A decision regarding federal oversight of Boeing goes beyond a single company or a single industry. It speaks to the role that a regulatory state plays in protecting consumers and holding multinational corporations accountable.
When Boeing resumes delivery of its troubled 787 Dreamliner, the Federal Aviation Administration announced this week, federal regulators will certify the airworthiness of each plane. That authority typically is left to the manufacturer; but problems with the 787 — and the lingering specter of the 737 Max — has led federal inspectors to withhold that power.
“This will allow the agency to confirm the effectiveness of measures Boeing has undertaken to improve the 787 manufacturing process,” FAA officials said.
The decision will have an impact on Washington. Boeing is the state’s second-largest private employer, behind Amazon, and it contracts with hundreds of suppliers throughout the region.
Problems with the 787 surfaced in late 2020, including gaps between structural joints in the fuselage. Since then, Boeing has delivered 14 Dreamliners, while 110 jets needing repairs have been stockpiled. Boeing has estimated the cost of the delivery halt to be $5.5 billion.
This follows issues with the 737 Max. Crashes in 2018 and 2019 led to an extended grounding of that model and revealed how lax regulatory oversight contributed to the disasters. Since the FAA approved the 737 Max to return to service in December 2020, following changes to the flight control system, regulators have inspected each Max prior to delivery.
For the 787, the FAA will retain certification authority until: Officials are confident that Boeing’s quality control meets federal standards; the company has a plan to rework planes that are in storage; and delivery processes are stable.
Still, there is pressure for additional oversight. Key congressional Democrats have asked the Department of Transportation Inspector General Office to review what they see as a failure to hold Boeing accountable for lapses that contributed to the 737 Max crashes. Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., told The Seattle Times he is “concerned about what is going on deep within the FAA.”
For example, a congressional investigation into the crashes revealed that Boeing officials worked to downplay the importance of the flight-control system that later resulted in the crashes. Boeing employees serving as the FAA’s authorized representatives went along with the decision.
Boeing has undergone a change of leadership since then, with CEO Dennis Muilenburg leaving in 2019 and receiving a severance package worth more than $60 million. Hopefully, the company also has undergone a change of culture.
But, as noted, this is not about a single company or a single industry. It is about governmental management of private business for the benefit of the public. As The General Principles of Congressional Oversight spell out on the House of Representatives website, oversight “provides the legislative branch with an opportunity to inspect, examine, review and check the executive branch and its agencies.”
Federal agencies are important for ensuring the quality of our water, air, roads, food, cosmetics, electronics, vaccines and other essentials of daily life. Congress is tasked with overseeing those agencies; when an agency allows a business to police itself, the consequences can be deleterious to the public good.
That is the purpose of FAA officials inspecting each 787 Dreamliner prior to delivery. We all are safer because of it.
