HEARING ON THREE BILLS INTENDED TO IMPROVE THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 79
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 30, 2009
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: June 27, 1985
• Content Type: MEMO

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5 ,
MEMORANDUM FOR: FOR: See Distribution
STAT FROM:
VIA:
Liaison Division, OLL
OLL 85-1906
27 June 1985
Oil RF
RUPt
11474/)
Chief, Liaison Division, OLL/
SUBJECT: Hearing on Three Bills Intended to Improve
the Civil Service Retirement System
1. On 27 June, the House Post Office Civil Service
Committee, Subcommittee on Compensation and Employee
Benefits held a hearing on three bills intended to improve
the Civil Service Retirement System for selected employee
groups. The purpose for the hearing was to build a strong
case in support of the legislation.
2. The three bills are:
H.R.989: Would extend early retirement
eligibility to flight service
station employees;
H.R. 1131 Would correct certain inequities
in the retirement contribution
rate for former members of the
armed services who wish credit
under the civil service
retirement system for their
years of military service;
H.R. 1518 Would include inspectors of the
immigration and naturalization
service and the customs service
under the early retirement
provisions of current law.
Of interest to the Agency is the bi-partisan support on
the House Committee for improving benefits for special
employee groups, and the proposed change in the contribution
rate for former members of the armed services which would
impact on Agency administration.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
AS'
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
3. The Committee plans to work for passage of this
legislation this calendar year. Further hearings, which
will include spokesmen from the Administration, will be
held. Chances for clearance by the Committee and passage by
the House are strong; Senate action, however, is uncertain.
4. Copies of the bills and statements for the record
from the 27 June hearing are attached.
Attachment:
as stated
Distribution:
1 -
DDA
1 -
D/OP
1 -
DD/EB&S/OP
1 -
DD/PA&E/OP
1 -
D/OLL
1 -
Chief/ Leg/OLL
1 -
C LD OLL
STAT
1 -
Subject
1 -
Chrono w/d att
1-secord
1 - OLL Chrono w/o att
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
99TH CONGRESS LT 13
1ST SESSION
1 1 ? 11.
? 1518
To amend title 5, United States Code, to include inspectors of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service and inspectors of the United States Customs
Service within the immediate retirement provisions applicable to certain
employees engaged in hazardous occupations.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 7, 1985
Mr. SWIFT (for himself, Mr. DWYER of New Jersey, Mr. BONIOR of Michigan,
Mr. ADDABBO, Mr. NowAK, Mr. STARK, Mr. BIAGGI, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr.
FAZIO, and Ms. Milcuisia) introduced the following bill; which was referred
to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
A BILL
To amend title 5, United States Code, to include inspectors of
the Immigration and Naturalization Service and inspectors
of the United States Customs Service within the immediate
retirement provisions applicable to certain employees en-
gaged in hazardous occupations.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That (a) section 8336(c)(1) of title 5, United States Code, is
4 amended to read as follows:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
2
1 "(c)(1) An employee who is separated from the service
2 after becoming 50 years of age and completing 20 years of
3 service as a law enforcement officer, firefighter, immigration
4 inspector, or customs inspector, or any combination of such
5 service totaling at least 20 years, is entitled to an annuity.".
6 (b) Section 8331 of title 5, United States Code, is
7 amended by striking out "and" at the end of paragraph (21),
8 by striking out the period at the end of paragraph (22) and
9 inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon, and by adding at the end
10 thereof the following new paragraphs:
11 "(23) 'immigration inspector' means an employee,
12 the duties of whose position are primarily to perform
13 work as an inspector in the Immigration and Natural-
14 ization Service, Department of Justice; and
15 "(24) 'customs inspector' means an employee, the
16 duties of whose position are primarily to perform work
17 as an inspector in the United States Customs Service,
18 Department of the Treasury.".
19 SEC. 2. The amendments made by the first section of
20 this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this
21 Act, and shall apply with respect to employees separated
22 from the service on or after such date.
0
ill 1518 10
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
99TH CONGRESS
H R. 989
?
1ST SESSION
To amend title 5, United States Code, to revise the definition of air traffic
controllers entitled to immediate retirement annuities under section 8336(e),
and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 6, 1985
Mr. TAYLOR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee
on Post Office and Civil Service
A BILL
To amend title 5, United States Code, to revise the definition of
air traffic controllers entitled to immediate retirement annu-
ities under section 8336(e), and for other purposes.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 lives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That section 8336(e) of title 5, United States Code, is
4 amended to read as follows:
5 "(e) An employee who is voluntarily or involuntarily
6 separated from the service, except by removal for- cause on
7 charges of misconduct or delinquency, after completing 25
8 years of service as an air traffic controller or as an employee
9 who (determined under regulations prescribed by the Secre-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
2
1 tary of Transportation) is actively engaged in providing pre-
2 flight, inflight, or airport advisory service to aircraft opera-
3 tors, or who is the immediate supervisor of such an employ-
4 ee, in a flight service station facility, or after becoming 50
5 years of age and completing 20 years of such service, is enti-
6 tled to an annuity."
7 SEC. 2. The foregoing provisions of this Act shall take
8 effect on the 90th day after-
9 (1) the date of the enactment of this Act, or
10 (2) October 1, 1985,
11 whichever is later.
0
II 989 IR
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
99TH CONGRESS
R. FI R 1131
?
1ST SESSION
To amend title 5, United States Code, to modify the method for determining the
amount payable by a Federal employee or Member of Congress in order to
receive credit under the civil service retirement system based on certain
military service.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 19, 1985
Mr. OBERSTAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
A BILL
To amend title 5, United States Code, to modify the method for
determining the amount payable by a Federal employee or
Member of Congress in order to receive credit under the
civil service retirement system based on certain military
service.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That (a)(1) the first sentence of section 8334(j)(1) of title 5,
4 United States Code, is amended by striking out "an amount"
5 and all that follows thereafter through the period and insert-
6 ing in lieu thereof "for each period of military service after
7 December 1956, an amount equal to that percentage of the
Sanitized CopyApproved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
2
1 basic military pay paid to the employee or Member which
2 would have been payable under subsection (c) of this section
3 if such pay had been paid to the employee or Member for
4 civilian service as an employee rather than for military serv-
5 ice.".
6 (2) Section 8334(j)(1) of title 5, United States Code, is
7 amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sen-
8 tence: "For the purpose of this paragraph, the term 'basic
9 military pay' means basic pay paid under section 204 of title
10 37, United States Code.".
0
Hi 1131 111
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS
MARY ROSE OAKAR, OHIO, CHAIR
MICKEY LELAND, TEXAS JOHN T. MYERS. INDIANA
STEPHEN J. SOLARZ. NEW YORK DON YOUNG. ALASKA
1:1.6S. tom of Representatioes
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
406 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
filagbington, 33C 20515
minima (204 226-7546
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
HEARING ON W.R. 1111, W.R. QPQ AND H.R. 1R18
JUNE 27, 1V9
WITNESS LIS'
PANEL 1: THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ORERSTAR (D-MN)
MEMBER OF CONGRESS
THE HONORABLE GENE TAYLOR (R-MO)
MEMBER OF CONGRESS
THE HONORABLE AL SWIFT (D-WA)
MEMBER OF CONGRESS
PANEL 2: MR. BRUCE HENRY, PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AIR TRAFFIC SPECIALISTS
PANEL 3:
ACCOmPANIED BY
MR. EDWARD L. HUIE
DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AIR TRAFFIC
SPECIALISTS
MR. CHARLES T. MURPHY, PRESIDENT
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE COUNCIL
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
MR. PAUL NEWTON
DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATION
NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION
MS. TRICIA THOMAS
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
COMMANDER JOHN WANAMAKER
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
RETIRED OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS
MARY ROSE OAKAR, OHIO, CHAIR
MICKEY LELAND, TEXAS JOHN T. MYERS. INDIANA
STEPHEN J. SOLARZ, NEW YORK DON YOUNG. ALASKA
/Muse of Representatives
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
406 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Washington, ac 20515
TELEPHONE [phone]
STATEMENT OF CONORESSWOMAN MARY ROSE OAKAR, CHAIR
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
OF THE
HOUSE POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE COMMITTEE
HEARING ON H.R. 111, H.R. 989 AND H.R. 1918
THURSDAY, JUNE 27, 1985
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL COME TO ORDER.
TODAY, THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL COMMENCE HEARINGS ON THREE
BILLS TO IMPROVE THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM.
H.R. 1131, WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY CONGRESSMAN JAMES
ORERSTAR, WOULD CORRECT CERTAIN INEQUITIES IN THE RETIREMENT
CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR FORMER MEMBERS OF THE ARMED SERVICES WHO
WISH CREDIT UNDER THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR THEIR
YEARS OF MILITARY SERVICE.
H.R. qPQ, WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY THE RANKING MINORITY
MEMBER OF THE FULL POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE COMMITTEE,
CONGRESSMAN GENE TAYLOR, WOULD EXTEND EARLY RETIREMENT
ELIGIBILITY TO FLIGHT SERVICE STATION EMPLOYEES.
H.R. 151P, INTRODUCED BY CONGRESSMAN AL SWIFT, WOULD INCLUDE
INSPECTORS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE AND THE
CUSTOMS SERVICE UNDER THF EARLY RETIREMENT PROVISIONS OF CURRENT
LAW.
UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S CONTINUING
EFFORTS TO SEEK REDUCTIONS IN CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT BENEFITS
AND INCREASES IN THF CONTRIBUTION RATES, WE HAVE BEEN FORCED TO
FOCUS MOST OF OUR ATTENTION ON MAINTAINING THF EXISTING BENEFIT
AND RATE STRUCTURE. THERE IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND, HOWEVER, THAT
THE CURRENT RETIREMENT SYSTEM CAN BE, AND SHOULD BE, IMPROVED.
I AM ESPECIALLY PLEASED THAT EACH OF THE BILLS BEFORE THF
SUBCOMMITTEE TODAY REPRESENTS A STEP FORWARD IN PROVIDING
DESERVED BENEFITS TO FORMER MILITARY PERSONNEL AND FEDERAL
WORKERS. ONE BILL RECOGNIZES AND SEEKS TO CORRECT AN INEQUITY IN
THE CURRENT RETIREMENT PROGRAM THAT REQUIRES FORMER MILITARY
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
2
PERSONNEL TO PAY MORE FOR RETIREMENT BENEFITS THAN CIVILIAN
EMPLOYEES; THE OTHER TWO WOULD PROVIDE EARLY RETIREMENT
ELIGIBILITY FOR EMPLOYEES IN CERTAIN OCCUPATIONS WHO EXPERIENCE
UNUSUAL STRESS, EXTREME EmOTIONAL AND PHYSICAL DEMANDS, OR
LIFE-THREATENING SITUATIONS. EACH OF THESE RILLS ARE WORTHY OF
SERIOUS CONSIDERATION BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO TODAY'S HEARING AND THE TESTIMONY
FROM OUR FINE WITNESSES.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
A STATEMENT BY
THE HONORABLE GENE TAYLOR
BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
JUNE 27, 1985
I WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO MY
COLLEAGUE FOR HOLDING THESE HEARINGS, BECAUSE AS SHE KNOWS, I HAVE
HAD A LONG TIME INTEREST IN THE SUBJECT OF EARLY RETIREMENT FOR THOSE
AIR TRAFFIC EMPLOYEES OR CONTROLLERS WHO WORK IN FLIGHT SERVICE
STATIONS.
I AM PLEASED TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU TODAY AS WE BEGIN THESE
HEARINGS AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS MYSELF TO THE SUBJECT I HAVE
ALREADY MENTIONED. AS YOU KNOW, I HAVE INTRODUCED H.R. 989, WHICH
WOULD PROVIDE THE EARLY RETIREMENT BENEFITS ENJOYED BY TOWER AND
CENTER CONTROLLERS TO STATION CONTROLLERS. I HAVE INTRODUCED SIMILAR
MEASURES IN PAST CONGRESSES BECAUSE I CONTINUE TO BELIEVE THAT THE
RETIREMENT TREATMENT RECEIVED BY STATION CONTROLLERS IS UNFAIR, IN
LIGHT OF THE EARLY RETIREMENT BENEFITS RECEIVED BY THEIR COLLEAGUES
IN TOWERS AND CENTERS. HOW WE CAN CONTINUE TO TREAT ONE SEGMENT OF A
PERSONNEL COMMUNITY WITH CERTAIN BENEFITS AND DENY THOSE BENEFITS TO
OTHERS IN THE SAME COMMUNITY WHO DO SIMILAR WORK IS INDEED A MYSTERY.
MY INVOLVEMENT IN THIS ISSUE BEGAN IN THE 94th CONGRESS WHEN I
WAS PRIVILEGED TO SERVE AS THE RANKING MINORITY ON OUR FORMER
SUBCOMMITTEE ON RETIREMENT AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS AND HAS CONTINUED
UNTIL TODAY. DURING SOME OF THESE YEARS, I ALSO SERVED ON PUBLIC
WORKS SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION AND I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH OUR
NATION'S AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM, PARTICULARLY
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
THE FINE ROLE OF THE SPECIALISTS WHO WORK IN OUR FLIGHT
SERVICE STATIONS AND I CAN ATTEST TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THEIR WORK TO
A LARGE SEGMENT OF THE AVIATION COMMUNITY.
