FlightCentral

Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) operations are unique due to the emergency nature of the flight. The FAA, operators, and the medical community all play a vital role in promoting a positive safety culture that ensures the safety of passengers, flight crews, and medical professional on these flights.

In August 2004, the FAA initiated a government and industry partnership that reduced HEMS accidents in 2005 and 2006. While the total number of accidents declined, fatal accidents increased sharply to eight in 2008. There were two fatal accidents in 2009 and two so far in 2010. While the FAA is pursuing new rules that support National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations, the agency has aggressively promoted significant short-term safety initiatives that do not require rulemaking. The FAA's has immediate focus has been:

• Encourage risk management training to flight crews so that they can make more analytical decisions about whether to launch on a flight.
• Better training for night operations and responding to inadvertent flight into deteriorating weather conditions.
• Promote technology such as night vision goggles (NVGs), terrain awareness and warning systems (TAWS) and radar altimeters.
• Provide airline-type FAA oversight for operators. Identify regional FAA HEMS operations and maintenance inspectors to help certificate new operators and review the operations of existing companies.

Background

There are approximately 840 emergency medical service helicopters operating today, most of which operate under Part 135 rules.

The HEMS fatal accident rate is 1.18 per 100,000 hours. The fatal accident rate for all general aviation and air taxi flights is 1.13 per 100, 000 hours. It is 1.00 and 1.94 for other turbo-shaft and all piston helicopters respectively. The number of HEMS accidents nearly doubled between the mid-1990s and the HEMS industry's rapid growth period from 2000 to 2004. There were nine accidents in 1998, compared with 15 in 2004, five of which resulted in 17 fatalities. The main causes were controlled flight into terrain (CFIT), inadvertent operation into instrument meteorological conditions and pilot spatial disorientation/lack of situational awareness in night operations. Safety improvements were needed.

The Role of the Medical Community

Aviation safety decisions are separate from medical decisions. The decision to conduct a flight with a patient on board does not mean that flight safety can be compromised in any way. Once the medical need for air transportation is determined, it is up to the HEMS operator to make the air transportation decision based on pre-flight factors such as weather conditions, maintenance, and crew readiness.

FAA Oversight

The FAA inspects HEMS operators, but has prompted changes beyond inspection and surveillance. Rather, the FAA uses a risk-based system that includes the initiatives outlined below which focus on the leading causes of the HEMS accidents.

FAA Actions

• In August 2004, the FAA established a task force to review and guide government and industry efforts to reduce HEMS accidents.
• On January 14, 2005, the FAA hosted a meeting with HEMS industry representatives to discuss safety issues and gain feedback. Representatives from the Association of Air Medical Services, Helicopter Association International, the National EMS Pilots Association and several operators attended.
• Decision-making skills: On January 28, 2005, the FAA published a notice providing guidance for safety inspectors to help operators review pilot and mechanic decision-making skills, procedural adherence, and crew resource management practices. It includes both FAA and industry intervention strategies (Notice 8000.293 Helicopter Emergency Medical Service Operations). These principles were reinforced in the "Safety Alert for Operators" (SAFO) 06001 issued on January 28, 2006.
• Risk assessment programs: On August 1, 2005, the FAA issued guidance to inspectors promoting improved risk assessment and risk management tools and training to all flight crews, including medical staff (Notice 8000.301 Operational Risk Assessment Programs for Helicopter Emergency Medical Services).
• Air Medical Resource Management (AMRM): On September 22, 2005, the FAA issued guidance to HEMS operators establishing minimum guidelines for Air Medical Resource Management (AMRM) training. The training focuses on pilots, maintenance technicians, flight nurses, flight paramedics, flight physicians, medical directors, specialty team members (such as neonatal teams), communications specialists (dispatchers), program managers, maintenance staff, operational managers, support staff, and any other air medical team members identified by specific needs (AC No. 00-64 Air Medical Resource Management).
• Special emphasis inspection program: On September 27, 2005, the FAA issued revised standards for inspection and surveillance of HEMS operators, with special emphasis on operations control, risk assessment, facilities and training, especially at outer locations away from the certificated holder's principal base on operations.
• FAA establishes new office: In December 2005, the FAA's Flight Standards Service's Air Transportation Division established the new Commuter, On Demand, and Training Center Branch (AFS-250) to work Part 135 and Part 142 policy issues. The FAA has begun hiring aviation safety inspectors with specific "helicopter only" experience in order to keep pace with industry growth.
• Loss of Control (LOC) and Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT): On January 24, 2006 the FAA issued a handbook bulletin to inspectors describing acceptable models for LOC and CFIT avoidance Programs. The bulletin provides inspectors with information to provide to HEMS operators for developing LOC/CFIT accident avoidance programs and clarifies existing guidance (HBAT 06-02 Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) Loss of Control (LOC) and Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) Accident Avoidance Programs).
• HBAT 06-01 & OpSpec A021: On January 24, 2006 the FAA issued revised guidance to inspectors regarding HEMS OpSpecs, amending the Visual Flight Rule (VFR) weather requirements for HEMS operations, including consideration of the adverse affects of reduced ambient lighting at night and mountainous terrain (HBAT 06-01 Helicopter Emergency Services; OpSpec A021/A002 Revisions).
• Guidance to Part 142 training centers: On February 24, 2006, the FAA issued a Notice to Training Center Program Managers assigned to oversee Part 142 training Centers advising them of recent changes to HEMS operations and training standards (Notice 8000.317, Operator Training Provided by Part 142 Training Centers for Helicopter Emergency Medical Services.)
• Public HEMS operators: On March 2, 2006, the FAA issued guidance to inspectors on the surveillance and oversight of public aircraft operators for HEMS operations (Notice 8000.318 Public Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) Operations).
• Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems (TAWS): On June 27, 2006, at the FAA's request, RTCA, Inc. established a Special Committee to develop Helicopter Terrain Awareness and Warning System (H-TAWS) standards. These standards will be used to develop FAA requirements for H-TAWS systems, installation and operations.
• Aeronautical Information Manual: In August 2006, the FAA revised the Aeronautical Information manual (AIM) to provide guidance to pilots on assessing ambient lighting for night visual flight rule (VFR) operations and for off-airport/heliport landing zone operations.
• Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC): The FAA is currently reviewing the 140 recommendations made by the Part 135/125 ARC. We have begun rulemaking on many issues which pertain to HEMS operations and training. Examples of the areas considered for change are: weather requirements for IFR flight, medical personnel as crew, IFR landing minimums, instrument flight competency, etc.
• International Helicopter Safety Team (IHST): The helicopter industry has formed the IHST to gather data and draft strategies to reduce helicopter accidents globally by 80 percent by 2015. The effort is modeled on the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) which has achieved a significant reduction in the commercial fatal accident rate in the United States. Members include the FAA, European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), Transport Canada, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and industry representatives.
• Surveillance of large HEMS operators: The FAA's Flight Standards Service established a task group to focus on the certification and surveillance requirements for large HEMS operators that support diverse medical programs throughout the United States. The group's findings resulted in the increase in the cadre of inspectors assigned to HEMS operations.
• Operational Control Centers: On May 5, 2008, the FAA's Flight Standards Service issued an advisory circular (AC 120-96) highlighting the "best practices" for use by HEMS operators in establishing their control centers and training their specialists.
• FAA/Association of Air Medical Service (AAMS) Safety Meeting: On July 11, 2008, 80 representatives from the FAA and HEMS operators met in response to recent accidents. Discussions focused on night operations in poor or deteriorating weather, risk management, complacency, the agency's policies on the use of Night Vision Goggles (NVGs), as well as helicopter shopping.
• Notice to FAA Inspectors: On January 12, 2009, the FAA issued a notice (Notice 8900.63) to agency inspectors with oversight of HEMS operators to find out how many operators have adopted FAA-recommended best practices. With reports in from all of the 74 operators surveyed, the percentages that have adopted various programs are:
  • Decision-making skills and risk assessment programs - 94 percent
  • Response to FAA guidance on Loss of Control (LOC) and Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) avoidance - 89 percent
  • Integration of operation control center - 89 percent
  • Installation of Flight Data Recorders and devices that can re-create a flight. - 11 percent
  • TAWS equipage - 41 percent
  • Use of radar altimeters - 89 percent

