Narrative:

On june/fri/06; fai management implemented new runway access procedures. The new procedures are unnecessary; incomplete; and unsafe. These procedures have caused significant confusion among controllers; developmentals; pilots; and vehicle operators. The most notable deficiency of the new procedures is in the requirement to have all vehicles requesting runway access to do so on local control's frequency. The vast majority of vehicles operating at fai are unable to meet requirements as they are without the equipment to communicate on any frequency other than ground control. The following is one of many examples in which the new procedures have proven inadequate. I was ojti at ground control. I believe the radar controller had declared an emergency for an arriving air carrier; it had one engine shut down. Local control activated the crash fire rescue equipment line and we (ground control) had an airport operations vehicle and a fire engine approved on taxiway a and awaiting the air carrier's arrival. As the air carrier landed and rolled out; the airport vehicle changed to local control frequency and was given access to the runway to follow the air carrier and perform a FOD check. The fire engine requested of ground control to enter the runway and follow the air carrier to parking. I asked the air carrier if it was able to change to local control frequency. The fire engine replied that it was not able to change frequency; but it would use an access road to meet the aircraft as it entered the taxiway (4000 ft down the runway). I believe this was against the fire department's sops and was a shameful lack of service by ATC to both the operator of the air carrier and the airport's fire department. As a minimum; these procedures need to be set aside until such time as all vehicles are able to comply with the requirement to communicate on local control's frequency. The other shortcomings of these procedures will need to be addresses as well. Perhaps a joint management/controller work group is in order.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated that the situation was unchanged since he had filed the report. The reporter stated that only airport operations vehicles had the local control frequency; that the fire department; snow removal; and FAA maintenance vehicles had only ground control frequency. The reporter stated he was not aware of and had not been informed of any plans for the non equipped vehicles to be upgraded.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FAI TWR INSTITUTED NEW PROC REQUIRING ALL VEHICLES TO BE ON TWR FREQ FOR RWY ACTIVITY. NOT ALL ARPT VEHICLES HAVE THE FREQ AVAILABLE. IN THIS INSTANCE; FIRE EQUIP WAS UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH TWR FREQ REQUIREMENT.

Narrative: ON JUNE/FRI/06; FAI MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTED NEW RWY ACCESS PROCS. THE NEW PROCS ARE UNNECESSARY; INCOMPLETE; AND UNSAFE. THESE PROCS HAVE CAUSED SIGNIFICANT CONFUSION AMONG CTLRS; DEVELOPMENTALS; PLTS; AND VEHICLE OPERATORS. THE MOST NOTABLE DEFICIENCY OF THE NEW PROCS IS IN THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE ALL VEHICLES REQUESTING RWY ACCESS TO DO SO ON LOCAL CTL'S FREQ. THE VAST MAJORITY OF VEHICLES OPERATING AT FAI ARE UNABLE TO MEET REQUIREMENTS AS THEY ARE WITHOUT THE EQUIP TO COMMUNICATE ON ANY FREQ OTHER THAN GND CTL. THE FOLLOWING IS ONE OF MANY EXAMPLES IN WHICH THE NEW PROCS HAVE PROVEN INADEQUATE. I WAS OJTI AT GND CTL. I BELIEVE THE RADAR CTLR HAD DECLARED AN EMER FOR AN ARRIVING ACR; IT HAD ONE ENG SHUT DOWN. LOCAL CTL ACTIVATED THE CFR LINE AND WE (GND CTL) HAD AN ARPT OPS VEHICLE AND A FIRE ENG APPROVED ON TXWY A AND AWAITING THE ACR'S ARR. AS THE ACR LANDED AND ROLLED OUT; THE ARPT VEHICLE CHANGED TO LOCAL CTL FREQ AND WAS GIVEN ACCESS TO THE RWY TO FOLLOW THE ACR AND PERFORM A FOD CHK. THE FIRE ENG REQUESTED OF GND CTL TO ENTER THE RWY AND FOLLOW THE ACR TO PARKING. I ASKED THE ACR IF IT WAS ABLE TO CHANGE TO LOCAL CTL FREQ. THE FIRE ENG REPLIED THAT IT WAS NOT ABLE TO CHANGE FREQ; BUT IT WOULD USE AN ACCESS ROAD TO MEET THE ACFT AS IT ENTERED THE TXWY (4000 FT DOWN THE RWY). I BELIEVE THIS WAS AGAINST THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S SOPS AND WAS A SHAMEFUL LACK OF SVC BY ATC TO BOTH THE OPERATOR OF THE ACR AND THE ARPT'S FIRE DEPARTMENT. AS A MINIMUM; THESE PROCS NEED TO BE SET ASIDE UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ALL VEHICLES ARE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT TO COMMUNICATE ON LOCAL CTL'S FREQ. THE OTHER SHORTCOMINGS OF THESE PROCS WILL NEED TO BE ADDRESSES AS WELL. PERHAPS A JOINT MANAGEMENT/CTLR WORK GROUP IS IN ORDER.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THAT THE SITUATION WAS UNCHANGED SINCE HE HAD FILED THE RPT. THE RPTR STATED THAT ONLY ARPT OPS VEHICLES HAD THE LOCAL CTL FREQ; THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT; SNOW REMOVAL; AND FAA MAINT VEHICLES HAD ONLY GND CTL FREQ. THE RPTR STATED HE WAS NOT AWARE OF AND HAD NOT BEEN INFORMED OF ANY PLANS FOR THE NON EQUIPPED VEHICLES TO BE UPGRADED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.