THERE CONTINUES TO BE A GREAT DEAL OF MISUNDERSTANDING CONCERNING
THE ROLE OF FLIGHT SERVICE STATIONS WITHIN THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
SYSTEM. SOME OF THIS CAN, I BELIEVE, BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE TITLE OF
THE ORIGINAL EARLY RETIREMENT LEGISLATION ENACTED IN 1972 AS THE "AIR
TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS CAREER PROGRAM". THERE IS ONLY ONE AIR TRAFFIC
CONTROL SYSTEM MADE UP OF THREE CATEGORIES OF SPECIALISTS, NOW KNOWN
AS CONTROLLERS, AND THEY ARE EMPLOYED IN TOWERS, CENTERS AND
STATIONS.
IN MY OPINION, THE CONGRESS MADE A MISTAKE IN 1972 BY NOT
INCLUDING ALL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALIZATIONS, THOSE IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AS WELL AS THOSE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, UNDER SOME OR ALL OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THE ORIGINAL ACT. ALTHOUGH WE AMENDED THE LAW IN 1960
TO INCLUDE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, WE FAILED TO
COMPLETELY CORRECT THE PROBLEM.
PERSONNEL IN ALL THREE CATEGORIES ARE FREQUENTLY CALLED
"CONTROLLERS" BY THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) AND OTHERS
AS WELL AND ONE MIGHT BELIEVE THAT THEY ACTUALLY CONTROLLED
AIRCRAFT. HOWEVER, FAA REGULATIONS CLEARLY STATE THAT: "THE PILOT IN
COMMAND OF AN AIRCRAFT IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR, AND, IS THE FINAL
AUTHORITY AS TO THE OPERATION OF THE AIRCRAFT". THE COURTS HAVE
TAKEN A SIMILAR VIEW AND IN SAWYER v. U.S. D.C. N.Y. 1969 STATED:
-2-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
"RESPONSIBILITY FOR SAFETY OF AN AIRPLANE AND ITS PASSENGERS
RESTS WITH THE CAPTAIN-PILOT BY GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS
HAVING THE FORCE AND EFFECT OF LAW."
ALSO FROM THE SAME CASE:
"THE FACT THAT THE PILOT MAY BE FLYING WITH AN AIR TRAFFIC
CLEARANCE DOES NOT RELIEVE HIM OF THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR
OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THE AIRCRAFT."
ACCORDINGLY, CONTROL CAN ONLY BE EXERCISED IN THE COCKPIT AND BY THE
PILOT IN COMMAND.
IN LOOKING OVER THE FATALITY STATISTICS PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD (NTSB) ON JANUARY 10, 1985, I WAS SHOCKED
TO LEARN THAT OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS GENERAL AVIATION, INCLUDING AIR
TAXIS AND COMMUTERS, EXCEEDED 13,000 FATALITIES, WHICH IS MORE THAN
13 TIMES THE DEATHS AMONG THE SCHEDULED AIR CARRIERS.
GENERAL AVIATION PILOTS ARE THE PRIMARY USERS OF THAT BRANCH OF
THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM KNOWN AS THE FLIGHT SERVICE STATION.
I'M SURE YOU CAN NOW SEE WHY THIS CAN BE SUCH A TRAUMATIC AND
STRESSFUL ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH TO WORK. FURTHER, ALMOST HALF OF ALL
EMERGENCY FLIGHT ASSISTS, ACCORDING TO RECENT HOUSE TRANSPORTATION
APPROPRIATIONS HEARINGS, WERE MADE BY STATION SPECIALISTS, WHILE IT
HAS LESS THAN 20 PERCENT OF THE PERSONNEL IN THE ENTIRE SYSTEM. I AM
CONCERNED THAT ONE-FIFTH OF THE PERSONNEL HANDLE ALMOST FIFTY
PERCENTOF THE EMERGENCY SITUATIONS IN THE AIR AND CAN DO SO UNTIL
THEY REACH THEIR LATE FIFTIES OR EARLY SIXTIES.
-3-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
GENERAL AVIATION IS THE MOST HAZARDOUS SEGMENT OF AVIATION, AND
YET, THE FAA DENIES EARLY RETIREMENT BENEFITS TO EMPLOYEES INVOLVED
WITH GENERAL AVIATION AND PROVIDES THESE BENEFITS TO THOSE EMPLOYEES
INVOLVED WITH SCHEDULED CARRIERS, THE SAFEST SEGMENT OF AVIATION.
?
THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION RECOGNIZED THE HAZARDS OF THE
WORKPLACE IN THE FLIGHT SERVICE SYSTEM IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF 5 USC
5542 BY INCLUDING STATION EMPLOYEES FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR SPECIAL
OVERTIME PAY AND STATED:
"(A) THE DUTIES OF WHICH ARE CRITICAL TO THE IMMEDIATE DAILY
OPERATION OF THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM, DIRECTLY AFFECT
AVIATION SAFETY, AND INVOLVE PHYSICAL OR MENTAL STRAIN OR
HARDSHIP;".
IN MY VIEW, THIS ACTION ALONE, IS SUFFICIENT REASON FOR THE ENACTMENT
OF H.R. 989.
GOING BACK TO THE 1980 LEGISLATION, ALREADY MENTIONED, IT IS
INTERESTING TO FOLLOW THE SERIES OF EVENTS AFTER THIS COMMITTEE
FAVORABLY REPORTED THE BILL. EVEN THOUGH THE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE REPORT_]D THE BILL ADVERSELY IT RECOGNIZED THE POTENTIAL FOR
DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON EMPLOYEE MORAL. IN THEIR REPORT THEY
RECOMMENDED THAT A STUDY BE DONE BEFORE THEY MADE A DECISION AS TO
INCLUDING "FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS" IN THE PROGRAM. THE COMMITTEE
FOLLOWED THROUGH ON THIS RECOMMENDATION AND DIRECTED THE FAA TO
CONDUCT A STUDY IN COOPERATION WITH AN INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATION, AND
TO REPORT IT TO THE COMMITTEE NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 30, 1981.
-4-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
ON NOVEMBER 30, 1981 THE FAA FORWARDED A REPORT PREPARED BY A
PRIVATE CONTRACTOR AND THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE FAA STATED, IN HIS
COVER LETTER
IN PART:
"BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS PRESENTED BY JWK
INTERNATIONAL, WE DO NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE WHICH WARRANTS
THE EXTENSION OF EARLY RETIREMENT BENEFITS TO FLIGHT SERVICE
STATION SPECIALISTS."
IT WOULD SEEM TO ME, THAT THE ONE OF THE BEST PIECES OF EVIDENCE WAS
LOCATED AT 5 USC 5542, WHICH I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED.
AT THAT TIME, I EVALUATED THE FAA'S EFFORT AS A HALF-HEARTED
ATTEMPT TO APPEASE THE CONGRESS WITH THE HOPE THAT THE PROBLEM WOULD
DISAPPEAR. THE ONLY THING WHICH HAS DISAPPEARED IS THE $75,000 IN
TAXPAYER MONEY WHICH THE FAA USED TO PAY THE PRIVATE CONTRACTOR.
THIS REPORT WAS REVIEWED AND CRITIQUED, AT THE REQUEST OF THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AIR TRAFFIC SPECIALISTS (NAATS), BY THE FIRM
OF RITTENBERG, FRIEDMAN, KILGALLON AND ASSOCIATES, WHICH IS A
WASHINGTON-BASED ECONOMIC RESEARCH AND CONSULTING FIRM SPECIALIZING
IN LABOR ECONOMICS AND EMPLOYMENT ISSUES SINCE 1969. UPON URGING BY
THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE, IN CONFERENCE, ON THE 1983
TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL, THE FAA FORWARDED BOTH REPORTS TO
THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE (GAO) FOR EVALUATION, ANALYSIS AND A
REPORT.
-5-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
IN MARCH 1984, THE GAO REPORTED ITS FINDINGS AND CONCLUDED:
"OUR REVIEW SHOWED THE JWK'S STUDY RESULTS ARE
INCONCLUSIVE. THE RESULTS DO NOT SUPPORT FAA'S CONCLUSIONS
THAT FSS SPECIALISTS SHOULD NOT BE AFFORDED EARLY
RETIREMENT...."
AS I HAVE ALREADY SET FORTH IN THIS STATEMENT, NO FAA GROUND
PERSONNEL CONTROL AIRCRAFT, BUT ALL CONTROL PERSONNEL MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS TO PILOTS TO INSURE A SAFE FLIGHT. STATION PERSONNEL
MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS TO SEPARATE AIRCRAFT FROM
DANGEROUS WEATHER CELLS. IN HIS HEARING ON THE "IMPACT OF WEATHER ON
AVIATION SAFETY", OUR COLLEAGUE, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PUBLIC WORKS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT STATED:
"IT BECAME PRETTY CLEAR THAT THE MESSAGE BEING GIVEN BY ALL
THE WITNESSES IS THAT SUSPECT WEATHER CELLS SHOULD BE
AVOIDED JUST AS ONE AIRCRAFT SHOULD AVOID THE PATH OF
ANOTHER AIRCRAFT..."
THE HEAVY RESPONSIBILITY FOR HUMAN LIFE THAT IS CITED AS A STRESS
PRODUCING FACTOR FOR CONTROLLERS IN TOWERS AND CENTERS IS SHARED BY
THE SPECIALISTS IN STATIONS AND IT IS OFTEN A MORE MEANINGFUL FACTOR
BECAUSE THESE EMPLOYEES DEAL FACE TO FACE WITH THE GENERAL AVIATION
PILOTS AND THEIR PASSENGERS.
DURING THE COURSE OF AN 8 HOUR SHIFT, A STATION SPECIALIST MAKES
A SERIES OF JUDGEMENTS AND RENDERS ADVICE TO PILOTS THAT IS VITAL TO
THEIR SAFETY.
-6-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
HE EXPERIENCES JUST AS MUCH STRESS AND JUST AS MUCH WORRY AS ANY
OTHER SPECIALIST OR "CONTROLLER". THIS STRESS OFTEN BECOMES ACUTE
WHEN WEATHER CONDITIONS ARE INCLEMENT, WHEN AN INEXPERIENCED PILOT IS
AT THE CONTROL OF A PLANE, WHEN AN AIRCRAFT MALFUNCTIONS OR WHEN AN
EMERGENCY SEARCH IS UNDERWAY.
SPECIALISTS EMPLOYED AT ALL LOCATIONS WITHIN THE FAA SYSTEM OR
THE MILITARY SYSTEM, ARE AWARE THAT THEIR LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE MUST
CONSTANTLY BE OF THE HIGHEST CALIBER. THEY KNOW THE COST OF
INDECISION AND ERROR IS MEASURED IN TERMS OF HUMAN LIFE. BOTH THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS WELL AS THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT HAVE ATTEMPTED, THROUGH SEVERAL ADMINISTRATIONS, TO
MINIMIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY FLIGHT SERVICE
PERSONNEL.
THIS CONCERNS ME BECAUSE TO ANY ONE WHO THINKS IN PRACTICAL
TERMS, THE STATION SPECIALIST IS AS VITAL TO AVIATION SAFETY AS ANY
CONTROL OR TOWER SPECIALIST. IN THE PAST, SPOKESMEN FOR THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH HAVE TRIED TO DIVERT THE FOCUS ON THESE MATTERS AWAY
FROM THE INTERESTS OF AIR SAFETY, BY PERSISTENTLY OPPOSING MEASURES
THAT WOULD EXPAND THE COVERAGE OF ALL OR EVEN PART OF PUBLIC LAW
92-297 TO FSS SPECIALISTS. THESE SPOKESMEN USUALLY TALK IN TERMS OF
THE IMMEDIATE BENEFITS WHICH MIGHT BE GRANTED, AS THOUGH THESE
SPECIALISTS ARE AN UNDESERVING SECOND-CLASS CITIZEN.
-7-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
IF THE FAA ARGUES THAT A YOUTHFUL WORK FORCE IS REQUIRED IN
CENTERS AND TOWERS, I WILL QUICKLY POINT OUT THAT THEIR ACTIONS OF
THE PAST COMPLETELY BELIE SUCH ARGUMENTS, SINCE THEY ARE NOW
EMPLOYING AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALISTS WHO, YEARS AGO, RETIRED
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF PUBLIC LAW 92-297. THESE PERSONNEL WERE
DESCRIBED, BY THE FAA, AS "HIGH PERFORMERS" BEFORE THE HOUSE
TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE.
IF FAIRNESS AND EQUITY IN THE WORK FORCE IS TO BE ACHIEVED AND IF
AVIATION SAFETY IS TO BE ENHANCED, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO
INCLUDE THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALISTS IN STATIONS WITHIN THE
GROUP ENTITLED TO EARLY RETIREMENT AND REMOVE THE STIGMA OF
SEPARATENESS FROM THESE LOYAL AND DEDICATED FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
AGAIN, I WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN THIS ISSUE AND
FOR HOLDING THESE HEARINGS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
-8-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30 : CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
STATEMENT BY CONGRESSMAN AL SWIFT
BEFORE THE COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS SUBCOMMITTEE
JUNE 27, 1985
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS SUBCOMMITTEE:
I AM PLEASED THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS CONTINUING ITS EFFORTS TO BRING
FAIRNESS AND EQUITY TO THE EARLY RETIREMENT ISSUE. AS YOU KNOW, ON FEBRUARY 7TH
OF LAST YEAR YOUR SUBCOMMITTEE HELD AN EXTENSIVE HEARING ON A BILL I INTRODUCED
TO BRING CUSTOMS AND IMMIGRATION INSPECTORS UNDER THE 6(C) EARLY RETIREMENT
PROVISION OF CIVIL SERVICE. I BELIEVE WE MADE A GOOD RECORD THAT DAY, AND I'M.
GLAD THAT WE HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND UPON THAT RECORD. I AM HERE TODAY
TO SPEAK ON MY BILL, HR 1518, WHICH CONTINUES IN THE 99TH CONGRESS WHAT WE BEGAN
IN THE 98TH CONGRESS.
