/
UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action

UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action - PDF document

yoshiko-marsland
yoshiko-marsland . @yoshiko-marsland
Follow
397 views
Uploaded On 2016-06-14

UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action - PPT Presentation

ID: 362159

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions Executive Summary the U.S. air transportation system. FAA defines a runway incursion as “any occurrence in theintending to take off, landing, or intending to land.”for a catastrophic accident is “unacceptable,” according to the FAA’s risk/severity matrix.U.S. Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST), a group made up of dozens of government andsituational awareness and provide conflict alerting to air traffic controllers and pilots. Numerousother enhancements can provide further margins of safety.industry made commitments five years ago to institute them, but few have been completed.address the risk of runway incursions through prompt implementation of all CAST- Runway Incursions UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions I. Introduction The risk of a runway incursion event that could kill hundreds of people in a single accident is real and growing largeras a result of current, and forecast, increases of traffic within the U.S. National Airspace System (NAS). Fortunately,the incursion problem has been exhaustively studied by dozens of experts, and mitigations have been devised thatcan greatly lessen the risk inherent with ground operations today. Unfortunately, implementation of most mitigationshas been very slow. The question that must be answered is whether the government and industry are willing to spendthe resources that are required to achieve the potential high level of safety.We have traveled this road before. Ingenious technology, combined with political will and monetary resources, havevirtually thwarted two of the deadliest types of accidents: midair collisions and controlled flight into terrain (CFIT).Numerous midair collisions, resulting in hundreds of deaths over several decades, occurred when air traffic control-between aircraft. The development of the traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) equipped pilots with anance from the ground in low visibility conditions and periods of darkness. The invention, development, and implemen-tation of the ground proximity warning system (GPWS), and its newer supplement, the enhanced GPWS, or EGPWS/TAWS, has had the same powerful effect on reducing the number of CFIT accidents that TCAS has had on reducing theSo it is with runway incursions. The risk posed by runway incursions can be significantly reduced—by as much as 95percent according to the U.S. Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST)—with a combination of technologies whichgreatly improve the flight crew’s situational awareness and provide conflict-alerting capability during groundoperations. For decades, ALPA has led the airline industry in developing and promoting airport-related measures toreduce the potential for incursions. In the early 1990s, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) adoptednew standards for airport signs that bore ALPA’s influence, and new signs have been installed at nearly all airlineairports in North America, and many other airports around the world. New paint markings, vehicle driver trainingprograms, pilot training programs, localized runway incursion action teams, and numerous other initiatives have been ......................................................................2.......................................................................3...............................................................3IV. Studies.............................................................................8V. U.S. Commercial Aviation Safety Team...............................................................11.........................................................11................................................................12.....................................................121. NTSB “Most Wanted Improvements” List...............132. Transport Canada Recommendations.....................15................................16..................................19..................23............................................................................24 UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursionsthe trend once again, from 1993 to 1998, traffic volume grew only 2.41 percent, but the runway incursion rate climbed anA September 2000 study by Transport Canada elaborated on the relationship between traffic volume and the potentialin Table 1.