Based on these results, the FAA will determine next steps.

Operations Specifications

On November 14, 2008, the FAA published a Notice in the Federal Register that advised operators of important mandatory changes to HEMS flights. The agency also included a provision to encourage the use of NVGs and Terrain Awareness Warning Systems. Consistent with NTSB recommendations, all HEMS operators will comply with Part 135 weather minimums, including repositioning flights with medical crew onboard. The FAA is also providing greater access to weather reporting facilities, and requiring the flight crew to determine a minimum safe altitude and obstacle clearance prior to each flight. The compliance date is no later than February 22, 2009.

Weather

In March 2006, the FAA and the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research hosted a weather summit in Boulder, Colorado to identify the HEMS-specific issues related to weather products and services. Attendees explored possible regulatory improvements, weather product enhancements, and operational fixes specific to HEMS operations. Attendees included the National Weather Service, National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Helicopter Association International, American Helicopter Society International, Association of Air Medical Services, National EMS Pilots Association, National Association of Air Medical Communications Specialists, manufacturers, and many operators.

As a result, the FAA funded the development and implementation of a graphical flight planning tool for ceiling and visibility assessment along direct flights in areas with limited available surface observations capability. It improves the quality of go/no-go decisions for HEMS operators. The tool was fielded in November 2006. The response from the users continues to be very favorable (Notice 8000.333, HEMS use of the aviation digital data service experimental HEMS tool).

Night Vision Goggles

The FAA has a solid record of facilitating safety improvements and new technologies for EMS helicopters, including certification of Night Vision Goggles (NVGs). Since 1994, the FAA has worked 28 projects or design approvals called Supplemental Type Certificates (STCs) for installation of NVGs on helicopters. This number includes EMS, law enforcement and other types of helicopter operations. Of the 28 projects, the FAA has approved approx. 15 NVGs STC's for EMS helicopters. The FAA initiated and wrote (in coordination with RTCA) the minimum standards for NVGs/cockpit lighting.

Technical Standard Order (TSO) C164 was published on September 30, 2004 referencing RTCA document DO 275 Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS), published October 12, 2001. The FAA has hosted workshops to help applicants work with the FAA to obtain NVG certification. One set of NVGs costs approx. $7,000 and an operator must carry multiple sets per flight. Certification is just one step. The operator must also have an FAA-approved training program for using NVGs.

The FAA has revised the NVG guidance in the Operations Inspectors Handbook, Order 8900.1. Produced using considerable industry input, the revision includes the establishment of a cadre of NVG national resource inspectors (Notice 8000.349, Night Vision Imaging Systems).

While the FAA encourages use of NVGs where appropriate, they are not a one-size-fits-all magic bullet. Flying at night is not inherently dangerous if rules and procedures are followed. In fact, many operators who do not use NVGs have never had an accident at night.

Flight Data Recorders

Flight Data Recorders (FDRs) are not required for HEMS operations. FDRs offer value in any accident investigation by providing information on aircraft system status, flight path and attitude. The weight and cost of FDR systems are factors. Research and development is required to determine the appropriate standards for FDR data and survivability in the helicopter environment, which typically involves substantially lower speeds and altitudes than airplanes. Funds are currently best invested in preventive training.

However, the FAA is considering alternatives to expensive and heavy airliner-style FDRs, especially in light of the relatively low-impact forces in most helicopter accidents. By establishing a standard appropriate to the helicopter flight envelope, the FAA may be able to make meaningful future FDR rulemaking efforts.

Terrain Awareness Warning Systems

The FAA supports the voluntary implementation of Terrain Awareness Warning Systems (TAWS) and did consider the possibility of including rotorcraft in the previous TAWS rulemaking process. Through this process, however, the FAA concluded that there are a number of issues unique to VFR helicopter operations that must be resolved before the FAA considers mandating the use of TAWS in this area, such as modification of the standards used for these systems. For example, helicopters typically operate at lower altitudes so TAWS could potentially generate false alerts and "nuisance" warnings that could negatively impact the crew's response to a valid alert. TAWS use in HEMS operations required study of TAWS interoperability within the lower altitude HEMS environment, and possible modification of TAWS system standards.

