Southwest Facing $10.2 Million FAA Fine Over Safety Checks

[Matt Molnar]

Wall Street Journal:

FAA May Fine Southwest Over Missed Safety Checks (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120476517555515181.html)
By ANDY PASZTOR
March 6, 2008; Page D4

Federal aviation regulators are seeking a penalty of at least $3 million from Southwest Airlines Co. for failing to properly inspect nearly four dozen older planes for potentially hazardous structural cracks, according to people familiar with the details. The penalty is expected to be the largest imposed against any passenger carrier in about two decades.

The Department of Transportation and a congressional committee are examining why the Federal Aviation Administration didn't ground the planes temporarily last March after learning of the missed inspections. The case focuses on the carrier's failure to perform certain inspections on its older-version Boeing 737-300s as required.

[snip]

Southwest completed all the inspections roughly 10 days after it voluntary alerted the agency about the problem, which didn't cause any accidents or incidents. Six of the 46 affected aircraft turned out to have cracks -- some as long as four inches -- in the fuselage, according to one person familiar with details. The mandatory inspections, part of federal and industry efforts to ensure the structural integrity of older passenger jets, are designed to detect and repair such cracks when they are much smaller and pose less of a safety risk. [Full Article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120476517555515181.html) (Free article, no subscription required]

[Alex T]

Official SWA Response.

"We are aware of all of your concerns and passion for the safety of Southwest flights. And, no one is more passionate about the safety of our Customers and Employees than we are. As an official representative of Southwest Airlines, I would like to make clear the following points:

First and foremost, our Customers must know this was never and is not now a safety of flight issue.

The media is suggesting that the FAA plans to fine Southwest regarding aircraft inspections, but to date, we have not received any notification or indication from the FAA that that is what they plan to do.

The inspections for early signs of skin cracking on some of our aircraft in question were one of many routine, redundant, and overlapping inspections of our fleet and involved an extremely small area in one of the many overlapping inspections. When we discovered a missed inspection, we informed the FAA and promptly completed the missed inspections in March 2007. The FAA approved our actions and considered the matter closed as of April 2007.

Again, safety is always our number one concern. Southwest has an excellent maintenance program, and this experience has helped improve the overall safety of the fleet."

This was said by a Rep of SWA, and internally we knew the investigation was on going but as of now we have yet to get any FAA notification of any such sort.

Alex

[Matt Molnar]

Maybe the FAA is going to start cracking down on stuff like this as a way to supplement their revenue. The money for their new $40 billion ATC system has to come from somewhere. :)

[Alex T]

Maybe the FAA is going to start cracking down on stuff like this as a way to supplement their revenue. The money for their new $40 billion ATC system has to come from somewhere. :)


HAHAHAHA.

Another was "joking" our fuel hedges was the result of this MX stuff.

Alex

[lijk604]

The whole BS of the thing is how the media is saying that these were "dangerous and unsafe" aircraft.
All that happened was they delayed inspection...kind of like when you are driving in your car and look at the inspections sticker and notice that it was due 2 weeks ago. The car is no less safe, you just missed a deadline. These aircraft were not dangerous or unsafe, they were late for inspection, and SWA self-reported that fact to the FAA. I really hate the media, they blow everything out of proportion. :evil:

[HPNPilot1200]

Yet the FAA pulled AMI's Part 135 operating certificate (owned by Tag Aviation, a Swiss-based company) for similar stunts which also did not affect safety of flight. Your hypocritical gov'ment at work.

[hiss srq]

Yet the FAA pulled AMI's Part 135 operating certificate (owned by Tag Aviation, a Swiss-based company) for similar stunts which also did not affect safety of flight. Your hypocritical gov'ment at work.
AMI's certificate for 135 actually got the yank because of ownership issues. Tag owned too much of it. It was somthing in the corperate structure not MX.

[Matt Molnar]

Edited thread title to reflect FAA announcement.