I WOULD BE REMISS.IF I DID NOT ALSO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COMMEND THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE FULL COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE, BILL FORD, FOR
HIS WORK IN THIS AREA, INCLUDING THE HEARING HELD ON APRIL 25TH OF THIS YEAR ON
THE EARLY RETIREMENT ISSUE. MUCH OF THE TESTIMONY AT THAT HEARING PARALLELED
THE CASE THAT I HAVE TRIED TO MAKE FOR CUSTOMS AND IMMIGRATION INSPECTORS.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE FOREIGN SERVICE REPRESENTS THEIR OCCUPATION AS AN
"INCREASINGLY ARDUOUS LIFE; THOSE WHO, AFTER A LONG AND VALUED CAREER, CANNOT
CONTINUE TO MEET THOSE CHALLENGES SHOULD BE ABLE TO RETIRE VOLUNTARILY..."
THE FBI STATED THAT CONGRESS "RECOGNIZED THE NEED TO ENCOURAGE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A YOUNG AND VIGOROUS SPECIAL AGENT WORKFORCE CAPABLE OF
PERFORMING PHYSICALLY ARDUOUS TASKS UNDER STRESSFUL CONDITIONS...(AND)...THE
SPECIAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS HAVE HISTORICALLY PROVEN TO BE A VALUABLE INDUCEMENT
IN THE RECRUITMENT OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED APPLICANTS."
SIMILAR COMMENTARY WAS RECEIVED FROM FEDERAL FIREFIGHTERS, AIR TRAFFIC
CONTROL SPECIALISTS, THE CIA, AND OTHERS.
I AM STRUCK BY THE SIMILARITY OF ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY SPOKESPERSONS FROM
THOSE AGENCIES JUST REFERENCED, WITH THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY ADVOCATES FOR
EARLY RETIREMENT FOR CUSTOMS AND IMMIGRATION INSPECTORS AT LAST YEAR'S HEARING
BEFORE THIS SUBCOMMITTEE.
FOR INSPECTORS ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO DANGERS, AND THE HAZARDS THEY FACE ARE
SUCH THAT THEY CANNOT BE DISCOVERED PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THEIR DUTIES.
IN THE EXAMINATION OF PERSONS, THE INSPECTOR IS ALWAYS FACED WITH THE
POSSIBILITY THAT THE ARRIVING TRAVELER IS AN ARMED AND DANGEROUS FUGITIVE FELON
WHO LOOKS AT THE INSPECTOR AS A ROADBLOCK BETWEEN FREEDOM AND APPREHENSION.
IN LAST YEAR'S HEARING A GROUP OF INSPECTORS' WIVES FROM MY DISTRICT GAVE
WHAT I BELIEVE IS COMPELLING TESTIMONY ON THE HAZARDOUS DUTIES OF INSPECTORS.
THE INSPECTOR IS TRAINED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED NOT ONLY ON WHAT IS
SAID, BUT HOW IT IS SAID, MANNERISMS EXHIBITED...PROFILES LEARNED AND A HOST OF
OTHER TECHNIQUES. IT IS VERY OFTEN THE INSPECTOR'S ABILITY AND HIS COWORKER'S
ABILITY TO COME TO HIS AID WHICH MAKES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIFE AND DEATH.
THE MENTAL AND PHYSICAL STRAIN THIS PLACES THE INSPECTOR UNDER IS ENORMOUS.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
MULTIPLY THIS STRESS OVER A LONG PERIOD OF SERVICE, AND YOU CAN IMAGINE THE TOLL
IT TAKES." IN CONTRAST, POLICE OFFICERS "ARE USUALLY ARMED WITH ARREST AND
SEARCH WARRANTS BEFOREHAND, AND THEY HAVE INFORMATION ON THE SUBJECT TO BE
ARRESTED--WHO HE IS, WHAT HIS KNOWN HABITS ARE, AND WHETHER OR NOT HE IS LIKELY
TO BE ARMED. THEY KNOW WHEN AND WHERE THE ARREST WILL TAKE PLACE, AND THEY PLAN
ACCORDINGLY, USUALLY MAKING SURE THERE WERE MORE OFFICERS THAN SUBJECTS PRESENT.
THE INSPECTOR, HOWEVER, HAS NONE OF THESE LUXURIES. IT IS THE CRIMINAL WHO
PICKS HIS TIME FOR THE CONFRONTATION, AND THE CRIMINAL APPROACHES THE INSPECTOR,
KNOWING HE IS IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW, AND FULLY PREPARED TO PREVENT HIS ARREST
AT ALL COSTS."
THE ARREST STATISTICS--WHILE NOT AS PERSONALLY COMPELLING--ARE ALSO GRAPHIC.
CUSTOMS INSPECTORS MAKE IN THE ORDER OF 13,000 ARRESTS A YEAR, MANY OF THEM
BASED IN PART ON INFORMATION FROM THE FBI'S NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER.
THE FBI STATES THAT CUSTOMS INSPECTORS MAKE MORE NCIC ARRESTS THAN ALL OTHER
FEDERAL AGENCIES COMBINED, AND ALL OF THEM ARE FELONY ARRESTS. IMMIGRATION
INSPECTORS HAVE LEAD RESPONSIBLITY FOR SCREENING INDIVIDUALS ENTERING OUR
COUNTRY. IN PAST YEARS, MORE THAN ONE-HALF MILLION INADMISSIBLE ALIENS A YEAR
HAVE BEEN INTERCEPTED AT PORTS OF ENTRY, MANY OF THEM USING FRADULENT OR
COUNTERFEIT DOCUMENTS. THIS IS AN INCREASINGLY VOLATILE SITUATION, AND VIOLENCE
AND ARREST RESISTANCE ARE A CONSTANT THREAT TO INSPECTORS.
WE HAVE SUPPLIED INSPECTORS WITH HIGH TECHNOLOGY TOOLS FOR CRIME DETECTION
AND PREVENTION; WE HAVE FUNDED AGGRESSIVE AND EFFECTIVE SPECIAL INTERDICTION
TEAMS TO COMBAT DRUGS, FELONS AND DEFENSE-RELATED CONTRABAND; AND WE HAVE
DEMANDED OF CUSTOMS AND IMMIGRATION INSPECTORS--AND RIGHTFULLY SO--THAT THEY
SERVE AS A FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF OUR BORDERS AND
ENSURE THE VIGILANT AND ENERGETIC ENFORCEMENT OF OUR NATION'S LAWS. IF WE
EXPECT THIS PUBLIC MANDATE TO BE MET, THEN WE NEED THE BEST PEOPLE FOR THE JOB.
WITHOUT ENSURING THE ENTHUSIASM AND ESPIRIT DE CORPS THAT A YOUNG AND VIGOROUS
'WORKFORCE WILL BRING TO THE JOB, WE HAVE NOT DONE OUR BEST TO PROTECT OUR
NATIONAL INTERESTS AND THE PUBLIC WELFARE.
AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR, THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON
THE ISSUE OF EARLY RETIREMENT FOR CUSTOMS AND IMMIGRATION INSPECTORS.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
_ONAA7S1>
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AIR TRAFFIC SPECIALISTS
SUITE 415, WHEATON PLAZA NORTH
WHEATON, MARYLAND 20902
Area Code 301
946-0882
STATEMENT
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
THE HONORABLE MARY ROSE OAKAR
CHAIRPERSON
COMMITTEE
ON
POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Ninety-Ninth Congress
on
BENEFITS FOR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALISTS (STATION)
EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
by
BRUCE B. HENRY
PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
AIR TRAFFIC SPECIALISTS
June 27, 1985
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
1
Madam Chair and Distinguished Members of this Subcommittee, I
am grateful that you have provided me with the opportunity to appear
before you and to express my thoughts and opinions relative to early
retirement benefits for Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station).
I am accompanied by Mr. Edward L. Huie, our Director of Legislative
Affairs, and Mr. Edward J. Malo, an aviation consultant and an ex-
pert on the Air Traffic Control System. Mr. Malo will make a short
statement after I conclude.
These hearings are most timely since all issues relating to
Federal employee retirement are under consideration by this Congress.
We believe that the issue before you is one of air safety and fair-
ness.
The Flight Service System is an integral part of the Air Traf-
fic Control System and there are about 317 flight service stations
throughout the United States. The personnel who staff the Air
Traffic Control System are designated by the Office of Personnel
Management as Series 2152 and are called:
? Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station)
This category is the least understood of all the categories
because of the lack of term standardization and the widespread use
of colloquialisms. FAA, and others as well, confuse the issue by
referring to this category as Flight Service Specialists, Specialists
Flight Service Station Specialists, Station Specialists, Station
Personnel, Station Controllers, Controllers and Specialists. It is
so confusing that uninformed persons sometimes infer that these
are the personnel who fuel and maintain aircraft. For NAATS,
this is an overwhelming educational burden. An example is
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
2
included as Attachment (1) hereto. (FAA news release dated
March 5, 1985--FAA 10-85).
The two other categories are:
. Air Traffic Control Specialists (Terminal)
. Air Traffic Control Specialists (Center)
This Association is designated by the Secretary of Labor
as the exclusive representative of all the bargaining unit
members who are Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station)
Series 2152.
Personnel in all three categories are frequently called
"Controllers" by FAA and others as well, and one might infer
that they actually control aircraft in the ordinary sense of
the word "control." Federal Aviation Administration Regulation
91.3(a) clearly states, "The pilot in command of an aircraft is
directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to the
operation of that aircraft."
If responsibility for operation of the aircraft is vested
in the "pilot in command" as the FAA has prescribed, then
control and separation can only be exercised by the pilot and
not by an FAA employee located on the ground in some far away
place using a radarscope, an inexact instrument at best even
when operating at peak efficiency.
Additionally, we have all heard of radar "_outages" in
recent years, an event upon which the news media thrives.
We often wonder how the media finds out about "outages" so
quickly. Of course, when there is an "outage" the FAA ground
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
3
personnel can provide no information to the pilot at all.
The Federal Aviation Administration has, therefore, wisely
placed all command, control and separation squarely on the
shoulders of the pilot because there is no other place where
this awesome responsibility can be lodged.
On such a basis we do not believe that responsibility
can be shared for the safety of that aircraft, and that
control can only be exercised in the cockpit.
We can provide no better example of this than the
near miss between two jumbo jet aircraft on March 31, 1985,
at Minneapolis, Minnesota, with a combined total of 500 peolole
aboard. While the National Transportation Safety Board has
not rendered its report, Chairman Burnett and other Safety
Board personnel have been widely quoted by the news media.
"Both crews were executing the air traffic control instruc-
tions they were provided, no question", according to Michael
O'Rourke, investigator in charge for the Safety Board.
However, one pilot in command disregarded the "controller
instructions" and acted on his own and within his authority
and responsibility. He avoided what could have been a dis-
aster reminiscent of the world's worst aviation disaster, where
577 people were killed in Tenerife, Canary Islands, in 1977 in
a similar crossing situation.
This is not to say that the FAA employee on the ground
has no responsibility, for he does have the responsibility
for carrying out the assigned duties of that position
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
4
which are to provide information, make recommendations and
to warn the pilot of other objects in the area as seen on his
radarscope. He cannot in any way interfere with the preroga-
tives of command, which can be no less than absolute.
Nevertheless, we have heard in past hearings, and probably
in this one as well, the FAA witness state that station
personnel are not qualified for early retirement because they
do not control and separate aircraft. We hasten to add that
no FAA employee on the ground controls and separates aircraft
with the exception of the operation of a drone aircraft (no
pilot) and in this case control is exercised from a ground
position or from another vehicle. An example of this was the
recent intentional crash of FAA aircraft in the desert for
reasons of research. In that specific case, FAA employees on
the ground did, in fact, exercise the prerogatives of command,
control and separation. This is the only example that has
come to our attention, where control and separation has been
experienced by FAA ground personnel.
In our view, commercial air carriers are not too anxious
for it to be well known that their pilots in command bear the
full responsibility for the aircraft. It is in their best
interest to dilute and confuse the issue when it comes to
public liability litigation and, if possible, involve the
government as much as possible in sharing damages which may
be awarded by the courts as the result of an air carrier
accident or crash. This applies to the general aviation
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
5
community as well.
In FAA's recent report to the Congress entitled
"FY 1985-87 Planned Office and Facility Consolidations--To
Improve System Effectiveness and Efficiency" dated December 1,
1984, the functions and mission of the flight service stations
are set forth as follows:
"Flight Service Station (FSS). Flight service stations
offer a broad range of pre-flight. and in-flight services
aimed at general aviation (or non-airline) pilots. These
services include conducting pre-flight weather briefings
for pilots and accepting and closing flight plans,
primarily through telephone and radio communications.
Additionally, FSS's provide enroute communications with
pilots flying under Visual Flight Rules (VFR), assist
pilots in distress, work with search and rescue units in
locating missing aircraft, assist lost aircraft and
aircraft in emergency situations, monitor radio navigation
stations, relay air traffic control (ATC) clearances,
originate Notices to Airmen, broadcast aviation weather
and National Airspace System (NAS) information, receive
and process Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight plans,
and monitor radio air navigations facilities (NAVAIDS).
In addition, at selected locations, FSS's provide Enroute
Flight Advisory service (Flight Watch), take weather
observations, issue airport advisories, and advise
Customs and Immigration of transborder flights. The
FSS's also have communications equipment for relaying
information to air traffic towers and control centers and
for various emergency services. Flight service stations
are under the general direction of the regional Air
Traffic Divisions and Washington headquarters."
This statement of mission and function deserves careful
study:
. In the first sentence, the FAA attempts to
downgrade our service by eliminating scheduled
airline pilots as one of the users of flight
service information. While the service may be
aimed at general aviation pilots, the truth is
that scheduled carriers are very frequent
users of flight service products.
