Investigation of Colgan Air Flight 3407 Focuses On Training,
Records
North Dakota Senator
Byron Dorgan (D), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee's
Aviation Subcommittee (pictured right), Wednesday called on
the FAA to "immediately" begin the process of changing a rule
that can allow airlines to hire pilots without checking their
training history beyond five years.
Dorgan made the demand at a hearing of the Subcommittee on
Aviation Operations, Safety and Security called to examine regional
airline safety. The hearing was prompted by allegations of improper
training, pilot fatigue, and other problems that may have
contributed to the Colgan Air flight 3704 crash near Buffalo
February 12th.
USA Today reports that in 8 of the 9 major accidents involving
regional airlines over the past 10 years, at least one pilot had
failed more than one checkride. The Pilot Records Improvement Act
of 1996 requires regional carriers to check for failed checkrides
in the previous 5 years, but according to the report, many of the
pilots involved had busted a checkride outside that 5 year window.
"We need to fix that and fix that soon," Dorgan said.
"There is no reason that you can learn everything there is to
know about the airplane, but not the pilot."
In his prepared remarks, FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt told
the committee: "On January 12, 2009, the FAA issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding upgraded training standards
for pilots, flight attendants and dispatchers."
"The aviation industry has moved to performance-based training
rather than prescriptive training to reflect that the way people
learn has changed," Babbitt (shown
below, right) said.
"New technology, particularly simulators, allows high-fidelity
training for events that we never could have trained to in the past
using an aircraft, e.g., stall recovery. We now have qualitative
measures to measure actual transfer of knowledge. We can determine
proficiency based on performance, not just on the number of hours
of training. While the major airlines are already doing this type
of training, our proposed rule incorporates best practices and
tools so that all operators will use the upgraded standards."
He went on to address
the Pilot Records Improvement Act, saying the FAA recommends that
airlines go beyond the 5 year statutory requirement. "PRIA requires
carriers to obtain a limited waiver from prospective pilots
allowing for the release of information concerning their current
airman certificate and associated type ratings and limitations,
current airman medical certificates, including any limitations, and
summaries of closed FAA legal enforcement actions resulting in a
finding by the Administrator of a violation that was not
subsequently overturned. Although PRIA does not require carriers to
obtain a release from prospective pilots for the entirety of the
pilot’s airman certification file, including Notices of
Disapproval for flight checks for certificates and ratings, FAA
guidance suggests to potential employers that they may find this
additional information helpful in evaluating the pilot. In order to
obtain this additional information, a carrier must obtain a Privacy
Act waiver from the pilot-applicant." The remarks were Babbitt's
first official statements on these issues since being named to his
post 3 weeks ago.
The bottom line is that the FAA recommends that regional carries
request all records pertinent to a pilot's qualifications, but they
must ask for permission from the pilots to check those records and
have not made the practice mandatory. There was some
finger-pointing at the hearing as well. As previously reported by
ANN, acting NTSB Chairman Mark Rosenker told the subcommittee the
safety board has previously recommended that the FAA address the
pilot records issue, as well as several other areas germane to the
crash. Babbitt responded that the NTSB makes hundreds of
recommendations, and that sometimes they require technology that
does not exist or would take years to implement. Still, Babbitt
said, when the FAA does not act on a recommendation, it has "an
obligation to explain to the NTSB and the public why we don't adopt
it."