top exercise review.

SMS Evaluation 6 % Part 139 and the airport ACM address so me elements of the SMS during FAA evaluations (i.e., authority and training, or ganizational structure, self-inspections, documentation, emergency prepar edness, etc). There currently is no system in place for critically reviewing and periodically evaluating all SMS elements.

Safety Promotion (5) 28 %

Training and

Education 48 % Part 139 and the airport ACM is detailed and specific regarding airside training and education requirements. Curriculum fo r line services is conducted utilizing "NATA Safety First.” For race events, fa miliarization training and orientation are provided by public safety agencies. The Fire department performs fire extinguisher training. Additional personnel (flagmen and aircraft marshallers) are trained on roles and responsibilities from NATA safety first. The training is documented and tracked for personnel othe r than airport staff employees. ARFF training records are maintained at the fire stations; however, it has been noted in the FAA report that the ARFF personnel have not received live-fire training. Additional training is required for incident commander, accident, and incident reporting.

Design and Delivery 44 % Part 139 and the airport ACM require a formal training program for ARFF personnel, fueling agents, pedestrians and ground vehicles in movement area and safety areas. All airside required training includes formal testing, scoring, and documentation. Race event safety training is informally conducted in the monthly meetings held by NATC.

Competency 24 % Part 139 and the airport ACM require per sonnel to be proficient and certified (i.e., live drills, air traffic tower operators, airfield hazard recognition). Evidence of continuous improvements for race even ts was noted, i.e., implementation of new radio system, increase in staff, live fire extinguisher training, and on-site claims investigators were added improvements.

Lessons

Learned 0 % Part 139 and the airport ACM addresses lesson learned through events identified during surveys and evaluations. Some are available through government agencies, e.g., NTSB, FA A, EPA, and OSHA. There is no formalized process established for in formation to be comm unicated to the employees. Information is shared with airport staff as it relates to airport operations.

Recognition/ Encouragement 24 % Part 139 and the airport ACM do not fo rmally promote or encourage safety participation or a recognition process. The Airport board does not provide award or incentive programs for safety reporting. NATC does not have a recognition program. Supervisors do provide verbal recognition for outstanding dedication to safety awareness during race events. Airport staff has been presented certificates of application and letters of appreciate from the Airport Board. Airport staff does feel moderately encouraged to report.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 15 The following information futher summarizes the above, and is based upon our document review, perception survey and interviews, and physical survey, as evaluated using the Profile :



# Safety Policy and Objectives

Assessment : Management Commitment to SMS (Written Policy and Objectives gapped)

Safety Policy: 3%

There is no formal safety policy statement established at Talladega Airport; however employees 68% feel management is committ ed to the safety of the personnel at Talladega Airport. There are no documents to state airport’s commitment to meet the intent of an SMS program.

Safety Objectives: 19%

There are no formalized written safety goals and objectives to communicate to airport `employees. Talladega Municipal Airport Board has defined written responsibilities for all airport activities; however, objectives are not developed as a result of safety evaluations or observations, trend analysis, risk assessment, etc. Action plans to

measure in terms of results have not been implemented. During race events, the attitudes, decisions and methods of operations demonstrate an emphasis given to safety.

Responsibilities and Authority: 26%

Safety responsibilities outside of the airport manager are not written in the job descriptions defining responsibilities across the organization. Airport staff and stakeholders demonstrated the authority to stop unsafe operations, especially during race week, according to over 90% of the personnel interviewed).

Accountability: 22%

There is no written guidance regarding safety accountability for top managers or key airport personnel. Performance appraisals di d not show supervisors or hourly personnel accountable (e.g., measured) for safety and health responsibilities. Race events are agency specific; for example, the fire department is responsible for emergency rescue and fire response activities however performance is not quantified or qualified. There was no link between Accountability or Indicators and Targets.

Resources: 48%

Resources for Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) training have not fully been provided to meet Part 139 regulatory requirements. Resources have not yet been established to provide for data capture and analysis. Resources are allocated to

address race event activities. Resources are made available, as demonstrated by the new fuel trucks and a generator.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 16 Evidence of continuous improvements for race events was noted during the analysis, i.e., new radios, staff manpower increases, etc. Observation of some other equipment as well as survey results demonstrated the need for additional maintenance, such as: the ARFF truck repairs and tow vehicle for aircraft movement.

Documentation: 22%

The ACM requires and documents the various c hecklists used, including the pre-event checklist established for the preparation and planning of race events and maintenance checklists. There is no formal managemen t of all required documents such as, spreadsheet of findings, scheduling calendar, etc. However, Talladega adheres to the established ACM that has mandatory documentation requirements for inspections and training; similar to the SMS process. ACM required records are to be maintained on file

for a minimum of twelve consecutive months.

Committee: 0%

Not established. Talladega Municipal Airport has four (4) employees to operate and

service the GA aircrafts and facilities and a number of tenant organizations. The Airport manager attends monthly safety meetings at the Talladega Speedway and provides feedback to the airport staff. There is no airport safety committee; however there is a City of Talladega Airport Board which has twelve members and includes outside stakeholders (Talladega speedway) that the airport manager can address safety concerns. The Airport Board is used in the advisory capacity for airport safety resources.

Overall Assessment Policy & Objectives: 20% and Red

Talladega provides a motivating force and the resources for the organization during race events. Due to the nature of the day-to-day operations performed by the FBO, line service personnel, and the small airport staff at the GA airport has not implemented a formal safety policy. There are no formally written Safety Policy and Object ive statements regarding airport safety beyond the Part 139 requirements which include inspections, emergency response, and ARFF. Top managers’ accountability for SMS has control of the financial and human resources required for the proper execution of their SMS responsibilitie s. There is no established safety policy manual or workers handbook containing policy statements. Although verbally communicated on a consistent basis, management has not set written safety goals, objectives, or targets for the airport personnel or tenants that lease the hangars at TMA. As expected, the established safety procedures and processes for the airport are governed around the Part 139 and ACM requirements. Airport Management has not been actively involved or encouraged participation in the safety process at all levels of airport operations. Organizational goals for the safety and health program have not been formally documented, communicated and measured so that all members understand the desired results or the measures planned for achieving them. There were limited organizational charts available to identify the relationship between Talladega staff, the NATC and the Airport Board, even as presented in the ACM. Performance appraisals and reports currently do not address safety roles and responsibilities. Currently no written guidance is established regarding accountability for safety indicators and targets. The organization consists of four personnel at the airport which is a airport manager, two lineman (aircraft fuelers) and a secretary. Safety concerns are addressed informally on a day to day base due to the structure of the organization. When additional focus or attention is required on a safety issue, the airport manager documents the concern and notifies the appropriate agency (i.e., Airport Board, NATC, Federal Agency Representative, Public Safety Agencies, etc).

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 17 

# Safety Risk Management

Assessment : Manager’s approach to Risk Management (Safety Risk Management gapped)

Requirements: 67%

Part 139 and the airport ACM is the requirement for airport operation. This includes daily airside surveillances. They are awar e of other requirements, such as OSHA (occupational Safety and Health Agency) but they have not been incorporated in a safety manual, operating manual or list of requirements and assignments. This being said, there is accountability on the part of the Site manager to comply with all regulations, as well as the NCTA and Talladega city.

Hazard Identification: 33%

Part 139 and the ACM pre-identify a number of hazards and identify required controls. It does not prescribe a process to identify other hazards through an internal and external process. However, 1) Internally, the air port performs daily surveys (i.e., runway and taxiway markings, NAVAIDs, directional signs, lighting and fuel services operations to identify hazards associated with the airfield; 2) External hazard identification occurs annually by the FAA. For race weeks there are additional informal processes

established.

Hazard Analysis: 13%

There is no documented hazard analysis process to follow, such as Job Hazard or Safety Analysis, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, HAZ-Ops, fault trends, etc. Airport staff is not trained to conduct risk assessment review as it relates to analysis quality or control processes.

Race week employs experienced personnel to perform an informal analysis process. Associate public safety agencies (i.e., fire dept, law enforcement, and security) review operations for hazardous conditions and co nsideration. The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) provides periodic inspections of the airport throughout the year to identify environmental concerns, but this is more of an inspection and not a hazard analysis program. There are no documented analyses performed on working conditions and operations to identify hazards not previously recognized by the aviation industry.

Risk Assessment: 14%

There is no structured process for the assessment of risk associated with identified hazards, expressed in terms of severity and probability of occurrence. Airport personnel are not trained to perform Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) or Job Safety Analysis (JSA). Personnel are qualified and trained to conduct assessments of their designated locations or area of expertise. Part 139 requirements help ensure airfield operational hazards are prioritized by impact of identified deficiencies and/or discrepancies noted during airfield inspection. No written risk assessment procedures exist to identify high hazard task or

activities.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 18 There are no formal hazard analyses or safe job procedures established. Operating Instructions or Standard Operating Procedures are not developed or maintained at the airport. Public safety agencies have spec ific procedures. TMA established race week pre-checklist provides communication and close coordination between the agencies (stakeholders) to help improve the safe work procedures. Personnel are informed during event orientation of changes in conditions and hazards associated with the workplace. No JHAs or written procedures are implem ented; however, processes are in place and incorporated during races. The fire department, emergency management agency, security personnel, and airfield operators hav e PPE available on-site during race week.

Risk Management: 17%

There is no formal Safety Risk Managem ent (SRM) process implemented. The Talladega Speedway provides a Risk Manager from the Dayton, Florida facility (Department level) to assist the airport and perform external audits. There are no trained risk assessments experts at the airpor t or on the speedway staff that document,track, or measure risk data. Training is tailored to workers that perform internal selfinspections as it relates to Part 139 requirements. The Part 139 (airfield surveillance, fuel and refueling operation, etc) and facility inspections are conducted daily to identify operational hazards. These inspections are performed by NATC and Talladega speedway staff personnel.

Investigations: 20%

Part 139 and the airport ACM address formal investigation procedures. As part of the
AEP, actions are identified to be taken in case of an incident at the airport (i.e., aircraft
accident, bomb incident, structural fire, nature disaster, etc. Race event, incidents are investigated and documented when airport staff is informed. Accident reports are filed at the International speedway corporation (ISC) in Daytona, Florida. Aircraft accidents are investigated and reports maintained by National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the FAA. Injuries and incidents are investigated and records maintained by ISC. Talladega does not have established written investigation procedures to identify responsibilities, instructions, definitions and recordkeeping requirements. The airport uses Talladega Speedway Incident Report forms. During race event, airfield accidents are investigated by the NTSB or regional FAA staff. ISC investigators and United Services Administration (USA) adjusters are on site during race week. Talladega is considering having a full time investigator on site at all future race events for the airport operations. Airport staff is required to investigate minor airport incidents. Closure and causal factors are not identified, verified or trended. Airport staff has not had formal accident investigation training.

Overall Assessment Safety Risk Management: 28% and Red

During race events, there are reactive hazard identification mechanisms in place, such as passenger vehicle encroachments, aircraft wing walks/spotters positioning during aircraft towing and parking operations, or pedestrians having access to interfere/damage airfield lighting. Recording and analysis of hazards to establish additional controls are not formalized. There are proactive means of identifying and reporting hazards, such as daily self-inspections for Part 139 requirements, however, these inspections relate only to the airside, performed by trained

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 19 inspectors. There is no system established to prioritize task or activities outside of the Part 139 inspections. Race event participants are provided awareness training and briefed on hazards associated with specific jobs or tasks. Supervi sors are actively involved during speedway races and safety violations are corrected on the spot during race events. Race events stakeholder collectively discuss risk factors associated with related operations. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are not documented; unwri tten rules are implemented and seem to be effective and clearly understood by participants. Talladega has had three minor aircraft incidents in the last twenty plus years during race events.



# Safety Assurance

Assessment : Managers safety oversight and practices (Safety performance indicators gapped)

Inspections and Self-Auditing: 60%

Talladega Speedway performs facility inspections and manually tracks results. The airport does not have a developed terminal/faci lity inspection checklist. Per ACM and Part 139 requirements, the airfield surveillance, fuel farm, and refuel operations are regulatory requirements that are being accomplished and documented, however the ramp area is not annotated on the checklist. Independent external inspections are performed by the FAA, the Chevron Fueling Company, and the (ADEM). During race events, public safety agencies (i.e., fire department, law enforcement, emergency management, etc.) conducts inspections prior to the race and the agency personnel are qualified in their particular field to help ensure safe operations during the event. For daily inspections, personnel receive refresher training as it relates to the ACM, runway incursions, self-inspections, and ramp communications.

Self-inspections are performed monthly throughout the year and increased during the major speedway events. External audits of the speedway are conducted by the NATC Headquarters Office in Daytona.

Non- Punitive Safety Reporting: 11%

The airport does not have an established formal non-punitive reporting system. A work order system is in place through Talladega Sp eedway, but it is used mainly prior to and during race week, but not on daily basis. Talladega’s tenants primarily use verbal
requests.

Tracking System: 21%

There is a centralized system to track some preventive maintenance and work orders, particularly during race week. However, other findings from periodic inspections, audits, incidents, near misses, observations and suggestions are not recorded. FAA Part 139 inspections are tracked and corrective actions are annotated on the self-inspection form with comments until the noted discrepancies are corrected. The Chevron Fueling Company and ADEM inspections are performed quarterly. Part 139 findings and corrective actions are not formally tracked, however documentation is filed relating to the airport responses to FAA.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 20 Performance Indicators: 0%

Scorecards, leading metrics, or corrective action plans have not been implemented to provide safety performance indicators. Thus targets have not yet been established.

Trend Analysis: 23%

Part 139 and the airport ACM do not directly identify or require a trending process, however, the airport perform assessments of airfield operations. For example; wildlife hazard abatement for bird strikes (seasonal migrations) or aircraft accident reporting are tracked. Informally, management recognize s problem areas over time and implements preventive measures. Documented trending is not performed. Daily activity hazards are not fully identified or recorded where hazards are corrected on the spot. There are no trend analysis records maintained or shared with the airport board, therefore there is no product to drive annual action plans.

Integration (Maintenance and Operations): 37%

Due to the nature of day-to-day operations performed at the airport, FBOs are responsible for managing both operations and maintenance. Line serve, fuelers and maintenance personnel, are required to conduct the Part 139, Class IV type airport operational requirements. Safety critical equipment is inspected which include fuel farm and refuel trucks. Airfield surveillance is performed on the airfield areas; apron, ramp, and taxiway that includes signs/markings, lighting and associated equipment to ensure serviceable conditions. In addition, during race events, public safety agencies are responsible for safety critical equipment in their designated location.

The Talladega Emergency Plan (AEP) is in dr aft form and revisions are currently under

consideration to ensure all Part 139 r equirements are addressed. The AEP for the airport will be reviewed and approved by the FAA. Aircraft Rescue Firefighter (ARFF) training is required for first responders at the airport. Airport employees are not trained in emergency response as the airport relies on public safety departments during race

events.

SMS Evaluations: 6%

As expected, a process to evaluate SMS elements is not yet in place. The FAA evaluates Part 139 requirements annually. Part 139 and the airport ACM address some elements of the SMS during FAA evaluations (i.e., authority and training, organizational structure, self-inspections, documentation, emergency preparedness, etc). There currently is no system in place for critic ally reviewing and evaluating all SMS elements periodically.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 21 Overall Assessment Safety Assurance: 23% and Red

Daily ACM inspections are completed and docum ented. Safety performance indicators or targets are not developed to directly relate to airport safety. There are no published trend analysis data; informally management recognize s problem areas over time and implements measures for control. Procedures or processes are not established to review, measure, or monitor SMS performance on regular basis. However, there was evidence that safety considerations are taken to mitigate and /or reduce hazardous situations. For example, there were public and airfield safety concerns regarding fencing: wildlife hazards (e.g., deer and coyotes crossing runways/taxiways) and race event incident indicated a concern for higher fencing which the airport board has approved. Trend Analysis is not formally implemented; yet daily airside inspections provide an opportunity to identify hazards and hazardous activities. As mentioned earlier, there are no trend analyses records maintained or shared at the airport to drive an action plan. Emergency procedures were recently performed to review the newly

drafted AEP. The review was constructive in identi fying key players and lines of authority in the event of an emergency condition. When comparing the FAA Part 139 mandates to the SMS requirements the airport is accomplishing several of the SMS elements (i.e., authority and training, organizational structure, self-inspections, documentation, emergency preparedness, etc). There currently is no system in place fo r critically reviewing and evaluating all SMS elements periodically.



# Safety Promotion

Assessment: Manage safety training and education (Continuous improvement gapped)

Training and Education: 48%

Curriculum for FBO, line serves, fueling and re fueling operations are conducted utilizing "NATA Safety First." Additional, training is provided by the airport manager using approved training curriculum for airfield operations. Airport staff personnel have not been required to take incident investigation or hazard recognition training. Additional training maybe warranted for airfield inspections and hazard recognition. Observations such as extraneous airfield markings and some inoperable directional sign lights indicate additional attention may be needed during the inspection process. No specific curriculum for employees is developed; therefore they are not conversant in SMS.

Design and Delivery: 44%

For fueling activities the airport uses a certified program. For safety presentations,Talladega brings in speakers for safety meetings. Live fire extinguisher training and onsite claims investigators were added improvements. Formal training programs include formal documentation of testing, scoring, and evaluation of line service training. The speedway provides training to the staff per sonnel at weekly management meetings. Safety is not the driving objective for t he meetings; however various safety topics and courses are performed during the meetings.

Competency: 24%

Part 139 and the airport ACM require personnel to be proficient and certified (i.e., live drills, air traffic tower operators, airfield hazard recognition). Evidence of continuous improvements for race events was noted, i. e., live fire extinguisher training and on-site

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 22 claims investigators were added improvements. The airport operations and maintenance personnel have years of airport experience and an in-depth knowledge of the operations and tasks performed at the GA airport.

Lesson’s Learned 0%

No formal processes exist for lesson’s learned. For race events, there is a free exchange of safety information, across all areas and at all levels, both vertically and horizontally. It is actively promoted by Talladega management and facilitated by mechanisms and processes established by Talladega stakeholders. Some are available through government agencies, e.g., NTSB, FAA, EPA, and OSHA but these are not yet being used. There is no standing agenda where SMS-related issues are critically assessed and objectively discussed.

Recognition / Encouragement: 24%

There is no written recognition program. Neither the Airport board nor Talladega speedway has provided or budgeted for recogniti on, awards, or incentive programs. However, there is a culture led by top management where two-way communication is encouraged, based on the Perception Survey. In addition, Supervisors provide verbal recognition for outstanding dedication to safety awareness during race events. Since our initial assessment visit in December 2008, the Airport staff has been presented with certificates of appreciation and letters of recognition from the Airport Board. Airport staff does feel moderately encouraged to report.



## Overall Assessment Safety Promotion: 28% and Red

The Airport Manager provides current information and training relating to safety issues relevant to the specific operation of the airport. Gener al training requirements for line servicemen is documented and maintained on the airport personnel; train-the-trainer type courses are provided. Curriculums are pre-established by an FAA approved course, “NATA Safety First”. The course provides lesson plans, tests, and evaluations. Manual training files are developed for each airport employee to assist in identif ying and tracking employee training requirements and verify that the personnel have received initial and recurring training. Feedback and sharing of lessons learned is not systematic. Additional training is provided by the speedway to the staff personnel at weekly management meetings. Safety is not the driving objective for the meetings; however various safety topics and courses ar e performed during the meetings. The Part 139 and the airport ACM require personnel to be prof icient and certified; however there is no requirement established for a safety recognition program or encouragement process. These elements in the Safety promotion program w ill have to be addressed when establishing an SMS process. Perception surveys reveal that personnel perceive safety as being promoted and demonstrated during the race weeks.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 23 

# Part 139 Observations

Talladega maintains an ACM and has achieved an Airport Operating Certificate approved by the FAA required by today’s regulatory requirements. Talladega is a Class IV airport and some of the ACM requirements were not required to be implemented until June 9, 2007, such as Subpart D – Operations, ARFF requirements.

Surveillance of the airfield inspection and review of the ACM revealed that the airport operations may not fully meet with all Part 139 ACM requirements, such as:

• Airport ACM did not contain sufficient information covering Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) coverage and operational requirements of 139.315, 317, and 319.

o Airport did not have sufficient qualification ARFF personnel to meet the mandated requirement of section 139.319.

o Firefighters assigned to airport duties were found to be in noncompliance with requirements to perform a live-fire drill initially and every 12 months.

