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 responsible for the airworthiness of the

7 aircraft?

8 A That's correct, sir.

9 MR. STREETER: I have no further questions.

10 Thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you. Emery?

12 DIRECT EXAMINATION

13 BY MR. HAGQUIST:

14 Q Good morning, Mr. Ungemach.

15 A Good morning, sir. Mr. Carbone asked you a

16 number of questions about what might have occurred or what

17 may have occurred in connection with the work done on the

18 aircraft elevator dampers. Isn't it true that you do not

19 actually know what manuals were referenced by the mechanics

20 working on the elevator dampers?

21 A That's true, I don't.

22 Q Isn't it also true that you do not actually know

23 what the mechanics did when troubleshooting the elevator

24 damper issue?

25 A That's also true. I do not know.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

311

1 MR. HAGQUIST: That's all we have, sir.

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, Mr. -- to the Board of

3 Inquiry. Mr. DeLisi.

4 DIRECT EXAMINATION

5 BY MR. DeLISI:

6 Q Thank you. Good morning.

7 A Good morning.

8 Q As director of line maintenance, where were the

9 personnel in your department located?

10 A I was in charge of the maintenance control

11 department, that's located at the Dayton hub. I was in

12 charge of the Dayton hub line maintenance department, also

13 located in Dayton. And I was responsible for the line

14 maintenance at the field stations.

15 Q Let's talk about the field stations. Was Mather

16 Field a field station where your employees were located?

17 A At the time of the crash, it's difficult to say

18 because the stations moved, but I believe, if memory serves

19 me correctly, at the time of the crash the supervisor was in

20 fact an Emery employee, but the remainder of the people were

21 contract employees.

22 Q Tell me again, the supervisor was an Emery -- the

23 supervisor of?

24 A Of the station.

25 Q At Mather Field?

312

1 A Correct.

2 Q And that supervisor was a member of the line

3 maintenance department?

4 A Yes, sir, he was.

5 Q Could we go back to Exhibit 7-O, it's a

6 maintenance log sheet.

7 A Alrighty.

8 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Does the witness have it?

9 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

10 BY MR. DeLISI:

11 Q Item six is that writeup that we've been talking

12 about about the elevator requiring more back pressure than

13 normal. On this card somewhere, does it identify the

14 location where this pilot writeup was made?

15 A This -- the log squawk was entered at Dayton.

16 Q And how, from this log sheet, are you seeing

17 that?

18 A Because the terminating station is Dayton. Upper

19 left hand side of the sheet.

20 Q Upper left hand, the KDY.

21 A Correct, that's Dayton.

22 Q So that writeup was done at Dayton.

23 A Correct. And the signoff was also at Dayton.

24 Q Okay. The -- an entry such as that one,

25 "Elevator requires more back pressure than normal to flare

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

313

1 the aircraft" -- is that something that would have had to

2 have been dealt with immediately when it was written up?

3 A Prior to departure, yes, sir.

4 Q So you could not have MEL'd an item like that and

5 continue to fly the airplane --

6 A No, sir.

7 Q -- with that squawk being open?

8 A No, sir, that's not an MEL item.

9 Q What would have been the procedure at the time of

10 the accident if a writeup like this had been entered into

11 the log book for an airplane on the ground at Mather?

12 A They would have to first determine whether or not

13 the backpressure was beyond the limits per the manual. If

14 that in fact were true, then they would have to troubleshoot

15 the system to determine what was causing it.

16 Q Are you aware of troubleshooting of that nature

17 having been performed on occasion at Mather?

18 A Troubleshooting of that type was performed at a

19 lot of stations. I don't know that Mather was one of the

20 them. However, the supervisor that is in charge of Mather

21 and Reno, both, had extensive knowledge in aircraft rating.

22 He was an extremely experienced mechanic.

23 Q Are you aware ever, of any tendency for flight

24 crews to delay their writeup of a mechanical issue until the

25 airplane was at a facility more suitable for the maintenance

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

314

1 to be performed?

2 A I'm not aware that crew members did anything

3 other than make log entries. When they made log entries,

4 they were addressed.

5 MR. DeLISI: Thank you. No further questions.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Dr. Kushner?

7 DIRECT EXAMINATION

8 BY DR. KUSHNER:

9 Q Yes, hi. I'm just -- on the same discussion

10 subject. I believe Mr. Hoffstetter said that he did not

11 feel that the reverse dampers would cause the system to

12 require more pressure to actuate the elevator. Now, if I

13 were just to read this, I would come to the conclusion that

14 either your people did not agree with that conclusion, or

15 other stuff was done that is not documented here. Could you

16 elaborate a little bit? Give me some -- is there a

17 procedure where somebody checks and says, now wait a minute,

18 these symptoms, according to all the documentation we have

19 do not imply that that's the corrective action? Let's go

20 back and see that this has been checked out.

21 A I can't specifically speak about the mechanics

22 performing this task, but I can give you my experience.

23 Because of the relationship that we were trying to obtain

24 with the crew and to help prevent recurring log squawks,

25 even had this log squawk fallen within the maintenance

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

315

1 manual limits of the pull test. The mechanics, by my

2 instruction, would have been required to inspect the system

3 further for anything else. In the process of doing that,

4 they certainly could have determined, at the flight control

5 surface itself, whether or not there was a defect with those

6 dampers. Whether or not they would cause this particular

7 log squawk, I can't disagree with Mr. Hoffstetter. I think

8 it probably would have been more pronounced had the dampers

9 been installed correctly, however, just in general

10 inspection of this system, they certainly could have found

11 this.

12 Q I guess really what I'm trying to understand is -

13 - I have a symptom or a problem identified. In other places

14 -- and I can't remember the numbers, so correct me if I'm

15 wrong -- it gave you the procedures to follow if you had

16 excessive friction or something else in there. Nowhere did

17 it say check the dampers.

18 A That's probably correct.

19 Q So is there someplace in your maintenance system

20 where there's a check done and somebody should be noticing

21 that the corrective action is not identified any place in

22 the service manuals with those symptoms and we should go

23 back and do a double check on this?

24 A The maintenance manual gives you exact direction

25 depending on the certain system that you're troubleshooting.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

316

1 That does exist. I think what we're looking at here,

2 though, is a mechanic who went beyond what he was required

3 to do and he looked further, and in the process he happened

4 to find this defect. I think that's --

5 Q That's fine. I think that's very good.

6 A But there are already procedures written to

7 document -- to show how you test certain systems. There --

8 Q Yes, what I'm trying to get to, though, is

9 nowhere do we see a record of him following the recommended

10 checks for that system.

11 A That's correct.

12 Q For those symptoms. And yet I don't see anything

13 in the procedures and what's been discussed that would, in

14 terms of a oversight, pick up this, that the corrective

15 action identified does not follow what is suggested to be

16 done, we'd better go back and make sure and document that

17 all of the corrective actions that are called for, or all of

18 the inspections that are called for in the manuals were

19 followed. Is --

20 A I believe that eventually would have occurred had

21 the squawker turned especially, but the log sheets are

22 reviewed. They're reviewed in several different

23 departments, including reliability, engineering,

24 maintenance, and they do search for signoffs that, although

25 they may have found a defect, don't appear to apply to the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

317

1 log squawk. That does occur. In this particular case, I

2 have to agree with you that the signoff is vague and I can

3 tell you that I've seen signoffs that are several pages

4 long. In this particular case, it's vague.

5 DR. KUSHNER: Thank you. That's all I have.

6 DIRECT EXAMINATION

7 BY CHAIRMAN GOGLIA:

8 Q Before we get off that subject, you just

9 mentioned a few minutes ago that this mechanic possibly

10 could have found this on a general inspection -- the dampers

11 were different -- and you know, I'm looking at the part

12 numbers of the two units, and the only difference is the

13 dash number.

14 A He probably wouldn't have noticed the part

15 number, sir.

16 Q I agree. And for that reason, it's very

17 interesting -- let's leave that alone. I'll return to that

18 with other people later. I do have a number of questions

19 for you. I wonder if you could walk me through a typical

20 day in maintenance control.

21 A There are no typical days in maintenance control,

22 sir.

23 Q I know that. I understand it, having been around

24 that side of the business.

25 A Yes, I certainly can. The maintenance

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

318

1 controllers work a four on, four off, 12 hour day. The

2 start of a shift -- we'll use a controller as an example --

3 as a maintenance controller at the start of your shift you

4 receive a turnover both in writing and verbally from the

5 controller you're relieving. You are separated from the

6 hustle and bustle of maintenance control for about 30

7 minutes and the two controllers will go to the board. They

8 will discuss the airplane; they will discuss the issues on

9 the airplane. A question and answer session takes place so

10 that the new controller coming on duty has a very good idea

11 of what processes were in place.

12 He then assumes his duties at the desk, and at

13 that point he will now turn on his phone and he will respond

14 to the phone calls from various different people and

15 departments like crews, mechanics, outside vendors,

16 engineering, and provide data, both technical data,

17 experience. He provides direction. He will organize

18 recovery teams, for example, like Tennessee Tech, fuel cell

19 teams. He notifies the different departments when an

20 aircraft is AOG, gives an estimate on how long it's going to

21 take for parts to arrive, gives an estimate on how long it

22 takes for the aircraft to be repaired. Reports all those --

23 all that information goes into a maintenance control

24 turnover document which is provided to different members of

25 engineering and reliability and maintenance and so on and so

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

319

1 forth.

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: I just looked at the clock.

3 We've been going for more than two and a quarter hours.

4 Let's take a break and come back because I think you need a

5 break. We may spend a little more time yet.

6 THE WITNESS: Wonderful.

7 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: So let's take a -- let's return

8 here at 10:40 -- a 20 minute break.

9 (Whereupon, a 25 minute recess off the record was

10 taken.)

11 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, Court Reporter ready? We

12 can go back on the record. Okay.

13 BY MR. CARBONE:

14 Q When we last left, you were just -- explained a

15 day in the life of a maintenance controller, and we had a

16 considerable number of items that you mentioned. I'd like

17 to break those down a little bit and talk about them, and I

18 would like you to help me in case I forget any. But I'd

19 like to start first with the point where, after the turnover

20 and you sit down and you turn your telephone on. Typically,

21 what type of calls do you get? First of all, where's the

22 break for the 12 hour day? Seven in the morning?

23 Noontime?

24 A Actually the break is done at the maintenance

25 controller's leave, whenever he feels he needs a break.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

320

1 Q No, no. I mean between the shifts. Between the

2 two shifts?

3 A Oh, there's a -- a separation between the

4 different boards so that the turnover is separated --

5 Q So if somebody comes on at seven, another person

6 would come on at eight?

7 A Right.

8 Q So there's always somebody there who had been

9 there earlier.

10 A There are always two people there that had been

11 there earlier. There were three people -- when I worked in

12 maintenance control, there were three just on the

13 controllers shifts.

14 Q Okay, and the board you're talking about, it's an

15 aircraft order flight number board?

16 A It's an aircraft status board. It was later

17 updated to a computer program, but at the time I worked

18 there, it was a manual board you would document the

19 condition of the aircraft with red or green, the items that

20 were on the -- the board always listed the MEL items, so at

21 a glance you had a very good idea of the condition of your

22 fleet when you came on duty.

23 Q And at the time of the accident, a rough guess,

24 how many flights? 50 airplanes? Ten airplanes?

25 A In maintenance?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

321

1 Q In the fleet?

2 A I believe we were at 40.

3 Q DC-8s and? Were there DC-10s on board then?

4 A I'm not sure if they were on. If they were, they

5 just came on. I'm not sure.

6 Q It really doesn't matter. A phone starts to

7 ring. What are you hearing?

8 A Well, you get all kinds of phone calls. You get

9 phone calls from line stations. They are required to call

10 and give you a verbal -- not only are they required to fax

11 the log page, but give you a verbal on the items inbound on

12 the aircraft, the troubleshooting processes that they're

13 taking. They give E-tics to maintenance control and

14 maintenance control uses that to base the E-tic that they

15 give to the remainder of the airline.

16 Q So inbound -- after the airplane lands and the

17 maintenance department takes control and they get the log

18 books, they would call in to maintenance control and give

19 you a status.

20 A Correct.

21 Q The airplane has landed, and the log book

22 contains the following writeups.

23 A Correct.

24 Q And I would assume that you don't put much

25 emphasis on the landing lights burned out and that light's

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

322

1 burned out, but you would be concerned about items of

2 greater significance.

3 A Any item that's documented in the log book is

4 reviewed and faxed in. It didn't matter how severe it was,

5 but of course the maintenance controllers spend more of

6 their time working on the more critical items because that's

7 where most mechanics need the most help.

8 Q Okay. Did that help involve identifying where in

9 the manuals to go for procedures and --

10 A On occasion, it did, yes.

11 Q And in your opinion, what would the condition --

12 I heard you -- you mentioned this already -- but the

13 overall, the condition of the manual on the DC-8, in

14 particular.

15 A Well, the manuals were separated by type and of

16 course the outstations had a copy of all the maintenance

17 manuals, as well as maintenance control.

18 Q On tape?

19 A Yes, they were on tape. We actually had some

20 hard copies of wiring diagrams, but everything was

21 documented on tape.

22 Q And where were the conversions -- like the cargo

23 doors? Where were those located? Embedded within the

24 United DC-8 manual or were they somewhere else?

25 A The different conversions were located in

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

323

1 different areas, but they were all in maintenance control.

2 Maintenance control had a full set. The outstations had

3 them too, but for example, the Monarch (ph) door was not in

4 tape form, it was in hard copy form.

5 Q And how would those stations get that copy? They

6 had that manual --

7 A They had that, yes.

8 Q And did you do the ordering of parts for your

9 line stations?

10 A The line stations ordered parts in several

11 different methods. If the aircraft was AOG, they were

12 required to go through maintenance control to order the

13 part. If they were ordering a part for a deferral, they

14 would go through the planning section of maintenance

15 control, not the maintenance controllers themselves, and if

16 they were ordering a part for their stock, they could go

17 directly to the materials department for that.

18 Q And where was the materials department?

19 A It was located in Dayton, a couple hundred feet

20 away from maintenance control.

21 Q Adding an MEL. Line mechanic in Austin.

22 Airplane comes in, he needs to add an MEL because whatever -

23 - something's inop and he doesn't have any parts and the

24 airplane's leaving that afternoon. Walk me through the

25 process.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

324

1 A He would call -- first of all, he would fax the

2 log page to maintenance control.

3 Q He would fax the log page before it was

4 completed?

5 A He faxes the log page when the airplane arrives,

6 before there's any maintenance done.

7 Q Okay.

8 A So maintenance control is aware he has a defect

9 with the system and the maintenance controllers will -- they

10 will attempt to -- the policy was you will attempt to move

11 known failing components. For example, if he had a

12 hydraulic pump that failed or the log entry had to do with a

13 hydraulic pump. The maintenance controller, as soon as he

14 got the inbound log page would immediately try to locate a

15 pump seal kit, things to replace the pump, just as a

16 precaution, should that in fact be the defect, and arrange

17 for shipping to the station and the idea was to try to

18 prevent items from being deferred. However, if the part did

19 not arrive, or it turned out that the part he needed to fix

20 it was different from what the maintenance controller had

21 sent, then the line station mechanic would notify

22 maintenance control of what he needed and he would request a

23 deferral.

24 The maintenance controller is the only authority

25 to issue the deferral. He does it through a computer

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

325

1 program after all of the data, including the log squawk

2 page, so on and so forth, is entered into the computer. The

3 computer will, only then, generate a number. You give that

4 number to the mechanic. That's the DMI number and he

5 follows the MEL procedures to install placards and so forth

6 as required.

7 Q How many maintenance controllers were there?

8 A Oh, there were three controllers per shift, one

9 senior controller, one shift manager, one planner, and I

10 believe two chronics on every shift. I believe that's

11 correct.

12 Q So you have seven or eight people in the

13 facility?

14 A Right, the aircraft -- the planners, really their

15 function didn't involved AOG aircraft as much as general

16 planning, however, but the controllers -- we broke the fleet

17 down into separate boards, and one controller was

18 responsible for a specific number of aircraft. The shift

19 manager would oversee the entire department, so if one

20 particular controller was overwhelmed, he could jump in and

21 help him.

