NEW YORK - s4story -- On April 17, 2024, Daryl Guberman, a 40-year quality assurance expert, arrived at a Senate subcommittee hearing under the Department of Homeland Security chaired by Senator Richard Blumenthal. Despite being uninvited, Guberman presented documented evidence exposing Boeing's decades-long quality system failures and systemic conflicts of interest.

Boeing required AS9100 certification from suppliers starting in July 2002 but never achieved certification itself for 23 years. In June 2024, VP of Quality Elizabeth Lund admitted in a Reuters interview that Boeing was "willing and prepared" to obtain certification, confirming that more than 12,000 commercial and 400+ military aircraft were built in an uncertified environment.

More on S For Story

• Crossroads4Hope Welcomes New Trustees to Board of Directors as Organization Enters 25th Year of Caring
• Inside Secondhand Stories: The Hidden Gem Etsy Shop Where Books Are Chosen with Heart
• PromptBuilder.cc Launches AI Prompt Generator Optimized For ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok & Claude
• UK Financial Ltd Advances Compliance Strategy With January 30th CATEX Exchange Listing Of Maya Preferred PRA Preferred Class Regulated Security Token
• NOW OPEN - New Single Family Home Community in Manalapan

From 2014 through 2024, Boeing held a seat on the Management Systems Accreditation Committee (MSAC), which can grant, suspend, or withdraw accreditation for AS9100 registrars. Boeing employee Tim Lee served on MSAC while leading the International Aerospace Quality Group, operator of the OASIS supplier database. ANSI–ANAB issued mandates, including "Heads Up 22," requiring suppliers to pay database fees or risk losing certification. Boeing enforced compliance on suppliers while remaining uncertified, controlling the system it was meant to follow.

In 2009, the FAA delegated authority allowing Boeing to self-certify aircraft designs and critical systems, including MCAS. Boeing employees acted as FAA designees while being paid by Boeing, merging manufacturer and regulator roles and eliminating oversight independence. This dual authority enabled Boeing to dictate supplier compliance, control accreditation, and approve its own aircraft designs, creating profound systemic risk.

To validate public claims, Guberman conducted on-site investigations in October 2024 at Boeing facilities in Everett, Renton, Auburn, and Northfield. Interviews with 300–600 employees revealed widespread unawareness of AS9100 requirements and no evidence of internal auditing aligned with the standard.

More on S For Story

• Kintetsu And Oversee Announce New Partnership
• The Myth of Atlantis, Reconsidered Through Forbidden Texts
• Save 10 Percent Off KeysCaribbean's Newly Added Luxury Vacation Home in Marathon
• Why 'Instant-Liquidity' Gaming is Dominating the Nordic Tech Demographic
• STATEMENT: Shincheonji on Religious Freedom Controversy

Guberman's findings highlight that Boeing's long-standing dominance over certification enforcement, accreditation committees, and FAA self-certification created an environment where oversight was structurally compromised. Suppliers were tightly controlled while the prime manufacturer remained uncertified, and critical testimony from experts was excluded from the Senate hearing.

This is not a technical oversight. It is a systemic institutional failure with safety, fiduciary, and regulatory implications across aerospace, defense, and global supply chains. Regulators, lawmakers, and industry stakeholders must confront Boeing's dual control over certification, accreditation, and FAA self-certification to restore public trust and ensure accountability.

BOEING NEVER CERTIFIED TO AS 9100 (JULY 2002 TO PRESENT)
https://youtu.be/1OhkFSsDXCo