SSMMSS PPiilloott SSttuuddyy // GGaapp AAnnaallyyssiiss RReeppoorrtt

The Talladega Municipal Airport (TMA)

PPrreeppaarreedd ffoorr

TThhee TTaallllaaddeeggaa MMuunniicciippaall AAiirrppoorrtt BBooaarrdd

TTaall llaaddeeggaa,,

AAl

laabbaammaa

PPrreeppaarreedd bbyy

NNeeeell--SScchhaaffffeerr,, IInncc.. EESSIISS,, IInncc.. BBiirrmmi

inngghhaamm,,

AALL AAnnnnaappooll i

iss,,

MMaarryyl

laanndd

SSeepptteemmbbeerr 22000099

Table of Contents

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. 1 

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 3 

BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 3 

METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH .............................................................................. 6 

 Building the Gap Analysis..................................................................................... 6 

 Gap Analysis Process .......................................................................................... 7 

 Scoring Process ................................................................................................... 8 

 Perception Survey ................................................................................................ 9 

GAP ANALYSIS FINDINGS .......................................................................................... 10 

 Safety Policy and Objectives .............................................................................. 15 

 Safety Risk Management ................................................................................... 17 

 Safety Assurance ............................................................................................... 19 

 Safety Promotion................................................................................................ 21 

 Part 139 Observations........................................................................................ 22 

Comparison of ACM to SMS Elements Requirements .................................................. 25 

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

Attachment 1 Perception Survey – Raw Data Analysis..................................................... 

Attachment 2 Perception Survey – Additional Comments Results .................................... 

Attachment 3 Perception Survey – Overview Report ........................................................ 

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

Attachment 5 Talladega – ESIS FAA SMSProfileTM.......................................................... 

Attachment 6 SMS Implementation 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 Systems (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 Airports 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 the 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 complying 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 summarize 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 deliverables 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 American 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 the 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 the 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 Instrument 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 long 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 indicator (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 organization. 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 remedies 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 implementation 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., fire 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 

SMSProfileTM (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 Management 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

Inspections

Reporting 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 asked 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 against 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), Points 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 compared to the total points available, yielding a 

score from 0-100%. Based on over 300 surveys performed 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 the 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 implementation 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 example, 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 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. 

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 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. 

Documentation 22 % 

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. 

Committees 0 % 

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. 
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 requirement 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 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 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 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. 

Risk 

Assessment 14 % 

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). 

Risk 

Management 17 % 

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 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 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. 

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 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. Nonregulatory controls identified by the 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 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, selfinspection, 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. 

Performance 

Indicators 0 % 

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. 

Trend Analysis 23 % 

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. 
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 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. 

SMS Evaluation 6 % 

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. 

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 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. 

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 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. 

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, 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. 

Recognition/ 

Encouragement 24 % 

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. 
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 committed 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 did 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 checklists used, including the pre-event 

checklist established for the preparation and planning of race events and maintenance 

checklists. There is no formal management 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 Objective 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 responsibilities. 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 aware 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 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. 

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 consideration. 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 specific 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 implemented; however, processes are in place and 

incorporated during races. The fire department, emergency management agency, 

security personnel, and airfield operators have PPE available on-site during race week. 

Risk Management: 17% 

There is no formal Safety Risk Management (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 airport 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. Supervisors 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; unwritten 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/facility 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 Speedway, 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 recognizes 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 draft form and revisions are currently under 

consideration to ensure all Part 139 requirements 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 critically 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 documented. Safety performance indicators or 

targets are not developed to directly relate to airport safety. There are no published trend 

analysis data; informally management recognizes 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 identifying 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 for 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 refueling 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 personnel at weekly management meetings. 

Safety is not the driving objective for the 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 recognition, 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. General 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 identifying 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 are performed during the meetings. The Part 139 

and the airport ACM require personnel to be proficient and certified; however there is no 

requirement established for a safety recognition program or encouragement process. These 

elements in the Safety promotion program will 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 almost 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 

Talladega Performed by ESIS                                            Comparison of ACM and SMS Elements Requirements:In comparing the documents required by Part 139 and the ACM to an SMS expectation, the SMS expects more implementation strategy, roles and responsibilities as well as an auditable set of records. In Table 3 below, we 

required documentation, and listed where this matches up to an SMS expectation. 

Table 3: Comparison: Documentation Expectations: Part 139 and SMS 

Talladega Municipal Airport 

Class IV Airport Certificate Manual (Elements) 

Safety Management System 

Elements Requirement

1. ACM Section 303 Personnel. Lines of succession of airport operational 

responsibility 2. ACM Section 113 Deviation to Part 139 Requirements. Each current 

exemption issued to the airport from the Part 139 requirements 3. ACM Section 105 Inspection Authority. Any limitations imposed by the 

Administrator 4. ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (airport grid map). A grid map or other means of identifying locations and terrain features on and around the airport that are significant to emergency operations 5. ACM Section 331 Obstructions. The location of each obstruction required to 

be lighted or marked within the airport’s area of authority 6. ACM Section 319 ARFF Operation requirements. A description of each 

movement area available for air carriers and its safety areas, and each road 7. ACM Section 301 Records: A description of the system for maintaining 

records 8. ACM Section 303 Personnel (training requirements). A description of 

personnel training 

1. Safety Policy and Objectives (ResponsibilWritten guidance on safety authorities and reairport personnel. (AC 150/5200-37) Safety Policy and Objectives (responsibility a

documentation related to Part 139 responsibincorporated into the ACM. (AC 150/5200-37) 2. N/A 3. N/A 4. Safety Assurance (Integration / Emergency Emergency Response Planning for efficient tto emergency operations and return to normSMM) 5. N/A 6. N/A 7. Safety Policy and Objectives (DocumentatAssurance (Tracking Systems): It is importanmaintain a record (safety reporting records, sreporting forms, and risk analysis. (AC 150/58. Safety Promotion (Training): Documented training requirements. Process that measuretraining. (AC150/5200-37 
SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis 

Table 3: Comparison: Documentation Expectations: Part 139 and SMS 

Talladega Municipal Airport 

Class IV Airport Certificate Manual (Elements) 

Safety Management System 

Elements Requirement

9. ACM Section 305 Paved Areas. Procedures for maintaining the paved areas 

10. ACM Section 307 Unpaved Areas. Procedures for maintaining the unpaved 

areas 11. ACM Section 309 Safety Areas. Procedures for maintaining the safety areas 

12. ACM Section 311 Marking Signs and Lighting. Plan showing the runway and taxiway identification system, including the location/inscription of signs, runway markings, and holding position markings 13. ACM Section 311 Marking signs and Lighting. A description of, and 

procedures for maintaining, the marking, signs, and lighting systems 14. ACM Section 315, 317, and 319 ARFF Index, Equipment and Agents, and Operational Requirements. A description of the facilities, equipment, personnel, and procedures for meeting the aircraft rescue and firefighting 

requirements 15. ACM Section 113 Deviation to Part 39 Requirements (Statement in section 317 –ARFF requirement). A description of any approved exemption to aircraft rescue and fire-fighting requirements 16. ACM Section 321 Hazardous Materials. Procedures for protecting persons and property during storing, dispensing, and handling of fuel and other hazardous substances and materials 17. ACM Section 323 Traffic and Wind Indicators. A description of, and 

procedures for maintaining, the traffic and wind direction indicators 18. ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan. An emergency plan 

19. ACM Section 327 Self-Inspection Program. Procedures for conducting the 

self-inspection program 20. ACM Section 339 Airport Condition Reporting. Procedures for airport 

condition reporting 21. ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority and responsibilities in case of an incident or accident). Aircraft incident and 

accidents response 22. ACM Section 325 Bomb incidents, including designation of parking areas for aircraft involved 

9. N/A 10. N/A 11.Safety Assurance (Integration of Maintena12. “ “ 13. “ “ 14. “ “ 15.Safety Assurance (Integration of Emergen16.“ “ 17.“ “ 18. Safety Assurance (Integration of Mainten19. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emerge20. Safety Assurance (Inspections) 21. Safety Assurance (Tracking Systems) 22. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emerge
SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis 

Table 3: Comparison: Documentation Expectations: Part 139 and SMS 

Talladega Municipal Airport 

Class IV Airport Certificate Manual (Elements) 

Safety Management System 

Elements Requirement

23. ACM Section325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority and responsibilities in case of an incident or accident) Structure fires 

24. ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority and responsibilities in case of an incident or accident) Fires at fuel farms or fuel 

storage areas25. ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority and responsibilities in case of an incident or accident) Hazardous materials / 

dangerous goods incidents 26. ACM Section 325 Airport Emergency Plan (provides authority and responsibilities in case of an incident or accident) Sabotage, hijack incidents, 

and other unlawful interference with operations 27. ACM Section 339 Airport Condition Reporting. Failure of power for 

movement area lighting 28. ACM Section 105 Inspection Authority. Any other item that the administrator finds is necessary to ensure safety in air transportation 

23. Safety Assurance (Integration of Emerge24. Safety Assurance (Integration of EmergeAirports must develop an AEP and airlines mEmergency Response Plan. (ICAO) 25. “ “ 26. “ “ 27.Safety Assurance (Tracking Systems): Airresponsibilities for self-inspection and correunder 14 CFR Part 139, an effective airport S37). In the case of a major power outage, or lcommunications or other major facilities. ICA28. Safety Policy and Objectives (Roles and 

As a result of this comparison, Part 139 and ACM requirements provide some of the documentation expected of the majority of the implementation strategy and responsibilities are undefined, except for Inspections, IntegratioEmergency Preparedness. Some other element of SMS, (i.e., Tracking Systems, Roles and Responsibilities) wfew of the expected documentation. Overall, the documentation expectations of SMS would require the ACM to 

bit. 
SMS Pilot Study Gap Analysis Survey of Dec 2008

Talladega Performed by ESIS  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 documentation 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 the 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 above 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 Controllers, 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 RW One

Scores: 50%

Question 5

Total 2

X4 1

X5 0

Question 6

Total 2

X4 1

X5 0

Safety Risk Management

Only One RW 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 RW 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 RW 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?Please 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 and 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. 

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Open Ended Report: Question 10 Page 1 of 1

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintOpenEndedResponsesPage.aspx?print_all= 1/20/2009
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 fuel takers should have a color, etc. 

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

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Open Ended Report: Question 18 Page 1 of 1

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintOpenEndedResponsesPage.aspx?print_all= 1/20/2009
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 stressed 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 job of handling as many aircraft and people they do in a short amount of time 

of race week. With only one incident that I can recall, and that happened this past fall race. 

5 Because of the high amount of traffic and personnel, there should be a safety meeting Saturdays during race 

weekend. 

6 Runway Flagman 

7 I think there ought to be a more secure lcoation for handling money. I think the airport manager and the rest of 

the crew do a really great job, especially for the race weekend and the stress that it brings. 