. The word "emergency" is used twice.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Other phrases:
It
. Assist pilots in distress.
. Work with search and rescue units
missing aircraft.
. Assist lost aircraft and aircraft
situations.
in locating
in emergency
6
. Advise Customs and Immigration of transborder
flights (includes drug and narcotics interdiction--
added).
is very significant that 45.7 percent (1985 House
Appropriations Hearings,Part 6, page 641), of all flight assists
were made by Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) while
the system was endowed with only 18 percent of the total
personnel positions in the Air Traffic Control System. To us,
this looks like our people work in an environment where there
are more opportunities to provide assistance for safe flight.
Flight assists are usually emergency
the pilot, passengers and aircraft are in
We believe that emergency situations
situations where
jeopardy.
create a tense
working environment which requires the utmost from the
journeyman in time-critical situations where superior judg-
ment is required.
In this matter, we believe that the Federal Aviation
Administration itself has expressed the strains upon the
Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) far more elo-
quently than we ourselves can express it. In the case of
Marvin A. Miyai (an Air Traffic Control Specialist (Station))
V. Federal Aviation Administration, before the United States
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
7
Merit Systems Protection Board, at a hearing dated February 7,
1985, (Docket No. SF07528510116), Mr. Malachy T. Coghlan, for
the FAA, said of Mr. Miyai's job:
"There are few jobs that require more alertness
of mind, more sound judgement, [sic] the ability to
assimilate information, and the ability to make split
second decisions. The stresses and the strains of the
job are incalculable. And there are very few people
who can perform in that position."
The Comptroller General of the United States recently
published a Report to the Congress, "Safety Standards on
Small Passenger Aircraft," (GAO/RCED-84-2 of January 4, 1984)
which is germane to the Flight Service System and sets forth
the major safety problems with smaller aircraft. While the
report deals specifically with small air carrier aircraft,
the problems set forth are applicable, we believe, to all
general aviation aircraft. All of these are the primary
customers of Flight Service. An appropriate excerpt from this
report follows:
"For a variety of reasons it is difficult to attribute an
aircraft accident to any single cause or factor. According
to NTSB reports, aircraft accidents generally result from
multiple causes. Yet, based on the accident statistics,
one fact remains clear: Flying in a small carrier aircraft
is definitely less safe than flying in a large one.
"How small commuter and air taxi aircraft are used obvi-
ously affects the level of safety that they can achieve.
For example, small commuter aircraft average twice as
many take-offs and landings per hour flown as do large
air carrier aircraft (most accidents occur-during take-offs
and landings). Also, commuter and air taxi aircraft serve
a significantly larger number of lesser equipped or remote
airports than the large aircraft. Finally,small aircraft
spend considerably more time operating at lower altitudes,
where flying weather is often less than ideal.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
8
"The incongruity of this situation, however, is that small
aircraft, which are operating potentially under the more
hazardous conditions, are being built and operated under
FAA's least stringent airworthiness standards and operating
rules for air carriers.
"MAJOR CAUSES AND FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE AIR CARRIER
ACCIDENTS
"While we cannot draw a direct link between accidents and
specific causes, our analysis of FAA accident data for
the period 1975-81 indicates that the causes and factors
of air carrier accidents are related to three areas.
--personnel (including pilot and flight crew and other
personnel such as mechanics and dispatchers),
--environment (airports, weather, and terrain), and
--aircraft (airframe, powerplant, instruments and
accessories).
"Using FAA and NTSB data and our own analyses of these
data on 1,327 commuter air taxi accidents that occurred
during 1975-81, we found that about 53 percent of the
accident causes and factors were personnel-related,
30 percent were related to the environment, and 14 per-
cent were related to the aircraft."
In general aviation,overall, it is estimated that 40% of
all accidents are weather related.
To approach this from another point of view, the National
Transportation Safety Board (SB 85-01 of 1/10/85) has published
the stark body count of fatalities for the past ten years as
follows:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
U.S. Air Carriers*
All Scheduled
Service
(Airlines)
(14 CFR 121)
1975 122
1976 38
1977 78
1978 160
1979 351
1980 0
1981 4
1982 233
1983 15
P. 1984 4
Total 10 yr. 1,005
period
9
FATALITIES
General Aviation**
Air Taxis
Commuters Air General
TOTAL Taxis Commuters Aviation
1,355 69 28 1,258
1,353 100 27 1,226
1,430 118 32 1,280
1,761 155 48 1,558
1,380 77 66 1,237
1,392 103 37 1,252
1,410 94 34 1,282
1,268 72 14 1,182
1,119 62 11 1,046
1,094 55 41 998
13,562
905 338 12,319
AIRCRAFT HOURS FLOWN
P. 1984 7,302,000 35,626,000 3,328,000 1,757,000 30,541,000
P. Preliminary
* About 2,200 aircraft
**Over 200,000 aircraft
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
10
Further, on February 28, 1985, the Chairman, National Transpor-
tation Safety Board, testified before the House Committee on
Appropriations (Transportation) as follows:
"Tremendous strides have been made in aviation
technology in the brief eight decades of its
existence, and yet aviation continues to be plagued
by one of the oldest causes of accidents in the
book -- weather."
From this, one might observe that the FAA is concentrating
the preponderance of its personnel and material resources in
the safest and least accident-prone sector of the Air Traffic
Control System (e.g., scheduled carriers).
From all this, we can only conclude that Air Traffic
Control Specialists (Station) experience physical and mental
strain and hardship in the workplace and that the work is
unusually taxing and extremely stressful, perhaps more than
any part of the Air Traffic Control System.
It is for these reasons that the Secretary of Transporta-
tion, in implementation of 5 USC 5542, included Air Traffic
Control Specialists (Station) within the provisions of that
law. The pertinent provisions are quoted below:
"(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2) of
this subsection for an employee of the Department
of Transportation who occupies a nonmanagerial
position in GS-14 or under and, as determined by
the Secretary of Transportation,
(A) the duties of which are critical to the
immediate daily operation of the air traffic
control system, directly affect aviation
safety, and involve physical or mental strain
or hardship;
(B) in which overtime work is therefore
unusually taxing; and
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
11
(C) in which operating requirements cannot
be met without substantial overtime work;
the overtime hourly rate of pay is an amount equal to
one and one-half times the hourly rate of basic pay
of the employee, and all that amount is premium pay."
Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) are employees of
the Department of Transportation. They do occupy nonmanagerial
positions in GS-14 or under. Their duties are critical to the
operation of the Air Traffic Control System and directly affect
aviation safety. These duties involve physical and mental strain
and hardship and, therefore, overtime work is unusually taxing.
Lastly, operating requirements cannot be met without substantial
overtime work.
In the House Appropriations Hearing for Fiscal Year 1985,
(Part 6, page 641), the FAA estimated that overtime in the
Flight Service System would be 163,561 hours.
Not only has the Secretary of Transportation determined
that Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) are covered
by 5 USC 5542, but also the Secretary has reaffirmed this
determination every pay period since the enactment of the law.
Not only is special overtime pay for Air Traffic Control
Specialists (Station) provided in 5 USC 5542, but also premium
pay is provided by the Congress in the Continuing Appropriations
for Fiscal Year 1983 (P.L. 97-276 Oct. 2, 1982)-quoted below:
"S5546a. Differential pay for certain employees of the
Federal Aviation Administration
"(a) The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration (hereafter in this section referred to
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
12
as the 'Administrator') may pay premium pay at the rate
of 5 per centum of the applicable rate of basic pay to--
"(1) any employee of the Federal Aviation
Administration who is--
"(A) occupying a position in the air traffic
series classified not lower than GS-9 and
located in an air traffic control center or
terminal or in a flight service station;..."
"(e)(1) The Administrator may pay premium pay to any
air traffic controller or flight station specialist of
the Federal Aviation Administration who, while working
a regularly scheduled eight-hour period of service, is
required by his supervisor to work during the fourth
through sixth hour of such period without a break of
thirty minutes for a meal.
"(2) Premium pay paid under paragraph (1) of this
subsection shall be paid at the rate of 50 per centum
of one-half of the applicable hourly rate of basic
pay."
Here again the law is permissive as to its application,
and the FAA Administrator has, for good and sufficient
reasons, included Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) as a
group of employees qualified for the premium pay authorized.
We, accordingly, hold that the community of Air Traffic
Control Specialists (Station) is a unique group of Federal
employees who, by law, is worthy of special consideration and
that exclusion of this group from early retirement benefits
accorded to other Air Traffic Control Specialists of the same
2152 designation and covered by 5 USC 5542 and PL 97-276
constitutes unfair and inequitable treatment.
Unfair and inequitable treatment is demonstrated daily by
the "Second Class Citizen" label which Air Traffic Control
Specialists (Station) have applied to themselves on a national
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
13
basis with the attendant low morale environment which is
apparent to even a casual observer.
The enabling legislation, Public Law 92-297, provided
that only those GS-2152 series Air Traffic Control Specialists
employed at centers and towers would be provided coverage
and benefits under that legislation.
The discriminatory aspects of that legislation has divided
the different categories of Air Traffic Control Specialists into
the "haves" and the "have-nots" and has created a very real
caste system within this safety and life-saving system.
This discrimination has escalated at all levels of the FAA
and the legislation as enacted has proved to be detrimental,
rather than beneficial, to aviation safety.
The cumulative effects of the discrimination by FAA, which
favored one sector of its Air Traffic System workforce to the
exclusion of another, has resulted in feverish attempts on the
part of those covered by the legislation to protect the "private
domain" interests, and they were provided with all possible aid
and comfort by the FAA in continuing and expanding the area
of discrimination.
The question is sometimes asked, "Can the Government be
sued in aircraft accidents involving alleged negligence on
the part of Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station)?".
The answer to that question is in the affirmative, and numerous
examples are set forth in this Committee's Hearing Record
Serial 94-40.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
14
Accordingly, legal burden is upon the shoulders of every
Air Traffic Control Specialist (Station) in the everyday
performance of his duties.
While pay is not a subject of this hearing, discrimination
certainly is a major subject. One only needs to refer to GAO
Report "Development of the Classification Standard for Flight
Service Station Specialists" (FPCD-79-52 of July 25, 1979) to
find significant examples which are quoted:
"Because of the possibility of widespread work slowdowns
by controllers, the Commissioners intervened directly in
the decison making process.PATCO was granted a personal
hearing by the Commissioners who overturned the Standards
Division's position which resulted in a one-grade increase
for controllers over what the Standards Division had recom-
mended. NAATS was also granted a personal hearing, but
it was unsuccessful in its appeal for higher grades for
flight service station specialists."
?
We hold that if the Commissioners so much as lifted a finger
in response to a threat of a widespread work slowdown by "con-
trollers", then the Commissioners were, in fact, placed in the
position of condoning the commission of an intended felonious
act. Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) did not
threaten the Commissioners in any way nor did they contemplate
any such action.
In the Secretary of Transportation's comment on this GAO
report, the Secretary stated:
"It was the Department's and the agency's expectations and
point of view that selected air traffic control and FSS
facilities should be elevated one grade level.
"Although the GAO concludes, and we agree, that proper
procedures were followed by the CSC, we continue to be
convinced that high-volume FSS facilities should be
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
15
established at the GS-12 level. Nothing in the report
changes this belief or resolves this dilemma."
5 USC 2109 defines Air Traffic Controller as "an employee
of the Department of Transportation who is actively engaged
in the separation and control of air traffic", and provides that
the Secretary of Transportation may prescribe regulations or
determine the application of this section. As previously argued
in this testimony, we contend that no FAA personnel on the
ground controls aircraft.
It is interesting to note at this time the document used
by the Secretary of Transportation to implement the provisions
of P.L. 92-297. It is identified as Department of Transporta-
tion Federal Aviation Administration Order 3410.11a, dated May
16, 1975,and reprinted August 30, 1976, with change 1 entitled
"ATC Second Career Program".
The "Foreword" to this order, signed by the "Acting
Administrator", J. W. Cochran, is quoted:
"EXPLANATION. This order revises the ATCS Second Career
Program to incorporate recommendations of the ATCS
Second Career Review Committee, guidance contained in
Supplemental Instruction letters issued as supplements
to Order 3410.11, and recommendations from Washington
and field offices."
No mention is made of retirement benefits or other subjects
addressed in this order and yet, on page 4 we find that the
purpose of the order is significantly expanded:.
"PURPOSE. This order implements Public Law 92-297 which is
designed to improve the conditions of employment for air
traffic controllers by offering retirement benefits, job
training and special appeal procedures for those who are
involuntarily removed from air traffic control work; and
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
16
to establish maximum age limitations for recruitment
under 5 U.S.C. 2109, 3307, and 3384."
The coverage section is of such importance that it is set forth
in its entirety.
"5.
COVERAGE
a. This order applies to and affords coverage for:
employees of DOT with five or more years of
career controller service who meet all of the
following requirements; or the immediate super-
visor or a nonsupervisory employee who meets all
of the following requirements:
(1) Offically assigned to an air traffic control
facility;
(2) Actively engaged in the separation and control
of live air traffic;
(3) Occupies a position which requires him to meet
on a continuing basis the physical qualifica-
tion standards established by the Civil Service
Commission for an air traffic controller.
b. This coverage includes and is limited to full
professional level controllers and their immediate
supervisors; those assigned as flow controllers;
and employees receiving developmental training at
or above the established entry levels as defined
by the classification standards and the Civil
Service examination announcement at time of en-
trance on duty. Also included are controllers
assigned to a combined Flight Service Station/
Tower where the tower duties are performed on a
regular, recurring basis. Where a second level
or higher supervisor is required to serve as a
career controller or as the immediate supervisor
of a career controller or as the immediate super-
visor of a career controller performing the full
range of first level supervisor duties on a
regular, recurring basis for a substantial
portion (e.g., 50% or more) of his- time, and
these duties are included in the official
position description, he is covered under P.L.