“Referring to Table 1, it becomes immediately apparent that the potentialfor a runway incursion increases more rapidly than traffic volume. Forexample, a 20 percent increase in volume (4 aircraft to 5 aircraft), which isaerodromes, represents a 140 percent increase in runway incursionIn keeping with the laws of probability, and in theabsence of significantly improved safeguards, anThe Australian Transportation Safety Board alsomade a direct correlation between the number of as is seen in Chart 1.The FAA has forecast that IFR aircraft operationswill increase 3.0 percent annually, from 47.5 millionNAS. Chart 2 is an FAA chart of incursions, whichequates to roughly one incursion per day. Air trafficAccording to FAA figures, 327 runway incursions Perhapseven more importantly, the number of incursions in UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursionsillustrated in Figure 1. The example matrix shows three areas of acceptability. Risk matrices may be color coded—Where combinations of severity and likelihood cause risk to fall into the red area, the riskthat lead to higher risk likelihood or severity.always be to reduce risk to as low asdefined conditions of mitigation.Using the FAA guidance materials above, andfacts about the likelihood and severity of runway incursion accidents, ALPA has come to the following conclusions:1. The most severe types of runway incursions may result in catastrophic accidents that lead to the loss of aircraft2. Although the number of serious runway incursions has declined since 67 were recorded in 2000, runwayincursions still happen too frequently; 31 combined Category A and B incursions occurred in FY 2006. A consis-. Given the potential severity and likelihood of a Category A or B event, ALPA’s believes that the U.S. air transportationIn addition, we need to move beyond the current FAA classification of runway incursions based only on who is at fault.proaches. Examining and correcting systemic deficiencies is the most effective way to reduce safety risk.AC 120-92 discusses actions that should be taken to deal with various risks; following is an excerpt from that document:The process of selecting or designing controls should be approached in a structured manner.most to least effective. Depending on the hazard under scrutiny and its complexity, more than one action or strategymay be applied. Further, the controls may be applied at different times depending on the immediacy of the requiredInstall physical guards or barriers—reduce exposure to the hazard or reduce the severity of consequences.Train pilots and controllers to avoid the hazard or reduce the likelihood of an associated risk. UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway IncursionsIn 1999, Transport Canada (TC) created a subcommittee of the National Civil Aviation Safety Committee (NCASC) todeveloped to address it.Transport Canada and NAV Canada. The SCRI held meetings with users at several airports to collect feedback, under-of experts to develop preventive strategies that could be implemented by NAV Canada. The group published a finalrequired to keep the runway clear. (Example: An aircraft or vehicle was near [within 200 feet] but not on a service-able runway and stopped short of the runway surface without intervention.)the occurrence was unlikely to result in a collision with an aircraft or vehicle. ATS [air traffic services] orpilot intervention was required to keep the runway clear. (Example: A vehicle or aircraft was near [within 200 feet]but not on a serviceable runway and stopped short of the runway surface when contacted by ATC.)the occurrence could have resulted in a collision with an aircraft or vehicle. A vehicle or aircraft wason a serviceable runway without authorization or was cleared onto (or across) a serviceable runway in error.(Example: An aircraft crosses a serviceable runway without clearance.)the occurrence could have resulted in a collision with an aircraft or vehicle. A vehicle or aircraft was on arequires ATS intervention to correct. (Example: Two aircraft take off from the same runway at the same time.)by the flight crew and/or vehicle operator(s). (Example: A pilot rejects a takeoffThe Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) published a report in June 2004, which stated that “although mostthem high on the agendas ofinternationally.” The Bureaubetween controllers, pilots, and Table 5: Severity Levels LevelDescriptionDLittle or no chance of collision but met the definition of a runway incursion.CSeparation decreased, but there was ample time and distance to avoid aBSeparation decreased, and there was a significant potential for collision.ASeparation decreased, and participants took extreme action to narrowlyAccidentAn incursion that resulted in a collision. UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions V. U.S. Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) Initiatives The most comprehensive study on runway incursion risk completed to date was conducted by CAST. Its report,“Runway Incursion Joint Safety Implementation Team (RI JSIT) Results and Analysis,” was released in December2002. The data-driven approach used by CAST, combined with an objective cost/benefit analysis of each mitigation,CAST and the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA JSC) chartered the Runway Incursion Joint SafetyImplementation Team (RI JSIT) to develop a plan to effectively reduce the severe threat of fatalities and loss caused byairline and general aviation runway incursion accidents/incidents. The RI JSIT brought together expert representa-tives from across the aviation community, including participants from government, industry, and pilot and controllerunions. These experts developed, prioritized, and coordinated a plan to implement the most effective, analyticallydata-driven intervention strategies recommended by the RI Joint Safety Analysis Team (RI JSAT). The RI JSIT ana-lyzed the RI JSAT’s 115 intervention strategies, together with 37 GA JSC intervention strategies, to determine thefeasibility of gaining significant safety benefits through implementation. From the overall effectiveness and feasibilityscores, 22 “Safety Enhancements” were incorporated into seven (7) Detailed Implementation Plans.The government and industry have succeeded in implementing a number of CAST-recommended safety enhancements. VI. Accomplishments ALPA has been directly involved in developing and getting implemented several runway incursion-related safetySOPs for Ground Operations (FAA Advisory Circular 120-74A)This FAA document was published to encourage airlines to standardize their ground operations. The AC was anaccomplishment of the CAST Joint Safety Action Team and was brought to publication by the CAST RI JSIT. Not allairlines have totally embraced all of the AC’s recommendations. Consequently, individual procedures vary. ALPArecommends that airlines standardize their implementation of the AC’s recommendation.A runway safety training aid resides on the ALPA public website at www.alpa.org, available to any pilot seekingrunway incursion training. To date, more than 50,000 pilots have availed themselves of the opportunity to use thisPilot Education—FAA/ALPA DVD, “Was That for Us?”During 2006, the FAA, United Airlines, and ALPA collaborated to distribute thousands of copies of a DVD specificallyrelated to runway incursion training and AC 120-74A. The information on the DVD is presented in such a mannerpublication of the DVD is recommended.Paint and Markings (Advisory Circular 150/5340-1J)ALPA has been instrumental in the continual upgrading of standards for taxiway and runway paint markings. ThisAC has been enhanced to describe new standards for marking runway holding locations, and the holding locationsmark runway entrances. The 73 busiest U.S. civil airports are required to implement these markings, and that work isRunway Incursion Information Evaluation Program (RIIEP)This FAA program gathers critical safety data not otherwise available concerning the root causes of airport surfaceevents, including runway incursions. Pilots who are involved in runway incursion events who cooperate with FAAaviation safety inspectors by providing information are extended some protections against legal action. RIIEP wasbegun March 2000 and was reinstated in 2004 and again in 2006. UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions The FAA recommends that airports complete these enhancements by 2008. ALPA recommends that these surfaceAtlanta Hartsfield and Dallas-Fort Worth International Airports are constructingend-around (or perimeter) taxiways that will allow traffic to proceed from arrival runways to terminals withoutcrossing other arrival or departure runways and will eliminate the incursion danger described above. ALPAsupports the expenditure of funds to install perimeter taxiways, which enhance both safety and capacity.ALPA recommends use of improved standard operatingprocedures (SOPS) and training for aircraft ground operations throughout the aviation industry—current stan-Provide better ATC ground movement training. Provide improved ground movement training for air trafficcontrollers, particularly with the use of high-fidelity visual tower simulators, which are similar in quality toaircraft flight simulators routinely used for pilot training.Provide controllers with better technology. The situational awareness of air traffic controllers should beenhanced through technology such as ASDE-X airport surface radar and emerging capabilities demonstrated inthe FAA’s Safe Flight 21 Program.approach, and automated “smart lighting” to indicate taxi routes. Appendix 1: National Transportation Safety Board Item fromAgency’s “Most Wanted” Transportation Safety Improvements List Most WantedTransportation Safety Improvements Federal Issues AVIATION Stop Runway Incursions/Ground Collisions of Aircraft Give immediate warnings of probable collisions/incursions directly to flight crews in the cockpit.In March 1977, in what remains the world’s deadliest aviation accident, two passenger jumbo jets collided on arunway at Tenerife, Canary Islands, causing the deaths of 583 passengers and crew. The deadliest U.S. runwayincursion accident was a