8 We work hard during Race weekend. Long 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. 

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Open Ended Report: Question 19 Page 1 of 1

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintOpenEndedResponsesPage.aspx?print_all= 1/20/2009

 

Attachment 3 

Perception Survey – Overview Report 
 
Date: 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 Talladega Municipal Airport. Talladega Municipal airport is voluntarily

participating in an FAA pilot study to evaluate safety progress. This survey is designed to help us better understand the 

effectiveness of our safety program and identify opportunities for improvement. It is entirely ANONYMOUS, which means

that you should feel free to answer every question honestly without any concern that anyone will know what you 

answered. You will be asked to tell us about your role (e.g. front line leader/supervisor, manager, hourly paid employee 

or contractor). This will help us compare responses and 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%

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Results Overview Page 1 of 5

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintResultsPage.aspx 1/20/2009
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 Talladega Municipal Airport and safety objectives are written and 

include measurable targets to which the organization can improve. Questions 5 & 6 apply to Safety Policy and 

Objectives.

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.

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 and the identification of prevention and control efforts. 

Questions 7 - 10 apply to Risk Management.

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Results Overview Page 2 of 5

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintResultsPage.aspx 1/20/2009
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. 

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 provide 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 activities are safe? At a level 5, employees 

should feel confident that hazards 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 controlled. 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 inspection 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%

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Results Overview Page 3 of 5

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintResultsPage.aspx 1/20/2009
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 accidents, incidents and near-misses? 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 means 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 receive safety training and 

are positive about the training received and can give examples as to how 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 recognition that you receive from your supervisor 

for safe behavior, safety suggestions and hazard reporting? At a level 5, employees are positive about the safety 

encouragement and recognition they receive.

Not at all 0 0%

Fair 2 7%

Good 5 17%

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Results Overview Page 4 of 5

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintResultsPage.aspx 1/20/2009
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 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.

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 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.

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 would like to share that will help the Airport continually improve safety. Question 

18 and 19 apply to Other Input.

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

Zoomerang | Talladega FAA SMS Perception Survey: Results Overview Page 5 of 5

http://app.zoomerang.com/Report/PrintResultsPage.aspx 1/20/2009

 

Attachment 4 

Talladega Schedule (On-site) 
 
FAA SMS BASELINE ASSESSMENT – ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control Services

Day 1 

Monday 

Time

Element

(Protocol ID)

Department

(Documents – see attached Doc list)

Person 

12:30 – 1:00 Opening Meeting Key Airport Management Staff Jim Brock James Smith 

1:00 – 2:30 Airport Operations Familiarization Site tour and Orientation Jim Brock 

2:30 - 3:30 

Safety Promotion 

Training & Education 

Element 2.1, 4.1

Line Serviceman Activity and Refueling James Smith 

3:30 – 4:30 

Documentation Review 

(Airport Certification Manual, Airport Emergency Plan, Federal Aviation Administration Report 

Fixed Base Operator Reports i.e., Fuel Farm, Fuel Truck, Certificate of Insurances) 

4:30 – 5:00 Daily Wrap Up and Status 5:30 – 6:30 Airfield Assessment Part 139 Airfield Night Time Surveillance Jim Brock 

We 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.
FAA SMS BASELINE ASSESSMENT – ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control Services

Day 2 

Tuesday 

Time

Element

(Protocol ID)

Department

(Documents – see attached Doc list)

Person 

8:30 – 9:00 Inspections and Audits Servicing Element 2.5, 3.1, 3.4, 3.6 Aircraft Maintenance Harold Corlde 

9:00 – 10:00 

Doc Review 

Safety Policy and Objectives 

Element 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.7, 

Safety Performance and Resources 

Element 1.1,1.5, 3.4

IMHOF Operations Manager 

(Safety Policy, Goals, Objectives) 

Target and Indicators 

Bruce Ramsey 

10:00 –11:00 

Doc Review 

Performance Appraisal, Discipline, 

Recognition 

Element 1.3, 1.4, 2.5, 3.4, 4.4, 5.5

Airport Manager 

(Sample Appraisals) 

 (Appraisal process, Disciplinary Actions, and recent Awards) 

Jim Brock 

11:00 – 11:30 

Site Survey 

Inspections and Audits and 

Aircraft Servicing 

Element 2.5, 3.1, 3.4, 3.6

General Aviation Tenant 

( Hangar Inspections, Maintenance Reports) 

Jim Jackson 

11:30 – 1:00 Working Lunch – Document Review & Completion of Protocol Travel to Downtown Talledaga 

1:00 – 2:00 Responsibility and Authority 

Risk Management 

Airport Board

Offsite Visit 

Attend City of Talledaga Board Meeting Board Members 

2:00 – 2:30 Responsibility and Authority 

Risk Management 

Airport Board

Offsite Visit 

Board Chairman 

Interview with Committee Chairman 

Ray Miller 

3:00 – 4:30 

Accident Investigation, Hazard 

Identification, Analysis 

& Reporting System 

Element 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2

Documentation Review 

(Airport Accident and Incident reports) 

Jim Brock 

4:30 – 5:00 Daily Wrap Up and Status Check 
FAA SMS BASELINE ASSESSMENT – ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control Services

Day 3 

Wednesday 

Time

Element

(Protocol ID)

Department

(Documents – see attached Doc list)

Person 

8:30 – 9:30 

Doc Review 

Integration of Operations 

Preventative Maintenance

Element 3.6

Maintenance/ Facility manger 

(Repair Records, Safety Work Orders) James Smith 

9:30 – 10:30 Travel to Lincoln Fire Department and Observation of Fire Response Equipment Offsite Visits

Working Lunch – Discussion with major participants (include Special Event topics)

Operations, Fire Department, EMA, Security, FAA Tower Representative 

10:30 – 2:00 Emergency Preparedness 

Element 3.1, 3.6 

Risk Management 

Element 1.3, 2.1, 2

Airport Board Chairman: Ray MillerCity of Lincoln Fire Department: Chief Mike WesleyState Fire Marshall: Michael Haynes FAA Air Traffic Manager: Bill WagnerTalladega Fire & Rescue: Chief Danny Warwick and Captain Ronnie DavisTalladega Police Department: Captain Thomas Talladega Speedway Security: Director Bill Hodges and Major Ed Gardner Talladega Sheriff: Bill Kennedy United Service Administrators (Insurance Adjustor): Ernie Canfield 

2:00 – 3:00 

Doc Review 

Safety Promotion 

Training & Education 

Element 2.1, 4.1

Training Coordinator 

(Examination & Attendance) Jim Brock 

3:00 – 3:30 

Doc Review 

Lessons Learned 

Element 1.3, 2.4, 4.4 

Accident Investigator 

(Review 2 Incident Investigation, and Action Plans) Jim Brock 

3:30 – 4:30 Hanger, Maintenance & Fuel Farm 

Onsite Visit

Talledaga Airport – Tenant 

Carwash & Talledaga Aero port Maintenance 

(Informal Interviews) 

Steve Horne 

Harold Cordle 

4:30 – 5:00 Daily Wrap Up and Status Check 
FAA SMS BASELINE ASSESSMENT – ESIS, Inc. – Global Risk Control Services

Day 4 

Thursday 

Time

Element

(Protocol ID)

Department

(Documents – see attached Doc list)

Person 

8:00 – 10:00 

Doc Review 

SMS Documentation 

Element 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 2.1, 2.4, 2.6, 3.7

Airport Manager and Staff

(Data control, Records) Jim Brock 

10:00 – 12:00 Wrap up Site Interviews 

12:00 – 1:00 Working Lunch - Completion of Race Week Protocol and Evaluation Criteria Race Week Emphasis 

1:00 – 4:30 

Doc Review 

Drafting of Gap Analysis Report 

Drafting of Safety Plan 

4:30 – 5:00 Daily Wrap Up and Status 

Day 5 

Friday 

Time

Element

(Protocol ID)

Department

(Documents – see attached Doc list)

Person 

8:00 – 9:00 Exit Briefing 

9:00 – 10:00 Draft Report Review 10:00 – 4:00 Return Travel 

*For the exit brief - In attendance (suggested): Airport Manager and Airport Staff. 
 

Attachment 5 

Talladega – ESIS FAA SMSProfileTM 
 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 

1.1.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review policy manual, or worker handbook for 

policy statement.

Management's commitment to safety should be formally expressed in a statement of the organization's safety policy.

There is no formal safet

I = Ask workers if they are aware of the policy (worker interview ).V = Observe if policy statements are posted/published

1.1.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask workers if they understand policy, and feel 

management's commitment is real

Establishment of clear standards of acceptable behavior related to safety.

There is no formal safetcommitted to the safety 

ACRP 4-05 D = Review policy for statement concerning safety as a 

value, not just a priority

AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask workers to compare the facilities commitment to 

safety with operations (worker interview ).

1.1.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Policy should reference a commitment to implement 

h SMS h f di i El

A safety policy is signed by Top Management No, Talladega airport do

1.1.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Management’s commitment to safety should be 

formally expressed in a statement of the organization’s safety policy. I = Worker. Ask is there a SMS policy.

Top Management involved in safety policy making. Policy reflects the organization’s safety philosophy and become the establishment of the SMS.

Management committed 

1.1.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 Policy should reference a commitment to SMS No written policy establ

(SMS) at the Airport. 

1.1.1.8 ACRP 4-05 Safety Policy must indicate how safety management 

principles will be integrated into the organizational structure and define the procedures necessary for a successful SMS implementation.

No written policy establ

1.1.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 The policy should describe a commitment to continual safety 

improvement.

No written safety policy 

1.1.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 The policy should describe a commitment to provide safety 

resources

Talladega speedway pol

1.1.1.11 AC 150/5200-37 The policy should describe that employees can report safety 

issues without fear of reprisal.

No formal reporting propersonnel to freely repo

1.1 Policy1.1.1.2

No written safety policy 

D = Safety PolicyV = Verify Organizational Integration of Safety.

1.1.1.4 Executives are monitoring safety performance just as keenly 

as financial performance. A commitment to make safety the highest priority (not a priority, but a value) 

Talladega Speedway, Npolicy for the company. 

1.0 Policy and Objectives

Section 1.0 (Policy and Objectives): Provides the motivating force and the resources for organizing and controlling activities within an organi

the organization and applies its commitment to safety and health protection with as much vigor as to other organizational purposes. [PMG (b)(safety and health protection in a proactive manner, others will see and follow.

Element 1.1 (Safety Policy): A statement of policy is the foundation of safety and health management. It communicates the value in which safety abecomes the basic point of reference for all decisions affecting safety and health. It also becomes the criterion by which the adequacy of protectiv

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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 1.2.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Review the airport’s published objectives. Objectives 

can be numeric or descriptive, better if both. Preferably one of the SMS elements.

A clear results oriented objectivel(s) for the safety and health program (SMS) has been established. Goals are meaningful and obtainable. [PMG(c)(1)(ii)] 

No, airport does not pubmanagement focus is to safe manner, especially 

1.2.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = SMART. Specific, measurable, actionable, relevant 

and timely.

Objectives are meaningful and attainable. There are no established 

1.2.1.3 CSP - IB2 I = Ask employees what the objectives of the safety 

program is. (worker interview )

The objectives for the safety program has been communicated to all members of the organization. 

There are no formal objactivities are directed toplanning and training ststages. Although all are documented, other than sweeping.

