APPENDIX AUGUST 14, 1984, LETTER FROM THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, TO CHAIRWOMAN COLLINS, WITH ENCLOSURES This is in response to your request for additional information for the record of the June 13-14 hearing before your Subcommittee on Aviation Safety Management. I am pleased to share with you my views on the questions you have asked. Your questions and my responses are listed below. 1. In response to a question concerning FAA's surveillance procedures, NTSB Chairman Burnett testified that "they are very inconsistent between (FAA) regions" and were "weak in several respects." As Administrator, have you detected weaknesses or inconsistencies in your surveillance procedures between regions? Are you concerned that inconsistencies may exist between regions? What actions can you initiate to ensure surveillance consistency between regions? ANSWER: Concerning Chairman Burnett's remarks on Federal (505) provide me with an accurate assessment of the effectiveness of our present inspection program--both its strengths and its weaknesses. I expect to have preliminary information from the review by December 1984 and to have the program completed by December 1985. I will make whatever changes may be necessary to correct any inconsistencies or weaknesses which I discover that may reduce our surveillance and inspection effectiveness. 2. In your prepared testimony, you indicated that the FAA has suspended and revoked the certificates of several carriers for safety deficiencies. Please list for the last 3 years all Part 121 or 135 operators and the specific violations which prompted enforcement actions resulting in suspension or revocation of their certificates. Due ANSWER: With respect to the FAA's enforcement actions which have led to suspension or revocation of Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Parts 121 and 135 operators' certificates, we have enclosed (Enclosure 1) a list of violation actions contained in our Automated Enforcement Information System. to system time lags, there are additional actions: Global International Airlines, Supplemental Air Carrier, Emergency Suspension, 47 days, FAR 39.3, 43.13, 121.3, 121.5, 121.380, and 121.697; Rich International Airways, Supplemental Air Carrier, Emergency Suspension, 60 days, FAR 43.13, 91.29, 121.3, 121.153, 121.303, 121.310, 121.441, 121,571, and 121.683; Spirit Airways, Inc., Air Taxi, Emergency Revocation, FAR 43.12, 121.163, 121.165, and 121.167. 3. Please list the educational background, experience, training, civil service rating and other criteria necessary to qualify as an air carrier safety inspector. Will the same criteria be applicable to the 166 additional inspector slots mandated by Secretary Dole? ANSWER: The qualification requirements for an aviation safety inspector differ among the operations, airworthiness, and manufacturing specialties. I have enclosed (Enclosure 2) a copy of an aviation safety inspector announcement which specifies the minimum general and specialized qualifications necessary for an aviation safety inspector. These same criteria are applicable for all of our aviation safety inspectors, including the additional 166 inspector slots. 4. What steps does the FAA employ to ensure that the integrity of the inspector work force is not compromised, as result of frequent contact with air carriers? a ANSWER: We have not encountered any problems to date with our aviation inspector work force. This may be attributable, in part, to our organizational structure which provides a system of checks and balances. The actions of individuals approving changes in air carrier operations are subject to supervisory reviews. Additionally, our surveillance and inspection programs are accomplished on a geographic basis so that many individuals from different offices and different regions have access to changes made in each air carrier's operation. For example, one regional office may be responsible for approving a given carrier's training program. If that carrier's training, however, is actually conducted at a facility geographically located within another region, another regional office will actually oversee the day-to-day operations of the training program. We believe that the fact that many individuals are typically involved in the surveillance of a carrier precludes the compromise of integrity of an individual from going unnoticed. However, this is an area which will be evaluated during the review of our safety inspection program. 