• Required an approved Airport Emergency Plan (AEP), 139.325; draft under review.

• Marking, Signs, and lighting on airfield.

o Taxiway Alpha 1 had three taxiing route signs that are inoperable. 139.311

o Taxiway Alpha 4 was found to have a partial centerline painted with broken up asphalt on the taxiway area. 139.305

o Taxiway Alpha 3 center line is painted through the holding position line and extraneous markings (pre-existing taxiing lines) exist on the taxiway area.

139.311

• Traffic and wind direction indicators were not located at the end of the runway and lights

were unserviceable. 139.323

Physical discrepancies noted during the surveillance were corrected within a 24 hour period. ARFF requirements are still under review by the FAA.



# COST ESTIMATE:

Part of the requirement of this study was to develop a cost estimate for the implementation of FAA SMS at Talladega. Attachment 6 represents our estimate of this effort, represented both in terms of initial and ongoing. The initial is based on the man-hours that may be needed to establish and set up the process. The ongoing man-hours is based on maintenance of the SMS. These estimates are based on taking into account existing efforts. As the airport management gain more experience with the SMS, it is expected that the long term maintenance costs would go down another 50%. These figures are based on implementation strategies based on the SMS Safety Plan for Talladega.

## SMS Pilot Study - Gap Analysis Report Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Municipal Airport / Talladega, AL    Page 24 The table below represents the summary man-hour cost estimate

Attachment 6 SMS Implementation Cost

Estimate (In addition to current level of effort) Cost Estimate (Man hours)

Section/ Element Assessment Initial Ongoing

Safety Policy & Objectives (7) 20% 68 68

Safety Risk Management (6) 28% 340 200

Safety Assurance (7) 23% 325 344

Safety Promotion (5) 28% 220 108

TOTAL 953 720



## As you can see, implementation would take almo st 1⁄2 person-year to implement, while long term it would take approximately 2 months of time annually to maintain.SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis Survey of Dec 2008Talladega Performed by ESISPage 25ComparisonofACMandSMSElementsRequirements:In comparing the documents required by Part 139 and the ACM toan SMS expectation, the SMS expects more documentation of theimplementation strategy, roles and responsibilities as well as an auditable set of records. In Table 3 below, we listed the ACMrequired documentation, and listed where this matches up to an SMS expectation.Table 3: Comparison: Documentation Expectations: Part 139 and SMSTalladega Municipal AirportClass IV Airport Certificate Manual (Elements)Safety Management System (SMS)Elements Requirements1.ACM Section 303 Personnel.Lines of succession of airport operationalresponsibility2.ACM Section 113 Deviation to Part 139 Requirements. Each currentexemption issued to the airport from the Part 139 requirements3.ACM Section 105 Inspection Authority.Any limitations imposed by theAdministrator4.ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (airport grid map).A grid map orother means of identifying locations and terrain features on and around theairport that are significant to emergency operations5.ACM Section 331 Obstructions. The location of each obstruction required tobe lighted or marked within the airport’s area of authority6.ACM Section 319 ARFF Operation requirements. A description of eachmovement area available for air carriers and its safety areas, and each road7.ACM Section 301 Records: A description of thesystem for maintainingrecords8.ACM Section 303 Personnel (training requirements). A description ofpersonnel training1. Safety Policy and Objectives (Responsibility and Authority):Written guidance on safety authorities and responsibilities of keyairport personnel. (AC 150/5200-37)Safety Policy and Objectives (responsibility and Authority):SMSdocumentation related to Part 139 responsibilities would beincorporated into the ACM. (AC 150/5200-37)2. N/A3. N/A4. Safety Assurance (Integration / Emergency Preparedness):Emergency Response Planning for efficient transition from normalto emergency operations and return to normal operations. (ICAOSMM)5. N/A6. N/A7. Safety Policy and Objectives (Documentation) and SafetyAssurance (Tracking Systems): It is important that the organizationmaintain a record (safety reporting records, surveys, hazardreporting forms, and risk analysis. (AC 150/5200-37)8. Safety Promotion (Training): Documented process to identifytraining requirements. Process that measures the effectiveness oftraining. (AC150/5200-37SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis Survey of Dec 2008Table 3: Comparison: Documentation Expectations: Part 139 and SMSTalladega Municipal AirportClass IV Airport Certificate Manual (Elements)Safety Management System (SMS)Elements Requirements9.ACM Section 305 Paved Areas.Procedures for maintaining the paved areas10.ACM Section 307 Unpaved Areas.Procedures for maintaining the unpavedareas11.ACM Section 309 Safety Areas.Procedures for maintaining the safety areas12.ACM Section 311 Marking Signs and Lighting.Plan showing the runwayand taxiway identification system, including the location/inscription of signs,runway markings, and holding position markings13.ACM Section 311 Marking signs and Lighting.A description of, andprocedures for maintaining, the marking, signs, and lighting systems14.ACM Section 315, 317, and 319 ARFF Index, Equipment and Agents, andOperational Requirements. A description of the facilities, equipment,personnel, and procedures for meeting the aircraft rescueand firefightingrequirements15.ACM Section 113 Deviation to Part 39 Requirements (Statement in section317 –ARFF requirement).A description of any approved exemption to aircraftrescue and fire-fighting requirements16.ACM Section 321 Hazardous Materials.Procedures for protecting personsand property during storing, dispensing, and handling of fuel and otherhazardous substances and materials17.ACM Section 323 Traffic and Wind Indicators.A description of, andprocedures for maintaining, the traffic and wind direction indicators18.ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan.An emergency plan19.ACM Section 327 Self-Inspection Program.Procedures for conducting theself-inspection program20.ACM Section 339 Airport Condition Reporting.Procedures for airportcondition reporting21.ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority andresponsibilities in case of anincident or accident).Aircraft incident andaccidents response22. ACM Section 325 Bomb incidents,including designation of parking areasfor aircraft involved9. N/A10. N/A11.Safety Assurance (Integration of Maintenance)12. “ “13. “ “14. “ “15.Safety Assurance (Integration of Emergency Procedures)16.“ “17.“ “18. Safety Assurance (Integration of Maintenance)19. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emergency Procedures)20. Safety Assurance (Inspections)21. Safety Assurance (Tracking Systems)22. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emergency Procedures)SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis Survey of Dec 2008Table 3: Comparison: Documentation Expectations: Part 139 and SMSTalladega Municipal AirportClass IV Airport Certificate Manual (Elements)Safety Management System (SMS)Elements Requirements23. ACM Section325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority andresponsibilities in case of anincident or accident)Structure fires24. ACM Section325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority andresponsibilities in case of anincident or accident)Fires at fuel farms or fuelstorage areas25. ACM Section325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority andresponsibilities in case of anincident or accident)Hazardous materials /dangerous goods incidents26. ACM Section325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority andresponsibilities in case of anincident or accident)Sabotage, hijack incidents,and other unlawful interference with operations27.ACM Section 339 Airport Condition Reporting.Failure of power formovement area lighting28.ACM Section 105 Inspection Authority.Any other item that theadministrator finds is necessary to ensure safety in air transportation23. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emergency Procedures)24. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emergency Preparedness):Airports must develop an AEP and airlines must develop anEmergency Response Plan. (ICAO)25. “ “26. “ “27.Safety Assurance (Tracking Systems): Airport operator existingresponsibilities for self-inspection and correction of discrepanciesunder 14 CFR Part 139, an effective airport SMS audit. (AC 150/5200-37). In the case of a major power outage, or loss of radar,communications or other major facilities. ICAO SMM28. Safety Policy and Objectives (Roles and Responsibilities)As a result of this comparison, Part 139 and ACM requirementsprovide some of the documentation expected of an SMS, however,the majority of the implementation strategy and responsibilities are undefined, except for Inspections, Integration of Maintenance andEmergency Preparedness. Some other element of SMS, (i.e., Tracking Systems, Roles and Responsibilities) would only provide afew of the expected documentation. Overall, the documentationexpectations of SMS would require the ACM to be enhanced quite abit.

## SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis Survey of Dec 2008



## Talladega Performed by ES IS  Talladega   Page 28 

# CONCLUSION:

An SMS can provide an airport with the capacity to anticipate and address safety issues before they lead to catastrophic incident or accident. SMS provides management with the ability to deal effectively with accidents and near misses so that valuable lessons are applied to improve safety and efficiency. Research has shown that safety and efficiency are positively linked.

The ESIS Consulting team agrees with the results that the airport’s ACM is supportive of SMS, however the reality is that only portions of the ACM can be directly adapted to SMS. An SMS implementation would add quite a bit of docum entation and recordkeeping requirements, both initial and ongoing, to airport operations. However, in terms of ongoing activities and implementation, the SMS would tend to formalize and provide sustainability to Part 139 and ACM requirements, with the benefit of continuous improvement and a culture of prevention. An SMS, rather then burden the organization with unnecessary requirements, would help strengthen communication among airport organizations and personnel via a culture of prevention and continuous improvement.

Upon comparing ICAO and AC SMS expectations to other industry SMS standards (ANSI Z10, OSHA’s VPP, OHSAS 18000, etc.), there are a number of gaps to the proposed FAA SMS. ESIS recommends that, at a minimum, FAA consider either adding or better integrating or expanding the concepts of:

• Safety Policy and Objectives: Objective setting based on Leading Trend Data and

Performance Indicators.

• Safety Policy and Objectives: Safety Committee Expectations

• Safety Risk Management: Requirements

• Safety Risk Management: Incident Investigations and Root Cause Analysis.

• Safety Risk Management: Emphasize t he Risk Management Portion, Especially in Terms of Continuous Improvement and Risk Reduction.

• Safety Promotion: Recognition and Encouragement

ESIS recommends that FAA refer to OSHA’s VPP and ANZI Z 10 for better clarification of the above integration and expansion suggestions, in addition to the criteria ESIS used within our

Profile.

This study also validates the comment presented during the SMS conference last October in Baltimore where it was stated “it would be more appropriate that Part 139 is part of SMS, rather than the other way around”. The SMS is more comprehensive and more inclusive; assigning responsibilities to multiple organizations. SMS also better defines the expectations that safety efforts should be proactive and focus abov e and beyond minimum FAA requirements.

Talladega is a key part of the aviation industry, together with Talladega Super Speedway, Public Safety Agencies (FAA Air Traffic Contro llers, Fire Departments, Emergency Management Agency, Police Departments, etc) and Federal Agencies (Federal Bureau of Investigation, NTSB, etc), the GA airport becomes more populated with small aircraft, automobiles, and people than any airport in the southern region. Through close coordinated efforts and effective planning all key players contribute to meet the high demands of the Speedway race events and the safety of all parties.



## END OF REPORT

# Attachment 1

Perception Survey – Raw Data Analysis

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Overview Raw Data Analysis



## Score 68%

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Response X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Frequency 0 1 11 13 6

Value 1 2345

Product 0 2 33 52 30

Total Score 117

Average 3.77

Std Dev 0.79

Variance 0.63

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Response X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Frequency 0 0 8 15 8

Value 1 2345

Product 0 0 24 60 40

Total Score 124

Average 4.00

Std Dev 0.72

Variance 0.52



## Score 60%

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Response X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Frequency 1 1 6 8 15

Value 1 2345

Product 1 2 18 32 75

Total Score 128

Average 4.13

Std Dev 1.04

Variance 1.08 

## Safety Policy and Objectives

Question 5: How familiar are you with the safety objectives? At a level 5, the safety objectives are specific and
measurable. Employees are aware of the safety objectives via regular communication from airport management.

Question 6: Do you know if the safety objectives are being met? At a level 5, employees are aware of the status of the
safety objectives and the status is discussed by management.

Question 7: What is the overall condition of the tools, equipment and vehicles that you use on the job?At a level 5,
employees should feel that the tools, equipment and vehicles are safe and in good repair. 

## Safety Risk Management

1/4 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Overview Raw Data Analysis

Average 3.27

Std Dev 2.00

Variance 4.00

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Response X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Frequency 0 0 5 12 14

Value 1 2345

Product 0 0 15 48 70

Total Score 133

Average 4.29

Std Dev 0.73

Variance 0.53



## Score 88%

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Average 4.19

Std Dev 0.74

Variance 0.54

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Response X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Frequency 0 0 2 7 22

Value 1 2345

Product 0 0 6 28 110

Total Score 144

Average 4.65 Question 8: Have you ever participated in or been asked to provide suggestions for better control of safety hazards?

Question 9: Do you think that serious hazards are controlled and that your work activities are safe?
At a level 5, employees should feel confident that hazards are being controlled and that risks are controlled or minimized.

Question 11: How satisfied are you that management audits and inspects, so that hazards are identified and resolved
quickly?At a level 5, employees feel that there is an effective auditing and inspection process to identify hazards and get

Question 12: How satisfied are you that management has a high value on safety?At a level 5, employees feel positively
that management puts a high value on safety. 

## Safety Assurance

2/4 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Overview Raw Data Analysis

Std Dev 0.60

Variance 0.36

Total
Responses 31 inverse 0.03225806

Response X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

Frequency 0 1 2 6 22

Value 1 2345

Product 0 2 6 24 110

Total Score 142

Average 4.58

Std Dev 0.75

Variance 0.57



## Score 74%

Total
Responses 30 inverse 0.03333333

Average 4.13

Std Dev 0.76

Variance 0.58

Total
Responses 29 inverse 0.03448276

Average 4.24

Std Dev 0.97

Variance 0.94

Total
Responses 29 inverse 0.03448276 y g gy y supervisor for safe behavior, safety suggestions and hazard reporting? At a level 5, employees are positive about the
safety encouragement and recognition they receive.

Question 16: How satisfied are you with the personal protective equipment training you have received? Some examples
of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) would be gloves, goggles, safety toed shoes, respirators, etc.

At a level 5, employees feel comfortable that the PPE training they received helps them stay safe on the job. Question 13: Do you feel encouraged to report accidents, incidents and near-misses? At a level 5, employees feel
encouraged to report accidents and incidents AND often do.



## Safety Promotion

Question 14: How satisfied are you that the information received at regular safety and health training (e.g. orientation,
meetings, etc.) prepares you to do your job safely?At a level 5, employees receive safety training and are positive about



### 3/4 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Overview Raw Data Analysis

Average 4.24

Std Dev 0.97

Variance 0.94

Total
Responses 29 inverse 0.03448276

Average 3.93

Std Dev 1.11

Variance 1.24 Question 17: How satisfied are you with regards to being trained to use tools and equipment safely?
At a level 5, employees are positive about the safe work procedures related to the tools and equipment that they use.



### 4/4 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis



## Safety Policy and Objectives

Years

of

Service < 1 year 1-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years > 20 years

Scores: 50% 79% 58% 64% No Data

Question 5

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 15070

X5 04200

Question 6

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 15450

X5 05120 

## Safety Risk Management

Years

of

Service < 1 year 1-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years > 20 years

Scores: 67% 71% 78% 70% No Data

Question 7

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 12230

X5 18150

Question 8

Total 2 11 6 11 0

Yes 05570

Question 9

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 02460

X5 28220 

## Safety Assurance

Years

of

Service < 1 year 1-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years > 20 years

Scores: 100% 96% 83% 73% No Data

Question 11

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 15250

X5 16320

Question 12

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 02140

X5 2 10 5 5 0

Question 13

Total 2 12 6 11 0

X4 10140

X5 1 12 4 5 0 

## Safety Promotion

Years

of

Service < 1 year 1-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years > 20 years

Scores: 100% 85% 63% 61% No Data

Question 14

Total 2 12 5 11 0

X4 16050

X5 15320

Question 15



### 1/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis

Total 2 12 4 11 0

X4 03030

X5 28240

Question 16

Total 2 11 5 11 0

X4 15120

X5 14240

Question 17

Total 2 12 5 11 0

X4 13240

X5 16230



### 2/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis



## Safety Policy and Objectives

Race Week
Only Yes No

Scores: 64% 75%

Question 5

Total 21 10

X4 8 5

X5 4 2

Question 6

Total 21 10

X4 10 5

X5 5 3 

## Safety Risk Management

Race Week
Only Yes No

Scores: 68% 80%

Question 7

Total 21 10

X4 6 2

X5 10 5

Question 8

Total 20 10

Yes 9 8

Question 9

Total 21 10

X4 8 4

X5 9 5 

## Safety Assurance

Race Week
Only Yes No

Scores: 86% 85%

Question 11

Total 21 10

X4 10 3

X5 7 5

Question 12

Total 21 10

X4 4 3

X5 15 7

Question 13

Total 21 10

X4 5 1

X5 14 8 

## Safety Promotion

Race Week
Only Yes No

Scores: 71% 80%

Question 14

Total 20 10

X4 8 4

X5 7 4

Question 15



### 1/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis

Total 19 10

X4 5 1

X5 10 6

Question 16

Total 19 10

X4 6 3

X5 5 6

Question 17

Total 20 10

X4 7 3

X5 7 5



### 2/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis



## Safety Policy and Objectives

Only One R W One

Scores: 50%

Question 5

Total 2

X4 1

X5 0

Question 6

Total 2

X4 1

X5 0 

## Safety Risk Management

Only One R W One

Scores: 67%

Question 7

Total 2

X4 1

X5 1

Question 8

Total 2

Yes 0

Question 9

Total 2

X4 0

X5 2 

## Safety Assurance

Only One R W One

Scores: 100%

Question 11

Total 2

X4 1

X5 1

Question 12

Total 2

X4 0

X5 2

Question 13

Total 2

X4 1

X5 1 

## Safety Promotion

Only One R W One

Scores: 100%

Question 14

Total 2

X4 1

X5 1

Question 15

Total 2

X4 0

X5 2

Question 16

Total 2

X4 1

X5 1

Question 17



### 1/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis

Total 2

X4 1

X5 1



### 2/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis



## Safety Policy and Objectives

Depts Maintenance Operations Services
(Terminal &

Grounds) Aircraft

Response
Firefighters
(ARF) Security Loss Control Other

Scores: 50% 70% 68% Insufficient Data 33% No Data 33%

Question 5

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 0547000

X5 1150000

Question 6

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 2662202

X5 0240002 

## Safety Risk Management

Depts Maintenance Operations Services
(Terminal &

Grounds) Aircraft

Response
Firefighters
(ARF) Security Loss Control Other

Scores: 78% 77% 71% 33% 33% No Data 33%

Question 7

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 0240103

X5 1560202

Question 8

Total 3 10 13 2 3 0 6

Yes 3771303

Question 9

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 1351303

X5 2670002 

## Safety Assurance

Depts Maintenance Operations Services
(Terminal &

Grounds) Aircraft

Response
Firefighters
(ARF) Security Loss Control Other

Scores: 100% 95% 93% 50% 33% No Data 33%

Question 11

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 1561201

X5 2470002

Question 12

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 1330201

X5 2 7 11 2 0 0 3

Question 13

Total 3 10 14 2 3 0 6

X4 0221102

X5 3 8 11 0 2 0 3 

## Safety Promotion

Depts Maintenance Operations Services
(Terminal &

Grounds) Aircraft

Response
Firefighters
(ARF) Security Loss Control Other

Scores: 75% 86% 76% 25% 33% No Data 33%

Question 14



### 1/2 Attachment 1

### Safety and Health Perception Survey

2008 Talladega Municiple Airport Length of Employment Analysis

Total 3 9 14 2 3 0 6

X4 0540203

X5 2370101

Question 15

Total 3 9 13 2 3 0 6

X4 1250001

X5 2670202

Question 16

Total 3 9 13 2 3 0 6

X4 0441001

X5 2440202

Question 17

Total 3 9 14 2 3 0 6

X4 0241203

X5 2560101



### 2/2 Attachment 1

# Attachment 2

Perception Survey – Additional Comments Results

### Products & Services | About Us | Support/Help | Zoomerang Forums

© 2009 Copyright MarketTools Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

Date: 1/20/2009 10:46 AM PST Responses: Completes Filter: No filter applied 

# Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey

Results Overview

10. What do you think could be controlled better?Plea se give us your suggestions for hazard and risk

control.