22 Q Now, your MEL log, did you keep a master log of

23 MELs?

24 A Yes, there was a computer program that maintained

25 that.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

326

1 Q So we've heard some discussion today, and I've

2 also read in the record, about repeat MELs. And sounds to

3 me the way you just described it, that the maintenance

4 controller would be the pivot person in the MEL process, and

5 he would be the person that immediately determined that we

6 have this repeat MEL process going on. Was there anything

7 in the system -- your system -- that would alert the

8 maintenance controller that an MEL was coming back again,

9 one day, one flight?

10 A There was, at the end of my time at Emery, there

11 was. Prior to that, everything was documented in manual

12 form and controllers were just too busy to go back and

13 review those. But at the end we had initiated a program

14 that allowed the controller, if he tried to reenter an MEL,

15 he would know that it was a repeat item.

16 Q But if we played the game of changing ATA code,

17 would that elude him?

18 A Well, no, because the MEL itself is specific and

19 on the MEL it wouldn't, because the MEL is a specific number

20 listed in the MEL and that's the only number you can use.

21 The ATA doesn't change on that particular item.

22 Q But sometimes -- never mind. You mentioned the

23 three items in ten days and you touched upon the reliability

24 system in the same sentence a couple of times. Where was

25 the reliability department, physically?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

327

1 A It was in Dayton, in the same facility that

2 maintenance control and most of the other departments were.

3 Q And do you know off the top of your head how many

4 people there were involved in the reliability department?

5 A No, sir, I don't.

6 Q And what was their work product? What came out

7 of there? Do you know? Did you see it?

8 A No, sir, I didn't physically see it. I knew when

9 an item was issued but I didn't physically see it.

10 Q Okay. And then I would have to assume that you

11 had no access to the records that they were amassing either.

12 In the course of your work day, if you wanted to see about

13 repeat items on an airplane that were maybe not MEL-able

14 items, but were somewhat more secure -- more or less visible

15 -- you know, an MEL item, as you said, that the crew -- your

16 organization, but there's other items that occur on the

17 airplane that don't necessarily come through you routinely,

18 unless it's a non-routine item that do reside in the

19 reliability department, like high failure rates for certain

20 components.

21 A That's correct.

22 Q Would you ever see that? Did you have access to

23 it?

24 A We had a -- yes, we did have access to it. The

25 department had access to it as a member of the reliability

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

328

1 board, and if there was a reliability issue other than a

2 repeat, they would issue notices for those also. Those went

3 -- we received notices from engineering, from reliability on

4 various issues that we addressed.

5 Q Okay, and before I leave this log page, would an

6 item like that same item six that we've been talking about,

7 the elevator dampers, and the excessive back pressure, would

8 a test flight be required?

9 A No, sir, not per Emery's procedures.

10 Q Did Emery have a policy of test flights? What

11 required test flights?

12 A Yes, sir, they did.

13 Q And I asked earlier to Mr. Hoffstetter about the

14 RII items, not necessarily who's approved to sign for the

15 items, the items themselves -- the required inspection

16 items.

17 A There was a master list in the maintenance policy

18 and procedure manual that identified each item that was

19 considered an RII.

20 Q It's item by item.

21 A Correct, yes.

22 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And Mr. Hilldrup or Mr. McGill,

23 do we have a copy of that?

24 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: I'm sorry, could you

25 repeat what the topic was?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

329

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: The items requiring inspection

2 buy-back after work accomplishment. Do we have a copy? The

3 witness just stated there is a list, item by item --

4 MR. McGILL: I'm sure it's listed in the

5 maintenance ... document -- the MPPM that you all have.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Is that correct?

7 THE WITNESS: That's correct.

8 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Then I have a copy of that, so

9 I know it should be in there.

10 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you.

11 BY CHAIRMAN GOGLIA:

12 Q Now, in the course of a day -- well, let's not do

13 that. We've heard people repeatedly say about the manuals

14 and how many and the different kinds. Did you receive a

15 number of calls from your line stations asking for help to

16 find things in the manual?

17 A Yes, we received calls. I mean they weren't --

18 given the amount of work that was being performed, I would

19 say it was negligible for the most part.

20 Q Okay. Now when you go through the different

21 checks on the airplanes, the B-check, do you have A-checks

22 on the DC-8?

23 A At one time we did.

24 Q Are there any additional instructions on how to

25 accomplish the task than what I read here on this page?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

330

1 A What page are you referring to?

2 Q Well, on any page. If you want to be specific,

3 if you look at the B-9 check card -- the B-2 check card, I'm

4 sorry -- I'm trying to find one -- I guess one would need to

5 go back and --

6 A Yes, this -- I think I can answer your question.

7 The steps that take place in this particular check that's

8 provided under the 17U is a B-2 check, one of four different

9 types that we have, and the different items that are

10 requested in this particular check are items that a mechanic

11 can find -- for example, it tells you install and secure a

12 cap for the oil, but you would have to go to the maintenance

13 manual to find out what process you would take to complete

14 that task. The reason that -- we had discussed at Emery at

15 one time when compiling the specific photos and maintenance

16 procedures for each item into a B-check document, but we

17 determined that the document would become more confusing and

18 it would be huge, several inches thick, and because there

19 are so many different types of DC-8s, you would have

20 stations that would have to stock huge quantities of

21 paperwork and in my opinion, it would have put the mechanic

22 in a position where he could have easily grabbed the wrong

23 B-check. We wanted to try to avoid that.

24 Q Okay, go to the last page of that -- there's only

25 two items on the last page. I'm a new mechanic, fairly new

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

331

1 mechanic at Emery. The second item. Where would I find in

2 the manual what you mean by visually inspect the elevators

3 and tabs for general condition? First a broad statement.

4 A Yes, sir, it is. First of all, if you were a new

5 mechanic you wouldn't be doing it by yourself. That's the

6 first point that needs to be made.

7 Q Okay, let's say new mechanics get most of their

8 training by osmosis?

9 A No, if you -- you of course have training classes

10 that are required, but a new mechanic isn't just turned

11 loose on an aircraft, especially a B-check. The station is

12 staffed with experienced people and you work with those

13 people. The learning process includes hands on. There's an

14 on the job training program that you also have to work into

15 and --

16 Q Is that formalized?

17 A Yes, we have a -- Emery had an on the job

18 training program, yes.

19 Q In the manual someplace?

20 A Yes, sir. OJT forms would be completed. The

21 person providing the OJT would have to sign the document.

22 Q Okay, and just --

23 A But you're correct. The statement is asking you

24 to do a general visual inspection. It isn't asking for

25 anything specific.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

332

1 Q I mean something this simple, do I do it from the

2 ground or do I get a stand?

3 A Well, you can't check the attachment fittings

4 from the ground. So you would have a stand.

5 Q And do I go above and below it, or do I just look

6 at the attachment fittings from below?

7 A You'd have to look above and below to see the

8 upper and lower part of the surface.

9 Q Those are just types of general questions I

10 wouldn't expect --

11 A I understand. I think a reasonably intelligent

12 person could determine that to complete what it's asking you

13 to do, you would have to go up to the airframe. I mean

14 that's the -- a lot of this is -- a lot of the things that

15 occur in the maintenance manual themselves require common

16 sense, and I think this would be one of them.

17 Q Now, after general condition, it talks about

18 corrosion, and then the next item is leakage. What kind of

19 leakage do you think we're talking about here?

20 A Well, you could have -- it's asking you to check

21 the elevators and the tabs, so you could have a damper or

22 something else that might be leaking.

23 Q What else is up in there? Are these powered

24 flight controls?

25 A No, the damper would be the only thing on that

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

333

1 system, but if you're in that area of the tail, you really

2 want to look for not only for the item that's listed here,

3 but anything in the general area. But in that particular

4 case, the damper would be the issue, I would think.

5 Q Do you know off the top of your head whether

6 those expanded instructions would be found in the manual?

7 A For?

8 Q Accomplishing task documents or B-check. If you

9 know, that's fine. We'll find out.

10 A I'm not sure. Yes, I'm sure they located in

11 there.

12 Q Okay. Now, the maintenance reps that were in the

13 facility, Mr. Hoffstetter mentioned that there were

14 maintenance reps as compared to quality reps. When they

15 were in the facilities, were they under your control?

16 A No, sir, the maintenance rep worked for the heavy

17 maintenance director.

18 Q Okay, and they didn't report to line maintenance

19 at all?

20 A No, sir, with the exception of us stealing their

21 parts, they really had no communication with us.

22 Q And speaking of that, how did you control your

23 borrow of raw parts?

24 A There was a document we had to complete to rob a

25 part. It had to be approved by Mr. Almond (ph) or the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

334

1 maintenance rep at the facility. They would remove the --

2 we would fill out the document, they would approve it. The

3 facility that had the aircraft would remove the part and

4 ship it as requested.

5 Q And do you know the RII policy as it pertains to

6 flight controls? I know I'm just asking if you --

7 A Generally, I do. I can give you a general idea.

8 Q I won't ask you any specific questions for that.

9 Just give me a second here.

10 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: That's all the questions that I

11 have, and we have another round back with the technical

12 panel from the parties. The technical panel?

13 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Yes, sir, I think Mr.

14 Carbone has a question.

15 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

16 BY MR. CARBONE:

17 Q Mr. Ungemach, before you said that security

18 relates to safety, safety-ing specifically, did you not?

19 A It could. Yes, it could. I mean if it says to

20 check for security, that would be one thing you would check.

21 Q So you're saying that safety of an item, safety

22 wire, some sort of safteying device is considered a

23 security?

24 A What I'm saying is that it tells you to check for

25 the security of an item. It could mean many things,

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

335

1 including safety wire, yes.

2 Q Including safety wire. So when you look at a

3 line like "security of attachment", that would include

4 safety wiring? Cotter pins?

5 A It could include it. To be specific, it depends

6 on the item you're referring to. If it tells you to secure

7 an oil cap, you have to -- the oil cap has to be screwed

8 down at a certain torque, and on an oil cap there is safety

9 wire that is applied that keeps it from unscrewing, yes,

10 sir.

11 Q Alright, so are you saying that the

12 interpretation of that line should be left up to the

13 maintenance personnel?

14 A What line are you referring to?

15 Q To "general condition, corrosion and security of

16 attachment".

17 A On?

18 Q You're saying it could mean something. What I'm

19 asking you specifically is, what --

20 A Are you talking about the B-check, sir?

21 Q The B-check 9 card.

22 A Well, on the B-check, when they're talking about

23 security, I think they're -- I think it's obvious that

24 they're talking about the control being attached correctly

25 with -- I don't know if that control has safety wires. If

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

336

1 it does, then it would have to be safety wired.

2 Q Well --

3 A I'd have to look at the maintenance manual to

4 answer that question.

5 Q Well, let's say since according to Mr. Robbins --

6 Mr. Robbins before had done a PowerPoint display, and it

7 showed that the tab is attached to the input rod, would you

8 consider that an attachment to a tab and elevator?

9 A Tab is attached --

10 Q To the input rod.

11 A It's connected to the rod -- that would not be my

12 interpretation of that B-check. My interpretation of that

13 is you're checking to see if it's attached correctly, that

14 rod is a control rod.

15 Q But what Mr. Robbins was saying that it is

16 attached at the hinges and at the input rod. Would you be

17 checking for attachments?

18 A I would not be checking that rod, that's not what

19 I would consider an attachment. Yes, it is attached, but

20 the attachment point is what -- I don't have the B-check in

21 front of me, but --

22 Q It's "visually inspect elevators and tabs for

23 general condition, corrosion, leakage and security of

24 attachment."

25 A That's not a point of attachment. That is a

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

337

1 connection, but it is not a point of attachment. On a B-

2 check, that would not be something that I would look at,

3 given that language.

4 Q There's a hinge fitting underneath that

5 attachment too. Would that be considered an attachment

6 according to this B009 card?

7 A If there's a hinge fitting, I would consider the

8 point at which that control attaches to the other surfaces

9 as an attachment point.

10 Q So would you be required to remove a panel to

11 double check to see if that attachment is secure?

12 A If there was a panel covering it, you would.

13 Q Okay, and you're saying the attachment between --

14 or the -- put in your words, the connection between the

15 input rod from the elevator damper to the tab is not an

16 attachment.

17 A That's not an attachment point, no. I believe on

18 the DC-8 tab there are four attachment points, hinge points.

19 Q Does it concern you at all that Mr. Hall and Mr.

20 Hoffstetter and yourself disagree on how that part is

21 interpreted?

22 A I'm not aware that there is a disagreement.

23 Q I believe Mr. Hall and Mr. Hoffstetter had said

24 that they would remove -- I'm sorry, at least Mr. Hall said

25 that they would remove that panel to verify that the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

338

1 attachment to the input rod to the tab was attached.

2 A Yes, sir, he did. He also said that he was using

3 the full blown B-check, and I don't have that document in

4 front of me, so I'm not sure how that's worded. This is

5 part of the phased B-check and ... the language has been

6 changed.

7 Q I believe Mr. Hall was looking at the B009 card

8 when he said that.

9 A Okay, I'm --

10 Q What I'm trying to draw here is there's a

11 disagreement between two A&P mechanics on how they interpret

12 this card. Do you agree on that?

13 A That's possible. If there's a disagreement.

14 Q I think it's more than possible. I think it's

15 very likely that there is a disagreement in interpretation

16 of this card.

17 A Okay, I'll agree with you there. I don't see a

18 problem with it.

19 Q Okay. I would like to go back to what Mr.

20 Hagquist had asked you before about the writeup concerning

21 November 25th where the elevator dampers were reversed. I

22 just want to clarify that I was not saying that that was

23 what they used, but I would like to verify -- is it

24 possible, since there is no reference in their log page, is

25 it possible that they used that reference, that they used --

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

339

1 I'm sorry, that maintenance manual to troubleshoot that

2 item?

3 A The log squawk that's written down here is

4 extremely vague. It doesn't provide a great deal of data

5 for a mechanic to determine where the defect may be. Given

6 the fact that he pretty much has everything in the system

7 could be possible, he could have used that. He could have

8 used a lot of things. I really don't know what he used.

9 Q Okay, I just want to verify that you're saying

10 that that log -- that that m... reference in the DC-8 60

11 manual could have been used to reference to troubleshoot

12 this item.

13 A The troubleshooting reference that I reviewed

14 earlier is a reference that he could have used --

15 Q Okay.

16 A -- but given the data that's here, I have no way

17 of knowing if he did.

18 Q We're in agreement with that. There's no way to

19 tell by the log page if or if not this gentleman or these

20 gentlemen or -- I should say mechanics to be correct --

21 these mechanics actually used that maintenance manual

22 reference or any other maintenance manual reference. There

23 is no way to determine that.

24 A Given the data that's on the sheet, that's

25 correct.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

340

1 MR. CARBONE: That's all for me.

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, anyone else at the tech

3 panel? Okay, to the parties. FAA? ALPA?

4 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

5 BY MR. GUNTHER:

6 Q I have just one more question, sir. Is there --

7 where the clevis is mounted for the control tab, is there a

8 pivot point or attachment that that clevis is on that ...

9 and supports that side control tab?

10 A The push rod is connected to the control tab on

11 the inboard section of the tab.

12 Q And what is it pivot about? Is there a seal

13 bearing or is there a bearing that --

14 A I'm not sure which type of bearing it is. The

15 bearing is sealed, but I don't know what type it is.

16 MR. GUNTHER: No further questions.

17 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Tennessee Tech?

18 MR. HOFFSTETTER: Yes, I have a better picture of

19 what the attached point for the rod and the inboard bearing.

20 Could I give this to Mr. Ungemach to help clarify what we're

21 talking about here?

22 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Is it an Exhibit?

23 MR. HOFFSTETTER: No, sir.

24 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Then, Eunice, I wonder if you

25 would make a couple dozen copies of that?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

341

1 MR. HOFFSTETTER: Well, we could also put it on

2 the visualizer. I could identify it as an Exhibit if you'd

3 like.