At the FAA's request, RTCA, Inc. established a Special Committee (SC-212) to develop H-TAWS standards for use in future FAA rulemaking projects. The final report was delivered to RTCA in March 2008. Those standards were subsequently reviewed by the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service and on December 17, 2008, the FAA issued Technical Standards Order (TSO) C-194 to standardize the manufacture of H-TAWS within the industry.

HEMS Rulemaking Project

The FAA recognizes that voluntary compliance alone is not enough to ensure safe flight operations throughout an industry. In April 2009, the FAA started a formal rulemaking project to address many of the HEMS initiatives and best practices found in advisory circulars, orders and notices issued over the last several years, as well as the November 2008 revisions to HEMS operating specifications. The proposed rule will consider issues such as:

• HTAWS for air ambulance helicopters
• Radar altimeters for all part 135 helicopters
• Operational control center for helicopter air ambulance operators with 10+ aircraft
• Part 135 weather minima for all legs of a helicopter air ambulance flight
• Implementation of a Risk Management program
• Flight data monitoring devices that perform the function of a CVR/DFDR on helicopter air ambulance aircraft
• Requiring pilots in commercial operations to demonstrate, annually, recovery from inadvertent flight into Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC)
• Change terminology to "helicopter air ambulance" in lieu of "helicopter EMS" to remove reference to "emergency" regarding the air transportation flight.
• Facilitating more IFR operations by permitting helicopter air ambulance operators to continue IFR approaches into hospitals or airports using weather reports from nearby stations rather than requiring weather reports specifically from the destination location.

Remarks as prepared for delivery

What a pleasure it is for our FAA team to meet with our partners in the European Aviation Safety Agency and from around the world. We've been very fortunate over the years to develop a mutually beneficial partnership that's built on our common values and a shared commitment to maintaining and continuously improving aviation safety - whenever and wherever an aircraft is in the sky. So it's appropriate that we focus on "Global Safety Management: Evolving a Common Culture" during this conference.

By working together, industry and governments have made aviation the safest way to travel. But the real purpose of this conference is to find ways to work together to make aviation even safer. This partnership and meetings like this are our best hope to establish seamless and consistent standards of safety around the world. And working together and sharing expertise is the only way forward.

In that spirit, I want to take a minute to talk about the status of the FAA reauthorization bill. Obviously, this is a hot topic throughout the aviation community. So I'd like to update you on what's going on.

As you may know, the House of Representatives passed its FAA reauthorization bill last year, and they updated their version on March 19 to include the Flight Safety Bill. Meanwhile the Senate unanimously approved its reauthorization bill on March 22. Because several significant differences exist in the two versions, the bills will have to be reconciled before the reauthorization can go to the President to be signed into law. So, right now, we all just have to wait to see what the final bill holds.

It's important to note, though, how something like the FAA reauthorization bill has a ripple effect throughout our industry. It speaks to how interdependent our global aviation community is.

Our industry is really made up of an international network of networks, and if one network in our international community falls short in its commitment to safety, the integrity of the entire international airspace system is compromised. On the other hand, improvements in aviation safety in any one part of the world benefit aviation across the globe.

The shared challenge for governments and industry is to protect our connections and find mutually beneficial solutions to the everyday problems we face.

That's why creating a common safety culture is so important.

Perhaps the best recent example of this can be seen in how air travel was affected by a volcanic eruption in Iceland in March. The ash spewing from the volcano caused countless cancellations, delays, and even airport closures. By some estimates, airlines lost over $1.7 billion in revenue and canceled flights exceeded 100,000.

However, our charge as stewards of aviation safety was to ensure safety was never compromised. Fortunately, we're part of an international community. So we were able to share information, ideas, best practices and lessons learned with each other to determine our individual approaches to maintaining safety throughout this ordeal. And when our community realized the need for harmonization, the International Civil Aviation Organization pulled all of us together to work the problem.

This is just one example of something happening in one part of the world having implications on our global airspace system.

As interdependencies among nations increase and as we continue to address the shared challenges we face, we need to understand that the initiatives we implement and the data we share have an impact not only where we live but everywhere airplanes fly.

In the spirit of that partnership, I'd like to take a few minutes to share with you some important changes and initiatives the FAA is undertaking to improve our safety culture.

To meet future demand and avoid gridlock in the sky and at airports, we've begun the process of completely transforming our national airspace system. The Next Generation Air Transportation System - or NextGen - is the blueprint for changing our National Airspace System from a World War II-era ground-based navigation, radar and voice communication system to a modern satellite and performance-based system. This is a huge undertaking that will integrate policy, technology and procedures to revolutionize operation in the NAS.

This can only be accomplished through a proactive approach to safety management, supported by a strong safety culture in which every member of the team is empowered and equipped to ensure safety is never compromised and always continuously improved. That's why we're implementing a robust Safety Management System or SMS that will use a process-oriented approach to safety to proactively identify, manage, and prioritize areas of risk and promote the growth and sustainment of a safety culture. When fully implemented, SMS will enable us to adapt to changes and continuously improve safety in the air transportation system. And our work is well underway.

We've identified areas where we can begin to implement SMS requirements. We've created training for new employees on basic SMS principles, and we've increased safety awareness for all employees through improved safety communications.

That's just the beginning though. We've also created a broad database of incident data to ensure a strong reporting culture.

As part of our overall safety goals, we implemented the Air Traffic Safety Action Program - or ATSAP - a system for our air traffic controllers to voluntarily identify and report safety and operational concerns. Patterned after similar programs at US Airlines, the collected information is reviewed and analyzed to facilitate early detection and improve awareness of operational deficiencies and adverse trends. The information specified in employee reports is used to identify the root causes and determine appropriate remedial actions which are then monitored for effectiveness. This process promotes collaboration between employee work groups and management for the early identification of hazards. It also maintains a proactive approach regarding safety concerns and corrective action recommendations. The program is non-punitive, and serves as an additional layer in our safety culture.

