233

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

In the matter of the Investigation : of :

EMERY WORLDWIDE AIRLINES, Flight 17 : McDonnell Douglas DC-8-71F :

N8079U :

Rancho Cordova, :

California : Docket No.:

: SA-521

February 16, 2000 :

:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

Friday, May 10, 2002

The above captioned matter convened, pursuant

to adjournment at 8:04 a.m.

BEFORE:

FRANK HILLDRUP,

Hearing Officer

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

234

APPEARANCES:

On behalf of the NTSB:

JOHN GOGLIA, CHAIRMAN

JOHN DeLISI

ALAN KUSHNER

NTSB Technical Panel:

KEN EGGE

FRANK McGILL

STEVE CARBONE

KEVIN PUDWILL

On Behalf of the FAA:

LYLE STREETER

Other Participants:

RICHARD HAGQUIST

BRUCE ROBBINS

Emery Worldwide Airlines

RICHARD BREUHAUS

The Boeing Company

TODD GUNTHER

Airline Pilots Association

DAVID HOFFSTETTER

SAM PORTER

RON ALVARADO

Tennessee Technical Services

235

I N D E X

WITNESS DIRECT REDIRECT

David Hoffstetter (cont.)

by Mr. Hilldrup 237

Mr. Gunther 240

Mr. Breuhaus 242

Mr. Streeter 245

Mr. Hagquist 247

Mr. Porter 252

Mr. DeLisi 256

Dr. Kushner 259

Chairman Goglia 260

David Ungemach

by Mr. Carbone 274 334, 350

Mr. Gunther 299 340

Mr. Hoffstetter 302 342

Mr. Breuhaus 305

Mr. Streeter 308

Mr. Hagquist 310 349

Mr. DeLisi 311

Dr. Kushner 314

Chairman Goglia 317

Thomas Ian Wood

by Mr. Carbone 357

Mr. Hilldrup 396 419

Mr. Gunther 397

Mr. Hoffstetter 402 421

Mr. Breuhaus 400

Mr. Streeter 412

Mr. DeLisi 417

Dr. Kushner 418 427

Chairman Goglia 418

Mr. Pudwill 425

Bruce A. Robbins

by Mr. Pudwill 430

Mr. Hilldrup 558

Mr. Gunther 559 585

Mr. Breuhaus 568

Mr. Porter 568 587

Mr. DeLisi 582

236

E X H I B I T S

EXHIBIT IDENTIFIED

7-V 354

11-K 417

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

237

1 P R O C E E D I N G S

2 8:04 a.m.

3 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: We will reconvene this morning

4 and we left I believe with the tech men concluding their

5 questions, is there any change in that?

6 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Well, sir, I had a

7 question or two for Mr. Hoffstetter.

8 Whereupon,

9 DAVID HOFFSTETTER

10 was called as a witness, and having been previously sworn,

11 was examined and testified further as follows:

12 DIRECT EXAMINATION

13 BY HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP:

14 Q I can't find my notes right now, but basically it

15 involved the statements you made yesterday about two things.

16 One was the apparent or the comments you heard from, I

17 believe one of your mechanics, about Emery rerigging after

18 airplanes perhaps coming out of TTS or rerigging to a

19 Douglas spec versus a United spec. Could you review that

20 again briefly and what I'd like to do if -- tell me how you

21 came about with that knowledge, and I'd like to ask for the

22 record of the folks that you -- that told you that

23 information as well. Provide that for the record after the

24 hearing, I'm not worried about it right now.

25 A Okay. The -- about a year ago we had a team of

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

238

1 mechanics working for Emery at Dayton. We had a crew, a

2 supervisor, some A&P mechanics, a couple avionics people,

3 and there was a rig problem on one of the aircraft that was

4 at the Dayton hub. Some of the mechanics from Emery were

5 working on that particular problem and one of them made the

6 statement to one of my mechanics that they have to rerig

7 everything that comes out of the Tennessee tech. He was one

8 of the people who is on our rig crew and took exception to

9 the comment. Called me up and explained to me that what it

10 appeared they were doing was taking an aircraft that was not

11 a ex-United airplane, and rerigging it to a Douglas -- the

12 original Douglas spec.

13 United changed the rigging on the ailerons and

14 the tabs to rig the tabs on the ailerons to a neutral

15 position. I believe Douglas originally rigs those ailerons

16 to four degree trailing edge down. I'm not real sure about

17 the number, but there is a difference. United did this

18 improve fuel efficiency, and we have a job card that's

19 provided by Emery in their D check package that tells us to

20 rig their entire fleet to the United specification as it

21 relates to ailerons.

22 When he pointed that out to mechanics that were

23 working on the problem at Dayton, and they said that's not

24 the way we do it here. We rig to the Douglas spec.

25 That's -- we're charged with working to the manual that's

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

239

1 appropriate to the aircraft.

2 He called me in. I pulled a copy of the job card

3 that tells us to rig to the United dimensions, faxed that up

4 Emery's maintenance control and to the people -- it went

5 from there to the people who were doing maintenance at

6 Dayton -- their line crew at Dayton. They went ahead and

7 rigged to the Douglas spec, which is what they are charged

8 with doing under their maintenance manual.

9 The aircraft departed, went on a flight, came

10 back the following evening. It still had trim problems and

11 it was turned over to the TTS crew that was on station at

12 Dayton, and that' when they discovered the missing cotter

13 keys, broken safeties and loose jam nuts.

14 Q Did you personally talk to Emery maintenance

15 control about this?

16 A I sent the fax on the D check. I -- their

17 quality control was there when the panel was opened and was

18 aware of the missing safeties and loose jam nuts. I didn't

19 find out about for a day or two after the -- after that

20 particular problem. I was aware of the United versus

21 Douglas problem as it was happening and provided the job

22 card from TTS that we used during their heavy checks.

23 Q Okay, but you didn't speak to maintenance control

24 personally? Emery maintenance control about --

25 A This issue?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

240

1 Q Yes.

2 A No.

3 Q Okay, well, that's really my only question. I

4 would like to have for the record, the folks that you're

5 aware of that were involved with that, and again, I can get

6 that after the hearing.

7 A Well, the gentleman involved from TTS's

8 standpoint is here. His name's Ron Alvarado.

9 Q Okay. I'd like any TTS and Emery folks -- you

10 can just provide that to me afterwards. Thank you.

11 A Thank you.

12 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: That's all I have, Mr.

13 Chairman.

14 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, to the parties. We'll

15 start with ALPA today. Surprised?

16 MR. GUNTHER: Never surprised.

17 DIRECT EXAMINATION

18 BY MR. GUNTHER:

19 Q Mr. Hoffstetter, just one question. Fleet

20 campaign directive for the bolt, did your company at any

21 time participate with any Emery aircraft with that?

22 A Yes, we did. We had some problem with the fleet

23 campaign.

24 Q Could you describe those?

25 A The last aircraft we did for Emery, we were asked

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

241

1 -- and I can't remember the tail number on that airplane --

2 when the fleet campaign was issued by Emery, they list

3 materials. I have a copy of the fleet campaign. I'm ont

4 sure what Exhibit this is, but I know it is in the Exhibit

5 List, and the materials -- it says "make sure these parts

6 are on hand when performing this FCD. If the installation

7 is incorrect and the parts are not available, then the

8 aircraft is out of compliance". And it specifically calls

9 for an NAS460-to-4 P5 L14 bolt. That is not the bolt that

10 was installed. The bolt that was installed was an NAS1252

11 dash 50 dash 516, which I believe actually is a stronger

12 bolt, but the fleet campaign is very specific about what

13 they want, direction of installation and the part number of

14 bolt.

15 We called to advise them that the incorrect

16 number per the FCD was installed and their response was --

17 it's a better bolt, don't worry about it, just put it back

18 together and let it go. We had the 464 bolt in stock and

19 put the aircraft in compliance with the FCD before it

20 departed but there was -- I think we had to go out and buy

21 the bolt. There was a little debate over what they really

22 wanted to have done and you know, I can see the same thing

23 happening. If it happens with me and I've got lots of time

24 to solve the problem, the airplane's going to be there for a

25 few days or weeks -- or sometimes months -- I can imagine

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

242

1 the problems that the people on the line have with the same

2 issues.

3 Q Did you ever receive any results from Emery in

4 results to the fleet campaign directive as to what they

5 found with their fleet?

6 A We were a late party to the investigation. I

7 have never seen results from the FCD. I have never seen log

8 pages from the time the aircraft left Tennessee until the

9 incident. The only records that I have have been shown on

10 log pages involved with the dampers and the B-checks. I

11 have no idea what other maintenance was accomplished on the

12 aircraft.

13 MR. GUNTHER: Thank you very much. No further

14 questions.

15 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And ... the Boeing Company.

16 DIRECT EXAMINATION

17 BY MR. BREUHAUS:

18 Q Yes, good morning, Mr. Hoffstetter. Yesterday

19 you were discussing TTS' involvement in B-checks. Just a

20 couple questions in that area. How often is a B-check

21 normally performed?

22 A I believe they were 90-day checks, if they're

23 doing the full-blown inspection. There's an hour and a time

24 requirement, whichever comes first.

25 Q And you would perform B-checks on the Emery

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

243

1 airplanes?

2 A Yes.

3 Q And you mentioned full-blown. Do you mean the

4 entire B-check?

5 A Right now they do a segmented B-check which is B-

6 1, B-2, B-3, and B-4. They do a portion of the inspection.

7 One engine is heavy, they do all the filters, and the next

8 segmented B-check, they'll do another engine in a different

9 portion, so at the end of the second time period, all the

10 same items have been looked at. When we were doing it, it

11 was a complete -- the complete B-check program at one time.

12 Q So just to make sure I'm clear on that. When TTS

13 did it, you did complete B-checks for -- on the Emery

14 airplanes.

15 A Yes.

16 Q When the B-checks were broken into parts or

17 segments, those segmented parts were done by Emery?

18 A That's correct.

19 Q And who did the last B-check on the accident

20 airplane?