1.2.1.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Doc. I = leadership Management/Leadership owns the majority of these goals. Undocumented goals: th

(FBO), owns the majoridefined goals and object

1.2.1.5 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 establish

used to guide the safety 

1.2.1.6 ACRP 4-05 I = Ask workers and supervisors at all levels if they are 

aware of H&S objectives for their department, some committees, the site... I = Ask workers at all levels if they are aware of safety

The majority of employees are aware of objectives, the results desired, and measures planned for achieving them. [PMG(c)(1)(ii)]

No written documentatiactivities such as fueling 

1.2.1.7 AC150/5200-37 D = Review written objectives and inventory accountable 

parties. The majority of objectives should not fall onto Safety and Maintenance.

Objectives are assigned to and spread among various departments and committees.

No, written objectives, hunderstand safety as prim

1.2.1.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Look for a Scorecard documenting completion rates, 

etc.

Specific times for objectives to be met and be revisited to ensure effectiveness.

For the race events the sstakeholders recognize tevent.

1.2.1.9 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 the SMS elements

No, airport does not mea

Element 1.3 (Responsibility and Authority): Assign and communicate responsibility for all aspects of the program so that managers, supervisorsauthority 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 

1.3 Responsibility and Authority

Element 1.2 (Goals and Objectives): Establish and communicate a goal for the safety and health program and objectives for meeting that goal, so them. [TED 8.4 CPTR III, II.C.I; Appendix E, Section I.B; Appendix F 4.2.2]

1.2 Objectives1.3.1 Responsibilities Sub-Element 1.3.1 (Responsibility): Assignment of responsibility for safety and health protection to a single staff member, or even a small group

an organization has some responsibility for safety and health, especially those in line management, who ultimately control what workers do, the to

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 1.3.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Policy and Objectives. Review written guidance.

I = Leadership

Organization’s policy concerning responsibility and accountability, including written guidance regarding the safety authorities and responsibilities of all key personnel assigned to the airport.

Resolution No 2211 estaTalladega Municipal Aitransactions of the muniincludes " the Board handispersions of the fundsrepairs..." "Day by day, sets, as to the landing anaircraft support systemsTesting Company. This and is responsible for alrequired by FAA laws aoperational responsibilitpersonnel of the FBO. Ahave defined, written oractivites in both the race 

1.3.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Documentation of Senior management reviews 

I = Leadership. Review consist of not only the financial performance of the organization but also its safety performance. = 

Executives and Managers commitment to safety on the part of senior management. The attitudes, decisions and methods of operation at the policy-making level demonstrate the priority given to safety.

During racing events, thpriority given to safety. including police, fire, moperations there is no clwhich includes the Airpobjectives. 

1.3.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Executives and managers decision making process.

I = Leadership

Managers decisions and methods of operation at the policymaking level demonstrate a priority given to safety. During race events, safe

making decisions are of

1.3.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Organizational chart. Succession of control

V = Distribution of responsibilities throughout airport staff.I = Safety Manager and Staff personnel.

Airport organizational chart should be distributed as necessary to educate and inform the airport staff.

Limited organizational cincludes the Airport Boamanagement structure. 

1.3.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Safety Mangers roles and responsibilities.

I = Safety Manager and Staff

The responsibilities of the Safety Manager are clearly defined along with identified lines of communication within the organization.

There is no Safety Mana

1.3.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Safety Manager communicate lessons learned from 

events.I = Worker. Are lessons learned distributed.

Lessons learned from hazardous occurrence investigations and case history or experiences, both internally and from other organizations.

No formal process in pla

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 1.3.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 I = Worker. Ask worker if airport operator/safety manager 

communicate safety goals and procedures.V = The safety management system should be visible in all aspects of the airport operation.

Relationship among safety manager and airport operations No designated safety ma

1.3.1.8 ACRP 4-05 I = Worker. Ask worker about organizational structure. Organizational Structure. SMS spreads responsibility for safe 

operations throughout all levels.

ACM defines some limiclearly defined. Airport structure.

1.3.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 I =. Worker. Are there clear reporting lines, clearly 

defined duties and well understood procedures (worker interview).

Personnel fully understand their responsibilities and know what to report, to whom and when.

No written procedures idreport. 

1.3.2.1 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask personnel with assigned health and safety 

responsibilities if they have received the authority to perform their assigned duties. This includes committee members, supervisors, etc.

Authority has been provided to responsible parties, so that assigned responsibilities can be met. [PMG (c)(1)(vi)]

During racing events, auManagement, but generaManager. Designated pin cooperation and undeevents 

1.3.2.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Policy or procedures to if this authority has 

been communicated.I = Ask employees if they are empowered to stop and shut down processes when hazards are identified. 

Employees have the authority to stop jobs and shut down equipment if it is considered unsafe and demonstrates this ability. [(PMG (c)(1)(v)]

Yes. Airport staff and sespecially during race w

1.3.2.3 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask personnel to explain what personal safety actions 

they have taken in the last year. 

Authority has been clearly implemented. [TED 8.4 Appendix F, 4.2.2 (I) (B) and Appendix E (I) (D) (2)]

Airport management haimplement safety at the implementation of SMS 

1.4.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D: Performance Appraisals referencing "Element for 

Indicators and Targets" (if Element does not meet, or has gaps, then this criteria also must demonstrate gaps).

There is written guidance regarding accountability for all key personnel.

Performance reviews di

Element 1.4 (Management Accountability) : Stating expectations of managers, supervisors, and other employees means little if management 

Holding everyone, especially line-management, accountable for meeting their responsibilities is at the heart of effective workers safety and productivity or other values, safety and health protection may be neglected. To be effective, a system of accountability must be applied to everyoare not, the system will lose its credibility. Those held to expectations will be resentful; those allowed to neglect expectations may increase their nSection I.D; Appendix F 4.2.3].

Sub-Element 1.3.2 (Authority) : It is unreasonable to assign responsibility without providing adequate authority to get the job done. For examp

repaired. 

1.4. Accountability1.3.2 Authority

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 1.4.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D: Check Performance Appraisals, Recognitions and 

Discipline Records. Discipline is not expected to occur predominately after incidents, but be more proactive. I: Ask employees explain the acoountability process.

Management holds workers accountable for safety and health through an effective evaluation process and by checking to make sure they are meeting their responsibilities (performing essential tasks) and correcting or rewarding them as appropriate. 

Performance reviews difeels safety is part of the 

1.4.1.3 

AC 150/5200-37

D: Performance Appraisal should match up to Element for ResponsibilitiesI = Verify that they are aware of these responsibilities.

Managers and supervisors are asked about and held accountable for carrying out their established safety and health responsibilities. [PMG (c)(1)(vii)]

Performance reviews difor safety. 

1.4.1.4 ICAO SMM D: There is evidence that a periodic evaluation system is 

used by the facility. This can be periodic scorecards, Performance Appraisals, etc. V: The safety performance standards need to match up to Element Indicators and Targets.

Managers are rewarded when safety performance standards are met and vice versa. 

Performance reviews di

1.4.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = There is evidence that key indicators of 

management’s commitment to safety.

Management structure assigned responsibility and accountability, and allocation of appropriate resources must be consistent with the organization’s stated safety objectives.

Safety objectives are noprovided to maintain to 

1.4.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Risk mitigation strategy. Management official certify acceptance and accountability for 

risk mitigation strategy.

No evidence found of ri

1.5.1.1 CSP D: Budget for Safety Program and its elements. 

(Adequacy is determined by effectively addressing risks and exposures in priority order.)I: verify that the reporting of safety concerns are not limited due to a feeling or perception of resource constraints.

Safety budget is in place and adequate resources in budget are available. 

Airport management doMonies are requested anavailable for the maintenairfield maintenance cosPart 139 that have not ban approved AEP.

1.5.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 

V: 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 

allocated for safety train

1.5.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 Adequate resources in equipment are available. Resources are made ava

additional attention, i.e. trucks and generator rec

1.5.1.4 PMG (c)(1)(vi) The resources provided include time to meet expected 

responsibilities.

Limiting overtime pay fOnly four night inspecti

1.5.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 The resources provided include technical resources such as 

outside consultants, and experts in the field to meet expected responsibilities. [PMG (c)(1)(vi)]

Neal Schaffer's technicaconsultants were identif

Element 1.5 (Resources): Providing and directing adequate resources (including time, funding, training, personnel, etc.) to those responsible for s

1.5 Resources

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 1.5.1.6 PMG (c)(1)(vi) The resources provided includes funding to meet expected 

responsibilities. 

Resources for Aircraft Rmeet Part 139 regulatory three persons to receive the first responders does 

1.5.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 Resources include organizational systems to meet the SMS 

elements, to include Documentation, Data capture and analysis.

1.5.1.8 CSP Resources are available to prevent exposure to serious 

uncontrolled hazards. [Appx F ID5 4.2.3]

Resources are allocated 

1.6.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Documentation of a disciplined approach to 

documentation and information management.

Management follows a disciplined approach to documentation and information management

Various checklists are uand planning of race eveall required documents scalendar, etc. 

1.6.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Safety Objectives

I = Leadership

Senior Management support requirements of SMS Documented safety obje

1.6.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal Safety Policy and Objectives for 

implementation

Documentation that clarifies the relationship of the SMS to other organizational functions and the integration of SMS activities

No, formal safety policy 

1.6.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Documentation process that defines how SMS 

activities relate to the organization’s operating policies.

The contents of this documentation may be in the form of safety reporting records, surveys, hazard reporting forms, and risk analysis/mitigation processes.

No formal hazard identi139requirements (i.e., in

1.6.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review identified hazards. Hazards to the system (i.e., operation, equipment, people, and 

procedures) are identified in a systematic or disciplined way.

During speedway eventssystematic process of adday-to day business, are and airfield inspections 

1.6.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review SMS documentation that relate to 14 CFR 

Part 139 responsibilities.

The content may be incorporated into the Airport Certification Manual (ACM)

SMS documentation not processes.

1.7.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review committee charter. Rotation is encouraged. Committee membership allocations are based upon written 

guidelines. (Charter)

There is no designated o

1.7.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes Minutes are documented for each committee and subcommittee meeting. None 

1.7 Committees1.6 Documentation

Element 1.7(Committees): Have a defined charter that outlines employee rotation, quorum rules, goals, objectives, etc. and operates to successful Otherwise, information sharing is just a meeting. If the committee is effectively involved, (but does not demonstrate ownership) maximum score is 

Element 1.6 (Documentation): All critical elements of a basic systems management safety and health management system must be part of the writprocess of formal documentation clarifies the relationship of the SMS to other organizational functions and the integration of SMS activities. Furth

contents of this documentation may be in the form of safety reporting records, surveys, hazard reporting forms, and risk analysis/mitigation proces

SM

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 1.7.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes Minutes are kept that include members in attendance. None 1.7.1.4 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes . Assignments should be 

tracked month to month until closed.

Minutes are kept that include recommendations made and assignments. 

None

1.7.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review meeting minutes. Minutes are published and distributed to upper management 

and the work force.

None

1.7.1.6 ICAO SMM I = Ask employees to name some people on the safety 

committee, how they got there, and what they do. Get specific examples. 

Employees know who is on the safety committee and what functions it serves and oversees. 

