AVIATION SAFETY

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1978

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION,

San Diego, Calif.

The committees met at 9:30 a.m., Luce Auditorium, Naval Training Center, Hon. Howard Cannon, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. Today's hearing is a joint hearing of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House Public Works and Transportation Committee, both of which have jurisdiction over aviation matters. Cochairing the hearing today is Congressman Glenn Anderson, who is Chairman of the House Aviation Subcommittee, and myself, Senator Howard Cannon, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and Chairman of the Senate Aviation Subcommittee.

Today is the first day, and only the beginning, of the congressional examination of midair collisions and the systems improvements which will reduce the potential of future tragedies such as the one that occurred in San Diego.

I want to make clear at the beginning that this is not a hearing to find the cause of the San Diego crash. The panel and witnesses will be restricted in the depth to which we can delve into circumstances surrounding that accident at this time. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has the responsibility to determine the precise cause of the PSA accident, and I for one intend to see that they get the proper opportunity to determine that cause without interference or prejudice from this congressional inquiry.

However, the NTSB investigation need not, and must not, delay the congressional responsibility to make a timely investigation of the institutional safety questions raised by the facts of this and similar collisions. Without knowing the precise cause of the PSA accident, the facts leading up to that and other midairs provide a number of systems and procedural questions about contributors to the potential for two airplanes trying to occupy the same space at the same time.

It is sorely inadequate to say that my sympathy and that of the other panel members goes out to the families of those who were killed by this horrible accident. A tragedy like this is felt emotionally by everyone in the country even if they are not directly affected. So we

(1)

are here to do more than say we are sorry. We are here, we hope, to see that those lost lives are remembered with safety improvements which will save many, many more lives in the future.

Clearly, we have a difficult situation with the division of responsibility in this case between the NTSB to determine cause, and the Congress to determined systems improvements to prevent future, similar tragedies. I am certain we can both carry out our separate responsibilities without one prejudicing the other, and I want to ask the press and public to cooperate with us in seeing that these roles, which are in the best interest of aviation safety, are respected.

Personally, I want to see some safety improvements started today. Not rash, cosmetic improvements, but realistic changes in procedures and standards that can help prevent a potential accident tomorrow. I also believe there are a number of long-term improvements, accelerating the development of systems and facilities, that can begin with today.

Friday, October 27, 1978, will not be the end of this inquiry for the Senate Aviation Subcommittee. I plan to introduce next January a bill aimed at, first, the safety issue, and second, the aircraft noise problem, the latter a subject on which legislation has been pioneered by Cochairman Anderson.

Specifically, today, I am interested in questioning witnesses about air traffic control procedures after a conflict alert; the requirement for positive control at more major air carrier airports; the development and installation of both ground-based and airborne collision avoidance systems and what can be done to accelerate the introduction of that safety hardware; and the issue of accelerating the implementation of reliever airports to provide incentives for reducing the mix of general aviation and air carriers at major airports.

I would add that this last issue is one which I find particularly disturbing. There is currently a $2 billion surplus in the airport and airway trust fund, yet virtually every administration since 1970 has fought increasing expenditures from this user-tax revenue source for aviation safety items: Navaids, airport construction, and other equipment. I hope that is all behind us and OMB, DOT, and FAA will help Congress next year to increase substantially the funds for facilities and equipment and airport development. Those monies will not come from the taxpayers but from the $2 billion surplus already collected from aviation users and earmarked for safety items.

Finally, I want to recognize the cooperative effort put into this hearing by Chairman Bizz Johnson, who could not be here today, Chairman Anderson, and my other colleagues from the House Public Works and Transportation Committee. Safety should be and is beyond the bounds of party politics and individual Houses of Congress. I thank the House Members for their cooperation and enthusiastic endorsement of this joint hearing.

We have a number of important witnesses, so I would ask the witnesses and panel members alike to be brief and keep our time constraints in mind.

Congressman Anderson, I would like to call on you for some opening remarks.

OPENING STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE GLENN ANDERSON

Mr. ANDERSON. Thank you, Senator Cannon, for a very fine statement. And a special thank you for the fine leadership and cooperation you have displayed in calling for these hearings. I want to associate myself with your remarks and to reemphasize that we are not here to interfere in any way with the NTSB investigation.

Air disasters are rare, fortunately, but when they occur, the shock waves can be felt far beyond the community most directly affected. Indeed, the tragic accident which occurred here shocked the Nation. Even when all statistics demonstrate that commercial air travel is the safest available means of transportation, we must not content ourselves with the decreasing accident rates, and we cannot afford to believe in the inevitability of such disasters. We must continually seek to minimize the potential for air disasters and to stay ahead of increasing demands on the air traffic system.

I would hope that in the aftermath of this tradegy, we can move ahead toward assuring a safer system rapidly, but deliberately, and without resorting to short-term, quick-fix, bandaid approaches. As Senator Cannon has stated in different words, there is no magic box which will prevent all accidents. However, I am confident there are several things we can be doing now to minimize current problem areas. It is my hope that during these hearings today and our followup investigation, we can explore new traffic procedures, reassess current reliance on the see and be seen concept, look to improve pilot training techniques in scanning for air traffic in their vicinity, improve aircraft lighting, develop a collision avoidance system, and install upgraded and automated navigational aids.

Earlier this year I chaired hearings into the need for FAA to spend more money to purchase radars and other navigation aids and safety equipment. Senator Cannon mentioned a current uncommitted trust fund surplus exceeding $2 billion, yet funding levels for these essential safety programs are decreasing rather than increasing. This must stop, and I look forward to working with you, Senator Cannon, in reversing this distressing trend.