They did find 6 planes with cracks when they caught up with the inspections, so this is not a minor oversight.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndu ... 5020080306 (http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSWBT00855020080306)

[HPNPilot1200]

AMI's certificate for 135 actually got the yank because of ownership issues. Tag owned too much of it. It was somthing in the corperate structure not MX.

Yes, which was also not a safety of flight issue. I understand the media is reporting the (safety of flight issue) information they receive from the FAA, but most of what I hear from the FAA I do not trust.

[T-Bird76]

Maybe the FAA is going to start cracking down on stuff like this as a way to supplement their revenue. The money for their new $40 billion ATC system has to come from somewhere. :)

Matt to be frank your not that much off the mark. Part of my job is Regulatory affairs and we are finding that the Fed, State, and Local govts are imposing more and more fees and fines on companies in order to raise cash in a turning economy.

[Alex T]

Maybe the FAA is going to start cracking down on stuff like this as a way to supplement their revenue. The money for their new $40 billion ATC system has to come from somewhere. :)

Matt to be frank your not that much off the mark. Part of my job is Regulatory affairs and we are finding that the Fed, State, and Local govts are imposing more and more fees and fines on companies in order to raise cash in a turning economy.


That would be a shame and totally unneccesary thing to do though unfortunate, and at the expense of a company. Not excusing what Southwest Airlines did, but the damage and harm to the company and any company by levying such major fines is not good at all.

Alex

[Alex T]

Southwest Airlines Co. (LUV) placed three employees on administrative leave after releasing preliminary findings from its internal investigation into allegations the company violated Federal Aviation Administration regulations in March 2007.

The Dallas carrier said it launched an investigation last month immediately after learning of an FAA probe regarding the company's compliance with FAA Airworthiness Directives. Southwest "accelerated" its internal probe after the FAA released details of its letter of civil penalty.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/art ... RTUNE5.htm (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200803111608DOWJONESDJONLINE000793_FORTUNE5.htm)

Alex

[Ari707]

Southwest Airlines grounds dozens of planes

DALLAS - Southwest Airlines said it grounded dozens of planes in the wake of its recent admission that it had missed required inspections of some planes for structural cracks.

According to an airline press release, the decision affected 44 planes — one is retired, five are already being inspected, leaving 38 removed from service.

The move, announced Wednesday, comes as Southwest faces a $10.2 million civil penalty for continuing to fly 46 planes after the airline told regulators that it had missed required inspections of the planes.

The Federal Aviation Administration, which announced the penalty last week, has also come under fire for failing to immediately ground the Southwest jets when it learned they had not been inspected for cracks in the fuselage.

Southwest spokeswoman Christi Day said Wednesday that the move to ground the aircraft resulted in some flights being canceled, although she didn’t have a precise figure.

The company said it had 520 Boeing 737 jets at the end of last year. Nearly 200 of them are older models, the Boeing 737-300, that were supposed to undergo extra inspections for cracks in the fuselage.

Southwest Chief Executive Gary Kelly had said Tuesday he was concerned by findings from an internal investigation into the missed inspections. He announced that the Dallas-based company had placed three employees on paid leave while it investigated the situation.

Acting FAA Administrator Robert A. Sturgell called the events “a twofold breakdown in the aviation system” — first, Southwest’s failure to properly inspect its planes; and the FAA’s failure to ground the jets as “at least one FAA inspector looked the other way.”

The $10.2 million penalty is the largest the FAA has ever imposed on a carrier. Southwest has said it will appeal.


© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[T-Bird76]

They took out all of the 500s and some 300s for safety checks. Also WN suspended three ppl connected to these events. Looks like a few folks were cutting corners from the reports.

[Alex T]

From SWA--

Last night, we successfully completed reinspection of all aircraft that we had previously removed from scheduled service. Out of the 44 affected aircraft we told you about yesterday, only 38 aircraft were removed from service because five aircraft are in regularly scheduled heavy maintenance and one is retired. Of the 38 aircraft, 34 were cleared and put back into the schedule by early this morning. Four of those aircraft were held for surface repairs, and we expect to have them back in service by the weekend.