No

1.7.1.7 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of follow-ups of 

corrective actions identified in Safety Work Orders.

No

1.7.1.8 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of the corrective 

action follow-up of employee concerns.

No

1.7.1.9 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of the inspection 

process

No

1.7.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 Committees are involved in/have ownership of the Risk 

Assessment process.

No

1.7.1.11 ICAO SMM Committees are involved in/have ownership of the Objective 

Setting process.

No

1.7.1.12 ICAO SMM Committees are provided with the time, training, equipment, 

on-site safety staff technical support and any other resources required in order to perform their functions adequately.

No

1.7.1.13 AC 150/5200-37 D = Hazard Identification. The safety committee acts as a 

source 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 larger airport.

No, Talladega Speedwathe organization. 

1.0 Policy and Objectives Section Total 

D: MinutesI: Committee Members verify that this is effective and part of their responsibilities as a committee.

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.1.1.1 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 for identifying the ACM and Part 139 requirements that are applicable to it.

ACM has been deevlopeAirport Emeregency Pla

2.1.1.2 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.2 D = Review SMS documentation. Does the SMS 

incorporated Part 139. I = Leadership. Ask 

The airport ensures FAA Part 139 responsibilities are incorporated into the ACM. SMS has been taken into account in establishing, implementing and maintaining the airport management systems.

No SMS documentationCertification Manual (A

2.1.1.3 VPP 3.1.1.1 

IIA1

D = Review dcoumentation.V = Observe the hazards and conditions present in the workplace or airfield.

Compliance with ACM identifies high risk hazards procedures (i.e., fueling operations, airfield electrical work) and determines potential risks.

Part 139 (airfield surveiconducted daily to identpersonnel. 

2.1.1.4 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 other agencies have been identified and assigned. 

No formal OSHA traininairport manager provide

2.1.1.5 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.3 D = Other regulatory documents.

I = Safety manager or safety committee members regarding training requirements.

All regulatory requirements are maintained and up-to-date. Part 139 requires are ma

2.1.1.6 VPP 3.1 D = Review Hazard Records. The hazard record is kept 

for the lifecycle of the system change. 

Requirements required by insuerance complany been identified and assigned.

Insurance representative 

2.1.1.7 OHSAS 18001, 4.3.2.4 D = Document review

I = Interview verification

Relevant information on legal requirements are communicated to persons working under the control of the airport and other relevant interested parties i.e., tenants, contractors).

Discussions with tenantclearly commiunicated. 

Element 2.1 (Requirements): Understanding and acknowledging requirements, to include 14 CFR Part 139, the safety related functions of the ACM

requirements, but inclusive of the expected controls. 

2.1 Requirements2.0 Risk Management

Section 2.0 ( Safety Risk Management): Involves a variety of worksite examinations to identify not only existing hazards, but also conditions and o

failure to examine the worksite, is a sure sign that safety and health policies and / or practices are ineffective. Effective management actively anal

III, 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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.2.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 The Hazard identification process is in writing, and samples 

are provided. 

No, written or formal pranalysis that have been and controls are in place 

2.2.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 The hazards associated with Equipment, Tools and Materials 

are considered.

No formal system in pla

2.2.1.3

AC 150/5200-37 The hazards associated with Operational procedures are 

considered.

No written procedures frepresentative stated thaimplementation, and exe

2.2.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 The hazards associated with Incident History are considered. There is no records or d

for addressing incidents

2.2.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards associated with the Human Element are considered. No behavioral observati2.2.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards associated with the Environment are considered. During race week, EMA 

issues. ADEM provide penvironmental concerns

2.2.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards associated with External services (e.g., FBO or law 

enforcement, etc.) are considered.

Speedway race week, asoperations for hazardou

2.2.1.8 PMG (c)(2) Working conditions & operations are analyzed to identify 

hazards not previously recognized by the industry. 

No formal documented 

2.3.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review process instructions, training and program 

procedures.

The Hazard Analysis process follows a prescribed process, such as Job Hazard or Safety Analysis, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, HAZ-Ops, fault trends, etc. and are documented.

No formal process

2.3.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 I: Verify that they are knowledgeable and received 

training

Personnel performing worksite analysis should have a degree of experience and competence. 

Race week provides exp

Element 2.3 (Hazard Analysis): Procedures exist to ensure the review of processes and the identification and control of related hazards. Acceptab

CPTR 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 

periodically, 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 edeveloped 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 a

action is required to eliminate or reduce the safety risk associated with the hazard.D = Review the hazard analysis program for evidence of when it was initiated. I: Verify that the assessors used and understood how to identify all hazards.V: Observe the workplace to verify that workplace hazards have not been missed.

2.3 Hazard Analysis2.2 Hazard Identification

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.3.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 Analysis is scheduled based on a priority system. No formal process found2.3.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 Hazard analysis is performed for higher risk jobs, tasks and 

processes.[PMG (c)(2)(C)]

No formal process found

2.3.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard analysis information looking for 

analysis quality, control process.I = Ask safety director to explain the process of reviewing hazard analysis performed by others.

Staff personnel who specialize in risk assessment review the results of worksite analyses. 

No, airport staff do not caccomplished by agency 

2.4.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 V = Verify the assessment of the system or component 

compare to the achieved risk level with the tolerable risk level.

A qualified (industry recognized) risk assessment process is used.

No written risk assessm

2.4.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Persons or group require sufficient operations 

expertise, safety experience, and training to conduct the assessment.

Risk Assessors are trained in this process. Airport personnel are no

Analysis (JSA). Personndesignated locations or a

2.4.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review incident reports (a risk factor). In order to 

assess the risk of an accident or incident occurring, severity and likelihood are first determined.

Risk determination is in part based on incident history (a risk factor)

Talladega Airport has a activities performed annlearned and action items prioritize task or activiti

2.4.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 V = Each hazard in its system context is identified to 

determine what risks exist, if any, that may be related to the hazard.

Risk determination is in part based on regulatory requirements. (a risk factor)

No process found

2.4.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 V = Any existing or potential condition that can lead to 

injury, illness, or death to people; damage to or loss of a system, equipment, or property; or damage to the environment.

Risk determination is in part based on property damage criteria. (risk factor)

No process in place to s

2.4.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review assessment documents. Depending on the 

nature and size of the system under consideration operating environment, e.g., cold, night, low visibility (a risk factor)

Risk determination is in part based on environmental impact criteria. (a risk factor)

Part 139 requirements hidentified deficiencies a

2.4.1.7 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documented inventory of airport operations 

and activities

An inventory of activities and tasks is created, and is a basis for risk characterization. 

No documented invento

Element 2.4 (Risk Assessment): Risk assessment system involves an analysis of a job, process or the interaction of activities in order to identify haz

analysis, ergonomic assessments, etc. The analysis must result in improved work practices and employee training as well as (particularly with proabatement technology, the degree of risk, and the availability of necessary equipment, materials and qualified staff affect hazard controls. In VPP

measures, serve as a means for communicating the rational of decisions, and encourage employee acceptance of decisions. Hazard controls are icontrols, (3) administrative controls, (4) personal protective equipment, and (5) work rules as a part of the site safety and health program. A VPP

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]

2.4.1 Risk Assessment Inputs 

D = Priorities typically include incidence, high-hazards, regulations, risk, judgment and change.V = Verify through observation that higher risks are on the schedule.

2.4 Risk Assessment 

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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.4.1.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documented list of potential hazard A list of potential hazards is determined and documented to 

assist in the risk determination process.

No documented list

2.4.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review safety risk controls to ensure mitigation of an 

unacceptable risk for measurable and monitored effectiveness.

A list of potential controls is determined and documented to assist in the risk determination process.

No

2.4.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review document for Hierarchy of controls used in 

controlling risk.

The list of potential controls are organized based on hierarchy, to include elimination, substitution, engineering, administrative and personal protective equipment

No

2.4.1.11 AC 150/5200-37 V = Verify how risk are determined to be unacceptable, 

identify and evaluate risk mitigation measures by which the probability of occurrence and/or the severity of the hazard could be reduced.

A risk matrix is used to determine "acceptable", "unacceptable" and "remediation option" risks (tolerability)

No

2.4.1.12 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review established requirements. Determination of 

severity is independent of likelihood, and likelihood should not be considered when determining severity.

Risk Factors, Severity and likelihood, are defined. No

2.4.2.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal risk assessment program that identifies and 

documents hazards on the airport.

A written risk assessment procedure exists, encompassing all of these criteria (inputs, process steps and outputs). 

No Formal risk assessm

2.4.2.2 ICAO SMM D = Review Prioritized listing Tasks and activities are prioritized by assessment by risk 

factors.

No formal prioritized lis

2.4.2.3 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard listing Hazards are identified for prioritized tasks and activities. No hazard listing 2.4.2.4 ICAO SMM I = Management. Prioritized Task and Activities Risk is determined for prioritized tasks and activities. Speedway events stakeh

related operations. 

2.4.2.5 ICAO SMM D = Review documents for hierarchy of controls Controls are selected based on the hierarchy of controls. No documents found or 

2.4.2.6 ICAO SMM D = Review procedures for identifying high risk and 

effective controls

Higher risk (unacceptable) use more effective controls (elimination, substitution and engineering). 

No written procedures f

2.4.2.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Lessons learned, safety news letters, notices 

and bulletins, bulletin boards, Etc. I = Ask staff and employees are they actively encouraged to identify potential hazards and propose solutions. V = Safety reporting drop boxes and electronic reporting through web sites or email

Hazard and controls are initially and routinely communicated to the workforce.

Safety meetings provide exchange information anreporting drops availablregarding safety concern

2.4.2 Risk Assessment Process 

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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.4.2.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review self-inspections and external reports. Safety 

Assurance includes self-auditing, external auditing, and safety oversight.

The use of controls, identified for initial high risks, are verified as being in place and used via a verification/inspection process. 

Self-inspections are perfspeedway events. Externin Daytona (no external 

2.4.2.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Goals and Objectives for risk reduction. Risk reduction is ongoing, and as a by product of Goals and 

Objectives.

No formal process to sh

2.4.2.10 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review annual safety reports. Self-audits and external 

auditing practices.

The Risk Assessment Process (input, process and output) is evaluated annually as part of the SMS assessment.

Uncertain, if external auexternal report available

2.4.2.11 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review records. Hazards are assessed, mitigated, 

documented, tracked, and operational data are continuously monitored to provide feedback on hazards.

Records of inputs, data and outputs are maintained No records.

2.4.3.1 ICAO SMM D = Review documentation A high hazard task and activity list is documented and 

maintained.

No formal documentatio

2.4.3.2 ICAO SMM I = Workers Involvement There is worker involvement in the risk assessment process. No formal risk assessme

2.4.3.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review risk assessment documentation. The 

identified risk would be documented before moving to assess and analyze the risk, a determination of the probability of that risk occurring, and the severity if such an event were to occur.

Risk and tolerability limits are established and documented for tasks and activities.

No documentation foun

2.4.3.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Hazard and identified risk are documented before 

moving to assess and analyze the risk, a determination of the probability of that risk occurring, and the severity if such an event were to occur.

Controls and work procedures from the risk assessment are integrated into operational procedures.