# Response

1 Better PPE

2 The race fans. There should be a better way for the race fans to be held outside the terminal. Adn for the reace car drivers and their crew to be piced up at their planes an d get to the track without interfeerance from the fans and the fans crowding in or outside of the terminal

3 Security gates

4 Better night time security

5 More equipment and training

6 Drivers wanting to go on tarmac to pick up racing personnel. 

## Pa g e 1 of 1 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : O p en Ended Re p ort: Question 10

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintO p enEndedRes p onsesPa g e.as p x? p rint

_ all=

### Products & Services | About Us | Support/Help | Zoomerang Forums

© 2009 Copyright MarketTools Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

Date: 1/20/2009 10:47 AM PST Responses: Completes Filter: No filter applied 

# Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey

Results Overview

18. Are there any tools, equipment or tasks that you believe create an uncomfortable risk of damage or injury? Please use the box below to describe the tools, equipment or tasks. (This box is limited to 3500 characters)

# Response

1 Improper PPE for Aircraft Firefighting.

2 16

3 None

4 The 1986 GMC Pickup truck.

5 No

6 No

7 None

8 I am very happy with the equipment I use

9 No

10 some of the equipment could use updating for bettter serice of the customer.

11 Better night time lighting for the tarmat. We work late on Race nights and it's hard to see. Better reflective Vests. The gas crew should hava clolor, the fu el takers should have a color, etc.

12 We don't hae any and training is needed. 

## Pa g e 1 of 1 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : O p en Ended Re p ort: Question 18

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintO p enEndedRes p onsesPa g e.as p x? p rint

_ all=

### Products & Services | About Us | Support/Help | Zoomerang Forums

© 2009 Copyright MarketTools Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

Date: 1/20/2009 10:47 AM PST Responses: Completes Filter: No filter applied 

# Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey

Results Overview

19. Additional Comments Please use the box below to provide any additional comments regarding this survey. (This box is limited to 3500 characters)

# Response

1 This survey was completed by Complete Car Wash Systems.

2 I work with contruction. Good to work with. Safety is st ressed everday. Commuicates well and gives plenty of time and notice to safetyly prepare and/or move to safe place.

3 Other work I do is with Law Enforcement

4 I believe the staff does an excellent jo b of handling as many aircraft and people they do in a short amount of time of race week. With only one inci dent that I can recall, and that happened this past fall race.

5 Because of the high amount of traffi c and personnel, there sh ould be a safety meeting Saturdays during race

weekend.

6 Runway Flagman

7 I think there ought to be a more secure lcoation for ha ndling money. I think the airpo rt manager and the rest of the crew do a really great job, especially for th e race weekend and the stress that it brings.

8 We work hard during Race weekend. Lo ng hours, but most of us enjoy the job. We like NASCAR & we like planes. Money could be better, but most of us don't do this job for the money. 

## Pa g e 1 of 1 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : O p en Ended Re p ort: Question 19

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintO p enEndedRes p onsesPa g e.as p x? p rint

_ all=

# Attachment 3

Perception Survey – Overview ReportDate: 1/20/2009 10:45 AM PST Responses: Completes Filter: No filter applied 

# Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey

Results Overview

Image - Talladega Municipal Airport

Image - For additional information please call 410-267-0531.

Copyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.

Please help us understand the level of safety at the Talladeg a Municipal Airport. Talladega Municipal airport is voluntarily participating in an FAA pilot study to eval uate safety progress. This survey is desi gned to help us better understand the

effectiveness of our safety program and identify opport unities for improvement. It is entirely AN ONYMOUS, which means that you should feel free to answer every question honestly without any co ncern that anyone will know what you answered. You will be asked to tell us about your role (e.g. front line leader/supervisor, ma nager, hourly paid employee or contractor). This will help us compare responses an d perceptions by groups. Thank you in advance for your cooperation! - Jim Brock



## 1. Please select how long you have worked here (years)

Less than 1 year 2 6%

1-5 years 12 39%

5-10 years 6 19%

10-20 years 11 35%

Greater than 20

years 0 0%

Total 31 100%



## 2. Do you work Race Week only?

Yes 21 68%

No 10 32%

Total 31 100%



## 3. If you work Race Week only, how many have you worked? If you do not work Race Week ONLY, please select

"More than one."

One 2 6%

More than one 29 94%

31 100% 

## Pa g e 1 of 5 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : Results Overview

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintResultsPa g e.as p x

### Total



## 4. What department do you work in? Select all that apply.

Maintenance 3 10%

Operations 10 32%

Services (Terminal & Grounds) 14 45%

Aircraft Response Firefighters (ARF) 2 6%

Security 3 10%

Loss Control 0 0%

Other 6 19%

Safety Policy and Objectives - the safety policy for the Tallad ega Municipal Airport and safety objectives are written and include measurable targets to which the organization ca n improve. Questions 5 & 6 apply to Safety Policy and Objectives.



## 5. How familiar are you with the safety objectives? At a leve l 5, the safety objectives are specific and measurable. Employees are aware of the safety objectives v ia regular communication from airport management.

Not al all 0 0%

Fair 1 3%

Good 11 35%

Excellent 13 42%

Extremely 6 19%

Total 31 100%



## 6. Do you know if the safety objectives are being met? At a level 5, employees are aware of the status of the safety objectives and the status is discussed by management.

Not al all 0 0%

Fair 0 0%

Good 8 26%

Excellent 15 48%

Extremely 8 26%

Total 31 100%

Safety Risk Management – is the recognition of hazards an d the identification of prevention and control efforts. Questions 7 - 10 apply to Risk Management. 

## Pa g e 2 of 5 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : Results Overview

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintResultsPa g e.as p x

## 7. What is the overall condition of the tool s, equipment and vehicles that you us e on the job?At a level 5, employees should feel that the tools, equipment an d vehicles are safe and in good repair.

Unsafe 1 3%

1 3%

6 19%

8 26%

Very safe 15 48%

Total 31 100%



## 8. Have you ever participated in or been asked to pr ovide suggestions for better control of safety hazards?

Yes 17 57%

No 13 43%

Total 30 100%



## 9. Do you think that serious hazards are controlled and that your work activiti es are safe? At a level 5, employees

should feel confident that haza rds are being controlled and that risks are controlled or minimized.

Not controlled 0 0%

Fair 0 0%

Good 5 16%

Excellent 12 39%

All controlled 14 45%

Total 31 100%

Safety Assurance - is the process used by management to ensure that risks are controlle d. Questions 11 - 13 apply to Safety Assurance.



## 11. How satisfied are you that management audits and inspects , so that hazards are identified and resolved quickly? At a level 5, employees feel that there is an effective auditing and insp ection process to identify hazards and get the hazards resolved quickly.

Not at all 0 0%

0 0%

6 19%

13 42%

Extremely 12 39%

Total 31 100% 

## Pa g e 3 of 5 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : Results Overview

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintResultsPa g e.as p x

## 12. How satisfied are you that management has a high value on safety?At a level 5, employees feel positively that management puts a high value on safety.

Not at all 0 0%

0 0%

2 6%

7 23%

Extremely 22 71%

Total 31 100%



## 13. Do you feel encouraged to report acci dents, incidents and near-m isses? At a level 5, employees feel encouraged to report accidents and incidents AND often do.

Not at all 0 0%

Fair 1 3%

Good 2 6%

Excellent 6 19%

Very much 22 71%

Total 31 100%

Safety Promotion – is the development of a positive safety culture which is essential to a sustainable safety management system. Training, communication and recognition are the me ans for promoting safety througout the

location. Questions 14 - 17 apply to Safety Promotion.



## 14. How satisfied are you that the information received at regular safety and health training (e.g. orientation, meetings, etc.) prepares you to do your job safely ?At a level 5, employees re ceive safety training and are positive about the training receiv ed and can give examples as to ho w the safety training helps them to continue to stay safe on the job.

Not at all 0 0%

Fair 0 0%

Good 7 23%

Excellent 12 40%

Extremely 11 37%

Total 30 100%



## 15. How satisfied are you with the amount of encouragement and reco gnition that you receive from your supervisor for safe behavior, safety sugge stions and hazard reporting? At a level 5, employees are positive about the safety encouragement and reco gnition they receive.

Not at all 0 0%

Fair 2 7%

Good 5 17% 

## Pa g e 4 of 5 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : Results Overview

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintResultsPa g e.as p x

### Products & Services | About Us | Support/Help | Zoomerang Forums

© 2009 Copyright MarketTools Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use 

### Excellent 6 21%

Extremely 16 55%

Total 29 100%



## 16. How satisfied are you with the personal protective equi pment training you have rece ived? Some examples of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) would be gloves, goggles, safety toed shoes, respirator s, etc. At a level 5, employees feel comfortable that the PPE training th ey received helps them stay safe on the job.

Not satisfied 2 7%

Fair 0 0%

Good 7 24%

Excellent 9 31%

Very satisfied 11 38%

Total 29 100%



## 17. How satisfied are you with regards to being trained to us e tools and equipment safely? At a level 5, employees are positive about the safe work procedures related to the tools and equipment that they use.

Not at all 1 3%

Fair 1 3%

Good 6 20%

Excellent 10 33%

Extremely 12 40%

Total 30 100%

Other input – is information that you woul d like to share that will help the Airp ort continually improve safety. Question 18 and 19 apply to Other Input.

Thank you for taking this survey and he lping us to improve the airport safety. 

## Pa g e 5 of 5 Zoomeran g | Tallade g a FAA SMS Perce p tion Surve y : Results Overview

1/20/2009 htt p ://a pp .zoomeran g .com/Re p ort/PrintResultsPa g e.as p x

# Attachment 4

Talladega Schedule (On-site)FAASMSBASELINEASSESSMENT–ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control ServicesDay 1MondayTimeElement(Protocol ID)Department(Documents – see attached Doc list)Person12:30 – 1:00Opening MeetingKey Airport Management StaffJim BrockJames Smith1:00 – 2:30Airport OperationsFamiliarizationSite tour and OrientationJim Brock2:30 - 3:30Safety PromotionTraining & EducationElement 2.1, 4.1Line Serviceman Activity and RefuelingJames Smith3:30 – 4:30Documentation Review(Airport Certification Manual, Airport Emergency Plan, Federal Aviation Administration ReportFixed Base Operator Reports i.e., Fuel Farm, Fuel Truck, Certificate of Insurances)4:30 – 5:00Daily Wrap Up and Status5:30 – 6:30Airfield AssessmentPart 139Airfield Night Time SurveillanceJim BrockWe request 1 room for the duration of the visit where we will perform interviews and review documentation.Please place as much of the requested documentation in this room upon our arrival.FAASMSBASELINEASSESSMENT–ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control ServicesDay 2TuesdayTimeElement(Protocol ID)Department(Documents – see attached Doc list)Person8:30 – 9:00Inspections and Audits ServicingElement 2.5, 3.1, 3.4, 3.6Aircraft MaintenanceHarold Corlde9:00 – 10:00Doc ReviewSafety Policy and ObjectivesElement 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.7,Safety Performance and ResourcesElement 1.1,1.5, 3.4IMHOF Operations Manager(Safety Policy, Goals, Objectives)Target and IndicatorsBruce Ramsey10:00 –11:00Doc ReviewPerformance Appraisal, Discipline,RecognitionElement 1.3, 1.4, 2.5, 3.4, 4.4, 5.5Airport Manager(Sample Appraisals)(Appraisal process, Disciplinary Actions, and recent Awards)Jim Brock11:00 – 11:30Site SurveyInspections and Audits andAircraft ServicingElement 2.5, 3.1, 3.4, 3.6General Aviation Tenant( Hangar Inspections, Maintenance Reports)Jim Jackson11:30 – 1:00Working Lunch –Document Review & Completion of ProtocolTravel to Downtown Talledaga1:00 – 2:00Responsibility and AuthorityRisk ManagementAirport BoardOffsite VisitAttend City of Talledaga Board MeetingBoard Members2:00 – 2:30Responsibility and AuthorityRisk ManagementAirport BoardOffsite VisitBoard ChairmanInterview with Committee ChairmanRay Miller3:00 – 4:30Accident Investigation, HazardIdentification, Analysis& Reporting SystemElement 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2Documentation Review(Airport Accident and Incident reports)Jim Brock4:30 – 5:00Daily Wrap Up and Status CheckFAASMSBASELINEASSESSMENT–ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control ServicesDay 3WednesdayTimeElement(Protocol ID)Department(Documents – see attached Doc list)Person8:30 – 9:30Doc ReviewIntegration of OperationsPreventative MaintenanceElement3.6Maintenance/ Facility manger(Repair Records, Safety Work Orders)James Smith9:30 – 10:30Travel to Lincoln Fire Department andObservation of Fire Response EquipmentOffsite VisitsWorking Lunch –Discussion with major participants (include Special Event topics)Operations, Fire Department, EMA, Security, FAA Tower Representative10:30 – 2:00Emergency PreparednessElement 3.1, 3.6Risk ManagementElement 1.3, 2.1, 2Airport Board Chairman:Ray MillerCity of Lincoln Fire Department: Chief Mike WesleyState Fire Marshall:Michael HaynesFAA Air Traffic Manager:Bill WagnerTalladega Fire & Rescue:Chief Danny Warwick and Captain Ronnie DavisTalladega Police Department:Captain ThomasTalladega Speedway Security:Director Bill Hodges and Major Ed GardnerTalladega Sheriff:Bill KennedyUnited Service Administrators (Insurance Adjustor):Ernie Canfield2:00 – 3:00Doc ReviewSafety PromotionTraining & EducationElement 2.1, 4.1Training Coordinator(Examination & Attendance)Jim Brock3:00 – 3:30Doc ReviewLessons LearnedElement 1.3, 2.4, 4.4Accident Investigator(Review 2 Incident Investigation, and Action Plans)Jim Brock3:30 – 4:30Hanger, Maintenance & Fuel FarmOnsite VisitTalledaga Airport – TenantCarwash & Talledaga Aero port Maintenance(Informal Interviews)Steve HorneHarold Cordle4:30 – 5:00Daily Wrap Up and Status CheckFAASMSBASELINEASSESSMENT–ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control ServicesDay 4ThursdayTimeElement(Protocol ID)Department(Documents – see attached Doc list)Person8:00 – 10:00Doc ReviewSMS DocumentationElement 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 2.1, 2.4, 2.6, 3.7Airport Manager and Staff(Data control, Records)Jim Brock10:00 – 12:00Wrap up Site Interviews12:00 – 1:00Working Lunch- Completion of Race Week Protocol andEvaluation Criteria Race Week Emphasis1:00 – 4:30Doc ReviewDrafting of Gap Analysis ReportDrafting of Safety Plan4:30 – 5:00Daily Wrap Up and StatusDay 5FridayTimeElement(Protocol ID)Department(Documents – see attached Doc list)Person8:00 – 9:00Exit Briefing9:00 – 10:00Draft Report Review10:00 – 4:00Return Travel*For the exit brief - In attendance (suggested): Airport Manager and Airport Staff.

