By Derek Royal  

When it comes to instances of substance abuse, aviation personnel are no different to the rest of the community. Which begs the question: is drug and alcohol testing of safety sensitive personnel a necessity?

JUST after 5pm on 26th September 2002, 27-year-old pilot Andrew Morris taxied a Piper Cherokee for departure from Runway 14 at Hamilton Island Airport, Queensland. Morris, who’d been on the job at Island Air Taxis for just a few days, was due to fly five passengers on a 10-minute charter to Lindeman Island, a short hop of 15km. The passengers aboard the Piper were New Zealanders Kevin Bowles, 47 and Joanne Bowles, 46, their children Sophie, nine, and Michael, six, and 33-year-old American honeymooner Christopher Le Gallo. Shortly after takeoff the aircraft crashed into a hillside some 300m west of the runway and exploded into flames, killing all six people on board.

Coroner Michael Barnes found evidence that suggested alcohol and drugs taken by Morris was a factor in the crash. But Barnes said there was no evidence anyone had committed a criminal offence.

“In my view, the effect of this evidence raises a real possibility that the alcohol and marijuana Mr Morris ingested the day or days before the crash may have contributed to his poor decision-making or execution and therefore, indirectly, to the crash," Barnes said in his findings.

Brisbane lawyer Peter Carter, who sought compensation for relatives of the victims, said that despite the coroner’s findings, ‘restrictive’ Australian laws limited the amount of restitution available. Carter also represented Christopher Le Gallo's wife, Laura, who had taken an earlier flight to Lindeman Island so the Bowles family could sit together on the ill-fated flight that claimed both them and her husband. Mrs Le Gallo received the maximum compensation payout of $A500,000 under the Civil Aviation Act.

The subsequent ATSB (Australian Transport Safety Bureau) investigation into the tragedy issued four recommendations concurrent with the release of its official report. Three of those recommendations addressed the potential use of alcohol and drugs by safety sensitive personnel in Australian aviation, including options to manage the safety risk to the travelling public.

Following the report, a review of the safety benefits of introducing a drug and alcohol testing program for Australian aviation was announced by the then Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS), John Anderson. A joint DOTARS-CASA team led by Dr Doug Hartley later presented a review to Anderson’s successor, Minister Warren Truss, that aimed to comprehensively examine the safety benefits of introducing such a program to the Australian aviation industry. 
Hartley’s review stated that alcohol abuse and dependence affected between 5% and 8% of pilots, with similar figures for maintenance personnel, flight attendants and management.

“The fact is that substance abuse occurs across national borders and job descriptions, and that people have died in substantial numbers where evidence of inappropriate substance use was confirmed,” Hartley said.

“In short, aviation personnel are no different from the rest of the community in their experiences with substance abuse and so it’s appropriate to consider suitable safety responses – specifically testing – to be employed in aviation and other vocations and industries to achieve better safety outcomes.”

An ATSB pilot safety survey released in June 2005 showed that 22.5% of almost 1,200 pilot respondents indicated that at some point in the previous 12 months they believed safety had been affected in some way by alcohol, drugs or prescribed medication. Considering the common use of drugs and alcohol in modern western society, this is no surprise. Alcohol is the most widely used and misused drug in the western world, while cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug. Chronic misuse of such substances can cause significant social, economic, legal and public health problems for the wider community, especially when used by someone operating in a safety-sensitive environment.

Flying an aircraft is an activity requiring high levels of cognitive functioning and psychomotor skill. These areas of human performance are generally impaired following the use of substances such as alcohol and illicit drugs. As such, the use of drugs and alcohol by pilots can compromise their ability to safely operate an aircraft. This can lead to reduced flight safety, with clear adverse implications for pilots, passengers and the entire air transport system.  

Apart from the Hamilton Island tragedy, other high profile incidents involving substance use have occurred in Australia and New Zealand, most notably an accident that killed nine people on New Zealand’s Franz Joseph Glacier in 1993 and an incident in 2006 that saw three elite RAAF crew busted for drug use (while a fourth was sacked for refusing a drug test). All belonged to the RAAF’s Canberrra-based 34 VIP squadron, which flies dignitaries, including the Queen and Prime Minister, aboard the government’s luxurious executive jet.

According to Andrew Leibie, scientist and former account manager at a leading Australian supplier of workplace drug and alcohol tests, Australia’s aviation industry has a duty to educate employees about the impact of alcohol, medication and illicit substances on work performance in order to prevent another Hamilton Island tragedy.

“A drug and alcohol screening program quite literally means the difference between life and death,” Leibie said. “Public confidence in air travel has undoubtedly been impacted in the wake of terrorist attacks, drug smuggling and several publicised mechanical failures and this is only compounded when safety issues related to drug or alcohol use are revealed.”

However, despite Leibie’s concerns and regulatory attempts to modify pilot crew behaviour towards drug and alcohol use, there have been numerous well-publicised cases overseas where pilots have attempted to fly or have actually flown aircraft whilst under the influence of illicit drugs or alcohol.

In 2003 a veteran Virgin Atlantic Airways pilot was arrested after arriving at work intoxicated just before he was due to fly a Boeing 747 airliner with 383 passengers on board between Washington D.C. and London.
Police at Washington Dulles International Airport seized the pilot after being summoned by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), whose screeners had detected alcohol on the pilot's breath. He was interrogated at the airport, arrested and charged under Virginia law with operating an aircraft while under the influence of an intoxicating drug or alcohol. Ultimately, he was jailed.

