20090325012369I

(-23)ON APRIL 3, 2009, I PARTICIPATED IN A SOSAP ERC MEETING AS THE FAA REPRESENTATIVE. DURING THE MEETING A REPORT WAS REVIEWED THAT INDICATED TWO AIRCRAFT MAY HAVE BEEN DAMAGED DURING DISPATCH (PUSHBACK) AT CHICAGO O’HARE ON MARCH 25, 2009. ONE AIRCRAFT, AN AIRBUS A319 OPERATING AS FLIGHT 628 TO DCA, WAS PUSHED OFF OF GATE B10 AND WAS BEING DISCONNECTED FROM THE TOW BAR. A SECOND AIRCRAFT, AN AIRBUS A 320, OPERATING AS FLIGHT 110 TO LAS, WAS THEN PUSHED OFF OF GATE B11 WITH A WING WALKER ON THE SIDE OF THE PARKED A319 DUE TO THE CLOSE PROXIMITY OF THE AIRCRAFT. AS THE WING TIP OF FLIGHT 110 HIT THE WING TIP OF FLIGHT 628 THE WING WALKER SIGNALED THE TUG DRIVER TO STOP. HE THEN WALKED OVER TO THE TUG DRIVE AND TOLD HIM THE WING TIPS HAD TOUCHED. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION AND A CURSORY LOOK AT THE WING TIPS FLIGHT 110 WAS GIVEN A SALUTE AND RELEASE FROM GUIDANCE. BY THIS TIME FLIGHT 628 HAD ALREADY TAXIED CLEAR OF THE AREA UNDER ITS OWN POWER. BOTH FLIGHTS DEPARTED O’HARE FOR THEIR DESTINATIONS AND LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. HOWEVER, DURING ARRIVAL AND WALK AROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED AT THE DESTINATION AIRPORTS DAMAGE TO THE WING TIP FENCE ON BOTH AIRCRAFT WAS DISCOVERED. ONCE THIS INFORMATION WAS KNOWN TO ME, SEPARATE FROM THE ERC, I OPENED AN INCIDENT INVESTIGATION DUE TO THE FACT UNITED AIRLINES FLEW TWO AIRCRAFT IN REVENUE SERVICE IN AN UNAIRWORTHY CONDITION. ON THIS SAME DAY I INFORMED JONATHAN LEGG UNITED AIR LINES FAA MAINTENANCE LIAISON, OF THE POTENTIAL NON COMPLIANCE. ON APRIL 7, 2009, THE ERC’S INVESTIGATION CONTINUED INTO WHETHER THE SOSAP REPORT FOR THE DISPATCH TUG DRIVER SHOULD BE REJECTED ON GROUNDS OF INTENTIONAL DISREGARD FOR SAFETY DUE TO HIS FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE FLIGHT CREW AND MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL OF THE POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO THE AIRCRAFT. AS PART OF THE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE DISPATCH TUG DRIVER’S AUTHORIZATION TO DISPATCH AIRCRAFT HAD BEEN REMOVED ON AN EARLIER DATE. IN A DISCUSSION WITH ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^, THE MANAGER OF RAMP TRAINING AT O’HARE, HE STATED HE HAD REMOVED THIS INDIVIDUAL’S AUTHORIZATION TO DISPATCH AIRCRAFT ON DECEMBER 18, 2008. WHEN ASKED WHY HE STATED THAT DURING A ROUTINE AUDIT OF TRAINING RECORDS IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL HAV BEEN GIVEN AUTHORIZATION TO DISPATCH AIRCRAFT BY A SUPERVISOR BUT THERE WERE NO TRAINING RECORDS TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT CLAIM. ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^ SAID THAT HE PERSONALLY TOLD THE EMPLOYEE, AND HIS SUPERVISOR, THAT UNTIL HE RECEIVED THE PROOF (TRAINING RECORDS) THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL WAS QUALIFIED HIS DISPATCH QUALIFICATION WOULD REMAIN INVALID. THE PAPERWORK WAS NEVER RECEIVED BY THE TRAINING STAFF AT O’HARE. ON ANY GIVEN DAY A “MANPOWER SHEET” IS SUPPLIED TO THE RAMP FOR THE NEXT DAYS OPERATION SO THEY KNOW WHAT RESOURCES THEY HAVE. THIS SHEET IS PRODUCED WITH INFORMATION FROM THE MANPOWER ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCE SUIT (MARS) WHICH SHOWS THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE SCHEDULED WORK FORCE FOR THE FOLLOWING DAY. THIS INVESTIGATION HAS DISCOVERED THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL’S MANPOWER SHEET CORRECTLY SHOWED HIM AS NOT BEING QUALIFIED TO DISPATCH AIRCRAFT. FOR REASONS YET UNKNOWN, POSSIBLY DUE TO A SHORTAGE OF RESOURCES, THE SUPERVISORY STAFF ASSIGNED HIM TO DISPATCH AIRCRAFT ON MARCH 25, 2009, CONTRARY TO HIS STATUS IN MARS. ON APRIL 9, 2009, AFTER OBTAINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE UNITED AIR LINES SUBMITTED A VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE VIA THE VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE REPORTING PROGRAM (VDRP). THIS INCIDENT IS CLOSED.