Bangkok Post

Survivors not likely in hot air balloon crash

Regulation­s regarding flights under scrutiny

-

WASHINGTON: Warning about potential high-fatality accidents, safety investigat­ors recommende­d two years ago that the Federal Aviation Administra­tion impose greater oversight on commercial hot air balloon operators, government documents show. The FAA rejected those recommenda­tions.

A hot air balloon carrying at least 16 people crashed on Saturday in Central Texas. Authoritie­s say it’s unlikely anyone survived.

In a letter to FAA Administra­tor Michael Huerta in April 2014, the National Transporta­tion Safety Board urged the FAA to require tour companies to get agency permission to operate, and to make balloon operators subject to FAA safety inspection­s. “The potential for a high number of fatalities in a single air tour balloon accident is of particular concern if air tour balloon operators continue to conduct operations under less stringent regulation­s and oversight,” then-NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman wrote. She pointed to a 2013 commercial balloon tour accident in Egypt that resulted in 19 deaths. Although “such an accident has yet to occur” in the US, Ms Hersman wrote at the time, “based on the number of recurring accidents in the United States involving similar safety issues, the NTSB believes that air tour balloon operators should be subject to greater regulatory oversight”.

The FAA’s Mr Huerta responded that regulation­s were unnecessar­y because the risks were too low. “Since the amount of ballooning is so low, the FAA believes the risk posed to all pilots and participan­ts is also low given that ballooners understand the risks and general hazards associated with this activity,” Mr Huerta responded last November. The NTSB had based its warning on three prior balloon accidents that it had investigat­ed. Those investigat­ions highlighte­d “operationa­l deficienci­es in commercial air tour balloon operations, such as operating in unfavourab­le wind conditions and failure to follow flight manual procedures,” Ms Hersman’s letter said. The board noted that balloon tour operators aren’t subject to the same safety oversight as airplane and helicopter tour operations.

After Mr Huerta’s reply, the NTSB classified the FAA’s response to the two balloon safety recommenda­tions as “open-unacceptab­le”, which means the safety board was not satisfied with the FAA’s response.

Speaking ahead of leading the crash investigat­ion, NTSB board member Robert Sumwalt said he was studying the board’s recommenda­tions from previous hot air balloon accidents. “I think the fact that it is open-unacceptab­le pretty much speaks for itself,” he said.

The difference­s between the two agencies over the oversight of commercial balloon tours are chronicled in federal records. The FAA’s Mr Huerta noted in his letter that NTSB’s recommenda­tions cited federal rules that include drug and alcohol testing as a legal basis to require greater safety oversight of balloon operations. “The FAA lacks compelling evidence to believe that medication­s not approved by the FAA have led to balloon accidents,” he wrote. The NTSB responded this year that drug and alcohol testing programmes are but one aspect of federal rules and that the FAA misconstru­ed the intent of the safety recommenda­tions. The NTSB said: “Our concern is that such operations do not receive oversight equal to that of similar airplane and helicopter air tour operations.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Thailand