 Defense Watch, Defense Daily, May 27, 2008.
… Bad Apple? An Army memo alleges aircraft material supplier Airtech International Inc. committed fraud on "every aircraft manufacturer in the world" from 1997 to 2005, according to the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), which says it has a copy of the September 2006 missive. POGO reports: "In addition to committing fraud and paying bribes and kickbacks, the company has threatened the safety of civilians and soldiers who fly on commercial and military aircraft, the memo states." It says the memo, that followed a four-year investigation, recommends the Air Force "take action against Airtech." …
U.S. probe accuses aircraft parts supplier of fraud, Reuters, By JoAnne Allen, May 22, 2008.
Reports: Army investigates Calif. supplier of aircraft parts, The Associated Press, May 22, 2008.
The U.S. Army is investigating a California supplier of composite materials for allegedly selling bogus products to the makers of civilian and military aircraft, according to reports.
Major Aircraft Manufacturer Accused Of Fraud, CBS News, May 22, 2008.
POGO Alert - Army: Bogus Materials Supplied to “Every Aircraft Manufacturer In the World”
Supplier Committed Fraud, Bribery For a Decade Threatening Flying Safety, May 22, 2008.
POGO Alert - Internal Boeing Documents Support Whistleblower's Allegations: Aircraft Quality Control Problems Cited, May 8, 2008.
Case implicates free speech, Op-Ed by POGO's Nick Schwellenbach, SPI Seattle.com, May 7, 2008.
The King County Prosecutor's Office is pursuing a criminal case against a former Boeing employee with dangerous implications for whistle-blowers, the flying public and free speech rights.
After the first trial resulted in a hung jury a few weeks ago, King County prosecutors, will soon announce a second trial date for former Boeing quality assurance inspector Gerald Eastman. The prosecutors likely will charge Eastman with "computer trespass"-- a euphemism for Eastman's unauthorized whistle-blowing to the media, which is not an illegal act. Jurors in the first trial were conflicted about the judge's instructions not to consider the issue of whistle-blowing.
Most of Eastman's concerns related to the safety implications of what he considered poor quality assurance at Boeing. While Eastman clearly violated Boeing policy, the criminal charges against him raise serious issues, especially in regards to the First Amendment right of free speech.
In other words, it is one thing to fire a whistle-blower for breaking company policies, quite another to try to jail one for the act of whistle-blowing, which is protected by law.
"Bringing criminal charges in this type of case is a very extreme reaction. However, it is another example of the disturbing trend of punishing whistle-blowers with criminal prosecution," said Dave Colapinto, a partner with the whistle-blower law firm Kohn, Kohn and Colapinto, which runs the National Whistleblower Center.
Eastman is not alone in his concerns about quality control and accountability. In 2000, a Federal Aviation Administration special technical audit on Boeing's production and quality problems, found "in some cases, manufacturing planning was not adequate, requirements were not followed, inspections were not specific or personnel were not knowledgeable about requirements."
Eastman's whistle-blowing came from his belief that Boeing had not adequately resolved the issues found in this FAA audit. He perceived that the practice of "roller-stamping" was widespread. Roller-stamping is approving work as complete without performing a thorough check.
In addition, an internal January 2004 Boeing document titled "Status Report: Investigation of 'Dual Failures' " underscored Eastman's concern. It states, "There appears to be a systemic issue within BCA (Boeing Commercial Aircraft) involving parallel process breakdowns of mechanics and inspectors involved in assembling and inspecting aircraft, assemblies and parts."
The FAA also examined 55 issues at Boeing between 2002 and 2003 and found that "24 percent of these issues have involved instances where the mechanic and inspector created and accepted nonconforming conditions."
And, in February 2008, the Department of Transportation IG issued a report of all the major aerospace manufacturers, including Boeing, faulting them for their quality assurance systems for their suppliers.
The employment consequences for Eastman's breaking company policy have been severe. A second round of a dubious criminal prosecution threatens to ruin this man's life and further hurt his family. But the issue is greater than that.
Does a whistle-blower have a First Amendment right to inform the public in a manner that should be considered protected speech without being jailed? If Boeing and King County prosecutors get their way, the future for whistle-blowers and the public is grim.
Nick Schwellenbach is an investigator at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO; pogo.org), a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit that works with whistle-blowers.
Bills would slow revolving door between FAA, airlines, Federal Times, By Gregg Carlstrom, April 15, 2008.
Two lawmakers are proposing legislation that would block former Federal Aviation Administration employees from working for airlines immediately after their retirement.
The legislation is a response to congressional testimony by FAA safety inspectors earlier this month; the whistleblowers described a cozy relationship between the agency and airlines that led to safety lapses. The bills, being drafted by Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., would create what Oberstar calls a “cooling-off period,” during which FAA inspectors would be frozen out of airline jobs after retirement.
The Senate version would affect safety inspectors and supervisors; they would be prohibited from working for the airline industry for two years after leaving the agency.