The last point I would make is that we have rapidly, if not regretably, reached the point in aviation where complete freedom of the skies must be reasonably curtailed. While I would not suggest there is a demonstrated need to restrict aircraft use of airports based on the type of plane or purpose of the flight, particularly in certain crowded terminal areas, we have come to realize the need to bring more airspace users into the system. The development of the terminal control area concept has worked well, and this concept should be extended to more areas. I urge Administrator Bond to move in this direction without delay. And a little later when he comes before us, I will bring that point out.

Thank you very much, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you Congressman Anderson.

We have on our congressional panel today Congressman Allen Ertel of Pennsylvania, Congressman Bob Stump of Arizona, Congressman Barry Goldwater of California.

I would like to acknowledge receipt of testimony from Senator Hayakawa. He was originally scheduled to appear before the committee this morning to give his testimony, but was unable to attend due to a conflict of schedule. I'm sorry he can't be here, and I would like to have his testimony included in the hearing record in full.

Our first witness this morning is James King, the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. As I already stated, Mr. King appears under the constraint that he cannot prejudice the NTSB probe by speculating at this time about the cause of the PSA accident. Therefore, to maintain the integrity of the NTSB's investigation, you may please proceed, Mr. King, providing the facts you can about the PSA crash, and I want you to be uninhibited about declining to answer questions which might transgress the bounds of your own accident investigation.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, one of the members does have a statement that he would like to make.

The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Goldwater.

OPENING STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE GOLDWATER

Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. Chairman, I think that much good can result from today's hearing. This Nation enjoys the greatest aviation system in the world, but safety remains a problem, and we've got to come up with some solutions.

I consider it appropriate that these hearings are being held, and I compliment our two very fine chairmen, Senator Cannon and Congressman Anderson.

There are so many facets to aviation safety that it is impossible to explore everything that is relevant to the subject of this hearing in the brief time allotted to us today. But, I want to mention one thing right now that is a burr under my saddle-the aviation trust fund. I want the record to reflect how deeply concerned I am about the direction of the Airport and Airway Development Act since its implementation back in 1970.

Since this is the football season and the political season, let's talk about the biggest "political football" of them all-the ADAP Trust Fund. We've got people in this administration just like we've had people in other administrations who have betrayed the trust of the flying public by holding our aviation trust fund politically captive. The trust fund is not supported from general revenues; it is supported by the people who fly. The flying public pays those little inconvenient taxes that make up the trust fund, and the flying public has a right to expect that those taxes go for the reason that they were created in the first place safety and airport improvement.

Yet, we have seen three administrations use the trust fund as their money. It is our money that they use as a hedge against Federal deficits, deficits that they created in the first place.

Let's look at the record. The Treasury Department reported that the unexpended balance in the trust fund at the end of fiscal 1977 was $3.2 billion. Of that amount, about $1.5 billion was committed for airport projects around the country. But that still leaves $1.7 billion in uncommitted money. Furthermore, some estimates indicated that the uncommitted balance could topple $3 billion at the end of 1980.

Yet, with all this money on hand, safety problems go unnoticed. For instance, of the 1,700 air-carrier runways in the United States, less than 30 percent have precision ILS's, less than 20 percent have grooved runways to prevent skidding, less than 30 percent have approach lights for night landings, and less than 3 percent of the air carrier airports have a wind shear program. We've got more than enough money in the trust fund to alleviate these significant safety problems immediately.

ADAP is up for renewal next year. Mr. Chairman, if we don't accomplish but one thing today, we'll do the American people a favor by setting the stage for establishing a new criterion for the trust fund. That criterion should be to spend the money that is now idle in the trust fund to improve safety.

While we're at it, I want to mention one other thing and that is the utilization of trust fund money for safety features at privately owned/ public use airports. The only way to reduce the number of general aviation aircraft at major air carrier airports is to give general aviation a viable alternative to these larger airports. We can't do this as long as privately owned/public use airports are closing down right and left due to exorbitant taxes, municipal encroachment, and plain neglect. About half of the landing areas in the country are open for public use and approximately 38 percent of them are privately owned. Yet, in the period from 1969 to 1976, the number of such airports decreased by almost 100, and the FAA predicts that the downward trend will continue.

Mr. Chairman, I would just like to close by asking the witnesses that appear before us today to answer some very significant questions that I think need to be addressed not only as they apply to Lindbergh Field and the incident that occurred here but, obviously, as they apply across the country.

For instance, at Lindbergh Field, why wasn't there an ARTS III with an altitude capability ever installed at the airport tower? Why are opposite-approach landings and takeoffs allowed at Lindbergh Field for practice?

Mr. Chairman, I think those are basically the questions that need to be answered as far as this airport is concerned: Why there was not the upgraded radar capability as well as allowing opposite approaches and takeoffs and landings. I would like some of the witnesses to be able to address themselves to these questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Congressman Goldwater. Chairman King, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF JAMES B. KING, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD; ACCOMPANIED BY LLOYD LaGRANGE, OPERATIONS DIVISION; AND WILLIAM LAYNOR, CHIEF, VEHICLE FACTORS DIVISION

Mr. KING. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am James B. King, Chairman of the NTSB. With me today on my right are Mr. Lloyd La Grange from our Operations Division and Mr. William Laynor, Chief of the Board's Vehicle Factors Division.