Change Agent

Ken Mead

Ken Mead was the inspector general for the Department of Transportation from 1997 to 2006. During that time, he supervised a number of audits of the Federal Aviation Administration's oversight of aircraft maintenance, both that conducted by carriers and that contracted out to repair facilities. In his capacity as inspector general, he acquired a unique perspective, which he shares below. Mr. Mead is presently with the law firm of Baker Botts dealing with matters of transportation safety and security.

AM: What are the primary concerns you have with oversight of maintenance?

Mead: There are two. First, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) needs to direct its resources to areas where maintenance is occurring. Second, I am concerned about the amount of attention paid to maintenance inspectors. Consider that air traffic controllers represent a large, well paid workforce, and they attract attention to whether or not their facilities are adequately staffed for the volume of traffic.

Now consider aviation maintenance, where the maintenance community isn't nearly as vocal. The maintenance system has grown, and the FAA inspector workforce needs attention in that regard as well. Moreover, a substantial part of the maintenance is outsourced, and that has ramifications for the amount of inspectors the FAA needs. Basically, the FAA needs to pay comparable attention to the staffing of maintenance inspectors as it does to air traffic controllers.

AM: Why?

Mead: The FAA is experiencing difficult times with respect to budgets and personnel strengths, and this extends to the inspector workforce as well. For example, in 2004 the FAA had 3,605 inspectors, but this year, as of March 16, had 3,375, and by the end of the year will still be down with 3,511. There is significantly more maintenance to inspect, and fewer inspectors. To be sure, the air transport oversight system (ATOS) was intended to allow the more strategic deployment of inspectors to those areas of interest and concern highlighted by ATOS. However, ATOS has been implemented only at the major carriers, and even if ATOS worked perfectly, which it does not, a robust inspector workforce is still needed

AM: What are the trends you see as sources of concern?

Mead: Well, very clearly, it is not an issue of in-house or outsourced maintenance. The issue is that wherever maintenance is performed, effective oversight is key. We audited many facilities where the FAA inspectors visited only once a year. The FAA would have a better handle on the state of affairs if it visited these facilities more often. It's hard to imagine that the FAA has a good pulse on the state of maintenance in those locations it only visits annually.

AM: What about the distribution of inspectors?

Mead: When there are geographic changes in terms of where the maintenance is performed, the FAA doesn't necessarily change the location of the inspectors. In many cases today, inspectors are not geographically situated where the maintenance is being performed, and this exacerbates the challenge of effective oversight.

AM: You mentioned that the FAA has two bureaucracies. Can you explain?

Mead: The FAA has one portion of its workforce focusing on the airlines and their in-house maintenance. They have another bureaucracy focused on contract maintenance. The FAA said they going to coordinate the two better, but you need to watch that very carefully. In part, to do that, the FAA has a risk-based program, but there are two systems, unique to its two bureaucracies, that have to be integrated. The FAA is doing that, but it's a long way from being all tied together.

AM: What about unlicensed repair stations?

Mead: If they are going to perform work that's comparable to the certified repair stations, a case can be made that they should be certificated as well, especially if they are going to be allowed to perform higher level maintenance.

AM: What about maintenance of general aviation (GA) aircraft?

Mead: Let me borrow an analogy from the railroad industry, where grade crossing accidents have declined significantly. I don't see that with respect to GA aircraft, where the accident rate is roughly the same as it was a few years ago. The FAA needs to place a stronger emphasis on oversight of GA maintenance.