21 A Emery did three B-checks after it departed.

22 Q Are you familiar with the B-2 check, I think it's

23 Exhibit 11-I?

24 A Yes, I am.

25 Q Do you have that in front of you? It's Exhibit

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

244

1 11-I.

2 A I'm sorry, I'll get it in just a second. Okay.

3 Q And we're looking at page one. Could you

4 describe what TTS would do relative to that visual

5 inspection on the elevator and tab conditions?

6 A The card says "Visually inspect elevators and

7 tabs for general condition, corrosion, linkage insecurity of

8 attachment", and then it -- "Inspect static dischargers for

9 general condition and security". We would inspect each

10 attachment on the elevator and the elevator tab. In order

11 to do that, you have to remove the fairings on the gear tab,

12 and the fairing on the flight tab.

13 Q And when you were doing the checks, what was the

14 maintenance environment? I mean yours is a heavy

15 maintenance facility?

16 A Yes, it is.

17 Q And so where would the airplane be, typically,

18 during these checks?

19 A I think when we were doing the B-checks, the tail

20 of the aircraft was on some occasions, outside. The

21 majority of the airplane would be inside.

22 MR. BREUHAUS: Okay, thank you, no more

23 questions.

24 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you. Federal

25 Aviation Administration.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

245

1 DIRECT EXAMINATION

2 BY MR. STREETER:

3 Q Mr. Hoffstetter, first let me apologize for going

4 over some old ground, but some of our common phrases that we

5 use here among the aviation people, I think, can create some

6 confusion for the public. Confirm that when Tennessee Tech

7 works on Emery's airplanes, they're doing it in accordance

8 with Emery's maintenance program. Is that correct?

9 A Yes, sir.

10 Q So when you reference -- when you and other

11 reference United manuals, even though those manuals might

12 have United markings on them, they are part of Emery's

13 maintenance program. Is that correct?

14 A That is correct.

15 Q Okay. And does it also work the same way with --

16 when you're speaking of the United procedure. It's actually

17 an Emery procedure that came from United at one time?

18 A Yes, that is correct.

19 Q So everything that's done on the airplane while

20 you guys have it, is in accordance with Emery's procedures?

21 A That is correct.

22 Q Okay. Mr. Hilldrup discussed with you some of

23 the actions that were taken after the findings of missing

24 cotter keys and loose jam nuts and so on. I think I heard

25 you say, but I want to confirm it, that there were Emery

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

246

1 personnel that actually saw the hardware in this state?

2 A That's what I was told, yes, sir.

3 Q And you were told that by your personnel?

4 A Yes, sir.

5 Q Did you have any follow-up discussions or memos

6 or anything that you got the word out to your mechanics

7 about this situation?

8 A No, I did not.

9 Q And finally, there was a discussion yesterday

10 about the elevator and the tabs on the accident airplane

11 when you received the items back from the vendor, and there

12 was some discussion about when the installation was done

13 that there was a kit called for that -- where there was no

14 kit number matching that. Is that correct?

15 A That's correct.

16 Q Okay, when you have a situation like that where

17 the work card calls out for a kit, and the kit doesn't

18 exist, what actions do you take?

19 A Emery generally provides us a list of the parts

20 that are associated with the kits, so if there is not a kit

21 available, we will obtain the part numbers that are called

22 for in that kit. When we assimilate the parts required for

23 any individual task, they're put in a box in the stock room

24 where there's a complete list of the parts required for that

25 task, and once all the requirements for that individual task

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

247

1 are complete, then the job card would normally be issued.

2 It shouldn't be issued until we're sure we have all the

3 pieces to put it together.

4 But occasionally, when there's a kit called for,

5 we don't get that put together ahead of time, and

6 occasionally it'll take an inspector or lead mechanic to

7 bring the card back and say, hey, you issued this and we

8 don't have the ability to do the job. So it goes back into

9 planning, the parts are put together, and then the card

10 would be reissued.

11 Q Okay, but the kit number components would be

12 identified by Emery, then, right?

13 A Yes, sir.

14 Q So even though your personnel at Tennessee Tech

15 might physically assemble the kit, it's based on the

16 information provided by Emery.

17 A That's correct.

18 MR. STREETER: That's all the questions I have,

19 thanks.

20 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, Emery?

21 DIRECT EXAMINATION

22 BY MR. HAGQUIST:

23 Q Good morning, sir.

24 A Good morning.

25 Q In this discussion today regarding the loose

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

248

1 safety wires and the discussions you had with your

2 maintenance people, was that on the accident aircraft, sir?

3 A No, it was not. It was well after the accident.

4 Q You testified that TTS is an FAA-approved, Part

5 145 repair station, and that your repair station is approved

6 to perform substantial maintenance on DC-8 aircraft. Is

7 that correct?

8 A That's correct.

9 Q Now isn't it true that you have had to

10 demonstrate to the FAA that you had a workforce of

11 maintenance personnel specifically trained to work on DC-8

12 aircraft to gain that approval?

13 A That's correct.

14 Q Who performed that training for you, sir?

15 A We used an outside company -- actually there was

16 two of them. The names escape me right now, but I think the

17 one gentleman that we used for the A&P portion of the

18 training, is someone that had also trained -- done some of

19 the Emery training at one time. I'm sorry I can't

20 remember --

21 Q That's fine.

22 A We also had a different instructor that did

23 avionics and electrical course .

24 Q Thank you. So it's true that Emery did not

25 provide DC-8 specific maintenance training to personnel at

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

249

1 TTS?

2 A That's correct.

3 Q TTS didn't rely on Emery to train its mechanics

4 on how to accomplish DC-8 maintenance, did they?

5 A No, not beyond items that were specific to

6 Emery's maintenance manual -- policy and procedures manual.

7 Q Isn't it true, sir, that Emery's spent

8 approximately $2.1 million, excluding materials, to perform

9 the D-check on the accident aircraft?

10 A I don't have that number in front of me. That

11 doesn't sound unreasonable.

12 Q Thank you. With respect to Emery's work cards,

13 Mr. Hall testified yesterday that he had seen better. Isn't

14 it true that Emery's D-check maintenance work cards are all

15 FAA approved?

16 A Yes, it is.

17 Q Isn't it also true that Emery's entire

18 maintenance program is FAA approved?

19 A Yes, that's correct. There is some confusion

20 about what's approved and what's accepted, but they are all

21 FAA --

22 Q Approved or accepted?

23 A Yes.

24 Q If TTS had concerns about Emery's work cards,

25 isn't it true that TTS could consult with Emery's onsite

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

250

1 representative or Emery's quality control department agents

2 to clear up any issues it had?

3 A Yes, sir.

4 Q During D-check, was it TTS's responsibility to

5 physically perform the maintenance and inspect the

6 maintenance that it performed?

7 A Yes, sir.

8 Q Isn't it also true that it was TTS's

9 responsibility to insure that the parts installed on the

10 aircraft were in an airworthy condition?

11 A Yes, sir.

12 Q Sir, to continue, it was TTS's responsibility to

13 install the aircraft elevator and its component parts

14 correctly?

15 A Yes, sir, that's correct.

16 Q Again, yesterday, you expressed some concern that

17 the elevator and its control tabs were received by TTS as

18 separate components. Isn't that true?

19 A That's correct.

20 Q TTS's is a Part 145 repair station. Isn't it

21 true, sir, that it is competent to assemble these components

22 and make them a serviceable unit?

23 A Yes, sir.

24 Q And isn't it also true, sir, that it's TTS's

25 responsibility to correctly install and inspect the bolt,

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

251

1 nut and cotter key on the elevator push rod assembly?

2 A Yes, it is.

3 Q So, sir, isn't it also true that it was not

4 Emery's responsibility to physically install and inspect the

5 bolt, nut and cotter key on the elevator control tab push

6 rod?

7 A We have a job card with our mechanics and our

8 inspectors had signed for that work, that's correct.

9 Q Thank you. Again, your testimony yesterday -- a

10 fair amount of discussion, sir, that you received parts that

11 were in some way deficient, and that TTS found these parts

12 during Emery's receiving inspection process. Is that

13 correct?

14 A No.

15 Q Alright, whose inspection process would you have

16 used, sir?

17 A Some of the them were found during receiving

18 inspection process. Some of them were items that could not

19 be detected, problems that could not be detected under a

20 normal receiving inspection.

21 Q And those items that could be identified during

22 the receiving inspection process, was TTS not using the

23 Emery receiving process?

24 A Emery's receiving process and TTS's receiving

25 process.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

252

1 Q So, sir, that to me seems to confirm the fact

2 that the receiving processes that were developed by Emery

3 worked. You identified the parts and they don't get on the

4 aircraft, is that correct?

5 A The parts that are defective do not get on the

6 aircraft, that's correct.

7 Q Has TTS ever installed a substandard or

8 unairworthy part on an Emery aircraft?

9 A Not that I'm aware of.

10 MR. HAGQUIST: I have nothing further, Mr.

11 Chairman.

12 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Thank you. You've given the

13 Chairman plenty to talk about. And TTS, finally.

14 DIRECT EXAMINATION

15 BY MR. PORTER:

16 Q Thank you. My name is Sam Porter. I work at

17 TTS. We have a few questions for you, Mr. Hoffstetter, if I

18 may. You were speaking a couple minutes ago about not being

19 able to audit or review the maintenance records for N8079U

20 from the time it left TTS until the time of the accident

21 flight, and you were speaking to aircraft log pages. Were

22 there any other documents that would have been included in

23 the maintenance records that you would have liked to have

24 viewed in order to try and understand any potential earlier

25 problems with the elevators before the accident flight?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

253

1 A Obviously, we'd like to look at everything -- all

2 the log pages, the ME-O9s, anything related to the aircraft.

3 Q About approximately eight days after the aircraft

4 left TTS -- we spoke to it yesterday and heard about it a

5 couple times from other parties -- there was a pilot report

6 for, I believe it was excessive force on flare during

7 landing, and then there was some troubleshooting of some

8 kind accomplished and it was determined that the elevator

9 dampers were the cause of the problem at that time. I was

10 wondering if you had done any research at all, or anything

11 to retrace the potential troubleshooting steps that could

12 have taken place on that day to identify the dampers?