No document or records

2.4.3.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review risk assessment documents. All potential 

hazards are identified and documented and are subjected to an assessment of the possible severity and potential risk.

Action items identified during the risk assessment process are documented, tracked and closed on a timely basis.

No risk assessment docu

2.4.3.6 ICAO SMM D = Review risk assessment documentation, determine if 

a reasonable percentage of controls are based on these more effective methods. V = Observe the worksite and identify areas where engineering design principles integrate hazards and those areas yet to be addressed.

Substitution, Defense in Depth and Engineering techniques are used preferably to control or correct hazards where feasible and appropriate, especially for more serious hazards. [PMG(c)(3)(i)(A)]

No formal process estabcollection system (datab

2.4.3.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review safety self-audits and external auditing 

practices.

The Risk Assessment annual process evaluation results in a documented improvement strategy. 

Periodic self-audits and are evaluated and perfor

Sub-Element 2.4.3 (Outputs): 

2.4.3 Risk Assessment Outputs

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 

Subtotal 

Total: 

2.5.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard analysis procedures and safe job 

procedures. Have the results of the analysis made it into the safe job procedure. I = Ask employees to describe the hazard analysis process for recent changes or initiatives. (worker interview )V = Are job hazard analysis posted in the workplace?

Routine hazard review such as process review or hazard analysis or (in construction) phase hazard analysis results in improved safe work procedures and controls. 

No formal hazard analychecklist, communicatioimprove the safe work pchanges in conditions an

2.5.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review process instructions and program procedures. Risk Analysis results are documented. No instructions availabl

2.5.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review Analysis 

V= sample at least a few tasks and analysis records.

Analysis documents task steps, hazards and controls, recommendations made, dates conducted, and responsible parties.

Documents/records unav

2.5.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training documentation.

I = Ask employees if they have received training on PPE use. (worker interview )

Employees have received training on why controls (including PPE) are necessary and how to use and maintain it.

PPE training provided thand safety meetings. Duhad PPE available when etc). Equipment and trai

2.5.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training records.

I = Workers - verify.

The controls identified are used to train operators to safe job procedures.

Reviewed airport staff trTalladega speedway pro..etc). Other in-depth spspaces are performed in 

2.5.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Review PPE program, JHAs, written procedures, 

inspections, etc. for inclusion of PPE.

Controls are understood and followed by all affected parties.[PMG(c)(3)(C)]

No JHAs or written procFire department, EMA, available on-site during protection, gloves, as re

2.5.1.7 ICAO SMM D = Review operating instructions. Determine if they 

reflect safe work practices identified in hazard analysis.

Safe operating procedures have been incorporated into operating instructions. 

No Operating Instructioagencies have specific p

Sub-Element 2.5.1 (Mitigation): Implementation and Communication of Controls and Work Procedures. Risk mitigation strategies are based on huidentification, risk determination, and analysis is to prepare for risk mitigation. Risk mitigation measures work through reducing the probability of transfer, assumption, or control measures.

2.5 Risk Management Element 2.5 (Risk Management): Safety risk management encompasses the assessment and mitigation of the safety risks of the consequences of ha

The objective of safety risk management is to provide the foundations for a balanced allocation of resources between all assessed safety risks and design into which appropriate controls to the safety risks of the consequences of anticipated hazards are embedded in the system.

2.5.1 Mitigate

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.5.1.8 ICAO SMM D = Review maintenance instructions. Determine if they 

reflect safe work practices identified in hazard analysis.

Safe operating procedures have been incorporated into maintenance instructions. 

No maintenance instruc

2.5.1.9 ICAO SMM D = Review safe job procedures. Determine if they 

reflect non-routine tasks performed at the facility.I = Ask employee responsible for performing non-routine tasks if they are aware of the hazards associated with the tasks.

Workers involved in non-routine operations, or who are rarely assigned, are aware of job hazards and safety precautions. 

No official safe job procand briefed on hazard asairport. 

Subtotal 

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 

during speedway races. 

2.5.2.2 ACRP 4-05 I = Ask workers if they know of workplace rules and can 

give examples. (worker interview ) Positive reinforcement cannot be based on absence of accidents.

Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by all affected parties as a result of an effective positive reinforcement process. [PMG(c)(3)(B)]

Positive reinforcement iaccomplishment. No for

2.5.2.3 ICAO SMM D = Review disciplines. Apply to both management and 

employees.

Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by all affected parties through a clearly communicated and implemented disciplinary system. 

No evidence of safety draces disciplinary action

2.5.2.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Review most of the discipline reports. Compare to 

the OSHA log.

The majority of disciplines are based on observations rather than management waiting for accidents to occur. [PMG(c)(3)(B)]

No evidence of safety ob

2.5.2.5 ICAO SMM D = Review most of the discipline reports. The discipline systems is enforced for both management and 

employees.

No evidence of safety d

2.5.2.6 ICAO SMM D = Review conformance reports

V = Verify measures are posted or distributed

Control verification conformance is measured and reported to the workforce.

No conformance reports 

2.5.2.7 ICAO SMM D = Review performance appraisals process for 

conformance.

Management and departments are measured on control conformance, risk reduction strategies, and timely closure of action items. These measurements are part of the performance appraisal process and results in improved performance.

Performance appraisals requirements, such as roconformance. 

2.5.3 Change Hazard Analysis Sub-Element 2.5.3 (Change Hazard Analysis): Procedures to ensure analysis of all newly acquired or altered facilities, processes, materials, e

Typically, a process includes requirements, review criteria checklists, health and safety signature authority, etc.

Sub-Element 2.5.2 (Monitoring and Supervision): The establishment and maintenance of a safety database provide an essential tool for corporate 

2.5.2 Monitoring/Supervision

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.5.3.1 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Pre-use or change analysis written program or 

procedure.

There is a written procedure for the Pre-Use process. This procedure includes responsibilities and a description of what the reviewer is suppose to review.

No written process for p

2.5.3.2 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Check Pre-use and incident records.

I = Verify that hazard analysis are updated by responsible 

parties, typically for each incident investigation or process change, integrated with Pre-use.

Analysis is re-visited whenever changes or errors are identified.

No, reviewed three incidprocess.

2.5.3.3 PMG(c)(2)(B) D= Required by the written program, and evidenced by 

engineering design review records.

The Pre-Use Analysis is integrated into the sites' engineering design review process.

No written program esta

2.5.3.4 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Review procedures for performing pre-use analysis 

on new facilities. I = Ask process owners to explain the process with examples.

There is a process to analyze modifications to existing and new facilities.

No documentation. Race analysis of existing facilinformal analysis on the 

2.5.3.5 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Review procedures for performing pre-use analysis 

on new equipment. I = Ask process owners to explain the process with examples.

There is a process to analyze modifications to existing and new equipment. 

No

2.5.3.6 PMG(c)(2)(B) D = Review procedures for performing pre-use analysis 

on new materials.I = Ask process owners to explain the process with examples.

There is a process to analyze modifications to existing and new materials and chemicals. 

No

2.5.3.7 PMG(c)(2)(B) This Pre-use analysis process exists at design stage, prior to 

purchase. 

No 

2.5.3.8 PMG(c)(2)(B) The Pre-use analysis process effectively identifies and assures 

that all safety controls are in place prior to production/use.

Race events stakeholder operations. Rules seem 

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 p

2.5.4 Risk Reduction 

D=Review the latest changes for documented evidence of process, checklist and recommendations tracked to closure.I = Ask process owners to explain the process with examples.V = Verify that appropriate hazards have been identified and controlled.Sub-Element 2.5.4 (Risk Reduction): Trend analyses in the safety assurance process should be employed to track safety performance measures Moreover, where deficiencies have been found and corrected as a result of past audits, evaluations, investigations, or reports, it is essential tha

air safety-related incidents are best recorded and tracked using a PC-based database. However, a spreadsheet format, Gantt chart or MS Projethe organization will create or modify policies, objectives, procedures or processes to incorporate the required SMS components and elements.

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.5.4.2 ICAO SMM I = Ask workers if they know of workplace rules and can 

give examples. (worker interview ) Positive reinforcement cannot be based on absence of accidents.

Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by all affected parties as a result of an effective positive reinforcement process. 

No written formalized p

2.5.4.3 ICAO SMM D = Review disciplines. Apply to both management and 

employees.

Procedures for safe work are understood and followed by all affected parties through a clearly communicated and implemented disciplinary system. 

Discipline process not adocumented. 

2.5.4.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Review most of the discipline reports. Compare to 

the OSHA log.

The majority of disciplines are based on observations rather than management waiting for accidents to occur. [PMG(c)(3)(B)]

Discipline process not a

2.5.4.5 ICAO SMM D = Review most of the discipline reports. The discipline systems is enforced for both management and 

employees.

Discipline process not adocumented.

Subtotal 

2.6.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review written procedures. They typically include 

responsibilities, instructions, definitions and recordkeeping requirements.

Accident/Investigation procedures are in writing. Not in writing for the ai

2.6.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review investigation reports. Accident investigations are documented. Airport uses Talladega S

2.6.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Training records and course outline.

I = Investigators

All investigations are conducted by personnel trained in investigation and causal factor techniques.

During race event, accidinvestigated by NTSB, Fidentified. Note: Design

2.6.1.4 ICAO SMM I = Validates

V = Verify a few yourself.

Personnel independent of the injured party should validate that corrective actions are appropriately identified.

Corrective actions are n

2.6.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review investigation reports. All accident investigations include prevention 

recommendations.

Corrective actions are n

2.6 Investigations Element 2.6 (Investigation): All types of significant incidents (incursions, property damamge, injuries, illness, spills, fires, first aid, near-misses) a

Analysis to identify their causes permits development of measures to prevent future injury or illness. Although a first look may suggest that “emplrequired work practice, it is critical to ask, “Why”? A thorough analysis will generally reveal a number of deeper factors, which permitted or eve

employee to take short cuts in the interest of production, inadequate equipment, or a work practice that is difficult for the employee to carry out sa

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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 2.6.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Review investigation reports and compare with 

OSHA log. Determine if lost time accidents are captured.I = Discuss with responsible parties methods of capturing lost time incidents for investigation.

In depth incident investigations are conducted for all serious and lost time accidents. [PMG(c)(3)(B)]

If aircraft related, it is dsite during race week. Arace events for the airpo

2.6.1.7 ICAO SMM D = Review investigation reports and compare with first 

aid logs and near miss. Determine if accidents and near misses are captured. I = Discuss with responsible parties methods of capturing property loss investigations.

All significant incidents including recordable, injuries, illnesses, property damage, fires, spills etc. resulting in personal injury or property damage are investigated. [PMG (c)(2)(iv)]

If aircraft related, it is dsite during race week. Arace events for the airpo

2.6.1.8 ICAO SMM D = Review caused factor methodology to verify it 

follows a defined causal analysis or root cause analysis techniqueV = Observe investigation techniques to verify if causal factor methods conform to requirements and identify root causes.

All investigations address the causal factors and root cause rather than simply blame on the employee (i.e., stopping at 

“human error” ). This results in actions to prevent future 

occurrences. 

Not addressed

2.6.1.9 ICAO SMM D = Review committee meeting minutes.

I = Ask committee members their role in accident investigations.