The FAA's Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing program or ASIAS is another tool we're using to improve our margin of safety. Through ASIAS, we're able to gather crucial safety information from a number of data sources. Then using sophisticated analysis tools, we're able to analyze that data to detect trends, identify precursors, and assess risks.

The significance of this program cannot be overstated because monitoring the safety of the NAS is critical to rapidly finding and correcting risks as changes to operations are made with NextGen.

ATSAP and ASIAS are just two examples of specific tools we're using to continually update and improve our approach to managing safety.

We also have specific NextGen operational capabilities that address key risk areas. For example, Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast or ADS-B enables pilots of equipped planes to see airborne traffic, weather conditions and flight-restricted areas on their cockpit displays, allowing them to avoid potential dangers. We also anticipate that advances in tracking and managing operations on airport surfaces will make runway collisions less likely.

As we implement these changes, we understand safety could easily be overlooked or compromised in the process, but we're committed to ensuring that does not happen. As proof of our commitment to safety, we released the AVS Work Plan for NextGen last month. This work plan explains how my organization supports NextGen, and lays out major deliverables the Aviation Safety workforce will contribute toward the successful implementation of NextGen. The bottom line is: our focus is on ensuring every new technology we utilize, every new advancement we implement, not only maintains but also pushes the boundaries of managing safety.

So you can rest assured, the FAA is committed to expanding our Quality Management Systems; implementing an integrated Safety Management System; continuously improving our safety culture; creating successful, enduring partnerships; strengthening the global aviation infrastructure; building and maintaining bilateral and multilateral relationships; and negotiating agreements that improve aviation safety and efficiency worldwide.

I'm really proud of opportunities like this - opportunities to build better partnerships with members of our global aviation community - opportunities to ensure the safety of air travel around the world.

The globalization of aviation has and will continue to lead to new challenges for us all, and if we're going to keep pace with increasing demand while maintaining our highest standards of safety, we have to work together.

Certainly, what we do here this week and in the future will play a key role in advancing aviation safety worldwide.

On behalf of the FAA team, I look forward to working with you this week.

Good morning. Thank you for such a gracious welcome. I can't tell you how excited I am to be here and to get to talk with you about what's going on in the FAA.

I always joke that the FAA and our partners in industry are a big family, and just like in any family, everything isn't always going to be smooth sailing. There's going to be some hiccups. That's OK, though, because at the end of the day, we all want the same thing - we're all working toward the same goal - a better, safer, more efficient national airspace system. So even though we may not always see eye to eye on everything, as in any family, we still have a mutual respect for each other. So I want to thank you for recognizing the FAA with a NATA Industry Excellence Award in

You honored the South Florida FSDO-19 with your FAA Customer Service Excellence Award for being the FAA facility with the highest degree of customer service and for elevating the quality of interaction between the FAA and aircraft maintenance and repair facilities, Part 135 certificate holders, airport service organizations, and flight schools. Thank you for honoring the great work these folks do, day in and day out.

I also applaud your decision to honor Arlynn McMahon, the 2009 Flight Instructor of the Year, with the Excellence In Pilot Training Award for her outstanding contributions to safety, professionalism, leadership, and excellence in the field of pilot training. As you obviously know, you could not find a stronger advocate for scenario-based training than Arlynn. So I thank you for recognizing her outstanding contribution to pilot training.

These are just a couple of examples of the great work our team's doing, but the thing is, as much as I love my job - as much as I love to work for the FAA - as proud as I am of our safety record - I also know we're not perfect. And as in any family, NATA was kind enough to let us know we can do better when you released the results of a study in October that indicated the FAA is not always consistent in the way we interpret regulations.

This led Congress to commission the Government Accountability Office to conduct its own review, which basically came out to be, "Yep, you guys at the FAA have got to do a better job at standardization." So that's what we're trying to do.

Now I want you to know that it's OK. We're not mad. The bottom line is we weren't living up to your expectations. So you called us on it. And as much as it irritates me that it took something like that to happen before we made necessary changes - the truth is we weren't meeting the mark. And when that happens, we need to know about it. We need to be held accountable, and we need to do better.

So, yes, we have issues with standardization, but we're working on them. And it's a work in progress, but we are making progress. I'm reminded of a quote I read once on someone's desk. It said, "I do the best I can with who I am and what I know, and when I know better, I do better." Well, we know better. So now we're going to do better - we're doing better.

Now that we've addressed that, let's talk about what's going on in the FAA. I bet you're especially interested in a couple of important issues, and I want to address them right off the bat.

First, let's talk about the reauthorization bill. It seems like everywhere I go lately, people ask me, "What's the deal with the FAA Reauthorization?" Obviously, this is a hot topic in the aviation community. So I'd like to take a minute to update you on what's going on.

As you may know, the House passed its FAA reauthorization bill last year, and they updated their version on March 19 to include the Flight Safety Bill. Meanwhile the Senate unanimously approved its bill on March 22. Because there's some significant differences in the two versions, the bills will have to be reconciled before the reauthorization can go to President Obama to be signed into law. So, right now, we all just have to wait to see what the final bill holds. I can tell you, though, that Peggy's spent a lot of time on the Hill lately. But the bottom line is: we're in a holding pattern just like all of you are.

Now let's talk about the Part 135 ARC. This is a huge elephant, and the only way to eat it is one small bite at a time. So that's what we're doing. We're writing a lot of new regulations, and we're doing it one step at a time. I can tell you that we've reviewed all of the recommendations that came out of the rulemaking committee, and we're currently involved in rulemaking on air ambulance and commercial helicopter operations and crew resource management training in Part 135. We're on target to publish the air ambulance notice of proposed rulemaking - the NPRM - sometime later this summer. And as for Crew Resource Management Training, the comment period for the NPRM closed at the end of July, and we expect the final rule to be published this fall.

Now I know I just gave you the CliffsNotes version of where we are with these issues. So Jim Ballough's going to give you more details later in this session.

