FAA Proposing To Keep Bird Strike Data Secret

Ever since Sully Sullenberger successfully ditched US Airways flight 1549 in the Hudson River following bird strikes that killed both engines, public awareness and interest in bird strikes has been on the rise. The FAA has a database of 100,000 bird strikes reported since 1990 and it presumably sheds some light on a problem which, according to Bird Strike Committee USA, has led to over 200 deaths--of people, not birds--since 1988.

But in what amounts to a public relations gaffe, the FAA has...

reversed itself and now says that it plans to keep the bird data secret. The AP used the Freedom of Information Act to request the data and the FAA had indicated in a conference call on Feb. 18, that it would turn over the data within days. Instead on March 19, the FAA proposed in an obscure notice in the Federal Register that it keep the data secret.

While there may be merit to keeping some of the data private, the way in which the FAA has handled the issue totally overshadows the validity of any arguments for keeping the data secret. Doing so during the beginning of a new Administration which has been calling for greater transparency in government shows how desperately the FAA needs a new Administrator. Coincidentally, The White House announced yesterday that they have named Randolph "Randy" Babbitt as the new FAA Administrator.

FAA Concerns
The FAA is worried that if the bird strike data were released, the public would compare data for different airports. In its proposal, the FAA said that "Drawing comparisons between airports is difficult because of the unevenness of reporting," since some airports do a better job of reporting the voluntary bird strike data. The FAA was also concerned that "Inaccurate portrayals of airports and airlines could have a negative impact on their participation in reporting bird strikes." The agency was also "concerned that there is a serious potential that information related to bird strikes will not be submitted because of fear that the disclosure of raw data could unfairly cast unfounded aspersions on the submitter."

The FAA already has many programs that grant some level of anonymity to reporters, in the interest of maintaining a strong flow of information related to aviation safety. Were the data not restricted in some way, pilots and others might be less inclined to report safety issues if their employers knew who was making the reports. This makes sense so it’s understandable that the FAA would consider the full ramifications before releasing the bird strike data.

However, keeping all of the data secret is absurd. Presumably, the data could be redacted in a fashion that still makes it useful while protecting those who’ve submitted the data. To not release data raises suspicions about the agency’s motives, even when they are probably well intentioned. Floating the proposal in the obscure Federal Register--rather then publically announcing it to the press--also smacks of an agency trying to fly under the radar and pull a fast one. Regardless of the merits of the proposal, it's probably now doomed because of the agency's inept handling of it.

Lawmakers React
The FAA’s plan to keep bird strike data secret has already raised hackles in Congress. Sen. Chuck Schumer wrote the agency and asked them to abandon the proposal. “There's no reason to make ... the causes of other accidents public and not this," Schumer said Friday. Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C agreed, saying "Whether the public should worry is for the public to decide, not FAA."

Perhaps the most underreported related story is that the FAA has approved a bird attracting, garbage transfer facility in Queens, New York less than 1,900 feet from the runways at LaGuardia airport! The Queens Chronicle reported that nearly 3,000 tons of garbage a day will move through the Department of Sanitation’s North Shore Converted Marine Transfer Station. Congressman Gary Ackerman said “Of all of the shorelines that surround all of the boroughs, why would they pick the one spot that is directly opposite an active runway at our busiest [airport]?” In a letter to FAA acting Administrator Lynne Osmus, Ackerman wrote, “I would like to know if the FAA is reconsidering its determination in light of the Jan. 15 crash landing of US Airways Flight 1549 on the Hudson River due to a bird strike."

Overall, it sounds like Administrator Babbitt will be arriving none too soon. The flap over the bird strike database needs to be resolved and regardless of the merits of the FAA’s proposal to restrict the data, I think they’ll be forced by public opinion and Congress to reverse their position yet again and release the data. Hopefully future proposals on other even more important topics aren’t fumbled as badly as this one.

Comments

[George Finlay]

Max,

Good summary of the issues. Have you had a chance to read my piece on single-engine passenger jets and birds?

http://www.principiainc.com/?p=123

[Rob Mark]

Oh lord. Just what we need, the agency protecting us from ourselves yet again.

What was it last year ... oh yes, aspects of the ASRS data, now this.

I wouldn't put too much hope into the new administrator, at least not early on Max.

The agency is so huge, that I don't believe it is possible any longer for one person to lead it.

There are simply too many little silos that local bosses protect, just like at TSA where they dumped the LASP on us while the still leaderless agency is on autopilot.

Rob
www.jetwhine.com