Introduction
This report contains information on how to better assist families following the loss of a loved one in an aviation disaster involving a government owned or operated aircraft.The aftermath of a plane crash is an extraordinarily painful time for the families of the passengers on board. The shock and sense of loss felt by families of passengers who are killed is incalculable. In a memorandum issued on September 9, 1996, President Clinton recognized that the Federal government bears responsibility for addressing the needs of these families.
When the accident involves a government owned or operated aircraft, the Federal government bears a special responsibility. In its final report issued on February 12, 1997, the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security (the White House Commission) chaired by Vice President Al Gore, called on the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) to coordinate the development of plans for responding to accidents involving civilians injured or killed while traveling on government aircraft. The White House Commission recognized that families of those who gave their lives serving their country are entitled to receive assistance at least comparable to that provided to families of passengers killed in accidents involving commercial aircraft.
Recommendation 4.2 in the White House Commission's report states as follows:
“The families of civilians killed while traveling on government aircraft face the same traumas and challenges as those whose loved ones were killed on commercial flights. However, the response to such disasters is covered under different laws and procedures. Those differences, and a clear statement regarding their rights and benefits in the event of an aviation disaster, should be provided to passengers on government aircraft prior to boarding. The Commission believes that it is essential that those families receive assistance comparable to that provided after commercial disasters through the enhanced role of the NTSB. The Commission urges the DOT to work with NTSB, DOD, and other agencies and family members to develop plans to accomplish that goal by September 1997 and to evaluate the need to revise existing laws and regulations governing the rights and benefits of civilians on government aircraft.”
This report is the product of an intergovernmental working group consisting of representatives of ten departments (Department of Agriculture (USDA), Department of Commerce (DOC), Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Department of Interior (DOI), Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Labor (DOL), Department of State (DOS), Department of Transportation (DOT), and Department of Treasury) and four other Federal agencies (Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), General Services Administration (GSA), National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)), referred to hereafter as “the working group.” The working group’s efforts were coordinated by the Office of the Secretary of Transportation. The members were experts from the personnel benefits, travel, emergency mental health services, family assistance, tort and general law, and aircraft operations fields. Over thirty agency and departmental representatives took part. The members were organized into smaller, more focused subgroups that met regularly for five months. Family members of the victims of the CT-43 crash in Dubrovnik, Croatia, in April 1996 were welcomed participants in the development of this report. The aftermath of that crash -- which took the lives of 35 people, military and civilians, private citizens and Federal employees -- provided the working group with valuable lessons about what the government can do to assist families who are coping with the shock and grief that accompanies the loss of a loved one. Family members were invited to meet the working group at the inaugural September meeting, where several of them gave moving verbal and written statements of their experiences. Some families also attended other working group sessions to comment on issues and enter into dialogue with the various smaller teams. While most of this report represents the consensus of the working group, not all parties are in agreement with all of the findings or recommendations. In particular, the CT-43 families have submitted specific comments to this final report (Appendix A).
The DOC, which sponsored the Croatia trade mission, and the DOD, which provided the aircraft and crew, have been involved with the CT-43 families since the day of the accident. The departments performed under extreme pressures and with no precedent to guide them. They have a unique perspective and have gathered a body of knowledge on how to provide a response to families. DOC has put together a “lessons learned” paper and distributed it to all departments and agencies participating in the working group.
Perhaps most importantly, the working group learned that each Federal agency must commit the time and the resources now for planning how best to assist families. Without the right people providing support and assistance to the families, even the best plans could compound families’ loss and grief. Accordingly, each agency should screen personnel to ensure the best people are available to work in such a situation, train them properly in advance, and prepare for the possibility of a crash rather than react only once it has happened.
Much of the work is already underway concerning several of the issues contained in this report. There is a clear need for policies to catch up with the family support that has already been delivered to victims’ and survivors’ families in previous tragedies involving the Federal government.
Many of the experiences of the CT-43 families are similar to those related by the families of passengers killed or injured in commercial aircraft disasters. The working group listened to the CT-43 families and studied the lessons learned in previous commercial air disasters. In particular, the working group relied on the Final Report of the Task Force on Assistance to Families of Aviation Disasters (“the ADFAA Task Force”), which was co-chaired by Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater and NTSB Chairman Jim Hall. That Task Force had 22 members, including four family members and one crash survivor. In October 1997, the ADFAA Task Force issued its Final Report containing 61 recommendations to improve family assistance. That report details a helpful inventory of family members’ needs and much insight on the best ways to meet these needs. While the bulk of those recommendations are directed to the airlines and are thus specific to the commercial context, many have general applicability to government air disasters as well. That report provides many useful roadmarkers to successfully guide implementation efforts.
In order to avoid duplicating the work of the ADFAA Task Force, this report is focused on the specific problems that surface following government crashes. As this report was developed by an interagency group, many of the recommendations are general in form. Each of the implementing agencies will need to apply these issues within the context of its own programs and particular concerns. These family support issues can apply in a larger sense to any government mishap that results in injury or death. Agencies should give due consideration to applying these issues and practices to other accident response plans.