92-297.
c. This coverage does not include employees tempor-
arily assigned to control of live air traffic
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
17
primarily for the purpose of maintaining profi-
ciency in order to aid in the performance of
their other regularly assigned duties or primarily
for research, development, or evaluation purposes.
Also not included are employees receiving pre-
developmental training at grades below the normal
entrance level, supervisors of flow controllers,
and second level and higher level supervisors
except as provided in item b above.
d. Decisions regarding application of coverage
provisions in this paragraph will be made by the
regional/center directors. This authority may
be redelegated to the manpower division chief.
The regional/center director, or his designee,
may refer questions regarding interpretations
of coverage provisions to the Director of
Personnel and Training."
We note that only five years of "career controller service"
as a full-time permanent employee of the Department of Trans-
portation is required to qualify.
Not only are "full professional level controllers" included
in the coverage, but also those receiving developmental training
and those employees holding undefined "flow controller" posi-
tions.
The authority for making decisions regarding coverage
provisions is delegated to regional/center directors of which
there are thirty-one in number. Such authority may be further
delegated to "manpower division chiefs."
Accordingly, we have 62 officials who may be authorized to
make.decisions relative to coverage under this order. How any
standard for approval/disapproval can be achieved under these
conditions is indeed mysterious to us.
To look further into the implementing order, we believe
the section on retirement is germane to the confusion:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
18
"12. RETIREMENT
a. An employee who meets the service and age require-
ment under P.L. 92-297 has a vested right to such
entitlement, which he may exercise at his option,
regardless of subsequent job assignments within the
Federal service. The annuity computed for employees
retiring under the provisions of this order is
based on the regular retirement formula with a
guaranteed minimum equal to 50% of the high-3 average
salary. The annuity is not reduced even if the
employee is under age 55 at the time of separation.
b. In order for the Civil Service Commission to determine
whether the retirement claim of an employee is
governed by P.L. 92-297,it is necessary that a
certification will be made by the chief of the
servicing payroll branch and will be based on the
determination of creditable service made by the
respective manpower division chief in coordination
with the air traffic division chief, as appropriate.
A completed FAA Form 3300-30, signed by the manpower
division chief, or his designee, will be forwarded
along with Standard Form 2801, Application for
Retirement, (and any other applicable material) to
the chief of the payroll branch. Based on this
information, the payroll chief will make the necessary
certification on Standard Form 2806, Individual
Retirement Record. Where the employee claims credit-
able experience which is not readily determined, due
to inadequate records, position descriptions, etc.,
the employee should seek verification of his claimed
experience from his former supervisor, if available;
from old records at home or elsewhere; and furnish
his own statement of the duties he performed, time
performed, and circumstances surrounding the perfor-
mance. All the pertinent information should then be
sent along with the employee's application for
retirement to the manpower division for determination.
The Regional Flight Surgeon will also submit a
recertification that the employee is permanently
disqualified for career controller work."
In this section we note that additional officials partici-
pate in the approval/disapproval determination relative to the
"certification of creditable service," i.e.:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
19
Chief of the Servicing Payroll Branch;
Air Traffic Division Chief;
Designee of the Manpower Division Chief.
Not only are additional authorities designated, but also
the selection provides that creditable service may be certified
by a former supervisor or by an unsworn self-serving statement
by the employee himself relative to his own stewardship.
From this implementing order 3410.11A,it is difficult
for us to understand how any knowledgable Air Traffic Control
Specialist (Center/Tower) would be denied the benefits provided
by Public Law 92-297.
By way of review, this issue with kindred subjects was
considered by this Committee in the 96th Congress and reported
favorably [House Report 96-726 (Part I)] after exhaustive,
in-depth hearings conducted by Chairperson Schroeder, Subcom-
mittee on the Civil Service. (Serial 96-37)
The Bill was subsequently referred to the House Appropri-
ations Committee which reported the Bill adversely (House Report
96-726, Part 2) but with an important recommendation quoted as
follows:
"The Committee is cognizant of the potential for
detrimental effect on employee morale resulting from
the exclusion of flight service station specialists
from programs such as those authorized by Public Law
92-297. The committee intends, therefore, to recom-
mend a further review of this problem and its impact
on aviation safety. The committee believes that this
further study is necessary before a decision is made
with respect to inclusions of flight service station
personnel in this program." (Italics supplied)
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
20
On July 24, 1980 - House Appropriations Committee directed
further review and report (House Report 96-1193) quoted below:
"Under Public Law 92-297, air traffic controllers can
qualify for an early retirement program, but flight
service station specialists are not entitled to
similar benefits. In part 2 of the report of H.R.
1262, the Committee recommended a further review
of this situation. This Committee reiterates this
recommendation and directs the FAA, in cooperation
with an independent organization, to report on this
matter no later than September 30, 1981."
Finally, on November 24, 1981, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration forwarded his report to the
House Committee on Appropriations. In his covering letter
the Administrator stated:
"Based on the findings and conclusions presented
by JWK International, we do not find any evidence
which warrants the extension of early retirement
benefits to Flight Service Station Specialists."
This was an excellent opportunity for the Administrator
to express his own views on the issue since the entire Flight
Service System is an important part of his organization. He,
however, remained silent and relied completely on the views of
an outside entity. We can only infer that the FAA Administra-
tor had no position he considered worthy of consideration by
the Appropriations Committee.
Believing the JWK International study to be inadequate,
the NAATS leadership commissioned the authoritative personnel
firm of Ruttenberg, Friedman, Kilgallon and Associates, Inc.,
to critique the FAA product, which they found to be faulty.
These conclusions were forwarded to the House Appropriations
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
21
Committee which,subsequently,on August 19, 1982 (Report 97-783)
stated:
"EARLY RETIREMENT - Under Public Law 92-297 air traffic
controllers can qualify for an early retirement program,
but flight service station specialists are not entitled
to similar benefits. In part 2 of House Report 96-726
the Committee recommended a further review of this
situation. This study was completed in November, 1981,
and an analysis of the study was provided to the
Committee earlier this year. Because of the questions
raised regarding the validity of the conclusions
contained in the study, the Committee is considering
requesting a General Accounting Office evaluation of
both the study and the subsequent analysis."
The conferees, meeting on the Department of Transportation
and related agencies appropriations in 1983, considered this issue
to be of such importance that it was addressed in the Confer-
ence Report:
"The conferees urge that the study and the analysis
relative to eligibility of flight service station
specialists for early retirement under Public Law 92-297
be referred to the General Accounting Office for evalua-
tion, analysis and report." (Congressional Record,
Volume 128, No. 46, Monday, December 13, 1982, page H
9512)
Eventually, in May 1983, the FAA Administrator, in compliance
with the Congressional mandate, forwarded the two studies
to the General Accounting Office.
On March 27, 1984, the United States General Accounting
Office report B-214320, "Review of Studies on Early Retirement
of Flight Service Station Specialists," the GAO concluded:
"Our review showed the JWK's study results are inconclu-
sive. The results do not support FAA's conclusions
that FSS specialists should not be afforded early
retirement
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
22
And that, Madam Chair and Members of this Subcommittee,
is where the matter stands today.
In our view, the recommendations to aircraft pilots by
Air Traffic Control Specialists (Station) are just as important
and just as vital to aviation safety as the recommendations by
Air Traffic Control Specialists (Center, Tower), including
such geographical locations as O'Hare, Kennedy, Los Angeles
and any other area.
The issue is one of fairness and equality, and our com-
munity of Specialists have been second class citizens since the
passage of PL 92-297, and they consider themselves as such.
It is axiomatic that all personnel in the same personnel
category must be treated equally and fairly if high morale,
good order and discipline are to be achieved. This is not
the case in the air traffic control community where there
exists a caste system of noblemen and serfs.
We believe it to be appropriate to quote the Chairman of
the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the House
Committee on Public Works and Transportation in his hearing
record "The Impact of Weather on Aviation Safety". (98-440;
pages 425-26)
"We did not begin this inquiry with the thought that it
might solve the weather problem, but I believe we did put a
handle on some of the things which will help in improving
our accommodation of weather into the Nation's air trans-
portation system.
"Initially, we learned some alarming statistics from
the Safety Board as to the impact of weather on general
aviation, commuter airlines, and the air carrier opera-
tions. The percentages quoted for the number of fatal
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
23
accidents where weather was considered a factor seem to be
far beyond what the safety investigators had expected to
find, and certainly they were shocking to us.
"The loss of even one life is difficult to accept, but
the 5-year total of 4,000 tells us that a lot of people
may be concerned about weather. But not enough people
are talking about how to avoid flying into these turbulent
cells.
"We heard of the planning activities of some carriers
who utilize all the weather information available so as
to avoid flying near or into what may be a hazardous
situation. But we also heard of some of the difficulties
associated with general aviation attempts to obtain
weather information from flight service stations.
"It became pretty clear that the message being given
by all the witnesses is that suspect weather cells
should be avoided just as one aircraft should avoid the
path of another aircraft." (Italics added)
And lastly, Madam Chair, we invite your attention to a
study which has come to our attention only this month. It is
entitled:
"PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO UNVARYING (STEADY) AND 2-2-1
SHIFTS: MIAMI INTERNATIONAL FLIGHT SERVICE STATION
(FAA-AM-85-2 - dtd February,1985)
By C. E. Melton
Civil Aeromedical Institute
Federal Aviation Administration
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma"
The Civil Aeromedical Institute is the FAA's own medical
research activity and Dr. Melton has been involved in and has
conducted many studies related to stress in the Air Traffic
Control environment.
Some excerpts from this report are germane to this
hearing:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
24
"In 1974 a stress index was formulated in this laboratory
based on excretion levels of the stress indicator hormones
(SIH's) in urine (KGS, E, and NE). This index facilitated
comparison of stress at various ATC facilities (5,7). Basic-
ally, the index consists of the product of resting and
working values of each SIH mathematically treated so as
to provide a unitary common denominator for each SIH.
The SIH's are treated in this way so that each will have
equal importance in stress assessment; otherwise, the
catecholamines' importance would be overwhelmed by the
steroids' importance because of the far greater amount of
steroid material in urine compared to catecholamines. The
individual indices are designated cst (KGS), ce (E) and
cne (NE). The average of the three indices is designated
Cs, the composite stess index."
(underlining added)
?
"When stress indices for all ATC facilities studied are
listed (Table XIX), MIA IFSS tops the list as the most
stressful (Cs=2.60)."
(MIA IFSS means Miami International Flight Service Station.)
Table XIX follows:
TABLE XIX
Comparison of Various ATC Facilities Means of a Stress Index
Facility
C
s
C
St
C
e
C
ne
Miami IFSS ('82)*
2.60
.95
1.03
4.85
O'Hare ATCT ( '68)
1.05
1.41
.75
.98
Opa Locka ATCT ('72)
.84
.64
.74
1.15
Atlantic ARTCC ('73)
.82
.76
.34
1.37
Miami ARTCC ('72)
.76
.61
.71
.96
Los Angeles TRACON ('74)
.75
.27
1.10
1.44
Houston ATCT ('70)
.74
1.27
.29
.65
Oakland TRACON ('74)
.72
.23
1.31
.61
Houston ATCT ('71)
.68
.89
.62
.52
Oakland TRACON ('72)
.60
.62
_.76
.43
Los Angeles TRACON ('72)
.60
.66
.34
.81
Fort Worth ARTCC ('73)
.34
.22
.58
.20
*NOTE: The Csfor Miami IFSS was subsequently corrected as per
the Addendum (pages 29-30) to 1.46.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
25
"It was thought that perhaps the high level of excretion
of NE might be a reflection of the age of the subjects.
However, the correlation between NE excretion level and
age is not statistically significant (r=0.29, 1) 0.30).
Some of the subjects were on medication for control of
blood pressure; however, there was no apparent significant
correlation between medication usage and NE excretion.
Analytical reruns and audits of laboratory procedures have
likewise failed to reveal experimental error as the cause
of the high values. Further, urine collection procedures
were identical to procedures used in other studies. The
same personnel performed these analyses by the same
methods as in the previous studies."
(underlining added)
"A diligent search for experimental error has delayed
this report beyond the reporting time normally required
for studies of this type and the search will continue as
long as personnel and facilities are available for this
purpose or until the validity of the high values is
established.
"The MIA IFSS employees as a group possibly show the
highest level of acute workload stress of any ATC facility
yet studied."
It is apparent to NAATS that the Miami International
Flight Service Station did not fit the mold which we believe
was presupposed by the FAA's Civil Aeromedical Institute.
In fairness to Dr. Melton, he did include information
as to his checks and double checks of all procedures in the
laboratory reruns. In fact, at the end of the report he included
an addendum to express his views, not based on fact or research,
but based on his belief and conjecture:
"It is now believed that, by human error, samples
for creatinine analysis were taken from the nonacidified
moiety, resulting in low creatinine values_. Because
the weight of creatinine forms the denominator of the
creatinine-based ratio, calculated SIH's were inordinately
high. The fact that all SIH values were high, impelled
us to look first at the creatinine analysis, but the
samples for the reruns were again taken from the urine
previously set aside for creatinine analysis, thus giving
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
26
the same result as the first run. It was only when we
started from "square one" that we realized what had hap-
pened."
(underlining added)
The last sentence in the above paragraph is not under-
stood since throughout the report it is apparent that the
CAMI staff and Dr. Melton started from "square one" many
times.
