SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

SMS Assesment Checklist – Initial SMS Acceptance

1. MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES
    
   1. There is a documented safety policy statement.
   2. There is evidence that the safety policy is communicated to all employees with the intent that they are made aware of their individual safety obligations.
   3. There is a periodic review of the safety policy by senior management or the safety committee.
   4. The safety policy is relevant to aviation safety.
   5. The safety policy is endorsed by the accountable manager.
   6. The accountable manager’s terms of reference indicate his overall responsibility for all safety issues.
   7. The safety policy is relevant to the scope and complexity of the organization’s operations.
   8. The safety policy addresses the provision of the necessary human and financial resources for its implementation.
       
2. SAFETY ACCOUNTABILITIES
    
   1. There is a documented safety (SMS) accountability within the organization that begins with the accountable manager.
   2. The accountable manager’s terms of reference indicates his ultimate responsibility for his organization’s safety management.
   3. The accountable executive has final authority over all the aviation activities of his organization
   4. The accountable manager’s final authority over all operations conducted under his organization’s certificate(s) is indicated in his terms of reference.
   5. There is a safety committee (or equivalent mechanism) that reviews the SMS and its safety performance.
   6. For a large organization, there are departmental or section safety action groups that work in conjunction with the safety committee
   7. The safety committee is chaired by the accountable manager or (for very large organizations) by an appropriately assigned deputy, duly substantiated in the SMS manual.
   8. The safety committee includes relevant operational or departmental heads as applicable.
   9. There is an appointed safety (SMS) coordinator within the safety action group.
   10. The safety action groups are chaired by the departmental or section head where applicable.
        
3. APPOINTMENT OF KEY SAFETY
    
   1. There is a manager who performs the role of administering the SMS.
   2. The manager responsible for administering the SMS does not hold other responsibilities that may conflict or impair his role as SMS manager.
   3. The SMS manager has direct access or reporting to the accountable manager concerning the implementation and operation of the SMS.
   4. The manager performing the SMS role has relevant SMS functions included in his terms of reference
   5. The SMS manager is a senior management position not lower than or subservient to other operational or production positions.
       
4. EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING
    
   1. There is a documented ERP or equivalent operational contingency procedure.
   2. The ERP includes procedures for the continuing safe production, delivery or support of aviation products or services during such emergencies or contingencies.
   3. The ERP addresses relevant integration with external customer or subcontractor organizations where applicable.
   4. The ERP is appropriate to the size, nature and complexity of the organization.
   5. There is a plan for drills or exercises with respect to the ERP.
   6. There is a procedure for periodic review of the ERP to ensure its continuing relevance and effectiveness.
   7. The emergency plan addresses possible or likely emergency/crisis scenarios relating to the organization’s aviation product or service deliveries.
   8. ERP drills or exercises are carried out according to plan and the result of drills carried out are documented.
       
5. SMS DOCUMENTATION
    
   1. There is an SMS document or exposition which is approved by the accountable manager and accepted by the CAA.
   2. The SMS document is accepted or endorsed by the organization’s national aviation authority.
   3. The SMS procedures reflect appropriate integration with other relevant managements systems within the organisation, such as, QMS, OSHE, security, as applicable.
   4. There is an SMS document or exposition which is approved by the accountable manager and accepted by the CAA.
   5. The SMS document is accepted or endorsed by the organization’s national aviation authority.
   6. The SMS procedures reflect appropriate integration with other relevant management systems within the organization, such as QMS, OSHE, security, as applicable.
   7. The SMS document provides an overview or exposition of the organization’s SMS framework and elements.
   8. The SMS document’s exposition of each SMS element includes cross-references to supporting or related procedures, manuals or systems as appropriate.
   9. The SMS procedures reflect relevant coordination or integration with external customer or subcontractor organizations where applicable.
   10. The SMS document is a stand-alone controlled document or a distinct part/section of an existing CAA endorsed/accepted document.
   11. Records are maintained pertaining to safety committee/SAG meeting (or equivalent) minutes.
   12. There is a process to periodically review the SMS exposition and supporting documentation to ensure their continuing relevance.
   13. All components and elements of SMS regulatory requirements are addressed in the SMS document.
   14. Records pertaining to periodic review of existing safety/risk assessments or special review in conjunction with relevant changes are available.
   15. Records are maintained pertaining to safety risk assessments performed.
   16. Records pertaining to identified or reported hazards/threats are maintained.
        
6. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION
    
   1. There is a procedure for voluntary hazards/threats reporting by all employees.
   2. In the hazard identification system, there is a clear definition of and distinction between hazards and consequences.
   3. There is a procedure to identify hazards/threats from internal incident/accident investigation reports for follow-up risk mitigation where appropriate.
   4. There is a procedure for incident/accident reporting by operational or production personnel.
   5. The hazard reporting system is confidential and has provisions to protect the reporter’s identity.
   6. There is a procedure to review hazards/threats from relevant industry service or incident/accident reports for risk mitigation where applicable.
   7. There is a procedure for investigation of incident/accidents relating to quality or safety.
   8. The organization’s internal investigation and disciplinary procedures distinguish between premeditated and deliberate violations and unintentional errors and mistakes.
   9. There is a procedure for periodic review of existing risk analysis records.
       
7. SAFETY RISK ASSESMENT AND MITIGATION
    
   1. There is a documented HIRM procedure involving the use of objective risk analysis tools.
   2. Risk assessment reports are approved by departmental managers or at a higher level where appropriate.
   3. There is a procedure for identification of operations, processes, facilities and equipment which are deemed (by the organization) as relevant for HIRM.
   4. Recommended mitigation actions which require senior management decision or approval are accounted for and documented.
   5. There is a programme for progressive HIRA performance of all aviation safety-related operations, processes, facilities and equipment as identified by the organization.
   6. There is a procedure to prioritize HIRA performance for operations, processes, facilities and equipment with identified or known safety-critical hazards/risks.
   7. There is evidence of progressive compliance and maintenance of the organization’s HIRA performance programme.
       
       
8. SAFETY PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND MEASUREMENT
    
   1. There are identified safety performance indicators for measuring and monitoring the organization’s safety performance.
   2. There are lower-consequence safety performance indicators (e.g. non-compliance, deviation events).
   3. There is a procedure for corrective or follow-up action to be taken when targets are not achieved and/or alert levels are breached.
   4. There are high-consequence data-based safety performance indicators (e.g. accident and serious incident rates).
   5. There are alert and/or target level settings within the safety performance indicators where appropriate.
   6. Safety performance indicators are reviewed by the safety committee for trending, alert levels that have been exceeded and target achievement where applicable.
       
9. THE MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
    
   1. There is a procedure for review of relevant existing aviation safety-related facilities and equipment (including HIRA records) whenever there are pertinent changes to those facilities or equipment.
   2. There is a procedure for review of new aviation safety-related facilities and equipment for hazards/risks before they are commissioned.
   3. There is a procedure for review of relevant existing facilities, equipment, operations or processes (including HIRM records) whenever there are pertinent changes external to the organization such as regulatory/industry standards, best practices or technology.
   4. There is a procedure for review of relevant existing aviation operations and processes (including HIRA records) whenever there are pertinent changes to those operations or processes.
   5. There is a procedure for review of new aviation safety-related operations and processes for hazards/risks before they are commissioned.
       
10. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT OF THE SMS
     
    1. There is a procedure for periodic internal audit/assessment of the SMS.
    2. There is a follow-up procedure to address audit corrective actions.
    3. SMS audit/assessment has been carried out according to plan.
    4. There is a current internal SMS audit/assessment plan.
    5. There is a process for SMS audit/assessment reports to be submitted or highlighted for the accountable manager’s attention when necessary.
    6. There is a documented internal SMS audit/assessment procedure.
    7. The SMS audit plan includes the sampling of completed safety assessments.
    8. The SMS audit plan covers the SMS roles/inputs of contractors where applicable.

 

 

1. TRAINING AND COMMUNICATION
    
   1. There is a documented SMS training/familiarization policy for personnel.
   2. Personnel involved in conducting risk evaluation are provided with appropriate risk management training or familiarization.
   3. There is evidence of organization-wide SMS education or awareness efforts.
   4. The manager responsible for SMS administration has undergone an appropriate SMS training course.
   5. Personnel directly involved in the SMS (safety committee/SAG members) have undergone appropriate SMS training or familiarization.
   6. There is evidence of a safety (SMS) publication, circular or channel for communicating safety and SMS matters to employees.
   7. The accountable manager has undergone appropriate SMS familiarization, briefing or training.
       
       
       
       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JIG 4 ( FOR SMALLER AIRPORTS) AND JIG 1, JIG 2

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JIG 4 ( FOR SMALLER AIRPORTS) AND JIG 1, JIG 2

Smaller airports are defined as follows:

Aviation fuel is supplied to the location by road or rail transport,  fuelling equipment has a maximum flow rate of 1000 litres/min per delivery hose, total number of fuelling operations per year is less than 10.000 and throuhgput is less than 10 million litres and if a hydrant is used for fuelling, it has a diameter of 150 mm (6’’) or less.