collision between a USAir 737 and a Skywest Metroliner commuter airplane at LosAngeles International Airport (LAX) in February 1991, which killed 34 people.Most recently, in July 2006, at O’Hare International Airport, a United 737 passenger jet and an Atlas Air 747cargo airplane nearly collided. The 747 had been cleared to land and was taxiing on the runway towards thecargo area when the 737 was cleared to take off on the intersecting runway, over the 747. The pilot of the UnitedThe runway incursion issue has been on the Safety Board’s Most Wanted list since the list’s inception in 1990. Inthe late 1980s, an inordinate number of runway incursions/ground collision accidents resulted in substantial loss UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions Appendix 2: Recommendations from Transport Canada’sRunway Incursions, September 14, 2000 4.1.In consultation with NAV CANADA, Transport Canada formalize and promulgate the following runway4.2.Transport Canada develop and administer a comprehensive and recurring runway incursion awarenessprogram, possibly in collaboration with NAV CANADA, the Canadian Airports Council and other professionalaviation organizations.4.3.Transport Canada focus on developing preventive strategies for runway incursions that result from pilotperformance vulnerability to error due to workload, and potential distractions associated with the performance of4.4.Transport Canada training guidelines and audit processes be revised to place additional emphasis on radio-telephony procedures and ICAO standard phraseology, familiarity with SIRO operations, pre-planning and briefing ofintended taxi routes prior to arrival and departure, and minimizing other cockpit tasks while taxiing. The TransportCanada Flight Instructor’s Guide should be amended to reflect these principles.4.5.Transport Canada require that an explicit ATC clearance be given for an aircraft to cross any runway.4.6.Transport Canada ensure that existing “line up and wait” procedures are revised to preclude aircraft from being4.7.Transport Canada work in collaboration with ATS service providers to develop a policy regarding runwayintersection departures. The intent of this policy should be to minimize or, when practicable, eliminate the use of4.8.Transport Canada establish guidelines for the promulgation of standard taxi routes and encourage the imple-4.9.Transport Canada develop and implement commonstandards and recommended practices (CAR 322) for all4.10.Transport Canada place more emphasis, particularly during airport inspections, on ensuring that airport signsand markings are clearly visible to aircraft on the manoeuvring surface and are unambiguous.4.11.In consultation with airport authorities, Transport Canada investigate the viability of an automated runwayincursion warning system, using inductive loop or similar technology, that provides a direct warning of an approaching4.12.Transport Canada establish standards pertaining to the number of runways and/or taxiways that can intersect4.13.Transport Canada promulgate ICAO standard naming conventions for taxiways and, if applicable, standard taxi4.14.Transport Canada investigate the feasibility of developing an objective methodology, and associated equipment,to determine when airport surface markings need repainting due to rubber obscuration, normal wear, fading, lack ofcontrast with the pavement, or other reasons.4.15.Transport Canada investigate the feasibility of making aerodrome maps available to pilots at reduced cost, possiblyby making them available on the INTERNET or by producing these maps in a format similar to terminal area charts. UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions4.2.3Assess the need for additional ICAO standards for aerodrome signage markings and lighting. Make recommen-dations to ICAO where appropriate.4.2.4Implement safety management systems in accordance with ICAO provisions.4.2.5Ensure a continued 4.2.6Introduce a formal Driver training and assessment programme, or where already in place review against the4.2.7Introduce formal communications training and assessment for Drivers and other personnel who operate on ornear the runway.4.2.8Implement the standard ICAO naming conventions for taxiways.4.3—Communications (Language, Radiotelephony, Phraseologies and Procedures)4.3.1To avoid the possibility of call sign confusion, use full aircraft or vehicle call signs for all communicationsassociated with runway operations.4.3.2Verify the use of standard ICAO RT phraseologies.4.3.3Use the ICAO read-back procedure (including Drivers and other personnel who operate on the manoeuvring area).4.3.4Improve situational awareness, when practicable, by conducting all communications associated with runway4.3.5Improve situational awareness, when practicable, by conducting all communications associated with runwayoperations on a common frequency. (note—aerodromes with multiple runways may use a different frequency foreach runway.)4.4—Recommendations