5. Please provide the current FAA policies and guidelines concerning conflict of interest, for SES and GS employees. the last 3 years have there been conflict of interest allegations against FAA safety inspectors? If air carrier inspectors were involved, what were the specific allegations and disposition of their cases? In ANSWER: There has been one occasion of which we are aware involving a conflict of interest charge. That involved a principal maintenance inspector in our Western-Pacific Region who was accused in behalf of a small repair station/air taxi of giving time extensions for engine repairs in advance of the time when extensions would have been due and of inadequate surveillance practices over that operator. The FAA referred the matter to the Department's inspector general for investigation, conducted its own safety inspection of the operator to assure the safety of its practices, and subsequently suspended the inspector for a 30 day period. The rules pertaining to possible conflicts of interest of FAA employees are contained in Part 99 of the DOT regulations, 49 CFR Part 99, a copy of which is enclosed (Enclosure 3). These rules are derived directly from E.O. 11222. The principal elements of these rules are as follows: A. No employee may accept a gift (such as free travel) from anyone representing a regulated entity, an entity which seeks or does business with the agency, or an entity which has interests that can be affected by the employee's official duties. B. C. Ꭰ . No employee may have a financial interest that creates an actual or apparent conflict of interest. In connection with apparent conflicts, we in the FAA have administratively established a presumption against financial holdings in airlines, aircraft manufacturing companies, and companies doing extensive business in aviation, even though the employee may have no duties related to that entity. All GS employees in certain positions, including air carrier inspectors, must annually file confidential reports of their financial holdings and transactions. These reports are reviewed by FAA lawyers, and corrective action, such as divestiture, ordered as needed. SES employees must file nonconfidential reports All inspectors are prohibited from part-time employment in any aviation activity for which their office or a higher echelon through which they report has regulatory responsibility. The Federal Government's rules for post-employment conflicts of interest derive from the Ethics in Government Act. 6. In your testimony, you indicated that the FAA has conducted over 1,000 inspections of CAL, since the beginning of the labor/bankruptcy dispute. Please describe what is typically involved on the part of FAA inspectors in the following types of inspections: Operations Training Courses Maintenance Systems Inspections Operations Enroute Maintenance Enroute Operations Ramps Maintenance Ramps Maintenance Spot Maintenance Facilities ANSWER: Concerning the various types of inspections performed by FAA inspectors, we have enclosed (Enclosure 4) the handbook guidance provided for inspectors. 7. Please provide the copies of FAA's written policies, guidelines, manuals or directives concerning surveillance when air carriers are faced with financial or labor problems. ANSWER: Copies of handbook guidance pertaining to surveillance of air carriers faced with financial or labor problems are enclosed (Enclosure 5). 8. As a result of the occurrences reported by ALPA concerning CAL, have any analyses been made of CAL Maintenance, Operations and Training Systems? ANSWER: The Principal Inspectors assigned to Continental continually evaluate the maintenance, operations, and training programs to determine compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations. Furthermore, when CAL labor problems began, the FAA initiated special surveillance procedures emphasizing all aspects of CAL's operation. More than 1,000 units of surveillance have been conducted since the commencement of the strike. In conducting over 100 separate investigations of alleged incidents raised by ALPA, our Principal Inspectors have also been alert for trends which might indicate deficiencies in any phase of CAL's programs. 9. As a result of the occurrences reported by ALPA concerning CAL, has any consideration been given to extending the ATC tape recycling period, particularly ARTCC's and ATC's with a high frequency of CAL flights? In ANSWER: We have reviewed our ATC tape recycling policy. general, I believe the present policy is appropriate and provides the FAA with adequate data to support its safety obligations. With respect to CAL, you may recall that we earlier apprised the Airline Pilots Association of the need for timely notification of possible safety violations. We will preserve from routine recycling any tapes involving occurrences which ALPA brings to our attention in a timely manner as well as other tapes we have reason to believe may contain information concerning possible violations that could involve ALPA and Continental Airlines. 10. In their testimony, ALPA President Duffy and NTSB Chairman Burnett referred to the 1982 Air Florida crash, specifically, the consequences of a rapidly expanding inexperienced pilot work force. Recognizing that there is no requirement to do so, has any consideration been given to a review of CAL's hiring and promotion policies? ANSWER: We have checked on the experience level of CAL's pilot work force. The following statistics reflect experience levels of CAL pilots since the strike. The average flight time for 39-223 0-84-33 |