Alex

[Matt Molnar]

How did they inspect 38 planes in one day?

[HPNPilot1200]

How did they inspect 38 planes in one day?

When you ground that many aircraft greatly depended upon to fly on the schedule, you'll do whatever you can to get the inspections complete, whether it means offering overtime and possibly other incentives to mechanics, it's worth the cost to get them flying again. Pretty impressive response.

[LGA777]

From SWA--

Last night, we successfully completed reinspection of all aircraft that we had previously removed from scheduled service. Out of the 44 affected aircraft we told you about yesterday, only 38 aircraft were removed from service because five aircraft are in regularly scheduled heavy maintenance and one is retired. Of the 38 aircraft, 34 were cleared and put back into the schedule by early this morning. Four of those aircraft were held for surface repairs, and we expect to have them back in service by the weekend.


Alex

So Alex, does this mean they actually found legitimate cracks in 4 aircraft ? Thats they way I am interpeting this in a read between the lines way.

Regards

LGA777

[Matt Molnar]

Yes they did.


Southwest Repairs 4 Planes for Cracks (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i3xcXMwZ_QFkq-ughBpIu7ryKzLQD8VCT7501)

By DAVID KOENIG – 14 hours ago

DALLAS (AP) — Four of the planes that Southwest Airlines Co. grounded for inspections this week were found to have cracks in their fuselages and were undergoing repair, the company said Thursday.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i3xc ... QD8VCT7501 (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i3xcXMwZ_QFkq-ughBpIu7ryKzLQD8VCT7501)

[PhilDernerJr]

How did they inspect 38 planes in one day?

When you ground that many aircraft greatly depended upon to fly on the schedule, you'll do whatever you can to get the inspections complete, whether it means offering overtime and possibly other incentives to mechanics, it's worth the cost to get them flying again. Pretty impressive response.

Also, when you have as many planes as they do, I would assume that more than 38 are in some kind of mx checks at any given time anyway. It shouldn't be hard to just hold off on some unnecessary checks on planes for a couple of days to free up resources to prioritize the 38 that needed checking.

[FlyingColors]

How did they inspect 38 planes in one day?

Very quickly.

"Sheana, they bought their tickets. I say let em crash!"

[Alex T]

How did they inspect 38 planes in one day?

When you ground that many aircraft greatly depended upon to fly on the schedule, you'll do whatever you can to get the inspections complete, whether it means offering overtime and possibly other incentives to mechanics, it's worth the cost to get them flying again. Pretty impressive response.

Also, when you have as many planes as they do, I would assume that more than 38 are in some kind of mx checks at any given time anyway. It shouldn't be hard to just hold off on some unnecessary checks on planes for a couple of days to free up resources to prioritize the 38 that needed checking.


You would be correct, SWA has about 525 planes, off and on. However they only utilize 483 of them any given day for the 3,400+ routes they fly daily.

On weekends, when schedule is reduced, more planes stay grounded.

On this day, SWA was scheduled to have 40 planes out of service anyway, then an additional 4 extra for the 44 planes taken out of service for inspection, so SWA had to operate a very tight schedule, yet only was able to cancel 128 flights, or between 4-8% of the actual flights being cancelled. It took about 90 minutes for the inspection for each aircraft.

As the article stated SWA really has had strong bookings, even higher this month compared to last year's of March. So if the public is troubled by this they sure aren't showing it through the bookings.

Alex

[Matt Molnar]

I read a report from some PR firm about the effect of this on Southwest and it sounds like the public is a bit down on Southwest's image, but overall the brand itself remains as strong as ever. I think they can thank the overall safety of our nation's air transport industry for that...because there have been so few accidents in the past few years, people still feel safe despite this seemingly dangerous oversight. If they had an accident (on any carrier) fresh in their minds, I think Southwest would take a bigger hit.