Subject: Advance distribution of name-redacted ASAP reports to ERC members.
The ERC is responsible for reviewing and investigating events reported under ASAP, a task which can place a significant workload on the respective members of the ERC. In order to facilitate that process, ASAP reports should be distributed in a confidential manner to each member of the ERC in advance of ERC meetings. Only the name of the reporting employee(s) should be removed from a report distributed to ERC members in advance. The policy of name-redaction is intended to prevent personal bias based on ERC member knowledge of the individual from potentially biasing initial evaluation of an event. All other information concerning the event should remain on the report. ASAP is not intended to provide anonymity of the reporter within the ERC, since the ERC may interview the reporter, if it determines that it needs to do so to better understand an event. The fact that reporter identity may be derived from the information that remains on the report is not germane. The ERC, including in particular the FAA member, needs all of the information on the report in order to facilitate timely and complete investigation of the safety event. Note: ASAP policy stipulates that except for the "big five" (reports that involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification), the FAA will not use the report, or the content of the report, in any legal enforcement action against a reporting employee, regardless of whether the report is accepted or excluded from ASAP. In addition, for reports accepted under ASAP, sufficient evidence means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual’s safety-related report. In such cases, except for the "big five", the FAA does not use the information on the report to generate evidence that would not have been obtained in the absence of the employee's ASAP report.
In a nutshell...
Up until now ASAP managers, before distributing ASAP reports to ERC committee members would remove all information that could be used to identify the pilots. Mainly, names, dates, and flight numbers.
The new policy states that all members copies should have all information except for the names. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to be able to figure out the names if they have the flight number and the date. Also the information makes it much easier for the FAA to launch investigations outside the ASAP process. For example if they have your flight number, date, location where the incident took place, they could very easily get the tower tapes pulled.
Probably more crtically, the company will now know who the pilots are that they are deciding issues on. The company will then be able to start it's own rogue investigation for non-sole source reports. This could be a huge issue depending on the company you work for.
ALPA safety has issued a recommendation that no new ASAP MOU's be signed until this issue is resolved with the FAA.
Sadly, I think this is a huge step backward for the FAA and aviation safety. The FAA still hasn't figured out that many pilots fear their companies more that the FAA.
Later
The ERC is responsible for reviewing and investigating events reported under ASAP, a task which can place a significant workload on the respective members of the ERC. In order to facilitate that process, ASAP reports should be distributed in a confidential manner to each member of the ERC in advance of ERC meetings. Only the name of the reporting employee(s) should be removed from a report distributed to ERC members in advance. The policy of name-redaction is intended to prevent personal bias based on ERC member knowledge of the individual from potentially biasing initial evaluation of an event. All other information concerning the event should remain on the report. ASAP is not intended to provide anonymity of the reporter within the ERC, since the ERC may interview the reporter, if it determines that it needs to do so to better understand an event. The fact that reporter identity may be derived from the information that remains on the report is not germane. The ERC, including in particular the FAA member, needs all of the information on the report in order to facilitate timely and complete investigation of the safety event. Note: ASAP policy stipulates that except for the "big five" (reports that involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification), the FAA will not use the report, or the content of the report, in any legal enforcement action against a reporting employee, regardless of whether the report is accepted or excluded from ASAP. In addition, for reports accepted under ASAP, sufficient evidence means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual’s safety-related report. In such cases, except for the "big five", the FAA does not use the information on the report to generate evidence that would not have been obtained in the absence of the employee's ASAP report.
In a nutshell...
Up until now ASAP managers, before distributing ASAP reports to ERC committee members would remove all information that could be used to identify the pilots. Mainly, names, dates, and flight numbers.
The new policy states that all members copies should have all information except for the names. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to be able to figure out the names if they have the flight number and the date. Also the information makes it much easier for the FAA to launch investigations outside the ASAP process. For example if they have your flight number, date, location where the incident took place, they could very easily get the tower tapes pulled.
Probably more crtically, the company will now know who the pilots are that they are deciding issues on. The company will then be able to start it's own rogue investigation for non-sole source reports. This could be a huge issue depending on the company you work for.
ALPA safety has issued a recommendation that no new ASAP MOU's be signed until this issue is resolved with the FAA.
Sadly, I think this is a huge step backward for the FAA and aviation safety. The FAA still hasn't figured out that many pilots fear their companies more that the FAA.
Later
