The Association would like to raise the following points having reviewed the raft of submitted written and oral evidence:

Under-reporting of Cabin Air Contamination events, further research

  The Global Cabin Air Quality Executive (GCAQE) has recently conducted research of 242 past and present BAe 146 qualified pilots, 86% of whom had experienced contaminated air events. 57% reported various degrees of adverse effects, 25% reported medium or long-term health effects and 8.5% (number believed to be increasing) of the pilots appear to have medically retired or had their medical certificate withdrawn by the CAA. These figures are in complete contrast to the official statistics that apparently show minimal contaminated events occur.

  As recently as 31 July 2007, DHL undertook a flight test on behalf of the Department for Transport (DfT) to demonstrate the ability of proposed test equipment to detect contaminated air events and quantitative air sampling. During the flight a contamination event occurred and the captain of the aircraft submitted an Air Safety Report, as required by the CAA, on the incident. To date this report has not found its way onto the CAA database. Where is it? A further demonstration of under-reporting.

  Further, the report of the flight test which is to include analysis by two independent laboratories of the samples taken is still awaited by the DfT. This Association feels this further demonstrates the apparent lack of concern by Government and airline operators to protect both crews and passengers health and is a basic failing in their duty of care.

Ability of aircraft passengers to gain meaningful help after suffering a perceived cabin air event

  The attitude of the respondents at the 17 July hearing of oral evidence when a letter from a concerned passenger was referred to was inexcusable and demonstrated the lack of gravity with which they viewed the case. The letter and writer were identifiable and from what was said it was self-evident that the writer was not able to express themselves very cogently. The respondents failed to grasp the main point highlighted by the letter, ie, there is no system in place whereby a crew member, passenger or group of passengers who consider they have suffered adverse health effects whilst flying on a British registered aircraft, can get accurate advice, impartial assistance and a thorough investigation to resolve and rectify the situation. This state of affairs should not be permitted to continue.

Further evidence

  The Association has recently received a copy of a spread sheet listing the results of a series of blood and fat tests carried out on a group of pilots. The tests would appear to show that all those tested showed evidence of organophosphate contamination, 18.7% of which were specifically TriCresylPhosphate, together with a mix of other contaminants. These contaminants also appear in the list of substances found in the contaminated air tests conducted by Honeywell Aerospace (TOX/2006/39 Annex 11).

  The details from the spreadsheet can be found in Dr Sarah Mackenzie-Ross's report to the COT, believed to be TOX/06/21 Annex 7 or 12.

Committee on Toxicity Report

  A great deal of time and effort has no-doubt gone into compiling the report. Unfortunately it appears to pay scant regard and makes no recommendation to address the synergistic effects of the many chemicals released into the cabin air system when a contamination event occurs. Similarly, clinical blood and fat test results as mention earlier have been disregarded. The Committee will not disclose why, even to the researcher who compiled the data.

  Also the report does not address the damage that is known to occur to both the human DNA and genes. There are papers published by several eminent Professors of Toxicology on the subject of which the COT is aware.

  The Committee states, "it would be prudent to take appropriate action to prevent oil or hydraulic fluid smoke/fume contamination incidents" (para 28 of the report). Why it did not recommend the investigation of filtering and subsequent fitting of filters in the aircraft cabin air supplies is beyond this Association's understanding.

  During the course of their investigation the COT have made reference to the fact that on many occasions, after an air contamination event MOR/ASR has been raised, the subsequent technical investigation found no engineering faults. It is due to the fact there was no aviation expertise within the committee membership upon which members could draw, that is was not appreciated that the modern jet engine has a maximum oil consumption rate (normally between one and two pints per hour) and any consumption below this level would not be considered a defect. It is therefore possible for an engine to be discharging oil through a faulty compressor bearing seal and hence into the air-condition system at or near to the engine's maximum oil consumption rate without it being recognised or accepted as a fault.

A suggestion

  Whilst not wishing to rake over old ground the Association wishes to reiterate that it concurs with the submission by the GCAQE of the list of inaccuracies, misinformation and at times untrue information given by civil servants from various departments to the members of both Houses of Parliament. It not being helpful or practical to pursue the failures further the Association would ask the Committee to consider recommending that a line be drawn under these past failures and that all those engaged in resolving the problem of cabin air contamination go forward together in a spirit of openness, honesty and co-operation.

  From the reaction to the report that the Association is receiving from its members it has done nothing to ally their concerns that the "system" is only there to protect the interests of manufacturers and operators and the fact that crew members and passengers are at times being adversely effected is of little consequence. This feeling is further compounded by the fact that 8 of the annexes to the COT reports were kept secret—for members only. How can such reports be peer reviewed and commented upon and confidence in the "system" re-established while such secrecy exists?

13 November 2007