# Attachment 5

Talladega – ESIS FAA SMS Profile TMAttachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile1 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.1.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review policy manual, or worker handbook forpolicy statement.Management's commitment to safety should be formallyexpressed in a statement of the organization's safety policy.There is no formal safety policy statement established at Talladega Airport.D DNM 0 3I = Ask workers if they are aware of the policy (workerinterview ).V = Observe if policy statements are posted/published1.1.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask workers if they understand policy, and feelmanagement's commitment is realEstablishment of clear standards of acceptable behaviorrelated to safety.There is no formal safety policy statement, however employees feel management iscommitted to the safety of the personnel at Talladega Airport.I UD 1 3ACRP 4-05 D = Review policy for statement concerning safety as avalue, not just a priorityAC 150/5200-37 I = Ask workers to compare the facilities commitment tosafety with operations (worker interview ).1.1.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Policy should reference a commitment to implementh SMS h f di i ElA safety policy is signed by Top Management No, Talladega airport does not have a policy letter signed by Top ManagementD DNM 0 31.1.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Management’s commitment to safety should beformally expressed in a statement of the organization’ssafety policy.I = Worker. Ask is there a SMS policy.Top Management involved in safety policy making. Policyreflects the organization’s safety philosophy and become theestablishment of the SMS.Management committed to the goal of safety enhancement through application of SMSD,I DNM 0 31.1.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 Policy should reference a commitment to SMS No written policy established that would meet the intent of theSafety Management System(SMS) at the Airport.D DNM 0 31.1.1.8 ACRP 4-05 Safety Policy must indicate how safety managementprinciples will be integrated into the organizational structureand define the procedures necessary for a successful SMSimplementation.No written policy established that would meet the intent of the SMS.D,V DNM 0 31.1.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 The policy should describe a commitment to continual safetyimprovement.No written safety policy available.D DNM 0 31.1.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 The policy should describe a commitment to provide safetyresourcesTalladega speedway policy needs to incorporate a commitment to provide safety recoursesD DNM 0 31.1.1.11 AC 150/5200-37 The policy should describe that employees can report safetyissues without fear of reprisal.No formal reporting process identified during visit; new policy should encourage airportpersonnel to freely report hazards.D DNM 0 31 33Score:1.1 Policy1.1.1.20No written safety policy effectively communicated to airport employees.I,VD = Safety PolicyV = Verify Organizational Integration of Safety.1.1.1.4Executives are monitoring safety performance just as keenlyas financial performance. A commitment to make safety thehighest priority (not a priority, but a value)3DNMTalladega Speedway, North American Testing Company (NATC), has an established safetypolicy for the company. (Documentation not provided).D,I1.0 Policy and ObjectivesTotal:Section 1.0(Policy and Objectives):Provides the motivating force and the resources for organizing and controlling activities within an organization. In an effective program management regards worker safety and health as a fundamental value ofthe organization and applies its commitment to safety and health protection with as much vigor as to other organizational purposes. [PMG (b)(1)] . Commitment to SMS: Actions speak louder than works. If top management gives high priority tosafety and health protection in a proactive manner, others will see and follow.3%DNM 0 3Element 1.1 (Safety Policy): A statement of policy is the foundation of safety and health management. It communicates the value in which safety and health protection is held in the business organization. If it is absorbed by all in the organization, itbecomes the basic point of reference for all decisions affecting safety and health. It also becomes the criterion by which theadequacy of protective actions is measured. [TED 8.4 CPTR III, II.C.1.a; Appendix E, Section I. B & C; Appendix F 4.2.2]ACRP 4-05 Safety policy document to communicate to all employees.Other affiliated entities with a stake in organizational safety.S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile2 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.2.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Review the airport’s published objectives. Objectivescan be numeric or descriptive, better if both. Preferablyone of the SMS elements.A clear results oriented objectivel(s) for the safety and healthprogram (SMS) has been established. Goals are meaningfuland obtainable. [PMG(c)(1)(ii)]No, airport does not publish goals and objectives that relate to SMS elements. A primarymanagement focus is to ensure personnel and equipment are maintained and operated in asafe manner, especially during race events.D DNM 0 31.2.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = SMART. Specific, measurable, actionable, relevantand timely.Objectives are meaningful and attainable. There are no established objectives for the airport.D DNM 0 31.2.1.3 CSP - IB2 I = Ask employees what the objectives of the safetyprogram is. (worker interview )The objectives for the safety program has been communicatedto all members of the organization.There are no formal objectives written for the special race event, however many plans andactivities are directed towards safety of the event. Safety measures are communicated duringplanning and training stages prior to the race. Many people are involved in these planningstages. Although all are aware of safety requirements, no real measurable objectives weredocumented, other than additional observations such as facility inspections and bombsweeping.I UD 1 31.2.1.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Doc. I = leadership Management/Leadership owns the majority of these goals. Undocumented goals: the AirportManager and staff, which is the Fixed Base Operators(FBO), owns the majority of the goals of ensuring a safe working environment. There are nodefined goals and objectives for such as the Airport Board or the City of Talladega.D, I UD 1 31.2.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Doc. I = leadership Goals are based on incident analysis, risk reduction, the selfassessment and other safety data analysis.Airport has not established appropriate safety targets, goals, and/or indicators that would beused to guide the safety efforts of the organization.D, I DNM 0 31.2.1.6 ACRP 4-05 I = Ask workers and supervisors at all levels if they areaware of H&S objectives for their department, somecommittees, the site...I = Ask workers at all levels if theyare aware of safetyThe majority of employees are aware of objectives, theresults desired, and measures planned for achieving them.[PMG(c)(1)(ii)]No written documentation found, yet airport staff understand the goal relating to safety of allactivities such as fueling and refueling services.I UD 1 31.2.1.7 AC150/5200-37 D = Review written objectives and inventory accountableparties. The majority of objectives should not fall ontoSafety and Maintenance.Objectives are assigned to and spread among variousdepartments and committees.No, written objectives, however each department member interviewed demonstrated that theyunderstand safety as primary goal during the race event.D,I UD 1 31.2.1.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Look for a Scorecard documenting completion rates,etc.Specific times for objectives to be met and be revisited toensure effectiveness.For the race events the specific objectives are based on the planned schedule, i.e.stakeholders recognize that they must have safety elements in place before and during theevent.D UD 1 31.2.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Look for a Scorecard documenting completion rates,etc.The site regularly measures progress towards objectives.Goals are both measurable and descriptive relating to theSMS elementsNo, airport does not measure goals or objectives that relate to SMS elements.D DNM 0 35 27Score:Element 1.3 (Responsibility and Authority): Assign and communicate responsibility for all aspects of the program so that managers, supervisors, and employees in all parts of the organization know what performance is expected of them. Provide adequateauthority and resources to responsible parties, so that assigned responsibilities can be met. [TED 8.4 CPTR III; II.C.2.a; Appendix E, Section I.D and Appendix F 4.2.2 and 4.2.3]1.3 Responsibility and AuthorityTotal:19%Element 1.2 (Goals and Objectives): Establish and communicate a goal for the safety and health program and objectives for meeting that goal, so that all members of the organization understand the results desired and the measures planned for achievingthem. [TED 8.4 CPTR III, II.C.I; Appendix E, Section I.B; Appendix F 4.2.2]1.2 Objectives1.3.1 ResponsibilitiesSub-Element 1.3.1 (Responsibility): Assignment of responsibility for safety and health protection to a single staff member, or even a small group, will leave other members feeling that someone else is taking care of safety and health problems. Everyone inan organization has some responsibility for safety and health, especially those in line management, who ultimately control whatworkers do, the tools they use, etc.S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile3 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.3.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Policy and Objectives. Review written guidance.I = LeadershipOrganization’s policy concerning responsibility andaccountability, including written guidance regarding thesafety authorities and responsibilities of all key personnelassigned to the airport.Resolution No 2211 establishes and creates the Talladega Municipal Airport Board.Talladega Municipal Airport Board has defined written responsbilities for "all activities andtransactions of the municiple airport for the City of Talladaga." With regard to SMS thisincludes " the Board handles all the federal funds and makes recommendations as todispersions of the funds. All funds for the Airport Board operations, safety, improvments andrepairs..." "Day by day, the Airport Board has control of all the requirements that the FAAsets, as to the landing and takeoff of aircraft, their guide path, safety aprons, runway lighting,aircraft support systems, taxiports, parking areas, and etc... " The FBO is the North AmericanTesting Company. This means that the North American Testing Company Leases the airportand is responsible for all in coming and outgoing aircraft, refueling, safty and etc. which isrequired by FAA laws and is the responsiblitity of the Fixed Based Operator." Limitedoperational responsibilities are defined within the Airport Certification Manual for keypersonnel of the FBO. Authority for safety decisions are not clearly defined. NATC does nothave defined, written orgainizational responsibilities and accontabilities with regard to airportactivites in both the race event and the day to day operations.D,I PM 2 31.3.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Documentation of Senior management reviewsI = Leadership. Review consist of not only the financialperformance of the organization but also its safetyperformance. =Executives and Managers commitment to safety on the part ofsenior management. The attitudes, decisions and methods ofoperation at the policy-making level demonstrate the prioritygiven to safety.During racing events, the attitudes, decisions and methods of operations demonstrate thepriority given to safety. Examples include multiple public safety agencies are involvedincluding police, fire, medical, emergency management, etc. However, for day to day airportoperations there is no clearly defined commitment to safety from executives or managerswhich includes the Airport Board, NATC, TSS that should be safety policies, programs orobjectives.D,I UD 1 31.3.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Executives and managers decision making process.I = LeadershipManagers decisions and methods of operation at the policymaking level demonstrate a priority given to safety.During race events, safety is demonstrated and executed as a priority. However, policy-making decisions are often based on financial business.D,I UD 1 31.3.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Organizational chart. Succession of controlV = Distribution of responsibilities throughout airportstaff.I = Safety Manager and Staff personnel.Airport organizational chart should be distributed asnecessary to educate and inform the airport staff.Limited organizational chart are identified in the ACM and AEP. Organizational chartincludes the Airport Board and the relationship of the North American Testing Companymanagement structure. Chart should be posted or communicated during race events.D,V,I UD 1 31.3.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Safety Mangers roles and responsibilities.I = Safety Manager and StaffThe responsibilities of the Safety Manager are clearly definedalong with identified lines of communication within theorganization.There is no Safety Manager position defined .D,I DNM 0 31.3.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Safety Manager communicate lessons learned fromevents.I = Worker. Are lessons learned distributed.Lessons learned from hazardous occurrence investigationsand case history or experiences, both internally and fromother organizations.No formal process in placeD,I DNM 0 3S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile4 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.3.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 I = Worker. Ask worker if airport operator/safety managercommunicate safety goals and procedures.V = The safety management system should be visible inall aspects of the airport operation.Relationship among safety manager and airport operations No designated safety managerI,V DNM 0 31.3.1.8 ACRP 4-05 I = Worker. Ask worker about organizational structure. Organizational Structure. SMS spreads responsibility forsafeoperations throughout all levels.ACM defines some limited responsibility for safety among key personnel, however it is notclearly defined. Airport staff personnel do understand their immediate organizationalstructure.I UD 1 31.3.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 I =. Worker. Are there clear reporting lines, clearlydefined duties and well understood procedures (workerinterview).Personnel fully understand their responsibilities and knowwhat to report, to whom and when.No written procedures identifying roles and responsibility; not identified on performancereport.I UD 1 37 27Score:1.3.2.1 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask personnel with assigned health and safetyresponsibilities if they have received the authority toperform their assigned duties. This includes committeemembers, supervisors, etc.Authority has been provided to responsible parties, so thatassigned responsibilities can be met. [PMG (c)(1)(vi)]During racing events, authority for safety has not been defined in writing for AirportManagement, but generally airport safety responsibilities are carried out by the AirportManager. Designated public safety does have authority to carry out safety related measuresin cooperation and under guidance of TSS and NASCAR during race events and emergencyeventsD,I UD 1 31.3.2.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Policy or procedures to if this authority hasbeen communicated.I = Ask employees if they are empowered to stop and shutdown processes when hazards are identified.Employees have the authority to stop jobs and shut downequipment if it is considered unsafe and demonstrates thisability. [(PMG (c)(1)(v)]Yes. Airport staff and stakeholders demonstrated the authority to stop unsafe operations,especially during race week according to personnel interviewed. No written policy available.D,I UD 1 31.3.2.3 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask personnel to explain what personal safety actionsthey have taken in the last year.Authority has been clearly implemented. [TED 8.4 AppendixF, 4.2.2 (I) (B) and Appendix E (I) (D) (2)]Airport management has limited authority and does not have clear guidance on how toimplement safety at the airfield as it relates to changes in the facility or the airfield and to theimplementation of SMS elements.D,I DNM 0 32 9Score:9 36Score:1.4.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D: Performance Appraisals referencing "Element forIndicators and Targets" (if Element does not meet, or hasgaps, then this criteria also must demonstrate gaps).There is written guidance regarding accountability for all keypersonnel.Performance reviews did not reflect safety.D DNM 0 325%Element 1.4 (Management Accountability): Stating expectations of managers, supervisors, and other employees means little if management is not serious enough to track performance, to reward when it is competent, and to correct it when it is not.Holding everyone, especially line-management, accountable for meeting their responsibilities is at the heart of effective workers safety and health protection. If management states high expectations for such protection but pays greater attention toproductivity or other values, safety and health protection may be neglected. To be effective, a system of accountability must be applied to everyone,from senior management to hourly employees. If some are held firmly to expected performance and othersare not, the system will lose its credibility. Those held to expectations will be resentful; those allowed to neglect expectations may increase theirneglect. Consequently, the chance of injury and illness will increase. [TED 8.4 CPTR III, II.C.2.a; Appendix E,Section I.D; Appendix F 4.2.3].22%Subtotal:26%Sub-Element 1.3.2 (Authority): It is unreasonable to assign responsibility without providing adequate authority to get the job done. For example, people with responsibility for the safety of a piece of machinery needs the authority to shut it down and get itrepaired.Subtotal:1.4. Accountability1.3.2 AuthorityTotal:S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile5 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.4.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D: Check Performance Appraisals, Recognitions andDiscipline Records. Discipline is not expected to occurpredominately after incidents, but be more proactive.I: Ask employees explain the acoountability process.Management holds workers accountable for safety and healththrough an effective evaluation process and by checking tomake sure they are meeting their responsibilities (performingessential tasks) and correcting or rewarding them asappropriate.Performance reviews did not reflect safety. Based on the perception onsite, the workforcefeels safety is part of the jobD,I UD 1 31.4.1.3AC 150/5200-37D: Performance Appraisal should match up to Element forResponsibilitiesI = Verify that they are aware of these responsibilities.Managers and supervisors are asked about and heldaccountable for carrying out their established safety andhealth responsibilities. [PMG (c)(1)(vii)]Performance reviews did not reflect safety. Employees feel that everyone is held accountablefor safety.D, I UD 1 31.4.1.4 ICAO SMM D: There is evidence that a periodic evaluation system isused by the facility. This can be periodic scorecards,Performance Appraisals, etc.V: The safety performance standards need to match up toElement Indicators and Targets.Managers are rewarded when safety performance standardsare met and vice versa.Performance reviews did not reflect safety.D,V DNM 0 31.4.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = There is evidence that key indicators ofmanagement’s commitment to safety.Management structure assigned responsibility andaccountability, and allocation of appropriate resources mustbe consistent with the organization’s stated safety objectives.Safety objectives are not defined. There are no key indicators, however, some resources areprovided to maintain to FAA standards.D UD 1 31.4.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Risk mitigation strategy. Management official certify acceptance and accountability forrisk mitigation strategy.No evidence found of risk assessments, yet they do try to mitigate FAA identified hazards.D UD 1 34 18Score:1.5.1.1 CSP D: Budget for Safety Program and its elements.(Adequacy is determined by effectively addressing risksand exposures in priority order.)I: verify that the reporting of safety concerns are notlimited due to a feeling or perception of resourceconstraints.Safety budget is in place and adequate resources in budget areavailable.Airport management does not provide an annual or five year written forecasted safety budget.Monies are requested and allocated as needed by the Airport Board. Financial resources areavailable for the maintenance and property improvement of the airport. Operational costs andairfield maintenance costs are the responsibility of the FBO. There are two elements of thePart 139 that have not been met; recent Class IV requirements for ARFF live-fire training andan approved AEP.D,I PM 2 31.5.1.2 AC 150/5200-37V: Verify that High Priority Risks are being addressed,mitigated and that critical controls are maintained.Adequate resources in people are available. The airport is staffed up during race events. It was identified that financial resources are notallocated for safety training for race event staff, i.e., staff personnel must, yet are not paid.I PM 2 31.5.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 Adequate resources in equipment are available. Resources are made available, but observation of equipment demonstrated the need foradditional attention, i.e. ARFF truck repairs, tow vehicle for aircraft movement. New fueltrucks and generator recently purchased.I,V UD 1 31.5.1.4 PMG (c)(1)(vi) The resources provided include time to meet expectedresponsibilities.Limiting overtime pay for staff, limits some safety responsibilities such as night inspections.Only four night inspections were documented for 2008.D,I UD 1 31.5.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 The resources provided include technical resources such asoutside consultants, and experts in the field to meet expectedresponsibilities. [PMG (c)(1)(vi)]Neal Schaffer's technical expertise is utilized for airfield improvements. No other outsideconsultants were identified at this time.D,I PM 2 3Element 1.5 (Resources): Providing and directing adequate resources (including time, funding, training, personnel, etc.) to those responsible for safety and health, so they are able to carry out their responsibilities. TED 8.4 III.II C.1.a)22%Total:1.5 ResourcesS=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile6 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.5.1.6 PMG (c)(1)(vi) The resources provided includes funding to meet expectedresponsibilities.Resources for Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) training have not been provided tomeet Part 139 regulatory requirements. Talladega Fire Department has budgeted for at leastthree persons to receive live fire training in the coming year. The Lincoln Fire Department,the first responders does not have such plans at this time.D,I PM 2 31.5.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 Resources include organizational systems to meet the SMSelements, to include Documentation, Data capture andanalysis.D,I DNM 0 31.5.1.8 CSPResources are available to prevent exposure to seriousuncontrolled hazards. [Appx F ID5 4.2.3]Resources are allocated to address race event exposures.I, V M 3 310 21Score:1.6.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Documentation of a disciplined approach todocumentation and information management.Management follows a disciplined approach todocumentation and information managementVarious checklists are used including the pre-event checklist established for the preparationand planning of race events and maintenance checklists. There is no formal management ofall required documents such as found in a management system, spreadsheet, schedulingcalendar, etc.D UD 1 31.6.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Safety ObjectivesI = LeadershipSenior Management support requirements of SMS Documented safety objectives are not yet required.D,I DNM 0 31.6.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal Safety Policy and Objectives forimplementationDocumentation that clarifies the relationship of the SMS toother organizational functions and the integration of SMSactivitiesNo, formal safety policy or objectives documented. SMS directed, therefore not yet required.D DNM 0 31.6.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Documentation process that defines how SMSactivities relate to the organization’s operating policies.The contents of this documentation may be in the form ofsafety reporting records, surveys, hazard reporting forms, andrisk analysis/mitigation processes.No formal hazard identification process defined to address SMS. Limited to Part139requirements (i.e., inspections, training, etc.)D UD 1 31.6.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review identified hazards. Hazards to the system (i.e., operation, equipment, people, andprocedures) are identified in a systematic or disciplined way.During speedway events, each agency assigned to provide public safety has established asystematic process of addressing concerns. Hazards identification during routine operation,day-to day business, are documented through various processes; such as facility, equipmentand airfield inspections to help identify hazards.D UD 1 31.6.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review SMS documentation that relate to 14 CFRPart 139 responsibilities.The content may be incorporated into the Airport CertificationManual (ACM)SMS documentation not established. Draft ACM and AEP incorporates some of theprocesses.D UD 1 34 18Score:1.7.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review committee charter. Rotation is encouraged. Committee membership allocations are based upon writtenguidelines. (Charter)There is no designated or identified safety committee.I DNM 0 31.7.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes Minutes are documented for each committee and subcommittee meeting.NoneD,I DNM 0 348%1.7 CommitteesTotal:1.6 DocumentationElement 1.7(Committees): Have a defined charter that outlines employee rotation, quorum rules, goals, objectives, etc. and operates to successful committee rules and guidelines. A Committee is active involvement of all participants outside of the meeting.Otherwise, information sharing is just a meeting. If the committee is effectively involved, (but does not demonstrate ownership) maximum score is PMElement 1.6 (Documentation): All critical elements of a basic systems management safety and health management system must be part of the written program. Written documents include procedures and records. [TED 8.4, Chapter III, IIC.1.a.]. Theprocess of formal documentation clarifies the relationship of the SMS to other organizational functions and the integration ofSMS activities. Further, the documentation process defines how SMS activities relate to the organization’s operating policies.Thecontents of this documentation may be in the form of safety reporting records, surveys, hazard reporting forms, and risk analysis/mitigation processes. It is important that the organization maintain a record of the measures taken to fulfill the objectives of theSMTotal:22%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile7 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P1.7.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes Minutes are kept that include members in attendance. NoneD,I DNM 0 31.7.1.4 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes . Assignments should betracked month to month until closed.Minutes are kept that include recommendations made andassignments.NoneD,I DNM 0 31.7.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes. Minutes are published and distributed to upper managementand the work force.NoneD,I DNM 0 31.7.1.6 ICAO SMM I = Ask employees to name some people on the safetycommittee, how they got there, and what they do. Getspecific examples.Employees know who is on the safety committee and whatfunctions it serves and oversees.NoI DNM 0 31.7.1.7 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of follow-ups ofcorrective actions identified in Safety Work Orders.NoD,I DNM 0 31.7.1.8 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of the correctiveaction follow-up of employee concerns.NoD DNM 0 31.7.1.9 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of the inspectionprocessNoD DNM 0 31.7.