4 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Well, we don't -- the parties

5 haven't had a chance to look at it, so -- is it out of the

6 maintenance manual? What's the source?

7 MR. HOFFSTETTER: It's a section out of the DC-8

8 overhaul manual.

9 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, why don't we pass it

10 around the table quickly. If anyone has an objection --

11 start right here, Eunice, with Boeing -- if anyone has an

12 objection, we'll stop and pause until we clear it. Emery.

13 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Mr. Hoffstetter, could

14 you look at Exhibit 7-J. At this point, all the parties,

15 once you've seen the proposed Exhibit, if Exhibit 7-J

16 satisfies that, we've got it already in the docket material.

17 MR. HOFFSTETTER: No, sir, it does not.

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Any objections? Okay, Eunice,

19 would you make a couple dozen copies, and we'll just take an

20 in place pause for a second until we get them so that

21 everybody can have it and put it up on the visualizer.

22 (Pause)

23 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, I believe we all have a

24 copy of the Exhibit now.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

342

1

2 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

3 BY MR. HOFFSTETTER:

4 Q Looking at this Exhibit it shows a picture of the

5 push rod for the tab and the hinge point that attaches to

6 the same fitting, and looking back at the B-2 job card,

7 would you say that the job card calls for inspecting that

8 hinge point that's the inboard attachment on the aileron --

9 or the elevator tab?

10 A Item 190? Is that the item that you're referring

11 to?

12 Q Yes, that would be the bracket that's mounted on

13 the elevator.

14 A That would be an inspection point you would have

15 to inspect.

16 Q Thank you. Can you do that without the fairing

17 removed?

18 A I can't answer that without looking at the flight

19 control. I just don't know.

20 Q I think Mr. Robbins' PowerPoint showed pretty

21 clear that you can't inspect that area without removing the

22 fairing. Were you a member of the reliability board at

23 Emery?

24 A Yes, sir, I was.

25 Q And did you feel like you could not get the rapid

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

343

1 response that you needed from the reliability group, and

2 that's why you started your chronic team or --

3 A No, I started the chronic team because I didn't

4 want to ever get anything from reliability. I wanted us to

5 be better than that. That's really the reason.

6 Q During the -- the troubleshooting guide that Mr.

7 Carbone had showed us earlier, would you say that's the

8 guide that should have been used to troubleshoot the

9 elevator systems when the dampers were changed?

10 A I would not say that. And the reason I wouldn't

11 say that is because the troubleshooting is a guide, it's not

12 -- troubleshooting an airplane is not that black and white.

13 It's hard to say what he used, but given the log squawk

14 here, he could have been -- there's a lot of things he could

15 have been doing.

16 Q Where would you have gone? Could you have gone

17 to that push rod looking for freedom of motion from the tabs

18 and work forward?

19 A If I were doing this, I would have gone to the

20 maintenance manual, found out how many pounds it takes to

21 pull that unit back, found out whether or ont it was within

22 limits. If it was within limits, I would have done a visual

23 of the system, nothing more. Signed off the log squawk and

24 waited to see if it came back or if any other crew member

25 had a problem with it.

344

1 So a couple pieces of information that would be

2 extremely important to the mechanic would be, one, is this

3 an item that happened more than once? two, after he found

4 this discrepancy and he repositioned these units, did it

5 reoccur? I mean the mechanic has to collect a lot of that

6 data, review the log page to try to determine whether or not

7 he's going down the right road because the log entry is just

8 extremely vague. That's my -- what I would do with it.

9 Q Assuming there was excessive force required to

10 move the elevator, would that be a logical place to break

11 the system to check for binding and wear?

12 A Would what be a logical place?

13 Q At the push rod, where the tab connects.

14 A I -- I couldn't imagine going there myself unless

15 I went through everything else -- and it's possible you

16 might end up there, but I don't see that being very likely.

17 Q That's not a --

18 A A line mechanic -- it's a lot different from

19 heavy maintenance. Working in both, it's rather difficult

20 to explain sometimes, but a line mechanic -- his whole

21 troubleshooting technique really is based on the information

22 he gets in the log squawk. If it's a vague squawk, you

23 know, this isn't up -- he could literally spend weeks trying

24 to find the problem. So he'll do a maintenance manual test,

25 find out if the system functions correctly, and if it

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

345

1 doesn't, then he can start narrowing it down. But in my

2 experience, a lot of the times you find that because the log

3 entry was so vague, and it did pass the maintenance manual

4 test, you really have to wait until it's logged at a

5 different time with a better description.

6 Q We don't know if this passed a manual maintenance

7 test or not, that I --

8 A I have no idea, given this data. I really can't

9 answer that.

10 Q You had spoken about log pages being faxed into

11 the maintenance control when the aircraft arrived, and that

12 information from the log pages goes into your chronic team

13 computer?

14 A It's given to the chronic team and they -- they

15 use the log sheets to track the computer run that's

16 generated by the company. There's a large stack of computer

17 runs and the reason that I wanted them to get the log sheets

18 was because the computer run is a very brief description,

19 and the log sheets will help clarify what's wrong so if

20 there is an ETA discrepancy, they can pick up on that and

21 actually apply a chronic when it may not have been.

22 Q There was a policy at Emery to -- for the

23 mechanics to not make log book items if they were doing

24 work, to use an ME-09, is that correct?

25 A Could you repeat that question?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

346

1 Q I believe I was told earlier that there was a

2 policy at Emery, if the mechanic, doing a post flight

3 inspection found a problem, he would document that on an ME-

4 09 and not make a log book writeup. Is that correct?

5 A Not that I'm aware of, no.

6 Q Would it be possible for him to use an ME-09 to

7 document squawks found on a post flight?

8 A It was against policy. The policy was that non-

9 routine forms would be used at B-check inspections or

10 higher. We had a lot of difficulty -- it was a policy that

11 I initiated because we had a lot of difficulty showing the

12 flight crews the extent of the work that was being done and

13 so we changed it.

14 Q When did you implement that policy? That was

15 after 8079U?

16 A Yes, sir, it was after that.

17 Q Before that policy was implemented, there was a

18 general policy -- or mechanics were allowed to use the ME-09

19 to document maintenance at a line station?

20 A Yes, they were, prior to that.

21 Q How would -- did you have your chronic team in

22 place at that time?

23 A At the time of the accident?

24 Q Yes.

25 A No, sir.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

347

1 MR. HOFFSTETTER: That's all, thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Before we proceed further, ME-

3 09 is what?

4 THE WITNESS: It's a nonroutine form. You

5 document discrepancies that the mechanic would find. Crew

6 members enter discrepancies directly into the log book, but

7 for example, on a B-check, when you're dealing with -- you

8 could be dealing with 50 or 60 discrepancies, you would eat

9 the entire log book up doing a B-check, so that document was

10 a supplement to the log sheet.

11 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, and that's -- stayed

12 attached to the completed B-check form?

13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

14 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And went to maintenance

15 records?

16 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. It was put in an

17 envelope and the envelope had a check list and was sent to

18 aircraft records.

19 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, where did I leave off --

20 the Boeing Company, you're next. No? Did I get everybody

21 else except Emery?

22 MR. HOFFSTETTER: Could I clarify the ME-09?

23 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Sure.

24 BY MR. HOFFSTETTER:

25 Q One time. The ME-09, at the time of the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

348

1 accident, could have been used by line maintenance personnel

2 to document maintenance accomplished on the aircraft. They

3 are not serialized. They're really not a control document

4 other than the fact that they would go into an envelope and

5 it would say we have three ME-09s on the face of that

6 envelope when it went into records. Is that correct?

7 A The ME-09 -- the nonroutine form, I'm not sure

8 what the number was prior to -- but the nonroutine form had

9 a section where you would identify the tail number of the

10 aircraft, the date, and there were three or four blocks, I

11 believe, on each sheet that allowed you to write a

12 discrepancy. There was no -- I'm not sure what you mean

13 by --

14 Q Well, there was no traceability -- there was

15 nothing in the log book or a mandatory control document,

16 like a log page, that has a serial number on it that says we

17 issued three nonroutine forms in addition to this log page.

18 I assume when the envelopes came in to maintenance records,

19 they were opened and thrown away -- looked to see if there

20 was material there and the envelope disappeared. So there

21 is no record that we issued 20 nonroutine forms to 8079U

22 during the three months that it operated or 200. We would

23 never know.

24 A Well, there was the -- you're right, the form did

25 not have a traceability number, however, the data was

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

349

1 entered on the envelope and it was sent to aircraft records.

2 Now I'm not familiar with exactly what their procedure is,

3 but I can tell you that there was more than one occasion

4 when aircraft records sent a notice to myself that a

5 document, a tag, a nonroutine, a log page, something was

6 missing from that envelope when they received it, and we

7 immediately went to the station and recovered it. So they

8 have a process, but I don't know specifically what it was.

9 MR. HOFFSTETTER: Thank you.

10 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Who did aircraft records answer

11 to in the chain -- the management chain at Emery?

12 THE WITNESS: I believe engineering.

13 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay. Thank you. Emery

14 Worldwide, I think, is the last one. Am I correct?

15 MR. HAGQUIST: Yes, sir, we just have two more.

16 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

17 BY MR. HAGQUIST:

18 Q Did you find the manuals difficult or confusing?

19 A The maintenance manuals?

20 Q Maintenance manuals.

21 A I didn't find them difficult or confusing, no,

22 sir.

23 Q When you were using those maintenance manuals,

24 did you have trouble identifying the appropriate manual that

25 was required to perform a task?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

350

1 A No, sir. There was a procedure that, as far as I

2 know, every airline uses, to determine which manual's

3 effective for the airplane, and that -- we had a procedure

4 at Emery too, and it was -- wasn't extremely difficult, no,

5 sir.

6 MR. HAGQUIST: We have nothing more.

7 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, was that the last round?

8 I've lost track. Is that the second round for everybody?

9 Okay. Tech panel? Okay, Mr. Carbone.

10 FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION

11 BY MR. CARBONE:

12 Q I'm sorry to be tenacious about this, but I just

13 want to verify and close the subject. Could you pull

14 Exhibit 7-Juliet, Mr. Ungemach?

15 A Yes, sir, one moment, please, to see if I have

16 it.

17 Q I promise you, this will be the last time I ask

18 you about this.

19 A I don't have it. Thank you. Alrighty, sir, I

20 have it.

21 Q Item 7-Juliet is an illustrated parts catalog,

22 page 27-32-06, page 1001. At the right hand side, about

23 midway, there's three numbers: 876, going down, and then A,

24 phraseology, inboard hinge bolt with an arrow, points down

25 towards where the connection between the input rod and the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

351

1 tab, and right below that is the inboard hinge bolt. Would

2 you agree that that is an attachment?

3 A That particular hinge located right below that

4 appears to be an attachment, yes, sir.

5 Q Are you aware that the only way to see that is by

6 removing the panel?

7 A I am not aware of that, but I don't disagree with

8 that.

9 Q I understand that. If that's the only way to get

10 to it, to see it, to visually verify that it is attached and

11 safetied, would you have to remove the panel?

12 A If you're required to do a visual inspection of

13 an attachment point, and the only way to do that is to

14 remove that faring, you would have to remove that faring.

15 MR. CARBONE: Okay. That's it.

16 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Mr. DeLisi?

17 MR. DeLISI: Nothing further, thank you.

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Dr. Kushner?

19 DR. KUSHNER: Yes, I just have one quick

20 question. When you were describing procedures you might

21 follow, you said you'd go to the maintenance manual and

22 you'd record the force needed to activate and see if it was

23 within the range of acceptable. Where would, in the

24 process, in all these forms, where would you document the

25 results of your check?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

352

1 THE WITNESS: On the log page.

2 DR. KUSHNER: Okay, so -- but we don't see

3 anything like that. What would we assume?

4 THE WITNESS: That he made a very poor entry.

5 DR. KUSHNER: Okay. That's it.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you. I have no

7 further questions. I would request that you stay around for

8 the remainder of the day. I assume we're going to finish by

9 the end of the day. Although we may be a little bug-eyed

10 before we get there. And thank you very much for your

11 testimony.

12 To the parties: It's 11:30. If we break for

13 lunch now, we could probably do it in an hour since we will

14 be ahead of the rush upstairs for food. If we wait until

15 after the next witness, we'll probably need more than an

16 hour. What's the pleasure? I see a lot of nods saying yes

17 for now. Okay, in that case, we'll take a one hour break,

18 come back at --

19 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Mr. Chairman? I'm

20 sorry to interrupt, but before we get too far away, I need

21 to follow my protocol. I need to have you identify, Mr.

22 Hoffstetter, the new Exhibit, just for my records, please.

23 And this will be Exhibit 7-Victor. I'll make copies --

24 better copies, perhaps, if we need to. If you could just

25 identify what that is.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

353

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: The source document. I think

2 he did already, saying the overhaul manual.

3 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Well, I just want -- I

4 didn't get it.

5 MR. HOFFSTETTER: It's the DC-8 overhaul manual,

6 chapter 2716.1 page 11 and 12.

7 (The document presented, marked

8 for identification as Exhibit

9 Number 7-V, was identified.)

10 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Thank you. That's all

11 I had.

12 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay we will recess for one

13 hour until 12:35.

14 (Whereupon, at 11:34 a.m., the hearing was

15 recessed, to reconvene at 12:35 p.m., this same day, Friday,

16 May 10, 2002.)

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

354

1 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N

2 12:44 p.m.

3 Whereupon,

4 THOMAS IAN WOOD

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

6 was examined and testified as follows:

7 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Could you please state

8 your full name and address for the record, please?

9 THE WITNESS: Thomas Ian Wood. 8658 Deer Bend

10 Driver, Huber Heights, Ohio 45424.

11 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Your current position

12 and employer?

13 THE WITNESS: Current position is aviation

14 consultant.

15 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: So you're self-

16 employed?

17 THE WITNESS: That's correct.

18 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Could you briefly

19 review your aviation-related experience?

20 THE WITNESS: Certainly, my aviation career

21 started in 1967 at which time I entered the Air Force, spent

22 seven years. Served a tour in VietNam at that time, got out

23 of the Air Force, continued my pursuit of a 121 airline

24 career. Went to college at that time, got a degree and my

25 A&P certificate. Went to work after that college degree and

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

355

1 certificate were received for American Trans Air in

2 Indianapolis, Indiana as the director of quality control,

3 which I served in that position for nearly seven years.

4 Left there, went to World Airways as a director

5 of quality control, was promoted at World to senior director

6 of maintenance. Left World, came to Emery. Hired in as the

7 director of quality control for a startup airline, so I was

8 the singular person in quality control from the beginning.

9 In my Emery career, the company allowed me to be

10 very interactive with the FAA and the industry, as was very

11 significant to Emery at that time because of the fact we

12 were the second largest DC-8 operating fleet in the world,

13 UPS being the largest at that time. So we could see right

14 away the very significant importance of being involved with

15 the maintenance program, development -- AD developments, so

16 forth and so on.

17 My initial introduction into working with Douglas

18 on model task force was with the DC-8 aging aircraft program

19 in which I was elected on model task group for the CPC

20 program, also the -- after that time, the structural

21 inspection program. Worked in the development of those

22 programs to start to finish. So, what that meant also was

23 as a carrier of the DC-8 -- as the second largest carrier of

24 the DC-8, we inputted a lot of data on statistics of our

25 aircraft, the operations, so forth and so on, to help

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

356

1 develop those programs, so it was -- that it was applicable

2 to what the FAA and the OEM and the operators all

3 collectively wanted, together.

4 After -- also during that period of time,

5 actually back in the middle 80's, I was very fortunate also,

6 at American Trans Air, they allowed me to be industry

7 active, to which I was one of five carriers that got

8 together that started the coordinating agency for supplier

9 evaluation group, better known as CASE. I served as a

10 member for over 15 years. I was on the board of directors

11 for CASE for over 11 years, to which when I finally felt

12 like I paid my dues to that organization, I served a tenure

13 as the president of that organization.

