Narrative:

Working local control. Developmental working ground control; who is newly certified on ground control. OJT was being conducted on ground control prior to the developmental taking the position. VFR weather; with snow removal in progress on the field. Airport operations called on the tower frequency requesting access to runway 2L. Normally; vehicles contact ground control for clearance on taxiway a and then ground control writes a strip and places it appropriately on the local control strip board if the vehicle requests access to an active runway. I had no strip indicating the vehicle and asked my ground control if they were aware of a vehicle. Ground control indicated they were not aware of airport operations; but that they had previously had a 'airport operations AC & company' approved on taxiway a. I coordinated with ground control and approved airport operations ab on taxiway a and runway 2L. I queried airport operations AC; who was already on my frequency and approved on runway 2L as to how many vehicles had been in 'airport operations AC & company'. He/she indicated that it was a company of four vehicles which had broken up into individual vehicles. When I asked ground control about this; they indicated that airport operations AC had indeed communicated that they were breaking away from the company; but that he/she was only aware of two vehicle. Around this time a third vehicle came on my frequency asking for runway access as well. I asked their position and they indicated that we were unaware they were approved on taxiway a. At this point I indicated to airport operations AC; (as that had been the vehicle in charge when the vehicles were all one company); that they needed to be more specific when the 'company' was breaking up as to what vehicles are where and how they will be handling their radio communications. At this point between ground control and myself double-checked that our strip board's accurately reflected the vehicular traffic approved on controller surfaces. The confusion in no way impacted aircraft operations; but the potential existed for a safety issue. Recommendation; when snow removal is in progress at fairbanks (fai/pafa); it is not uncommon for vehicles to operate as a 'company'. This reduces frequency congestion; as the lead vehicle is responsible for communicating with ATC ... Although; to my knowledge/understanding; all the vehicles in the 'company' are monitoring the appropriate frequency for the surface(s) the 'company' is approved on at the time. I believe the vehicles also have a separate frequency allowing for communication between vehicles without imposing on the ATC frequency. Usually when a 'company' of vehicles changes in any way; the operators are very good about informing ATC and adjusting their communications appropriately. Ground control and local control keep track of the vehicles approved on controlled surfaces via our facility directive utilizing strips and placing them appropriately on our strip boards at the operating positions. As all safety issues; there were multiple lapses in the system to allow this confusion to develop.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FAI Local Controller described a very confusing event involving a number of snow removal vehicles and questions regarding runway clearances and airport vehicle contact procedures.

Narrative: Working Local Control. Developmental working Ground Control; who is newly certified on Ground Control. OJT was being conducted on Ground Control prior to the developmental taking the position. VFR weather; with snow removal in progress on the field. Airport operations called on the tower frequency requesting access to Runway 2L. Normally; vehicles contact Ground Control for clearance on Taxiway A and then Ground Control writes a strip and places it appropriately on the Local Control strip board if the vehicle requests access to an active Runway. I had no strip indicating the vehicle and asked my Ground Control if they were aware of a vehicle. Ground Control indicated they were not aware of Airport Operations; but that they had previously had a 'Airport Operations AC & Company' approved on Taxiway A. I coordinated with Ground Control and approved Airport Operations AB on Taxiway A and Runway 2L. I queried Airport Operations AC; who was already on my frequency and approved on Runway 2L as to how many vehicles had been in 'Airport Operations AC & Company'. He/she indicated that it was a company of four vehicles which had broken up into individual vehicles. When I asked Ground Control about this; they indicated that Airport Operations AC had indeed communicated that they were breaking away from the company; but that he/she was only aware of two vehicle. Around this time a third vehicle came on my frequency asking for Runway access as well. I asked their position and they indicated that we were unaware they were approved on Taxiway A. At this point I indicated to Airport Operations AC; (as that had been the vehicle in charge when the vehicles were all one company); that they needed to be more specific when the 'company' was breaking up as to what vehicles are where and how they will be handling their radio communications. At this point between Ground Control and myself double-checked that our strip board's accurately reflected the vehicular traffic approved on controller surfaces. The confusion in no way impacted aircraft operations; but the potential existed for a safety issue. Recommendation; when snow removal is in progress at Fairbanks (FAI/PAFA); it is not uncommon for vehicles to operate as a 'company'. This reduces frequency congestion; as the lead vehicle is responsible for communicating with ATC ... although; to my knowledge/understanding; all the vehicles in the 'company' are monitoring the appropriate frequency for the surface(s) the 'company' is approved on at the time. I believe the vehicles also have a separate frequency allowing for communication between vehicles without imposing on the ATC frequency. Usually when a 'company' of vehicles changes in any way; the operators are very good about informing ATC and adjusting their communications appropriately. Ground Control and Local Control keep track of the vehicles approved on controlled surfaces via our facility directive utilizing strips and placing them appropriately on our strip boards at the operating positions. As all safety issues; there were multiple lapses in the system to allow this confusion to develop.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.