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 Committees are involved in/have ownership of the RiskAssessment process.NoD DNM 0 31.7.1.11 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of the ObjectiveSetting process.NoD DNM 0 31.7.1.12 ICAO SMM Committees are provided with the time, training, equipment,on-site safety staff technical support and any other resourcesrequired in order to perform their functions adequately.NoD,I DNM 0 31.7.1.13 AC 150/5200-37 D = Hazard Identification. The safety committee acts as asource of expertise for the Safety Manager.Airport manager at a small airport could conduct it alone,while it may be conducted by a committee or group at a largerairport.No, Talladega Speedway provide monthly safety meetings to address hazards associated withthe organization.D DNM 0 30 39Score:1.0 Policy and ObjectivesSection TotalTotal:D: MinutesI: Committee Members verify that this is effective andpart of their responsibilities as a committee.0%20%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile8 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.1.1.1 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.1 D = Review documentation.V = Formal process, Airport Certification Manual (ACM),describe the system (i.e., operation, equipment, people,and procedures), to identify the hazards.Airport has implemented and maintained procedures foridentifying the ACM and Part 139 requirements that areapplicable to it.ACM has been deevloped to identify hazardous procdeures, operations and conditions.Airport Emeregency Plan (AEP) requirements have not been implemented or approved.D,V PM 2 32.1.1.2 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.2 D = Review SMS documentation. Does the SMSincorporated Part 139.I = Leadership. AskThe airport ensures FAA Part 139 responsibilities areincorporated into the ACM. SMS has been taken into accountin establishing, implementing and maintaining the airportmanagement systems.No SMS documentation. However, FAA Part 139 has been incorporated into the AirportCertification Manual (ACM) relating to a Class IV airport.D,I UD 1 32.1.1.3 VPP 3.1.1.1IIA1D = Review dcoumentation.V = Observe the hazards and conditions present in theworkplace or airfield.Compliance with ACM identifies high risk hazardsprocedures (i.e., fueling operations, airfield electrical work)and determines potential risks.Part 139 (airfield surveillance, fuel and refueling operation..etc) and facility inspections areconducted daily to identify operational hazards. These inspections are performed by NATCpersonnel.D,V M 3 32.1.1.4 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.3 D = Review OSHA training document. (i.e.,lockout/tagout, machine guarding, electrical safety)Regulatory requirements required by OSHA and otheragencies have been identified and assigned.No formal OSHA training courses identified for airport personnel. Monthly meetings theairport manager provides awareness training.D UD 1 32.1.1.5 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.3 D = Other regulatory documents.I = Safety manager or safety committee membersregarding training requirements.All regulatory requirements are maintained and up-to-date. Part 139 requires are maintained and up-to-date.D,I PM 2 32.1.1.6 VPP 3.1 D = Review Hazard Records. The hazard record is keptfor the lifecycle of the system change.Requirements required by insuerance complany beenidentified and assigned.Insurance representative are readily available and onsite during race week.D M 332.1.1.7 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.4 D = Document reviewI = Interview verificationRelevant information on legal requirements arecommunicated to persons working under the control of theairport and other relevant interested parties i.e., tenants,contractors).Discussions with tenants confirm the communication. Non-FAA safety information is notclearly commiunicated.D,I PM 2 314 21Score:Element 2.1 (Requirements): Understanding and acknowledging requirements, to include 14 CFR Part 139, the safety related functions of the ACM, internal and external (insurance company) requirements such that the analysis will not only be inclusive ofrequirements, but inclusive of the expected controls.67%2.1 Requirements2.0 Risk ManagementTotal:Section 2.0 (Safety Risk Management): Involves a variety of worksite examinations to identify not only existing hazards, but also conditions and operations in which changes might occur to create hazards. Unawareness of a hazard, which stems fromfailure to examine the worksite, is a sure sign that safety and health policies and / or practices are ineffective. Effectivemanagement actively analyzes the work and worksite, to anticipate and prevent harmful occurrences. [PMG (b)(2)] [TED 8.4 CPTRIII, II.C.2.b; Appendix E, Section II.C; Appendix F 4.3.2].S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile9 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.2.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 The Hazard identification process is in writing, and samplesare provided.No, written or formal process. For race weeks there is an informal, yet comprehensive riskanalysis that have been done over time to identify potential hazards of this major sport eventand controls are in place to address the raceway type of issues.D PM 2 32.2.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 The hazards associated with Equipment, Tools and Materialsare considered.No formal system in place to show hazards that results from equipment.D,V DNM 0 32.2.1.3AC 150/5200-37 The hazards associated with Operational procedures areconsidered.No written procedures found for race event, however, interviews with public safetyrepresentative stated that operational hazards are addressed during the planning,implementation, and execution of the events.D UD 1 32.2.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 The hazards associated with Incident History are considered. There is no records or documentation providedto demonstrate lessons learned or action plansfor addressing incidents.D,V DNM 0 32.2.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards associated with the Human Element are considered. No behavioral observations were indicated.D,I DNM 0 32.2.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards associated with the Environment are considered. During race week, EMA and Lincoln Hazmat teams areavailable and address environmentalissues. ADEM provide periodic inspections of the airport throughout the year to identifyenvironmental concerns.D M 332.2.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards associated with External services (e.g., FBO or lawenforcement, etc.) are considered.Speedway race week, associate agencies (i.e. fire dept, law enforcement, security) reviewoperations for hazardous conditions and consideration.D,I UD 1 32.2.1.8 PMG (c)(2) Working conditions & operations are analyzed to identifyhazards not previously recognized by the industry.No formal documented analysis accomplished. Informal assessment are performed.D UD 1 38 24Score:2.3.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review process instructions, training and programprocedures.The Hazard Analysis process follows a prescribed process,such as Job Hazard or Safety Analysis, Failure Modes andEffects Analysis, HAZ-Ops, fault trends, etc. and aredocumented.No formal processD DNM 0 32.3.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 I: Verify that they are knowledgeable and receivedtrainingPersonnel performing worksite analysis should have a degreeof experience and competence.Race week provides experienced personnel to perform informal analysis process.I UD 1 3Element 2.3 (Hazard Analysis): Procedures exist to ensure the review of processes and the identification and control of relatedhazards. Acceptable techniques include, but are not limited to Job Hazard Analysis and Process Hazard Analysis. [TED 8.4CPTR III, II.C.2.b]. The objective of the system description is to determine a baseline hazard analysis for the baseline system. A formal process of the management of change, the system description and the baseline hazard analysis should be reviewedperiodically, even if circumstances of change are not present, to determine their continued validity.Element 2.2 (Hazard Identification): The first step in Safety Risk Management is to identify hazards that the organization faces in its operational environment. A description of the system or operation that is going to be changed or implemented must bedeveloped as part of this step in order to be able to identify what could go wrong. A hazard is any existing or potential condition that can lead to an accident or incident. In an SMS, all identified hazards are documented and analyzed to determine whataction is required to eliminate or reduce the safety risk associated with the hazard.D = Review the hazard analysis program for evidence ofwhen it was initiated.I: Verify that the assessors used and understood how toidentify all hazards.V: Observe the workplace to verify that workplacehazards have not been missed.Total:2.3 Hazard Analysis2.2 Hazard Identification33%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile10 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.3.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 Analysis is scheduled based on a priority system.No formal process found.D,V DNM 0 32.3.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 Hazard analysis is performed for higher risk jobs, tasks andprocesses.[PMG (c)(2)(C)]No formal process found.D DNM 0 32.3.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard analysis information looking foranalysis quality, control process.I = Ask safety director to explain the process of reviewinghazard analysis performed by others.Staff personnel who specialize in risk assessment review theresults of worksite analyses.No, airport staff do not conduct risk assessment review. Undocumented worksite analysis isaccomplished by agency specific personnel.D,I UD 1 32 15Score:2.4.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 V = Verify the assessment of the system or componentcompare to the achieved risk level with the tolerable risklevel.A qualified (industry recognized) risk assessment process isused.No written risk assessment procedures exists to identify high hazard task or activities.V DNM 0 32.4.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Persons or group require sufficient operationsexpertise, safety experience, and training to conduct theassessment.Risk Assessors are trained in this process. Airport personnel are not trained to perform Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) or Job SafetyAnalysis (JSA). Personnel are qualified and trained to conduct assessments of theirdesignated locations or area of expertise.D UD 1 32.4.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review incident reports (a risk factor). In order toassess the risk of an accident or incident occurring,severity and likelihood are first determined.Risk determination is in part based on incident history (a riskfactor)Talladega Airport has a low incident rate due to the amount of personnel, exposure andactivities performed annually. The reported aircraft incidents that occurred provided lessonslearned and action items to help minimize recurrence. There is no system established toprioritize task or activities.D PM 2 32.4.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 V = Each hazard in its system context is identified todetermine what risks exist, if any, that may be related tothe hazard.Risk determination is in part based on regulatoryrequirements. (a risk factor)No process foundV DNM 0 32.4.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 V = Any existing or potential condition that can lead toinjury, illness, or death to people; damage to or loss of asystem, equipment, or property; or damage to theenvironment.Risk determination is in part based on property damagecriteria. (risk factor)No process in place to show action items or means of controls (hierarchy)V DNM 0 32.4.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review assessment documents. Depending on thenature and size of the system under considerationoperating environment, e.g., cold, night, low visibility (arisk factor)Risk determination is in part based on environmental impactcriteria. (a risk factor)Part 139 requirements help ensure airfield operational hazards are prioritized by impact ofidentified deficiencies and/or discrepancies noted during airfield inspection.D PM 2 32.4.1.7 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documented inventory of airport operationsand activitiesAn inventory of activities and tasks is created, and is a basisfor risk characterization.No documented inventoryD DNM 0 3Element 2.4 (Risk Assessment): Risk assessment system involves an analysis of a job, process or the interaction of activities in order to identify hazards that have been or could be “built in”, this analysis could include JHA, failure modes and effects,analysis, ergonomic assessments, etc. The analysis must result in improved work practices and employee training as well as (particularly with process analysis) preventive engineering controls where hazards are discovered. Typically, the complexity ofabatement technology, the degree of risk, and the availability of necessary equipment, materials and qualified staff affect hazard controls. In VPP-level site, managers involve employees in discussions of methods to identify useful prevention and controlmeasures, serve as a means for communicating the rational of decisions, and encourage employee acceptance of decisions. Hazardcontrols are incorporated in the following order to alleviate potential hazards (1) material substitution, (2) engineeringcontrols, (3) administrative controls, (4) personal protective equipment, and (5) work rules as a part of the site safety and health program. A VPP-level site will use engineering and administrative controls where possible to control and reduce exposures,before considering the need for of PPE. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, II.C.3.b; Appendix E, Section III.A.; Appendix F 4.4.1]13%2.4.1 Risk Assessment InputsD = Priorities typically include incidence, high-hazards,regulations, risk, judgment and change.V = Verify through observation that higher risks are onthe schedule.2.4 Risk AssessmentTotal:Sub-Element 2.4.1 (Inputs):S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile11 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.4.1.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documented list of potential hazard A list of potential hazards is determined and documented toassist in the risk determination process.No documented listD DNM 0 32.4.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review safety risk controls to ensure mitigation of anunacceptable risk for measurable and monitoredeffectiveness.A list of potential controls is determined and documented toassist in the risk determination process.NoD DNM 0 32.4.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review document for Hierarchy of controls used incontrolling risk.The list of potential controls are organized based onhierarchy, to include elimination, substitution, engineering,administrative and personal protective equipmentNoD DNM 0 32.4.1.11 AC 150/5200-37 V = Verify how risk are determined to be unacceptable,identify and evaluate risk mitigation measures by whichthe probability of occurrence and/or the severity of thehazard could be reduced.A risk matrix is used to determine "acceptable","unacceptable" and "remediation option" risks (tolerability)NoV DNM 0 32.4.1.12 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review established requirements. Determination ofseverity is independent of likelihood, and likelihoodshould not be considered when determining severity.Risk Factors, Severity and likelihood, are defined. NoD DNM 0 35 36Score:2.4.2.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal risk assessment program that identifies anddocuments hazards on the airport.A written risk assessment procedure exists, encompassing allof these criteria (inputs, process steps and outputs).No Formal risk assessment programD DNM 0 32.4.2.2 ICAO SMM D = Review Prioritized listing Tasks and activities are prioritized by assessment by riskfactors.No formal prioritized listing for hazard abatement.D DNM 0 32.4.2.3 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard listing Hazards are identified for prioritized tasks and activities. No hazard listingD DNM 0 32.4.2.4 ICAO SMM I = Management. Prioritized Task and Activities Risk is determined for prioritized tasks and activities. Speedwayevents stakeholder participants collectively discuss risk factors associated withrelated operations.I PM 2 32.4.2.5 ICAO SMM D = Review documents for hierarchy of controls Controls are selected based on the hierarchy of controls. No documents found or presented reflecting controlsD, I DNM 0 32.4.2.6 ICAO SMM D = Review procedures for identifying high risk andeffective controlsHigher risk (unacceptable) use more effective controls(elimination, substitution and engineering).No written procedures for controlsD, I DNM 0 32.4.2.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Lessons learned, safety news letters, noticesand bulletins, bulletin boards, Etc.I = Ask staff and employees are they actively encouragedto identify potential hazards and propose solutions.V = Safety reporting drop boxes and electronic reportingthrough web sites or emailHazard and controls are initially and routinely communicatedto the workforce.Safety meetings provide opportunity for airport staff and Talladega speedway employees toexchange information and data relating hazards associated with events. There is no safetyreporting drops available; however, personnel can contact the Talladega Speedy "hotline"regarding safety concerns.D,I,V UD 1 3Subtotal2.4.2 Risk Assessment Process14%Sub-Element 2.4.2 (Process):S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile12 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.4.2.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review self-inspections and external reports. SafetyAssurance includes self-auditing, external auditing, andsafety oversight.The use of controls, identified for initial high risks, areverified as being in place and used via averification/inspection process.Self-inspections are performed monthly throughout the year and increased during the majorspeedway events. External audits of the speedway are conducted by the Headquarters Officein Daytona (no external report available).D PM 2 32.4.2.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Goals and Objectives for risk reduction. Risk reduction is ongoing, and as a by product of GoalsandObjectives.No formal process to show risk reduction of hazards associated with race week.D DNM 0 32.4.2.10 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review annual safety reports. Self-audits and externalauditing practices.The Risk Assessment Process (input, process and output) isevaluated annually as part of the SMS assessment.Uncertain, if external audits are conducted by the Headquarters Office in Daytona (noexternal report available).D UD 1 32.4.2.11 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review records. Hazards are assessed, mitigated,documented, tracked, and operational data arecontinuously monitored to provide feedback on hazards.Records of inputs, data and outputs are maintained No records.D DNM 0 36 33Score:2.4.3.1 ICAO SMM D = Review documentation A high hazard task and activity list is documented andmaintained.No formal documentation or system maintainedD DNM 0 32.4.3.2 ICAO SMM I = Workers Involvement There is worker involvement in the risk assessment process. No formal risk assessment, personnel perform daily inspections and surveillanceI UD 1 32.4.3.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review risk assessment documentation. Theidentified risk would be documented before moving toassess and analyze the risk, a determination of theprobability of that risk occurring, and the severity if suchan event were to occur.Risk and tolerability limits are established and documentedfor tasks and activities.No documentation foundD DNM 0 32.4.3.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Hazard and identified risk are documented beforemoving to assess and analyze the risk, a determination ofthe probability of that risk occurring, and the severity ifsuch an event were to occur.Controls and work procedures from the risk assessment areintegrated into operational procedures.No document or recordsD DNM 0 32.4.3.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review risk assessment documents. All potentialhazards are identified and documented and are subjectedto an assessment of the possible severity and potentialrisk.Action items identified during the risk assessment process aredocumented, tracked and closed on a timely basis.No risk assessment documents to identify action items/plan implemented.D DNM 0 32.4.3.6 ICAO SMM D = Review risk assessment documentation, determine ifa reasonable percentage of controls are based on thesemore effective methods.V = Observe the worksite and identify areas whereengineering design principles integrate hazards and thoseareas yet to be addressed.Substitution, Defense in Depth and Engineering techniquesare used preferably to control or correct hazards wherefeasible and appropriate, especially for more serious hazards.[PMG(c)(3)(i)(A)]No formal process established, possibly due to the amount of incident. There is no centralizedcollection system (database) to review actions taken.D,V DNM 0 32.4.3.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review safety self-audits and external auditingpractices.The Risk Assessment annual process evaluation results in adocumented improvement strategy.Periodic self-audits and external audits performed on the speedway. Part 139 requirementsare evaluated and performed by FBOs and FAA.D PM 2 3Sub-Element 2.4.3 (Outputs):Subtotal2.4.3 Risk Assessment Outputs18%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile13 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA PSubtotal3 21Score:Total:14 90Score:2.5.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard analysis procedures and safe jobprocedures. Have the results of the analysis made it intothe safe job procedure.I = Ask employees to describe the hazard analysis processfor recent changes or initiatives. (worker interview )V = Are job hazard analysis posted in the workplace?Routine hazard review such as process review or hazardanalysis or (in construction) phase hazard analysis results inimproved safe work procedures and controls.No formal hazard analysis/safe job procedures established. Speedway race week prechecklist, communication/, and close coordination between the agencies (stakeholders) helpimprove the safe work procedures. Personnel are informed during event orientation ofchanges in conditions and hazards associated with the workplace.D,I,V UD 1 32.5.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review process instructions and program procedures. Risk Analysis results are documented. No instructions available.D DNM 0 32.5.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review AnalysisV= sample at least a few tasks and analysis records.Analysis documents task steps, hazards and controls,recommendations made, dates conducted, and responsibleparties.Documents/records unavailable to reflect analysis processD,V DNM 0 32.5.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training documentation.I = Ask employees if they have received training on PPEuse. (worker interview )Employees have received training on why controls (includingPPE) are necessary and how to use and maintain it.PPE training provided through National Air Transportation Association's (NATA) Safety 1stand safety meetings. During observation and informal interview noted that not all personnelhad PPE available when performing hazardous operations (i.e., fire retarded gloves, aprons.etc). Equipment and training is provided.D,I PM 2 32.5.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training records.I = Workers - verify.The controls identified are used to train operators to safe jobprocedures.Reviewed airport staff training records and Speedway monthly safety training meeting.Talladega speedway provides training during monthly meetings (i.e. PPE, electrical safety,..etc). Other in-depth specialized training such as forklift driving, lockout/tagout, confinedspaces are performed in a different forum.D, I PM 2 32.5.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Review PPE program, JHAs, written procedures,inspections, etc. for inclusion of PPE.Controls are understood and followed by all affectedparties.[PMG(c)(3)(C)]No JHAs or written procedures. Process are in-place and incorporated during speedway races.Fire department, EMA, Security personnel and Airfield operators have appropriate PPEavailable on-site during race week. Volunteers are provide reflective vests, hearingprotection, gloves, as required per assigned operation.D PM 2 32.5.1.7 ICAO SMM D = Review operating instructions. Determine if theyreflect safe work practices identified in hazard analysis.Safe operating procedures have been incorporated intooperating instructions.No Operating Instructions (OI) or Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). Public safetyagencies have specific procedures. Airport does not maintain OI or SOPs.D DNM 0 316%Sub-Element 2.5.1 (Mitigation): Implementation and Communication of Controls and Work Procedures. Risk mitigation strategies are based on human performance; it is the least reliable sort of solution to depend upon. The ultimate purpose of hazardidentification, risk determination, and analysis is to prepare for risk mitigation. Risk mitigation measures work through reducing the probability of occurrence, severity of the consequences, or both. Risk mitigation approach selections include avoidance,transfer, assumption, or control measures.2.5 Risk ManagementElement 2.5 (Risk Management): Safety risk management encompasses the assessment and mitigation of the safety risks of the consequences of hazards that threaten the capabilities of an organization, to a level as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP).The objective of safety risk management is to provide the foundations for a balanced allocation of resources between all assessed safety risks and those safety risks the control and mitigation of which is viable. Safety risk management builds upon a systemdesign into which appropriate controls to the safety risks of the consequences of anticipated hazards are embedded in the system.2.5.1 Mitigate14%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile14 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.5.1.8 ICAO SMM D = Review maintenance instructions. Determine if theyreflect safe work practices identified in hazard analysis.Safe operating procedures have been incorporated intomaintenance instructions.No maintenance instructions beyond equipment or vehicle manufactures instructions.D UD 1 32.5.1.9 ICAO SMM D = Review safe job procedures. Determine if theyreflect non-routine tasks performed at the facility.I = Ask employee responsible for performing non-routinetasks if they are aware of the hazards associated with thetasks.Workers involved in non-routine operations, or who are rarelyassigned, are aware of job hazards and safety precautions.No official safe job procedures. Speedway race participants are provided awareness trainingand briefed on hazard associated with job or task. Contractor safety plans are not filed at theairport.D,I UD 1 3Subtotal9 27Score:2.5.2.1 ICAO SMM D = See Doc.I = Ask supervisors to explain how rules are enforced.(supervisor interview )Safety and health rules are enforced by line management. Violations are corrected on the spot during race events. Supervisorsare actively involvedduring speedway races.I PM 2 32.5.2.2 ACRP 4-05 I = Ask workers if they know of workplace rules and cangive examples. (worker interview ) Positivereinforcement cannot be based on absence of accidents.Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by allaffected parties as a result of an effective positivereinforcement process. [PMG(c)(3)(B)]Positive reinforcement is provided verbally to individuals and luncheons for organizationalaccomplishment. No formal process exist.I UD 1 32.5.2.3 ICAO SMM D = Review disciplines. Apply to both management andemployees.Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by allaffected parties through a clearly communicated andimplemented disciplinary system.No evidence of safety discipline actions been accomplished at the airport. During speedwayraces disciplinary actions is communicated to participants (temporary employees).D PM 2 32.5.2.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Review most of the discipline reports. Compare tothe OSHA log.The majority of disciplines are based on observations ratherthan management waiting for accidents to occur.[PMG(c)(3)(B)]No evidence of safety observations performed relating to disciplinary actions.D DNM 0 32.5.2.5 ICAO SMM D = Review most of the discipline reports. The discipline systems is enforced for both management andemployees.No evidence of safety discipline actions.D DNM 0 32.5.2.6 ICAO SMM D = Review conformance reportsV = Verify measures are posted or distributedControl verification conformance is measured and reported tothe workforce.No conformance reports distributed or available.D, V DNM 0 32.5.2.7 ICAO SMM D = Review performance appraisals process forconformance.Management and departments are measured on controlconformance, risk reduction strategies, and timely closure ofaction items. These measurements are part of the performanceappraisal process and results in improved performance.Performance appraisals of airport staff personnel do not address or identify safetyrequirements, such as roles and responsibilities, safety goals, or measures of safetyconformance.D DNM 0 35 21Score:2.5.3 Change Hazard AnalysisSub-Element 2.5.3 (Change Hazard Analysis): Procedures to ensure analysis of all newly acquired or altered facilities, processes, materials, equipment, and/or phases before use begins, to identify hazards and the means for their prevention or control.Typically, a process includes requirements, review criteria checklists, health and safety signature authority, etc.24%Sub-Element 2.5.2 (Monitoring and Supervision): The establishment and maintenance of a safety database provide an essential tool for corporate managers, safety managers and regulatory authorities monitoring system safety issues.33%2.5.2 Monitoring/SupervisionS=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile15 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.5.3.1 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Pre-use or change analysis written program orprocedure.There is a written procedure for the Pre-Use process. Thisprocedure includes responsibilities and a description of whatthe reviewer is suppose to review.No written process for pre-use analysisD, I DNM 0 32.5.3.2 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Check Pre-use and incident records.I = Verify that hazard analysis are updated by responsibleparties, typically for each incident investigation or processchange, integrated with Pre-use.Analysis is re-visited whenever changes or errors areidentified.No, reviewed three incident reports (minor), documentation or evidence of an existingprocess.D DNM 0 32.5.3.3 PMG(c)(2)(B) D= Required by the written program, and evidenced byengineering design review records.The Pre-Use Analysis is integrated into the sites' engineeringdesign review process.No written program establishedD UD 1 32.5.3.4 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Review procedures for performing pre-use analysison new facilities.I = Ask process owners to explain the process withexamples.There is a process to analyze modifications to existing andnew facilities.No documentation. Race coordinators (stakeholders) and Talladega speedway performanalysis of existing facilities prior to the events (interview). The airport conducted aninformal analysis on the new GA hangars.D,I UD 1 32.5.3.5 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Review procedures for performing pre-use analysison new equipment.I = Ask process owners to explain the process withexamples.There is a process to analyze modifications to existing andnew equipment.NoD,I DNM 0 32.5.3.6 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Review procedures for performing pre-use analysison new materials.I = Ask process owners to explain the process withexamples.There is a process to analyze modifications to existing andnew materials and chemicals.NoD,I DNM 0 32.5.3.7 PMG(c)(2)(B) This Pre-use analysis process exists at design stage, prior topurchase.NoD,I DNM 0 32.5.3.8 PMG(c)(2)(B) The Pre-use analysis process effectively identifies and assuresthat all safety controls are in place prior to production/use.Race events stakeholder participants collectively discuss risk factors associated with relatedoperations. Rules seem to be effective and clearly understood by all participants.D,V UD 1 3Subtotal3 21Score:2.5.4.1 ICAO SMM D = See Doc.I = Ask supervisors to explain how rules are enforced.