13 A There is no logical way to get from excessive

14 force on flare to a damper problem. I don't question the

15 record that the dampers were installed -- there's

16 documentation to say they were moved and put in the correct

17 positions, but my knowledge of the damper system tells me

18 that if the dampers are installed on the opposite sides,

19 there is very little travel on the damper, maybe an inch to

20 an inch -- maybe 45 degrees of travel at the most. With the

21 dampers installed correctly, there's probably 180 degrees of

22 travel on that arm, so there's a more significant damping

23 effect for a -- more significant resistance to moving the

24 elevator. So if you have an excessive force or a hard to

25 flare on approach or on landing, and you move the dampers to

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

254

1 the opposite positions, to the correct installation, it

2 should have made the problem worse.

3 Q Okay. What's the TTS policy on reusing cotter

4 pins?

5 A Never. Never happens.

6 Q How would you rate, based on other customers

7 you've had in the hangar with their onsite support, how did

8 TTS's heavy maintenance rep perform in relation to other

9 maintenance representative support that you may have seen in

10 TTS?

11 A You lost me there.

12 Q How did TTS's onsite reps perform related to reps

13 provided by other customers? Did he do a good job?

14 A I think -- yes, the Emery reps that were located

15 at TTS were competent people, yes. They did a good job.

16 Q Did you feel as though that when they were

17 presented a problem that they had the empowerment to try and

18 solve problems expeditiously, or would they have to -- would

19 everything have to go through their superiors?

20 A Obviously, they had people that they reported to

21 and there's a system that they had to work through.

22 Sometimes problems were solved quickly; sometimes it took a

23 while. We had several -- numerous problems with

24 cannibalized parts. When aircraft were in heavy check, it's

25 not uncommon to remove parts and send them out to support

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

255

1 the line -- their line activity. That was requested through

2 their maintenance reps. There was times when it was

3 difficult to get pieces back.

4 The general rule that was laid out by the

5 director of heavy maintenance was no parts were removed from

6 the aircraft during the last two weeks of the check. And

7 generally that's a good rule and we did the best to follow

8 it. There were some occasions where they may have removed a

9 part from one of their heavy maintenance airplanes to

10 support their line activity.

11 Emery was the only maintenance customer I ever

12 had that we provided a representative at Dayton to

13 coordinate activity in the different departments at Emery.

14 We found a significant problem between, I think they called

15 it their inventory control group, which worked for a

16 different director than purchasing, but had to approve

17 everything before it went to purchasing. There were some

18 communications issues and lines of responsibility and

19 authority problems. Emery asked us to provide a rep to keep

20 them better informed on what was happening on the airplane,

21 and we did have a Tennessee Tech Services person on site at

22 Dayton during the last couple of heavy maintenance checks.

23 That was requested by Emery.

24 Q Did that improve the logistical support?

25 A I think it helped communications for both of us.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

256

1 MR. PORTER: I don't think we have anything else,

2 thank you.

3 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay. We'll come up to the

4 Board of Inquiry. Mr. DeLisi?

5 DIRECT EXAMINATION

6 BY MR. DeLISI:

7 Q Thank you. Mr. Hoffstetter, when an Emery DC-8

8 would come out of D-check at TTS, was there an test flight

9 performed on the airplane?

10 A Yes, sir.

11 Q And who performed that test flight?

12 A Emery had a test crew that came down and did a

13 very extensive ground checks, probably spent two days going

14 over the airplane on the ground before they did a test

15 flight.

16 Q Was there a final preflight done on the airplane

17 that released it for flight?

18 A Yes, sir.

19 Q And who would perform that preflight?

20 A TTS would perform that.

21 Q Would TTS actually then sign off that the

22 airplane was in an airworthy condition?

23 A Yes, sir.

24 Q But it was Emery crews that would then get on

25 board and make the flight?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

257

1 A Yes. Their flight engineer generally showed up

2 almost a week before departure. He watched the final

3 closeup on the aircraft and final rig checks -- very

4 meticulous program that they went through.

5 Q Okay. Typically, was there just one flight done

6 as the DC-8 came out of the D-check?

7 A No. I wish it was, but no it was not. Generally

8 there was more than one.

9 Q Do you recall on the accident airplane, when it

10 came out of its D-check, how long it was test flown?

11 A It made one test flight. When they left on the

12 test flight all the work -- the log book was generally

13 clear, and we always hoped that there would not be any

14 problems, and the aircraft would proceed to Dayton, and

15 that's what happened with the 79U.

16 Q Okay, thank you. Yesterday you described a

17 scenario where there were several different manuals for the

18 rigging of the DC-8 flight controls. You talked about the

19 Emery manual, United, I even heard Lufthanza and Eastern

20 mentioned. To try and bring that now back to a circumstance

21 that may be more relevant to this accident, I'd like to talk

22 to you about the procedure for building up some hardware and

23 correctly installing the push rod. Is there more than one

24 manual that would describe the build up of that nut and

25 cotter pin at the end of that control head push rod?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

258

1 A Yes, sir, there is. There is information in the

2 maintenance manual, which is the reference given on the job

3 card. The temporary revision that was issued by Boeing was

4 not the maintenance manual, it's to the SRM. The SRM is

5 involved with balance and repairs to the aircraft, but the

6 SRM temporary revision is the one that was issued that

7 addresses the installation of the bolt. There's an overhaul

8 manual that also has additional information on the flight

9 control. And within those three manuals, there are codes

10 that you refer to, based on the serial number or line number

11 of the aircraft.

12 Q In the work that you did at TTS on a variety of

13 different DC-8s, have you had occasion to build up that

14 attachment, that push rod attachment, differently?

15 A No, generally -- as far as I'm aware, that

16 procedure is the same for every -- all of the installations

17 on elevators is the same push rod and the same hardware.

18 There have been several ADs issued against that push rod --

19 I think when it was originally manufactured it was an

20 aluminum rod. There were some incidents involved with the

21 DC-8 and they changed that to steel. There are items that

22 we, from experience, know to check for on that particular

23 rod, so it's a well known area.

24 Q So in your experience, whereas the rigging may be

25 different based on each operator, the build up of that push

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

259

1 rod hardware is the same?

2 A As far as I'm aware, it is.

3 MR. DeLISI: Okay, very good. Thank you.

4 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Dr. Kushner?

5 DIRECT EXAMINATION

6 DR. KUSHNER:

7 Q You mentioned concerns or issues about receiving

8 parts separately that should have come together. Obviously

9 this could be a nuisance for you, but could you give an

10 example or two of areas where this could actually have a --

11 cause you some concern about either the integrity or fit of

12 the system when it's put back together?

13 A The control surfaces, I guess, are classic

14 examples. If we were overhauling an aileron and it would be

15 -- or an elevator -- it would be completely built up before

16 it's sent to balance. There are provisions in the manual

17 for balancing the elevator without tab installed, but I

18 think the things are much more accurate if it's a complete

19 assembly when balance is accomplished. You worry about the

20 match on the -- on the surfaces, and if an elevator would

21 come in and we were working towards a schedule, if the

22 balance data is on the data plate on the end of the

23 elevator, as I believe it was on 79U, then we would probably

24 go ahead and install the elevator. And the gear tab and the

25 flight tab are both line replaceable units, which means they

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

260

1 could be replaced at Dayton or anywhere, so we would install

2 those when they arrived. Those two units, I believe, are

3 composite or honeycomb units, and if there's a problem with

4 them when they're inspected by either us or the overhaul

5 facility for the flight controls, they may not have the

6 capability to do the honeycomb repairs, so they may go to a

7 different vendor and then come back. Anytime we have

8 multiple operations there is -- you need to be very cautious

9 of what's happening on the airplane, and I think we were.

10 I'm confident that when that aircraft left that the elevator

11 and tabs were installed correctly and balance was right.

12 It's a nuisance problem.

13 Q It's basically nuisance and extra work.

14 A Yes.

15 Q There's not an issue that you can think of where

16 something would go together and not function at 100 percent

17 of design and you wouldn't realize it?

18 A Not that I can think of right now.

19 DR. KUSHNER: Thank you. That's it.

20 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, Mr. Hoffstetter, I have a

21 few questions for you.

22 DIRECT EXAMINATION

23 BY CHAIRMAN GOGLIA:

24 Q Now you mentioned, just moments ago, about

25 training -- DC-8 training. But that's not the only training

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

261

1 required. Your people must know the Emery policies and

2 procedures, how to handle paperwork, approve parts cards,

3 and a number of other documents. Who provided that training

4 for you?

5 A Emery provided a significant portion of the

6 training. There were areas that we felt were particularly

7 important or prone to problems that we accomplished our own

8 training. I think -- Sam, hand me those scrolls back there

9 -- we made some copies of specific forms that Emery uses and

10 had those hanging in the stock room and by our work control

11 stations so they were handy for mechanics to look at and

12 review the procedures. This is Emery's parts tag. There's

13 three of them. We broke it down into different areas of the

14 tag and that's something that we did on our own that wasn't

15 provided by Emery. That was to help minimize problems that

16 we saw going on with the procedures.

17 Q And how did you know that there were problems

18 with those procedures?

19 A Well, we audit the paperwork. We audit the tags

20 at the end of a check, and some of these -- if parts were

21 received directly by TTS that were Emery purchase

22 components, they would not have an Emery tag on them. We

23 created the tag with their approval and there are areas that

24 have to be filled out that were being missed -- dates and --

25 not significant overview problems, but for sure they were

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

262

1 paperwork issues, and it helped significantly to make sure

2 everything was done correctly when instructions are right

3 there in front of the mechanic. He can read them from his

4 toolbox.

5 Q Did every person that worked on the Emery

6 airplanes receive this, for lack of a better word, policies

7 and procedures training from Emery?

8 A My assumption is no. Every person did not

9 receive their training. We had people that we were hiring

10 and recruiting. Some of that type -- those individuals were

11 put into existing crews, received some training from us. We

12 had built a manual around Emery procedures on how we -- how

13 we interact with Emery and all of our leads and supervisors

14 were familiar with that manual -- and inspectors.

