Left Navigation

Special Counsel Questions Two Agency Investigations

12/3/2024
Disclosure of Wrongdoing
Reports Reviewing FAA Flight Safety at Detroit Metropolitan Airport and CBP Emergency Responses in Texas Do Not Appear Reasonable 

​ Reports Reviewing FAA Flight Safety at Detroit Metropolitan Airport and CBP Emergency Responses in Texas Do Not Appear Reasonable  

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) today alerted the President and Congress that agency findings issued in response to two separate whistleblower-initiated investigations do not appear reasonable.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) – Detroit, MI:

A now-retired Air Traffic Controller alerted OSC nearly a decade ago about a controversial, and potentially dangerous, landing approach being used at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport (DTW). The approach, used during times of heavy air traffic, was discontinued in 2015 following reports from pilots and, since then, its use has been paused at various times.

The safety concerns with the approach are well documented, yet it is being utilized once again at DTW to accommodate more aircraft landings and to maximize airspace efficiency. When three aircraft are landing at once, the aircraft using the western-most runway must approach at an angle and utilize an “offset localizer" antenna communication system. The offset localizer provides real-time information to pilots to aid in aligning the aircraft with the runway during an approach. But air traffic controllers interviewed by investigators say the offset localizer's placement at DTW results in the signal sometimes being interrupted – especially during inclement weather or when other aircraft taxi through the signal.

At the conclusion of a previous investigation into this landing approach, DTW officials assured OSC that it had two mitigations in place. One was for “high-tail" aircraft taxiing through the critical area where the offset localizer is positioned. However, smaller aircraft taxiing in this critical area, which have previously been acknowledged as a safety risk, have no such mitigation and could disrupt the signal. The second mitigation, involving restrictions during inclement weather, was discontinued by the FAA even though it had previously deemed the restrictions necessary for the safe operation of the approach.

“The approach at issue may create a danger for landing aircraft and the flying public," said Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger. “I have determined that the agency's findings once again do not appear reasonable. I urge the FAA to further review the safety issues associated with this approach, including the location of offset localizers at DTW, and take steps necessary to resolve them."

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) - El Paso, TX:

A former CBP Supervisory Air Interdiction Agent disclosed to OSC that senior CBP officials prevented the Deming Air Unit (DAU) in El Paso, Texas, from responding to emergency calls in cases where quicker responses could have saved lives. In one example, the DAU received a call relaying assistance was needed for a person “in distress" who was severely dehydrated, but able to provide his age and describe his clothing. The DAU, which was available and ready to respond, requested permission to conduct a search by air for the individual. The whistleblower alleged that senior CBP officials denied the request, and without air support, the individual was not located and found deceased the next day.

OSC referred the whistleblower's allegations, but most of the allegations were not substantiated. After reviewing interviews from management regarding the incidents, the agency determined there was “no evidence to support that [CBP officials] prevented the DAU from responding to emergency calls…"

OSC asked the agency to explain documents and statements contradicting the agency's finding that a senior CBP official never ordered Command Duty Officers (CDOs) to deny DAU's requests to launch air support. The Special Counsel determined the agency failed to adequately reconcile the contradicting facts.

“I am concerned with the agency's findings," said Special Counsel Dellinger.  “Despite evidence to the contrary, the agency's findings maintain that each denial of DAU's requests to launch was a decision by the assigned CDO alone.  I do not think the agency's conclusion is reasonable."
 

***