We're also in the process of reviewing comments we received about the advance NPRM for new pilot certification requirements for air carrier operations. We asked for feedback on our proposal to enhance traditional training programs for air carrier crewmember and dispatcher training. And we received a lot of feedback from the public - which we appreciate - and we're in the process of sifting through it now. So what I want you to know is - we recognize these are all important issues, and we're focused on getting it right.

I just want you to know that we get it. We understand that any change in regulations has a ripple effect throughout the industry. That's why it's especially important when we look at implementing new regulations that we make sure we're not just creating more work or having a knee-jerk reaction.

Part of our charge as stewards of safety is to make sure we're doing what's right, not what's easy - that we're making changes that will truly improve safety and efficiency and promote professionalism. That's why rulemaking is such a slow and deliberate process.

But we often hear complaints about how slow we are. People are always asking me, "Why can't you guys be any faster?" And the bottom line is we'd like to be faster, but we're much more concerned with getting it right. We owe that to you and to all of our stakeholders. So that's what we're doing.

As a matter of fact, we've taken on that sort of approach across the board. We're focusing on working smarter and making data-driven decisions that lead to meaningful and measurable progress. But no one ever said this would be easy. We have to make sure that in everything we do - every change we make - safety is always maintained and when possible, improved but never, ever compromised

To do this, we have to capitalize on advancements in computer systems and feedback mechanisms that can help us better manage risk. We're talking about smart systems and smart airplanes that can download real time information - not just when something bad happens but as warning signs first begin to present themselves and are brought to our attention by a system that works. This gives us the chance to be proactive rather than reactive, and we're creating a Safety Management System - an SMS - to do just that.

As the current air transportation system stretches the capabilities of our current aviation safety system, we need a new approach to our safety management and oversight problems. That's where SMS comes into play.

SMS is a systematic and continuous management process that's based on proactive identification of hazards and analyses of their risk, and it's the catalyst to increased safety and more efficient oversight. SMS is quickly becoming the standard for aviation around the world, and our strategy is to define an oversight methodology that takes into account industry input and works to harmonize with our global partners.

Certainly, this is more important than ever. We're currently undergoing change at a speed never seen in our industry. By 2023, air traffic is expected to almost double to one-billion passengers. That means we'll have more aircraft and more passengers in the sky than ever before. So we're working with you and our industry partners around the world to increase the safety and capacity of the global civil aviation system.

That's where our Next Generation Air Transportation System comes into play. By focusing on safety, aircraft centric operations, and aircraft equipage, NextGen is the catalyst for modernizing our air transportation system, transitioning it from a ground based system of air traffic control to a satellite based system of air traffic management. NextGen will also shift certain decision making responsibility from the ground to the cockpit.

This is a huge undertaking, and I don't think I'd be exaggerating if I said the future of aviation is tied to the success of NextGen. As we figure out how to meet increasing demand and avoid gridlock in the sky and at our airports, NextGen will give pilots the ability to access real-time information about their location and the locations of neighboring aircraft - which will allow pilots to take more direct routes and fly closer to other aircraft without increasing safety risks.

This is a big deal, and it's going to take a team effort - every one in this room - everyone in this industry - working together to do their part. That's why I'm so happy to announce that last month we released the AVS Work Plan for NextGen. This work plan explains how the Office of Aviation Safety supports NextGen, and lays out major deliverables that the Aviation Safety workforce will contribute toward the successful implementation of NextGen.

It's important for everyone to know that this is not Aviation Safety's NextGen implementation plan. The FAA already has an implementation plan, and that's what we're all following. Our work plan - the AVS work plan - sets out for our organization what we're already doing and what we're going to do to support the FAA's implementation plan. What we're going to do to fill in our pieces of the puzzle that make up the big NextGen picture. And our work is well underway.

Still, we have a lot to do in a short time, and we're all in this together. It's going to take all of us working together to make sure we meet these mounting challenges while ensuring aviation remains the safest form of transportation available. And I know that's a commitment we all share.

Certainly, this is a critical time for our entire industry. The last decade was difficult on economies and industries around the world, and we were all impacted. But what you do is too important and it matters too much to our economy to ever risk becoming obsolete. So make no mistake about it, you are a critical part of our industry.

I read that within 24 hours of the devastating earthquake in Haiti, this community developed a database of available aircraft and started transporting medical staff, relief personnel and supplies to the devastated area. No one had to ask. You just stepped up, and you did whatever you could to help.

As we create new regulations, implement new processes, and work to keep pace with innovation and technology, I know we can count on your community to once again step up and help lead the way.

Like I said, it's going to take a team effort. We're going to have to embrace accountability, professionalism, excellence, teamwork, partnership, and collaboration. We're going to have to share ideas, implement best practices, and lessons learned. We have to be the pacesetter in innovation - because we want to determine the speed and the direction of the plane, not chase after it once it's already lifted off. This isn't going to be easy, but if we're committed and if we work together, it will be worthwhile.

I look forward to continuing to work with you. Thank you for inviting me here today.

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Good morning, and thank you, Randy [Jones]. It's not often that I get to make this kind of observation, but I feel like Mike Ditka back when he was coaching the Bears. After a game they won by a bunch of touchdowns, something like 56-3, he was going through a laundry list of what went wrong. As the story goes, one of his players whispered, "Didn't we win?"

My message to you today is similar to Ditka's, in spirit, anyway: One, the safety record for rotorcraft is absolutely headed in the right direction. And two, that's absolutely not good enough. We need to keep going in the right direction.

When it comes to safety, phrases like "headed in the right direction" are nice to hear, but this is an industry that is built on the expectation of perfection. But being realistic: Our accidents make the front page. We're expected to reach the destination, and we're expected to reach it safely. There's no middle ground. In my book, "close enough" is never close enough. I think we'd all agree that the flying public feels that way too.

The helicopter industry has a good safety story to tell. There's a knee-jerk tendency to focus on headlines and we've had our share of those. But despite the handful of highly visible accidents. Over the past five years, the number of fatal helicopter accidents has decreased by 22 percent compared to the preceding five years. Even better, the fatal accident rate has decreased by more than 40 percent.