for Aircraft Operators4.4.1Provide training and assessment for Pilots regarding Aerodrome signage, markings and lighting.4.4.2Pilots shall not cross illuminated red stop bars when lining up or crossing a runway, unless contingencyprocedures are in force, for example to cover cases where the stop bars or controls are unserviceable.4.4.3Ensure that flight deck procedures contain a requirement for explicit clearances to cross any runway. Includesnon-active runways.4.4.4When in receipt of line-up clearance, Flight Crew must advise ATC if they will need to hold on the runway formore than 90 seconds beyond the time it would normally be expected to depart.4.4.5Promote best practices on flight deck procedures while taxiing—to include the “Sterile flight deck” concept.4.4.6Promote best practices for pilots’ planning of ground operations.4.5—Recommendations for Air Navigation Service Providers4.5.1Implement safety management systems in accordance with ESARR3 provisions.4.5.2Survey the different methods and techniques in use to indicate to controllers that a runway is temporarilyobstructed and recommend Best Practice.4.5.3Whenever practical give ATC en-route clearance prior to taxi.4.5.4Develop an ICAO compliant procedure applicable if an aircraft or vehicle becomes lost on the aerodromemanoeuvring area.4.5.5Develop an ICAO compliant procedure applicable if an aircraft or vehicle becomes lost on the aerodromemanoeuvring area.4.5.6Ensure that ATC communication messages are not over long or complex. UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway Incursions4.8.4Ensure that an accuracy feedback process exists for the users of aeronautical information.4.8.5The ergonomics of Maps and Charts and relevant documentation should be improved to enhance their readabil-ity and usability.4.8.6Aerodrome 5.1.1Data on the implemnew technologies that can be applied to runway safety shall be disseminated as part of the general runway safetyawareness campaign.5.1.2Identify any ICAO guidance material that should be upgraded to ICAO standards and recommended practicesand review other relevant materials.5.1.3Initiate a programme to better understand human factors contribution to runway incursions.5.1.4Review “Heads up, Heads down” time requirement of procedures and working methods and assess their Appendix 4: “Results and Analysis,” Executive Summary, December2002, Runway Incursion Joint Safety Implementation Team (RI JSIT) EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Runway Incursion Joint Safety Implementation Team (RI JSIT) was chartered by the Commercial Aviation SafetyTeam (CAST) and General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA JSC) to develop a plan to effectively reduce thesevere threat of fatalities and loss caused by commercial and general aviation runway incursion accidents/incidents.CAST’s goal is to reduce the US commercial aviation fatal accident rate by 80 percent by the end of the year 2007. Tohelp accomplish this goal, the RI JSIT brought together expert representatives from across the aviation communityincluding participants from government, industry, and pilot and controller unions. These experts developed, priori-tized, and coordinated a plan to implement the most effective analytically data-driven intervention strategies recom-mended by the RI Joint Safety Analysis Team (JSAT). Those 115 intervention strategies were joined with 37 GA JSCintervention strategies and were analyzed by the RI JSIT to determine the feasibility of gaining significant safetybenefits through implementation. From the overall effectiveness and feasibility scores, twenty-two “Safety Enhance-ments” were incorporated into seven Detailed Implementation Plans.FAA data on runway incursion incidents and accidents from 1997-2000 reflects that 55 percent were caused by pilotdeviations, 25 percent were caused by controller operational errors, and the remaining 20 percent were caused byvehicle or pedestrian deviations. Further break down of this data indicates that of the most serious incursions (Cat-egory A and B) 54 percent were due to pilot deviations, 35 percent were controller operational errors, and the remain-ing 11 percent were vehicle or pedestrian deviations.Industry wide, standard operating procedures have been among the highest scoring safety enhancements across fiveaccident categories including Controlled Flight into Terrain, Approach and Landing, Loss of Control, RunwayIncursion, and Turbulence. The implementation of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for surface operations is UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway IncursionsAir Traffic Control ProceduresThe ATC Procedures project will help to reduce the incidence of runway incursions by:Reviewing (and revising as necessary): capacity enhancement programs, required controller and pilot phraseology, andimplicit clearances to cross a runway.1. Establishing national standards for tower control positions to help promote