14 Also, in the middle 90's there was the concern of

15 the conversion -- AD concern of the conversion of the

16 passenger aircraft to all cargo, so there was a 727 AD front

17 action come forward to address that. The DC-8 operators, of

18 which I was one of those, obviously, the STC holders, and

19 the FAA developed a team which was called the DC-8 joint

20 task force team to which we would collectively work together

21 to start the development of the review, the analysis,

22 whether the AD needed to be complied with or developed,

23 clear through the process which the AD was developed and the

24 joint task force team ended up providing the writings for

25 the particular AD itself.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

357

1 There was several other things that I was

2 involved in with regard to leadership, but most of all,

3 interaction with the industry and the FAA, and also the OEM,

4 which was always my primary focus.

5 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Thank you very much.

6 Just follow up. Could you tell us when you joined Emery and

7 when you left Emery?

8 THE WITNESS: Yes, I can. I joined Emery in

9 December of '89, and left in November of 2000.

10 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Thank you. Mr.

11 Carbone will be doing the questioning of Mr. Wood.

12 DIRECT EXAMINATION

13 BY MR. CARBONE:

14 Q Good afternoon, Mr. Wood. You're director of

15 quality assurance, quality control and training, is that

16 correct?

17 A At that time, yes, I was.

18 Q Do you happen to remember what the reasoning was

19 behind Emery transferring its certificate?

20 A Would you like a reason? A specific reason?

21 Q Yes. A specific reason would be fine.

22 A Probably the most key position would be just for

23 mere logistics in working closer with the FAA. Because even

24 though we did have a good relationship with the San Jose

25 office, we, Emery, traveled to San Jose quite frequently.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

358

1 We just -- we adjusted, like several other air carriers have

2 adjusted with regard to the same certificate transfer. And

3 it was specifically set up to promote interaction with the

4 FAA to which it did do that.

5 Q Do you feel that this move had interrupted any

6 oversight that the FAA had for Emery?

7 A Interrupted the FAA oversight?

8 Q Well, FAA watching Emery -- not watching them,

9 but keeping tabs on them. Do you think that this

10 interrupted that process?

11 A No, in fact the Great Lakes regional office was

12 very, very supportive in that matter. The regional manager

13 in fact was one of the key supporters in providing, a year

14 prior to removal of certificate, a very, if you will, behind

15 the scenes coordination, to make sure there was no gap in

16 the particular coverage of FAA oversight of Emery. And that

17 was done by the primarily the geographic -- the new

18 geographic assignment to the Cincinnati office, which

19 assigned them to the oversight of Emery. And the newly

20 elected PMIs, in fact, that I worked with, prior to the

21 certificate move, as much as two or three months -- we

22 interacted -- they'd come up to the office and visited so

23 there was a promotion there. There was a concern there,

24 possibly, on Emery's side, you know, we don't want a gap

25 here, and that was collectively, as a lot of other things

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

359

1 done with the Great Lakes and San Jose office. It was

2 collectively communicated.

3 Q You were the FAA liaison, correct?

4 A That's correct.

5 Q How did you feel working with Mr. Camden? Harold

6 Camden?

7 A Very well. Harold and I had a previous

8 relationship, when I worked for World. Harold had -- Harold

9 was the PMI of World Airways when it was located in Oakland,

10 California, so Harold and I's relationship actually started

11 at that time, and it continued to promote even better than

12 what we had started.

13 Q On Exhibit 17-Zulu, your interview. I was

14 reviewing the transcripts, I'm just kind of curious about

15 something. You had stated that Mr. Camden had complimented

16 your VP on a significant turnaround by Emery, is that

17 correct?

18 A Can I look at that?

19 Q Yes, page 19.

20 A What was the number again, please?

21 Q Exhibit 17-Zulu.

22 A What page were you on, Mr. Carbone?

23 Q Page 1-9.

24 A Okay, I'm there.

25 Q I think it's about half way down, you had said --

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

360

1 you said you wanted to make something part of the record,

2 that Mr. Camden had complimented your VP on significant

3 turnarounds.

4 A No, on page 19 that I'm looking at, the very

5 first question at the top of the page says, "Your

6 participation in the CASE program -- how many particular

7 vendors ..."

8 Q I'm sorry, about half way down. "Prior to that

9 occurring, the principal maintenance inspector had met

10 several times with the vice president of this corporation

11 here and complimented him on the areas that he had seen in

12 the past."

13 A I'm on page 19, and the first question at the top

14 of the page, line six, says, "Your participation in the CASE

15 program, how many particular vendors you normally audit."

16 Are you on that page?

17 Q Are these out of sequence. I'm on page 19 on the

18 transcript. I don't know if it's the same number --

19 A It's not.

20 Q It's not. Okay. Gentlemen, from ... by three,

21 or help me. Should have the number at the top, top right.

22 A Yes, I'm reading it now. Yes, I see that

23 statement.

24 Q Is that -- do you have anything to -- was there

25 any -- how was this information relayed to you? For the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

361

1 record, I'm just trying to understand how was this

2 information relayed to you from the VP?

3 A Okay, well the document that we're -- that you

4 and I are reading is part of it -- part of that occurring --

5 "The principal maintenance inspector had met several times

6 with the vice president of this corporation here and had

7 complimented him on areas that had been seen in the past

8 that needed improvement, and in fact the company applied

9 that improvement and that he had noticed turnarounds --

10 significant turnarounds and improvements in several areas of

11 their own concern." These gentlemen. And your question to

12 me is how was this communicated to me?

13 Q How was this relayed to you, yes.

14 A Either by the vice president, or personally by

15 Harold as Harold and I were assigned to a task team in

16 approximately March of 2000 by a visit from Great Lakes

17 office, and Harold and I worked specific issues -- not only

18 specific issues of a normal transition of a certificate to a

19 new PMI, but any other open issues that may have come up.

20 So I probably -- I either heard it from the VP himself,

21 and/or I worked the subject matter directly with Harold.

22 Q But was that written -- was that a letter or

23 anything?

24 A No.

25 Q Was there any hard copy to that? That was just

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

362

1 word of mouth?

2 A There were several letters exchanged from the

3 Cincinnati office and Emery, but without reviewing those I

4 couldn't be sure.

5 Q Exhibit 17 CC -- Charlie Charlie -- and

6 obviously, it's not going to be the same page. Here it says

7 21. Mr. Camden stated that Emery was actually moving

8 towards improvement, but that you were moving too slowly.

9 Can you give your opinion on that?

10 A No, Mr. Carbone, I can't because I said in the

11 interview -- and I don't know what period of time, excuse

12 me, that he may have been referring to. I don't know

13 whether it was the time of the certificate transfer. I

14 don't know whether it was the time -- I don't know that time

15 period. The only thing I do know is the time that I did

16 work directly with Mr. Camden, there was never a concern of

17 too slow because, in fact, the FAA PMIs had put together,

18 for their office manager, a three year business plan, for,

19 if you will, the transition of the certificate to them, for

20 them to be able to go completely through all the manuals, to

21 review all the procedures and the normal occurrence once a

22 certificate gets transferred. That's the process.

23 Q The reason I'm asking is because he had concern

24 with your MPPM as far as being a functional document. Did

25 you agree with this assessment or did you feel the MPPM was

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

363

1 a functional document?

2 A I agree and I would state at any time that it's a

3 functional document. Harold's personal concern as relayed

4 to me was he -- he agreed that it was acceptable because in

5 the first month of the transition of the certificate, the --

6 Harold, the assistant PMI, the two assistant PMIs and

7 myself, and an individual from engineering -- a manager from

8 engineering, in preparation for an oncoming RASIP inspection

9 -- we went in a room and set down for nearly three weeks,

10 and what we done in that room is we looked at MPP page by

11 page, regulation by regulation, and went through the

12 complete UPP. Any suggestions made by Harold at that time,

13 or recommendations, we reviewed and in case of this review,

14 we placed them all in there and that become revision 21.

15 So Harold, and the office itself, accepted the

16 MPP as a compliant document to provide adequate procedures

17 to which in the past two years was also measured by several

18 NASIPs DOD inspections, to which it had a compliant history

19 of being a satisfactory document. Now I can't go -- I'd

20 like to stop right now, but I can't. Why then was there

21 such a concern?

22 There was a new standard recently been introduced

23 into the industry through the ATOS program and the CSET (ph)

24 and in those standards it did require more descriptive

25 procedures with regard to functionality of processes. But

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

364

1 the procedure that -- MPP that Emery had in place was a

2 standard 121 airline policy procedure manual, which was even

3 back in 1995, was requested by the DOD to use for training

4 for their inspectors.

5 Q I have from your response from Mr. Hagquist had

6 sent the RASIP responses from January 2000, and the finding

7 was that the maintenance -- "the MPPM appears to be mostly

8 policy, very little procedure." That was a RASIP response,

9 or a RASIP finding.

10 A Do you have --

11 Q Pardon me?

12 A Do you have the answer to that in the document

13 you're looking at?

14 Q Yes, I do.

15 A Can you tell me what you're looking at?

16 Q It's finding 2-3-11, it should be under Exhibit

17 17-Hotel?

18 A The Exhibit?

19 Q 17 -- 1-7-Hotel.

20 A Hotel. This, in fact, --

21 Q I'm sorry, I may have the wrong --

22 A Yes, there's another Exhibit that has I believe

23 what you may be referring to.

24 Q Okay, 17 November November. I apologize.

25 A Okay, I have that Exhibit, Steve. Can I ask what

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

365

1 page you're on.

2 Q It should be the cover letter, finding 2-3-11 and

3 then RXA response.

4 A What page is the response on?

5 Q You've indicated these by an arrow with the

6 responses, but that one doesn't have a response.

7 (Pause.)

8 Q I want to bypass that one, it never made the

9 docket. Alright. For what reason would Emery perform a

10 phase or sequential B-check?

11 A The primary reason why we'd done it was the good

12 common sense reason. If we increase exposure of looking at

13 the aircraft, my memory -- the interval by the OEMP Douglas

14 manual -- and I'm going to give you -- I'm ont going to give

15 you a specific number because my memory's not that good

16 today, but let's say the OEMP says the interval for the B-

17 check is 450 hours, that was in fact, Emery's program where

18 we performed a complete B-check every 450 hours. We also

19 had A-checks at that time which was a less of an inspection.

20 What we'd done was to increase reliability of our

21 aircraft and to really be able to totally take advantage of

22 all the ground time, was we segmented that 450 hour check,

23 but -- into lesser checks, like 133 hour segments -- but the

24 actual task to perform 450 hour item was not exceeded. So

25 what that'd done was, if you will, we took a B-check item

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

366

1 that was required to be done and done that, and then in

2 another area, since the aircraft was down for inspection,

3 you would go in and do a heavier -- you would spend more

4 time in that area doing a heavier visual inspection, just

5 for the simple fact that you were down, scheduled down for a

6 B-check.

7 What in fact that provided for Emery's DC-8,

8 which was an aging aircraft, it did provide increased

9 dispatch reliability of the aircraft and obviously, that's

10 the single - one of the single highest goals of a

11 maintenance program is to produce an aircraft at the gate

12 that dispatches when it's required.

13 Q Does this mean that each phase is different from

14 the next one or the one previous?

15 A Does it mean it's different?

16 Q If you do a B-3, is it different from a B-2?

17 A It's -- yes, it is different.

18 Q It is different. I'm going to shoot ahead to

19 November 25th, when Emery discovered -- they had a concern

20 with the elevator dampers -- here I go with the dampers

21 again. Did you approach either Complete Controls

22 Incorporated, CCI, or Tennessee Tech Services, TTS, to

23 address the issues?

24 A Both.

25 Q And when did you address them?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

367

1 A At that time.

2 Q Exhibit 7-Papa.

3 A I have it.

4 Q Is this the letter to which you referred when you

5 talked to TTS?

6 A This -- yes, this was one of the formal letters

7 that I sent, that's correct.

8 Q I'm saying is this the first correspondence?

9 A No, this is the second correspondence.

10 Q Okay. Did you say after your response, you did

11 talk to CCI about this?

12 A About --

13 Q Did you correspond with CCI about the dampers?

14 Did you say that you did correspond to CCI concerning the

15 dampers? Send them a letter or phone call?

16 A I don't think we're talking about the same

17 subject. CCI did not overhaul the dampers.

18 Q They overhauled the elevators, didn't they?

19 Didn't they overhaul the elevators?

20 A Okay, I'm sorry, yes, they did. I stand

21 corrected.

22 Q Did you address it with them?

23 A Yes, we did.

24 Q At that time?

25 A Yes, we did.

368

1 Q How would you define an inspector? RII

2 inspector?

3 A He's -- RII inspector is a person who

4 specifically reports to the quality control of a 121

5 airline, is -- has experience and is trained, and the

6 training requirements meets those training requirements on

7 an annual basis.

8 Q Were there specific quality assurance inspectors

9 in Dayton that formed their own department?

10 A Yes, there were.

11 Q Could you -- I'm sorry.

12 A Go ahead.

13 Q How many stations had inspectors that were

14 strictly quality assurance?

15 A As far as being quality assurance reporting to

16 the manager of quality control, there was none. The

17 individuals at the line stations were designated RII

18 inspectors that were trained to meet that task, and whenever

19 they performed a function under the RII requirement, they

20 then would report to the director of quality control.

21 Q But you said Dayton did have its own specific

22 group?

23 A It did.

24 Q Would you have any need to utilize an inspector

25 at Dayton that was anyone but quality assurance to do an

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

369

1 inspection?

2 A Yes, we did.

3 Q For what reason?

4 A For the mere reason to cover the production

5 requirements of the airline.

6 Q Are you talking about quantity of inspected items

7 needed during the night?

8 A Correct.

9 Q On the particular night of November 25th -- or

10 actually the morning of November 25th, you used a lead as a

11 QA inspector. Is that normal that you would use somebody on

12 -- who is the lead for the mechanic at the time as an

13 inspector?

14 A If the inspector was the designated RII

15 individual, then I would say yes.

16 Q But wouldn't you tend to use the QA department at

17 first?

18 A No, because the QA or QC, which is actually what

19 it was, their functionality did not physically take them out

20 to the flight line even at Dayton, to perform inspections on

21 aircraft.

22 Q I'm sorry, they didn't take them out to the

23 flight line?

24 A That's correct.

25 Q What would they be utilized on?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

370

1 A They were utilized on several auditing of

2 agencies, auditing of the line stations, fuel farms,

3 auditing of the paperwork and all the several other facets

4 of the airline.

5 Q Maybe I need to be clearer. When you say you

6 have an RII inspector at Dayton --

7 A Correct.

8 Q -- you're talking about somebody who does RII on

9 an airplane. Do you have an RII inspector department?

10 A We have a quality control department.

11 Q Right, but those people in quality control, the

12 inspectors, they would not go on the line to inspect items?

13 A Not unless there was a special need for them to

14 go out. On a -- what I'm trying to tell you is on a routine

15 shift by shift operation, at any line station, the required

16 inspection items were performed by the designated required

17 inspection trained personnel.

18 Q Was it quality assurance then that was

19 responsible for auditing daily paperwork from the field?

20 A That's correct.

21 Q Base maintenance and vendor maintenance?

22 A That's correct.

23 Q Did TTS or any other vendors make recommendations

24 to revise the work cards and/or maintenance procedures?

25 A During the time -- we started using TTS for heavy

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

371

1 checks in December -- or in January of 1999, to which they

2 performed roughly four or five C-checks, and then their

3 first D-check, which is the accident aircraft. At -- during

4 that year, their -- to my knowledge I didn't -- myself as

5 being the director of quality control, I didn't receive any

6 formal notice of work card changes.

7 Q Okay. How efficient was the paperwork auditing

8 compliance?

9 A I, through the years and through the measurement

10 of that record system, it was very efficient.

11 Q What problems did you -- did you run into any

12 problems with QA? In the QA department, were there any

13 problems that needed to be resolved?

14 A Not that I know of.

15 Q How often were inspectors required to requalify

16 on their special training?

17 A The RII inspectors, annually.

18 Q And how would you -- how would you record this?

19 A It was recorded -- we had a specific form for

20 that training and for that reauthorization because you had

21 to receive the training to be reauthorized or continue to be

22 authorized to be able to receive that. So that particular

23 training document and authorization is in that mechanic's

24 training records.

