Envoy E175 at Montgomery on Dec 31st 2022, ground worker killed
Last Update: December 20, 2024 / 16:54:17 GMT/Zulu time
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 31, 2022
Classification
Accident
Airline
Envoy Air
Flight number
AA-3408
Departure
Montgomery, United States
Destination
Dallas Ft. Worth, United States
Aircraft Registration
N264NN
Aircraft Type
Embraer ERJ-175
ICAO Type Designator
E175
Montgomery Airport reported a ground employee was involved in a fatality, no further information was available.
The FAA confirmed a fatality occurred while flight AA-3408 was still at the gate. The airport was closed for several hours as result. The NTSB is investigating.
According to local media reports the baggage handler was sucked into one of the aircraft's engines (CF34) and killed.
A fellow ground worker witnessing the accident confirmed the baggage handler was ingested by one of the engines of the aircraft.
The family of the baggage handler reported the ground worker involved was a wife and mother of three.
The NTSB stated the aircraft was parked at the gate with the park brakes on, when a ground worker was ingested into an engine. The NTSB have opened an investigation.
On Jan 23rd 2023 the NTSB released their preliminary report summarizing the sequence of events:
The flight was operated by Envoy Air Inc. doing business as American Eagle flight ENY3408 with an inoperative auxiliary power unit (APU). The flight crew reported that after an uneventful flight they elected to leave both engines running for the required two-minute engine cool down period. As the airplane approached the gate, three ramp agents were present, but clear of the safety area. After stopping the aircraft and setting the parking brake, the captain gave the hand signal to connect the airplane to ground power. As he was shutting down the number 2 (right) engine the “DOOR CRG FWD OPEN” engine indicating and crew alerting system (EICAS) message appeared (indicating that the forward cargo door had opened). The first officer (FO) opened his cockpit window to inform the ramp agent that the engines were still operating. The captain then made a brief announcement asking the passengers to remain seated until the seat belt sign had been turned off. He then relayed his intentions to the FO that the seat belt sign would stay illuminated until they had connected to ground power and could shut down the number 1 (left) engine. Immediately thereafter, he saw a warning light illuminate and the airplane shook violently followed by the immediate automatic shutdown of the number 1 engine. Unsure of what had occurred, he extinguished the emergency lights and shut off both batteries before leaving the flight deck to investigate.
Video surveillance captured the accident sequence and showed the airplane being marshalled to the gate. After the nose wheel was chocked, the ramp agent marshaling the airplane walked toward the forward cargo door located on the right side and near the front of the airplane.
Simultaneously, another ramp agent appeared walking towards the back of the airplane with an orange safety cone where she disappeared from view. A third ramp agent located near the right wing tip could be seen gesturing with his hand towards the back of the airplane.
Meanwhile, a fourth ramp agent knelt near the airplane’s nose wheel. The ramp agent from the back of the airplane reappeared and began walking away from the airplane and towards the left wing tip where she disappeared from the camera’s field of view. The marshaller could be seen backing away from the airplane’s open forward cargo door and the ramp agent from the back of the airplane reappeared walking along the leading edge of the left wing and directly in front of the number one engine. She was subsequently pulled off her feet and into the operating engine. Throughout the course of the accident, the airplane’s upper rotating beacon light appeared to be illuminated.
The ground crew reported that a safety briefing was held about 10 minutes before the airplane arrived at the gate. A second safety “huddle” was held shortly before the airplane arrived at the gate, to reiterate that the engines would remain running until ground power was connected. It was also discussed that the airplane should not be approached, and the diamond of safety cones should not be set until the engines were off, spooled down, and the airplane’s rotating beacon light had been extinguished by the flight crew.
One ramp agent located near the right wing tip stated that he observed another ramp agent approach the back of the airplane to set the rear safety cone. He observed her almost fall over from the engines exhaust while he attempted to alert her to stay back and wait for the engines to be shut down. He also stated that he observed the airplane’s upper and lower rotating beacon lights illuminated.
Another ramp agent stated that after chocking the nose wheel of the airplane, he observed another ramp agent approach the forward cargo door and he knelt to wave him off. He then observed another ramp agent about to set the safety cone at the rear of the airplane, he yelled and waved her off as the number 1 engine was still running. He observed her as she began to move away from the airplane before he turned to lower the cord for the ground power. Shortly thereafter he heard a “bang” and the engine shut down.
On Dec 20th 2024 the NTSB released their final report and investigation docket concluding the probable causes of the accident were:
The ramp agent’s cognitive impairment, which resulted in her (1) inconsistent behavior with trained procedures and pre-landing briefings, (2) presence on the left side of the airplane while the left engine was still operating, and (3) subsequent ingestion into the engine.