The House legislation isn’t as far along. Oberstar discussed the idea at a House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing April 3, but legislators haven’t come up with any details. …
“There needs to be some level of transparency,” said Nick Schwellenbach, an investigator at the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight. “The FAA should track where its former employees go. It would be interesting to know … if Southwest has hired former FAA inspectors in Texas and is now facing fewer adverse decisions by the FAA in that same region.”
A cooling-off period was also one of several recommendations for improving the FAA in a report by Transportation Department Inspector General Calvin Scovel.
FAA Inspections and a Role for Government, Reg Watch, by Matt Madia, April 03, 2008.
Today, a House hearing spotlighted recent lapses in regulatory oversight of airlines. "Federal Aviation Administration inspectors and managers told lawmakers Thursday that the agency's top officials endangered passenger safety by being too cozy with the airlines they oversee," according to CQ.com.
The House Transportation Committee scheduled the hearing after an audit showed three unnamed airlines missed inspection deadlines. Witnesses included one of two FAA inspectors who blew the whistle when their bosses ignored safety concerns they raised about Southwest jets. (See the Project on Government Oversight blog for more.) Rigorous aircraft inspection is critical to the safety of millions of passengers. Aircraft safety is one area where the American public seems to unequivocally accept the need for our federal government to play a strong role and intervene when necessary. …
Letter from POGO to congressional transportation committees on FAA and manufacturer oversight of suppliers, March 12, 2008.
Substandard Parts on Jetliners Due to Insufficient Oversight, Air Safety Week, March 10, 2008.
A recently-released report by the U.S. Transportation Department's inspector general shows that some jetliners have been built with "substandard" parts, some of which were manufactured in foreign countries where production oversight is spotty.
The DOT released the federal oversight report dated February 26, 2008 after it was made public by the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), a nonprofit watchdog organization for government accountability. … POGO says the DOT audit found that outsourcing to other countries is a significant safety oversight concern and that the Federal Aviation Administration and major aerospace companies have failed to ensure quality control.
The quality control issue should be of concern, the IG report says, because more and more cheaper aircraft parts are coming from foreign manufacturers. Whereas Boeing's first jetliners were built almost exclusively in the United States, the airframe parts for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is primarily manufactured overseas.
"A massive effort must be made to beef up the entire aviation safety oversight apparatus--lives and billions of dollars are at stake," said Nick Schwellenbach, a POGO investigator. "This is further proof that the FAA continues to be a captured agency, offering just a fig leaf of ineffective regulation at the public's peril. And manufacturers continue to put short-term profit ahead of proven and prudent safety and quality." …
FAA oversight of airplane parts criticized, Austin American-Statesman, By Rebecca Carr, March 05, 2008.
The Federal Aviation Administration lacks an adequate system for checking the quality of commercial airplane parts, creating a potential safety risk for airline passengers, according to a new oversight report.
"Neither manufacturers nor FAA inspectors have provided effective oversight of suppliers; this has allowed substandard parts to enter the aviation supply chain," says a 24-page report from the Transportation Department's inspector general.
Federal investigators assessed the oversight of suppliers to the nation's major aircraft manufacturers. They found "widespread deficiencies" at all but one of 21 suppliers that make parts for those companies.
The report found weaknesses throughout the FAA's oversight system for manufacturers and their suppliers. "The aerospace manufacturers and the FAA have put the flying public at unnecessary risk," said Nick Schwellenbach, an investigator at the nonprofit watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, which released the report in advance of the Transportation Department on Friday. …
Caution: Tax Increase Ahead, Regardless Of Political Rhetoric, Roll Call, by Stan Collender, March 4, 2008.
It's becoming increasingly clear that, at some point after the current economic difficulties fade into history, Congress and the White House are going to have to face up to the need to increase federal revenues.
This is not, of course, what the candidates are saying. But electoral politics is almost completely irrelevant. The situation will be the same regardless of who is elected president and which party controls the House and Senate.
This is hardly breakthrough analysis. Budget analysts and economists of practically every political persuasion have been saying for years that this will be the case if federal spending isn't cut. … Others became public last week. In separate reports, the Project on Government Oversight said the inspectors general at many federal agencies don't have adequate budgets or staff to do their jobs properly, and the Federal Aviation Administration doesn't have the resources it needs to properly review the quality of the spare parts being used by the airlines. In other words, the FAA isn't doing its job, but the IG can't find out.
FAA Oversight Of Foreign-Sourced Aircraft Parts Under Scrutiny, Aero News, March 3, 2008.
Boeing promises a serious review of a new report from the US Department of Transportations Office of the Inspector General, which claims poor FAA oversight of foreign manufacturers continues to allow substandard parts to find their way into US airliners.
