Gilligan: On-Demand Charter Safety Record Is Good
FAA Associate Administrator for Safety Peggy Gilligan and
Air Charter Safety Foundation (ACSF) President James K. Coyne
testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation
Wednesday at a hearing titled "FAA's Oversight of On-Demand
Aircraft Operators." The hearing's focus was on the U.S. Department
of Transportation Inspector General's report issued last July 13,
2009, titled "On-Demand Operators Have Less Stringent Safety
Requirements and Oversight Than Large Commercial Carriers." Part
135 operations include such flights as helicopter sightseeing
tours, Air Ambulance, Offshore Energy support, some cargo and
business jet operations, as well as some smaller scheduled airline
flights and other services.
Peggy Gilligan
"We acknowledge that the accident rate for on-demand operations
is higher than that for 121 scheduled operations, and our safety
professionals are constantly striving to make every air operation
the safest as possible," Gilligan said in her prepared remarks.
"For this reason, we formed an Aviation Rulemaking Committee to
review part 135 regulations, and provide recommendations for
improvements. They provided us with over 100 recommendations in
such areas as training, cabin safety and equipment, the majority of
which we concur with."
But Coyne said the DOT IG's report issued last July failed
to present an accurate picture of the Part 135 regulatory
environment. "The report cited numerous examples of differences
between Part 135 and Part 121 regulations but did not offer
adequate explanation for the reason for the variances and failed to
explain the wide variety of aircraft included in this
classification."
James Coyne
"In an apparent effort to bolster an argument for adding a
dispatcher requirement to Part 135, the IG attempts to assume the
role of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) by
suggesting that if a dispatcher had been present, the 2001 crash of
a Gulfstream III aircraft may have been averted," Coyne stated.
"The primary cause of that accident, as determined following an
extensive NTSB investigation, was operation of the aircraft below
approach minimums in violation of the regulations. Pressure to land
was listed as one of the six contributing factors."
"The ACSF is quite alarmed that the DOT IG, performing
perfunctory review of accidents, believed it was more knowledgeable
and qualified than the NTSB to be able to make this assertion,"
explained Coyne. "Assessing aircraft accidents, determining cause
and suggesting procedural or regulatory changes to prevent similar
future accidents is a role for which the DOT IG is poorly equipped,
and it should be left to the experts at the NTSB."
"The continued efforts of the FAA, NTSB and industry have made
improvements to safety that have elevated it to the high level at
which it stands today," Coyne said. The FAA's advancement of
NextGen, SMS, and continual safety improvements in standardization
and the safety recommendations program are essential components in
improving Part 135 safety."
Gilligan agreed that the Part 135 safety record is good. "The
history of on-demand operations shows that the accident rates have
been trending downward. In addition to targeted safety initiatives,
technical advances such as Global Positioning System (GPS), Glass
Cockpit and Electronic Flight Bag technology have led to much more
reliable aircraft and contributed to the improvements in aviation
safety, as evidenced by a sharp decrease in controlled flight into
terrain (CFIT) and loss of control in flight," she said. "Over the
past ten years, the number of on-demand fatal accidents due to CFIT
has dropped by more than 60 percent and the number of fatal
accidents due to loss of control in flight has dropped by more than
half."
"I want to reemphasize that on-demand operators conduct a wide
variety of commercial operations, meeting diverse needs throughout
the country," Gilligan concluded. "In some instances, it is
appropriate to implement oversight practices or safety requirements
for all on-demand operators. However, simply grouping on-demand
operations together in order to assess risk does not take into
account the true nature of on-demand operations and does not allow
for an effective safety response to the risks of each type of
on-demand operation."