Chairman Mica, Congressman DeFazio and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Jon L. Jordan, the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Federal Air Surgeon.  Accompanying me today is Ronald Wojnar, Deputy Director of the Aircraft Certification Service. 

It is a pleasure for us to appear before you today to discuss the issue of airliner cabin air quality.  I recognize that the issue of the quality of air in airliner cabins has for many years been a priority of this Subcommittee and FAA shares your concerns.  It has also been a matter of significant concern to aviation passengers and the crews that earn their living by working on commercial transport aircraft.  I assure you that both Secretary Mineta and Administrator Blakey take these concerns seriously.  They are supportive of efforts to help protect the health, safety and comfort of the traveling public and cabin crews and look forward to working with the Committee on your proposal on air quality in aircraft cabins. 

Today, I will describe recent developments related to airliner cabin air.  We are in the process of implementing the recommendations of the National Research Council (NRC) resulting from its study of airliner cabin air.  Meanwhile, new global circumstances have elevated fears about the healthiness of cabin air that have arisen since my last appearance before this Subcommittee.  The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks brought focus to the threat of chemical and biological weapons terrorism and the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) has generated new questions about health issues related to air travel.

Studies have indicated that many aspects of cabin air are as good as or better than the air found in office and home environments.  FAA regulations require that air carriers provide the equivalent of at least 10 cubic feet of air per minute per occupant, a ventilation rate that is consistent with recommendations for other public environments that are not as difficult to supply.  Additionally, air carriers have the added benefit of flying at altitudes above the air pollution that is circulated into these spaces on the ground that we occupy on a daily basis.

Also, for those aircraft that recirculate some part of the cabin air, that air is typically passed through high quality filters, not used in homes or offices, before it returns to the cabin.  Manufacturers of new airplanes used by air carriers incorporate either High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters, similar to those used in hospital isolation areas and surgical suites, or particulate filters that are only slightly less efficient.  Several airlines, in coordination with aircraft manufacturers, have even installed HEPA filters on board airplanes that did not originally incorporate them into their design.  These filters can prevent clumps of viruses, bacteria and fungi from reentering the cabin. 

Smoking and Disinsection

In the past, the two primary contributors to concerns regarding the health of cabin air quality were smoking and disinsection by spraying the aircraft cabin with an insecticide.  Today, as you know, smoking is banned on all scheduled passenger flights of domestic air carriers and on almost all scheduled passenger flights of foreign air carriers to and from the United States. 

Chemical disinsection has also been significantly reduced and approximately half of the 12 countries that still require disinsection of all in-bound flights allow disinsection prior to boarding the aircraft.  Although a 1995 World Health Organization report concluded that disinsection, if performed appropriately, would not present a risk to human health, the report also noted that some individuals may experience temporary discomfort following the application.  Today, an interagency task group, established by the Secretary of Transportation and chaired by the Department of Transportation (DOT) is working towards non-chemical methods of disinsection.  One non-chemical method of disinsection, which looks promising, would involve an “air curtain” that would prevent insects from entering or exiting the airplane. 

The National Research Council Report

As you know, in the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21^st Century, AIR-21, Congress directed FAA to request the NRC to perform an independent study of cabin air quality.  The NRC study, which was completed in December 2001, with help of FAA funding in the amount of $830,000, examined existing data from which the NRC developed ten recommendations related to cabin air quality.  FAA has addressed the NRC recommendations with a plan to define and resolve air quality issues.

FAA concurs with the intent of all of the recommendations and for many of these recommendations we have either completed actions that address the underlying concerns or we are in the process of addressing specific items.  I will address each of the recommendations. 

The first four NRC recommendations involve assessing the validity of current regulations related to airplane ventilation systems and potential contaminants of cabin air.  Current FAA regulations establish ventilation, ozone, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide standards based upon recommended standards provided by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) in addition to pressure standards, in order to ensure safe comfortable travel.  Our regulatory scheme ensures that passengers and crewmembers have enough uncontaminated air to allow for reasonable comfort during normal operating conditions, protects passengers and crew from hazardous ozone, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide exposure, and establishes standards for pressurized compartments in transport category airplanes.  Initially, we planned to task an aviation rulemaking advisory committee (ARAC) to assess existing cabin air environmental standards.  However, recognizing that there are new initiatives to collect data on air quality in air transport aircraft, we have deferred action by an ARAC.  We anticipate that by the close of 2006 or early 2007, substantial data will be available for our consideration. 