But it's clear to me that in this business, snapshots aren't enough. The total number of fatal accidents is around 22-25 per year, we want and expect the accident rate to continue to improve - and zero would be a wonderful goal.

I find this particularly remarkable given the challenging range of missions you're asked to fly and the challenging environments you're asked to fly them in. Whenever you're watching one of those reality shows about extraordinary jobs, there's typically a segment on someone who needs a helicopter. The guys who handle the high-power lines over a ravine. The people - including some who work for the FAA - who do maintenance work on mountaintops. And as far as I'm concerned, the people who ferry back and forth to the rigs are in that class as well.

Personally, I've been mostly fixed wing all my life, but I think that in order to understand the issues in helicopter safety, people have to first understand that we use helicopters in situations where no other vehicle can do the job. You provide high speed transportation of the injured or sick from anywhere. There are applications like construction, wildlife and seismic work sight-seeing, and urban transportation. In each of those venues, people choose to fly helicopters because no other vehicle, no plane, train, automobile, can get the job done the way it needs to get done.

But your ability to go virtually anywhere also means that there is little infrastructure to support the operation.

In my time as an airline pilot, I flew into airports that were well established, well maintained and well equipped. That's what this system is known for. I flew on airways that were checked and maintained. That's a life that many of you would gladly adopt. When you fly to a clearing to drop off a biologist, or land on a road intersection to pick up an injured motorist, or reload your hopper between swaths at a farmer's clearing you are likely the first person to ever land there. As a matter of course, you encounter a lack of weather information, lack of terrain and traffic information, and a lack of air traffic services, particularly in remote areas.

There are a smorgasbord of industries in which you fly, each with different operating environments and different challenges. Air Tours & Part 91 Sightseeing; EMS; Search & Rescue; Off-Shore Energy; Electronic News Gathering; Surveillance; Urban Air Taxi; Heavy Lift; Fire Fighting, Agricultural & Other Applications; and even the person who just wants to fly around.

The simple fact is that on average helicopter operations are dominated by more challenging missions and environments than any other category.

Many of these missions require low-level, VFR flight, flight that's complicated by challenging environments. And low-level flight does not always offer an envelope of altitude and speed to reach a safe landing area if something goes wrong. You encounter more obstacles and more traffic at these low levels which makes flying and landing all the more challenging.

I think that the helicopter community deserves real credit for pushing the safety needle as far as you have. This industry has been very active in the International Helicopter Safety Team, which is doing for helicopters what CAST or the Commercial Aviation Safety Team did for the airlines. Because of their work, we've been able to find common threads to the accidents. By improving pilot decision-making training and better access to helicopter simulators, by adopting safety management practices and improving maintenance practices, we know we can improve the vertical flight safety record. These are insights coming to us from the International Helicopter Safety Team. The team brings together our safety partners from the European Union, Brazil, Canada, India, the Middle East, Japan and Australia. They're looking to identify and implement ways to reduce the helicopter accident rate by 80 percent by 2016. That's a daunting number, a big challenge, but we set a similar goal in 1997 for the commercial fatal accident rate and government and industry worked together to achieve great improvements. I, for one, am confident we'll get there under the team's leadership.

Improving your safety often starts with making use of the tools put in place by others. If you haven't already checked out the toolkits at www.IHST.org, you're missing a terrific resource that comes free of charge.

You'll find information on how to design, establish and maintain effective SMS, risk-management, flight data monitoring, and training programs. To give credit where it is due, all of this came from you.

In addition to the practices and procedures I've just mentioned, the FAA and the industry both deserve some credit for getting ADS-B into the field, particularly in Alaska through Capstone and in the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf is a success story for ADS-B. The ADS-B system reached initial operating capability at Houston Center last December for operations in the Gulf. Over the first month of operations there were 209 ADS-B IFR flights on 12 equipped aircraft in the Gulf of Mexico. Right now, we're seeing hard benefits from ADS-B being implemented in the Gulf. For example, equipped helicopters are saving about 96 pounds of fuel per ADS-B IFR flight. Based on 12 equipped aircraft, we're seeing about 20,000 pounds of fuel saved every 30 days. The FAA has also seen an approximate operational time savings of 10 percent in IFR operations. Any one of those numbers is a very good day. If you're hoping to take full advantage of everything that NextGen has to offer, you must equip. For example, you'll be getting better situationalawareness, onboard collision avoidance and cockpit weather. If you equip, you'll have a lot more information available to you.

On another front, I'm pleased with our regulatory efforts, particularly in the air tour industry and in helicopter EMS. The fatal accident rate among air tour operators in Hawaii is down by more than half since the air tour rule went into effect. Even a cursory review of accidents before and after that rule has to conclude that it's been a success.

Despite all this, we still face some challenges. HEMS operations suffered a spike in fatal accidents in 2008. Since then, we have made progress but the highly visible nature of some of the accidents in 2008 means that the HEMS industry continues to be under scrutiny.

The good news here is that we now have a better understanding of these risks and that they are manageable. If you're not adopting and using a safety management system, you are putting yourself outside the circle where the real benefits of safety data can come. We need those data points, and they can only come from you. For example, VFR at night. Most of the time these operations happen safely , even though night VFR is more demanding, especially at low altitudes and in otherwise challenging environments. But we need to keep this in mind: the fatal accident rate increases during VFR at night operations when compared to those that take place in day VFR conditions. About three out of four fatal HEMS accidents take place at night. Night vision goggles will help but it will not address everything. Flying in weather or in instrument conditions, even in a properly equipped aircraft with a properly rated pilot, increases the risk.

The real frustration that we face comes from accidents involving VFR in IMC and VFR in night IMC. VFR in IMC accounts for many of the fatal accidents, 18 percent of all fatal helicopter accidents. Despite the common allusion to "inadvertent flight into IMC," a review of many of those accidents suggests that the weather was rarely a surprise. Issues related to continued airworthiness account for 16 percent of fatal helicopter accidents.