Even with his "correction" Dr. Melton states:
"Because the error is a relatively constant one, we
do not believe that conclusions regarding differences
in the two shift patterns are compromised. The com-
puted level of stress is changed, however, to about half
the value reported."
And finally FAA's Dr. Melton states:
"The Miami International Flight Service Station (MIA
IFSS), though, still retains its number one position on the
stress index list, surpassing even O'Hare Tower during the
high-stress time of the 1968 ATC slowdown (IFSS Cs= 1.46,
ORD Cs= 1.05)."
(ORD means O'Hare Tower.)
Thank you Madam Chair.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
kl1;11
I
U.S. Department of \
Transportation
1?111?MM????????????,...??????????111?11111?11101.M....=.......11?11?14
1 19C5
I it
)1\
Office of the AFS.stant Secretary for Pub!ic'as
Washington, 0 C 20590
?
FOR RELEASE TUESDAY
March 5, 1985
FAA REPORTS MORE THAN 1,000
FLIGHT ASSISTS IN 1984
FAA 10-85
Contact: John G. Leyden
Tel.: [phone]
In April 1984, a Federal Aviation Administration air traffic controller in St. Louis
gave flying instructions by radio to a woman in a -private aircraft when her pilot-
husband suffered a heart attack. The controller guided her down to a safe landing.
A few months later, Miami controllers, confronted with the same scenario,
provided similar assistance and went home that night knowing they had saved a human
life. And in November; Kansas City controllers helped two passengers keep their
airplane straight and level until the ill pilot cecovered consciousness and brought them
all down safely.
The FAA calls these incidents flight assists, and during 1984 controllers and flight
service station specialists were involved in 1,069 assists, possibly saving the lives of
2,852 people.
Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Hanford Dole said, "I am very proud of the
highly professional work done by the air traffic control specialists who have guided so
many pilots in distress to safe landings. They bring credit to the entire air traffic
control service."
FAA Administrator Donald D. Engen said that these flight assists happened at a
rate of roughly three a day in 1984, and that almost all of them involved private and
business aircraft.
More typically, the assistance given to pilots in trouble involves less dramatic
situations, although most assists are still critical. Typically, a non-instrument rated
pilot is lost, caught on top of clouds and may be running low on fuel. Controllers and
flight service station specialists use radar or direction-finding equipment to pinpoint
the pilot's position, talk him down through the overcast, and guide him to the ci:sest
airport for a safe landing.
The FAA Administrator said, "These flight assists rarely make the newspapers or
evening television news, so the outstanding work done by the agency's air traffic control
specialists on a day-to-day basis goes largely unnoticed by the general public.
"However," he added, "I believe the aviation community understands and
appreciates these efforts, and pilots fly with a lot more assurance knowing that help
from the FAA is as close as their radio microphone if they should get in trouble. Both
the pilots and controllers know that the FAA is here to serve."
/1 11 II I/
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
STATEMENT
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
THE HONORABLE MARY ROSE OAKAR
CHAIRPERSON
COMMATTEE
ON
POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS ?
ON
BENEFITS FOR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALISTS (STATION)
EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
-
BY
EDWARD J. MALO
AVIATION CONSULTANT
June 27. 1985
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Madam Chairperson and Members of this Subcommittee. I am pleased
to be allowed to present my statement.
My name is Edward J. Male and I reside in Burke, Virginia. For
most of my adult life, I have been closely associated with avia-
tion and served as a pilot in World War II. For some 29 of my 34
years of federal service, I was employed by the Federal Aviation
Administration and its predecessor organization. My experience
as a controller in 311 three options of air traffic control: namely
tower, flight service station and air route traffic control center,
has given me a good insight into the stresses of tower, station and
center controllers.
After retiring from the FAA. the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Associa-
tion employed me as the Director of the Air Traffic Control Depart-
ment. One of my primary duties was to assist our members in their
day-to-day dealings with flight service stations and the dedicated
men and women who work in those facilities.
First of all, let me state that I completely agree with the statements
and recommendations made by Mr. Henry. The specialists who are
working in flight service stations deserve the same treatment as
other controllers working in towers and centers. The job requirements
of station personnel are just as stressful as those for other types.
of ATC facilities. Let me cite a few for your information.
In centers and towers, controllers can genecally consult with other
personnel to decide the best course of action to take as there is
always additional personnel available. Just the opposite is true
in flight service stations where, because of inadequate staffing
and the work environment, station empioyees almost always make
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
judgments which affect safety of flight operations without consult-
ing with other knowledgable controllers.
The flight service stations generally deal with pilots who have less
experience than pilots who are in contact with tower and center
personnel. Therefore, they must exercise care and judgment in
providing information to these pilots. Controllers in stations must
ask themselves ---- Is this pilot fully knowledgable about flying
or is he just reluctant to ask for further details about his flight?
Many such questions arise in the minds
Will the pilot be insulted if too many
flight?
of station personnel. ---
details
are
given about his
Some pilots, unfortunately, are unwilling to admit that they have
made a mistake and are most reluctant to ask for assistance. This
is when the flight service station controller must determine the
type of action to take. All of us in aviation have, at one time or
another, heard a pilot call a flight service station and ask for a
practice "DF" (direction finding) steer to an airport. This type of
situation requires judgment on the part of the controller. Is the
pilot just asking for practice OR is he truly lost and requires
emergency assistance? Interestingly enough, statistics indicate that
station personnel, on a percentage basis of assigned controllers,
provide more flight assists annually than controllers in towers or
centers.
It may seem that I am placing too much emphasis on the judgmental
requirements of flight service station controllers. However, a review
of the FAA instructions on providing flight services -- the so-called
"station bible" -- shows a different story. Just broad general
2.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
guidelines are provided in this handbook. Personnel are told to
exercise "their best judgment" in dealing with pilots. Such phrases
as "brief by translating, interpreting and summarizing available
data for the intended flight"; "emphasize conditions that are
particularly significant such as low level wind shear, embedded
thunderstorms, reported icing and airport closures"; and "VFR flight
not recommended" can be found throughout this handbook.
Some people believe that the only duties of station controllers
involve briefing general aviation pilots on weather conditions and
filing a flight plan. it is true that these are their primary
duties. However, these are just routine assignments. Other tasks
of a non-routine nature are equally or more important and require a
great amount of judgment. For instance, station personnel are involved
in:
Emergency DF procedures and instrument approaches
Aircraft making emergency landings with explosive cargoes aboard
Aircraft bomb threats -
Law enforcement activities -
Lost or stolen airplanes -
Military flight exercises and training operations - and
Handling and forwarding messages concerning special air missions,
? including presidential flights.
Over the years that I've been involved in aviation. I have, as a
controller, manager,user of the ATC system and representative of a
general aviation association, seen the dedication of controllers
working in flight service stations. This is not to say that con-
trollers in towers and centers are not also dedicated and provide
3.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
an excellent service to those who fly or are dependent on aviation.
Unfortunately, flight service stations are not glamorous. When
resources are allocated to the ATC system, the flight service stations
are the first to be cut. Equipment is outmoded. In fact, 1 wouldn't
be surprised to see some of the teletypewriter equipment that I used
to operate still in service today. There always appears to be a
shortage of qualified controllers in the flight service option.
Nevertheless, these dedicated people, under very trying circumsLances,
continue to perform their duties in an outstanding manner.
Many of us in aviation are convinced that, after the unfortunate
job action of tower and center controllers in August 1981, station
controllers, by remaining on the job. were greatly responsible for
restoring the air transportation system in the United States to normal
operation.
Over the past twenty or thirty years, the FAA has conducted numerous
studies on the job stresses of tower and center controllers. May
I suggest that flight service station controllers experience similar
or greater stresses and frustrations.
There is an old saying among airline captains that 95% of their flying
job consists of sheer boredom and 5% of sheer terror. I might
paraphrase that and say that 95% of the time controllers in flight
service stations are extremely overworked and 5% of the time they
are experiencing sheer terror.
I wiah to think thin Subcommittee for allowing me to express my
views on air traffic control and flight service station controllers.
I hope that you will see fit to grant station personnel the same job
benefits afforded tower and center Controllers.
Sanitized Com/ Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
r F 1 1
L
The National Treasury Employees Union
STATEMENT OF
ROBERT M. TOBIAS
NATIONAL PRESIDENT
NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION
TO THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION
AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
HON. MARY ROSE OAKAR, CHAIR
HOUSE POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE COMMITTEE
H.R. 1518, INCLUDE U.S. CUSTOMS
SERVICE INSPECTORS IN '6(c)'
RETIREMENT
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, D.C.
JUNE 27, 1985
1730 K Street. N.W. ? Suite 1101 ? Washington. D.C. 20006 ? 2O 5-4411
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Madame Chair, Members of the Subcommittee, I am Paul W.
Newton, Director of Legislation of the National Treasury
Employees Union. NTEU is the exclusive representative of
over 120,000 Federal workers, including all employees of the
U.S. Customs Service worldwide.
We appreciate this opportunity to testify on H.R. 1518, a
bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to include
Inspectors of the U.S. Customs Service and the Immigration
and Naturalization Service within the Federal law enforcement
officers and firefighters retirement provisions with
entitlement to retire at age 50 with 20 years of service.
Our unibn -- especially the over 4,000 .Customs Inspectors
we represent -- commends the Chair of the Subcommittee for
once again facing the issue of the lack of fairness and
equity by excluding the inspector from the early retirement
provisions of the law. We also want to thank Rep. Al Swift
(D-WA) and the co-sponsors of the bill for their diligent
efforts to obtain enactment of this legislation.
We have long taken strong issue with the Office of
Personnel Management's narrow and strict interpretation of
the definition of 'law enforcement officer.' OPM testified
at your hearing last year that the definition is limited to
those positions the duties of which are primarily the
investigation, apprehension, or detention of individuals
suspected or convicted of offenses against the criminal laws
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/1-2/30 : CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
of the United States. On this basis. OPM has consistently
turned down agency requests for coverage of Inspectors saying
that . . most of their work involves routine inspections
. . . Routine inspection of travelers, baggage, and cargo is
not a qualifying duty for coverage under this program. It
is hardly routine when the inspection involves being always
alert to persons or companies known or suspected of being
Customs violators, or there is an outstanding warrant for
persons wanted by Federal, State and local law enforcement
agencies. It is hardly routine that it is the Inspector who
makes the initial apprehension and detention and is required
to arrest these fugitives, a group which includes persons
charged with crimes ranging from robbery, rape and murder to
those behind in their child support payments.
The enforcement nature of the Inspector's role cannot be
questioned. Overall, the Customs Service enforces over 400
statutes and regulations for 40 different Federal agencies.
Included among these are a number of statutes that require
the Inspector to be able to recognize and, if necessary,
detain individuals suspected of illegal criminal activity,
including drug trafficking and violent crimes. Inspectors
currently must complete a nine-week training program at the
outset of their employment which stresses law enforcement
aspects such as firearms operation, detention and arrest
techniques, and search and seizure procedures.
In fact, the interrogation and apprehension of known and
suspected criminals results in over 7000 arrests by Customs
Inspectors every year. Many of these are based on data from
the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Crime
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Information Center (NCIC). The FBI has noted that Customs
Inspectors have been responsible for nearly seven percent of
all NCIC arrests; more than any other single law enforcement
agency in the country. It should be no surprise, then, that
approximately 75 percent of Customs Inspectors carry firearms
either by requirement or by choice in order to protect
themselves against the types of individuals they may
encounter in the course of their jobs. Indeed, this past
year, the Customs Service established a new requirement that
Inspectors must qualify in the use of firearms before they
can perform inspectional duties.
In recent years, Customs Inspectors served on Special
Enforcement Teams which were responsible for 19 percent of
all heroin seizures by the agency, 49 percent of the cocaine
seizures, and 37 percent of the hashish seizures. Inspectors
have also participated in Operation Exodus which monitors
illegal exportation of high technology. Activities such as
these have taken the Inspector far beyond traditional duties
into the areas of investigation, surveillance, and
confrontation with dangerous criminals.
For example, the NCIC data basis is interfaced with the
Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS), which
provides Inspectors with jobsite information. The two
systems contain data on approximately 175,000 persons who are
wanted and/or considered dangerous, and 970,000 vehicles
which have been stolen or used in the commission of
felonies. As a result, there are at least 1,125,000
potentially dangerous situations that Inspectors could
confront at our nation's land crossings, airports, and
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
seaports. Since 1900, 54 Inspectors have been killed in the
line of duty and over 100 cases of assault have occurred
since 1974.
Clearly, as the law enforcement responsibilites of the
Inspector position--already a basic part of the
duties--increase, so too do the possibilities of injury or
even death. It is not merely the enforcement aspect of the
Inspector's job that contains danger, but also the adverse
environmental and physically strenuous conditions which these
employees face on a daily basis.
The mere recitation of law enforcement statistics does
not fully convey the accompanying mental and physical strain
that such acts place on the Inspector. Though the TECS
system enables and Inspector to identify many potentially
dangerous suspects, not everyone Who is armed and dangerous
is entered into the system. The potential for being 'caught
unaware is ever present for Inspectors. From the time a
criminal suspect is identified, either by his own action or
through TECS, to the time of apprehension, the Inspector is
in potential danger. The mental stress of facing a violent
confrontation combined with the physical strain of subduing,
disarming or chasing a suspect can exact a severe toll on the
Inspector.
In addition, the process of inspecting aircraft, vessels,
automobiles and railcars requires bending, lifting or moving
heavy containers, kneeling or stooping for prolonged periods
and even crawling into cramped cargo holds. Inspectors are
sometimes required to disembark from large ships onto smaller
craft in all types of weather conditions, or stand for hours
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
at land border crossings in an awkward position breathing
exhaust fumes. All of these strenuous conditions require the
stamina and endurance of a relatively young and fit workforce.