The NTSB analysed:
After an uneventful flight, Envoy Air flight 3408 (dba American Eagle) taxied with both engines operating to its assigned gate and parked at Montgomery Regional Airport, Montgomery, Alabama. The No. 1 (left) engine was still operating while they waited on ground power due to an inoperative auxiliary power unit (a minimum equipment list item). Shortly after arriving at the gate, the captain saw a “FAIL” symbol on his engine display, felt the airplane shake violently, and noticed that the left engine had shut down. The flight crew subsequently determined that one of the ramp agents had been ingested into the No. 1 engine.
Ramp agents from Piedmont Airlines were responsible for supporting airplanes after arrival at the airport. Before the accident airplane arrived, the ramp agents discussed each person’s role and the safety precautions that were to be taken, which included maintaining a position away from the airplane until the engines had spooled down and the red beacon lights were turned off (except when the lead ramp agent had to approach the airplane to chock the nosewheel). Security video showed at least one of the red beacon lights was still on when the accident ramp agent walked directly in front of the left engine before being ingested into the engine.
This investigation evaluated the accident ramp agent’s training and American Eagle’s procedures, her medical conditions and toxicology results, and her judgment. In addition, the investigation considered the result of the company’s drug and alcohol use policy and the benefit of classifying ramp personnel as a safety-sensitive position regarding federal drug and alcohol testing requirements.
Ramp Training and Operator Procedures
The accident ramp agent completed new-hire ramp training in December 2021 and recurrent training in September 2022. The training included a discussion about jetblast and ingestion zones and procedures for safely approaching an engine. The American Eagle Ground Operations Manual, which provided guidance to ground personnel supporting American Eagle regional flights, also specified jetblast and ingestion zones, engine spool down, procedures for approaching an airplane, and the importance of waiting until the airplane’s red beacon lights were turned off before doing so. The manual also stated that a ramp agent should never pass under the fuselage to move from one side of the airplane to the other.
According to the lead ramp agent on the day of the accident, ramp personnel were required to stay 15 ft away from an engine, consistent with guidance in the American Eagle Ground Operations Manual. The accident ramp agent should have been familiar with the company’s ramp safety policy because her position required her to continuously work around jet-powered airplanes. The 15-ft guidance provided a buffer that was almost two times the airplane manufacturer’s boundary for the inlet hazard area (8.3 ft).
In addition, the lead ramp agent ensured that the accident ramp agent participated in the safety huddle and understood her duties while providing ground support for the Envoy Air airplane. Notably, he tried to warn her, while she was at the back of the airplane, to move away from the operating engine. Thus, the accident ramp agent’s training and the operator’s procedures were not factors in this accident.
Medical Conditions and Toxicology Results
The accident ramp agent had relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, which can adversely affect cognition, including executive functioning, information processing, and working memory. Although no cognitive impairment was documented at the ramp agent’s most recent neurology visits, she had a substantial risk of such impairment because of her condition. This investigation was unable to determine whether she was experiencing a multiple sclerosis flare at the time of the accident.
The accident ramp agent also had diabetes that was treated with medications, including insulin. People with medication-treated diabetes are at risk for both abnormally high (from diabetes) and abnormally low (from medication effects) blood glucose. The ramp agent’s postmortem urine glucose result was normal; thus, she was not likely experiencing a major metabolic disturbance from extreme high blood sugar at the time of the accident. The investigation was unable to determine, from the available evidence, whether the ramp agent was experiencing milder high blood sugar effects (such as fatigue) or low blood sugar effects (such as diminished concentration).
The ramp agent’s toxicology testing detected delta-9-THC and its metabolites, indicating that she had used a cannabis product. Cannabis has the potential to cause cognitive and psychomotor impairment and can worsen cognitive impairment in individuals with multiple sclerosis. However, a person’s blood concentration of delta-9-THC does not directly predict that person’s impairment. Details of the ramp agent’s cannabis use, including dose, route, timing, and specific effects, could not be determined from the available toxicological evidence.
The ramp agent’s toxicology testing also detected carboxy-delta-8-THC, a non-psychoactive metabolite of delta-8-THC (which was not detected). This result indicated that the ramp agent had likely used a product containing chemically synthesized delta-8-THC given that very little delta-8-THC occurs naturally in the cannabis plant. However, because no delta-8-THC or psychoactive metabolite of delta-9-THC was detected in the ramp agent’s blood, she was not likely impaired by delta-8-THC effects at the time of the accident.
Ramp Agent’s Judgment
Multiple cues were available to the accident ramp agent to indicate that the left engine was running. These cues included the airplane’s red beacon lights, which were on and visible; the sound of the operating engine, which would have been discernible, even with the ear protection that the ramp agents were wearing; and the accident ramp agent’s encounter with the left engine’s jetblast (as shown on security video) when placing the safety cone at the tail of the airplane. Therefore, the accident ramp agent was likely aware that the left engine was still operating. However, the accident ramp agent’s actions on the day of the accident were not consistent with those that would be expected for someone in that position.