25 Q And when you say the training records, are you

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

372

1 talking about the certificate record summary?

2 A I'm talking about -- that's part of it -- the

3 training record package, that's correct.

4 Q Well, what else would it be shown on? If I was

5 an RII and I was requalifying every year, where else would

6 it show?

7 A It would show on an employee -- I don't recall

8 the name of the form, but it would show on an authorization

9 form, published by Emery, that shows the authorization of

10 all the mechanics.

11 Q Could you please refer to 17 Romeo Romeo?

12 MR. HAGQUIST: Mr. Chairman, Emery is going to

13 object to the use of any Exhibit which reflects FAA

14 investigative or enforcement material unless the

15 contemporaneous Emery response to that material is entered

16 as an Exhibit and available to the witness.

17 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, and do we have copies,

18 Mr. Hilldrup of the Emery response?

19 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: We do. We'll have to

20 have some identification as specific as possible, I think.

21 I believe all the parties were provided this information. We

22 certainly have some information as well, but it may take a

23 few minutes to find it, to identify the specific pages. If

24 Emery could do that?

25 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, we'll take a few minutes.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

373

1 If you have another area of questioning that you'd like to

2 pursue and we'll come back to that.

3 MR. CARBONE: Sure.

4 BY MR. CARBONE:

5 Q Were the RII training classes -- I'm sorry --

6 excuse me --

7 MR. HAGQUIST: Find this response before we

8 continue.

9 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Certainly, we have all the time

10 in the world.

11 THE WITNESS: Mr. Carbone --

12 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: For the benefit of everybody in

13 the room, I've notified the parties that my schedule is

14 clear for the next week, so we will stay here until we're

15 done. And while Emery is looking for it, we'll take a five

16 minute break in case anybody needs to use the facilities

17 after lunch.

18 MR. STREETER: Mr. Chairman?

19 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Yes.

20 MR. STREETER: Are we talking about Exhibit 17

21 Romeo Romeo? I'm not aware that this has anything to do

22 with any enforcement action, that's what I don't

23 understand.

24 THE WITNESS: I think there's a

25 misunderstanding --

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

374

1 MR. STREETER: Alright, maybe that's --

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Would you -- since we already

3 have people up and running, we're going to break for five

4 minutes. Sort it out and we'll talk about it in five

5 minutes.

6 (Whereupon, an 11 minute recess off the record

7 was taken.)

8 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Now, it's working. Okay, Mr.

9 Carbone, would you identify the Exhibit again?

10 BY MR. CARBONE:

11 Q Okay, it's 17 Romeo Romeo. Do you have that, Mr.

12 Wood?

13 A I have that.

14 Q Can you point out to me where the training is on

15 this? Is this your certificate record summary? If I were

16 to look for training for an employee, where would I look?

17 Would I look at this item?

18 A That's true, this would be one of the things that

19 you would look at.

20 Q Okay, but if you were doing an audit, what would

21 you be looking for?

22 A I'd be looking at this list compared to what's in

23 the training record itself, and making sure that they

24 matched.

25 Q So in other words, what you would do is -- is

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

375

1 this the training record you would go against?

2 A If that is in fact the training record, yes.

3 Q Okay. This is Mr. Hall. This is his training

4 records, what you sent to us. I'm not going to go through

5 it for obvious time reasons, but I did go through the

6 summary, and I can't find but maybe one or two items that

7 are in that package that is on here. Can you explain why

8 none of the -- a lot of the information is missing from

9 this? I have nothing on the fourth page as far as hours

10 trained. I have very little on the third page as far as

11 hours trained. Is baroscope -- is that something retrained

12 every year as part of an RII?

13 A That's -- no, I don't believe baroscope training

14 was annual requirement RII. What I have in front of me

15 right now, though, -- some of the things you're looking

16 for -- all of the things you're looking for is in what you

17 have in Inspector Hall's records. His RII training. His

18 authorization -- a copy of his authorization card, and the

19 whole nine yards.

20 Q I understand that. But if you're doing an audit,

21 your inspectors are not going to come up and look through

22 this entire package to verify his or her records are

23 accurate, would they?

24 A Yes, they would.

25 Q How many mechanics do you have? Or did you have

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

376

1 at Emery?

2 A About 340.

3 Q And they're going to look 340 of these packages

4 during an audit?

5 A Yes, they would. We done an audit of the

6 aircraft training records, and so did the NTSB during their

7 visits.

8 Q What are the various places that paperwork being

9 placed in to records be stored or placed?

10 A What type of various paperwork --

11 Q B-2 checks?

12 A The aircraft records section.

13 Q Who handled the training for the vendors?

14 A Quality control.

15 Q And what were the -- quality control handled the

16 training for the vendors? Did you bring your manuals and

17 train the vendors, say TTS?

18 A Yes, we did.

19 Q What about for systems?

20 A No, we didn't.

21 Q What would a 40 hour systems cost be comprised

22 of?

23 A Forty hour DC-9 systems cost?

24 Q Yes, please.

25 A It would be comprised of a description of the --

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

377

1 each ATA -- primary ATA system of the aircraft and its

2 operations and functions.

3 Q And you cover the whole airplane? Those ATAs in

4 40 hours?

5 A That's correct. Well, we cover the ATA chapters

6 that are outlined in that -- in that training document.

7 Q Are you supposed to be covering troubleshooting?

8 Troubleshooting techniques taught in there?

9 A I wouldn't know. It's been quite some time since

10 I reviewed that training material.

11 Q The MPPM states that you're supposed to be

12 teaching troubleshooting techniques --

13 A And we did.

14 Q -- and I looked in the book and I didn't really

15 see anything. How is this covered?

16 A It was covered by specific training courses, I

17 believe. We provided a number of those to you.

18 Q Right, I received the manuals, and what I'm

19 saying is that 40 hour course, I looked through several of

20 the manuals and I couldn't find anything on troubleshooting.

21 Where is that supposed to -- because according to the MPPM,

22 troubleshooting and maintenance are supposed to be taught in

23 the courses.

24 A Uh-huh.

25 Q And I couldn't find anything, and then I saw

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

378

1 things on familiarity, what a valve does, what an actuator

2 does, but not anything as far as maintenance or

3 troubleshooting.

4 A If I recall, what you had requested at the

5 prehearing was the maintenance training courses on those

6 particular ATA chapters, to which we did provide you even

7 over and above that.

8 Q Correct.

9 A But with regard to providing you all of the very

10 comprehensive training program that Emery had, we didn't

11 provide that.

12 Q So you would have provided something else in that

13 40 hours?

14 A Pardon me?

15 Q You're providing something else in that 40 hours

16 in lieu of what I got?

17 A Correct.

18 Q Were rotable parts -- rotable aircraft part

19 numbers with serial numbers traced to specific positions in

20 the aircraft? If you had a GCU in the number two position,

21 would you be able to find out from some record that that GCU

22 is in that position on that aircraft?

23 A We had a tracking system in our computerized

24 material planning program, and the serialized components

25 were, yes, tracked by aircraft by installation date and

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

379

1 time. So, yes, you would be able to go back into that

2 system and detect when it was tracked.

3 Q How many people did you have in the records

4 department for aircraft maintenance logs, B-2 checks? How

5 many people in that records department?

6 A From memory, I would say overall there was 15.

7 Q Fifteen. And can you tell me how long it would

8 take -- what the process was by which the paperwork made its

9 way back to the records department?

10 A From what point?

11 Q From the mechanic signing off the item.

12 A To?

13 Q Recording it.

14 A I'll use the example of Dayton. If the

15 maintenance paperwork was performed at Dayton, obviously

16 it's normally in the evening, so that would be the next day

17 that it would come to the aircraft records section, which

18 would first go to quality assurance for auditing.

19 Q And how long would this process take?

20 A It varies. If the paperwork comes through QA and

21 there's no errors, there's no concern, then it's an

22 expeditious process. If there's error corrections,

23 different things like that, then that would lengthen out the

24 process.

25 Q Did your department maintain responsibility of

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

380

1 overseeing the auditing of paperwork from Tennessee Tech?

2 A Yes, we did.

3 Q And how was this routed back to the vendor for

4 correction?

5 A Again, it goes directly to the QA inspection

6 reps, which they do 100 percent audit of all paperwork

7 performed against even the requested task items. If errors

8 are found in that particular paperwork, then the FAA

9 approved error correction procedure that we had, it was a

10 formal process to which a form is filled out with that

11 original document, and then that's returned, in what you

12 just said, Tennessee Tech, for correction of that paperwork.

13 Q And how long is a work package kept for? Say a

14 B-check?

15 A Until it's replaced by a light check.

16 Q And what would be considered a light check?

17 A Another B-check.

18 Q Another B-check? I thought you said before that

19 a B-check sequence check was different. Each sequence, B-

20 1,2,3, and 4 -- weren't they different?

21 A They were only different in the fact that it

22 broke down the entire inspection program.

23 Q So if a B-3 was done, a B-2 paperwork would have

24 been disposed of?

25 A That was the procedure, that's correct.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

381

1 Q But you didn't repeat the cards in the B-3 that

2 you had in the B-2, so how could that be --

3 A But we had, in the inspection program, obviously,

4 the cards that was performed.

5 Q I understand that, but what I'm saying is that if

6 you have a sequence check, and you do a B-2 check, when you

7 do the B-3 check, the cards are not the same. Is that

8 correct? They're not all the same?

9 A Yes, they're not all the same. That's correct.

10 Q So how could one override the other, if they're

11 not the same?

12 A It's -- in the fact of the accident aircraft,

13 they were all there.

14 Q What was all there?

15 A B-1, B-2, B-3.

16 Q According to the -- according to the addendum for

17 the maintenance factual report -- and if you'll give me one

18 second, I'll find it -- it's Exhibit 11-Hotel.

19 A I have that.

20 Q You have that. According to the addendum, it

21 says that the B-2 signed work cards had been previously

22 discarded per EWA maintenance policy and procedures

23 retention of records program.

24 A That's correct.

25 Q Did you not just send us the B-2 cards?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

382

1 A That I did.

2 Q So I guess what my question is is where have

3 these been for the last two years?

4 A In locked down records.

5 Q In locked down records. You yourself were part

6 of the investigation group for maintenance?

7 A That's correct.

8 Q And did you not know, as director of records and

9 part of the group, where these records were?

10 A No, actually I'm the person responsible for this

11 process, but the story is this. When the records were

12 reviewed -- in fact, I was part of that committee back in

13 February and March, and there was no finding so to speak, or

14 challenges of the record process. In October of 2001, the

15 maintenance group chairman had requested for -- as what this

16 letter -- your letter is referring to -- a copy of those

17 signed-off B-1, 2, and 3 checks. I was working as a

18 consultant for the company at that time and did know where

19 the location of the locked down records were -- they were in

20 multiple boxes, and I, myself, physically went back and went

21 through those records, and I could locate -- we actually

22 took the records, if you will, out of the file cabinets, and

23 picked the files up and set them down in a box so that we

24 would leave them in like recommendation -- or like example.

25 When we'd done that, I went into the files to

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

383

1 which those were to be kept in, and I found the B-1 --

2 signed off B-1. I found the signed-off B-2. I found the

3 non-routines -- or signed-off B-3. I found the non-routines

4 for the B-2, but I did not locate in that file, the signed-

5 off B-2 card. So then I went to the current records

6 management people there at the time and asked where could

7 this be? Could it be misplaced? So forth and so on, and at

8 that time, per the verbiage that's on this letter, the

9 assumption was that it was removed as a light check was

10 performed and it was not in the record.

11 By your request, I believe it was three weeks

12 ago, Mr. Hagquist, in fact, asked -- he said, you know, we

13 need to go talk to aircraft records manager and pursue this

14 search again, because we really have been extremely faithful

15 in providing anything and everything that the NTSB has

16 requested through this whole process, beginning in February

17 of 2000.

18 So in that search, I went to the aircraft records

19 manager, asked her -- I obtained signed-off B-1, B-3 checks

20 from this file where they were meant to be kept. Where else

21 could that other check be? Her response to me, first

22 response was did you check the error correction file, and

23 that file would have been kept at the QA area -- Quality

24 Assurance auditors -- they actually maintain that file until

25 it's corrected, and then that's handed back to records. The

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

384

1 record's updated and put into the file.

2 So the lady and I went back again to the locked

3 down files, went through the file that I had looked in, and

4 then started searching through the other files, to which we

5 found the physical folder of the error correction file from

6 quality assurance that had signed-off B-2 check card in it

7 with a letter of correction from placed on top of it, to

8 which I sent to you. And that's the occurrence of that

9 situation.

10 Q So am I to understand that two years ago, when

11 these were asked of you to bring them forward, you could not

12 find them two years ago.

13 A They weren't asked of me two years ago. They

14 were only asked of the company in October of 2001.

15 Q Were you on the maintenance group?

16 A That's correct.

17 Q So were you not generally asking for those things

18 as part of the group, as part of the records for Emery to

19 bring forward as part of the accident investigation?

20 A And we did do that at that time.

21 Q But it didn't happen until two years later that

22 these records became available again..

23 A I mean they were never asked for until two years

24 later.

25 Q Well, no. I have it here. I have "the signed

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

385

1 off work cards for B-1 and B-3 checks were made available

2 for review." This is on the addendum. This is part of what

3 you agreed to as part of the group when you initialed the

4 final report. "The B-2 signed work cards had been previously

5 discarded." But now two years later they have -- they

6 reappear again. And I'm just kind of curious why they

7 appear now as opposed to two years ago.

8 A This document you're reading from, when they were

9 not available to send to you, was September --

10 MR. HAGQUIST: Mr. Chairman, with all due

11 respect, Mr. Wood responded to this question a number of

12 times now.

13 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: He hasn't answered it yet.

14 MR. HAGQUIST: I think he gave a rather lengthy

15 explanation in finding the questioned B-2 cards in the error

16 correction files.

17 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: What I'm hearing is that he did

18 respond to that and how he found it, but he hasn't answered

19 why he didn't pursue a search in the fall of 2000. And it's

20 a trend. Let me advise Emery right now, that I see a trend

21 of evasive answers here -- would be non-responsive. So just

22 be conscious of that fact as this hearing proceeds. And

23 would the witness please answer the question.

24 THE WITNESS: Certainly. Could you ask me the

25 question again?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

386

1 BY MR. CARBONE:

2 Q I'm not even really sure how I phrased it. But

3 as being part of the maintenance group investigation of this

4 Emery accident, were you not privy to where these records

5 were kept, and why didn't you produce them for two years?

6 A At the initial lock down of the records, and the

7 review of the records, as I was part of that team, obviously

8 I had the knowledge of where the records were at. They were

9 readily available. They were provided to the team and the

10 team reviewed them. I'm talking in March of 2000. The next

11 time the -- the next time this record was requested by the

12 NTSB was October of 2001, and the Exhibit that you're

13 reading from, 11-H, is an answer at that period of time.

14 Q Alright, I'm sorry, you said October 2001 the

15 NTSB re-asked for these records?

16 A That's correct.

17 Q And why is it that we're only getting it in April

18 of 2002?

19 A Because it was requested again by you a few weeks

20 ago, as I mentioned.

21 Q When did you find the records? When did you

22 actually -- I have to understand something -- when did you

23 actually find the records -- actually find the B-2 check

24 cards?

25 A Just -- I don't know the exact date that I sent

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

387

1 them to you, but it would be that day. The day that I

2 located them in the lock down aircraft record files was the

3 day that I FedEx'd -- actually Mr. Hagquist FedEx'd these

4 items to you.

5 Q They were there all the time? And you do

6 understand that these records, these particular B-2 check

7 cards were part of the investigation, and that for two years

8 we didn't have those check cards to use to come to a

9 conclusion to this accident.

10 A They were never asked for.

11 Q In the beginning, those cards --

12 A They were never asked for by the NTSB until

13 October of 2001.

14 Q Mr. Wood, I'm looking at the addendum to the

15 maintenance records Chairman ...tual.