(supervisor interview )Safety and health rules are enforced by line management. No written formalized process, yet personnel are aware of hazardsD, I UD 1 32.5.4 Risk Reduction14%D=Review the latest changes for documented evidence ofprocess, checklist and recommendations tracked toclosure.I = Ask process owners to explain the process withexamples.V = Verify that appropriate hazards have been identifiedand controlled.Sub-Element 2.5.4 (Risk Reduction): Trend analyses in the safety assurance process should be employed to track safety performance measures over time and to factor this information into planning of future activities under situations of change.Moreover, where deficiencies have been found and corrected as a result of past audits, evaluations, investigations, or reports,it is essential that such information is considered to assure the effectiveness of corrective actions. Experience has shown thatair safety-related incidents are best recorded and tracked using a PC-based database. However, a spreadsheet format, Gantt chart or MS Project type layout is recommended for ease of viewing and tracking. Each item will be assessed to determine howthe organization will create or modify policies, objectives, procedures or processes to incorporate the required SMS componentsand elements.S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile16 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.5.4.2 ICAO SMM I = Ask workers if they know of workplace rules and cangive examples. (worker interview ) Positivereinforcement cannot be based on absence of accidents.Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by allaffected parties as a result of an effective positivereinforcement process.No written formalized process, personnel provide examples relating to race events.I UD 1 32.5.4.3 ICAO SMM D = Review disciplines. Apply to both management andemployees.Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by allaffected parties through a clearly communicated andimplemented disciplinary system.Discipline process not apparent. Speedway race event are communicated, yet notdocumented.D DNM 0 32.5.4.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Review most of the discipline reports. Compare tothe OSHA log.The majority of disciplines are based on observations ratherthan management waiting for accidents to occur.[PMG(c)(3)(B)]Discipline process not apparent. OSHA logs did not provide data.D DNM 0 32.5.4.5 ICAO SMM D = Review most of the discipline reports. The discipline systems is enforced for both management andemployees.Discipline process not apparent. Speedway race event are communicated, yet notdocumented.D DNM 0 3Subtotal2 15Score:Total:10 60Score:2.6.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review written procedures. They typically includeresponsibilities, instructions, definitions andrecordkeeping requirements.Accident/Investigation procedures are in writing. Not in writing for the airportD DNM 0 32.6.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review investigation reports. Accident investigations are documented. Airport uses Talladega Super speedwayand ISC Incident Report forms.D UD 1 32.6.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Training records and course outline.I = InvestigatorsAll investigations are conducted by personnel trained ininvestigation and causal factor techniques.During race event, accidents are investigated and some documented. Airfield accidents areinvestigated by NTSB, FAA and ISC. For day to day incidents causal factors are not alwaysidentified. Note: Designated airport staff personnel require formal investigation training.D, I UD 1 32.6.1.4 ICAO SMM I = ValidatesV = Verify a few yourself.Personnel independent of the injured party should validatethat corrective actions are appropriately identified.Corrective actions are not always identifiedI, V DNM 0 32.6.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review investigation reports. All accident investigations include preventionrecommendations.Corrective actions are not always identified so preventive measures are not documentedD DNM 0 313%17%2.6 InvestigationsElement 2.6 (Investigation): All types of significant incidents (incursions, property damamge, injuries, illness, spills, fires, first aid, near-misses) are investigated. Accidents and incidents in which employees narrowly escape injury, clearly exposehazards.Analysis to identify their causes permits development of measures to prevent future injury or illness. Although a first look may suggest that “employee error” is a major factor, it is rarely sufficient to stop there. Even when an employee has disobeyedarequired work practice, it is critical to ask, “Why”? A thorough analysis will generally reveal a number of deeper factors, which permitted or even encouraged an employee’s action. Such factors may include a supervisor’s allowing or pressuring theemployee to take short cuts in the interest of production, inadequate equipment, or a work practice that is difficult for the employee to carry out safely. An effective analysis will identify actions to address the causal factors in an accident or “nearmiss”incident. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, II.C.2.i; Appendix E, Section II.G.; Appendix F 4.3.5]S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile17 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P2.6.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Review investigation reports and compare withOSHA log. Determine if lost time accidents are captured.I = Discuss with responsible parties methods of capturinglost time incidents for investigation.In depth incident investigations are conducted for all seriousand lost time accidents. [PMG(c)(3)(B)]If aircraft related, it is done by others such as NTSB. ISC investigator and adjusters are onsite during race week. Airport is considering having full time investigator on site at futurerace events for the airport operations.D,I PM 2 32.6.1.7 ICAO SMM D = Review investigation reports and compare with firstaid logs and near miss. Determine if accidents and nearmisses are captured.I = Discuss with responsible parties methods of capturingproperty loss investigations.All significant incidents including recordable, injuries,illnesses, property damage, fires, spills etc. resulting inpersonal injury or property damage are investigated. [PMG(c)(2)(iv)]If aircraft related, it is done by others such as NTSB. ISC investigator and adjusters are onsite during race week. Airport is considering having full time investigator on site at futurerace events for the airport operations.D,I PM 2 32.6.1.8 ICAO SMM D = Review caused factor methodology to verify itfollows a defined causal analysis or root cause analysistechniqueV = Observe investigation techniques to verify if causalfactor methods conform to requirements and identify rootcauses.All investigations address the causal factors and root causerather than simply blame on the employee (i.e., stopping at“human error” ). This results in actions to prevent futureoccurrences.Not addressedD,V DNM 0 32.6.1.9 ICAO SMM D = Review committee meeting minutes.I = Ask committee members their role in accidentinvestigations.(For construction only) The joint labor managementcommittee is involved in accident investigations.Not applicableD,I N/A 02.6.1.10 ICAO SMM D = Review accident investigation documentation. Contractors report accidents, property damage, near misses. NoD DNM 0 32.6.1.11 ICAO SMM V = Verify that recent Corrective Action Plans are closed. Contractor corrective action plans are recorded and trackedand implemented.No, not verified or trackedV DNM 0 3Total:6 30Score:2.0 Risk ManagementSection Total3.1.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Written procedures typically identify: responsibility,frequency, topic areas, and recordkeeping.Written procedures exist for conducting routine selfinspections with written reports and hazard correctivetracking.Daily ACM inspections are completed and documented. TSS performs facility inspections bymanual tracking methods.D PM 2 33.1 Inspections and Self-Auditing20%3.0 Safety AssuranceSection 3.0 (Safety Assurance): Safety Assurance is triggered by a determination that a hazard or potential hazard exits. Where feasible, hazards are prevented by effective design of the jobsite or job. Where it is not feasible to eliminate hazards, they arecontrolled to prevent unsafe and unhealthful exposure. Elimination or controls is accomplished in a timely manner, once a hazard or potential hazard is recognized. The ideal order implementing controls systems is through substitution, engineering,administrative and lastly personal protective equipment.20%Element 3.1 (Inspections/Audits): A comprehensive examination of the workplace has been conducted and hazard controls have beenestablished, routine site safety and health inspections are necessary to ensure that changes in conditions and activities donot create new hazards, that hazard controls remain in place and are effective. Personnel performing regular inspections should, however, possess a degree of experience and competence adequate to recognize hazards in the areas they review and toidentify reasonable means for their correction or control. Such competence should normally be expected of ordinary employees who are capable of safely supervising or performing the operations of the specific workplace. Additional regulatory inspectionsmay include: emergency response equipment, PPE, forklift, cranes, hoists, slings, ladders, fire extinguishers, sprinkler systems, elevators, boilers, pressure vessels, etc. Inspection procedures must be written and include frequency, those responsible forconducting the inspections, recording of findings, responsibility for abatement and tracking of hazards for timely correction.[TED 8.4, Chapter III, IIC.2.f.].S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile18 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.1.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Written procedures typically identify: responsibility,frequency, topic areas, and recordkeeping.There is a written schedule of inspections. Yes, per ACM fuel farm, refuelers. Independent inspections are done by FAA, Chevron andADEM.D M 333.1.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Written procedures typically identify: responsibility,frequency, topic areas, and recordkeeping.Written procedures define inspections & corrective action asto responsibility.Per ACM procedures are definedD M 333.1.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Written procedures typically identify: responsibility,frequency, topic areas, and recordkeeping.Written procedures define corrective action as to frequency. Per ACM procedures are definedD M 333.1.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review the checklist and hazard inventory to verifythat they are based on common elements.V = Observe areas that have checklists to verify that allhazards have been addressed.Written inspection checklists are used to provide guidance asto where to look and what to look forYes. Daily inspections, pre race checklist, fueling activities and facility inspectionsD,V M 3 33.1.1.6 ICAO SMM D= Review Inspection checklists. References incorporates information sources such as jobhazard analysis, investigations, employee concerns, etc.No tailored to equipment and facilitiesD DNM 0 33.1.1.7 ICAO SMM D= Review Inspection checklists. Checklist criteria check for controls from hazards discoveredthrough regulatory review, investigations, hazard analysis.Checklists are periodically updated to reflect changes.No based primarily on regulatory requirements. Race checklists are based on priorexperienceD DNM 0 33.1.1.8 ICAO SMM D = Review written procedures. Written procedures define how to record findings. ACM procedures on how to inspectthe airfieldD PM 2 33.1.1.9 ICAO SMM D = Typically , even hazards fixed on the spot arerecorded. They may not need to be tracked, however.Written procedures define which findings are reported. Yes on daily self-inspections and fuelingD PM 2 33.1.1.10 PMG (c)(2)(C)(ii) D = Review inspections such as general workplace,chemical use, emergency preparedness, fire protection,and high hazard areas to determine hazards found.V = Observes hazards in the workplace that were notidentified on previous inspections.Regular site safety and health inspections identify new orpreviously missed hazards and failures in hazard controls.Observations indicate potential new hazards not identified such as older apron areas indeteriorating condition, and lack of centerlines on these taxi lanes; newly painted hold barmarkings and centerlines; and inoperable airfield signs.D,V UD 1 33.1.1.11 PMG (c)(2) D = Review Inspections and verify that they cover thewhole facility quarterly.I = Ask inspection team members how they ensure thewhole facility is inspected quarterly.Monthly inspections are performed with quarterly coverage ofwhole site (general industry). (More frequently if conditionschange often.) [Appx F IID2]Daily self inspections on airfield. Site inspections done periodicallyD,I PM 2 3S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile19 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.1.1.12 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training records to verify that inspectors haveappropriate training.I = Ask inspectors what training they have received.V = Walk with inspectors, perform an inspection andverify that they have the knowledge needed to identifyhazards and controls.Inspectors are qualified to recognize workplace hazards,particularly those particular to their industry. [appx F IID4]Race events- Public safety does inspections prior to race and the personnel are qualified. Fordaily inspections, personnel receive refresher training as it relates to the ACM, runwayincursions, self-inspections, ramp communications. Additional training appears warrantedfor airfield inspections and hazard recognition.D,I UD 1 33.1.1.13 ICAO SMM D = Review any requests for assistance made to stateconsultation services.For small businesses in need of assistance, a request has beenmade for a consultation visit from the state Consultationprogram to get a full survey of existing and potential safetyand health hazards in the workplace.FAA performs a periodic Airport Certification Inspections. OSHA or state OSHA has notbeen requested.D PM 2 33.1.1.14 PMG (c)(2)(ii) D =Review written inspection reports and related hazardcorrection tracking information.There are written inspection reports to document hazardsdiscovered, responsibility assigned for correction, and thetracking of correction completion.Yes for facility inspections. Tracking is informal.D PM 2 33.1.1.15 PMG (c)(2) Construction sites should be done at least weekly. D =inspection records.More dynamic environments where conditions changefrequency, require a more frequent inspection schedule.[Appx F IId1]No documented inspection records for construction site observation. For race events, morefrequent and in-depth inspections are accomplished on the airfield (public safety personal arein place full time during events).D PM 2 33.1.1.16 AC 150/5200-37 V = Compare the inspection form to the hazards observedduring the site walkthrough.The inspection process can identify the hazards observedthroughout the facility. [Appx F IID7]Observations such as extraneous airfield markings, sign lights not working, indicateadditional attention needed during inspection process.V UD 1 3Total:29 48Score:60%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile20 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.2.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review the procedure for employee reports ofhazards. This system may recommend but must notrequire that the internal process be used before filing acomplaint with OSHA. [TED 8.4 Appendix B Reports ofEmployee Safety and Health Problems / Concerns (A)]I = Ask employees to give examples of reporting hazardsand the process. (employee interview )A reliable system is provided for employees to notifymanagement personnel, in writing, about conditions thatappear hazardous.Work order system is in place through TSS. Not used on daily basis . Tenants use verbalrequests primarily. Before race events, work orders are used. Documentation not availablefor review.D,I UD 1 33.2.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review the procedure for employee reports ofhazards regarding notifying employees of actions taken.I = Ask employees who have reported hazards what typeof response they received. (worker interview )A reliable system is provided for employees to receive timelyand appropriate responses and employees are systematicallyinformed of the results of their notifications.During race events, the work order system thought facility at TSS is used. Unable to validateuse of work order systemD,I UD 1 33.2.1.3 ACRP 4-05 D = Review tracking records.V = Walkout recent closed items to verify closure.The status of all hazard reports (e.g., inspections,investigations, maintenance trends, etc.) are prioritized andassigned to include time frames and abatement follow-up.NoD,V DNM 0 33.2.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review tracking records.V = Walkout recent closed items to verify closure.Hazard reports (e.g., inspections, investigations, maintenancetrends, etc.) that will not be completed in a timely mannerdocument the interim protection.NoD,V DNM 0 33.2.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask employees if they readily use the system. Askhow the system was communicated to them. (workerinterview )Employees are encouraged to and use this reporting system aspart of a non-punitive culture.No formal system. Hazards are reported verbally.I DNM 0 33.2.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = The procedures allows for the anonymous reportingof hazards.A reporting system supporting anonymity is available, publicand used.No anonymous system.D DNM 0 3Total:2 18Score:11%3.2 Non-Punitive Safety ReportingElement 3.2 (Reporting System): Reliable system for employees to notify management of conditions or practices that appear hazardous and to receive a timely and appropriate response serves a dual purpose. It gives management the benefit of many morepoints of observations and more experienced insight in recognizing hazards or other symptoms of breakdown in safety and healthprotection systems. It also gives employees assurance that their investment in safety and health is worthwhile. A system isreliable only if it ensures employees a credible and timely response. The response will include both timely action to address any problems identified and a timely explanation of why particular actions were or were not taken. Since the employer benefits fromemployee notices, effective management will not only guard against reprisals to avoid discouraging them but will take positivesteps to encourage their submission. TED 8.4 CPTR III, II C.2.g; Appendix E, Section II.E, Appendix F, 4.3.4S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile21 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.3.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for employeereports of hazards.ACM requirements for airfield surveillances identify hazards reported by maintenance andoperations personnel. Discrepancies or defiencies are corrected on the spot or annotated totrack until completionD UD 1 33.3.1.2 ICAO SMM A corrective action tracking method exists for surveys andother safety initiatives (Insurance Company, regulators,critiques, etc.).FAA inspections are tracked and replies are made initially. Chevron inspections are done andADEM are performed quarterly. Tracking method is not in place but corrective actiondocumentation is done with response letters.D UD 1 33.3.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for inspectionfindings.Corrective actions tracking method exists for airside and fueling service operations (mobilefuelers and fuel storage areas)D UD 1 33.3.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for incidentinvestigation findings.NoD DNM 0 33.3.1.5 ICAO SMM A corrective action tracking method exists for safetymaintenance work orders.Manually through Talladega facilities section for race day events. In addition, the airportpersonnel submits safety maintenance work orders to management when hazards areidentified that can not be corrected by the maintenace staff.D PM 2 33.3.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for committeesuggestions and assignments.NoD DNM 0 33.3.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 a corrective action tracking method exists for RiskMitigations.NoD DNM 0 33.3.1.8 ICAO SMM a corrective action tracking method exists for RiskReductions.NoD DNM 0 33.3.1.9 ICAO SMM a corrective action tracking method exists for Objectives NoD DNM 0 33.3.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 a corrective action tracking method exists for Indicators andTargets.NoD DNM 0 33.3.1.11 ICAO SMM Corrective actions are assigned to responsible parties andprioritized.From interviews, for race events, work orders are assigned and prioritized. No work ordersavailable for reviewD UD 1 33.3.1.12 AC 150/5200-37 Interim abatement and protection is established for nonimmediate fixes.Yes cones are placed on hazards identified to warn until corrective action is performed. Notdocumented or trackedD,V UD 1 33.3.1.13 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards identified (inspections, incident investigations, safetywork orders, surveys, committee/employee suggestions, etc.)are reported, tracked and corrected in a timely manner.[PMG(c)(3)(i)]Race event - hazards are identified and corrected but not formally tracked. Daily activities -hazards are not fully identified and tracked to completionD,I,V UD 1 33.3.1.14 ICAO SMM Follow-up/closure of action plans occurs to ensure abatement. Yes for race events. For daily activities, follow-up not documentedV UD 1 3Total:9 42Score:D = Review correction report for closure.I = Ask employees, committee members, supervisors, etcif reported hazards and action plans are corrected in atimely mannerV = Take examples of closed out corrective actions andverify closure.3.3 Tracking System21%Element 3.3 (Corrective Action Tracking): SMS tracking systems will be somewhat centralized, will capture all corrective actions generated from self-inspections, self-evaluations, incident investigations, employee reports of hazards, and otherprocesses where corrective actions are necessary. Generally, the tracking system provides a reliable mans of communicating corrective action status and ultimate completion back to involved employees. [TED 8.4 CPTR III, II.C.3.f].If a method exists, but it is not used and should be, maximum score is a UD.If a method exists, and is used, but not effective, the maximum score is a PM.The method needs to exist, be used and be effective or receive a M.S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile22 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.4.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Check incidence reports. Mishaps include more thanproperty damage or injuries.Metrics are collected to measure the rate of mishaps andincidentsNoD DNM 0 33.4.1.2 ACRP 4-05 D= Trend reports / mishaps Incidence Rates are compared to previous years. Trends areimproving.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D: Safety Programs include the SMS elements, such asRisk Assessment, inspections and Audits.Leading metrics are developed to measure the volume ofsafety programs used to identify hazards and correctiveactions.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.4 ICAO SMM D = Check performance indicator reports Metrics are collected to measure the volume of hazardsidentified. Volume is either increasing or appearssustainable.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Check performance indicator reports Metrics are collected to measure the closure rate of the hazardfixes and controls. Improvement in the rate is apparent.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.6 ICAO SMM D = Check performance indicator reports All critical programs are include in each of the above metrics,such as: employee reports of hazards, inspections,investigations, hazard analysis, special surveys, etc.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Performance Appraisals.I= managers and supervisorsMetrics are assigned to operations management, andperformance improvements are required for a positiveperformance evaluation.NoD, I DNM 0 33.4.1.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Safety performance monitor processV = Verify if performance effected written objectivesSafety performance monitoring are regularly reviewed andevaluation. Revise safety objectives to ensure effective andrelevant to the organization’s operation.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Safety performance indicators and targets Performance indicators and targets addresses significanthazards and the possible risksNoD DNM 0 33.4.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review internal and external audits Safety audit and Safety oversight activities identifies theoverall safety performance of the organization.NoD DNM 0 33.4.1.11 ICAO SMM V = Take recently closed items to the workplace to verifyclosure.Closure rates are verified.NoV DNM 0 3Total:0 33Score:Elements 3.4. (Safety Performance Indicators and Targets): Metrics are the numbers themselves (Data) as well as a comparison tothemselves with established targets. Leading metrics measure the inputs, outputs and processes themselves, notjust outcomes like incidents and mishaps.3.4 Performance Indicators0%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile23 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.5.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Review the incident and OSHA logs to verify thatthis data is included in the trending.Incident trends are analyzed over time, so that patterns withcommon causes can be identified and prevented.[PMG(c)(2)(C)(iv)]Informally, management recognizes problem areas over time and implements measures forcontrol. A couple example were the wildlife hazards to the airfield and a race event incidentof man jumping 4 foot fence and accessing airfield lead to new seven foot fencing beinginstalled. OSHA logs not maintained on site. There has been one reported work relatedaccident since 2004. Aircraft related incidents are not trended.D DNM 0 33.5.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Part 139 Inspection data. Other trends - Part 139 inspection findings are also analyzedfor trends.Part 139 inspections are documented and maintained. Hazards identified daily during theinspections and tracked on the self-inpection checklist. Inspections consist of airsideoperations, markings, lighting, movement and non-movement areas. In addition, Part 139manadatory fuel truck and fuel storage insepction are documented. A formal trending processhas not been implemented at the airport. No analysis performed on identified hazards or risk.D PM 2 33.5.1.3 14 CFR Part 139 D = Airfield surveillance generated worker orders andmaintenance request formsOther trends - employee reports, safety maintenance workorders - are also analyzed.Part 139 airfield surveillance are performed both during day and nigthtime operations. Whena hazard is identified that can not be corrected on the spot or within 24 hours a work order ormaintenace request is generated. Data is not captured for trend analysis purposes.D PM 2 33.5.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review all available feedback from daily selfinspections, assessments, reports, safety risk analysis, andsafety auditsOther trends - inspection (non-Part 139) findings are alsoanalyzed.Airport Manager reviews all daily inspections for findings, follow-up actions and corrections.There are no formal reports, safety riska nalysis generated from the review.D UD 1 33.5.1.5 ACRP Report D = Review mishap reports, inspections, trend analysis Other trends -causal factors and root causes, are alsoanalyzed.NoD DNM 0 33.5.1.6 14 CFR Part 139 D = Airfield surveillance, refueling and fuel farmoperationsOther trends -observations, driver safety, etc, are alsoanalyzed.Performed, yet not trended for safety or significate impact on any goals or objectives.D UD 1 33.5.1.7 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review refueling and fuel farm surveillance reports Other trends -completion and failure rate analysis of safetycritical controls are also analyzed.Reviews of the surveillances are performed both internal and external. Internal by the airportmanager and external by FAA. Completeion of failure rates of safety critical controls are nottracked for trending.D UD 1 33.5.1.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review trend analysis corrective action plans whichdemonstrate continuous improvements.I = Ask responsible parties methodology for identifyingtrends and developing corrective action plans.Corrective action plans are developed and implemented toaddress any patterns that are identified.NoD,I DNM 0 33.5.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review goals and objective looking for connectionsto trend analysis reports.I = Ask Airport Manager, Risk Manager and S&HDirector, what trends and analysis led to current Goalsand Objectives.Corrective action plans are tied to making programmedchanges and are used to develop annual objectives. [PMG(c)(2)(iv)]NoD,I DNM 0 33.5 Trend AnalysisElement 3.5 (Trend and Pattern Analysis): Trend analysis systems would include Pareto analysis of: the OSHA logs, accident/incident investigation causal factors and root causes, corrective actions, inspection findings, and safety related work orders.Trend analyses are utilized in the SMS process to identify and help define goals and objectives with corrective actions developed from the trend analysis. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, II.C.2.i; Appendix E, Section I.G.; Appendix F 4.3.6]. By monitoring trends insafety data, predictions may be made about future events. Emerging trends may be indicative of embryonic hazards. Statistical methods can be used to assess the significance of perceived trends. The upper and lower limits of acceptable performance againstwhich to compare current performance may be defined.S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile24 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.5.1.10 ICAO SMM D = Review “published” trend analysis data to verify itexists.I = Ask committee members if they have seen andunderstand trend analysis data.Trend analysis records are maintained, shared withcommittees, and drive annual action plans. [PMG (c)(1)(viii)]NoD,I DNM 0 3Total:7 30Score:3.6.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review maintenance system or process for proactivemeasures [Preventative Maintenance (PM) schedule]Maintenance hazards are detected/identified before theybecome incidents. [PMG(c)(3)(ii)]Preventive maintenance on fueling vehicles is good. Limited on airfield hazards with regardto aprons.D,I UD 1 33.6.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review records on safety-critical control maintenance A survey of safety-critical control maintenance needsat theworksite has been conducted and is periodically updated andrevised and included in the preventative/predictivemaintenance system. [PMG (c)(3)(ii)]Specific safety criteria survey not done on airport site. Many safety critical items in ACM.Airport Pre Race Checklist includes safety critical items.D UD 1 33.6.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review reports on safety critical equipment (i.e.,exhaust ventilation, fire protection, alarms and hangersuppression system)Safety critical equipment, such as local exhaust ventilation,fire protection and alarm systems, fire suppression systems,etc. is part of this maintenance system and maintained to themanufacturer's schedule.Safety critical equipment is inspected, including Fuel farm and refuelers trucks. Lighting andfire extinguishers are maintained. In addition, during race events agencies are responsible forsafety critical equipment in there designated location. No suppression system for GeneralAviation hangars.D M 333.6.1.4 ACRP Report D = Review maintenance or work order request forrepairs.I = Ask how are maintenance request submitted and howis maintenance scheduledMaintenance requests, safety work orders, and repair recordsand repair records are routinely analyzed to predictbreakdown timing and to revise schedules as necessary.