These numbers are just a reminder that we must remain vigilant and gather enough data to get ahead of these accidents. Another area: professionalism. We need for the experienced operators in the room to come along side the less-well established. Particularly so in this field, there's much to be learned at the hands of an experienced professional. We need that information to be passed along. The night operations that I discussed a moment ago are particularly unforgiving. Those are the kind of lessons that don't have to be learned firsthand.

Another element of professionalism is being able to judge the circumstances around a mission and to make the right call when it's just too dangerous to fly. We need leaders in this industry who understand how human factors play into an operation. I know this is an industry full of dedicated men and women who want to complete the mission no matter the weather or the conditions - they want to make the rescue or transport that injured patient to the emergency room. In those tense moments we need professionals who can survey the situation and give good counsel about whether an operation should proceed or whether the aircraft needs to stay on the ground.

I issued a call to action almost a year ago for the airlines to step up their professionalism standards and their mentoring programs so young pilots could learn to do the job the right way. I'd like to do the same thing here today. And the burden for this doesn't just rest with those who have hours up into four digits. I have the full expectation that the newer pilots in this room will seek out the advice and counsel of their colleagues. I can't say it any more plainly. If you wait to learn safety lessons when you're at the controls, the odds are that you're going to learn hard lessons that you could have learned much more easily. But with all of that said, I think that this conference is an example that the will is there to keep our numbers heading in the right direction, and that is quite literally no accident. The operators here have shown consistently that you are willing to move to the next level of safety. And in safety, "good enough" really never is good enough. Greatness is the target, and I'm confident we'll get there. Thank you.

The NextGen Integration and Evaluation Capability (NIEC) display area at the Federal Aviation Administration's William J. Hughes Technical Center opened June 7, 2010.

The NIEC is a research platform where scientists will use simulation to explore, integrate and evaluate NextGen concepts, including area navigation (RNAV), trajectory-based operations, flying unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the national airspace system (NAS), and more. The NIEC display area compliments the existing unique facilities and aviation-based equipment at the Technical Center.

NextGen (Next Generation Air Transportation System) is the transformation of the air traffic control system of today to the satellite-based system of the future.

NextGen's innovative new technologies will improve safety, capacity and efficiency on runways and in the nation's skies and provide environmentally-friendly air traffic control procedures that reduce fuel burn, carbon emissions and noise.

Mission

The NIEC's mission is to foster the exploration, evaluation and integration of NextGen-enabling components. The idea is to rapidly develop prototypes and validate the concepts that will lead to full implementation of NextGen.

The NIEC uses existing NAS operating systems and high-fidelity, real-time simulation to create an integrated and flexible environment that can be tailored for NextGen research and test and evaluation.

The display area provides a futuristic NextGen gate-to-gate picture with advanced data collection to support integration and evaluation of new technologies and concepts. Its ability to combine existing systems with future technologies and capabilities means the NIEC will contribute significantly to the transition to NextGen.

Special Features

The NIEC complex features an air traffic control simulation area, a cockpit simulator, an unmanned aircraft system suite, a simulated tower cab interior and a multi-purpose display area.

The multi-purpose area can be used to show weather and traffic management data, operate as a simulation monitoring station or simulate an airline operations center. Each NIEC component mirrors a key area in the NextGen "gate-to-gate" spectrum.

Characteristics and Capabilities of the NIEC include:

• A NIEC display area to support human-in-the-loop simulations
• A real-time, rapid prototyping and simulation capability to simulate the NAS while integrating NextGen concepts
• Technical Center and external laboratory integration
• Voice communications
• Audio, video and data recording
• The flexibility to support multiple, concurrent studies
• Available 24 hours per day, 7 days a week
• A certified ISO 9001:2008 laboratory (ISO [International Organization for Standardization] certification is a world-class, quality management standard achievement)

The NIEC display area integrates key air traffic components into a single environment at the Technical Center to address emerging research questions. Initial NIEC operations will use existing Technical Center capabilities. Partnerships with federal agencies, industry and academia will lead to new NextGen capabilities. The NIEC platform will evolve as research requirements emerge.

The Technical Center's Target Generator Facility and the Distributed Environment for Simulation, Rapid Engineering and Experimentation (DESIREE) are existing simulation engines that will be important for NIEC simulations. The Target Generator can simulate air and ground traffic to drive work by various laboratories on advanced air traffic control concepts. DESIREE emulates the graphical user interface used in most air traffic control systems. These simulators cooperate to create a realistic user environment that can to emulate past, present or future air traffic environments.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has proposed to assess civil penalties ranging from $50,000 to $150,000 against two airlines and three shippers for alleged violations of Federal Aviation Regulations or U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulations. The proposed penalties include:

• $150,000 against Lion Mentari Airlines of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for allegedly shipping a chemical oxygen generator inside an unmarked metal case from Kuala Lumpur to Dallas. DOT classifies chemical oxygen generators as a hazardous material, and they may not be shipped on passenger-carrying aircraft.
• $53,000 against Stewart & Stevenson, LLC, of Houston, for allegedly shipping a box containing eight gallons of touch-up paint to FedEx Corp. for transportation by air when the package was not properly identified as containing hazardous materials and was not accompanied by the appropriate documentation. DOT classifies flammable materials as hazardous. The case has been settled
• $121,000 against Trans States Airlines, Bridgeton, MO, for allegedly operating four flights from Norfolk, VA to Miami on September 2, Oct. 6, 18 and 20, 2008, that flew more than 50 nautical miles from the nearest U.S. shoreline. The FAA alleges the aircraft used did not carry required equipment for extended overwater operations, including life preservers, life rafts with a locator light for each occupant, a pyrotechnic signaling device for each life raft, an emergency locator transmitter, and survival kit attached to each raft.
• $70,000 against Shanghai Fountainhead Electronics Co., Ltd., of Shanghai, for allegedly violating DOT hazardous materials regulations by offering 12 boxes of lithium-ion phosphate rechargeable batteries for shipment by air to the U.S. aboard a passenger-carrying aircraft, which is prohibited. The case has been settled
• $50,000 against SOSGlobal Express of New Bern, NC, for violating DOT hazardous materials regulations by allegedly offering 15 boxes of lithium-ion batteries for shipment by air aboard a passenger-carrying aircraft, which is prohibited.