Another factor adding to the danger and stress of the
Inspector's job is the isolation in which many of these
Customs employees must work. Wherever in the United States
international passengers and cargo arrive, a Customs
Inspector must be stationed there or travel to that location,
no matter how remote. In many cases, the Inspector is the
only law officer on the scene, with the closest backup miles
away. Airports, land crossings and seaports are all some of
the isolated areas where the Inspector must work.
The U.S. Customs Service has noted that even normally
busy terminals such as John F. Kennedy Internatbional Airport
in New York City Can at certain times be aptly called
isolated duty stations in that onlir one Inspector is assigned
to clear small aircraft after midnight.
A Customs Service report states that: 'In virtually all
locations along the borders, the airport is generally located
several miles outside of town, and the airport offices are
closed at night. The Customs Inspector reports alone to a
deserted, often poorly lighted airfield, generally with no
advance knowledge of the kind of people he will be meeting.
With air smuggling on the increase, the likelihood of
encountering a violation, or evidence of the aircraft having
been used to smuggle, is considerable. The Inspector who
makes such a discovery has no immediate support, and may be
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
considerably outnumbered. Even if he can get to the
telephone or radio to call for help, it may be an hour before
another law enforcement officer can reach him. This is
almost equivalent to no help at all, since it can be assumed
that the violator(s) will not wait quietly for that period of
time. The Inspector must handle the situation himself,
alone.'
The words used in that statement could accurately
describe any number of ports of entry along our nation's
border. The vulnerability these men and women feel is
underscored by the fact that smugglers and fugitives often
seek out such ports in the hopes of escaping detection.
Working alone in such potentially dangerous circumstances
only enhances both the danger and the stress of the
Inspector's job.
In apition, 'many Customs Inspectors commonly work
rotating shifts which require them to alternate between work
days of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.. 4:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight,
and 12:00 midnight to 8:00 a.m. This policy of rotating
shifts every two weeks adds yet another physical and mental
burden to the inspectional workforce.
In a study for the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Dr. Donald L. Tosto found that rotational shifts
had numerous deleterious effects on employees who worked
them. The results of the study showed that shift workers
tend to report more physical complaints, more problems with
sleep, more fatigue, and greater personal and domestic
problems than other workers. These findings provide further
evidence of the physical and psychological strains faced by
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Inspectors which necessitate the maintenance of a capable,
vigorous workforce.
We have described many of the factors which make the
Customs Inspector's job hazardous, yet incredibly the concept
of hazard is not a factor in determining whether a ?law
enforcement off icer should be entitled to early retirement.
OPM in their testimony last year stated 6. . . we might need
to consider . . . reintroducing the concept of hazard into
the definition. That was previously in the law and taken out
in 1974.? If that be the case, then Section 8331(20) of
Title 5, United States Code which defines law enforcement
officer ought to be amended to include the concept of hazard
in who would be eligible for early retirement. We would
strongly endorse such an amendment as it would allow for the
consideration of other occupation groups which should be
covered but for the existing narrow interpretation of the
definition and the lack of the concept of hazard in
determining eligibility.
We believe that Revenue Officers in the Internal Revenue
Service more than meet the criteria of a law enforcement
officer engaged in a hazardous occupation, kidnaping, murder
and assaults are an ever present danger to the Revenue
Officer. They are exposed to an ever increasing number of
life-threatening situations in the course of their normal
duties. Assaults against IRS employees increased from 531 in
1983 to 789 in 1984--a 50 percent increase. In addition to
these incidents, there are several well-financed groups
around the country who advocate organized violence against
IRS employees.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Excluding the Revenue Officers and the Inspectors of the
Customs Service and INS is not only unfair to this group of
employees but prevents the government as the employer from
maintaining a young and vigorous workforce in these areas of
law enforcement.
In summary Madame Chair, we strongly endorse H.R. 1518
and urge early favorable committee action.
In addition, we urge the Subcommittee to consider an
amendment to 5 U.S.C. 8331(20) that would clarify the
difinition and criteria of a law enforcement officer so that
similarly situated occupation groups are treated fairly and
equitable. I would be happy to answer any questions you may
have.
PN/prw/0152L
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
NATIONAL
FEDERATION
OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES
2020 K St., NW
WASHINGTON, DC
20006
[phone]
SERVING FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND THE NATION SINCE 1917
STATEMENT BY
THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
BEFORE
THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
ON
H.R. 1131
MODIFICATION OF THE METHOD FOR RETIREMENT CREDIT
BASED ON CERTAIN MILITARY SERVICE
June 27, 1985
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Madam Chairwoman and Subcommittee Members:
I appreciate the opportunity to appear today in support of H.R.
1131, a bill to modify the method by which Federal employees
receive credit under the Civil Service Retirement System based on
military service. Because many of the employees we represent are
also veterans, this issue is extremely important to our member-
ship. We therefore commend both you and Congressman Oberstar for
your efforts to treat these veterans in a more equitable manner.
We look forward to working with you toward the enactment of this
legislation.
Until September 1982, Public Law 84-881 contained a provision--
commonly referred to as Catch-62--which reduced annuities for
civil service retirees who became eligible for social security at
age 62, if those annuities were based in part on years spent in
the military after 1956. The provision targeted Civil Service
and Postal Service retirees who received military service credit
toward their civil service annuity. However, when their social
security benefits were based in any part on their military ser-
vice, these retirees were forced to delete the post 1956 military
service credit from their federal annuity. This has resulted in
substantial losses for many veterans.
In the meantime, civil service retirees with no military service
after 1956 did not suffer annuity reductions at age 62 if they
were entitled to social security. Unlike the all- military
careerist or the all-civil service careerist, the Catch-62 victim
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
-2-
was denied retirement income after age 62 based on all his
government service just because he transferred from military to
civil service.
This penalty was enacted in 1956 at the urging of the former
Civil Service Commission. The Commission took the position that
military service credit for both social security and civil ser-
vice retirement constituted a "double credit". Thus, it was in
violation of statutory prohibition against crediting service to
two retirement systems at one time.
After extensive lobbying by the National Federation of Federal
Employees and other organizations, Congress rejected this argu-
ment acknowledging that the Social Security System is not a
retirement system and was never so intended. Rather, it was
designed as a system to provide supplemental income to elderly
people, who are expected to have additional income from other
means. So, to correct the Catch-62 inequity, Congress modified
the law to allow current and future civilian retirees to avoid
the annuity reduction at age 62. The Omnibus Budget Reconcilia-
tion Act of 1982 gave retirees the opportunity to pay back to the
government an amount equal to seven percent of the basic pay they
earned while on military active duty after 1956. In return, re-
tirees would be permanently credited with this military service.
While this provision was a major victory for veterans who retired
from the civil service, it overlooked one detail: civil service
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
-3-
employees were required to contribute only six and one-half per-
cent of their pay to the retirement system until 1970. There-
fore, it makes little sense to require retirees seeking to avoid
the Catch-62 penalty to deposit seven percent of their basic pay
for this period. H.R. 1131 addresses the inequity by requiring
these retirees to pay back only the actual post 1956 employee re-
tirement contribution. For example, under H.R. 1131, a civil ser-
vice retiree with five years of military service from 1957-1962
would only be required to contribute six and one-half percent of
his basic pay in order to avoid the annuity reduction, because
during that time civil servants were only required to make a six
and one-half percent contribution to the retirement system. This
modification is only fair.
NFFE believes that H.R. 1131 provides further protection to a seg-
ment of the federal workforce whose needs for equal retirement
annuities have long been ignored. This bill's adjustment of the
Act is warranted and necessary.
Once again, the NFFE commend both you and Congressman Oberstar
for your efforts on behalf of veterans and Federal employees.
That concludes my statement. I will be happy to answer any ques-
tions.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
IIIPF, THE
IlOFFICERS
OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION
201 N. Washington St., Alexandria, VA 22314-2529 ? [phone]
Statement of
THE RETIRED OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
before the
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
Presented by
COMMANDER JOHN F. WANAMAKER
United States Navy, Retired
Deputy Director, Legislative Affairs
June 27, 1985
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30 : CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE:
I AM COMMANDER JOHN WANAMAKER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE
AFFAIRS OF THE RETIRED OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, (TROA) WHICH HAS ITS
NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS AT 201 NORTH WASHINGTON STREET, ALEXANDRIA,
VIRGINIA. OUR ASSOCIATION HAS A MEMBERSHIP OF OVER 343,000 RETIRED,
FORMER AND ACTIVE DUTY OFFICERS OF THE SEVEN UNIFORMED SERVICES.
INCLUDED IN OUR MEMBERSHIP ARE 42,871 WIDOWS OF FORMER MEMBERS.
I APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU TODAY TO PRESENT
THE VIEWS OF THE MEMBERS OF OUR ASSOCIATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
BILL (H.R. 1131). THIS BILL WOULD ESTABLISH IDENTICAL CONTRIBUTIONS
INTO THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT FUND BETWEEN CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
AND FORMER MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO WISH TO RECEIVE CIVIL
SERVICE RETIREMENT CREDIT FOR MILITARY SERVICE FROM 1 JANUARY 1957
THROUGH 1969. THE DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 1984 (P.L.98-369)
EXTENDS THE EFFECTIVE DATE TO 1 OCTOBER 1985 WHEN THE DEPOSITS ARE
TO BE MADE INTO THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT FUND WITHOUT INCURRING
INTEREST PENALTIES.
BY THE ENACTMENT OF P.L. 97-253 (BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT) FORMER
MILITARY MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES ARE REQUIRED TO DEPOSIT
INTO THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT FUND AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 7 PERCENT
OF THEIR BASIC PAY FOR YEARS OF MILITARY SERVICE AFTER 1956 IN ORDER
TO RECEIVE CREDIT FOR THOSE YEARS TOWARDS CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT.
THE CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR THE YEARS 1957 THROUGH 1969 FOR FEDERAL
CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES WAS ONLY 6.5 PERCENT. FORMER SERVICE MEMBERS
WILL, IN EFFECT, BE PAYING ONE-HALF OF ONE PERCENT MORE THAN THEIR
1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
CIVILIAN COUNTERPARTS FOR THAT SAME PERIOD. COMPOUNDING THIS
INEQUITY IS THE CURRENT SITUATION WHEREBY NEW CIVIL SERVICE
EMPLOYEES HIRED AFTER DECEMBER 1983 CONTRIBUTE ONLY 1.3 PERCENT INTO
THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT FUND FOR SERVICE AFTER THAT DATE. THE
BILL (H.R. 1131) WOULD MAKE THE PERCENTAGE AMOUNT OF CONTRIBUTIONS
EQUAL FOR FORMER MILITARY PERSONNEL AND CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR
SIMILAR PERIODS OF TIME. IN SUMMARY, MR. CHAIRMAN, H.R.1131 WILL
CORRECT A SERIOUS DEFICIENCY IN CURRENT LAW AND WE STRONGLY SUPPORT
THE MEASURE.
REPEAL OF DUAL COMPENSATION ACT
THE HEARING TODAY PRESENTS AN EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT
ANOTHER INEQUITY IN CURRENT LAW. THERE EXISTS ANOTHER GROUP WHO NOT
ONLY MUST CONTRIBUTE THE 7 PERCENT FOR YEARS OF SERVICE AFTER 1956,
BUT IN ADDITION, MUST FORFEIT A LARGE PORTION OF THEIR MILITARY
RETIRED PAY AS A PRECONDITION TO ACCEPT CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYMENT.
THAT GROUP CONSISTS ENTIRELY OF REGULAR RETIRED OFFICERS WHO ARE
SUBJECT TO THE DUAL COMPENSATION ACT OF 1964 (AS AMENDED).
THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT WAS TAKEN FROM THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
REPORT ACCOMPANYING THE DUAL COMPENSATION ACT IN 1964:
"ALTHOUGH GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT NEEDS GROW IN THE
SPECIALIZED FIELDS MORE WITH EACH PASSING YEAR, TO
PROHIBIT A LARGE NUMBER OF RETIRED REGULAR OFFICERS
FROM SERVING THEIR COUNTRY IN A CIVILIAN CAPACITY AS
THEY HAVE SERVED IT IN A MILITARY CAREER SEEMS NOT
ONLY UNJUSTIFIED, AND A SINGULAR DISCRIMINATION, BUT
2.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
A WASTE OF MANPOWER AND SKILL THAT CAN NO LONGER
BE AFFORDED."
THE ABOVE STATEMENT NOT WITHSTANDING, THE CONGRESS PASSED THE DUAL
COMPENSATION ACT OF 1964 TO LIMIT THE INCOME OF RETIRED REGULAR
OFFICERS WHO ELECTED TO ACCEPT A POSITION IN THE FEDERAL CIVIL
SERVICE. THEY THEN WERE REQUIRED TO FORFEIT ONE-HALF OF THEIR
MILITARY RETIRED PAY OVER A BASE AMOUNT WHICH HAS GROWN FROM $2000
IN 1964 TO APPROXIMATELY $7,000 TODAY ($6972.38 UNDER AGE 62;
$7012.87 OVER AGE 62.) THE CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT OF 1978 PLACED
ANOTHER RESTRICTION. IT REDUCED THE RETIRED PAY OF ALL FORMER
MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES WHO RETIRED AFTER JANUARY 11,
1979, BY THE AMOUNT THEIR COMBINED SALARY AND RETIRED PAY EXCEEDED
THE SALARY FOR LEVEL V OF THE EXECUTIVE SERVICE. (CURRENTLY
$67,800.) THIS CAP LIMITATION APPLIES TO ALL MILITARY RETIREES,
OFFICER, ENLISTED, REGULAR AND RESERVE. NOW, ADDED TO THE
SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL PENALTY ALREADY IMPOSED, MILITARY RETIREES
MUST ALSO CONTRIBUTE 7 PERCENT OF THEIR BASIC PAY ?FOR MILITARY
SERVICE AFTER 1956 IN ACCORDANCE WITH P.L. 97-253. CURRENT LAW
FURTHER REQUIRES THE RETIREE TO COMPLETELY FORFEIT ALL MILITARY
RETIRED PAY IF HE SHOULD ELECT A COMBINED ANNUITY.
