Speaking in general terms only (aa73 correct me please if I say something inaccurate, I'm speaking from memory and things may have changed)....
....in the early days of ASAP, the lion's share of ops ASAP matters were 'pilot deviations' although not exclusively of course. The untested question would occasionally come up, 'What if it involved hull loss, injury, or worse fatalities, would it be admissible?' The conclusion was that 'admissibleness' was a matter primarily of meeting the LOA requirements.
Without debating this, of more interest was that ASAP committee meetings and findings were as one would expect, confidential and any external party attending a meeting, to include reps from other carriers, signed a confidentiality agreement....the specific carrier committee deciding what and in what format other carrier reps could pass on to their fleets.
It was also often asked that if there were to be an accident referred to this program, would an NTSB rep be invited to attend. The answer was unequivocally, 'of course', but they would sign the same confidentiality agreement, prompting the speculation that they would most likely decline the invite for this reason.
In this light, of interest here is the fact that you've got a non-US AIB and an operator internal committee sworn to confidentiality, i.e. not necessarily having access to all of each other's info, but both 'investigating' the same incident for learning and prevention purposes, but lending to a potential for the conduct of and existence of two very different analyses....further complicating not only what can actually be learned, but what can rightly be distributed, and to whom.
Good questions OK465 and I am probably not able to answer in depth as I am not an expert on ASAP.
What I can tell you is that, quite simply, a hull loss will not exclude a crew from ASAP admission if it was found that the hull loss was not caused by an intentional violation of the regs. The folks who run the ASAP program (company, union, and FAA) are highly experienced folks who go to great lengths to remain neutral and anonymous when investigating reports. As long as the criteria for admission into ASAP are met, the flight crews will get accepted. However, ALL of the criteria need to be met and it has to be an unanimous approval from everyone. We've had several incidents where flight crews were not accepted simply by one vote, or due to the fact that they intentionally violated a reg or two. All airlines have this situation.
As far as confidentiality agreements and such, I'm in the dark. The tone of your post sounding like you were suggesting there might be some conflicts of interest in the ASAP program, some CYA stuff, etc... I have no clue if that's correct or not. In this accident, it was deemed acceptable into ASAP quite simply because it was the unanimous decision that they had met all of the ASAP criteria and fell under the definition of "non intentional" pilot deviation as a result of outside influences (ATC, etc.)