[PMG (c)(3)(ii)]Yes for fuel trucks and fuel farmD,I PM 2 33.6.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard reporting process for scheduledmaintenanceI = Ask are hazard reports part of the maintenanceschedulingV = Verify the reports are submitted and scheduledHazard reports submitted are part of maintenance schedulingand resource utilization.NoD,I,V DNM 0 33.6.1.6 ACRP Report D = Review equipment maintenance scheduleProcess and procedures in place to ensure calibration andmaintenance of monitoring equipmentThe only equipment that require calibration are the fuel trucks. The fuel meters are scheduledwell in advance and calibrated.D M 33Subtotal10 18Score:23%3.6.1 Preventative MaintenanceSub-Element 3.6.1 (Preventative Maintenance): Maintenance of equipment and facilities is an especially important means of anticipating potential hazards and preventing their development. Planning, scheduling , and tracking preventative maintenanceactivities provides a systematic way of ensuring that they are not neglected and that unsafe short cuts do not occur resultingfrom improperly maintained equipment. Safety critical equipment is maintained and typically includes exhaust ventilation, machineguards, employee alarms, sprinklers, cranes, elevators, etc. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, II.C.3.e; Appendix F, 4.4.1]56%3.6 Integration of Maintenance andEmergencyElement 3.6 (Maintenance and Emergency): of equipment and facilities is an especially important means of anticipating potentialhazards and preventing their development. Planning, scheduling , and tracking preventative maintenance activities provides asystematic way of ensuring that they are not neglected and that unsafe short cuts do not occur resulting from improperly maintained equipment. Safety critical equipment is maintained and typically includes exhaust ventilation, machine guards, employeealarms, sprinklers, cranes, elevators, etc. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, II.C.3.e; Appendix F, 4.4.1]S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile25 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.6.2.1 14 CFR Part 139D = Formal Airport Emergency Plan (AEP) writtenV = Verify document identify airport related (type)emergencies.Emergency plans and preparations are known anddocumented for all anticipated emergencies. [PMG(c)(3)(iii)]The Talladega Municipal Airport Emergency Plan is in draft form and revisions are underconsideration which is more detailed. There is currently not an approved AEP for the airport.The copies were not signed and dated, nor approved by FAA.D,V UD 1 33.6.2.2 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review Airport Emergency Plan (AEP)I = Ask worker about the Emergency plan.Plans to communicate requirements to the worksite areeffective and in writing and a schedule for conductingemergency drills annually is documented.The airport has conducted one table top exercise and plans are to complete a full drill inspring of 2009D,I UD 1 33.6.2.3 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review documentation on training exercise anddrills.I = Ask when the worker last performed in a emergencydrill or exerciseTraining and unannounced drills covering all employees areconducted annually for all emergency responses so that theywill be second nature.Table top provided some training to participants which included airport personnel, publicsafety, EMA, fire marshal, local police, etc.D,I UD 1 33.6.2.4 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review Airport Emergency Plan (AEP) for explosiontype exercises (i.e., bomb threat, aircraft fire)Emergency plans take into account potential explosions andare effective.The draft versions do includeD UD 1 33.6.2.5 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover fire scenarios Emergency plans take into account likely fire sources andscenarios and are effective.The draft versions do includeD UD 1 33.6.2.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover toxic chemicals scenarios Emergency plans take into account the release of toxicchemicals and are effective.Not included and because of Aniston chemical waste disposal, this should be included in theplan.D UD 1 33.6.2.7 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover inclement weather conditionsI = Ask worker actions required during inclementhEmergency plans take into account likely weather conditionsand are effective.The draft versions do include. But need more specifics for communications needed andshelter in place requirements.D,I UD 1 33.6.2.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover natural disasters (shelteringprocedures)Emergency plans take into account natural disasters and are inwriting and effective.The draft versions do includeD UD 1 33.6.2.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover natural disasters (shelteringprocedures)Emergency plans take into radiation exposures and are inwriting and effective.The new draft includesD DNM 0 33.6.2.9 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover bomb threat Emergency plans take into account bomb threats and are inwriting and effective.The draft versions do include bomb threats. Before each race bomb sweeps are conducted bylaw enforcementD UD 1 33.6.2.10 ICAO SMM D = Written procedures for potential public emergencysituations and incidentsEmergency plans take into account other emergency situations(terrorists, civil disturbances, etc.) and are in writing andeffective.The new draft includesD DNM 0 33.6.2.11 ICAO SMM D = Review AEP, Emergency Response Plan (ERP) orAirport Certification Manual for Incident commander roleand responsibilities.Written procedures are established to cover responsibility(e.g., incident commander) for handling each kind ofemergency and are effective.New draft is more completeD UD 1 33.6.2.12 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review written plan for emergencies shut down andstart up procedures for equipment (i.e., airfield, airport,and back generators)Written procedures are established to cover emergency shutdown and start up of equipment and are effective.The draft versions do includeD UD 1 33.6.2.13 ICAO SMM D = Review written Emergency Response Plan (ERP),Mutual-Aid or Support Agreements.Emergency medical care and follow-up and are in writing andeffective.The draft versions do includeD UD 1 33.6.2 Emergency PreparednessSub-Element 3.6.2 (Emergency Preparedness): Planning and training for emergencies is essential in minimizing the harmful consequences of an accident or other threat if it does occur. If personnel are not so thoroughly trained to react to emergencies thattheir responses are immediate and precise, they may expose themselves and others to greater danger rather than reduce their exposure. The nature of potential emergencies depends on the nature of site operations and its geographical location. The extentto which training and drills are needed depends on the severity and complexity of the emergencies, which may arise. Anticipated emergencies may include: fire, spills, explosion, natural disasters, terrorist threat, civil disturbance, earthquake, tornado,critical shutdowns, injuries and illness, etc. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, III.C.3.h; Appendix E, Section III.A; Appendix F, 4.4.1]S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile26 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.6.2.14 ICAO SMM D = Review documented critiques. Events and drills are critiqued. Critiques are documented andrecommendations for improvement are implemented andcompleted.The draft versions do includeD UD 1 33.6.2.15 ICAO SMM V = Emergency Response system established. The emergency response system is adequately designed,implemented, and communicated to both employees and tothe community.The draft versions do includeV UD 1 33.6.2.16 ICAO SMM D = Review AEP or Mutual Agreements for localemergency response services (airport authorities, firefighters, police, ambulances, medical agencies, etc);I = Management. Do outside agencies have writtenagreements.Agreements established with agencies outside of the airportand procedures established to address outside respondersparticipationMutual Aid Agreements are in place with City of Talladega for outside agencies.D,I M 3 33.6.2.17 ACRP 4-05 D = Written documentation for periodic review of SMSimplementationThe emergency procedures periodically reviewed as part ofthe management review of SMSNo SMS requirements established. All applicable parties will conduct plan review sessions atleast once every 2 years. Approximately six weeks prior to the review session, airportmanagement will provide all agencies who are involved in the plan, a copy of the plan toreview.D DNM 0 3Subtotal17 54Score:3.6.3.1 ICAO SMM D = Review Emergency Response Plan for essentialtraining requirements.Emergency Response procedures written to the size and scopeof the airport operations and identify potential emergencysituations and incidents.TSS Plan does not include coordination with Airport AEP.D UD 1 33.6.3.2 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review emergency response team training documents Emergency response team properly trained No trained response team for the aircraft incidents at the airport. Aircraft Rescue Firefighter(ARFF) training required. Talladega Fire Department has one ARFF Trained persons pershift, personnel are scheduled to receive Live Fire training in early 2009. Airport employeesare not trained in emergency response as the airport relies on public safety departments.D DNM 0 3Subtotal1 3Score:Total:28 75Score:33%37%31%3.6.3 Integration of OperationsSub-Element 3.6.3 (Integration of Operations): Planning and training for emergencies is essential in minimizing the harmful consequences of an accident or other threat if it does occur. If personnel are not so thoroughly trained to react to emergencies thattheir responses are immediate and precise, they may expose themselves and others to greater danger rather than reduce their exposure. The nature of potential emergencies depends on the nature of site operations and its geographical location. The extentto which training and drills are needed depends on the severity and complexity of the emergencies, which may arise. Anticipated emergencies may include: fire, spills, explosion, natural disasters, terrorist threat, civil disturbance, earthquake, tornado,critical shutdowns, injuries and illness, etc. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, III.C.3.h; Appendix E, Section III.A; Appendix F, 4.4.1]S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile27 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P3.7.1.1 ACRP 4-05 There is a system in place for critically reviewing andevaluating all SMS Elements periodically. [PMG (c)(1)(viii)]Part 139 requires the FAA to performs an annual airfield certification inspections. FAAprovides a written report identfying compliance with inspections, training, anddocumentation. FAA also evaluate the effectiveness of Part 139 implemented process; suchas ARFF response capabilities to an aircraft emergencies. Corrective Actions are generatedfrom the report if there are identified deficiencies or discrepancies.D UD 1 33.7.1.2 ICAO SMM An SMS evaluation has been performed within the last year. NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.3 ICAO SMM Interviews are conducted periodically at all levels todetermine how well the SMS program elements areunderstood and implemented.Airport personnel are not aware of SMS program elenments.D,I DNM 0 33.7.1.4 ICAO SMM Annual SMS evaluation reviews written safety policies andprograms, the ACM, procedures & programs that address thepotential hazards of the workplace.The ACM procedure and program requirements address hazards and risk associated withairfield operations. Potential hazards associated with other areas of the airport are notaddressed in detail as the Part 139 requirements.D UD 1 33.7.1.6 ICAO SMM The periodic program evaluation results in a written report ofstrengths and weaknesses of each element.NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.7 ICAO SMM The periodic program evaluation includes specific writtenrecommendations for improvement.NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.8 ICAO SMM The periodic program evaluation includes documentation offollow-up actions to satisfy the recommendations found inprior evaluation reports.NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.9 ICAO SMM Programs improvement and/or objectives not meet arerevised. [PMG (c)(1)(viii)]NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.10 ICAO SMM Each SMS element and section is evaluated. NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.11 ICAO SMM The SMS evaluation includes document and record review,worker and management interviews and surveys, as well asphysical observations of conditions, behaviors and workpractices.NoD DNM 0 33.7.1.12 ICAO SMM Qualified personnel typically means having some trainingexpertise and some independence from site operations.The evaluation is conducted by qualified personnel, corporatestaff, or other outside resources.NoD DNM 0 3Total:2 33Score:3.0 Safety AssuranceSection Total23%Element 3.7 (SMS Evaluation): A Comprehensive program evaluation is essential periodically to evaluate the whole set [i.e., allelements under Management Leadership, Employee Involvement, Worksite Analysis, Hazard Inventory & Control and Training)of safety and health management means, methods, and processes, to ensure that they are adequate to protect against the potential hazards at the specific worksite. The evaluation determines whether policies and procedures are implemented as planned andwhether in practice they have met the objectives set for the program goal of effective safety and health protection. When either performance or the objectives themselves are found inadequate, revisions are made. Without such a comprehensive review,program flaws and their interrelationship may not be caught and corrected. [TED 8.4, Chapter III, IIC.1.d.]D: Assessment GuideAnnual ReportCorrective Action PlansI: Assessment Team members: Verify their qualificationsas well as the scope of the evaluation.V: Verify completion of some of the action plans.6%3.7 SMS EvaluationS=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile28 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P4.0 Safety Promotion4.1.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal training needs survey conducted (related toknowledge and skills required to perform task safely)A needs survey has been performed resulting in a list ofrequired courses for each person/position.No formal internal survey performed.D DNM 0 34.1.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 A training curriculum exists for Managers and supervisorsand covers all required training.Airport Manager receives fueling and fire safety trainingD,I PM 2 34.1.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 A training curriculum exists for employees and covers allrequired training.Curriculum for fueling safety is conducted utilizing "NATA Safety First." Additional, trainingis provided by Airport manager using approved training curriculum for airfield operations.D,I PM 2 34.1.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal Job Specific TrainingI = Ask workers. Are they trained on hazards of the workassignmentWorkers are trained in specific hazards, safety rules andpractices related to their work assignments, before theyassume new duties.Yes for refueling operations. No JSA's. Safety meetings are performed monthly.D,I UD 1 34.1.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training documents People responsible for being involved in programs, such ashazard analysis, inspections, etc. have been trained to do so.Formal training provided on fueling and airfield inspection. No hazard analysis trainingprovided.D UD 1 34.1.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review attendance records Training attendance is documented and verifies successfullymeeting the training schedules.YesD M 334.1.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Revise training curriculum Training curriculum is up-to-date, specific to work placeoperations and procedures, trends, hazards and controls.YesD M 334.1.1.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal trainer qualification in-place Trainers are qualified (specific knowledge and expertise) inthe subject area.Management completes line service safety training. Train-the-trainer type training provided.D PM 2 34.1.1.9 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal Committee member training Workers who participate on committees have been trained ontheir responsibilities and committee functions. [PMG(c)(4)(i)]No committees.D DNM 0 34.1.1.10 ICAO SMM D = Emergency awareness trainingI = Ask worker. What are your responsibilities in anemergency.All personnel are aware of their responsibilities for each typeof emergencyNo documentation that training on AEP is done with airport employees before race.D,I DNM 0 3D = Review training curriculum for supervisors andmanagers.I = Ask Managers and Supervisors. Is there a safetytraining curriculum.4.1 Training and EducationSection 4.0 (Safety Promotion): The component Safety promotion is composed of two elements: Training and education and Safety communication. The organization shall develop and maintain a safety training programme that ensures that personnel aretrained and competent to perform the SMS duties. The scope of the safety training shall be appropriate to each individual’s involvement in the SMS. The organization shall develop and maintain formal means for safety communication which ensures that allpersonnel are fully aware of the SMS, conveys safety critical information, and explains why particular safety actions are takenand why safety procedures are introduced or changed.Element 4.1 (Training and Education): An established training program that provides to the level of competency required to maintain excellent safety levels. This apply to general work functions at the airport and to SMS functions as well. It also may applyto contractors and service providers who need to be aware of at least a minimum level of airport SMS requirements and emergencyprocedures. Moreover, safety training and education are essential in creating a positive safety culture within the airportorganization, which is vital to develop an effective SMS. A training file should be developed for each employee, including management, to assist in identifying and tracking employee training requirements and verifying that the personnel have received theplanned training.S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile29 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P4.1.1.11 ICAO SMM D = Formal Incident commander training Incident commanders are trained to their scenarios, specificresponsibility and this training is specific.Public safety agencies are trained and airport manager received informal training. AirportManager needs to attend a formal incident commander course.D PM 2 34.1.1.12 ICAO SMM D = Review Emergency Response Plan (ERP) and AirportCertification Manual (ACM)Response personnel (e.g., first aid, rescue, spills, etc.) arespecifically trained to site scenarios, procedures and this iseffective.Yes for the Airport and TSSD M 334.1.1.13 ICAO SMM D = Review Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)Training program.I = Ask worker. Are they trained on PPEPersonnel are trained in the care, use and maintenance of PPEdevices.Yes hearing protection, reflect vest are used for race events. No PPE for electrical safety.D,I UD 1 34.1.1.14 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal SMS indoctrination training for supervisors,managers, employees.I = Ask Management and worker. Is there a requirementfor employees to attend SMS training.All employees are trained to understand SMS elements and itis effective.NoD,I DNM 0 3Total:20 42Score:4.2.1.1 ICAO SMM V = Safety training presentationSubject Matter Experts are used in thedevelopment and presentation of safety training.For fueling activities the airport uses a certified program. TSS brings in speakers for safetymeetings.V PM 2 34.2.1.2 ICAO SMM V = Course development participantsTraining course development involvesmanagement and employees.Airport Manager is responsible for training topics with TSS inputs. No employee inputsencouraged for improvement.V UD 1 34.2.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review Lesson PlansGoals and objectives for training are clearlydefined in lessonplans.No lesson plansD DNM 0 34.2.1.4 ICAO SMM D = Review safety and health training planSafety and health training is incorporated intoother training about performance requirementsandjobpractices.Informally and in safety meeting.D UD 1 34.2.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review training evaluation plansPlans are for evaluating the program areincorporated into the traininglessonplans.NoD DNM 0 34.2.1.6 ICAO SMM I = Training plan process for course developmentTraining topics or jobs are explained andemployee knowledge is determined at the start oftraining.NoI DNM 0 34.2.1.7 ICAO SMM I = Ask trainer does the order of training presentationstimulates audience.The order of training presentation simulates theactual job as close as possible.Line service training includes towing and marshalling. It does simulate actual job. Note:electrical safety training does not fully incorporate airfield electrical safety.I PM 2 3Element 4.2 (Communication Design and Delievery) Processes and procedures must be in place to allow for communication among operational personnel and with the organization’s management. Organizations must make every effort to communicate theirobjectives, as well as the current status of the organization’s activities and significant events. Training requirements and activities should be documented for each area of activity within the organization.Training programs should be adapted to fit theneedsand complexity of the organization. Safety training within an organization must ensure that personnel are trained and competentto perform their safety management duties. The amount of safety training should be appropriate to the individual’sresponsibility and involvement in the SMS. The provision of appropriate training to all staff, regardless of their level in theorganization, is an indication of management’s commitment to an effective SMS. Safety training and education should consist ofthefollowing: a documented process to identify training requirements; a validation process that measures the effectiveness of training; initial (general safety) job-specific training; indoctrination/initial training incorporating SMS, including Human Factorsand organizational factors; and recurrent safety training.48%4.2 Design and DeliveryS=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile30 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P4.2.1.8 ACRP Report I = Ask worker if their ideas or feedback provided totrainersPersonnel with knowledge or workplace hazardsare encouraged to offer their ideas to improvetraining.NoI DNM 0 34.2.1.9 ACRP Report D = Formal test or examine provided.I = Ask instructor if oral questioning performed.When training ends, employee performance isevaluated by formal testing, oral questioning,observation,or other means.Formal training programs do include testing. Line service training includes formal testing ,scoring, and documentation.D,I PM 2 34.2.1.10 ICAO SMM I = Ask instructor is performance checks conductedduring sessionPerformance is checked during practice periodsto help evaluate the employees' understanding ofwhat was taught in the training session.Observation checklists area available in the NATA Safety 1st programI M 334.2.1.11 ACRP D = Written evaluations performed on course foreffectiveness.Evaluations are conducted to verify that desiredlearning was achieved and if the training sessionshould be offered again.Written evaluations are performedD M 334.2.1.12 ICAO SMM D = Review evaluation for job performanceEvaluations are conducted to determine ifemployee job performance improved aftertraining.Not indicatedD DNM 0 34.2.1.13 ICAO SMM D = Review training programTraining program modifications can be traced totrainingcourse evaluations.Not indicatedD DNM 0 3Total:8 18Score:4.3.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documents for evidence of continuousimprovement processContinuous improvement is an inherent part of the safetyobjectives at all levels of the organizationEvidence of continuous improvements for race events was noted, i.e., new radios, staffincreases, live fire extinguisher training and claims investigators on site were addedimprovements.D M 334.3.1.2 ACRP 4-05 V = Verify reviews are conducted to identifyimplementation of process.I = Ask management how the process is implementedRegular and periodic, planned reviews are conductedregarding organization safety processes and performance,with the objective of identifying opportunities forimprovement.NoV,I DNM 0 34.3.1.3 ACRP 4-05 V = Verify monitor system is established. Major decisions and actions aimed at improving safety aremonitored for their effectiveness.Not formallyV UD 1 34.3.1.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Review internal safety audits Managers are kept informed of the internal safety reviews,planned and implemented risk control actions.Informally communicated for the race. TSS management staff has weekly managementmeetings. Safety is not included.D UD 1 34.3.1.5 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documented annual reviews. There is an annual management review of the entire SafetyManagement System (SMS).NoD DNM 0 34.3.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Review performance measure documentation.I = Management. Ask if results are distributed.Results of regular, periodic and planned management reviewson safety processes and performance are documented.NoD,I DNM 0 3Element 4.3 (Competency and Continuous Improvement): Assurance builds on the principle of the continuous improvement cycle. Inmuch the same way that quality assurance facilitates continuous improvements in quality, safety assurance ensures controlof safety performance – including regulatory compliance – through constant verification and upgrading of the operational system. These objectives are achieved through the application of similar tools: internal evaluations and independent audits (bothinternal and external), strict document controls and on-going monitoring of safety controls and mitigation actions.4.3 Competency44%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile31 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P4.3.1.7 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal self-inspection documentation.I = Workers. Are workers involved in self-assessmentSMS self assessments are periodically revised to find outareas where improvements are necessary.NoD,I DNM 0 3Total:5 21Score:4.4.1.1 ICAO SMM The results of incident investigations are to be made availableto all covered employees on request.Some are available through government agencies, i.e. NTSB, FAA, OSHA. But this is notcommunicated to the employees.D,I DNM 0 34.4.1.2 ICAO SMM The report that is made available to employees should, at aminimum, describe the incident and what corrections havebeen made to avoid future occurrences.Not writtenD,I DNM 0 34.4.1.3 ICAO SMM The corrective actions communicated address both immediateand systems issues that will be or are addressed.NoD DNM 0 34.4.1.4 ICAO SMM Communication of lessons learned is in a timely manner. NoD DNM 0 34.4.1.5 ICAO SMM Lessons learned are shared with other departments. No evidenceD DNM 0 34.4.1.6 ICAO SMM Lessons learned from the site are shared among departmentsand tenants.Not formalizedD DNM 0 34.4.1.7 ICAO SMM Lessons learned from other facilities are shared amongdepartments and tenants.NoD DNM 0 34.4.1.8 ICAO SMM Action plans routinely result from lessons learned. NoD DNM 0 34.4.1.9 ICAO SMM Resulting action plans are assigned and tracked to closure. NoD DNM 0 3Total:0 27Score:4.5.1.1 PMG (c)(3) D = Recognition program announcement and records. The recognition program is based on the proactiveaccomplishment of safety programs, not the number ofinjuries and illnesses.No, Airport board does not provide award or incentive programs. Talladega speedway doesnot have a recognition program.D DNM 0 34.5.1.2 PMG (c)(3) D = Recognition program announcement and records. There are both individual and department based recognitioncriteria.No written recognition program.D DNM 0 34.5.1.3 ACRP 4-05 D = Department Scorecards. Department scorecards are used as part of the recognitionprogram.NoD DNM 0 34.5.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Recognition program announcement and records. The recognition program is consistently applied amongcommittee members and all personnel.No formal announcements for recognition. Periodically luncheons are provided during andafter race events at no cost to the airport personnel. There is no safety committee at Talladegaairport.D UD 1 34.5.1.5 PMG (c)(3) D = Recognition program announcement and records. The recognition program includes "On the spot" awards basedon finding people doing things right.No, but verbal "on-the spot" recognition is performed when employee provide informationregarding a safety concern or demonstrate safety awareness.D UD 1 3D = This does not mean that the actual investigationrecords must be provided, just the results.I = Ask employees if accident investigation results arecommunicated. (worker interview )Element 4.5 (Recognition and Encouragement): Procedures for safe work which are understood and followed by all affected parties, as a result of positive reinforcement... resulting from active participation. Recognition are not primarily based onincidence rates, and encourage the reporting process. PMG (c)(3)0%4.5 Recognition / Encouragement24%Element 4.4 (Lessons Learned):4.4 Lessons LearnedS=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.Attachement 5Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile32 of 32ID RefInstruction CriteriaFindingS R PR PA P4.5.1.6 PMG (c)(3) I = workers Workers feel encouraged to participate based in part on therecognition program.Perception recieved from the employees during the survey is that recognition is not formallyestablished , however, the airport staff recent received letters of appreciation for theiroutstanding contributions towards the success of airport operations and manaement.I PM 2 34.5.1.9 PMG (c)(3) D = rewards proactive involvement rather than just injuryrate achievements.I = workers are encouraged to participate.The recognition program does not discourage the reporting ofincidents.Workers feel that they are enncouraged to identify safety concerns at the airport. The injuryrate at the airport is lost due to the amount of personnel and proactive initatives relating to therace events.D,I UD 1 3Total:5 21Score:4.0 Safety PromotionSection Total28%24%S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual ObservationCopyright 2008 ESIS, Inc. All rights reserved.