Differences:

Double block and bleed valves are not specified in JIG 4.

No monthly conductivity measurements. JIG 4 airports do not generally have conductivity meters on site. The product conductivity is checked regularly at all major airport operations in the same area with more frequent product receipts from the same supply locations.

Certification (3-yearly) for master meters, master pressure gauges and torque wrenches (5-yearly) is not required. JIG 4 airports are not equipped with this type of “certified” instruments/tools. These gauges and tools are used by third parties or by dedicated maintenance personnel during regular maintenance visits.

No routine filter membrane testing requirements.

Bulk meter calibration is required annually in JIG 4 versus 6-monthly in JIG 1 and 2. This is due to lower throughput and the requirement for a specialist third party contractor.

Fuelling equipment pressure/surge control tests are 6-monthly versus quarterly in JIG 1. This is due to lower fuelling rate and throughput, and the need for a trained maintenance technician to perform the test.

A single filter for both depot receipt and fueler loading may be used although the preferred option is separate inlet and outlet filters (FWS meeting EI 1581).

6-monthly serviceability checks of fuelling steps and ladders by maintenance personnel versus quarterly in JIG 1.

Piston filter/differential pressure gauges checked monthly versus 6-monthly in JIG 1 and 2. This increased frequency is to take account of the significant presence of Avgas at smaller airports and the risk of the piston sticking from lead precipitation.

No defueling at JIG 4 operations.

Separate sections cover the handling of aviation fuel in drums and fuelling from drums. This is not included in JIG 1 & 2.

A separate and updated section for helicopter fuelling. Not part of JIG 1.

Adoption of the JIG HSSE management system is not a requirement but there is a reference to the new JIG HSSEMS Standard and updated HSE guidance is given in JIG 4 Chapter 2 (Health, Safety, Security and Environment).

No 3-monthly requirements for hydrant valve chamber checks. JIG 4 only includes the procedures and checks required for small low pressure hydrant systems (see appendix A7). For large high pressure hydrant systems there is a reference to JIG 2 and EI 1560 in appendix A7.

The daily stock control requirement is the same but JIG 2 has, in addition, a monthly reporting requirement to a financial controller, etc. appropriate to larger operation.

The requirement for a yearly check of the tank high level alarms is the same for JIG 4 and JIG 2, but JIG 2 also includes a monthly function check as a best practice “should”.

The refueler overfill protection devices to be function tested 6-monthly in JIG 4 compared to 3- monthly in JIG 1. This is a task for a specialist maintenance technician. The annual wet test is the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIRE EXTINGUISHERS IN AIRPORT FUEL FACILITIES

FIRE EXTINGUISHERS IN AIRPORT FUEL FACILITIES

LOCATION	TYPE	APPLIANCES REQUIRED
RAIL TANK CAR DISCHARGE FACILITY	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	1 UNIT BETWEEN EVERY 3 RAIL CAR DISCHARGE
ROAD-BRIDGER DISCHARGE AND FUELLER LOADING RACKS.	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG DRY CHEMICAL 55 KG	1 UNIT FOR EACH VEHICLE POSITION 1 UNIT FOR EACH ISLAND WHERE THERE ARE MORE THAN 4 VEHICLE POSITIONS
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOPS	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG CO2 9 KG	1 UNIT FOR EACH VEHICLE POSITION 2 UNITS FOR SHOPS HOUSING MORE THAN 6  VEHICLES
PACKAGED STORES	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	ONE UNIT PER 114 M2 FLOOR AREA
PUMP HOUSES	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	ONE UNIT FOR UP TO 3 PUMPS TWO UNITS FOR 4 OR MORE PUMPS
OPEN PUMP PLATFORMS	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	ONE UNIT FOR EVERY 3 PUMPS
OFFICE	WATER 6 LITRES CO2 5 KG	ONE UNIT PER 115 M2 FLOOR AREA AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
LABORATORY BUILDINGS	CO2 5 KG	ONE UNIT FOR EACH LAB. ROOM
BOILER HOUSE	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	2 UNITS
BATTERY CHARGING ROOM	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	1 UNIT, ADDITIONAL UNIT WHERE FACILITY IS IN GARAGE
FUELLERS, HYDRANT SERVICERS AND HYDRANT FLUSHING/LOW POINT DRAIN TRUCKS	DRY CHEMICAL 9KG	2 UNITS PER VEHICLE REGARDLESS OF CAPACITY OR SIZE

HSSEMS SYSTEM FOR FUEL COMPANIES

HSSEMS SYSTEM FOR FUEL COMPANIES

Permit to work systems – to ensure the system is applied to all relevant activities

Document control processes – to ensure documents and records critical to effective HSSE management are appropriately controlled so that information is accurate, relevant, current and accessible.