15 Q Did, at any time, Emery ever question you about

16 personnel turnover -- I mean replacement people -- and

17 whether or not they had received the training in the Emery

18 policies and procedures.

19 A Emery had a list of approved people that -- for

20 RII and airworthiness release and specific functions that

21 are closely monitored by them, and if we had somebody resign

22 or hired somebody in one of those capacities, they would not

23 be given the authorization to work -- to sign for work on

24 the -- or do II inspections or sign airworthiness release on

25 the Emery aircraft until they received Emery training and we

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

263

1 had received verification from Emery that they accepted that

2 individual.

3 Q Back to the parts ... for a minute. Did you ever

4 receive any either verbal or written correspondence from

5 Emery when they found a deficiency to any of the paperwork,

6 and particular, you didn't put those posters up from day one

7 of the Emery work --

8 A That's true.

9 Q Obviously they went up because there was

10 problems. Now, you indicated or you said that you caught

11 them. Did you ever receive any correspondence or

12 communications from Emery that they caught problems -- not

13 in -- let's expand it -- job cards, parts documents, log

14 pages?

15 A I don't remember any rejected notifications on

16 log pages. There may have been some on parts tags. I don't

17 remember a job card. There was probably some non-routines

18 that were questioned -- I'm sure there was some non-routines

19 that they questioned the sequencing or the signoff and the

20 evaluation of corrosion. They came back and did a fairly

21 extensive training program on the Emery CPCP program, and

22 categorizing levels of corrosion. We had some problems with

23 making sure they had all the information they needed to

24 provide the reports that they were mandated to provide to

25 Boeing. But Emery reacted to those, and we tried to react

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

264

1 to anything that they perceived as a problem.

2 Q Okay, let's talk about parts for a second. A

3 little bit more. This elevator on the 79 Uniform arrives in

4 your shop. Is it an serviceable parts tag installed on it?

5 Do you remember?

6 A I believe there was an 8130-3 on it. I'm sure

7 there was, yes.

8 Q And do you recall whether this part was shipped

9 to you from Emery in Dayton or another Emery facility, or

10 from a vendor?

11 A I'm sure it came from a vendor. It did not have

12 an Emery tag when it arrived, and if it had come from Dayton

13 I believe there would have been an Emery tag with it.

14 Reasonably sure it came to us from Willis Group, I believe

15 is the name of the company we received it from, and it came

16 with tags from a 145 repair station.

17 Q And what kind of condition was it in when you saw

18 it? Was it -- what I'm asking here, I guess is -- I'm going

19 to ask it a different way. Sometimes you'll receive parts

20 with a serviceable parts tag on them that have obviously

21 been through a very thorough shop visit. It's clean, clean

22 in the areas that you normally couldn't get to because it

23 had been through a cleaning system. At other times you

24 receive parts that are serviceable that may have been

25 recently, or not so recently, removed from serviceable and

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

265

1 registered aircraft. Do you --

2 A I could not tell you the specifics on that

3 particular part -- an evaluation of how the work was

4 accomplished or whether I felt like the cleaning and CPCP

5 was adequate. What I could tell you is it did ont -- it was

6 not removed from another Emery aircraft and tagged

7 serviceable. It did come from a 145. There was a shop

8 report with it. So I know it came out of a repair --

9 through a repair station.

10 Q And after you received it, at the receiving dock,

11 was there anything required to be accomplished on this unit,

12 other than the installation of the tabs and so on? Did it

13 require any additional work?

14 A I don't remember any damage being associated with

15 that elevator. We may have had to bring bushings up to

16 size. I really don't remember on that particular unit. I

17 don't believe there was anything significant.

18 Q Okay, give me a minute, I want to capture that.

19 A Let me look to my inspector and see if he

20 remembers anything.

21 (Pause.)

22 Q Okay, now -- sorry -- is that?

23 A He said he didn't remember anything on it.

24 Q Okay. Do you happen to remember if there was a

25 manufacturer's part number and tag -- a tag identifying the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

266

1 manufacturer's part number and serial number on the unit?

2 Or was it somebody else's method of identification?

3 A I have looked at several units -- several records

4 recently and we have seen some that had manufacturer

5 installed part numbers and serial numbers and some that the

6 part numbers and serial numbers were assigned by the repair

7 station with the note that they were received with no data

8 plate, that the records -- or that unit -- or here I could

9 find out. I really don't remember.

10 Q Okay, I may ask you to do that before we finish.

11 A Sure.

12 Q And you can do that and we can talk about it

13 later. And in fact, I do want you to do that, and in

14 particular -- not right now -- and I'm particularly

15 interested in how we identify this particular unit, and how

16 it's a... cover this airplane. The DC-8 was in production

17 for 20 years. There's a lot of different components from

18 earlier planes that were not as robust as those required for

19 the stretch version --

20 A That's correct.

21 Q -- and from time to time, mistakes were made, and

22 the wrong pieces were put on the wrong airplane -- the

23 heavier airplane.

24 A Yes.

25 Q It's a big airplane. So my concern, as I was

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

267

1 sitting up here listening to a few of you talk, is that how

2 did we determine that that unit, when it arrived at your

3 doorstep, was the correct one for that airplane? Given --

4 especially given the state of the manuals, and the fact that

5 the IPC is not an approved document and the revisions that I

6 see on those pages that we have here in Exhibits have --

7 they not only have whiskers, the whiskers have turned gray.

8 So I want to follow that to find out how it was determined

9 that that particular elevator was the right one for that

10 airplane. I'm going to ask you to do it. And I'm going to

11 ask Emery to do it.

12 A Okay.

13 Q Okay? Now we've been hitting on their reps a

14 little bit, and you said yesterday there were three reps,

15 and normally you had one on days, and one afternoons -- the

16 scheduling's not important. Do you know where they were in

17 the Emery system? Were they maintenance reps? Were they

18 quality assurance reps?

19 A They were maintenance reps.

20 Q Now when an airplane leaves your facility after a

21 D check, and it's ready to go out for its test flight, who

22 signs the maintenance release on the airplane?

23 A We do. If the operator has approved us to sign

24 for airworthiness, and Emery had approved us to sign

25 airworthiness on their aircraft.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

268

1 Q Okay, and does that person sign with his A&P or

2 does he sign with your repair station number?

3 A We put our repair station stamp in the log book,

4 and I believe the Emery procedure has him put his A&P number

5 in the book also when he signs the airworthiness release.

6 Generally, our chief inspector or one of the more senior

7 inspectors are the ones that are approved by Emery and

8 they'll sign the log book stamp, -- the stamp in the log

9 book. And records are on file and work order number.

10 Q What about any other maintenance. You talked

11 about B-checks and am I -- that question was just

12 specifically for D checks. Is that the same procedure for

13 any other maintenance that's done?

14 A Yes, it is.

15 Q Now can you give me what your understanding of

16 the role of the maintenance reps at your facility at the --

17 specifically, the Emery maintenance reps at your facility?

18 A They were there to monitor the status of the

19 Emery aircraft and they were there to help solve problems

20 that we would encounter with either supply of parts or

21 methods of repair. They were there to approve non-routine

22 task cards. We have a process that we go through on every

23 non-routine that's generated where an inspector writes the

24 card. After the card is written, either the supervisor or a

25 lead goes out and evaluates what needs to happen to that

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

269

1 card to correct the defect. There's a labor estimate, a man

2 hour estimate, that's put on the card and it goes to the

3 Emery rep for approval. He may or may not approve the

4 hours. There may be some debate or negotiation on how long

5 that card should take. Once he's approved it, it goes into

6 planning where they would research parts requirements and

7 schedule to go to mechanics for correction of the defect.

8 You got all that?

9 Q Yes, fortunately I worked this so I know -- in

10 that arena.

11 A It's --

12 Q RII list.

13 A Yes, sir.

14 Q Emery provided you an RII list.

15 A Yes, sir.

16 Q For the inspectors and inspection items on the

17 airplane. Two separate lists.

18 A Yes, sir.

19 Q We've talked at length about using the manuals,

20 use of the United manual and the Douglas manual, so let's

21 start with -- let's go to the United manual first. When you

22 follow the procedures for this job, or any other job in the

23 United manual, does it call out in the steps where

24 inspection is required?

25 A Yes, sir.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

270

1 Q When you use the Douglas DC-8 manual and you're

2 accomplishing a task such as this, does it anywhere tell you

3 where an inspection is required?

4 A No, sir.

5 Q Alright, I have one last piece that I've been

6 waiting for staff to provide, so what we're going to do is

7 we're going to take a very short break while Mr. Hilldrup

8 provides me with the material I've requested of him, and we

9 will come back to you for one question from me, and the

10 reason I'm not going around as I suspected some people in

11 the audience might want to question it, might want to

12 clarify what I have to say. So we'll take a very short

13 break. Don't go too far, but you can get up to stretch.

14 Mr. Hilldrup, would you provide me with the material that I

15 asked you for?

16 (Whereupon, a seven minute recess off the record

17 was taken.)

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, can we go back on the

19 record, please? Mr. Hoffstetter -- Eunice, are you down

20 there? Nobody's there. Okay. Here she's coming. Would

21 you give the witness Exhibit 7T, please? 7 Tango. And Mr.

22 Hilldrup, or somebody, would you put it up on the visualizer

23 for everybody?

24 BY CHAIRMAN GOGLIA:

25 Q Alright, Mr. Hoffstetter, this is a section of

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

271

1 the Federal Aviation Regulations, and it's Section 121. Now

2 we mentioned here a minute ago that you were a 145 repair

3 station.

4 A Yes, sir.

5 Q And would Section 121 govern your activities? I

6 don't mean that you have to work to those standards, because

7 you do work from 121 carrier, but are those rules the rules

8 that govern your operation?

9 A As it relates to Emery, they are.

10 Q I wonder if you would be -- let's take it line by

11 line. Under "121.363, Responsibility for airworthiness.

12 Each certificate holder is responsible for the airworthiness

13 of its aircraft." Do you have any aircraft?

