Read the complete article from ABC News, FAA seeks $3.1 million in fines from Boeing over safety violations, 2024 midair panel blowout.

According to the article, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is seeking $3.1 million in fines from Boeing over safety violations, including ones related to an Alaska Airlines jetliner losing a door plug panel on its fuselage in midflight.

The proposed penalty is for safety violations that occurred from September 2023 through February 2024, the FAA said.

That period includes the January 2024 blowout of a paneled-over exit door — called a door plug —- on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 shortly after it took off from Portland, Oregon.

None of the 171 passengers or six crew members on the flight were seriously injured. Pilots the plane landed safely back at the airport.

The NTSB Investigation

In June, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said its 17-month long investigation found that lapses in Boeing’s manufacturing and safety oversight, combined with ineffective inspections and audits by the FAA, led to the door plug blowout.

The FAA said that it identified hundreds of quality system violations at Boeing's 737 factory in Renton, Washington, and Boeing subcontractor Spirit AeroSystems' 737 factory in Wichita, Kansas.

Among other violations, the regulator also found that a Boeing employee pressured a member of Boeing's ODA unit, which is tasked with performing certain inspections and certifications on the FAA's behalf, to sign off on a 737 Max airplane “so that Boeing could meet its delivery schedule, even though the ODA member determined the aircraft did not comply with applicable standards.”

Arlington, Virginia-based Boeing has 30 days to respond to the FAA.

Boeing’s Response

In a recent statement, Boeing said it is reviewing the agency's proposed civil penalty, noting that the company put in place a safety and quality plan last year, under FAA oversight, that aims to enhance safety management and quality assurance in its airplane production.

“We regret the January 2024 door-plug accident and continue to work on strengthening our safety culture and improving first-time quality and accountability across our operations," the company said.

The Max version of Boeing’s bestselling 737 airplane has been the source of persistent troubles for the company since two of the jets crashed, one in Indonesia in 2018 and another in Ethiopia in 2019, killing a combined 346 people.

The Justice Department reached a deal in May allowing Boeing to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading U.S. regulators about the Max before the two crashes.

Boeing was also in the news in June when a 787 flown by Air India crashed shortly after takeoff and killed at least 270 people. Investigators have not determined what caused that crash, but so far they have not found any flaws with the model, which has a strong safety record.

Discussion Questions

  1. Explain the responsibilities of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is the national aviation authority of the United States. It is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation and is responsible for regulating and overseeing all aspects of civil aviation within the United States. Core functions of the FAA include:

    (1)  Air traffic control;
    (2)  Safety regulation;
    (3)  Certification;
    (4)  Airspace management;
    (5)  Airport infrastructure;
    (6)  Environmental regulation; and
    (7)  Unmanned aircraft systems.

    The FAA derives its authority from several key laws, including: (1) the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, which created the FAA to ensure the safety of civil aviation; (2) the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, which removed government control over airfares and routes but kept the FAA in charge of safety regulation; and (3) the FAA Reauthorization Acts, which empowers Congress to periodically reauthorize the FAA to ensure that funding and operational mandates are current.

  2. As indicated in the article, the U.S. Justice Department reached a deal in May allowing Boeing to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading U.S. regulators about the 737 Max airplane. In your reasoned opinion, should the Justice Department have agreed to such a deal? Why or why not?

    This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. The Justice Department has discretionary authority to decide whether to enter a deal with a defendant. The exact terms of the deal are also discretionary and subject to negotiation, including whether to allow the defendant to avoid criminal prosecution.

  3. As indicated in the article, the proposed settlement is for safety violations that occurred from  September 2023 through February 2024, a period that includes the January 2024 blowout of a paneled-over exit door, called a door plug, on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 shortly after it took off from Portland, Oregon. None of the 171 passengers or six crew members on the flight were seriously injured, and pilots landed the plane safely back at the airport. In your reasoned opinion, should the fact that no one was seriously injured or killed affect whether the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) imposes financial penalties in this case? Why or why not?

    This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. Without question, the January 2024 incident involving a door plug on a Boeing 737 Max could have been much worse, including the loss of life. As indicated in the article, the $3.1 million in fines the FAA seeks from Boeing accounts for violations that occurred from September 2023 through February 2024, including the January 2024 incident. To put the $3.1 million in proper context, in 2024 alone, Boeing’s annual revenue exceeded $66.5 billion, although the company did incur an almost $12 billion loss that same year. The company faces significant challenges in at least the near term, given its recent safety record and the reciprocal tariffs other countries have and will impose due the tariffs the Trump administration has levied on those countries. According to Boeing, approximately 70 percent of its commercial airplane revenue historically comes from customers outside the United States. Whether the “punishment fits the crime” in this case is obviously a decision the federal government (including the FAA and the court that has the authority to approve the settlement) must make.