(For construction only) The joint labor management committee is involved in accident investigations. 

Not applicable

2.6.1.10 ICAO SMM D = Review accident investigation documentation. Contractors report accidents, property damage, near misses. No 2.6.1.11 ICAO SMM V = Verify that recent Corrective Action Plans are closed. Contractor corrective action plans are recorded and tracked 

and implemented.

No, not verified or track

Total: 

2.0 Risk Management Section Total 3.1.1.1 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 corrective tracking. 

Daily ACM inspections 

manual tracking method

3.1 Inspections and Self-Auditing

3.0 Safety Assurance Section 3.0 (Safety Assurance): Safety Assurance is triggered by a determination that a hazard or potential hazard exits. Where feasible, hazards 

controlled to prevent unsafe and unhealthful exposure. Elimination or controls is accomplished in a timely manner, once a hazard or potential haadministrative and lastly personal protective equipment.

Element 3.1 (Inspections/Audits): A comprehensive examination of the workplace has been conducted and hazard controls have been established, not create new hazards, that hazard controls remain in place and are effective. Personnel performing regular inspections should, however, possesidentify reasonable means for their correction or control. Such competence should normally be expected of ordinary employees who are capable may include: emergency response equipment, PPE, forklift, cranes, hoists, slings, ladders, fire extinguishers, sprinkler systems, elevators, boilers, 

conducting the inspections, recording of findings, responsibility for abatement and tracking of hazards for timely correction. [TED 8.4, Chapter II

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.1.1.2 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

ADEM. 

3.1.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D = Written procedures typically identify: responsibility, 

frequency, topic areas, and recordkeeping. 

Written procedures define inspections & corrective action as to responsibility.

Per ACM procedures ar

3.1.1.4 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 ar

3.1.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review the checklist and hazard inventory to verify 

that they are based on common elements.V = Observe areas that have checklists to verify that all hazards have been addressed.

Written inspection checklists are used to provide guidance as to where to look and what to look for 

Yes. Daily inspections, 

3.1.1.6 ICAO SMM D= Review Inspection checklists. References incorporates information sources such as job 

hazard analysis, investigations, employee concerns, etc.

No tailored to equipmen

3.1.1.7 ICAO SMM D= Review Inspection checklists. Checklist criteria check for controls from hazards discovered 

through regulatory review, investigations, hazard analysis. Checklists are periodically updated to reflect changes.

No based primarily on rexperience

3.1.1.8 ICAO SMM D = Review written procedures. Written procedures define how to record findings. ACM procedures on how 

3.1.1.9 ICAO SMM D = Typically , even hazards fixed on the spot are 

recorded. They may not need to be tracked, however. 

Written procedures define which findings are reported. Yes on daily self-inspec

3.1.1.10 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 not identified on previous inspections.

Regular site safety and health inspections identify new or previously missed hazards and failures in hazard controls.

Observations indicate podeteriorating condition, markings and centerline

3.1.1.11 PMG (c)(2) D = Review Inspections and verify that they cover the 

whole facility quarterly. I = Ask inspection team members how they ensure the whole facility is inspected quarterly.

Monthly inspections are performed with quarterly coverage of whole site (general industry). (More frequently if conditions change often.) [Appx F IID2]

Daily self inspections on 

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.1.1.12 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training records to verify that inspectors have 

appropriate training.I = Ask inspectors what training they have received.V = Walk with inspectors, perform an inspection and verify that they have the knowledge needed to identify hazards and controls.

Inspectors are qualified to recognize workplace hazards, particularly those particular to their industry. [appx F IID4]

Race events- Public safedaily inspections, personincursions, self-inspectifor airfield inspections a

3.1.1.13 ICAO SMM D = Review any requests for assistance made to state 

consultation services.

For small businesses in need of assistance, a request has been made for a consultation visit from the state Consultation program to get a full survey of existing and potential safety and health hazards in the workplace. 

FAA performs a periodibeen requested.

3.1.1.14 PMG (c)(2)(ii) D =Review written inspection reports and related hazard 

correction tracking information.

There are written inspection reports to document hazards discovered, responsibility assigned for correction, and the tracking of correction completion.

Yes for facility inspectio

3.1.1.15 PMG (c)(2) Construction sites should be done at least weekly. D = 

inspection records.

 More dynamic environments where conditions change frequency, require a more frequent inspection schedule. [Appx F IId1]

No documented inspectifrequent and in-depth inin place full time during 

3.1.1.16 AC 150/5200-37 V = Compare the inspection form to the hazards observed 

during the site walkthrough.

The inspection process can identify the hazards observed throughout the facility. [Appx F IID7]

Observations such as exadditional attention need

Total: 

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.2.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review the procedure for employee reports of 

hazards. This system may recommend but must not require that the internal process be used before filing a complaint with OSHA. [TED 8.4 Appendix B Reports of Employee Safety and Health Problems / Concerns (A)]I = Ask employees to give examples of reporting hazards and the process. (employee interview )

A reliable system is provided for employees to notify management personnel, in writing, about conditions that appear hazardous. 

Work order system is in requests primarily. Befofor review.

3.2.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review the procedure for employee reports of 

hazards regarding notifying employees of actions taken.I = Ask employees who have reported hazards what type of response they received. (worker interview )

A reliable system is provided for employees to receive timely and appropriate responses and employees are systematically informed of the results of their notifications. 

During race events, the use of work order system

3.2.1.3 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 and assigned to include time frames and abatement follow-up.

No

3.2.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review tracking records.

V = Walkout recent closed items to verify closure.

Hazard reports (e.g., inspections, investigations, maintenance trends, etc.) that will not be completed in a timely manner document the interim protection.

No

3.2.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 I = Ask employees if they readily use the system. Ask 

how the system was communicated to them. (worker interview )

Employees are encouraged to and use this reporting system as part of a non-punitive culture.

No formal system. Haz

3.2.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = The procedures allows for the anonymous reporting 

of hazards.

A reporting system supporting anonymity is available, public and used.

No anonymous system. 

Total: 

3.2 Non-Punitive Safety Reporting Element 3.2 (Reporting System): Reliable system for employees to notify management of conditions or practices that appear hazardous and to rece

points of observations and more experienced insight in recognizing hazards or other symptoms of breakdown in safety and health protection system

reliable only if it ensures employees a credible and timely response. The response will include both timely action to address any problems identifie

employee notices, effective management will not only guard against reprisals to avoid discouraging them but will take positive steps to encourage 

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.3.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for employee 

reports of hazards. 

ACM requirements for aoperations personnel. Dtrack until completion

3.3.1.2 ICAO SMM A corrective action tracking method exists for surveys and 

other safety initiatives (Insurance Company, regulators, critiques, etc.).

FAA inspections are traADEM are performed qdocumentation is done w

3.3.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for inspection 

findings.

Corrective actions trackfuelers and fuel storage 

3.3.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for incident 

investigation findings.

No 

3.3.1.5 ICAO SMM A corrective action tracking method exists for safety 

maintenance work orders.

Manually through Tallapersonnel submits safety identified that can not b

3.3.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 A corrective action tracking method exists for committee 

suggestions and assignments. 

No

3.3.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 a corrective action tracking method exists for Risk 

Mitigations.

No

3.3.1.8 ICAO SMM a corrective action tracking method exists for Risk 

Reductions.

No

3.3.1.9 ICAO SMM a corrective action tracking method exists for Objectives No 3.3.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 a corrective action tracking method exists for Indicators and 

Targets.

No

3.3.1.11 ICAO SMM Corrective actions are assigned to responsible parties and 

prioritized.

From interviews, for racavailable for review 

3.3.1.12 AC 150/5200-37 Interim abatement and protection is established for nonimmediate fixes. Yes cones are placed on 

documented or tracked 

3.3.1.13 AC 150/5200-37 Hazards identified (inspections, incident investigations, safety 

work orders, surveys, committee/employee suggestions, etc.) are reported, tracked and corrected in a timely manner. [PMG(c)(3)(i)] 

Race event - hazards are hazards are not fully ide

3.3.1.14 ICAO SMM Follow-up/closure of action plans occurs to ensure abatement. Yes for race events. Fo

Total: 

D = Review correction report for closure.I = Ask employees, committee members, supervisors, etc if reported hazards and action plans are corrected in a timely mannerV = Take examples of closed out corrective actions and verify closure.

3.3 Tracking System

Element 3.3 (Corrective Action Tracking): SMS tracking systems will be somewhat centralized, will capture all corrective actions generated from processes where corrective actions are necessary. Generally, the tracking system provides a reliable mans of communicating corrective action staIf 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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.4.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Check incidence reports. Mishaps include more than 

property damage or injuries.

Metrics are collected to measure the rate of mishaps and incidents

No

3.4.1.2 ACRP 4-05 D= Trend reports / mishaps Incidence Rates are compared to previous years. Trends are 

improving. No 

3.4.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 D: Safety Programs include the SMS elements, such as 

Risk Assessment, inspections and Audits.

Leading metrics are developed to measure the volume of safety programs used to identify hazards and corrective actions.

No

3.4.1.4 ICAO SMM D = Check performance indicator reports Metrics are collected to measure the volume of hazards 

identified. Volume is either increasing or appears sustainable. No

3.4.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Check performance indicator reports Metrics are collected to measure the closure rate of the hazard 

fixes and controls. Improvement in the rate is apparent.

No

3.4.1.6 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.

No

3.4.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Performance Appraisals.

I= managers and supervisors

Metrics are assigned to operations management, and performance improvements are required for a positive performance evaluation. No

3.4.1.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Safety performance monitor process

V = Verify if performance effected written objectives 

Safety performance monitoring are regularly reviewed and evaluation. Revise safety objectives to ensure effective and relevant to the organization’s operation.

No

3.4.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review Safety performance indicators and targets Performance indicators and targets addresses significant 

hazards and the possible risks No 

3.4.1.10 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review internal and external audits Safety audit and Safety oversight activities identifies the 

overall safety performance of the organization.

No

3.4.1.11 ICAO SMM V = Take recently closed items to the workplace to verify 

closure.

Closure rates are verified.

No

Total:

Elements 3.4. (Safety Performance Indicators and Targets): Metrics are the numbers themselves (Data) as well as a comparison to themselves wit

just outcomes like incidents and mishaps.

3.4 Performance Indicators 

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.5.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Review the incident and OSHA logs to verify that 

this data is included in the trending.

Incident trends are analyzed over time, so that patterns with common causes can be identified and prevented. [PMG(c)(2)(C)(iv)]

Informally, managemencontrol. A couple exampof man jumping 4 foot finstalled. OSHA logs noaccident since 2004. Ai

3.5.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 D = Part 139 Inspection data. Other trends - Part 139 inspection findings are also analyzed 

for trends.

Part 139 inspections are inspections and tracked operations, markings, ligmanadatory fuel truck ahas not been implement

3.5.1.3 14 CFR Part 139 D = Airfield surveillance generated worker orders and 

maintenance request forms

Other trends - employee reports, safety maintenance work orders - are also analyzed.

Part 139 airfield surveilla hazard is identified thamaintenace request is ge

3.5.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review all available feedback from daily selfinspections, assessments, reports, safety risk analysis, and 

safety audits

Other trends - inspection (non-Part 139) findings are also analyzed.

