After Air India drug incident, DGCA weighs annual testing of all pilots

According to sources, while the DGCA was already in the process of revising the regulations about testing of aviation personnel for psychoactive substances, the incident has led to calls for more stringent drug testing protocols and stricter disciplinary action in proven instances of drug abuse. Earlier this month, the pilot grouping Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) urged the DGCA to expand the annual mandatory testing to 25% of the pilots from the current 10%.

“So right now, the rule says 10% (of pilots are to be tested) across the overall pilot network, but just like I said, DGCA is engaging (with stakeholders), and one of the opinions from our side is that everyone has to go through it in the year at a random time,” Naidu told reporters on the sidelines of an industry event.

“We have to see how all the stakeholders are going to respond to this because one is the safety aspect of it…and the second thing is the operational impact. That also has to be taken into consideration. So we are going to balance both,” the minister added.

As per the DGCA Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) on testing for psychoactive substances, random dope tests on 10% of the flight crew, other pilots, and air traffic controllers are mandatory each year. Apart from the routine random testing, these tests are also usually done after a safety-related incident, as is the case with the recent one involving an Air India plane.

The Air India Airbus A320 aircraft — VT-EXO — operating a flight from Phuket to Delhi on August 4 encountered a sudden altitude drop of about 300 feet and caused injuries to 20 passengers and four cabin crew members, and 17 of the 24 had to be hospitalised. The aircraft had 137 passengers, six cabin crew members, and two pilots on board. The incident was classified as a serious incident and is under investigation by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB). The preliminary investigation report is expected soon, according to Naidu.

The government and the airline had initially attributed the incident to severe turbulence. Conduct of the pilots is also under scanner, particularly in view of the pilot-in-command testing for marijuana, as per sources. Moreover, the Airbus A320 jet is also learnt to have faced multiple snags with the aircraft’s hydraulic and control systems in quick succession at the time of the incident, which is being investigated by the AAIB as a possible cause.

In the current DGCA CAR on testing for psychoactive substances, pilots and air traffic controllers are seen as the primary focus segments. But the rules also extend to the broader range of aviation personnel engaged in safety-sensitive functions, like aircraft maintenance engineers and certifying staff, trainee pilots, and instructors and examiners.

The DGCA rules state that urine samples of the employees are to be tested for the presence of the six categories of psychoactive substances — amphetamine and amphetamine-type stimulants, opiates and metabolites, cannabis as tetrahydrocannabinol, cocaine, barbiturates, and benzodiazepine.

The urine sample of the employee on whom the test is being conducted is to be split and stored in two separate containers. The testing process begins with a screening test on the sample in the first container, which is done immediately after the sample is collected. If this initial test is ‘non-negative’, which means it is indicative of the presence of psychoactive substances, the pilot is immediately taken off flying duty, pending the results of a confirmatory test. The sample in the second container is then sent for the confirmatory test at a designated laboratory using high-complexity instrumentation. Confirmatory testing is required as preliminary screenings can return false positives due to consumption of certain medications and food items, as well as technical errors.

If the confirmatory test is positive, the medical in-charge of the concerned organisation is required to consult a medical review officer (MRO) to determine if the positive result was due to a legitimate therapeutic treatment or some other innocuous source, and not drug abuse. For instance, pain relief medication containing codeine may trigger a positive result for opiates. If the MRO confirms the result is a positive case of drug use, there is an escalation ladder of disciplinary actions that comes into the picture.

If it is the first occasion of a positive drug test, the employee is referred by his or her organisation to a specialist doctor, counsellor, or de-addiction centre for a rehabilitation programme. To return to active duty, the employee must undergo new testing, receive a negative report, and obtain a fitness certificate from the organisation’s medical in-charge.

If the employee who returned to duty after a first offence is found positive again, his or her license is suspended for three years. A third positive test result leads to the cancellation of the person’s license.