# Attachment 6

SMS Implementation Cost EstimateSection/ Element Assessment Initial Ongoing
Safety Policy &

Ob j ectives ( 7 ) 20% 68 68

Policy 3% 4 -

Objectives 19%

10 24

Responsibility and
Authority 26%

20 -

Accountability 22%

10 24

Resources 48%

(not part
of SMS) -

Documentation 22%

24 20

Committees 0%

N/A - Cost Estimate (Man
hours)

Part 139 objectives are to ensure aircraft can safety land and depart without incident
or accident, but do not require formal documented objectives. There are no formal
safety objectives or targets written for the special race event or regular operations,
even though safety is a primary concern of all parties. TMA uses a pre-race checklist
as a guide to ensure that the airport is setup safely and operationally ready to handle

aircraft at the race time. Part 139 does not require a safety policy. Airport does not have a formal written
safety policy statement. Total

Part 139, Line of Succession of Airport operational responsibilities are required to be
identified in the ACM. Talladega Municipal Airport Board has defined written
responsibilities for the airport manager and key personnel. During race events, safety is supported and executed as a priority by NATC stakeholders (i.e., Talladega
Speedway, NASCAR, etc) and Public Safety Agencies which provides fire rescue,
medical care, security, environmental management, etc.

Part 139 and ACM does not mandate a safety committee to be established. There is
no designated or appointed committee that functions as a safety committee at the
airport. Part 139 requires the airport ACM, which is a description of the system for
maintaining records such as daily airfield self-inspections, training, quarterly fuel
farm and mobile fuel truck inspections. Talladega has a manual (hard copy) system
for recordkeeping of documentation. In addition, pre-event checklists are established for planning race events. The ACM is the documentation. Part 139 and the airport ACM identify the resources required to operate the airfield to
FAA requirements; such as aircraft rescue and line services equipment, personnel,
and training. Funds are requested and allocated as needed for construction or maintenance on hangars by the Airport Board. Some resources are provided to
maintain FAA standards. Resources are allocated to address race event expenses by NATC. Operational cost and airfield maintenance costs are the responsibility of
the FBO. Airport staffing is increased dramatically (from 4 to over 50) for races.
There are two elements of the Part 139 that have not been full implemented; recent Class IV requirements for ARFF live-fire training and an approved AEP. Part 139, Talladega ACM requires accountability of airport staff and key agencies to
adhere to safety requirements. Accountability and authority are addressed in the

A CM, Airport Emergency Plan and Security Plan which are coordinated and reviewed
by all airport agency personnel. Airport Management has not established written
procedures to hold staff accountable to any safety metrics, targets, or objectives. Comments Attachment 6 SMS Implementation Cost Estimate
(In addition to current level of effort)Section/ Element Assessment Initial Ongoing Cost Estimate (Man
hours)

Comments Attachment 6 SMS Implementation Cost Estimate
(In addition to current level of effort)

Safety Risk
Management (6) 28% 340 200

Requirements 67%

40 10

Hazard Identification 33%

40 20

Hazard Analysis 13%

150 40

Risk Assessment 14%

Incl in

above -

Risk Management 17%

10 50

Investigations 20%

100 80 Part 139 and the ACM pre-identify a number of hazards and identify required
controls. It does not prescribe a process to identify other hazards through an internal
and external process. However, 1) Internally, the airport performs daily surveys (i.e.,
runway and taxiway markings, NAVAIDs, directional signs, lighting and fuel services
operations to identify hazards associated with the airfield; 2) External hazard
identification occurs annually by the FAA. For race weeks there are additional
informal processes established; such as, a Pre-Race checklist that has been
developed to identify potential hazards and areas of concerns prior to the event. The
checklist is used as a proactive tool to ensure that the airport is set up safely and
operationally to handle aircraft at the race time. No formal hazard identification

written p rocess is established. Part 139 and the airport ACM is the requirement for airport operation through daily
airside surveillances. These are the primary regulatory drivers for an airport,.

Part 139 and the ACM does not require a formalize risk management process. Risk
management concepts and processes are performed through daily and quarterly
inspections that monitor compliance with Part 139 requirements. When a hazard or
risk to an aircraft or facility is identified, procedures are in place to eliminate
recurrence of hazards. For example; an unsatisfactory condition or hazard to an aircraft relating to the airfield may require a Notice to Airmen (NOTAMS) /Condition
report to be transmitted and available to pilots. During race week, pre-checklists are

communicated and close coordination between the stakeholders hel p im p rove the Total

Part 139 and the ACM require undocumented risk assessments of airfield
operations. For example; wildlife hazard management, airside obstructions, and foreign object debris (FOD). There is no formal written risk assessment procedures
developed to risk rank hazard tasks or operations for subsequent risk reduction and
control verification. Part 139 requirements are evaluated and performed by the FBO
and the FAA. Rain water runoff and fuel spills are evaluated periodically by the
Alabama Department of Environmental management (ADEM). Part 139 and the airport ACM does not require a hazard analysis to be performed
beyond assessing emergency response activities. Race week provides experienced
personnel to perform informal analysis process of airfield operations. Public safety
and security, and emergency management performs worksite analyses specific to
their operations prior to the race events. For example, emergency management and
the fire department perform an analysis for the staging of vehicles to meet response
time and personnel availability in case of an emergency. However, there is no
documentation maintained at the airport.

Part 139 and the airport ACM address formal investigation procedures. As part of
the AEP, actions are identified to be taken in case of an incident at the airport (i.e.,
aircraft accident, bomb incident, structural fire, nature disaster, etc.) Race event,
incidents are investigated and documented when airport staff is informed. Accident
reports are filed at the International speedway corporation in Daytona, Florida. Aircraft accidents are investigated and reports maintained by NTSB and FAA.
Injuries and incidents are investigated and records are maintained by International speedway corporation (ISC) in Daytona, Florida. No formal written program is
established for the airport.Section/ Element Assessment Initial Ongoing Cost Estimate (Man
hours)

Comments Attachment 6 SMS Implementation Cost Estimate
(In addition to current level of effort)

Safety Assurance (7) 23% 325 344

Inspections and SelfAuditing 60%

100 50

Non-Punitive Safety
Reporting 11%

10 24

Tracking Systems 21%

25 50

Performance Indicators 0% Part of

Goals

and Objective

s 20

Trend Analysis 23%

40 80

Integration
(Maintenance /
Emergency) 37%

Already a
part of

139 20

SMS Evaluation 6%

150 100 Part 139 and the airport ACM do not address non-punitive safety or near-miss
reporting. A work order system is in place during races; hazards are reported
verbally. The airport submits work orders for carpentry, electrical and plumbing to NATC. Personnel are encouraged to report unsafe conditions. No formal
mechanism exists for encouraging near-miss reporting.

Part 139 and the airport ACM address some elements of the SMS during FAA
evaluations (i.e., authority and training, organizational structure, self-inspections,
documentation, emergency preparedness, etc). There currently is no system in place for critically reviewing and periodically evaluating all SMS elements. Part 139 and the airport ACM do not directly identify or require a trending process;
however, the airport performs assessments of airfield operations. For example;
wildlife hazard abatement for bird strikes (seasonal migrations) or aircraft accident
reporting. Informally, management recognizes problem areas over time and
implements preventative measures. Documented trending is not performed. Daily
activity hazards are not fully identified or tracked where hazards are corrected on the spot. However for the SMS process, a system for trending to determine a logical
approach to counteract the any change in risk to safe operations is not developed.

Part 139 and the airport ACM identifies maintenance requirements of airfield
equipment; both FAA and airport owned. Emergency procedures are addressed in the AEP. Safety critical equipment is inspected daily (i.e., fuel farm, fuel trucks, etc.)
as identified by the ACM. Fire Extinguishers are inspected monthly by airport staff
and every 6 months by an outside company prior to each race event. Emergency response activities, the FBO, and public safety agencies (medical, fire marshal, local
police, etc) were involved in a recent airport emergency plan table top exercise

review. Total

Part 139 and the ACM require procedures for conducting a self-inspection program.
Daily inspections are conducted on the airfield and when an unusual condition is
present, such as construction activities or meteorological conditions, which may
affect safe aircraft operations. In addition, inspections occur immediately after an
accident or incident. Daily ACM inspections are completed and documented.
Terminal facility inspections are performed monthly. Findings are reviewed by the
airport manager and followed-up to completion. No documented tracking system is
established for terminal inspections. Non-regulatory controls identified by the Risk
Assessment process have not yet been integrated into the inspection process.

Part 139 and the airport ACM identify performance by success of meeting the basic
FAA goal – no accidents or incidents. No established system is in place to check
leading performance indicators and targets or to address significant hazards,
possible risks or lack of control implementation. Data is not collected for trending or
establishing targeted goals or objectives. Part 139 and the airport ACM requires airside inspection to be performed and
documented. The hazards identified by maintenance and operations are reported.
Discrepancies or deficiencies are corrected on the spot or annotated to be tracked
until completion. The airport maintains records for personnel training (emergency,
fueling, and movement safety area), fueling agent inspections, self-inspection,
accident and incidents, and airport conditions. During the race event, hazards are
identified and corrected but not formally tracked unless placed in the work order

system.Section/ Element Assessment Initial Ongoing Cost Estimate (Man
hours)

Comments Attachment 6 SMS Implementation Cost Estimate
(In addition to current level of effort)

Safety Promotion (5) 28% 220 108

Training and Education 48%

120 24

Design and Delivery 44%

incl

above incl above

Competency 24%

40 12

Lessons Learned 0%

10 24

Recognition/
Encouragement 24%

50 48

Total Additional Man hours for SMS Implementation 953 720 Total

Part 139 and the airport ACM is detailed and specific regarding airside training and
education requirements. Curriculum for line services is conducted utilizing "NATA
Safety First.” For race events, familiarization training and orientation are provided by
public safety agencies. The Fire department performs fire extinguisher training.
Additional personnel (flagmen and aircraft marshallers) are trained on roles and
responsibilities from NATA safety first. The training is documented and tracked for
personnel other than airport staff employees. ARFF training records are maintained
at the fire stations; however, it has been noted in the FAA report that the ARFF
personnel have not received live-fire training. Additional training is required for
incident commander, accident, and incident reporting.

Part 139 and the airport ACM require a formal training program for ARFF personnel,
fueling agents, pedestrians and ground vehicles in movement area and safety areas.
All airside required training includes formal testing, scoring, and documentation.
Race event safety training is informally conducted in the monthly meetings held by

NATC.

Part 139 and the airport ACM do not formally promote or encourage safety
participation or a recognition process. The Airport board does not provide award or incentive programs for safety reporting. NATC does not have a recognition program.
Supervisors do provide verbal recognition for outstanding dedication to safety
awareness during race events. Airport staff has been presented certificates of
application and letters of appreciate from the Airport Board. Airport staff does feel
moderately encouraged to report. Part 139 and the airport ACM require personnel to be proficient and certified (i.e., live
drills, air traffic tower operators, airfield hazard recognition). Evidence of continuous
improvements for race events was noted, i.e., implementation of new radio system,
increase in staff, live fire extinguisher training, and on-site claims investigators were
added improvements.
Part 139 and the airport ACM addresses lesson learned through events identified
during surveys and evaluations. Some are available through government agencies,
e.g., NTSB, FAA, EPA, and OSHA. There is no formalized process established for
information to be communicated to the employees. Information is shared with airport
staff as it relates to airport operations.