14 A No, sir.

15 Q And it says, "including airframes, engines,

16 propellers, and parts thereof." And under B -- that's A.

17 If we jump down to B, "The certificate holder may make

18 arrangements with another person for performance of

19 maintenance." Does that B fit your operation?

20 A We would be the other person.

21 Q Okay. You are the person that arrangements have

22 been made with.

23 A Yes, sir.

24 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay. That's all I need to

25 ask. I would ask Emery to be prepared to respond to

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

272

1 questions in this area. Okay, Mr. Hoffstetter, I have no

2 further questions -- back to the panel.

3 THE WITNESS: Okay, excuse me, I have located the

4 8130 for the elevator. It did not have a Douglas data

5 plate. It has a CCI serial number. I believe it was

6 received by the repair station without a data plate and they

7 installed their own part number, serial number, code, so

8 they could track what they did to the unit.

9 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And CCI is who?

10 THE WITNESS: I think it's Complete Controls --

11 Complete Controls Inc.

12 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: I will -- let's go back to the

13 tech panel and we'll go around the table.

14 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Nothing further.

15 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, ALPA. Nothing. FAA?

16 Boeing Company?

17 MR. BREUHAUS: Yes, just one point of

18 clarification, Mr. Hoffstetter. You mentioned the TR to the

19 SRM. Could you clarify that, please?

20 THE WITNESS: Actually we were both mistaken --

21 my inspector and myself. The temporary revision is to the

22 overhaul manual, and he's calling our quality control group

23 back in Smyrna to see if we can't get a copy of that faxed

24 up here.

25 MR. BREUHAUS: Okay, thank you, no more

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

273

1 questions.

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, Emery? TTS?

3 MR. PORTER: Nothing further.

4 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, I just saw one question

5 or two questions that I failed to ask when we went around.

6 Do you have a policy at TTS if a work card is incomplete or

7 inaccurate -- a work card that you received from one of your

8 customers --

9 THE WITNESS: We notify the customer.

10 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And have you ever kicked back

11 any of these work cards to your customers?

12 THE WITNESS: Yes, we have.

13 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, that's all I have. Mr.

14 DeLisi?

15 MR. DeLISI: Good enough.

16 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay. Mr. Hoffstetter, again,

17 you're released for now, but I don't want you going

18 anywhere. You may be back.

19 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

20 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Mr. Hilldrup, will you call

21 your next witness?

22 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Yes, sir, the next

23 witness is David Ungemach.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

274

1 Whereupon,

2 DAVID UNGEMACH

3 was called as a witness, and first having been duly sworn,

4 was examined and testified as follows:

5 DIRECT EXAMINATION

6 BY MR. CARBONE:

7 Q Good morning, Mr. Ungemach.

8 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: One second, let me

9 qualify the witness, please.

10 Could you state your full name, work address,

11 please for the record? Is your mike on?

12 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. My name is David

13 Ungemach. My address is 144 Mount Air Drive in A...ia,

14 Ohio. My experience --

15 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Excuse me, sorry to

16 interrupt. Your current employer and position.

17 THE WITNESS: My current employer is American

18 Aircraft Incorporated. I'm a vice-president. My experience

19 in aviation is about 25 years. I worked as a mechanic,

20 inspector, work in the heavy maintenance arena, the line

21 maintenance arena. I spent approximately ten years at Emery

22 Airlines. I was hired in '91 in the maintenance control

23 department. I also worked as the hub manager, and the last

24 two years at Emery I worked as the director of line

25 maintenance.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

275

1 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Thank you, Mr.

2 Ungemach. Mr. Carbone will be doing the interviewing.

3 BY MR. CARBONE:

4 Q You stated that you were a manager of maintenance

5 control, is that correct?

6 A No, sir, I worked in the maintenance control

7 department as shift manager, not the department manager.

8 Q What did you think of the maintenance control

9 department? Pros and cons, I mean?

10 A The maintenance control department, when I

11 started there, was fairly small, but the fleet at Emery was

12 also fairly small. It was a new company and they were

13 developing their procedures throughout my tenure at Emery.

14 I felt their maintenance control department was competent

15 and the people that worked there were experienced people.

16 Q How did their work relationship with line

17 maintenance?

18 A Well, like any maintenance control department,

19 relationship between maintenance control and line

20 maintenance can be difficult at times. Maintenance control

21 provides technical data and oversight and direction to the

22 line mechanics, and sometimes you have conflicts, but all in

23 all, I think the relationship was fairly well.

24 Q And how was their relationship with engineering?

25 A Emery didn't have an engineering department until

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

276

1 late in my career at Emery, and I wasn't in maintenance

2 control at the time that the engineering department was

3 developed.

4 Q If I wished to acquire a hard copy of information

5 for a B-check, would that be your department that I would go

6 to for that? Or would that be the records department?

7 A Records department would have the B-check hard

8 copies.

9 Q Perhaps the next line of questioning is going to

10 be a little fundamental, but I'm going to ask you to look at

11 Exhibit 17 Uniform.

12 A I don't appear to have that Exhibit, sir.

13 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Eunice, could you help

14 the witness, please? 17 Uniform.

15 THE WITNESS: Thank you. All righty, sir.

16 BY MR. CARBONE:

17 Q You have it?

18 A Yes, sir. I do.

19 Q Could you turn to the page, should be the first

20 ones, four of 16, B-card number B-002.

21 A Okay, I'm on that page.

22 Q And again, you are an A&P mechanic? Correct?

23 A That's correct, sir.

24 Q Could you please read item number 10C -- 10

25 Charlie -- and explain what is occurring in that step?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

277

1 A "Inspect hydraulic pumps for leaks and security

2 of mounting." Generally you would inspect the hydraulic

3 pump system for leakage, and make sure it's mounted

4 correctly, secured correctly.

5 Q And what does that mean, to secure correctly?

6 A The securing device, whether it's safety wire or

7 some sort of locking device is installed. By visual

8 inspection you don't see any defects with the way the pump

9 is attached. The hoses are secured correctly, the lines

10 aren't leaking. There's no evidence of a leak.

11 Q Could you turn to the next page, please, number

12 five of 16, Card Number B-002.

13 A Alright.

14 Q 12-B as in Baker, last line is "Reinstall starer

15 drain plug, magnetic plug with serviceable rings and secure

16 as required."

17 A That's correct.

18 Q What would secure as required mean to you?

19 A You'd follow the maintenance manual procedures

20 for securing it.

21 Q What would that mean? If you're looking at a

22 magnetic plug, what would you be securing?

23 A Well, the particular plug in question, I would

24 have to review the maintenance manual, but I'm sure the

25 particular plug in question is just inserted and safetied.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

278

1 Q Okay. The next page. Six of 16. It says, item

2 number 16, "Secure cap."

3 A That's correct, sir.

4 Q How would you secure the cap?

5 A It would be in the same fashion, sir. I'm sure

6 this particular cap is safetied.

7 Q And I would like you to turn to the last card,

8 which is B-009 card. Right hand and left hand elevator and

9 tab inspection. The last line is, "Inspect static

10 discharges for general condition" -- I'm sorry, the line

11 before that. "Visually inspect elevators and tabs for

12 general condition, corrosion, leakage, and security of

13 attachment." What would you consider the security of

14 attachment to be?

15 A The attachment points of the surface to the --

16 Q What does it mean by security of attachment?

17 A You'd make sure that the bolts are installed

18 correctly, safetied.

19 Q Safetied? Okay. If you should have a new hire

20 on your line station, would he or she be able to clear an

21 item on a B-check card without prior training? Would they

22 be authorized to clear a B-check card? Would they be

23 authorized to sign a B-check card without prior training?

24 A No, sir. No, they would not.

25 Q The person who accomplished this work card on 079

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

279

1 Uniform in Dayton was a new hire. When would he have

2 received training on B-check for this?

3 A The training is scheduled through the training

4 department. That wasn't handled through line maintenance.

5 My understanding was that within about 30 days of their hire

6 date they receive the training, the basic training from

7 Emery. That was the goal of Emery.

8 Q You say you had worked for several airlines

9 before this?

10 A Yes, sir.

11 Q Were they more activity specific on their work

12 cards? Did you have airlines -- did you work for airlines

13 that had several different airplanes from different

14 airlines?

15 A Yes, sir, I did.

16 Q Were they work cards more activity-specific?

17 A No, sir. Not more than Emery. The one -- one

18 airline that I worked for, as a matter of fact, had some

19 pretty serious discrepancies in their 727 fleet. Their work

20 cards did not specifically address what manuals to use

21 because their work cards were generic for their fleet. You

22 had to use the same process to determine the effectivity of

23 the aircraft.

24 Q Mr. Camden, who was your principle maintenance

25 inspector -- take a look at Exhibit 17 CC -- Charlie

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

280

1 Charlie.

2 A Alrighty. Thank you.

3 Q Actually I'm looking for your -- Mr. Camden had

4 said in his interview that one of the main problems with

5 Emery was that there was no communication existed between

6 the flight crews and maintenance. How did you alleviate

7 this situation?

8 A We had set up meetings -- weekly meetings with

9 chief pilot, Jim Oswald. We also arranged for meetings at

10 night, at the hub, with the flight crews. I attended those

11 meetings.

12 Q Were these meetings attended by both groups or

13 just separately?

14 A I don't understand sir. I attended meetings with

15 the flight crews.

16 Q I mean did the flight crews attend the

17 maintenance meetings, vice versa?

18 A No, the flight crews themselves did not attend

19 the meetings with the mechanics.

20 Q What resulted from these meetings? Anything?

21 A Yes, the problem that I felt we had, basically --

22 there were a lot of misunderstandings between the flight

23 ops department and the maintenance department. And because

24 of those misunderstandings, we had -- we had a wall between

25 the two departments. We weren't working with each other as

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

281

1 well as I thought we should. I met with the mechanics and

2 addressed their concerns in writing, and then I would meet

3 with the crews and present the concerns that the mechanics

4 had. And vice versa. And it opened up a lot of discussions

5 between the flight crews and the mechanics, but it was

6 basically through myself or one of my managers that the

7 discussion took place.