increased situational awareness forcontrollers with respect to surface operations.2. Reviewing capacity enhancement programs to determine whether they contribute to surface incidents; if so, theywould be revised or eliminated.3. Reviewing phraseology used for surface operations for greater efficiency and clarity, and then revised as needed.4. Conducting a study to determine whether revising FAR 91.129(i) would help reduce runway incursions.5. Initiating rulemaking to require that pilots read back all instructions to: “hold short”, “taxi into position and hold”or otherwise enter a runway.Situational Awareness Technologies for Air Traffic Control(SMA), and Airport Target Identification System (ATIDS). These technologies will also support pilots with a clearunderstanding of airport layout and clearance instructions to avoid deviations in all visibility conditions. The imple-1. New technology tools would be developed by the FAA to enable enhanced surveillance, information, communicationand conflict detection for ATC operations.2. FAA and airport operators would provide airport surface surveillance equipment with conflict alerting capability atair traffic control towers.3. Digital data link capability would be developed and implemented to enable automatic transmission of ATCinstructions/information (between the ground and aircraft).4. Situational Awareness Displays developed in support of the above listed strategies would incorporate industry bestpractices for computer-human interface (CHI) design to enhance and support ATC decision-making.Visual Aids Enhancement and Automation Technology for Airportsand incidents. The four Visual Aids Enhancement & Automation Technology Project safety enhancements that follow1. Variable message signs would have the capability to present critical clearances such as “hold”, “cross” or “takeoff.” UNWAYNCURSIONS: A Call for Action •Air Line Pilots Association White Paper on Runway IncursionsThe unifying goal of the Runway Incursion JSIT was to produce a practical agenda yielding significant safety benefits,not for a selected group of organizations, but for the entire aviation community. Because not all organizations com-prising the general and commercial aviation communities are represented on CAST and GA JSC, the RI JSIT recom-mends that CAST and GA JSC ensure prompt distribution of this report to all major organizations comprising the U.S.commercial and general aviation community, the presidents of IATA, IFALPA, the Chairman of the JAA Board, andthe President of the Council of ICAO.Additionally, the RI JSIT is the first of the CAST JSAT and JSIT teams to focus on incident data analysis as their primaryPlan for Aviation Safety, they will be required to increasingly move from a reactive to a preventive model of mishap elimina-protections among all the stakeholders within the aviation community. Most importantly, the RI JSIT recommends thatIn summary, the data driven and consensus based process that the RI JSIT has used yielded seven major project areaswith twenty-two specific Safety Enhancements. It is the consensus of this group that the implementation of the recom-mended “Safety Enhancements” should be pursued with a system approach. The causes (precursor events) of runwayincursion are many and varied.Aviation stakeholders will have to CAST a broad net if we are to significantly reduce the risk of fatal runway incursions. Appendix 5, Recommended Reading and References FAA Runway Safety Report, August 2005, FAA Air Traffic Organization—Safety Services, 65 pagesFAA Flight Plan 2006-2010, August 2005, Federal Aviation Administration, 115 pages Final Report, September 14, 2000,Transport Canada, 44 pagesManual for Preventing Runway Incursions, First Edition, International Civil Aviation Organization, 2006, 86 pagesNext Generation Air Transportation System Integrated Plan, December 12, 2004, Office of the Secretary and Administrator,Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 35 pages, July 17, 2002, prepared for Mr. William Davis, Director,FAA Office of Runway Safety, ARI-1, NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS), 55 pagesResearch Report—Runway Incursions (extracted information from FAA’s 2002-2004 Runway Safety Blueprint) Human December 2002, Runway Incursion Joint Safety Implementation Team (RI JSIT), chartered byCommercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) and General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GAJSC), 188 pagesExcerpts from National Desk/Transportation Reporter, June 26, 2001, U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. Representative Don Young, Chairman, 3 pagesFurther Actions Are Needed To Reduce Runway IncursionsKenneth M. Mead, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation, 12 pages, August 11, 2000, Runway Incursion Joint Safety Analysis Team (JSAT), chartered by CommercialAviation Safety Team (CAST) and General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GAJSC), 142 pages