No task on the day of the accident or on any day that accident ramp agent worked would have placed her in front of the left wing and engine. The accident ramp agent’s decision to walk in front of the engine, despite operating engine cues, was also inconsistent with her training and the briefings that she received before the airplane landed. The accident ramp agent’s records showed no previous instances in which she was within the engine ingestion zone while an engine was operating, and, as previously stated, the lead ramp agent reported that he tried to alert her that the left engine was still operating.
The accident ramp agent’s behavior at the time of the accident demonstrated that her judgment was deficient. Given her identified medical and toxicological cognitive risk factors, the ramp agent’s deficient judgment was likely due to cognitive impairment.The extent to which individual cognitive risk factors, such as the ramp agent’s multiple sclerosis and cannabis use, contributed to this impairment could not be determined based on the available evidence.
Company Policy on Drug and Alcohol Use
Piedmont Airlines had a company drug and alcohol policy that prohibited employees from reporting to work in a condition that would impair satisfactory work performance due to drugs or alcohol. The ramp agent acknowledged this policy electronically on November 10, 2021. However, toxicology results showed that the accident ramp agent had used a cannabis product at some point before her work shift. Thus, the company policy did not deter the accident ramp agent’s from working in a potentially impaired condition.
The Department of Transportation does not consider ramp personnel positions to be safety sensitive, so the company was not required to provide mandatory drug and alcohol training and perform required drug and alcohol testing, including random testing on its ramp personnel. If these positions had been classified as safety sensitive, the accident ramp agent would have been subject to federally required drug testing, and the company might have been able to detect the accident ramp agent’s use of cannabis and take appropriate action in response, including removing her from safety-sensitive functions.
Aircraft Registration Data
Incident Facts
Date of incident
Dec 31, 2022
Classification
Accident
Airline
Envoy Air
Flight number
AA-3408
Departure
Montgomery, United States
Destination
Dallas Ft. Worth, United States
Aircraft Registration
N264NN
Aircraft Type
Embraer ERJ-175
ICAO Type Designator
E175
This article is published under license from Avherald.com. © of text by Avherald.com.
Article source
You can read 2 more free articles without a subscription.
Subscribe now and continue reading without any limits!
Read unlimited articles and receive our daily update briefing. Gain better insights into what is happening in commercial aviation safety.
Send tip
Support AeroInside by sending a small tip amount.
Related articles
Envoy E170 at Chicago on Sep 25th 2024, landed on wrong runway
An Envoy Embraer ERJ-170 on behalf of American Airlines, registration N772MR performing flight AA-3936 from Norfolk,VA to Chicago O'Hare,IL (USA)…
Fleet type match
Envoy E175 near Lubbock on Jan 26th 2026, engine oil problem, engine failure
An Envoy Embraer ERJ-175 on behalf of American Airlines, registration N208AN performing flight AA-3573 from Dallas Ft. Worth,TX to Midland,TX (USA)…
Fleet type match
Envoy E175 at Dallas on Dec 6th 2025, engine failure
An Envoy Embraer ERJ-175 on behalf of American Airlines, registration N270NN performing flight AA-3939 from Dallas Ft. Worth,TX to Midland,TX (USA)…
Envoy E175 at Dallas on Nov 1st 2024, loss of nose gear steering
An Envoy Embraer ERJ-175 on behalf of American Airlines, registration N282NN performing flight AA-4174 from Little Rock,AR to Dallas Ft. Worth,TX…
Envoy E170 enroute on Aug 14th 2023, turbulence injures cabin crew
An Envoy Embraer ERJ-170, registration N776MS performing flight AA-3788 from Des Moines,IA to Chicago O'Hare,IL (USA), was enroute when the aircraft…
Newest articles
Fleet type match
Swiss A343 at Zurich on Mar 14th 2026, flaps problem
A Swiss International Airlines Airbus A340-300, registration HB-JMA performing flight LX-189 from Shanghai (China) to Zurich (Switzerland) with 209…
Fleet type match
TUI B738 at Manchester on Mar 13th 2026, flaps problem
A TUI Airways Boeing 737-800, registration G-TAWB performing flight BY-2540 from Manchester,EN (UK) to Palma Mallorca,SP (Spain), was climbing out of…
Subscribe today
Are you researching aviation incidents? Get access to AeroInside Insights, unlimited read access and receive the daily newsletter.
Pick your plan and subscribePartner
ELITE Simulation Solutions is a leading global provider of Flight Simulation Training Devices, IFR training software as well as flight controls and related services. Find out more.
SafetyScan Pro provides streamlined access to thousands of aviation accident reports. Tailored for your safety management efforts. Book your demo today
AeroInside Blog
Popular aircraft
Airbus A320Boeing 737-800
Boeing 737-800 MAX
Popular airlines
American AirlinesUnited
Delta
Air Canada
Lufthansa
British Airways