In July 2005, two former US pilots were sent to prison for five years and 2.5 years respectively for trying to fly from Miami International Airport after a night of excessive drinking. The America West pilots’ Airbus A319 was being towed to the runway for takeoff to Phoenix, Arizona, with 124 passengers and three flight attendants on board, when it was ordered back to the terminal. A security screener had reported that the pilots smelled of alcohol. These are just two incidents out of several that have been reported in various parts of the world. And thankfully, due to alert security personnel, the perpetrators were caught before they could do some serious damage. Imagine the catastrophe had something gone amiss in-flight?

But the highest percentage of aircraft accidents occur at general aviation level, not within the airlines. A search of the ATSB’s occurrence database for the period 1972-2002 was conducted to determine the prevalence of drug and alcohol use in Australian aviation. The data comprised 31 reported incidences where alcohol and/or drugs were present. Of the 31 reported occurrences, 29 involved aeroplane crew and two involved helicopter crew. Fourteen of the incidences involved fatalities. The majority of the occurrences involved GA aircraft conducting non-commercial operations. Of the occurrences reported during non-commercial operations, 26 cases involved the use of alcohol and seven cases involved the use of marijuana, heroin or prescription drugs. Two of those cases involved the use of both drugs and alcohol, of which one was fatal. There was one fatal commercial operation involving the use of alcohol by the pilot. One instance of alcohol use by an Australian airline crew was reported that had the potential to affect the safety of operations.

Overall, the ATSB search didn’t accurately determine the full extent of substance use as all of the incidences involved pilots, not other safety-sensitive personnel such as aircraft maintenance engineers or air traffic controllers.

As Leibie says: “Aviation operations pose obvious risks to public safety if they are not undertaken in a safe manner, with alcohol and drug use especially dangerous.”

But it’s not just hard drugs and alcohol that the industry needs to monitor. Seemingly harmless across-the-counter drugs are just as precarious.

“It’s important to note that drug use in the workplace isn’t just about illicit substances,” Leibie adds. “Benzodiazepines, or sleeping tablets, are commonly encountered in shift work situations. In many cases these are not prescribed but are just used occasionally by employees to avoid being fatigued the next day.”

However, research shows the impairment effects of these drugs can be as severe as the equivalent breath alcohol reading of 0.1% - i.e, twice the legal limit for Australian road users.

“Education is a vitally important component in drug testing in the workplace and Australia has been slow to follow the lead of the US and other countries where airport workers are required to be tested under federal law,” Leibie says. “Many people are unaware of the ‘hangover effect’ of alcohol consumption on their ability to perform complex tasks. Alcohol consumption can have serious consequences for their work performance hours later.”

He adds that the effects of cannabis are also often misunderstood, with a number of ‘urban myths’ prevailing.
“These include the misconception that smoking marijuana immediately prior to work is unlikely to affect the worker and that cannabis can be detected for three to six months after a single use.”

There’s no evidence to support either of these claims, Leibie says. “In fact, it’s quite the opposite as several studies have shown that cannabis consumption can affect individuals on a number of levels for up to eight hours post-consumption. The onus is on airline companies to ensure there are adequate screening processes in place to ensure the safety of the thousands of people who travel by air every day.”

Following Government acceptance of the DOTARS-CASA report, CASA has developed regulations in consultation with the aviation industry and introducing a random drug and alcohol testing regime for all persons involved in safety-sensitive areas. The regulations are directed at maintaining Australia’s reputation as a world leader in aviation safety, by ensuring that safety-sensitive participants have the physical and mental capability to perform their jobs in a safe, secure and effective manner. CASA and industry continue to work together on the broad program, which includes education and awareness: employee assistance and rehabilitation and the capacity to return to work.

The Hamilton Island tragedy will forever be remembered as one of the dark chapters in Australian aviation history. But the one positive to emerge from the ashes of that fateful day in September 2002 is the development of regulated drug and alcohol testing. The system may not have won favour with everyone, as proved by fierce ongoing debate between unions and airlines, but the testing program will ensure that Australian air travellers can board any aircraft knowing that everything has been done to make sure their journey is as safe and secure as possible.  

DRUGS AND ALCOHOL: THE HARD FACTS
Drug and alcohol abuse is estimated to generate enormous annual economic and social costs across all industry sectors:

• A$140 billion in annual losses in the US;
• A$120 billion in annual losses in Canada;
• A$10 billion in annual losses in Australia;
• 1991: The direct cost to Australian industry as a result of sickness and death due to drug and alcohol abuse was A$3.7 billion.

THE EFFECTS

• Alcohol abuse and dependence affects a similar number of maintenance personnel, flight attendants and management as pilots: about 5-8%. Professional occupations such as law and medicine are similarly affected;
• In the US, more than seven million employees in safety-sensitive roles in transport are covered by drug and alcohol testing programs;
• 53% of transport industry organisations conduct some form of alcohol and drug testing. In Australia a diverse and growing range of companies are implementing their own responses, including testing.

RANDOM TESTING
What substances will be tested?

• Cannabis;
• Amphetamines and amphetamine-type stimulates;
• Benzoylecgonie, the major metabolite of cocaine;
• Opiates, which can be found in heroin, morphine and codeine;
• Alcohol

For more detailed information see CASA website

What are the permitted levels?

• The testable drugs will be measured against the target concentrations specified in the Australian Standard 4760-2006;
• For alcohol a concentration below 0.02gms of alcohol in 100mls of blood (BAC 0.02%)

On who, when and where will the testing be conducted?

• Any person present in any area, airside or landside where safety sensitive aviation activities are undertaken can be asked to undergo a drug and/or alcohol test in accordance with the regulations;
• Testing will be conducted 365 days a year, 24/7.

How will the testing work?

• An independent authorised collector can ask for an oral fluid sample for drug testing and/or a breath sample for alcohol testing.

Source: CASA