8 Q Were there minimum equipment list problems? Was

9 that a volatile issue between pilots and mechanics?

10 A Yes, it was.

11 Q In what way?

12 A The pilots' concerns were that MEL items were

13 being cleared and then redeferred in a repeat fashion.

14 Q How would you do that?

15 A If a mechanic installed a component and performed

16 a test and found the system to function normally, he would

17 clear the MEL item. The airplane would fly. If the

18 problem would reoccur, the crew member would redocument and

19 the item would be put back on MEL. And that did happen.

20 Q And in the MEL process you have four or five

21 different -- well, actually, it's four different categories.

22 You have A, B, C, and D. Each one is a different time limit

23 on an MEL.

24 A That's correct.

25 Q How would you -- am I to understand that if a

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

282

1 mechanic had cleared, say a generator item, on a number two

2 engine, for instance, and cleared the item. If it went one

3 leg or it was squawked again before the next leg was

4 completed, that became a new MEL item?

5 A No, sir, the MEL -- when the MEL was opened on

6 the aircraft the system was not used by the flight crew, so

7 the flight crew would have no idea whether or not the system

8 functioned correctly at that point. If maintenance cleared

9 the deferral, installed a new generator for example, and

10 cleared the deferral because it functionally tested good on

11 the ground, and then during flight there was another issue

12 with that system, the crew member would relog it and if

13 there wasn't time permitting to repair it, it would be put

14 back on MEL. But that process could take place any time in

15 that ten day period.

16 Q I think what my question is, is if it dispatched

17 from Dayton with an MEL item that was recently cleared on

18 the ground, would you start a new MEL when it landed in

19 Houston? Or was that a continuation of that previous MEL?

20 A If it had been cleared, a new MEL would be

21 started. You wouldn't continue the old one.

22 Q Okay, so, in other words, if it did not make it

23 through its first leg, it was reclassified as a separate

24 MEL.

25 A Once the MEL item was cleared, you would initiate

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

283

1 a new one if you were to redefer the system, correct.

2 Q Okay. And was there conflict with repeat write-

3 ups from flight?

4 A Yes, we had some issues with repeat write-ups.

5 Q Can you expand on that a little bit?

6 A The MEL was a very good example. If we had

7 issues with the crew members had during flight that we

8 couldn't duplicate in the process of performing the

9 maintenance manual tests, and the item was cleared and not

10 deferred, and it reoccurred, it would eventually fall within

11 a repeat status. The repeat status, originally, was three

12 items in ten days, I believe. If the item was resquawked

13 three times within a ten day period, it was considered a

14 repeat item.

15 Q In relation to the differences between San Jose

16 and Cincinnati with the FSDOs, was there a difference in the

17 way you felt that San Jose and Cincinnati worked with Emery?

18 A Personally, I did, yes. The relationship on the

19 west coast was, from my standpoint, was very minimal. We --

20 of course I wasn't the director for very long prior to the

21 certificate move, but when the Cincinnati office became --

22 the principal inspector came from Cincinnati office, the

23 communication with him was immediate and daily. We had

24 meetings every week. We conversed almost every day. He

25 came to Dayton or one of his members came to Dayton on a

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

284

1 regular basis. We had a great deal of communication with

2 Cincinnati.

3 Q Alright, from your past experience, looking at

4 Emery, did you see any need for improvement or was Emery may

5 have been falling short?

6 A I believe we needed improvement from a line

7 maintenance standpoint and from a maintenance department

8 standpoint, a maintenance program has to continually develop

9 and I felt that Emery needed more development.

10 Q In what ways?

11 A Well, our chronic program that we eventually

12 initiated was one good step to help eliminate repeat write-

13 ups and chronic problems with airplanes. We had an

14 extremely large gap in communication between the flight

15 crews from even a maintenance standpoint because originally

16 when I started working as the director, log entries and non-

17 routines would be used at any point in the maintenance

18 process and the problem with that is that if you put an item

19 on a non-routine, a crew member never sees it, so he's not

20 aware that maintenance is being performed. There were

21 several issues that we eventually created programs that

22 helped. But as far as the line maintenance standpoint,

23 development has to continue. It can't stop. Our

24 maintenance program did not have our own maintenance manuals

25 and our own specific manuals, and that was some thing we

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

285

1 were hopeful for.

2 Q I'm sorry, you were hopeful for what? What do

3 you mean you were hopeful for?

4 A Well, Emery had five or six different types and

5 brands and previous operator aircraft -- all DC-8s, but all

6 different in their own ways, and because of that there were

7 a huge amount of technical data that applied to each

8 airplane. Most airlines that have that problem eventually

9 develop, for example, United, they developed a maintenance

10 program specific for their fleet that identifies them. It's

11 an easier program to use. It helps reduce mistakes, and we

12 were hoping for that.

13 Q I'm going to go with that, with the maintenance

14 manuals. On page 15 of your interview, you stated that

15 Emery had plans to have their own maintenance manuals. I

16 mean where were you with this? Where did you get -- how far

17 did you get?

18 A I can only speak indirectly on that, because that

19 was being handled through engineering, but from the meetings

20 that I had, they had acquired a company, made some sort of

21 financial deposit or started the process and they were --

22 I'm not exactly sure how far along, but they were in the

23 process of gathering data to develop a maintenance manual.

24 This particular program, from what I understand, was going

25 to be a digital program so that a mechanic could, from any

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

286

1 compute, he could go in and type in the tail number of the

2 aircraft, and the computer would only allow him data that

3 was applicable to that aircraft. Another nice thing about

4 this program was that there wasn't a revision process like

5 we have it now. The revision would be to a central hard

6 drive. The mechanics wouldn't have to worry about revising

7 their computer or getting new disks. It would all be

8 automatic, which I thought that was an exceptional thing to

9 do because it helps eliminate mistakes.

10 Q So was there any concern from your line mechanics

11 or leads concerning the way the manuals or IPCs --

12 illustrated parts catalogs were written?

13 A Yes, we had -- we certainly had concerns with

14 that, and it seemed to get a little more hectic towards the

15 end.

16 Q And I'm assuming since you were planning on

17 redoing the manuals, I was going to ask you, what did you do

18 to rectify the problems book -- from your perspective, since

19 manuals are handled by engineering?

20 A They were instructed, as directed. They had to

21 use the maintenance manuals applicable to the aircraft they

22 were maintaining. That was a mandate that we received from

23 the Cincinnati office.

24 Q I'm going to go back to November 25th for a

25 minute. November 25, 1999 was the night that Emery had

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

287

1 swapped out the elevator dampers from left to right on 079

2 Uniform. First of all, is there a difference between a dash

3 60 model and a dash 70 model DC-8? What are the

4 differences?

5 A On the DC-8?

6 Q Between a 60 and a -- a dash 60 series and a dash

7 70 series.

8 A A dash 60 series is a Pratt powered aircraft. It

9 has turbo compressors and various other systems that are

10 different from the 70 series, which is a CFM powered

11 aircraft, with air cycle machines and there -- there are

12 some differences.

13 Q Can you, from a maintenance perspective, explain

14 what the elevators dampers do?

15 A In laymen's terms they're a shock absorber. They

16 help eliminate small vibrations or buffeting of the flight

17 control. They allow a smooth operation of actuation.

18 They're a gel-filled, I believe it's a gel-filled, unit.

19 But that's how they function, basically.

20 Q Excuse me once again, I'm going to have to find

21 the reference.

22 (Pause.)

23 Q Can you please look in Exhibit 7-O, please? This

24 is a log page from the time that the yaw dampers were

25 swapped out.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

288

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Alright, can we pause for a

2 minute to make sure everybody has that? Some of our books

3 don't. Do all the parties have the Exhibit? You don't have

4 it. Eunice?

5 (Pause.)

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, we have it now, please

7 proceed.

8 BY MR. CARBONE:

9 Q Can you tell me what troubleshooting took place

10 on this airplane?

11 A Not specifically, sir, no, I cannot.

12 Q Can you tell me how many people worked the

13 aircraft?

14 A No, sir, not reviewing the log sheet.

15 Q Can you tell me how many shifts of mechanics

16 worked the aircraft?

17 A No, sir.

18 Q Is there any means of finding out who worked this

19 airplane, aside from the person who signed it off? How many

20 shifts? I mean is there a turn over log available?

21 A There is a turn over log at each station, and

22 they document in a binder form, per the policy manual, items

23 that they worked throughout the shift.

24 Q And how long is this log kept for?

25 A I believe it's a year. I'd have to review the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

289

1 policy manual.

2 Q Is it possible that your mechanics who did this

3 task to troubleshoot a pilot write-up start stating

4 "elevator" -- I'm sorry. I'm going to ask you to look at 7-

5 R.

6 A I'm afraid I don't have that Exhibit.

7 (Pause.)

8 A Alrighty, sir.

9 Q This Exhibit is a DC-8 60 series elevator and tab

10 troubleshooting. The writeup was that an elevator requires

11 more backpressure than normal to flare the aircraft. Is it

12 possible that with that writeup that your mechanics would

13 have used this as a troubleshooting guide?

14 A It's possible. I don't know that it's --

15 Q Was this available to them? That's what I'm

16 saying.

17 A Yes, it was available to them. I don't know if

18 they used this, though.

19 Q So since I don't have any kind of reference as

20 far as what it was signed off from, on this log page, is it

21 possible that they would have used this?

22 A That is possible, yes.

23 Q Would you please look on the second page, A-

24 Alpha-2- binding control surfaces?

25 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Again, the Exhibit

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

290

1 number and the page number?

2 MR. CARBONE: I'm sorry. It's Exhibit number 7-

3 Romeo, and it's page number two.

4 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

5 MR. CARBONE: Let me put it this way, it's manual

6 page number 2730-0, page 102.

7 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: It should be

8 identified by a bold number two in the upper right hand

9 corner. That's the right page. Let's try to use the

10 Exhibit numbering system.

11 BY MR. CARBONE:

12 Q I apologize. It is page four. Big four on the

13 side of the page. You see item A-2?

14 A Yes, sir.

15 Q Binding control surfaces. With a writeup like

16 that, would they have looked to this?