The White House Commission asked for a plan to respond to the families of “civilians” involved in government air disasters. The following groups are “civilians” for the purpose of family support: families of Federal workers, families of private citizens, military family members and military retirees and families, who routinely are authorized to fly on military aircraft. Family members may be the next of kin or other individuals who considers themselves to be the family of the victim, such as in the case of a fiance or long-term companion of victims, as well as the victims themselves. This report concentrates on civilian Federal workers, private citizens, and their families. The DOD is leading an effort to fully define the response to families of military members and those civilians who travel on military flights, where the military service providing the aircraft has sole investigatory and lead family assistance responsibilities.
The CT-43 families wanted the working group to address questions related to aviation safety with regard to government aircraft. These questions include whether government and military aircraft are required to meet the same safety standards as commercial aircraft, and whether the NTSB or another non-DOD agency should be required to investigate military air disasters. In particular, the CT-43 families strongly believe that the NTSB should lead the investigation of any aviation disaster involving civilians. The working group acknowledged the importance of these questions, but considered them to be outside the limits of time, resources, or authority of the participants. Therefore, as the White House Commission directed, this report addresses only how to better assist families following an aviation disaster. However, some in the working group consider the two issues of disparate safety standards between commercial and government/military aircraft, and the need for an outside investigatory source for military air disasters involving nonmilitary loss of life, as worthy of further study by appropriate entities. In conjunction with the issuance of this report, the Secretary of Defense sent a letter (Appendix B) to the Secretary of Transportation outlining the steps DOD has taken regarding safety standards for military aircraft, as well as DOD's policy concerning inviting other Government agencies with special expertise to participate in accident investigations, where appropriate.
The White House Commission called for three deliverables:
These three items are described below, and are explained in greater detail in appendices to this report.
Disclosure Statement of Rights and BenefitsThe White House Commission found, based in part on the testimony of the CT-43 family members, that a disclosure statement of rights, benefits, and possible consequences of boarding a government aircraft should be routinely available to passengers. At this time, there is no systematic process of notifying passengers in advance of boarding of their rights and benefits. The working group found that such notice should be given to passengers at the time of invitation, or at the issuance of the travel orders, depending on the nature of the mission and the type of passenger (private citizen or Federal employee). A sample disclosure statement of rights and benefits is attached as Appendix C. The purpose of the statement is to provide potential passengers adequate notice that traveling on government aircraft is different than traveling on commercial aircraft, and to inform the potential passenger to seek more information if the person so chooses. The OPM should produce a final version of this summarized statement for distribution.
OPM also has an excellent in depth pamphlet, “Work-Related Injuries and Fatalities -- What You and Your Family Should Know About Your Benefits,” Publication RI84-2. The pamphlet is clear and concise. It has updated the publication, will reissue it, and has made it available on the Internet. The pamphlet complements the statement of rights and benefits. OPM should coordinate with the GSA to issue the statement of rights and benefits to all agencies, which should establish processes to ensure that their travelers have timely notification of these rights and benefits.
The White House Commission called for an evaluation of existing laws and regulations governing the rights and benefits of civilians who travel aboard government aircraft. Two appendices related to the compensation of aircraft accident victims and their families are attached. Appendix D frames the legal issues as they arise in this context and discusses potential legislative changes should a greater range of options and benefits for accident victims be deemed desirable. Appendix E contains a synopsis of government benefits and other forms of assistance currently available to civilians injured or killed aboard government aircraft.
The NTSB has been asked by President Clinton, in a Memorandum dated September 9, 1996, to take the lead role to coordinate the provision of Federal services to families of victims of aviation (and other transportation) disasters. The NTSB’s Office of Family Affairs will serve as the executive agent to coordinate the completion and implementation of all support plans, policy initiatives, and processes necessary to assist families following nonmilitary Federal aviation disasters. While there are many existing policies, laws and regulations that encompass this response, the NTSB is best suited to lead the implementation of these recommendations to improve the response government-wide across the spectrum of personnel, travel, aircraft flight planning and management, interagency cooperation, mental health services, and the many other issues identified in this report, in the ADFAA Task Force’s Final Report, and by the White House Commission.
The NTSB is not authorized to investigate military or intelligence agency aircraft accidents. Their role as family liaison is built around full access to the investigation, which enables them to fully and properly apprise families of developments and coordinate family notifications and media briefings. However, they have agreed to provide technical assistance in family support if requested by DOD or other Federal agencies involved in a military or intelligence related crash. DOD began its own effort in September 1997 by launching an Interservice Task Force to study lessons learned from the CT-43 tragedy. The Secretary of Defense requested that those lessons be documented, disseminated, and acted upon by the military services. Specifically, the goals of this Task Force were to review the procedures, policies, and practices that the Services employ when dealing with tragedies involving private citizens and Federal civilian employees, and ensure that the Services have uniform and efficient procedures for addressing sensitive family support matters such as notification, counseling, and claims processing. Several representatives from DOC, DOS, DOT and DOD shared membership in both the DOD initiative and this effort, addressing mutual issues and concerns and integrating the appropriate findings of the Interservice Task Force as well.
The DOD report is not yet final. Once released, its recommendations will be developed in partnership with the same key agencies and departments already engaged.
Appendix G details several key family support issues for all departments and agencies involved in government air travel. The issues complement the findings of the ADFAA Task Force in its recommendations for assistance in commercial air disasters. These issues should be incorporated in departmental or agency-specific air disaster response plans to maximize effective family support actions in the event of a government air disaster.