This came in the mail today.  I post it to share it with all of you.  -GFS

 

____________________________________________________________________

July 22, 2008

 

POGO Letter to the Boeing Company regarding Airtech International Inc.’s product substitution

 

Related: POGO Letter to the U.S. Air Force Suspension and Debarment Office, July 22, 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

July 22, 2008

 

 

Boeing Corporate Offices

100 North Riverside

Chicago, Illinois 60606

 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes

P. O. Box 3707

Seattle, Washington 98124

 

Boeing Integrated Defense Systems

P. O. Box 516

St. Louis, Missouri 63166

 

 

Re: Airtech International, Inc.

 

To Whom It May Concern:

 

My organization, the Project On Government Oversight, revealed in May that The Boeing Company, along with other aerospace manufacturers, was being supplied with bogus materials by a composite materials supplier called Airtech International, Inc.  See: http://www.pogo.org/p/transportation/ta-080522-faa.html

 

As you know, your company requires strict compliance with its materials specifications.  Many of Boeing’s specifications state that suppliers cannot change material after qualification unless material is re-qualified. For example, attached are numerous Boeing specifications which state that a supplier cannot change material, its source, or the methods of manufacture after the material is qualified without a re-qualification of the material. [Attachment A]

 

Airtech, on a vast scale, has supplied bogus materials or changed the manufacturer or manufacturing process without proper notification to its customers, according to a 2006 Army Criminal Investigation Command letter to the Air Force, which states, “At one time or another, Airtech has supplied some fours of nonconforming product to every aircraft manufacturer in the world.”  Boeing is explicitly stated as a company which Airtech defrauds. Also, as stated by the Army letter, “Airtech at its own discretion, routinely changes the composition, the manufacturer or the manufacturing process of products without disclosure to its customer, which in most case would require requalification of the product.”  [Attachment B]

 

One of the greatest risks is that “These products are originally qualified for safety concerns. Changes to the products or processes could result in contaminations to the end product, which could result in the loss of parts or safety issues if the part is put into use,” according to the Army.  Specifically, instances of product substitution were confirmed at Vought Aircraft on its subcontract work on manufacturing of the longeron accessory compartment in the Boeing C-17 program for the U.S. Air Force.   [Attachment B]

 

Does the Army Criminal Investigation Command letter concern Boeing since it was concluded that Airtech, on a vast scale, is falsifying certifications on shipment to you and your subcontractors?

 

Why is Airtech still an approved Boeing supplier if they are changing material after qualification?

 

On your specifications [Attachment C], release film, flash tapes and peel plys are considered contact material and, in some cases, peel ply is a secondary bonding material on both composite parts and metal bond parts. Does Boeing consider this a safety concern since, as stated by the Army, if contaminants are left on the finished part due to substitution, this can ultimately contribute to composite delamination or other safety or maintenance issues?

 

If you have any questions or request assistance or further information, do not hesitate to contact me at 202-347-1122.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Nick Schwellenbach

Investigator

Project On Government Oversight

 

To See Attachments, go to document at www.pogo.org.  Support Project On Government Oversight!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements