‘SMS’ Means Simple Measures of Safety

Several questions surround safety management systems (SMS) and their associated programs, especially for smaller aviation service providers (i.e., operators, repair stations, flight schools, FBOs, airports, etc.). Many questions stem from unfamiliarity with system safety basics. Confusion and misinformation are also generated by various interest groups, despite their good intentions. Many miss the whole point — SMS is intended to be simple, practical and adequate! SMS should be straightforward and doable and should meet organizational requirements. Hence, SMS is not about using someone else’s system or some expensive software package, but rather an individual program designed by and for the organization. Aviation service providers must recognize that SMS, just as quality management, is about the way they do business.

Four SMS components

Most are already familiar with SMS’s four components: safety policy, risk management, safety assurance and safety promotion. Safety policy and safety promotion tend to be the portions which possess more easily defined principles, such as policy letters and manuals, processes and procedures to be followed. The larger bulk of questions usually center on less tangible ‘gray areas’ of the risk management and safety assurance components, the focus of this article.

Risk management (the ‘meat’ of ‘meat and potatoes’), includes hazard identification (i.e., to include newly found/created hazards) and risk analysis of hazard (i.e., consequences). Safety assurance (the ‘potatoes’ of ‘meat and potatoes’) consists of evaluation of the safety program (i.e., audits, trends, gap analyses, accident/incident investigations, etc., or  “How well are we doing what we said we would do?”), with event and ‘near-miss’ reporting (i.e., accident/incident investigations, near-miss occurrences, newly found hazards, etc.).

Going with the flow

Proper SMS, like Zen, is mostly a frame of mind in everything the organization does, in its functions both large and small, giving SMS a systemic purpose. The SMS program should be ever-learning, ever-wary and ever-vigilant, and should be something of a ‘living’ program (safety template) which adapts and adjusts as organizational requirements change. Please refer to Figure 1 for a simple Flowchart of the SMS process.

Pick a specific duty or assignment (work procedure) which has known hazards, and then begin the creation of a recording and filing system to store discovery information and analyses for the following steps. Identify all recognizable hazards (hazard identification) and document all those potential hazards identified. Rate each of the documented risks (risk analysis) and then record these results. Determine how often the danger may hurt (frequency) in terms of “a lot” or “not.” Is this acceptable? If acceptable — then see if the danger is acceptable for its severity-level; if unacceptable — then continue reassessment of frequency-reducing method adoption.

    

Determine how much the danger may hurt (severity) in terms of “a lot” or “not.” Is this acceptable? If acceptable for both frequency and severity levels, then document the work process as the ‘standard’. If unacceptable, then design a method to reduce the severity level from a list of ideas offered by staff. Be sure to make use of all warning and caution statements indicated in technical publications. Document all ideas, then choose the best option using a simple risk matrix (refer to Figure 2 for sample risk matrices). Does the method introduce new hazards not previously there? If so, then a reassessment may be necessary. Re-rate each of the risks after integration of elimination/mitigation method design (more risk analyses). Continue in estimating both severity and frequency of the danger for each new risk-reducing method until an acceptable level of risk can be obtained.

      

      

Practical application

Let’s use the example of the hazard of aircraft falling and/or injuring someone nearby. For instance, personal injury in striking a static wick, aircraft jacked at incorrect jack points, faulty equipment (jacks that don’t maintain hydraulic pressure), etc.

Frequency (how often could the hazard occur): Damage to property and injury to personnel can happen while the aircraft is jacked, even though these incidents are rare. Using the “simple” risk matrix, a value of “not often” is assigned.

Severity (how serious could the hazard impact the aircraft, personnel, and the greater organization): The highest value of severity (“a lot”) is assigned to this hazardous event, since substantial damage and serious personal injury remains a possibility.

Precautionary measures which could be implemented might include a few mandatory procedures, with built-in safeguards. The following are possible strategies in reducing the frequency and severity of the given hazard with some formal policy adherence:

• only properly trained personnel are to be involved with the jacking of the aircraft, as well as all subsequent work on the jacked aircraft

• the use of all proper technical data (AMM) and equipment/tooling (aircraft jacks) in serviceable condition for the specific task

• the use of all safety devices (safety glasses/goggles for eye protection from static wicks, locking collars on aircraft jacks, and banner/placard devices to cordon off the aircraft perimeter, tail stands, etc.)

• avoid wind gusts by keeping the hangar doors closed

• movement directly adjacent to jacked aircraft kept to a minimum (with sufficient distance from other aircraft/equipment)

• all work being accomplished on the jacked aircraft being supervised at all times

If all the precautionary requirements are fully satisfied, then the frequency value should be “not often” or less and the severity value should be “not much” or less. If these levels are acceptable, then assign them and document the process as such. Then track your progress in performing jacking of aircraft and working on or around jacked aircraft. If your precautionary measures work, then great; if not, then figure out additional or other fixes to remedy risks of the hazards. Most methods introduce new hazards, like personal limitations when using safety equipment, etc. New methods to be considered should not increase the frequency/severity level for this and other tasks being carried out.

This estimate may only be an educated guess, but it does provide what is needed: a starting point. After drawing the line in the sand, subsequent trends and audits should either confirm the risk level assigned to this hazard, or indicate additional or other preventive actions should be implemented to reduce the risks even more.

Implementation and monitoring

Once the procedure is approved, alert staff of ‘new’ work standard or process and file all recording of hazard identification and risk analyses for later use. Create a system for internal reporting of accident/incident events, ‘near-miss’ occurrences and new hazards (may be hard copy or electronic and may possess anonymity option). This reporting system may indicate that an impromptu non-routine inspection or audit may be necessary (safety assurance). Audits may be done internally or externally by third-party audit firms. Audits should not only be done by onsite inspection, but also by various analyses (gap analyses and any trend data), especially during accident and incident event investigations. Audit spreadsheets to measure safety gaps have already been designed by the FAA for your use. (You can visit http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/sms/ for free downloadable items.)

Monitor the safety program periodically for latent weaknesses and failures. How well is the organization doing what it said it would do? Consider promotion/rewards rather than punishment/intimidation; leadership must set the tone and pace by leading the way. Managers/supervisors must do what they preach. Strive for a ‘just’ culture with clear lines of demarcation. Determine what actions are within bounds and what behaviors are out of bounds. The goal is for a culture that embraces being informed, learned and wary. This in itself may be a significant change, but great dividends can be reaped following employee buy in.

SMS implementation will not be effortless. Most ‘good’ things do require some level of effort. Be patient. Results usually do not occur overnight. Do not forget: management teams must do what was said they would do, especially when someone comes forward with a self-disclosure.

Thomas Sheckler is President and Senior Consultant of Expert Aerospace Solutions LLC. His background includes all aspects of flight/ground operations of fixed/rotary-winged aircraft, having worked within several operational environments (i.e., Parts 91, 135, 145 and military). Serving as an airworthiness technical trainer (including instructional curriculum design) and performance consultant, he has undergraduate degrees in aircraft maintenance and aviation management, with graduate degrees in system safety and human factors. A former FAA Aviation Safety Counselor (Airworthiness), he continues to volunteer as a FAASTeam Representative.

Established in 2010, Expert Aerospace Solutions LLC is a multi-discipline consulting agency specializing in aviation problem solving. It engineers technical and non-technical responses to issues experienced within the aerospace industry, such as (but not limited to) safety, compliance, training and quality interventions. Thomas may be contacted via email at sheck1dd@hotmail.com.

About D.O.M. Magazine

D.O.M. magazine is the premier magazine for aviation maintenance management professionals. Its management-focused editorial provides information maintenance managers need and want including business best practices, professional development, regulatory, quality management, legal issues and more. The digital version of D.O.M. magazine is available for free on all devices (iOS, Android, and Amazon Kindle).

Privacy Policy  |  Cookie Policy  |  GDPR Policy

More Info

Joe Escobar (jescobar@dommagazine.com)
Editorial Director
920-747-0195

Greg Napert (gnapert@dommagazine.com)
Publisher, Sales & Marketing
608-436-3376

Bob Graf (bgraf@dommagazine.com)
Director of Business, Sales & Marketing
608-774-4901