According to The Washington Post, the report was made public by the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit organization that focuses on government accountability. The OIG charges the FAA's new records-review-based oversight model is missing problems which would be obvious if actual on-site inspections were conducted at foreign parts suppliers. …
FAA Criticized In Report on Airplane Parts, Washington Post, By Frank Ahrens, March 1, 2008.
Passengers have flown on jetliners built with "substandard" parts, some of which may have been made in foreign countries, because the Federal Aviation Administration lacks an adequate system for checking the quality of airplane components, according to a federal oversight report. … But the bargain-hunting has come at a price, according to a new report by the Transportation Department's inspector general.
"Neither manufacturers nor FAA inspectors have provided effective oversight of suppliers; this has allowed substandard parts to enter the aviation supply chain," reads the report, dated Feb. 26. The agency released the report yesterday after it was made public by the Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit organization that focuses on government accountability. …
This is not pork-barrel spending: No one is talking about an impossible-to-fathom bridge to nowhere. They are not programs that can be questioned on a philosophical basis. For the most part, these are as close to pure public good activities as you get and things we count on the government to provide because no one else will. …
DOT Audit Finds 'Widespread' Problems With Aircraft Suppliers, Dow Jones Newswires, By Martin Vaughan, February 29, 2008.
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Lagging oversight of airplane parts suppliers has led to substandard and possibly unsafe parts entering the supply chain, according to a government audit released Friday.
The report, from the Department of Transportation's Inspector General, said the Federal Aviation Administration has not done enough to prevent these supplier problems.
"Widespread deficiencies" were found among suppliers of both engine and airframe parts, according to the IG study, which was dated Feb. 26. The problems are abetted by too few on-site inspections by the FAA or the airplane manufacturers themselves, the IG concluded. … "We need to figure out a system that is global in scope because the industry is global now," said Nick Schwellenbach, an investigator with the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight. The group posted the IG report on its Web site Friday before DOT auditors had officially released it.
Transcripts Lou Dobbs Tonight, CNN, February 29, 2008.
… BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Federal Aviation Administration is failing to protect aircraft safety. That is the simple finding of a just-released report from the inspector- general of the Department of Transportation.
To quote the report: "Neither manufacturers nor FAA inspectors have provided effective oversight of suppliers. This has allowed substandard parts to enter the aviation supply chain. The quality of parts used in landing gear, jet engines and other critical components has been compromised." A government watchdog group says the report shows a broken system.
NICK SCHWELLENBACH, PROJECT ON GOV'T OVERSIGHT: They're pretty clear in the report. But when you fully understand, wow, there's just all these massive breakdowns throughout the system. The FAA is relying on manufacturers to a large extent and I'm sure that's the way the manufacturers want the system to be run, but the manufacturers are failing and governing themselves, which really strikes me as frankly stupid.
TUCKER: Only one percent of the suppliers to the manufacturers reviewed the inspector general's report have been inspected by the Federal Aviation Administration and at its current inspection rate it would take almost 100 years to inspect every supplier.
In a conference call with CNN officials from the FAA made it clear final responsibility rests with the companies. Quote, "Safety in aviation first and foremost rests with the manufacturers, not the Federal Aviation Administration. Courts have made that clear."
Those same officials also said they're satisfied with the way the companies assure the quality of parts, noting that an inspector general's report is never positive and always harsh in tone.
When asked about the comment, the spokesperson for the inspector general's office had no comment, saying the report "speaks for itself. (END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER: And it speaks loads knowing that FAA inspectors made decisions to conduct an audit of a local supplier, rather than a foreign supplier because well, the travel would, for the inspection would be too expensive. The report also notes that the current system was designed when aircraft carriers maintained primary control over the production of their planes, rather than today's model where the manufacturing is outsourced to a greater and greater and greater extent. In other words, we have a system that's broken, we've got a model that's broken and I got to tell you, it's uncomfortable reading that report feeling comfortable about the planes in the air.
PILGRIM: I could say so and the responsibility rests with the manufacturer. What's the FAA's role in this?
TUCKER: I don't know, a good question, Kitty.
PILGRIM: Thank you very much, Bill Tucker. …
Audit Finds Lax Aircraft Parts Oversight, The Associated Press, By Dan Cateriniccia, Feb. 29, 2008.
Regulators and aircraft manufacturers are not keeping adequate tabs on the quality of plane parts made domestically and abroad, potentially raising risks for fliers, government investigators said in a report released Friday.
The Transportation Department's inspector general's office said the Federal Aviation Administration has failed to conduct enough audits to determine whether manufacturers' quality-assurance systems are working.
… Nick Schwellenbach of the Project on Government Oversight, a private watchdog group, lauded the inspector general office's report, but said "Congress will have to dig into this and hold hearings for (the) full impact to be felt." …
POGO Alert - Leaked Audit: Manufacturers and FAA Allowing Defective Parts on Planes; Insufficient Oversight of Foreign and Domestic Outsourcing, February 29, 2008.
|
|