THESE COMBINED RESTRICTIONS IN EFFECT PREVENT MOST REGULAROFFICERS
FROM CONSIDERING ANY FORM OF FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT FOLLOWING RETIREMENT
FROM MILITARY SERVICE. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SUFFERS AS A RESULT.
THE CONCERNS THE CONGRESS EXPRESSED IN 1964 IN THE BEFORE MENTIONED
REPORT HAVE PROVEN TO BE ACCURATE. MANY WHO HAVE ACQUIRED
3.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
EXCEPTIONAL SKILLS AND TRAINING, OFTEN AT CONSIDERABLE GOVERNMENT
EXPENSE, AS DOCTORS, LAWYERS, MANAGEMENT EXPERTS, OR NUCLEAR
ENGINEERS ETC. WOULD OTHERWISE BE WILLING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
SERVICE TO THEIR NATION IN A CIVILIAN CAPACITY IF SUCH RESTRICTIONS
WERE ELIMINATED. IN LIGHT OF THE LEVEL V RESTRICTION, THE DUAL
COMPENSATION ACT SINGLES OUT REGULAR OFFICERS FOR THE KIND OF
SINGULAR DISCRIMINATION THAT THE 1964 ACT ASSERTED WOULD WASTE
MANPOWER SKILLS. THEREFORE, WE STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT THE 1964
DUAL COMPENSATION ACT BE REPEALED. IT WILL MOTIVATE EXCEPTIONAL
PEOPLE TO SEEK SECOND CAREERS IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BUT WILL
AVOID PAY INVERSION.
SHOULD THE COMMITTEE DECIDE TO RETAIN THE DUAL COMPENSATION OFFSET,
WE STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT THE REDUCTION IN RETIRED PAY AS REQUIRED
BY THAT ACT BE PLACED INTO THE CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT FUND TO
SATISFY THE CONTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS OF P.L. 97-253 (SECTIONS 306
AND 307). WE FURTHER RECOMMEND THAT THE FULL AMOUNT OF MILITARY
RETIRED PAY BE RESTORED, SUBJECT TO THE COMBINED EARNINGS LIMITATION
AFTER THE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT HAS BEEN SATISFIED.
WE STRONGLY SUPPORT H.R. 1131, BUT URGE THE COMMITTEE TO FAVORABLY
CONSIDER THESE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ITS DELIBERATIONS.
I WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR PROVIDING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO
PROVIDE TESTIMONY ON THE LEGISLATION UNDER CONSIDERATION (H.R. 1131)
AND WILL ATTEMPT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE MEMBERS MAY HAVE.
4.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
.Me CAM 011114?1.01,
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
1110VIIMON.,
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE COUNCIL
OF THE
American Federation of Government Employees
Affiliated with AFL-CIO
In Reply Please Refer To:
STATEMENT OF
CHARLES J. MURPHY
PRESIDENT
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE COUNCIL
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
BEFORE THE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
ON
H.R. 1518
JUNE 27?1985
TO DO FOR ALL THAT WHICH NONE CAN DO FOR ONESLLF
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am
pleased to appear here to testify on behalf of H.R. 1518, a
bill to amend Title 5, United States Code, to include
Inspectors of the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(1&NS) and Inspectors of the United States Customs Service
within the immediate retirement provisions applicable to
certain employees engaged in hazardous occupations.
As President of the National Immigration and Natural-
ization Service Council, of the American Federation of
Government Employees, which represents all non supervisory
I&NS employees except those assigned to Border Patrol
Sectors, I would like to express our deep appreciation to the
Chair for her untiring efforts on behalf of all Federal
workers and in particular our appreciation for these hearings
on H.R. 1518, which will extend long overdue hazardous duty
retirement coverage to the Immigration Inspectors we
represent. I would also li-ke to extend our thanks to
Representative Al Swift, and his colleagues, for their
sponsorship of this legislation.
Briefly, H.R. 1518 expands the provisions of 8336(c), Title
5, U.S. Code to cover Immigration and Customs Inspectors.
The Hazardous Duty Retirement provisions of the statute
provide that officers working under hazardous conditions may
retire at age 50 with twenty years of service. The law
guarantees that these employees will receive 50% of average
salary plus 2% for each year of creditable government
service over twenty years. The annuity is intended to make
retirement at this age economically feasible. Covered
employees contribute 7.5% of salary; exclusive of certain
types of overtime compensation, as opposed to the 7% which
is contributed by most employees. The law also provides for
mandatory retirement at age 55 for employees with twenty
years of hazardous duty service.
As the Subcommittee knows, C9ngress enacted Public Law
93-350, providing for such Hazardous Duty Retirement, not
primarily to reward those Federal employees who are exposed
to hardship and danger on the job, though some might argue
that such a reward would only be appropriate as compen-
sation for the risks these employees take. Rather, these
provisions were intended primarily as a personnel tool
through which the government would maintain a younger and
more vigorous workforce by making it possible for such law
enforcement personnel to retire at an earlier age.
Given this focus, the basic question regarding H.R. 1518 is
whether the duties of Immigration and Customs Inspectors
should mandate their coverage under this personnel policy. In
our view the answer to this question is a resounding yes.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
The American public is entitled to a young and vigorous
workforce to protect our borders and to ensure the energetic
and effective enforcement of our laws. As immigration issues
have moved to the forefront of the nation's public policy
agenda, it has become clear that it is important that we have
Immigration and Customs Inspectors who have the mental and
physical strength and stamina to fully meet the strenuous
requirements of their jobs. Inclusion of these Inspectors
under this established personnel policy will allow the needed
recruitment of young and able workers to perform this crucial
and increasingly dangerous task. The jobs of our Immigration
and Customs Inspectors are as difficult and as hazardous as
those of our other enforcement personnel.
The exclusion of these positions from hazardous duty
coverage creates a situation that is not only unjust but one
which is unwise as well. It works to encourage some of our
best and most qualified inspectors to seek positions in other
branches of the Services which are covered under the
statute. The effect is to deny this Branch of the Service the
ability, which other Branches have, to attract and hold for
their entire careers the best and most effective officers.
Further, while there is often movement among the Service's
other occupational groups little such movement occurs into
the Inspections Branch. This is not to say that those in the
job are less vigorous, less dedicated, or less effective than
the Service's other officers but it is to say that the cream
of the crop of the Inspections Branch move up and out of the
line inspections corps and into other covered positions. This
damages the Service's overall enforcement effort. Extending
6(c) coverage will increase the willingness of other Service
personnel to accept positions in this area.
I, for example, am a Special Agent, assigned to our
Anti-Smuggling Unit, and am covered under the present 6(c)
provisions. I would never voluntarily accept an offer of
employment in the Inspections Branch, and neither would many
of my colleagues. What prudent officer would accept a job
with hazards equal to those in other occupational areas when
the other jobs are covered under 6(c) retirement and the
Inspec- tor's job is not? The answer is few if any.
Given the importance of the nature of the Inspector's
duties in this Subcommittee's deliberations I would like to
briefly outline their jobs.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
The WENS and Customs share the inspections responsibil-
ilities at each port of entry. It is the practice in many cities
that these Officers be cross designated to perform the
other's functions, so that these officers have dual enforce-
ment responsibilites and in fact these officers perform the
mission of other federal agencies as well. Each Inspector is
an expert in his or her own agency's mission. In recognition
of this fact each agency maintains Secondary Inspectional
Facilities to conduct in depth inquiries into violations of
their particular statutes. Our Inspectors are trained to
enforce the Immigration Laws and to look to the admissability
of any individual seeking to enter the United States and to
prevent the illegal entry, or smuggling, of those not eligible
to enter under color of law. These officers inspect each
individual seeking to enter, they conduct interviews in depth
in Secondary Inspections. They make arrests, detain aliens
and citizens for prosecution or administrative proceedings.
They take part in every stage of such proceedings from
presentation of cases to United States Attornies for
prosecution, to grand jury proceedings and criminal trials.
They are in every respect law enforcement officers.
Immigration and Customs Inspectors rely upon their
judgement, personal observations, questioning techniques,
and increasingly sophisticated data bases to perform their
duties. In many areas the Inspector receives on the spot
assistance in identifying fugitives and other criminals by use
of the two Services' data bases but in every case the officer
is required to utilize his or her investigative skill to
determine if an arrest, seizure, or further investigative
activity are necessary. They are constantly in a position
which can demand that they arrest wanted felons, smugglers,
terrorists, or aliens seeking to enter the United States
illegally. These individuals may fall under the purview of
State or Federal or Foreign Law.
The nature of the Inspector's job is such that she or he
must act on the basis of their intuitive and investigative
skill in situations where only those skills and their judgment
lie in the way of ready entry of criminals or undesirable
aliens into the United States. Many land border ports are
staffed by a single Inspector. These officers are often
required to work alone for long hours. Not all of these
Inspectors work at Airports, or major Seaports, many work on
board ship miles far from other officers or any law
enforcement backup. Many of these Inspectors are required
to be armed for their own safety, and in many states these
officers are designated state peace officers by legislation.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
The fact of the matter is that the Immigration Inspector's
job is much like that of the Border Patrol Agent or Special
Agent. Like their colleagues Inspectors must distinguish
between those eligible to be in or to enter the United State-,
and those ineligible for admission. Their job varies in that
they work in a fixed location but it is similar in terms of the
danger inherent in the individual confrontation with each
person they encounter. One significant difference between
these officers is in the numbers of people each will have to
deal with in the normal course of a business day. While
Special Agents or Border Patrol Agents might deal with
dozens, or perhaps hundreds of people daily, Inspectors, of
both Services, deal with hundreds, and on busy days,
thousands of people. The personal health hazard of dealing
with such large numbers of people alone is significant yet we
must also take into account the knowledge that an Inspector
could be shot or killed or kidnapped at work or while off duty,
all of which have occurred during the last year.
The distinction seems to be that Inspectors must detect
the malafide document, impersonator, smuggler, felon, or
contraband goods from a fixed position on an immediate
basis, rather than after an investigation of greater length.
Yet the hazard is the same. In fact the hazard is growing, in
certain areas Inspectors now work undercover in and around
the Ports of Entry to identify and apprehend smugglers.
Inspectors perform most of the functions of their colleagues
without the freedom that characterizes the positions of their
brother and sister officers. Inspectors must act quickly,
without the benefit of planning, or backup, to affect the
arrests or seizures which their colleagues can plan and
control. In a sense it is from this requirement for on the spot
action that the hazard arises. For the public to be assured
that it has the vigorous and effective career minded officer
on the spot to do the job it is only appropriate that these
positions be covered under the early retirement provisions of
Section 8336(c).
While some would suggest that it is the nature and length
of the "investigation" that determines law enforcement
status we would suggest that the hazard arises out of the
actual confrontation both Inspectors and Agents of every
type must face. The hazard arises not out of the time
consumed in determining or recognizing illegal activity but
out of the moment of truth, and the likelihood of legal action,
that occurs with an arrest. An appropriate analogy could be
drawn to the police officer who walks a beat and the
detective who investigates "more sophisticated" crime.
Neither faces reduced hazards though one might know
beforehand, in a greater number of cases, when he might have
to make an arrest, based on the ability to conduct that later
and longer inquiry away from the scene.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5 2
A few examples would be appropriate at this and perhaps
the best example is that of our largest Port of Entry, San
Ysidro, California where an average of fifteen felony arrests
are made eacg day. More stolen vehicles are seized at this
port annually than in the entire state of California. At San
Ysidro, California this past weekend alone three Immigration
Inspectors were injured while attempting to prevent the. entry
of ineligible aliens. One female inspector was assaulted by a
female alien who attempted to pass through the vehicular
inspections lines on foot. Another Inspector was bit by a
female alien who attempted to flee during inspection. A third
officer had his wrist broken when he attempted to arrest an
alien who had made a false claim to United States citizen-
ship. During the past month our Immigration Inspectors, at
San Ysidro and Otay Mesa inter- dicted some 200 different
smuggling attempts and seized some 125 vehicles.
In each case where our Inspectors make a criminal arrest,
or apprehend a smuggler, they perform the same function as
our Special Agents. Their function and their responsibilities
are the same as those of our other officers and in fact where
officers have not carried out that responsibility as
effectively as expected the Service has attempted to impose
discipline.
Given the nature of the duties of Immigration and Customs
Inspectors, we fail to see the rationale for excluding these
positions from Hazardous Duty Retirement coverage.Both the
ISENS and the Customs Service have long recognized the
realities of this situation but apparently the career
managers of the Services are prevented from giving
expression to this realization. Hopefully the Congress will.
Given the overwhelming need for Hazardous Duty Retirement
Coverage for Immigration and Customs Inspectors the I&NS
Council wholeheartedly urges the,adoption of H.R. 1518. We
urge the Subcommittee to ensure the passage of H.R. 1518 to
assist us in improving the effectiveness of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service and Customs Services and to
provide thereby for the recognition of the increasing hazards
faced by these officers.
I would again express my thanks to the Chair and the
members of this Subcommittee for their patience here today
and, again, to Representative Swift and his colleagues for
their sponsorship of this legislation. I would be happy to
answer any questions you might have.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/30: CIA-RDP87M01152R000200170002-5