17 A That's possible.

18 Q I ask you to look at the second part, the

19 isolation procedure. The last line is check tab push rods

20 and linkage for binding or interference.

21 A Yes, sir.

22 Q Is it possible they would have been looking at

23 this?

24 A That's possible.

25 Q Does that correlate to the bolt that we were

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

291

1 discussing before?

2 A Yes, sir.

3 Q Okay, so without any reference to maintenance

4 manual on this, and I do want to note that during the

5 investigation the mechanics had said three months later that

6 they used a particular maintenance manual reference, but

7 again, I reiterate that was three months afterwards. Is it

8 possible that they would have used that reference to

9 troubleshoot this item?

10 A That is possible.

11 Q Okay. There's been talk about the direction of

12 this bolt, how it was supposed to be installed. Is -- do

13 you know what direction the bolt is to be installed? Do you

14 have any idea?

15 A No, sir, I do not.

16 Q How did you feel that your mechanic workforce

17 felt about the training that they received?

18 A I'm not sure how the mechanic workforce felt

19 about the training they received. I felt that the training

20 programs that Emery had were greatly improving.

21 Q So you felt it was adequate?

22 A Yes, I felt it was adequate.

23 Q Did they ever request of you or your management

24 staff to bring any training in or expand the department?

25 A Yes, there were several courses that different

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

292

1 mechanics had asked to take, and of course, that was all

2 done through the training department, so they were the ones

3 that made arrangements and tracked what training needed

4 done.

5 Q Mr. Camden, in his interview, had said that -- he

6 made a statement that the lower management appeared to be

7 above their heads -- to be in above their heads. How do you

8 interpret this remark?

9 A I couldn't possibly interpret Mr. Camden's

10 remark. I have no idea.

11 Q Was there --

12 A I don't know what Mr. Camden was feeling. The

13 conversations we had, he never indicated anything like that.

14 Q Did you see, as a director, any problems with the

15 Emery operations during your years with the company?

16 A Absolutely. We had a lot of problems. I mean

17 every airline I worked for has had problems and Emery was no

18 different.

19 Q Can you elaborate?

20 A I felt a lot of areas needed improvement. I

21 thought it took too long to get funds, but you know, in my

22 particular position, my job was to try to accomplish things

23 as quickly as possible, and I did so by harassing, whining,

24 begging, whatever I needed to do to get it done.

25 Q Did you feel that the manning at Emery

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

293

1 maintenance was adequate?

2 A I felt that the manning level originally was

3 adequate. I thought that we were cutting too many people

4 towards the end.

5 Q Did you feel that the aircraft maintenance

6 personnel were overworked?

7 A Personally I thought that a mechanic should be

8 limited to an eight hour day. That's the feeling that I

9 had. There's no requirement for that, and a lot of the

10 mechanics actually wanted to work longer hours just for the

11 overtime. So in my own personal opinion I thought that the

12 restrictions on our maintenance staff should have been

13 limited. As a matter of fact, at one point there was a

14 mandate that I put out to all the managers below me that

15 restricted a mechanic to working 16 hours or less, and that

16 applied especially to the maintenance reps because they had

17 very little time off. So in some aspects, they worked

18 beyond what I thought was reasonable and others, I thought

19 they were fine.

20 MR. CARBONE: Okay, I have nothing else.

21 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Technical panel?

22 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Yes, a couple

23 questions.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

294

1 DIRECT EXAMINATION

2 BY HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP:

3 Q Let me go back to the lines of questioning on the

4 elevator damper troubleshooting, if you will, and we talked

5 about certain things that you thought might have been done

6 by the mechanics. Given your experience, and perhaps your

7 position, what might you have done in trying to troubleshoot

8 this writeup -- based on the pilot's writeup -- to

9 troubleshoot the problem? Is there any more that you could

10 add over what you responded to Mr. Carbone's questioning?

11 What might you have done -- could you walk us through the

12 steps, perhaps, of what you might have done?

13 A Each mechanic has his own knowledge of the

14 aircraft, his own experience, and based on that knowledge

15 and experience, he may choose different directions,

16 following general guidelines as an A&P would. In this

17 particular case, the complaint here is that the elevator

18 requires more back pressure than normal to flare the

19 aircraft, and also during elevator check.

20 In my particular case, I would pull the

21 maintenance manual up and determine what the pressure

22 requirements are on the yoke, and get a scale and measure

23 the pressure requirements to see if in fact it did require

24 excessive pressure. A lot of people are built a lot of

25 different ways and for me excessive pressure would probably

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

295

1 be a great deal more than what you would need. So it's

2 difficult under that particular log entry to determine what

3 it was, and that's where I would begin.

4 If I did find that there was a problem, then I

5 would systematically eliminate sections of the aircraft to

6 try to determine what section of the aircraft might be

7 causing it. That would probably be pretty standard for most

8 mechanics with DC-8 experience.

9 Q I'd like to go back to a little bit of discussion

10 about repeat writeups. I believe you identified a repeat

11 writeup as three occurrences within ten days. Is that

12 correct?

13 A Originally. I believe the manual called out

14 three in ten as a chronic or repeat writeup and the

15 reliability department would issue a document to maintenance

16 control that would advise us of that. However, we changed

17 that and made it a great deal more restrictive, to try to

18 eliminate any repeats.

19 Q When you say restrictive, you're talking about

20 perhaps the same number of writeups in a longer timeframe to

21 capture those?

22 A Thirty days.

23 Q Thirty days?

24 A Correct. And the reason I based that and

25 recommended that to my superior, that time frame, because

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

296

1 that exceeded the time frame that other air carriers with

2 like aircraft, for example UPS and Airborne, that exceeded

3 the time frame that they had, and I felt that if we could

4 get to that goal, the chronics could be reduced to below

5 that figure that it would help greatly in both the

6 maintenance of the aircraft and the relationship with the

7 crews.

8 Q And by chronic, we're talking the same thing when

9 you say repeat writeups, or the definition of three items in

10 ten days or thirty days? Is that what you mean by chronic?

11 A Yes, in my mind, yes. There was a great deal of

12 confusion and discussion between my superiors and the FAA

13 about what's a chronic and what's repeat. The way I look at

14 it, if an item comes back, it's a repeat. The problem you

15 run into is that the computer system that we had was

16 specific only to ATA chapter and we had a lot of debris to

17 filter through because the computer told us we had repeat

18 tire changes, and those in fact were normal occurrences.

19 Tires wore out.

20 Q Let me stop you right there because that was my

21 next question. I want to find out what the system was at

22 Emery that identified -- what defined a repeat? Or how they

23 entered the writeup for instance -- is it by subchapter --

24 ATA subchapter, was that what was triggering the capture of

25 a repeat?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

297

1 A The reliability department had -- per our

2 manual -- had their own program, and I really couldn't tell

3 you exactly what they used to track, officially, the repeat.

4 What we did to try to get ahead of the game -- I wanted -- I

5 advised the manager of maintenance control that I never

6 wanted to see another repeat form from reliability. Find a

7 way to fix them before it becomes a repeat. And what he did

8 was he developed a chronic section in maintenance control,

9 and they used a computer program that took all of the log

10 page data and all of the pilot squawks, all of the

11 maintenance squawks, and they broke it down into chapters,

12 and they would determine how many times a specific item had

13 been logged. And it turned out that it was a very effective

14 way of determining when a repeat was going to happen. It

15 actually gave maintenance control the opportunity to

16 position an aircraft at a heavy check station to do some

17 extensive troubleshooting.

18 Q Would any writeup or resolution refer to an ATA

19 subchapter, or would that be something that somebody else in

20 the process would have to assign it an ATA subchapter, for

21 instance?

22 A Originally the mechanics were required, by the

23 regulations, to either one, use a description of the work

24 performed, or a reference, and in some cases, unfortunately,

25 they didn't do a very good job of either. However, towards

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

298

1 the end they were mandated to do both -- a good description

2 of the work performed, and a reference. And after that it

3 made it easier for the chronic team to determine what these

4 items were. But when the chronic team was started, their

5 job was to research the log entries and determine exactly,

6 by physically reviewing the log items, whether or not they

7 applied.

8 Q And just to be clear, once they -- a chronic

9 problem or repeat as defined by Emery -- that would go to

10 reliability for resolution or examination, or where in Emery

11 would that be resolved? How would that be handled?

12 A The reliability -- I think I'm confusing things

13 here. The reliability department had a repeat program,

14 approved and in place, and that was in fact, in effect. We

15 did a little bit more on the side, so to speak, in the

16 maintenance control department. We arranged -- organized a

17 group and all the different departments were aware of it,

18 and it was approved through my boss. But the goal was to

19 try to get the repeats before they were actually repeats per

20 our manual, before they reached that timeline. And we did

21 receive notices from reliability after that, but the repeats

22 and the chronics -- whatever you want to call them -- they

23 dropped dramatically.

24 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Thank you very much.

25 I have nothing further.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

299

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, to the parties. ALPA?

2 DIRECT EXAMINATION

3 BY MR. GUNTHER:

4 Q Mr. Ungemach, you talked before about meetings

5 with the pilots. Now when you say the pilots, do you mean -

6 - is that flight management or was that actual line

7 personnel?

8 A It was both. I had a meeting that we -- myself

9 and the manager of maintenance control would attend with the

10 management personnel, Jim Oswald, and his flight engineer,

11 and we also would go out during the operation, and I met

12 with the crews several times at night, as well as the

13 mechanics and talked to the Captains and the flight

14 engineers that were flying the airplane.

15 Q Was this an ongoing program?

16 A Yes, it was, however it started very late and my

17 tenure at Emery ended prior to the completion of the

18 program.

19 Q And did the program start prior to or after the

20 accident?

21 A No, that was after the accident.

22 Q Talk a little bit about mechanics. You say your

23 mechanics were fatigued at times?