16 A And I'm familiar with that.

17 Q Alright, along the same lines, Mr. Hagquist had

18 sent -- I'm sorry -- Exhibit 17-Uniform. Mr. Hagquist had

19 forwarded the B-2 check on April 24, 2002. When we had

20 received the first copy, one of the check cards was missing

21 and I had called up and it turned out to be coincidentally,

22 the B-009 card.

23 A Correct.

24 Q Was missing. Also in its place was a blank piece

25 of paper. Okay? Can you tell me why it was not sent? Why

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

388

1 that particular card, which turned out to be a very

2 important card was not sent with the regular package?

3 A I can tell you exactly why that card wasn't sent.

4 When the original B-2 check was taken out of the error

5 correction file, the B-009 card, I believe it was, I removed

6 -- it was laying on the desk I was working at. I removed

7 that card to go down to look at the maintenance training

8 records of the individual that signed that off -- the actual

9 original card. When I came back to my desk, I inserted that

10 card back into the deck, handed it to a lady to be copied.

11 It was copied, and then we forwarded it to you. When Dick -

12 - when I come in the next day and Dick said the card is not

13 there, I said, it has to be there.

14 So I went back to the original card deck that's

15 locked up in the records, pulled it out and what I had done

16 is inadvertently, whether this is a trend or not, turned the

17 page over and so that's the reason it had copied on the

18 wrong side.

19 Q I'm not going to name the individual personally

20 for the record, but the individual who did do the B-009 card

21 that day, you did say you reviewed his records? His

22 training records? You just said you checked his training

23 records.

24 A I went down to check, but as far as doing a

25 complete review of his training records, I did not.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

389

1 Q Why did you go down to check them?

2 A Routine.

3 Q Did you find that he was qualified to sign off

4 that card?

5 A Without looking at his training records, I

6 couldn't be sure. What I did note, though, that he had

7 received induct training in January of the previous year.

8 He had worked at Emery with a contract company, that

9 maintenance contract company that we had there, for some

10 period of time.

11 Q I'm sorry --

12 A Prior to being hired.

13 Q You say that you went down to check his records,

14 but you don't know if he was qualified. What did you go

15 down to check?

16 A Just the basic records, a routine check.

17 Q Basic records.

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: While they're doing that, Mr.

19 Wood, you referred to somebody in aircraft records, the

20 manager, as her. Her has a name. I wonder if you would

21 share that name with us.

22 THE WITNESS: Jill Greek.

23 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Creek? Like the --

24 THE WITNESS: Greek, like the country.

25 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And with so much under you, I

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

390

1 see that you had maintenance training, quality control, as

2 well as quality assurance and reliability, you have to have

3 some assistance. Were they all managers? Who was the next

4 under you dealing with those respective areas?

5 THE WITNESS: They were all managers.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Well, let's name the

7 individuals. Who had maintenance training?

8 THE WITNESS: Bruce Robbins.

9 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And quality control?

10 THE WITNESS: Ed Jones.

11 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And assurance -- quality

12 assurance?

13 THE WITNESS: Ed was also over that at the time.

14 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And reliability? Who ran the

15 reliability program?

16 THE WITNESS: I'm trying to knock that one out.

17 I don't -- I've got his face, I don't have his name, sir.

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Well, would you provide that

19 for us?

20 THE WITNESS: Certainly.

21 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And I don't think the folks are

22 ready yet.

23 MR. CARBONE: Yeah.

24 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: You're ready?

25 MR. CARBONE: Yes.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

391

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, carry on, please.

2 BY MR. CARBONE:

3 Q I just want to ask, as the director of QC, why do

4 you think that it is necessary or allowable to toss a

5 previous sequence card -- a sequence check away when --

6 because if I'm not mistaken, the check card -- the check

7 package that follows has to either supersede or copy the

8 previous check in order for that check to be thrown away.

9 It has to be either an exact duplicate, which means that it

10 accomplishes all that's done on that check -- for instance,

11 the B-2 check card -- everything that was accomplished on

12 the B-2 check card, according to the MPPM, you come in with

13 a B-3 check card, everything that is done on the B-3 has to

14 mock or copy what is done on the B-2. How do you justify

15 throwing away a B-2 check card when the two checks are

16 different?

17 A It's -- it was an FAA approved procedure that we

18 had.

19 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Can I --

20 MR. CARBONE: No, go ahead, please.

21 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: You know, we've been playing

22 this approved and accepted game for a while. Everytime you

23 submit a revision to your manual in 1999, was that approved?

24 THE WITNESS: To -- to --

25 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: When you wanted to change your

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

392

1 maintenance manual -- something came up, such as I see three

2 FCDs that we're going to talk about in a minute -- did you

3 get those approved by the FAA?

4 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, I did.

5 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: You got them approved. 709 --

6 you know what 709 -- in the recodification of the rules are?

7 It used to be 609. That means the FAA can call you back in

8 and requisition you and force you to take the A&P test again

9 because you don't understand the basic knowledge required to

10 hold the ticket. And let me tell you something, in my

11 opinion, you are walking out on that diving board real quick

12 here today. Real quick. Why don't you finish with this

13 witness and we're going to deal with this in a little

14 different way.

15 MR. CARBONE: Okay.

16 BY MR. CARBONE:

17 Q I'm going to ask you to look at three Exhibits:

18 17 Uniform, 7 - O and 7 - K. And this is just something I

19 wanted to touch down before. I'm going to look at 7-O

20 first.

21 (Pause.)

22 Q Seven was the log page from November 25th. Well,

23 my question is -- you still --

24 A Go ahead. I have 17-O.

25 Q I'm putting all these three Exhibits together,

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

393

1 because I'm trying to find my own trend here. But I notice

2 that there is no reference on sign off of reversed dampers,

3 and I'm kind of curious why this would get through QA, who's

4 doing the audit.

5 A At this particular time, under Emery's approved

6 and accepted procedures, the requirement to physically put

7 the maintenance manual reference was not a requirement at

8 that time -- for a period of over nine years. The -- it was

9 however changed by the request of the new PMI, Harold

10 Camden, and we'd worked up the procedures out of the

11 regulation of what actually what has to be put down, but we

12 went to the -- the company went to putting the maintenance

13 manual reference for all the common sense reasons. But at

14 this time, and having been audited for a number of years of

15 using the regulation, that's the reason why that maintenance

16 manual reference is not there.

17 Q Okay. Can you please look at item 7-Kilo, page

18 two? This is a D-check card from TTS. This is a D-check

19 card from TTS that should have gone through your auditing

20 group.

21 A Did you -- what's the Exhibit number?

22 Q 7-Kilo.

23 A 7-K. I have that.

24 Q Can you tell me what is exactly happening on

25 lines 2, 3, and 4, because I don't understand who's signing

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

394

1 and if they're stamping over something. And to me this --

2 how would this have passed through -- how would this have

3 passed through the auditing?

4 A Sir, we're looking at the first page --

5 Q Page two. Page two.

6 A Page two.

7 Q 6-Alpha-3502? And looking at steps 3 and 4, I

8 see a stamp over two signatures.

9 A Without seeing the original, I see what you see

10 now.

11 Q Okay. And I'm going to -- the last thing I'm

12 going to refer you to is Exhibit 17-Uniform, that's 1-7-

13 Uniform.

14 A I have that.

15 Q And the dates are double stamped. I have what

16 looks like 1/21 over 1/20 -- can you tell me what date that

17 was done?

18 A There's -- I could in one of the Exhibits which

19 represents the log page of --

20 Q I'm not talking about the log page. I'm talking

21 about looking at this B-check package, can you tell me what

22 day this was done?

23 A From looking at it, I would say the 21st.

24 Q Okay, well, I don't think I could see which one

25 it was done -- on the 20th or the 21st. But the thing that

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

395

1 concerns me is that all these three items relate back to one

2 incident, which is the elevators. You have your B-9 card,

3 which is part of that B-package. Same thing, I don't know

4 what date it was done. This particular D-check card relates

5 to the right elevator tabs, and this log page relates to

6 those elevators again. Now you could say that these are

7 random situations that came up in the middle of nowhere, but

8 I have three that relate right back to the elevators on

9 079Uniform. And I can't understand how they got passed the

10 auditing. If you can't look at these things and tell me

11 what took place on the D-check card, why this was not

12 returned to TTS and what date this B-check was accomplished.

13 A Well, out of all fairness, the 17-U was in the

14 error correction file. So it was under review, because I

15 also, when I looked at this, I also was concerned with was

16 it the 21st or was it the 20th. So this document was in the

17 error correction file to process. The one thing I will -- I

18 will tell you all that the -- that these cards that we're

19 reviewing that's very difficult to review, have been copied

20 several times, and with -- I can tell you right here face to

21 face that the original is much more legible than this.

22 MR. CARBONE: I have no more.

23 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you, Mr. Carbone.

24 Mr. Hilldrup, is there anybody else at the technical panel

25 that has a question.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

396

1 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Just a couple

2 questions, and I was looking to perhaps get a copy of the

3 page of the MPP that talks about the collection of records

4 and discarding of records, and I haven't gotten it yet, so

5 I'll hold off a minute.

6 DIRECT EXAMINATION

7 BY HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP:

8 Q But just a couple points going back to your -- a

9 couple of earlier questions, Mr. Wood, about the transfer of

10 the certificate and was Dayton the central hub or -- I don't

11 want to say headquarters, certainly, but was that the main

12 operation from the beginning with Emery?

13 A From?

14 Q From 1989, roughly?

15 A It was the -- it had always been the hub since

16 1989. The company's headquarters were in Palo Alto.

17 Q Right, which was the reason for the holding

18 office -- the certificate holding office being San Jose, is

19 that correct?

20 A That's correct, sir.

21 Q Did Emery request that the certificate be

22 transferred out of San Jose, specifically, or just -- or to

23 Cincinnati? Do you remember the nature of the request from

24 a company standpoint? Was it simply, we think it should be

25 moved out of San Jose, or specifically was it to be moved to

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

397

1 Cincinnati?

2 A The request was formally made to move it to the

3 Great Lakes region.

4 Q To the Great Lakes region. Okay. Thank you very

5 much. That's all for now.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: The witness will not be

7 released, so we'll have plenty of time to bring him back if

8 we need him. I guess we'll start with ALPA.

9 DIRECT EXAMINATION

10 BY MR. GUNTHER:

11 Q Mr. Wood, are mechanics limited to the tasks they

12 are signed on?

13 A The mechanics are trained and authorized to

14 perform certain tasks, that's correct.

15 Q What about sign offs as a function of the

16 training?

17 A That would be part of that also.

18 Q Mr. Carbone asked you before about the training

19 record that was provided -- the cover sheet that listed the

20 number of hours. Your company, if you have somebody that

21 for instance is authorized to do an RII, and you need to

22 determine whether or not that person is trained and

23 qualified to do that, how do you guys do that?

24 A There -- as I referenced a minute ago, there is a

25 maintenance authorization listing to which I provided the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

398

1 NTSB, and on that particular listing it lists all the

2 mechanics that Emery has, and it has literally a block in

3 there for what training and what authorizations that they

4 have received.

5 Q How do you determine the validity of that

6 comprehensive list?

7 A That list is a mirror image of the authorization

8 that is provided and kept in the mechanics' training

9 records.

10 Q When quality control or quality assurance does an

11 audit of let's say training records of those mechanics, what

12 documents were you using for that audit?

13 A When the quality control people went over -- the

14 manager, in fact, done the audit on the training records.

15 When he would go over and perform that, he'd perform it

16 roughly every 30 days, so because of the revision of the

17 training records, it wouldn't put him behind. But when he

18 would go over to do that, he would check the -- we have a

19 computerized listing of the training that Kent received, as

20 Mr. Carbone had put in Exhibit. He would compare that to

21 the current training that's provided -- that was -- a copy

22 of the certificate that's in the maintenance training

23 records.

24 Q So he's looking at computer records? He's not

25 necessarily looking at the original documents?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

399

1 A He's looking at the original documents. He bases

2 -- he actually audits the original document against the

3 computer list. That is -- and also he has a listing of

4 currency with regard to people who are coming due on

5 authorizations.

6 Q I want to finish it. I'd like to ask about also

7 is could you explain to me what it is for somebody to be an

8 RII. In other words, to have inspection authorization at

9 Emery's ...

10 A Emery has, as is in fact, in the guidelines of

11 the 121 regulation, designated required inspection item

12 personnel. And they perform, again, the function of

13 performing those required inspection items that are listed

14 in Emery's UPP. They perform those functions by which the

15 training and the authorization they're given.

16 Q Are they required to have special training?

17 A Yes, they are.

18 Q How about requalification?

19 A Yes, they are.

20 Q How long have you been with the company?

21 A I was with the company for nearly 11 years.

22 Q So you were there before the accident, and then

23 after the accident?

24 A Yes, sir, I was.

25 Q In that time, did the company ever RII any PFEs?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

400

1 A What's a PFE?

2 Q Professional flight engineer.

3 A Did we authorize a PFE to be an RII?

4 Q Without initial training, without recurrency?

5 A No, we did not.

6 Q Did the company at any time issue cards to PFEs?

7 A No, we did not.

8 Q That gave them RII authorization without that

9 training?

10 A No, sir.

11 MR. GUNTHER: I have no further questions.

12 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Thank you. The Boeing Company?

13 DIRECT EXAMINATION

14 BY MR. BREUHAUS:

15 Q Yes, thank you. Mr. Wood, just a few questions

16 along the -- having to do with the B-checks that we've been

17 discussing throughout the day. Emery has B-checks broken

18 down into the B-1, 2, 3, and 4 that can be done out in line

19 maintenance.

20 A That's correct.

21 Q And do you also do B-checks in heavy maintenance

22 if the opportunity arises?

23 A If it's required.

24 Q And would that still be broken into the same kind

25 of a break down, or would it be a complete B-check?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

401

1 A It would be -- I wouldn't have anything to do

2 with the production plant inside, but as a routine, it would

3 be just the C-check.

4 Q Would the level of detail vary or differ between

5 a check done in heavy versus a check done on the line, for,

6 say the B-2?

7 A Significant level.

8 Q Could you explain or expand relative to the steps

9 in the B-2 check?

10 A Emery's B-2 -- B-check program, as well as its

11 entire program, was built from the Douglas maintenance

12 program. We used the on aircraft maintenance planning

13 document to develop that process. It has two primary

14 processes. You have a visual inspection and/or a detailed

15 inspection, as is listed in that OEMP manual. The -- as for

16 the OEMP, the C-check level is a very comprehensive look at

17 the aircraft, very detailed, a lot of panel removal and

18 sometimes as many as possible. Whereas the B-check is a

19 line check function, which is primarily a servicing and a

20 visual inspection.

21 Q So did you just say that in the -- the B-check

22 was done in the heavy check facility, things would tend to

23 be opened up to a greater degree than when you did your line

24 maintenance.

25 A I'm not aware of what the B-check was done at the

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

402

1 heavy maintenance facility, other than the request that we

2 give them in a package that we give them to perform it.

3 Q And you heard the previous testimony relative to

4 the discussion on verifying the -- securing the attachments

5 et cetera?

6 A Yes, sir.

7 Q What was your opinion of those as to whether or

8 not the faring on the DC-8 would be removed or not removed

9 due to -- to accomplish that check?

10 A It would not be, and that was based on you going

11 back to the OEMP, but also, Emery back in 1990, done

12 comparison of the Douglas C and -- well, D and E check as

13 you would refer to, the OEMP, we also got the current United

14 DC-9 package. We also got the current Flying Tigers package

15 at that time, and we'd done a comparison, or a transition if

16 you will, to bring Emery's program in alignment with the

17 current Douglas OEMP and also a current industry operating

18 fleet.

19 MR. BREUHAUS: Okay, thank you. No more

20 questions.

21 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Tennessee Technical Services?

22 DIRECT EXAMINATION

23 BY MR. HOFFSTETTER:

24 Q Dave Hoffstetter, Tennessee Technical Services.

25 Tom, I'm a little confused about the RII and designated

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

403

1 inspector program. As I understand what you were saying

2 earlier, the -- there is not a full time inspector on the

3 ramp at Dayton. Is that correct? There's not a full time

4 inspector assigned just to work the mechanics at Dayton?

