A.3 INVESTIGATION PROCESS AND SCOPE

¶Decision to Pursue a Safety Investigation

¶During the first week of its investigation, the Board reviewed the structure and methodology of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, the International Civil Aviation Organization standards used by the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration, and the accident investigation models under which the U.S. Air Force and Navy Safety Centers operate. Rather than assign formal blame or determine legal liability for the cause of the accident, the Board affirmed its charge to pursue both an accident investigation and a safety investigation, the primary aim of which would be to identify and correct threats to the safe operation of the Space Shuttle.

¶The Use of Privileged Witness Statements

¶With a principal focus on identifying and correcting threats to safe operations, safety investigations place a premium on obtaining full and complete disclosure about every aspect of an accident, even if that information may prove damaging or embarrassing to particular individuals or organizations. However, individuals who have made mistakes, know of negligence by others, or suspect potential flaws in their organizations are often afraid of being fired or even prosecuted if they speak out. To allay these fears, which can prevent the emergence of information that could save lives in the future, many safety investigations, including those by NASA and by the Air Force and Navy Safety Centers, grant witnesses complete confidentiality, as do internal affairs investigations by agency Inspector Generals. This confidentiality, which courts recognize as "privileged communication," allows witnesses to volunteer information that they would not otherwise provide and to speculate more openly about their organizationsʼ flaws than they would in a public forum.

233

¶Given the stakes of the Columbia accident investigation, the most important being the lives of future astronauts, the Board decided to extend witnesses confidentiality, even though this confidentiality would necessitate that investigators redact some witness information before releasing it to the public.

¶Consistent with NASA Safety Program policy NPD 8621.1H Para 1.j, statements made to Board investigators under privi- lege were not made under legal oath. Investigators recorded and then transcribed interviews, with those interviewed af- firming by their signatures the accuracy of the transcripts. The Board took extraordinary measures to ensure that privileged witness statements would remain confidential by restricting access to these statements to its 13 members and a small number of authorized support staff. Witness statements and information derived from them are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

¶The existence of a safety investigation in which privileged statements are taken does not prevent an accounting of personal responsibility associated with an accident. It merely means that such an accounting must result from a separate investigation. In this instance, that responsibility has been left to the NASA administration and the Congressional committees that oversee the agency. To facilitate this separate investigation, the Board pledged to notify NASA and Congress if evidence of criminal activity or willful negligence is found in privileged statements or elsewhere. Additionally, the Board opened all its files to Congressional representatives, with the exception of privileged witness statements. Limited Congressional access to these statements is governed by a special written agreement between the oversight committees and the Board that preserves the Boardʼs obligation to witnesses who have entrusted them with information on the condition of confidentiality.

¶Expanded Bounds of Board Investigation

¶Throughout the investigation, Chairman Gehman consulted regularly with members of Congress and the Administration to ensure that the Board met its responsibilities to provide the public with a full and open accounting of the Columbia accident. At the request of Congressional Oversight Committees, the Board significantly expanded the scope of its investigation to include a broad review of the Space Shuttle Program since its inception. In addition to establishing the accidentʼs probable and contributing causes, the Boardʼs report is intended to serve as the basis for an extended public policy debate over the future course of the Space Shuttle Program and the role it will play in the nationʼs manned space flight program.