24 A Were they what?

25 Q Fatigued?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

300

1 A Yes. At times.

2 Q And was overtime mandatory for them?

3 A No, sir. No, sir. The only exception to that

4 would be the maintenance reps, and as long as they were on

5 the aircraft, I considered them on duty. It didn't matter

6 if they were sleeping on the aircraft or flying on the

7 aircraft, or working on the aircraft. They were considered

8 on duty, and in those particular cases, they would exceed 16

9 hours, and that's why I changed the mandate and required the

10 manager of line maintenance to set up more maintenance reps

11 so that after 16 hours they had to be removed from the

12 aircraft.

13 Q Let me ask you a question -- you said they're

14 sleeping in the aircraft. Do you have a crew rest facility

15 on board any of your aircraft?

16 A No, they slept during flight.

17 Q Do you have cots or how do they do that?

18 A They came up with very inventive ways --

19 hammocks, sleeping bags, things of that nature.

20 Q Didn't it bother you?

21 A It bothered me, that's why we changed the rule.

22 I felt that the line mechanic should be held to the same

23 restriction as the flight crew, to be honest with you. It

24 wasn't a mandate or an FAR, but that's how I felt.

25 Q You talked about your chronic program. When did

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

301

1 that go into effect?

2 A I can barely hear you, sir.

3 Q Your chronic program? When did that go into

4 effect?

5 A I'm not exactly sure. I'm not exactly sure the

6 date it went into effect, several years ago.

7 Q Prior to or after the accident?

8 A It was after the accident.

9 Q What did you do before that?

10 A We followed the same chronic program that

11 reliability department currently had. We didn't initiate --

12 we started our initiation after that.

13 Q So that was -- it would be applied if it had

14 three times in how many days was it?

15 A I believe the reliability department was three in

16 ten.

17 Q So what would you do --

18 A If memory serves me correct.

19 Q Do you know what a category C item is?

20 A Ten days.

21 Q Ten days.

22 MR. GUNTHER: I have nothing further, thank you.

23 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Tennessee Technical Services?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

302

1 DIRECT EXAMINATION

2 BY MR. HOFFSTETTER:

3 Q David Hoffstetter, Tennessee Tech Services. Your

4 chronic program -- you put the chronic program in place?

5 A The one in maintenance control, yes, sir.

6 Q And that was redundant to the reliability

7 program?

8 A That's correct, sir. That was a program -- that

9 wasn't even, as far as I know, prior to my leaving, it

10 wasn't even in the manual yet. We just tried to do

11 something to be more proactive.

12 Q You put that in place because the reliability

13 program didn't work quickly enough to advise you of

14 problems, or --

15 A I put that in place because I wanted to eliminate

16 repeats completely, and I wanted the crew members to know

17 that the maintenance department was doing everything they

18 could to completely eliminate them.

19 Q At your stations, Emery probably provided

20 maintenance manual tapes --

21 A Yes.

22 Q Did you also provide temporary revisions to all

23 the stations that had tapes?

24 A Yes, sir, they were supposed to be supplied with

25 the tapes. There was a temporary revision manual -- about a

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

303

1 four inch binder. I didn't supply them, so I don't know if

2 they went there, but they were on the list.

3 Q Was there a system in place to insure that you

4 didn't exceed duty time requirements for mechanics for Part

5 121?

6 A The duty time requirements per 121 would kill a

7 man. So, they never exceeded that. But that, as far as I

8 was concerned, was completely unreasonable for any human

9 being to try to endure, so the 16 hour mandate was put into

10 effect by myself. They couldn't work more than 16 hours if

11 they wanted to. It didn't matter.

12 Q Was there a hot line put into place to allow line

13 mechanics to call directly into a VP or flight crews or

14 anyone who felt like they had a problem to get into upper

15 management?

16 A Yes, sir. One of my -- one of the vice

17 presidents that I worked for had installed a hot line, and

18 that particular hot line number was given to everyone,

19 including the flight crews, and the only person that could

20 review that line was the vice president himself.

21 Q Do you feel like you were getting the support

22 that you needed from your vice president people you worked

23 for to be able to make changes within the Emery system?

24 A Yes, I always asked for more than I really

25 thought I would get, but yes, I did.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

304

1 Q Could you describe the flow of log books and ME-

2 09s from outside stations into Emery and the path of that as

3 it went through your department to get to records?

4 A Yes, sir. The documents that are completed at an

5 out station, the log pages, the parts tags, the non-routine

6 forms, all the documents containing to the aircraft were put

7 into an envelope. The front of the envelope has a type of

8 checklist on it where you document the items that are in the

9 envelope, and that particular packet for that maintenance on

10 that aircraft would be returned to Dayton. I believe it

11 went directly to reliability.

12 Q That would be the -- not your chronic team, but

13 to the reliability group?

14 A Correct, sir, not the chronic team.

15 Q And where did the information for your chronic

16 team come from? Did that come from the same package?

17 A No, sir. One of the requirements of the

18 maintenance control department was when aircraft landed, the

19 log sheet -- the inbound logsheet, and the log sheet prior

20 to departure had to be faxed into maintenance control, and

21 that gave the maintenance controllers the opportunity to

22 review the defects long before reliability ever received the

23 documents.

24 Q Was there any accountability for non-routine?

25 Were they serialized or logged in any manner? Was there a

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

305

1 note on the log page to advise somebody that there were non-

2 routines generated that weren't on the log page itself?

3 A The non-routines -- no, the non-routine form was

4 a standard form and it didn't have a serial number. I mean

5 on the form you would document tail number of the aircraft

6 and you would include it in your paperwork when you --

7 Q But if that was lost, there was nothing on the

8 log page to indicate that instead of writing non-routines in

9 the log book we used three ME-O9s or one ME-O9 or anything

10 like that?

11 A No, sir, the only documentation that that item

12 existed would have been the checklist on the front of the

13 envelope.

14 MR. HOFFSTETTER: I have no further questions.

15 Thank you.

16 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: The Boeing Company?

17 DIRECT EXAMINATION

18 BY MR. BREUHAUS:

19 Q Yes, thank you. Mr. Ungemach, could you pull up

20 Exhibit 17 Uniform? That's the B-2 Exhibit.

21 A I certainly will try.

22 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Does the witness have

23 that, Mr. Ungemach?

24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, I do. Here it is. I

25 knew I had it here somewhere.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

306

1 BY MR. BREUHAUS:

2 Q And could you turn to the last page of that

3 Exhibit? That's the card number B009.

4 A Yes, sir.

5 Q When was this B-2 check performed on the accident

6 airplane?

7 A On the 20th -- January 20, 2000.

8 Q And where would it have been performed?

9 A In Dayton.

10 Q And what's the -- what kind of facility would

11 that check have been performed in? Is that line maintenance

12 work?

13 A That's the hub -- the Dayton hub. Yes, sir. We

14 don't have a hangar, if that's what you're referring to.

15 Q Correct. So the airplane would be out on the

16 ramp during that maintenance?

17 A Correct.

18 Q And do you know what the weather was at that

19 time?

20 A No, sir, I don't.

21 Q Could you take a look at the left hand -- the

22 right and left hand elevator tab inspection line and read

23 what it says?

24 A "Visually inspect" -- is that what you're

25 referring to?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

307

1 Q Yes.

2 A "Visually inspect elevators and tabs for general

3 condition, corrosion, leakage and security of attachment.

4 Inspect static dischargers for general condition and

5 security."

6 Q Sir, I know we've talked about this before, but

7 how would that be done? That first item on the visual

8 inspection?

9 A We have man lifts. You would get in a man lift,

10 go up, do a visual inspection of the attach points.

11 Q So you'd go up and look at the surface?

12 A Correct.

13 Q Would there be any disassembly involved?

14 A No, sir, I don't believe so.

15 Q Was the check successfully completed?

16 A It appears to be, yes.

17 Q Then do we know what the condition of the tab rod

18 bolt and cotter pin on the control tab were?

19 A At this point in time?

20 Q Yes.

21 A No, sir. It tells you to inspect the attachment

22 points. It doesn't tell you to inspect the control tab.

23 MR. BREUHAUS: Okay, thank you. No more

24 questions.

25 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Federal Aviation

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

308

1 Administration?

2 DIRECT EXAMINATION

3 BY MR. STREETER:

4 Q I guess, if you would, sir, just leave that same

5 Exhibit right there, card B 009. The way I read that, it

6 says "Visually inspect elevator and tabs" --

7 A Correct.

8 Q "... for general condition." Are you stating

9 that you do not see that as requiring the removal of the

10 fairing then?

11 A No, sir, that's what I'm saying. I'm saying that

12 it -- the way I read this is you're inspecting the elevator

13 and tabs for the general condition, not specific. You're

14 looking for corrosion, leakage and security of attachment.

15 That's how it reads to me.

16 Q Okay, understood now. Have you ever performed

17 that inspection yourself as a mechanic?

18 A Not at Emery, no, sir.

19 Q At other carriers?

20 A I've inspected this system at other carriers,

21 yes, sir.

22 Q And when you did that inspection, would you

23 remove the fairing?

24 A When I did the inspection at other carriers, the

25 fairing was already removed. I did it in the heavy check

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

309

1 environment.

2 Q I see, okay. Now this inspection at Emery was

3 done in line check, is that correct?

4 A That's correct.

5 Q And were you the director of line check in

6 January of 2000?

7 A Yes.

8 Q Or director of line maintenance?

9 A Yes, sir.

10 Q Okay. This, speaking again of this particular

11 card, Mr. Carbone stated earlier that the mechanic -- he

12 stated that the mechanic who signed this off was a new hire.

13 Do you know that -- is that a correct statement?

14 A I have no idea, sir.

15 Q You do not know whether --

16 A I can't even read his name. I don't know.

17 Q There was an implication that the mechanic had

18 not yet received his initial familiarization. I'm going to

19 assume that because of your last statement that you don't

20 know who this guy was --

21 A I don't --

22 Q -- you don't know whether he completed the

23 training or not?

24 A Yes, sir, that's correct. I don't.

25 Q Does that mechanic's sign off relieve the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

310

1 operator, Emery, from their responsibility for the

2 airworthiness of the aircraft?

3 A No, sir.

4 Q So would it be correct, then, that whether that

5 mechanic had completed his initial training or not, Emery

6 would still be respon