5 A That reported to the quality control department,

6 at that time, no, there was not.

7 Q And you use designated inspectors to inspect

8 whatever work was accomplished at Dayton?

9 A That's true.

10 Q Who supervised the mechanics? Did they have

11 supervisors or lead mechanics?

12 A They had leads and supervisors.

13 Q And were the leads typically the people you would

14 give RII inspection -- or designated inspection authority

15 to?

16 A If -- if they were -- if they met the

17 qualifications for that. But by memory I couldn't say that

18 they would be the ones that you would pick.

19 Q Well, it seems like we've -- if there's a main

20 facility for Emery, that's Emery controlled, it's Dayton,

21 and if -- if we're going to do work at Dayton, then we're

22 going to designated people that primarily report to the

23 maintenance department to do the quality issues -- when

24 you've got -- I don't know how many you had there, it must

25 have been a couple hundred anyway -- that seems like a real

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

404

1 conflict to me within what I understand is the basic concept

2 of separation between quality control and maintenance.

3 A Oh, no, there wasn't any conflict at all because

4 the fact that Dayton was just a transit station where the

5 aircraft came in and went out at night. And all the primary

6 B-check stations were all out at other line stations. So

7 there was very minimal -- there was even a minimal

8 requirement for RII people to be there, because all the

9 people were focusing on was log page discrepancies, no

10 inspections, no called out inspections.

11 Q And there was no full time inspector assigned to

12 -- at Dayton. Or at the B-check stations, as I understand

13 it. The B-check stations also used designated inspectors?

14 A That's true.

15 Q And it's possible that a mechanic would work for

16 the first four hours as a mechanic, and then work for two

17 hours as an inspector to buy the guy working next to him's

18 work, and go back to work as a mechanic?

19 A I don't have knowledge of that.

20 Q Okay. I just -- I just -- it seems like a real

21 conflict. It seems like contradictory to everything that I

22 would normally do as a repair station or have done in other

23 airline environments.

24 You had spoke to the B-2 check being locked up in

25 a corrections file with a letter of correction form attached

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

405

1 to it?

2 A Correct.

3 Q And what was the reason for the -- the form must

4 have had a reason why it was locked up or what the

5 discrepancy was.

6 A It -- I don't recall the exact reason. It was a

7 step in the B-2 check that was not done correctly and -- as

8 I recall, in the information -- I sent this to Mr. Carbone -

9 - it was an operational check of the cargo vent door. The

10 vent on the cargo door.

11 Q That was not done correctly or not signed off

12 correctly?

13 A It wasn't signed off correctly.

14 Q You had stated that there is troubleshooting

15 training accomplished by Emery.

16 A That's correct.

17 Q Would -- if we accomplish troubleshooting

18 training, there should be some basic criteria that the

19 mechanic would use to accomplish troubleshooting. You know,

20 there should be either a trouble shooting guide that Emery

21 produced or some direction in that training as to where to

22 go, or a logical sequence of events that would happen during

23 troubleshooting. Yes or no? There should be in the

24 troubleshooting training, there should be some indication in

25 the manual as to what are logical steps? How do you do

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

406

1 troubleshooting? Apparently Mr. Ungemach said they don't

2 necessarily follow the troubleshooting guide in the manual,

3 but they have troubleshooting training. And I was just

4 wondering if you could clarify that for me a little bit.

5 A Their only -- all its personnel are given the EWA

6 training procedures for the use of the maintenance manual.

7 The troubleshooting process is part of what's contained in

8 the maintenance manual. Engineering produced -- even before

9 we had engineering -- engineering produced specific

10 troubleshooting processes for the use of maintenance service

11 letters and published to the line maintenance stations, to

12 which we also sent to the heavy maintenance facilities.

13 Q Do you know if the elevator dampers change is a

14 RII item in your manual?

15 A Not without going back to look, but from memory,

16 of all these issues, I believe it was.

17 Q The manual that I have does not list it. I don't

18 know, I was just curious as to with it not being listed as

19 an RII item, why the log page would be signed off as RII

20 when they did the troubleshooting on the dampers in Dayton,

21 and if there's any way to know if there was anything else

22 done that would require an RII signature.

23 A And I don't -- I don't have the knowledge of

24 that.

25 Q You had stated you were involved with the initial

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

407

1 CPCP program coordination with Douglas, I think, at that

2 time?

3 A The Douglas in 1990.

4 Q Emery has a significantly longer time between

5 corrosion inspections, as I understand the industry average.

6 Is that correct?

7 A Industry -- Emery has a FAA program, approved by

8 its PMI to be in compliance with the CPCP program.

9 Q The CPCP program -- the longest time that I'm

10 aware of in the Douglas program is the six year repeat item,

11 is that correct per your memory?

12 A I believe so from the initial inspection

13 requirements.

14 Q And what's the longest interval that Emery has in

15 their program?

16 A I don't recall specifically.

17 Q Does 12 years sound right?

18 A It could, but again, if I could look at the

19 document I could confirm that.

20 Q I was just wondering how you -- my understanding

21 of that AD is that in order to deviate from the Douglas

22 recommended program, you have to submit a plan through your

23 PMI to the ACO in Seattle. Is that your understanding?

24 A Actually at that time it was through the AC

25 office in LA.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

408

1 Q And did Emery do that?

2 A Yes, we did.

3 Q I'm a little interested in your records retention

4 program. I understand that -- what we say happens with B-

5 checks. At the time of the accident, Emery used ME-09s at

6 various stations to document maintenance that was

7 accomplished on the aircraft. That was what Dave Ungemach

8 said. Does that sound correct to you?

9 A The non-routine form --

10 Q The non-routine form.

11 A -- was used for B-checks, that's correct.

12 Q It was also used for line stations, through

13 flights, overnights, A-checks, any other type of maintenance

14 at that time.

15 A No, actually, being familiar with the review of

16 the paperwork on behalf of the log pages, it was only used

17 for the B-check. Those discrepancies were placed in the

18 aircraft log book.

19 Q Do you have a retention policy on the non-routine

20 forms? Would it be the same as the package they were

21 originally accomplished with?

22 A I would have to look at the -- our retention

23 policy was based off of the FARs -- requirements, and

24 without looking at that again -- I haven't looked at that

25 for quite some time.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

409

1 Q How was the selection of people to be trained

2 accomplished? In other words, if you had a 40 hour

3 familiarization course, or an eight hour troubleshooting

4 course on air cycle machines or CFM-56, who decided who

5 would go to that training program?

6 A We had in the MPP, a list of maintenance training

7 that was provided and required items that had to be

8 received. And above the ... indoctrination, the 40 hour fam

9 course for the DC-8, the special -- then mechanics then were

10 scheduled for power plant courses. There was a selection

11 process when you got into the specific avionics training,

12 because that was given to a specific group of avionics

13 mechanics, and may not have been given to them all. That

14 was -- the actual -- who got what training was then changed

15 to where the training department actually issued out, on a

16 90 day basis, a list of people to receive training courses

17 that they had not received.

18 Q Was that monitored by their supervisors, that

19 they had input into that program, or was it a separate

20 function run strictly by training? They would send out --

21 we want to see the following 12 people receive this training

22 in the next 90 days, and then it was up to the supervisor to

23 schedule or did they just push the schedule out?

24 A In the beginning the supervisors done the

25 scheduling. But when it was changed, the training

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

410

1 department done the scheduling.

2 Q And who was -- who ran the training department?

3 A At that time?

4 Q Yes.

5 A Bruce Robbins.

6 Q Flight control vendors. Who was involved with

7 the selection of vendors to provide flight controls to

8 Emery, do you know?

9 A I do. Emery has, again in their MPP, a very

10 comprehensive maintenance vendor selection process, to which

11 the director of material, the director of engineering, the

12 director of quality control, and the director of heavy

13 maintenance are all involved in the initial submittal of an

14 FAA-approved 145 vendor to be selected to provide service.

15 When it goes through that process for their review, then

16 it's forwarded to the manager of quality control who checks

17 the CASE registry and any other input from the industry with

18 regard to the status of the vendor, how many other airline

19 customers he may have, and so forth and so on. And then it

20 even goes to the manager of reliability, at that particular

21 time, who also does a check on any vendor information that

22 he may receive through the reliability information process.

23 At that time, if that's agreed upon, and that

24 vendor approval is approved by all those parties, then a QA

25 auditor is sent to that vendor to perform a CASE level 3

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

411

1 audit.

2 Q In the case of the flight controls on the

3 accident airplane, those were purchased from a company

4 called Willis Group, and Willis had them overhauled or

5 purchased them or had some arrangement with CCI. Was CCI at

6 that time a approved Emery vendor, or would it be necessary

7 for them to be an approved vendor if you were purchasing

8 flight controls from them?

9 A Two questions.

10 Q Yes, sorry.

11 A Fine. The answer to the first one. If we

12 purchased it from a -- whatever that company was --

13 Q A broker.

14 A -- a broker, no, they would not be required to be

15 on our approved vendor list. But in fact, we did go out and

16 audit that particular vendor. As you know, specifically,

17 Emery had a very, very heavy check schedule for the year

18 2000 and there was multiple number of flight controls

19 changed, and to meet that requirement even then, when the

20 number of DC-8 vendors are small to begin with, not to

21 mention the 145 heavy maintenance vendors, our selection is

22 small -- we had went out with this intense campaign to go

23 out and establish quality 145 approved vendors. We went out

24 and done an audit.

25 Q Did you do the audit on CCI before or after these

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

412

1 controls were purchased, or do you know?

2 A To my recollection, we did it before.

3 Q Willis Aeronautical was not a 145. It's a

4 broker.

5 A Yes.

6 MR. HOFFSTETTER: I don't have any more questions

7 right now.

8 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Thank you. Federal Aviation

9 Administration.

10 DIRECT EXAMINATION

11 BY MR. STREETER:

12 Q Mr. Wood, if you would please take a look at

13 Exhibit 17-RR again. Those are the training records for

14 that mechanic.

15 A Yes, sir.

16 Q When you were discussing this earlier, I thought

17 I heard you say that one of the items that would be on here

18 would be RII training. And I'm having -- I don't find RII

19 training listed for the DC-9 or the DC-10 on the page -- the

20 first page there. On the next page over, the 727 subjects

21 are listed, I do see an RII B-727 familiarization course.

22 My question is am I missing it in here somewhere, or is the

23 RII training included in another subject matter area?

24 A It is missing on this physical page, and that is

25 true. In -- this is Mr. Hall, so at the time we had

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

413

1 submitted this, some time back, from my memory now which

2 NTSB has a copy of, he is -- he does have the training.

3 It's in his training file. He has his training, he has his

4 authorization. From what you and I are looking at here

5 today, is -- and I'm not that knowledgeable -- is if the RII

6 should be listed on here, it's not.

7 Q Okay.

8 A On another document that I gave the NTSB, it is.

9 Q It is. Alright, fine, sir. Now, let me

10 apologize to you and everybody else in the room, because

11 we've now got to look at FARs and I hate going through this,

12 but let's give this a try. Over on Exhibit 7-T, 7-Tango,

13 and I'd better check here real quick, because I'm not even

14 sure if that's on -- no. Okay, I do not see 7-Tango listed

15 on Mr. Wood's list of items, so I'll have to check here with

16 Member Goglia and see if it's acceptable to use that or

17 what?

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: The witness is a certified A&P

19 mechanic. He is familiar with the FARs, and in his job he

20 should be intimately familiar with them. So please

21 proceed.

22 BY MR. STREETER:

23 Q Okay, Mr. Wood, do you have a copy of 7-T there

24 coming up. If you would look towards the back, it's on page

25 eight, and we're talking about FAR 121.380.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

414

1 A I'm there.

2 Q And in your job you would have been generally

3 familiar with this section, is that correct?

4 A That's correct.

5 Q Okay. Now I want to go over to the last page

6 there, and at the top of the page in Section C(1), and this

7 is where it refers to the -- basically to the retention time

8 of records that are required for return to service and the

9 release of an aircraft, and so on.

10 A That's correct.

11 Q Now, going back to the earlier discussions on the

12 B-2 check, as I understand it, the B-2 check was never

13 really thrown out, it was just misplaced somewhere.

14 A That's correct.

15 Q But at some point during the investigation,

16 somebody thought it had been thrown out and statements to

17 that effect were apparently made. And I believe that in the

18 discussion you mentioned that -- there was discussion that

19 you felt that that was allowable because the B-2 check had -

20 - there had been -- another B check had taken place.

21 A The company felt that.

22 Q The company felt that. Okay. Then I guess what

23 I would say is, I need to question on Subsection C(1) there,

24 it basically says that we're going to retain these records

25 until the work is repeated, superseded by other work, or for

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

415

1 one year. Is it the company's belief -- or was it the

2 company's belief at the time that it was thought these

3 records had been discarded, was it the belief that the B-2

4 check repeated what was on the B-1, or superseded it?

5 A If we had that Section out of the MPP that

6 addresses that, it would be -- neither one of those two

7 words.

8 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Sorry to interrupt.

9 I've got that page from the MPP on the visualizer. I think

10 all the parties should have a copy now, if it's appropriate,

11 Mr. Chairman, we could --

12 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Certainly. Proceed.

13 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: AV could you

14 illuminate the visualizer? Good luck. It's a little hard

15 to read, but -- For the record, this is from Emery's MPP

16 maintenance policy and procedures manual. It's Chapter six,

17 page 14, the effectivity date is January 15, 2000.

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Mr. Julius, could you slide the

19 page down so we can see the top of it, please? Thank you.

20 And Mr. Hilldrup, since this is your Exhibit, just where are

21 we looking?

22 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: It's a new Exhibit,

23 11-K.

24 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: And on the page, where are we

25 looking?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

416

1 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Oh, I'm sorry,

2 paragraph eight, I believe gets into the area of questioning

3 that Mr. Streeter's pursuing, but from a company literature

4 standpoint.

5 (The document presented, marked

6 for identification as Exhibit

7 Number 11-K, was identified.)

8 BY MR. STREETER:

9 Q Do you have that document in front of you, Mr.

10 Wood, or do you -- are you working off the --

11 A I have it.

12 Q Okay, good. And I just got that myself, but I

13 presume what we're going to look at is that paragraph eight

14 down there on it, inspections.

15 A That's correct.

16 Q And it looks like the company's procedure is "the

17 actual sign off document may be discarded upon recompliance

18 of the inspection, the inspection is superseded by a higher

19 inspection, or one year has elapsed." Would -- when I asked

20 you about the words in the reg, you said that they were

21 different words. Would it be one of these?

22 A Well, yes, the words that you just actually read.

23 Q I guess what I'm trying to get at is do we -- is

24 it the company's stance then that the B-2 was a recompliance

25 of the B-1 or that it superseded it with a higher level

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

417

1 work?

2 A At -- the company's position as in the letter

3 that they sent to NTSB, that it was superseded.

4 Q Superseded. Okay.

5 MR. STREETER: That's all I have, sir, thank you.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you, and Emery.

7 MR. HAGQUIST: We have no questions.

8 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: To the technical -- Board of

9 Inquiry. Mr. DeLisi.

10 DIRECT EXAMINATION

11 BY MR. DeLISI:

12 Q Thank you. Just one question, Mr. Wood. At the

13 time of the time of the accident, did Emery have a

14 designated RII -- did Emery have designated RII personnel at

15 Mather Field?

16 A I'm not sure.

17 Q What do you believe would have happened if some

18 maintenance was performed at Mather that required an RII

19 sign off?

20 A The Reno station, which is close to that, did

21 have that personnel there. That's from my memory right now,

22 so it would have -- the aircraft would have been on the

23 ground until that personnel was moved into that station and

24 that was addressed.

25 MR. DeLISI: Thank you. That's it.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

418

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Dr. Kushner.

2 DIRECT EXAMINATION

3 BY DR. KUSHNER:

4 Q Well, I mean I'm still a little bit confused

5 about the definitions or interpretation of the B-2

6 essentially recomplying with the B-1 or B-3 recomplying a B-

7 2. Do you have anything other than what you've already said

8 that could clear that up?