Airport Manager reviewThere are no formal rep

3.5.1.5 ACRP Report D = Review mishap reports, inspections, trend analysis Other trends -causal factors and root causes, are also

analyzed.

No

3.5.1.6 14 CFR Part 139 D = Airfield surveillance, refueling and fuel farm 

operations

Other trends -observations, driver safety, etc, are also analyzed.

Performed, yet not trend

3.5.1.7 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review refueling and fuel farm surveillance reports Other trends -completion and failure rate analysis of safety 

critical controls are also analyzed.

Reviews of the surveillamanager and external by tracked for trending.

3.5.1.8 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review trend analysis corrective action plans which 

demonstrate continuous improvements.I = Ask responsible parties methodology for identifying trends and developing corrective action plans.

Corrective action plans are developed and implemented to address any patterns that are identified. 

No

3.5.1.9 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review goals and objective looking for connections 

to trend analysis reports.I = Ask Airport Manager, Risk Manager and S&H Director, what trends and analysis led to current Goals and Objectives.

Corrective action plans are tied to making programmed changes and are used to develop annual objectives. [PMG (c)(2)(iv)]

No

3.5 Trend Analysis Element 3.5 (Trend and Pattern Analysis): Trend analysis systems would include Pareto analysis of: the OSHA logs, accident/incident investigatio

Trend analyses are utilized in the SMS process to identify and help define goals and objectives with corrective actions developed from the trend an

safety data, predictions may be made about future events. Emerging trends may be indicative of embryonic hazards. Statistical methods can be usewhich 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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.5.1.10 ICAO SMM D = Review “published” trend analysis data to verify it 

exists.I = Ask committee members if they have seen and understand trend analysis data.

Trend analysis records are maintained, shared with committees, and drive annual action plans. [PMG (c)(1)(viii)]

No

Total: 

3.6.1.1 ICAO SMM D = Review maintenance system or process for proactive 

measures [Preventative Maintenance (PM) schedule]

Maintenance hazards are detected/identified before they become incidents. [PMG(c)(3)(ii)]

Preventive maintenance to aprons. 

3.6.1.2 ICAO SMM D = Review records on safety-critical control maintenance A survey of safety-critical control maintenance needs at the 

worksite has been conducted and is periodically updated and revised and included in the preventative/predictive maintenance system. [PMG (c)(3)(ii)]

Specific safety criteria sAirport Pre Race Check

3.6.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review reports on safety critical equipment (i.e., 

exhaust ventilation, fire protection, alarms and hanger suppression 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 the manufacturer's schedule.

Safety critical equipmenfire extinguishers are masafety critical equipmenAviation hangars.

3.6.1.4 ACRP Report D = Review maintenance or work order request for 

repairs.I = Ask how are maintenance request submitted and how is maintenance scheduled 

Maintenance requests, safety work orders, and repair records and repair records are routinely analyzed to predict breakdown timing and to revise schedules as necessary. [PMG (c)(3)(ii)]

Yes for fuel trucks and f

3.6.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review hazard reporting process for scheduled 

maintenanceI = Ask are hazard reports part of the maintenance schedulingV = Verify the reports are submitted and scheduled

Hazard reports submitted are part of maintenance scheduling and resource utilization.

No

3.6.1.6 ACRP Report D = Review equipment maintenance schedule Process and procedures in place to ensure calibration and 

maintenance of monitoring equipment

The only equipment thawell in advance and cali

Subtotal 

3.6.1 Preventative Maintenance Sub-Element 3.6.1 (Preventative Maintenance): Maintenance of equipment and facilities is an especially important means of anticipating potentia

activities provides a systematic way of ensuring that they are not neglected and that unsafe short cuts do not occur resulting from improperly main

guards, employee alarms, sprinklers, cranes, elevators, etc. [TED 8.4, CPTR III, II.C.3.e; Appendix F, 4.4.1]

3.6 Integration of Maintenance and Emergency

Element 3.6 (Maintenance and Emergency): of equipment and facilities is an especially important means of anticipating potential hazards and presystematic way of ensuring that they are not neglected and that unsafe short cuts do not occur resulting from improperly maintained equipment. S

alarms, 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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.6.2.1 14 CFR Part 139

D = Formal Airport Emergency Plan (AEP) written V = Verify document identify airport related (type) emergencies.

Emergency plans and preparations are known and documented for all anticipated emergencies. [PMG(c)(3)(iii)]

The Talladega Municipaconsideration which is mThe copies were not sig

3.6.2.2 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review Airport Emergency Plan (AEP)

I = Ask worker about the Emergency plan.

Plans to communicate requirements to the worksite are effective and in writing and a schedule for conducting emergency drills annually is documented. 

The airport has conductespring of 2009 

3.6.2.3 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review documentation on training exercise and 

drills.I = Ask when the worker last performed in a emergency drill or exercise

Training and unannounced drills covering all employees are conducted annually for all emergency responses so that they will be second nature. 

Table top provided somsafety, EMA, fire marsh

3.6.2.4 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review Airport Emergency Plan (AEP) for explosion 

type exercises (i.e., bomb threat, aircraft fire)

Emergency plans take into account potential explosions and are effective. 

The draft versions do in

3.6.2.5 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover fire scenarios Emergency plans take into account likely fire sources and 

scenarios and are effective. 

The draft versions do in

3.6.2.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover toxic chemicals scenarios Emergency plans take into account the release of toxic 

chemicals and are effective. 

Not included and becauplan. 

3.6.2.7 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover inclement weather conditions

I = Ask worker actions required during inclement 

h

Emergency plans take into account likely weather conditions and are effective. 

The draft versions do inshelter in place requirem

3.6.2.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover natural disasters (sheltering 

procedures)

Emergency plans take into account natural disasters and are in writing and effective. 

The draft versions do in

3.6.2.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover natural disasters (sheltering 

procedures)

Emergency plans take into radiation exposures and are in writing and effective. 

The new draft includes

3.6.2.9 ACRP 4-05 D = Emergency Plan cover bomb threat Emergency plans take into account bomb threats and are in 

writing and effective. 

The draft versions do inlaw enforcement 

3.6.2.10 ICAO SMM D = Written procedures for potential public emergency 

situations and incidents

Emergency plans take into account other emergency situations (terrorists, civil disturbances, etc.) and are in writing and effective.

The new draft includes

3.6.2.11 ICAO SMM D = Review AEP, Emergency Response Plan (ERP) or 

Airport Certification Manual for Incident commander role and responsibilities.

Written procedures are established to cover responsibility (e.g., incident commander) for handling each kind of emergency and are effective. 

New draft is more comp

3.6.2.12 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review written plan for emergencies shut down and 

start up procedures for equipment (i.e., airfield, airport, and back generators)

Written procedures are established to cover emergency shut down and start up of equipment and are effective. 

The draft versions do in

3.6.2.13 ICAO SMM D = Review written Emergency Response Plan (ERP), 

Mutual-Aid or Support Agreements.

Emergency medical care and follow-up and are in writing and effective. 

The draft versions do in

3.6.2 Emergency Preparedness Sub-Element 3.6.2 (Emergency Preparedness): Planning and training for emergencies is essential in minimizing the harmful consequences of an a

their responses are immediate and precise, they may expose themselves and others to greater danger rather than reduce their exposure. The natur

to which training and drills are needed depends on the severity and complexity of the emergencies, which may arise. Anticipated emergencies may 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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.6.2.14 ICAO SMM D = Review documented critiques. Events and drills are critiqued. Critiques are documented and 

recommendations for improvement are implemented and completed.

The draft versions do in

3.6.2.15 ICAO SMM V = Emergency Response system established. The emergency response system is adequately designed, 

implemented, and communicated to both employees and to the community. 

The draft versions do in

3.6.2.16 ICAO SMM D = Review AEP or Mutual Agreements for local 

emergency response services (airport authorities, fire fighters, police, ambulances, medical agencies, etc);I = Management. Do outside agencies have written agreements. 

Agreements established with agencies outside of the airport and procedures established to address outside responders participation

Mutual Aid Agreements 

3.6.2.17 ACRP 4-05 D = Written documentation for periodic review of SMS 

implementation 

The emergency procedures periodically reviewed as part of the management review of SMS

No SMS requirements eleast once every 2 yearsmanagement will providreview.

Subtotal 

3.6.3.1 ICAO SMM D = Review Emergency Response Plan for essential 

training requirements.

Emergency Response procedures written to the size and scope of the airport operations and identify potential emergency situations and incidents.

TSS Plan does not inclu

3.6.3.2 14 CFR Part 139 D = Review emergency response team training documents Emergency response team properly trained No trained response team 

(ARFF) training requireshift, personnel are scheare not trained in emerg

Subtotal 

Total: 

3.6.3 Integration of Operations Sub-Element 3.6.3 (Integration of Operations): Planning and training for emergencies is essential in minimizing the harmful consequences of an a

their responses are immediate and precise, they may expose themselves and others to greater danger rather than reduce their exposure. The natur

to which training and drills are needed depends on the severity and complexity of the emergencies, which may arise. Anticipated emergencies may 

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 Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 3.7.1.1 ACRP 4-05 There is a system in place for critically reviewing and 

evaluating all SMS Elements periodically. [PMG (c)(1)(viii)]

Part 139 requires the FAprovides a written repordocumentation. FAA alsas ARFF response capabfrom the report if there a

3.7.1.2 ICAO SMM An SMS evaluation has been performed within the last year. No3.7.1.3 ICAO SMM Interviews are conducted periodically at all levels to 

determine how well the SMS program elements are understood and implemented. 

Airport personnel are no

3.7.1.4 ICAO SMM Annual SMS evaluation reviews written safety policies and 

programs, the ACM, procedures & programs that address the potential hazards of the workplace. 

The ACM procedure anairfield operations. Poteaddressed in detail as th

3.7.1.6 ICAO SMM The periodic program evaluation results in a written report of 

strengths and weaknesses of each element.

No

3.7.1.7 ICAO SMM The periodic program evaluation includes specific written 

recommendations for improvement. 

No

3.7.1.8 ICAO SMM The periodic program evaluation includes documentation of 

follow-up actions to satisfy the recommendations found in prior evaluation reports. 

No

3.7.1.9 ICAO SMM Programs improvement and/or objectives not meet are 

revised. [PMG (c)(1)(viii)]

No

3.7.1.10 ICAO SMM Each SMS element and section is evaluated. No 3.7.1.11 ICAO SMM The SMS evaluation includes document and record review, 

worker and management interviews and surveys, as well as physical observations of conditions, behaviors and work practices.

No

3.7.1.12 ICAO SMM Qualified personnel typically means having some training 

expertise and some independence from site operations.

The evaluation is conducted by qualified personnel, corporate staff, or other outside resources.

No

Total: 

3.0 Safety Assurance Section Total 

Element 3.7 (SMS Evaluation): A Comprehensive program evaluation is essential periodically to evaluate the whole set [i.e., all elements under Mof safety and health management means, methods, and processes, to ensure that they are adequate to protect against the potential hazards at the spwhether in practice they have met the objectives set for the program goal of effective safety and health protection. When either performance or the program flaws and their interrelationship may not be caught and corrected. [TED 8.4, Chapter III, IIC.1.d.]D: Assessment Guide Annual ReportCorrective Action PlansI: Assessment Team members: Verify their qualifications as well as the scope of the evaluation.V: Verify completion of some of the action plans.