NRC Recommendations 5 and 7 address allergen exposure and ventilation shutdown.  We have already addressed both of these recommendations through Advisory Circulars (AC).  Allergens in the airplane cabin are a serious, potentially life-threatening issue for a small segment of the airline passenger population.  Although some air carriers do not allow pets in the cabins, FAA and DOT regulations do not prohibit animals in air carriers for two primary reasons.  We believe that most animal allergens are brought onto the airplane on the clothes of passengers rather than by animals.   Therefore, prohibiting small animals altogether would have only a modest reduction in allergen levels.   In addition, carriage of  service animals in the cabin may be necessary to assist disabled travelers.  To meet this NRC recommendation, FAA issued an AC providing information to passengers, crew, and operators on how to prepare for air travel when allergens could present a medical concern and how to respond in the case of an allergen induced medical emergency. 

The agency also issued an AC implementing NRC’s seventh recommendation, concerning ventilation failure or shutdowns on the ground.  FAA agrees with NRC’s recommendation that whenever possible, passengers should be removed from an airplane within 30 minutes of a ventilation failure or shutdown.  We have advised air carriers to implement this practice as long as operational safety is not compromised.

In Recommendation 6, the NRC suggested that FAA increase efforts to provide information on health issues related to air travel to crew, passengers and health professionals.   Since this recommendation was received, FAA has redoubled its efforts to make available information and recommendations regarding air travel health and medical issues through our website (http://www.cami.jccbi.gov/aam-400/PassengerHandS.htm) and have linked our site with other websites that provide health information to passengers and crews.

In Recommendations 8 and 9, NRC recommends that FAA establish a surveillance and research program for air quality and health that would provide the data to analyze the relationship between cabin air quality and health effects or complaints.   These recommendations are being addressed through a joint research effort combining the resources and talent of FAA and ASHRAE. 

We have identified $550,000 to support ASHRAE’s two-part research proposal, developed with industry, including input from flight attendants, to monitor cabin air quality and determine whether there are links between aircraft cabin air and reported health effects.  The first part of ASHRAE’s study involves a literature review and the development and validation of a testing protocol on a limited number of flights.  In the second part of the ASHRAE study, the protocol and the measurement instruments developed in the first phase will be used to monitor the air on different types of aircraft, with varying flight duration and operating hours.  This evaluation will also examine both comfort and health related symptoms.  Coincident with the ASHRAE studies, instruments developed by the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory for continuous measurement of the air carrier operating environment will be placed on board two aircraft to validate performance of equipment in contrast with measurements taken in the ASHRAE study.

FAA proposes, dependent on the availability of funds, to follow the ASHRAE study with a Chemical/Biological Threat Mitigation Project.  Since September 11, 2001, we have had to focus on the threat of terrorism in our country, including the use of chemical or biological weapons.   The goal of the Chemical/Biological Threat Mitigation Project is be determine the best methods to detect chemical and biological threats in the cabin environment, and develop safe processes to return contaminated aircraft to service and to deal with health issues involving exposed passengers and crew.  In order to reach these goals and monitor the air for such hazards, we will need a device appropriate and adaptable to the airplane environment that can constantly monitor the air on board and provide real-time information on a potential air quality incident. 

The data collected from these studies on air quality and the potential air quality correlation with health concerns will provide us with information essential to developing an implementation plan for the first four NRC recommendations.   Specifically, we expect that we will be able to use the data we collect though this study to address the research recommendations on ozone, pesticides and residue from aircraft ventilation systems, highlighted by the Committee in the Flight 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act.  As I mentioned earlier, FAA expects data to be available by the end of 2006 or early 2007.

Finally, FAA has assumed the lead agency role for the study of cabin air quality.  FAA is best suited for this role because our central position in the aviation world enables us to facilitate the interaction of the interested parties.

SARS

Understandably, the recent outbreak of SARS has spiked concern about air travel.  FAA is aware of the heightened concern and has been working closely with staff at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to promote awareness of prevention guidelines for travelers, and all who work in the aviation industry.   The CDC’s experts on communicable disease are examining the relationship of the recent outbreaks to various modes of transportation.  On April 3, 2003, FAA issued a notice to all FAA principal operations inspectors directing them to notify the airline operators as soon as possible about the basic CDC information on SARS.  In addition, my office has been working with the Air Transport Association asking them, in the interest of passenger and crew safety and health, to work with their members to expedite implementation of the CDC’s prevention recommendations.  If the flight crew of a commercial aircraft arriving in the U.S. becomes aware of an ill person on board which may include a person with SARS symptoms, the captain is required by law to report the illness to the nearest U.S. Quarantine Station, who will arrange the appropriate medical response at the flight’s destination airport.   

Conclusion

In closing, on behalf of Administrator Blakey, I would like to reiterate that FAA is committed to ensuring the safest flight possible – from the safety of the operation of the aircraft to the quality of the air that passengers and crew breathe inside the cabin.  I look forward to working with the Subcommittee regarding any concerns you may have on the quality of airliner cabin air and specifically, the proposal on cabin air quality in H.R. 2115.

I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.