Narrative:

I was working the local control position. Ground control was staffed by a developmental. Clearance delivery was combined with tower controller in charge and staffed by a cpc. Snow removal was in progress on many surfaces. Several snow removal vehicles were requesting access to runway 19R. A BE20 was in the IFR approach pattern on a training flight. I gave ground control of runway 19R behind the BE20 who was executing a stop and go. The BE20 came to a stop just north of midfield (taxiway B). As this developmental had previous performance issues; I listened to him confirm the location of the various vehicles. Ground began to give access to vehicles from txwys north and behind the BE20. Pilot requested an extra 15-30 seconds of time holding on the runway. I approved the request. Ground queried about the BE20 and I relayed the information about the additional time on the runway. As the BE20 was 3/4 field airborne; the ground controller indicated confusion about BE20's departure. I observed vehicles at the southwest corner of the field approaching the runway; but could not tell if they were crossing the hold short lines. This incident was not classified as a controller error or a runway incursion; but rather a performance issue on the part of the ground controller. The ground controller did not have awareness concerning the coordination; the BE20's intentions; or the location of all the vehicles under his control. The number of runway incursions at fai has risen in the past 18 months. I believe this has to do with lower expectations from trainees; inadequate staffing; and lack of support from management. All vehicles at fai operate on ground control frequency. Previous runway incursions have led to the suggestion that all vehicles operate on local control frequency. No change has been implemented.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FAI LCL CTLR DESCRIBED NEAR RWY INCURSION WHEN GND CTLR FAILED TO COMPREHEND OPS TAKING PLACE ON THE RWY.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE LCL CTL POS. GND CTL WAS STAFFED BY A DEVELOPMENTAL. CLRNC DELIVERY WAS COMBINED WITH TWR CIC AND STAFFED BY A CPC. SNOW REMOVAL WAS IN PROGRESS ON MANY SURFACES. SEVERAL SNOW REMOVAL VEHICLES WERE REQUESTING ACCESS TO RWY 19R. A BE20 WAS IN THE IFR APCH PATTERN ON A TRAINING FLT. I GAVE GND CTL OF RWY 19R BEHIND THE BE20 WHO WAS EXECUTING A STOP AND GO. THE BE20 CAME TO A STOP JUST N OF MIDFIELD (TXWY B). AS THIS DEVELOPMENTAL HAD PREVIOUS PERFORMANCE ISSUES; I LISTENED TO HIM CONFIRM THE LOCATION OF THE VARIOUS VEHICLES. GND BEGAN TO GIVE ACCESS TO VEHICLES FROM TXWYS N AND BEHIND THE BE20. PLT REQUESTED AN EXTRA 15-30 SECONDS OF TIME HOLDING ON THE RWY. I APPROVED THE REQUEST. GND QUERIED ABOUT THE BE20 AND I RELAYED THE INFO ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL TIME ON THE RWY. AS THE BE20 WAS 3/4 FIELD AIRBORNE; THE GND CTLR INDICATED CONFUSION ABOUT BE20'S DEP. I OBSERVED VEHICLES AT THE SW CORNER OF THE FIELD APCHING THE RWY; BUT COULD NOT TELL IF THEY WERE XING THE HOLD SHORT LINES. THIS INCIDENT WAS NOT CLASSIFIED AS A CTLR ERROR OR A RWY INCURSION; BUT RATHER A PERFORMANCE ISSUE ON THE PART OF THE GND CTLR. THE GND CTLR DID NOT HAVE AWARENESS CONCERNING THE COORD; THE BE20'S INTENTIONS; OR THE LOCATION OF ALL THE VEHICLES UNDER HIS CTL. THE NUMBER OF RWY INCURSIONS AT FAI HAS RISEN IN THE PAST 18 MONTHS. I BELIEVE THIS HAS TO DO WITH LOWER EXPECTATIONS FROM TRAINEES; INADEQUATE STAFFING; AND LACK OF SUPPORT FROM MGMNT. ALL VEHICLES AT FAI OPERATE ON GND CTL FREQ. PREVIOUS RWY INCURSIONS HAVE LED TO THE SUGGESTION THAT ALL VEHICLES OPERATE ON LCL CTL FREQ. NO CHANGE HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED.

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.