3.7 SMS Evaluation

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 4.0 Safety Promotion4.1.1.1 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal training needs survey conducted (related to 

knowledge and skills required to perform task safely)

A needs survey has been performed resulting in a list of required courses for each person/position.

No formal internal surve

4.1.1.2 AC 150/5200-37 A training curriculum exists for Managers and supervisors 

and covers all required training. 

Airport Manager receive

4.1.1.3 AC 150/5200-37 A training curriculum exists for employees and covers all 

required training. 

Curriculum for fueling s

is provided by Airport m

4.1.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Formal Job Specific Training

I = Ask workers. Are they trained on hazards of the work assignment

Workers are trained in specific hazards, safety rules and practices related to their work assignments, before they assume new duties. 

Yes for refueling operat

4.1.1.5 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review training documents People responsible for being involved in programs, such as 

hazard analysis, inspections, etc. have been trained to do so.

Formal training provideprovided. 

4.1.1.6 AC 150/5200-37 D = Review attendance records Training attendance is documented and verifies successfully 

meeting the training schedules.

Yes

4.1.1.7 AC 150/5200-37 D = Revise training curriculum Training curriculum is up-to-date, specific to work place 

operations and procedures, trends, hazards and controls.

Yes

4.1.1.8 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal trainer qualification in-place Trainers are qualified (specific knowledge and expertise) in 

the subject area.

Management completes 

4.1.1.9 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal Committee member training Workers who participate on committees have been trained on 

their responsibilities and committee functions. [PMG (c)(4)(i)]

No committees.

4.1.1.10 ICAO SMM D = Emergency awareness training

I = Ask worker. What are your responsibilities in an emergency.

All personnel are aware of their responsibilities for each type of emergency

No documentation that t

D = Review training curriculum for supervisors and managers.I = Ask Managers and Supervisors. Is there a safety training curriculum.

4.1 Training and Education

Section 4.0 (Safety Promotion): The component Safety promotion is composed of two elements: Training and education and Safety communicationtrained and competent to perform the SMS duties. The scope of the safety training shall be appropriate to each individual’s involvement in the SMpersonnel are fully aware of the SMS, conveys safety critical information, and explains why particular safety actions are taken and why safety proElement 4.1 (Training and Education): An established training program that provides to the level of competency required to maintain excellent saf

to contractors and service providers who need to be aware of at least a minimum level of airport SMS requirements and emergency procedures. Morganization, which is vital to develop an effective SMS. A training file should be developed for each employee, including management, to assist iplanned training. 

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 4.1.1.11 ICAO SMM D = Formal Incident commander training Incident commanders are trained to their scenarios, specific 

responsibility and this training is specific.

Public safety agencies aManager needs to attend 

4.1.1.12 ICAO SMM D = Review Emergency Response Plan (ERP) and Airport 

Certification Manual (ACM)

Response personnel (e.g., first aid, rescue, spills, etc.) are specifically trained to site scenarios, procedures and this is effective.

Yes for the Airport and 

4.1.1.13 ICAO SMM D = Review Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 

Training program.I = Ask worker. Are they trained on PPE

Personnel are trained in the care, use and maintenance of PPE devices. 

Yes hearing protection, 

4.1.1.14 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal SMS indoctrination training for supervisors, 

managers, employees.I = Ask Management and worker. Is there a requirement for employees to attend SMS training.

All employees are trained to understand SMS elements and it is effective.

No

Total: 

4.2.1.1 ICAO SMM V = Safety training presentation Subject Matter Experts are used in the 

development and presentation of safety training.

For fueling activities the meetings. 

4.2.1.2 ICAO SMM V = Course development participants Training course development involves 

management and employees.

Airport Manager is respencouraged for improve

4.2.1.3 ICAO SMM D = Review Lesson Plans Goals and objectives for training are clearly 

defined in lesson plans.

No lesson plans 

4.2.1.4 ICAO SMM D = Review safety and health training plan Safety and health training is incorporated into 

other training about performance requirements and job practices.

Informally and in safety 

4.2.1.5 ICAO SMM D = Review training evaluation plans Plans are for evaluating the program are 

incorporated into the training lesson plans.

No

4.2.1.6 ICAO SMM I = Training plan process for course development Training topics or jobs are explained and 

employee knowledge is determined at the start of training.

No 

4.2.1.7 ICAO SMM I = Ask trainer does the order of training presentation 

stimulates audience.

The order of training presentation simulates the actual job as close as possible.

Line service training incelectrical safety training 

Element 4.2 (Communication Design and Delievery) Processes and procedures must be in place to allow for communication among operational pobjectives, as well as the current status of the organization’s activities and significant events. Training requirements and activities should be docu

and complexity of the organization. Safety training within an organization must ensure that personnel are trained and competent to perform their responsibility and involvement in the SMS. The provision of appropriate training to all staff, regardless of their level in the organization, is an ind

following: a documented process to identify training requirements; a validation process that measures the effectiveness of training; initial (genera

and organizational factors; and recurrent safety training.

4.2 Design and Delivery

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 4.2.1.8 ACRP Report I = Ask worker if their ideas or feedback provided to 

trainers

Personnel with knowledge or workplace hazards are encouraged to offer their ideas to improve training.

No

4.2.1.9 ACRP Report D = Formal test or examine provided.

I = Ask instructor if oral questioning performed.

When training ends, employee performance is evaluated by formal testing, oral questioning, observation, or other means.

Formal training programscoring, and documenta

4.2.1.10 ICAO SMM I = Ask instructor is performance checks conducted 

during session 

Performance is checked during practice periods to help evaluate the employees' understanding of what was taught in the training session.

Observation checklists a

4.2.1.11 ACRP D = Written evaluations performed on course for 

effectiveness.

Evaluations are conducted to verify that desired learning was achieved and if the training session should be offered again. 

Written evaluations are 

4.2.1.12 ICAO SMM D = Review evaluation for job performance Evaluations are conducted to determine if 

employee job performance improved after training. 

Not indicated

4.2.1.13 ICAO SMM D = Review training program Training program modifications can be traced to 

training course evaluations.

Not indicated

Total: 

4.3.1.1 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documents for evidence of continuous 

improvement process

Continuous improvement is an inherent part of the safety objectives at all levels of the organization 

Evidence of continuous increases, live fire extinimprovements.

4.3.1.2 ACRP 4-05 V = Verify reviews are conducted to identify 

implementation of process.I = Ask management how the process is implemented

Regular and periodic, planned reviews are conducted regarding organization safety processes and performance, with the objective of identifying opportunities for improvement.

No

4.3.1.3 ACRP 4-05 V = Verify monitor system is established. Major decisions and actions aimed at improving safety are 

monitored for their effectiveness.

Not formally 

4.3.1.4 ACRP 4-05 D = Review internal safety audits Managers are kept informed of the internal safety reviews, 

planned and implemented risk control actions.

Informally communicatemeetings. Safety is not 

4.3.1.5 ACRP 4-05 D = Review documented annual reviews. There is an annual management review of the entire Safety 

Management System (SMS).

No

4.3.1.6 ACRP 4-05 D = Review performance measure documentation.

I = Management. Ask if results are distributed.

Results of regular, periodic and planned management reviews on safety processes and performance are documented.

No

Element 4.3 (Competency and Continuous Improvement): Assurance builds on the principle of the continuous improvement cycle. In much the samof safety performance – including regulatory compliance – through constant verification and upgrading of the operational system. These objectiveinternal and external), strict document controls and on-going monitoring of safety controls and mitigation actions.

4.3 Competency

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 4.3.1.7 ACRP 4-05 D = Formal self-inspection documentation.

I = Workers. Are workers involved in self-assessment

SMS self assessments are periodically revised to find out areas where improvements are necessary.

No

Total: 

4.4.1.1 ICAO SMM The results of incident investigations are to be made available 

to all covered employees on request. 

Some are available throucommunicated to the em

4.4.1.2 ICAO SMM The report that is made available to employees should, at a 

minimum, describe the incident and what corrections have been made to avoid future occurrences. 

Not written 

4.4.1.3 ICAO SMM The corrective actions communicated address both immediate 

and systems issues that will be or are addressed.

No

4.4.1.4 ICAO SMM Communication of lessons learned is in a timely manner. No 4.4.1.5 ICAO SMM Lessons learned are shared with other departments. No evidence 4.4.1.6 ICAO SMM Lessons learned from the site are shared among departments 

and tenants.

Not formalized

4.4.1.7 ICAO SMM Lessons learned from other facilities are shared among 

departments and tenants.

No

4.4.1.8 ICAO SMM Action plans routinely result from lessons learned. No 4.4.1.9 ICAO SMM Resulting action plans are assigned and tracked to closure. No 

Total: 

4.5.1.1 PMG (c)(3) D = Recognition program announcement and records. The recognition program is based on the proactive 

accomplishment of safety programs, not the number of injuries and illnesses.

No, Airport board does not have a recognition p

4.5.1.2 PMG (c)(3) D = Recognition program announcement and records. There are both individual and department based recognition 

criteria.

No written recognition p

4.5.1.3 ACRP 4-05 D = Department Scorecards. Department scorecards are used as part of the recognition 

program.

No

4.5.1.4 AC 150/5200-37 D = Recognition program announcement and records. The recognition program is consistently applied among 

committee members and all personnel.

No formal announcemenafter race events at no coairport. 

4.5.1.5 PMG (c)(3) D = Recognition program announcement and records. The recognition program includes "On the spot" awards based 

on finding people doing things right.

No, but verbal "on-the sregarding a safety conce

D = This does not mean that the actual investigation records must be provided, just the results.I = Ask employees if accident investigation results are communicated. (worker interview )Element 4.5 (Recognition and Encouragement): Procedures for safe work which are understood and followed by all affected parties, as a resulincidence rates, and encourage the reporting process. PMG (c)(3)

4.5 Recognition / Encouragement

4.4 Lessons Learned Element 4.4 (Lessons Learned):

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
Attachement 5 Talladega Airport - ESIS FAA SMS Profile 

ID Ref Instruction Criteria Finding 4.5.1.6 PMG (c)(3) I = workers Workers feel encouraged to participate based in part on the 

recognition program.

Perception recieved from established , however, thoutstanding contribution

4.5.1.9 PMG (c)(3) D = rewards proactive involvement rather than just injury 

rate achievements. I = workers are encouraged to participate.

The recognition program does not discourage the reporting of incidents.

Workers feel that they arate at the airport is lost race events.

Total: 

4.0 Safety Promotion Section Total 

S=Source; R=Response; PR=Points Received; PA=Points Available; P=PriorityD=Documents, Procedures Records; I=Interviews; V=Visual Observation 
 

Attachment 6 

SMS Implementation Cost Estimate 
 
Section/ Element Assessment Initial Ongoing

Safety Policy & 

Objectives (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 

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. 

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 process 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 help improve 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 SelfAuditing60%

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.