The companies have 30 days from the date the civil penalty letter is received to respond to the agency.

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Good morning, and thank you, John [Allen], for inviting me.

I speak to a lot of groups across a very wide spectrum, but I dare say that there's no group more important than this one. And what brings me here today is a subject that is more important than any other.

The shared vision that brings us together is that safety is not a program but a culture. The main thrust of our discussions throughout this conference focuses on the sheer fact that compliance is not enough. We need to step above and beyond where we are today. The only way we can do that is to adopt the voluntary programs that will give us the data we need to connect the dots.

I'm talking specifically about ASAP, FOQA, AQP, VDRP, Internal Evaluation, ATOS, ASIAS and SMS. If you do not have at the very least a fundamental understanding of what each of those mean, your safety program is likely stuck in neutral.

The simple fact of it all is that our system is safe, so safe that it's hard for us to come up with a "common cause." There are no "common" accidents any more. When we put TCAS in place, the mid-airs dried up. When ground prox came along, machines stopped flying into the ground.

Each step of the way, technology, training and advanced procedures made the system safer and safer and safer. The low-hanging fruit was picked long, long ago.

We still have accidents, but they are the exception to the rule. To anticipate those accidents, to develop proactive strategies for identifying and managing risks, we've got to out-think accident before it happens. We have to head the cause off at the pass.

Without a proven problem, it is a challenge to come up with a solution.

This is why the ASIAS team is focusing on pushing the science of advanced data analysis. It's why the team is fostering the development of cutting-edge data analysis tools to find emerging threats, as well as identify previously undiscovered risks that are buried in terabytes of safety information.

After having experience on both sides of the table, I am convinced that the voluntary reporting systems are the only tools we have that will allow us to step safety up to the next level. A just safety culture demands that when someone sees something - anything - that gives them pause, that's the very time to raise your hand and say, "I think I've noticed something that needs looking at." And to do that without fear of reprisal.

When that doesn't happen, tiny pieces of the puzzle stay in the box. You'll never get the full picture without the benefit of the observations and the experiences of the professionals who are in the system day in and day out.

It's hard to hold up a single data point and say, "Voila!" Because you can't tell what you have amounts to anything. Sometimes, it really is nothing. But sometimes, sometimes it really is something; a lone data point that really isn't as uncommon as you might think, or hope. Think about a situation that's seemingly innocuous, like a flight bag placed inadvertently in front of a circuit panel. You can imagine what could happen there. All sorts of mischief. That particular instance - which is not hypothetical - points to human factors. I think that human factors is the hot spot for aviation safety in the next 10 years, maybe 20. The technology is getting us far but it still takes a human in the loop to make it work.

All of this makes it eminently clear that it still takes an observant professional to spot a mistake that very well may be an accident precursor. It takes a just culture to allow that pilot to raise a hand and say, "We had an oops, and we want to make sure that no one else in our company or any company has the same problem."

When you get to that place, then the picture starts to emerge from the shadows. What seemed kind of hazy becomes the sharp image of a safety problem that we need to pay attention to.

This industry is known for stepping up when it needs to and even when it doesn't. That's why I'm confident that SMS will really make a difference. I know that there are those who complain that they're too small for SMS. Or that it's too costly. Or that they don't have time.

One by one: no one and no company is too small for SMS. The cost of SMS is far less that the cost of an accident. Saying that you don't have time for SMS is the functional equivalent of saying that you don't have time for safety. At its essence, SMS forms a real triangle of safety. You identify the problem, you analyze it, you come up with a solution, you train to the solution, and then you check how you're doing. Bottom line: SMS is a safety feedback loop.

Not only is SMS here to stay, it's going to be here for the long haul because it works. Everybody has a responsibility for safety. SMS gives us the wherewithal to gather information that takes safety to the next level. If you're looking for the keys to unlock the safety question, SMS is a good place to start.

At the World Aviation Training Symposium a month ago in Orlando, I asked the people of this industry to continue to respond to the Call to Action I issued last June. I asked industry, labor, and the FAA to work together on implementing voluntary initiatives to improve safety and professionalism. The response was overwhelming.

Today we have over 200 aviation safety action programs in place. Of the 40 airlines with FAA-approved FOQA programs, half of those are regional airlines. Of the 31 advanced qualification programs for training pilots, flight attendants, and dispatchers, half are now regional airlines.

The majors are showing great initiative in working with regional partners to address issues of professional standards and flight discipline. And I am well aware of how very far along our U.S. airlines are in voluntarily implementing their safety management systems.

When you mix professionalism and leadership, safety happens. There are many companies in this room who recognize that professionalism and leadership go hand in hand. In fact, many are offering courses in leadership as a way to step things up.

I'm asking you to do just that. As the regulator, we take our role as safety professionals very seriously. I'm asking you to continue to match us stride for stride. There's no doubt that safety is a shared responsibility. There's no doubt that it will take a personal commitment on behalf of each of us to really ratchet things up.

I've seen a tremendous commitment already. We bear a shared responsibility to keep that commitment in high gear. I'm asking you to share in that vision. Thank you.

I'd like to take a moment to honor someone who provided the foundation for much of what we are talking about. These programs are doing well and are growing. We have many programs for many airline employees at many air carriers. We have ATSAP for the controllers. We have ASAP in the military. And we have much of this data turning to information by the Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing office. Now that these programs are taking off, it is easy to skip over the effort needed for their creation and development. Well, not this time.

Every one of us in this room greatly appreciates the innovation, creativity, and dogmatic persistence that it takes to beat back bureaucratic resistance and have new programs gain traction. Successes like the programs we're talking about rarely get hatched by committees. No, this comes from individuals with vision, who have the intellectual curiosity and energy to bring ideas to fruition. This type of talent is rare and must be acknowledged, appreciated and celebrated. And that is just I am going to do.

It is with pleasure that I present the FAA's award for superior achievement to Dr. Tom Longridge. Doctor, that applause is a sure-fire sign that your work has made a difference.