9 A It -- give me a minute, please. No, the simple

10 fact of this subject was that the company in October of last

11 year, per their accepted procedures, this was the position

12 that they took.

13 DR. KUSHNER: Fine.

14 DIRECT EXAMINATION

15 BY CHAIRMAN GOGLIA:

16 Q Okay, work cards. Who approves them at Emery?

17 A The work cards --

18 Q Yes, if you had change work cards in the package,

19 who would have approved the change?

20 A They would be approved first by the -- Emery's

21 MRB program, and then sent to the PMI for approval. That's

22 an arrangement that in fact we had with the PMI.

23 Q Do you sit on that MRB board?

24 A I did, sir.

25 Q Okay, do you have -- I know you've been busy up

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

419

1 there, but did the name come to your mind with the face that

2 you -- who was in charge of reliability?

3 A Yes, it did sir, Robert Crabtree.

4 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, can we go back to the

5 Board, technical panel? Would you like a minute?

6 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

7 BY HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP:

8 Q No, sir, and I apologize, I do want to just go

9 back to the MPP once again. We don't need it on the

10 visualizer per se, but we've heard about what you -- your

11 recollection of the company's decision or -- decision on

12 that point was about the supersedure of the B-2 by the B-3.

13 What's your personal opinion?

14 A Personal opinion.

15 Q Do you believe the B-3 supersedes the B-2 in the

16 Emery program?

17 A The very first thing that I would have to say,

18 based again on history, is -- at Emery -- is -- and I'm

19 adding things here -- Emery had also done C-1, C-2, C-3 and

20 C-4, and those -- that was primarily a Douglas block check,

21 but there was a few cards that were not done in some of the

22 checks. This procedure, which we've all read here, A,B, C,

23 and D, when Emery received in -- if a C-1 check was

24 performed, which that would have been the first check after

25 the B-check, a C-1 would be done, the old C-4 that would

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

420

1 have been done with the D, at that time would have stayed in

2 the drawer with the D. When the C-2 check was done and came

3 back, the C-1 would be removed from the active record files.

4 That's a procedure that we had in place for -- for over ten

5 years, was audited by the -- all different agencies and

6 found to be in compliance.

7 Q Thank you. Back again to my question about the

8 B-3 and the B-2, though. Your experience and what you know

9 about the B-3 and the B-2 checks at Emery, could you give me

10 a personal opinion of whether you think the B-3 superseded

11 the B-2?

12 A It did in functionality, that's true.

13 Q I'm sorry, could you be a little more specific?

14 I'm trying -- and specifically, there are portions that

15 appear in the B-2 that do not appear in the B-3, and perhaps

16 vice versa. There are certainly some portions that may be

17 repeated, but overall, as a segmented B-3, does that

18 segmented B-3 check supersede the B-2, and if you could be a

19 little more specific, please?

20 A Per Emery's procedures that they had in place, or

21 is this back to my personal opinion?

22 A I'd like your personal opinion, thank you.

23 A Per the procedures and per the regulation, and

24 having it being managed by 121 air carrier ... maintenance

25 analysis program, I would not see the requirement to

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

421

1 maintain the B-2 in this case. However it was.

2 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: That's all. Thank

3 you.

4 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, the parties. ALPA?

5 Tennessee Tech? Okay.

6 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

7 BY MR. HOFFSTETTER:

8 Q Tom, if -- was that record retention policy

9 actively maintained by Emery? I mean did they actually

10 remove the C-2 check after the C-3 was accomplished -- from

11 the aircraft records?

12 A From the active files?

13 Q From wherever -- from wherever you had records.

14 A It was removed from the active files, that's

15 true.

16 Q And then where did it go?

17 A Actually went into storage.

18 Q So you still had -- you still have the B-1

19 checks, even after the B-2 was accomplished? It doesn't

20 come out -- disappear forever? So you could go back to long

21 term storage, or whatever you want to call it, and find all

22 of the records for any aircraft that you had?

23 A There's a very strong likelihood.

24 Q My feeling was maybe that had something to do

25 with the numbers of repairs that we were getting involved

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

422

1 with on lease returns. If I have 80 repairs on an aircraft

2 and have no documentation, maybe that relates to the -- to

3 not maintaining the records on the aircraft?

4 A Now the records that were required to be kept on

5 the aircraft, were maintained. That was aggressively

6 audited over a ten year period of time, with -- with -- like

7 through ten years, there was five, six, seven NASIPs,

8 RASIPs. Less than six initial findings.

9 Q Are you familiar at all with aircraft 994?

10 A No, sir, I'm not.

11 Q The DC-862?

12 A No, sir.

13 Q Who in the Emery organization is responsible for

14 keeping the maintenance -- the maintenance data coordinated

15 with the operations data? Is there some group that -- let

16 me give you my example and maybe you can tell me where the

17 hole is. We did an overhaul on 994. The aircraft was

18 scheduled for a test flight. The flight engineer came in

19 and the -- he was checking the stabilizer trim, buttons on

20 the yoke, and the stabilizer trim buttons did not disconnect

21 the autopilot. That's on his check list. His contention

22 was that something was -- some error was installed in the

23 airplane, or defect was installed on the airplane during the

24 heavy maintenance visit. And I would assume this would have

25 -- this airplane was four months away from a lease return,

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

423

1 so it had to have been in the fleet for a while.

2 We got into wiring diagrams, and the maintenance

3 manual, and the aircraft had been modified in 1977 and wired

4 so that the autopilot would not disconnect when the

5 stabilizer trim was moving. We spent about 70 or 80 man

6 hours doing research on the airplane, but there was no

7 record anywhere within the operations group that anyone ever

8 made me aware of that operations could -- knew that that

9 airplane was different from the rest of the fleet.

10 Who -- if they had a problem, and the airplane

11 didn't comply with the checklist, they had to notify

12 somebody, and where does the coordination come in? How do

13 you update the checklist or the procedure to keep everybody

14 in the same loop?

15 A Specifically, the operations and the engineering

16 group would have taken care of that, and all of those items

17 would have been given to engineering, and engineering and

18 operations, along with the technical publications of

19 operations and maintenance -- everybody worked very closely

20 together to identify what those issues were, if there was

21 any modifications that needed to be performed and paperwork

22 associated with that distributed through training manuals,

23 training, and so forth and so on. But yes, sir, there was a

24 very comprehensive vehicle.

25 Q Well, how do we know when an airplane that's been

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

424

1 operating for at least a year with -- I'm sorry, how do we

2 end up with that type of situation? It baffled me. There

3 were several similar situations where we would end up in a

4 debate with the flight crew about what was supposed to

5 happen. They had a fairly detailed check list of what they

6 thought was supposed to work, and it didn't match what was

7 really on the airplane or what the maintenance manual.

8 A Well, again, I'm sorry I'm not familiar with that

9 aircraft or that event.

10 Q Where is long term storage for the records? If

11 we're only maintaining the last C-check and the last

12 overhaul -- and I assume that's in a file cabinet somewhere

13 where it should be very convenient to locate. The previous

14 C checks and the history that was provided to Emery when

15 they leased or purchased the airplanes, where is that

16 facility? Is that within the same building there at Dayton,

17 or is it off site or?

18 A It's within the same building.

19 Q So the records or retention policy really has

20 nothing to do with the destruction or throwing away records,

21 just a movement from short term storage into long term

22 storage?

23 A No, the record retention policy is a program in

24 place, and Emery abided by that program.

25 Q I'm confused, but I'm -- thank you.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

425

1 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Well, the ranks of the confused

2 continue to grow. Who do I leave -- the Boeing company, did

3 I ask you? No questions. The FAA? No questions. And

4 Emery Worldwide? No questions. Okay. We had a number of

5 questions there, is anybody -- ALPA? Any additional

6 questions since TTS had several there? Anybody on the

7 technical panel have any additional questions. Yes, Mr.

8 Pudwill.

9 DIRECT EXAMINATION

10 BY MR. PUDWILL:

11 Q Mr. Wood, in an attempt to try to clarify this

12 issue with the B-3 and B-2 checks, could you indicate

13 whether or not the inspection that was performed during the

14 B-2 check, i.e., the B-009 card, inspection for security of

15 the control tab and elevators, et cetera, was performed

16 during the B-3 check?

17 A Not without looking at the two cards that cover

18 that. The B-2 check that you're referring to?

19 Q The B-2 check card number B-009, which is one of

20 the Exhibit, Exhibit 7-O, the question is, was the

21 equivalent of that inspection performed during the B-3

22 check, and if not, how would the B-3 check supersede that of

23 the B-2 check and thereby allow Emery to discard the B-2

24 package?

25 A The -- again, I would have to look at the cards,

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

426

1 but their program was their program.

2 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: What was the Exhibit number

3 again, Mr. Pudwill?

4 MR. PUDWILL: Exhibit 7-O.

5 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Would the witness please --

6 BY MR. PUDWILL:

7 Q I'm sorry -- let's see here. It's actually in

8 two locations, It's actually in 17-U, signed, I believe the

9 last page, page four, 11-I is an unsigned copy.

10 A I've got 17-U.

11 Q Should be the last page of Exhibit 17-U.

12 A Correct. This -- again, you'd have all three of

13 these checks, so -- and by memory, I don't know whether this

14 exact verbiage is on -- is on the B-3. I know it's on the

15 B-4.

16 Q As you indicated, yes, the Board does have all

17 three check packages, and we have reviewed all B-1, B-2, and

18 B-3 checks, and since it's not an Exhibit here, from my

19 perspective, yes, there is no overlap between the B-3 and

20 the B-2. And with that in mind, then I would ask, how would

21 Emery be able to discard the B-2 check package just because

22 the B-3 had been completed? Without the Exhibits before

23 you, it's really useless to go any further.

24 A That's true, but -- but the issue, I believe,

25 too, is the fact that it was not discarded. It was found in

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

427

1 the lock down records.

2 Q That's correct, but essentially what I would be

3 asking, how would it be justified to discard those? I

4 realize that they were not discarded.

5 MR. PUDWILL: I have nothing further on this.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, thank you. Anybody at

7 the Board of Inquiry? No questions, okay.

8 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

9 BY DR. KUSHNER:

10 Q Just out of curiosity, then, did Emery ever

11 actually throw away any of these records? Or everything

12 that went into long term storage, or whatever you call it

13 stayed there forever?

14 A That I can speak to because from the day of the

15 lock down of the records, I was the director of quality

16 control at that time. And the manager of records and myself

17 physically went in to the records room and used tape, I

18 believe at that time, to make it secure, and then we moved

19 them into a secure room. So -- and then we collected the

20 records that were located in the quality assurance area,

21 maintenance control, and I believe maybe reliability that

22 had to do with that aircraft, so we could get all the

23 records available for this record audit that was actually

24 performed. So those were locked down, put -- then placed in

25 boxes and put into a specific room --

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

428

1 Q Excuse me. That's not really the question I

2 asked. I was just trying to get a clearer picture on

3 company policy, whether any records were ever thrown away.

4 A Not that I know of. I was just presenting a

5 history of the fact that I had been hooked up to.

6 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Okay, Mr. Wood. Thank you very

7 much for your conversation, and you can step down, but

8 again, like all the other witnesses, I request that you stay

9 around here and -- until the end.

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: We will take a ten minute

12 break. When we come back, it's Mr. Robbins up next. Would

13 he just go directly to the stand, please. TTS, yes?

14 MR. HOFFSTETTER: Excuse me, Mr. Goglia. I have

15 some business I need to take care of. I wonder if it's okay

16 if we designate Sam Porter as spokesman for the company for

17 the next witness.

18 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Yes, that's fine. I understand

19 that these proceedings put burdens on everybody, especially

20 small companies, so, yes, that's fine.

21 MR. HOFFSTETTER: Thank you.

22 (Whereupon, a 20 minute recess off the record was

23 taken.)

24 CHAIRMAN GOGLIA: Mr. Hilldrup, will you call

25 your next witness, please?

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

429

1 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Before we get started

2 I'd just like to say I've been presented with a new piece of

3 evidence. It's a key for a Nissan. If it's yours, feel

4 free, come on up. I have no idea what kind of Nissan, but

5 probably better than what I've got. Come on up.

6 Next witness is Mr. Bruce Robbins.

7 Whereupon,

8 BRUCE ROBBINS

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

10 was examined and testified as follows:

11 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Your full name and

12 current address, please?

13 THE WITNESS: Bruce A. Robbins, 7785 West

14 Highland Avenue, Dayton, Ohio 45424.

15 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: And you're currently

16 employed by who?

17 THE WITNESS: Self employed.

18 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Briefly describe your

19 experience, please?

20 THE WITNESS: Briefly, 24 years in aviation, four

21 of that, U.S. Navy as aircraft electrician. Twenty years in

22 commercial civil aviation, basically about 15 years of

23 that's on the DC aircraft, mainly in the area of avionics,

24 but general maintenance. I spent -- in August of '89 I was

25 employed by Emery Airlines as a mechanic and was there for

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

430

1 11 years where I progressed up through management, spent

2 times in various departments. At one point I was the

3 manager of maintenance training and established their in

4 house maintenance training program. From there I was

5 promoted to the director of engineering, where I established

6 an engineering department.

7 In June of 2000, I left to go to a start up

8 airlines and held the position as chief inspector and they

9 neglected to get their funding at least yet, so I'm self

10 employed at this point.

11 HEARING OFFICER HILLDRUP: Thank you, sir. Mr.

12 Kevin Pudwill will be doing the questioning of Mr. Robbins.

13 DIRECT EXAMINATION

14 BY MR. PUDWILL:

15 Q Good afternoon, Mr. Robbins. I've got to change

16 my sequence here. Could you please describe your title,

17 duties and responsibilities when you first started working

18 for Emery?

19 A When I first started working I was a lead

20 avionics mechanic on the Dayton line.

21 Q And once again, since it was rather quick, could

22 you please identify, in order of succession, the various

23 other positions that you've held while employed with Emery,

24 including your title at the beginning of the accident

25 investigation.

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

431

1 A Yes. Lead avionics. Avionics supervisor.

2 Maintenance controller. Line supervisor. Manager of

3 maintenance training. And at the time of the accident,

4 director of engineering.

5 Q Could you provide additional details regarding

6 your duties and responsibilities as a maintenance

7 supervisor?

8 A As a maintenance supervisor, it was kind of

9 double duty. We took care of personnel issues, vacations,

10 time cards, things of that nature. We also assisted

11 mechanics with particular -- particularly hard problems on

12 an aircraft, helped to distribute people so that they were

13 most effective. People with certain specialties -- they may

14 not be assigned to work on that aircraft, so we would move

15 people around to make sure that we accomplished the work in

16 the time allotted.

17 Q Could you elaborate regarding your duties and

18 responsibilities while working for maintenance control?

19 A At the time Emery had four aircraft and general

20 duties as maintenance controller, you answer the phone

21 calls, you track the aircraft maintenance activities, did as

22 much as you could to coordinate parts movement and any

23 troubleshooting tips or information you could help the

24 mechanics with in order to fix an aircraft.

25 Q Approximately how long did you work in

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064

432

1 maintenance control?

2 A I would say eight months, maybe nine months.

3 Q Could you explain why you left maintenance

4 control?

5 A Promoted to become a -- it was a promotion to be

6 a line supervisor over the Dayton RAMP activity, not just

7 avionics, but all the maintenance.

8 Q Okay. Could you elaborate regarding your duties

9 and responsibilities while acting as the manager of

10 maintenance training?

11 A When I was initially promoted to manager of

12 maintenance training, there was one individual assigned to

13 do maintenance training, basically records keeping. There

14 was outside contractors hired to train Emery's mechanics.

15 In the course of my six years as the manager of maintenance

16 training, I hired instructors, had a $1.5 million

17 maintenance facility built, developed the training manuals

18 that you guys see -- at least that's a portion of some of

19 the manuals that you have received.

20 And towards the end of my period as the manager

21 of maintenance training, I had -- let me back up a little

22 bit. I was an instructor as well, and did instructor duties

23 for several of the classes, mostly in the avionics, but

24 indoc and things of that nature. As I hired on -- as Emery

25 hired on more instructors, then my duties lightened up

Executive Court Reporters

(301) 565-0064