FY08 Aviation Mishap Review

2. Establish ground rules. Since 1995 and the enactment of Public Law 103-411, investigation of aviation accidents under the “operational control” of the Department of the Interior are the responsibility of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). OAS investigators may only participate in NTSB investigations at the invitation of the NTSB Investigator-In-Charge (IIC). As a result of a request or invitation from the NTSB IIC, the OAS investigator (as a representative for the Department of the Interior) is considered to be a “Party to the Investigation” in accordance with 49 CFR Section 831.11. §831.11   Parties to the investigation. All Investigations, regardless of mode. The investigator-in-charge designates parties to participate in the investigation. Parties shall be limited to those persons, government agencies, companies, and associations whose employees, functions, activities, or products were involved in the accident or incident and who can provide suitable qualified technical personnel actively to assist in the investigation. Other than the FAA in aviation cases, no other entity is afforded the right to participate in Board investigations. (2) Participants in the investigation (i.e., party representatives, party coordinators, and/or the larger party organization) shall be responsive to the direction of Board representatives and may lose party status if they do not comply with their assigned duties and activity proscriptions or instructions, or if they conduct themselves in a manner prejudicial to the investigation. (3) No party to the investigation shall be represented in any aspect of the NTSB investigation by any person who also represents claimants or insurers. No party representative may occupy a legal position (see §845.13 of this chapter). Failure to comply with these provisions may result in sanctions, including loss of status as a party. (4) Title 49, United States Code §1132 provides for the appropriate participation of the FAA in Board investigations, and §1131(a)(2) provides for such participation by other departments, agencies, or instrumentalities. The FAA and those other entities that meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section will be parties to the investigation with the same rights and privileges and subject to the same limitations as other parties, provided however that representatives of the FAA need not sign the "Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation" (see paragraph (b) of this section). (b) Aviation investigations. In addition to compliance with the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, and to assist in ensuring complete understanding of the requirements and limitations of party status, all party representatives in aviation investigations shall sign "Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation" immediately upon attaining party representative status. Failure to sign that statement in a timely manner may result in sanctions, including loss of status as a party. Establish ground rules. Since 1995 and the enactment of Public Law 103-411, investigation of aviation accidents under the “operational control” of the Department of the Interior are the responsibility of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). OAS investigators may only participate in NTSB investigations at the invitation of the NTSB Investigator-In-Charge (IIC). As a result of a request or invitation from the NTSB IIC, the OAS investigator (as a representative for the Department of the Interior) is considered to be a “Party to the Investigation” in accordance with 49 CFR Section 831.11. §831.11   Parties to the investigation. All Investigations, regardless of mode. The investigator-in-charge designates parties to participate in the investigation. Parties shall be limited to those persons, government agencies, companies, and associations whose employees, functions, activities, or products were involved in the accident or incident and who can provide suitable qualified technical personnel actively to assist in the investigation. Other than the FAA in aviation cases, no other entity is afforded the right to participate in Board investigations. (2) Participants in the investigation (i.e., party representatives, party coordinators, and/or the larger party organization) shall be responsive to the direction of Board representatives and may lose party status if they do not comply with their assigned duties and activity proscriptions or instructions, or if they conduct themselves in a manner prejudicial to the investigation. (3) No party to the investigation shall be represented in any aspect of the NTSB investigation by any person who also represents claimants or insurers. No party representative may occupy a legal position (see §845.13 of this chapter). Failure to comply with these provisions may result in sanctions, including loss of status as a party. (4) Title 49, United States Code §1132 provides for the appropriate participation of the FAA in Board investigations, and §1131(a)(2) provides for such participation by other departments, agencies, or instrumentalities. The FAA and those other entities that meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section will be parties to the investigation with the same rights and privileges and subject to the same limitations as other parties, provided however that representatives of the FAA need not sign the "Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation" (see paragraph (b) of this section). (b) Aviation investigations. In addition to compliance with the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, and to assist in ensuring complete understanding of the requirements and limitations of party status, all party representatives in aviation investigations shall sign "Statement of Party Representatives to NTSB Investigation" immediately upon attaining party representative status. Failure to sign that statement in a timely manner may result in sanctions, including loss of status as a party.

10. Discussion of a Bell 206B-III dynamic rollover accident near Medora, ND during a feral horse capture mission. Review included a graphic depiction of risk levels over-laid on the corral complex and a discussion of benefits v. risks and change analysis.Discussion of a Bell 206B-III dynamic rollover accident near Medora, ND during a feral horse capture mission. Review included a graphic depiction of risk levels over-laid on the corral complex and a discussion of benefits v. risks and change analysis.

11. Discussion of a Bell 206B-III dynamic rollover accident near Medora, ND during a feral horse capture mission. Review included a graphic depiction of risk levels over-laid on the corral complex and a discussion of benefits v. risks and change analysis.Discussion of a Bell 206B-III dynamic rollover accident near Medora, ND during a feral horse capture mission. Review included a graphic depiction of risk levels over-laid on the corral complex and a discussion of benefits v. risks and change analysis.

22. Discussion of a Bell 206B-III incident-with-potential where the pilot impulsively chose to fly through the spans of the I-5 bridge near Portland, OR. The investigation found virtually total non-compliance with the requirements of 352 DM 1.9 (Aviation Planning). Corrective actions involved having the vendor pilot assist the bureau management in updating their aviation plan.Discussion of a Bell 206B-III incident-with-potential where the pilot impulsively chose to fly through the spans of the I-5 bridge near Portland, OR. The investigation found virtually total non-compliance with the requirements of 352 DM 1.9 (Aviation Planning). Corrective actions involved having the vendor pilot assist the bureau management in updating their aviation plan.

29. Discussion of an AT-802 Single-Engine Air Tanker (SEAT) near Meeker, CO. Numerous prior events that demonstrated the pilot’s risk tolerance and aggressive flying were either not reported or not followed-up on. Discussion of an AT-802 Single-Engine Air Tanker (SEAT) near Meeker, CO. Numerous prior events that demonstrated the pilot’s risk tolerance and aggressive flying were either not reported or not followed-up on.

30. Discussion of an AT-802 Single-Engine Air Tanker (SEAT) near Meeker, CO. Numerous prior events that demonstrated the pilot’s risk tolerance and aggressive flying were either not reported or not followed-up on. Discussion of an AT-802 Single-Engine Air Tanker (SEAT) near Meeker, CO. Numerous prior events that demonstrated the pilot’s risk tolerance and aggressive flying were either not reported or not followed-up on.