Friday, December 10, 1999
By CHUCK TAYLOR
Special from The Seattle Times
SEATTLE -- An outside study of the National Transportation
Safety Board says the agency is stretched precariously thin by increasingly complex
plane-crash investigations, making it too reliant on the expertise of those with the most
liability -- airlines and aircraft manufacturers.
The report by the Rand Corp., a think tank in Santa
Monica, Calif., describes an agency "at or near the breaking point" in terms of
staff workload. Moreover, a "lack of training, equipment and facilities has placed
the NTSB's ability to independently lead investigations of major commercial aviation
accidents at risk," it says.
The "party system" of investigation, through
which the safety board taps the expertise of involved companies, such as Boeing, and
unions remains necessary, the report says, even though such sources of help have an
interest in the outcome. The rationale is that no one understands a complicated airplane
better than the people who built it.
But the NTSB needs to increase its own expertise and
capability and should consult disinterested experts more often to ensure that parties to
an investigation cannot unduly influence NTSB findings, the study says.
"Rand has found that, at least in certain complex
types of accidents, the party system is potentially unreliable and that party
representatives may be acting to further various interests beyond prevention of a similar
accident," the report says.
"NTSB investigations of major commercial aviation
accidents have become nothing but preparation for anticipated litigation," while the
rules of participation in an investigation supposedly prohibit that, the report says.
The Rand findings are not likely to surprise those in the
aviation safety field. The written report follows months of public discussion of the
evolving study.
Ron Hinderberger, Boeing's director of airplane safety,
denies that his company's participation in crash investigations is motivated by anything
other than a desire "to find out what happened and why."
"Our greatest liability is not the litigation that's
going to occur as a result of an accident, but the safety of the entire fleet," he
said, referring to engineering changes that often result from crash investigations.
Hinderberger agrees, however, with another Rand conclusion
-- that the NTSB staff is overworked.
Thursday's report could be the credible documentation the
safety board needs to get its budget increased.
"I hope this will be a wake-up [call] to the people
in Congress that this is a very important agency, and it holds a very important place in
the safety equation," said Cynthia Lebow, who led the Rand study.
The NTSB's fiscal 1999 budget was $55 million, about the
list price of one single-aisle jetliner.
The agency's challenges, the Rand report said, are not
entirely related to insufficient resources or the tension inherent in the party system.
The NTSB does a poor job of managing what resources it
has, does not keep records in a way that helps prevent accidents, intentionally and
detrimentally insulates itself from the aviation industry, and has archaic investigative
methods, the report says.
The report, based in part on many interviews of those
inside and outside the NTSB, cites no specific cases in which a party's behavior affected
the integrity of an investigation.
However, Rand's Lebow said: "This is a common
problem. Our purpose is not to point a finger at one party or another. It's as common to
the Federal Aviation Administration as it is to an engine manufacturer or an aircraft
manufacturer or an airline."
Copyright © 1999 Bergen Record Corp.
tm