Less formal risk assessment techniques – encouraging employees to take time before each and every task in order to verify the hazards and check that appropriate controls are in place before proceeding

Design parameters and capabilities of plant and equipment – ensuring consideration is given to both, when determining the operations to be performed

Management of change – post implementation reviews to confirm that the change has met its objectives and the risks identified are suitably controlled

Management of Contractors and Suppliers - listing qualified contractors and suppliers as part of a

system to ensure that all are subjected to the set management processes

Learning from incidents – use of results of incident and near miss investigations to improve risk

assessments, emergency preparedness and response

Sharing of HSSE performance - HSSE performance statistics regularly reported to interested parties so that any incidents prompt shared learning and encourage collaborative working to implement

improvement actions

SOURCE: JIG BULLETİN 89

HEALTH, SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT AND SECURITY

HEALTH, SAFETY, ENVIRONMENT AND SECURITY

It is very important to establish a systematic approach in order to manage safety, which includes organisational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures. This shall be met by the development of a Safety Management System (SMS).

A SMS provides a systematic way to identify hazards and control risks while maintaining assurance that risk controls are effective. Good safety management includes but is not limited to the following:

• Development of safety policy and objectives.
• Control of work systems (including Permit-to-Work).
• Identification and acknowledgement of hazards and risks in performing all activities.
• Safety induction/training for all staff, contractors and visitors.
• Proactive, as well as reactive measures to control risk.
• A change management process.
• A process for internal safety performance monitoring.
• Process for assessing the adequacy of the SMSs adopted.
• Identification of all legal compliance requirements affecting the operation and processes to keep up to date of changing requirements.
• SMS implementation process.
• Incident/accident/near miss reporting and investigation.

Source: EI 1540

FUELLING VEHICLE HOSE TYPES

FUELLING VEHICLE HOSE TYPES

The recommended types of the refueller hoses are as below:

1. For trailer/suction use type E or F. (SEE NOTE 1)
2. For fuelling vehicle intermediate applications, such as supply to an elevating platform, use type C, E or F. Where kinking is a problem type E or F with helix reinforcement should be considered. For enhanced defuelling capability use type F.
3. For hydrant servicer inlet use type C or F.
4. For fuel delivery use type C.
5. For frequent high speed suction defuelling use type F if type C is unsatisfactory.
6. For bridging vehicle discharge and refueller loading use type C, E or F. (SEE NOTE 1)
7. For hydrant pit valve flushing use type F if type C is unsatisfactory, and for low point drain and high point vent use type C.

Type B (conductive) and E (conductive) should not be used for into-plane deliver yor hydrant servicer inlet hoses unless there is a statutory requirement to use them. Connections to aircraft and hydrant systems should only be made with anti-static hose types C or F.

 

NOTE 1: The hoses shall be suitable for use with aviation fuel. It is essential to ensure that the hose will not affect the product and the product will not affect the hose. Internal line should be made of aluminium or stainless steel. Galvanised internal line shall not be used. Hoses used fort his type of service should be designed for a working pressure of at least 150 psi.

RE-CERTIFICATION TEST

RE-CERTIFICATION TEST

Where fuel can be positively identified by documentary evidence as belonging to a

particular batch covered by a related Refinery Certificate of Quality, then it is only

necessary to conduct such additional tests as are required to prove that fuel quality has

not changed. The results of such tests shall be compared with the results of the last

tests, as well as reviewed for compliance with the specification. These recertification

tests are:

1. appearance/colour
2. distillation;
3. flashpoint;
4. density/API gravity;
5.  freezing point;
6.  corrosion (copper);
7. existent gum;
8.  conductivity (to be carried out on bulk stock in storage, or immediately after taking a sample from storage tanks on fuels containing static dissipater additive);
9. MSEP;
10. Thermal Stability (JFTOT), when fuel:

              1) is received from a source (e.g. a marine vessel equipped with copper

                pipework in their cargo tanks) contrary to recommended practice; or

              2) has been static in storage for six (6) months

FAME unless FAME (Fatty Acid Methyl Ester) can be controlled to limit the exposure in Jet Fuel to less than 5 mg/kg in accordance with JIG Bulletin 75, then in markets and supply chains where FAME is present in multiproduct systems, FAME concentration shall be tested by an approved method, wherever Jet fuel has been transported in multi-product transport systems that also carry gas oil/deisel fuel or non-dedicated storage that may have contained gas oil/ diesel fuel.

·         Sample quantity of 4 litres (0.5 US gallons) minimum shall be taken, in an approved container

EXAMPLE