THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

SEATTLE — An Alaska Airlines passenger is suing the airline over injuries she says she suffered when deicer fumes entered an aircraft at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport on Christmas Eve.

Paramedics treated 25 people who were on an Alaska Airlines plane. Deicer fumes made their way onto the plane and irritated the eyes of passengers and the crew.

An attorney for passenger Arianna Morgan says she still feels the effects of that exposure and suffers numbness in her hands and fatigue.

The lawyer says the airline had a duty to ensure ventilation systems were closed during deicing.

The lawsuit was filed Monday in federal court in Seattle.

Airline spokeswoman Caroline Boren says the company is concerned about passenger welfare and is reviewing the complaint.

All 143 passengers boarded another plane and continued to Burbank, Calif.

By SUSANNAH FRAME / KING 5 News

Sparkling blue and white airplanes with the well-known Alaska Airlines logo painted on the side of the jets. This is the company image Alaska Airlines wants you to see.

But the KING 5 Investigators have obtained photos of the inside of some of their planes that the company would never want you to see: image after image of graffiti buried in the bellies of a number of planes where luggage, cargo and animals are loaded.

The pictures show area codes, scratched out symbols, and words that look like they could be related to gangs.
  
Is this harmless scribbling or really gang graffiti?  We showed our photos to five highly respected gang experts in Arizona, New York, California, and two in the Seattle area.  They all came to the same, disturbing conclusion.

“It’s definitely gang, and some major gangs are represented there, with some very violent rivalries.  No doubt about it,” said Richard Valdemar, who started the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department gang unit 33 years ago. He’s one of the top gang experts in the country.

“There is some real rivalry going on,” he said.

We asked him to analyze 62 images, all taken from Alaska cargo bins.  Like the other four experts, he said the graffiti shows gang members are working there, with full access to the airplanes.

 
  
“By definition, they are gang members, which means they are outlaws. They’re outside of our system of law. They answer to their own system of law, which is a criminal culture,” he said.

Experts say the word “norte” appears many times in the images, as does “XIV”, the Roman numeral 14. Together, they refer to the violent Norte 14 gang.  Members identify themselves with locations like Oakland , and area code 510.

Their number one rival – the Surenos — is represented as well, primarily from further south, like Orange County and Santa Ana and area code 714.

Experts say this gang answers to the Mexican mafia, or EME, which you can faintly see spelled out in one of the images.

Throughout the bins, the monikers are crossed out, which means a serious challenge by a rival gang.

“It’s not just ‘I’m claiming this territory’ it’s also an act of defiance and it demands retaliation,” said Valdemar.
  
There other references to “Tookie,” likely the Crips gang founder Tookie Williams executed in California last month.

What’s more, there are many references to smoking drugs on the job.

One picture shows a marijuana joint with the Seattle area code 206 reference nearby. Underneath the joint, a line reads: “reason for delays.”

And a dollar sign written on top of a person smoking pot means something else in the gang world.

“So, they’re saying they sling dope … sell dope,” said Valdemar.

Pilots tell their union they saw a dramatic increase in this kind of graffiti last May, after Alaska fired its ramp workers and hired a cheaper outside contractor, Menzies Aviation, to load the bags on planes at Sea-Tac.

The union says whoever’s to blame, they want something done.

“Where is their limit?  What else are they going to do or what are they capable of?  It’s against the law and they should be prosecuted, and not out there on our ramp,” said Capt. Paul Emmert of the Seattle Pilot’s union.

Asked by Alaska Airlines months ago to look into complaints about graffiti, the Port of Seattle Police concluded that gang graffiti does not always equal gang activity.

“It just doesn’t amount to anything that raises to that level of concern that we’d want to take any other overt action in dealing with it,” said Port of Seattle Police Chief Tim Kimsey.

Alaska’s director of security says the company’s satisfied with the Port police investigation.

“They have told us it is not an indication of gang activity,” Holly Geiger Zimmerman said.

“I think we have to go with the jurisdiction. The people with jurisdiction is the airport police unit. We know they are good at their job,” she said.

Port police say they even went outside their department and showed similar images to their own gang experts.

“A few of them in there may raise some concern, based on that input that we got back, but again, not enough that it tells us that we have an issue or problem here at Sea-Tac Airport,” according to Kimsey.

But the KING 5 Investigators learned Wednesday night that the port was warned. A local gang task force looked at some photos last summer and told the officer assigned to the case this looked like a serious problem. 

And that’s exactly what all the experts told us in our investigation.

And the people writing the graffiti don’t belong anywhere near an aircraft, said Valdemar.

“That is a criminal element, active in the bellies of the planes, with rivals also in the same proximity.”

Why did the port ignore the advice of experts?

When we confronted them with that question Thursday, they said they didn’t think the group had enough experience to draw any conclusions.

That doesn’t explain why they sought their advice in the first place.

The experts tell us the graffiti suggests strong connections to California and Seattle.

Alaska Airlines told us repeatedly it’s depending on the Port of Seattle to investigate.

To this date the Port has not interviewed one employee or done any surveillance, something our experts all say would be a very good idea.

FAA considers tighter scrutiny of airlines

Oversight of Alaska Air caused concern

Saturday, June 17, 2000
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF and NEWS SERVICES

The Federal Aviation Administration may change the way it monitors safety at the nation’s airlines after audits at Seattle-based Alaska Air Group Inc. showed potential weaknesses in the agency’s oversight.

The agency is preparing to announce next week whether it plans to take the dramatic step of suspending Alaska Airlines’ authority to perform heavy maintenance, FAA Administrator Jane Garvey said yesterday.

That move could force the carrier to park planes as they come due for heavy maintenance.

As Alaska awaits the FAA’s judgment, the broader changes could spark increased near-term scrutiny and audits for other U.S. airlines, Garvey said. She didn’t provide specifics of changes her agency is considering.

“I am not opposed to the audit of airlines because I think it is good to monitor ourselves as a precaution,” Garvey said. “With these audits we can make improvements to our training, oversight and maintenance systems. . . . We may, (although) I’m not sure we will.”

The FAA itself is coming under some scrutiny.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer first reported in April that federal agents investigating the crash of Alaska Airlines Flight 261 in January and the airline’s maintenance operations are also examining the FAA’s oversight of the carrier.

The FBI’s preliminary inquiry into the FAA was undertaken to determine if a formal criminal investigation is necessary, federal criminal justice sources said.

Agents with the FBI and the Transportation Department’s Office of Inspector General have been interviewing current and former FAA inspectors and supervisors along with Alaska Airlines personnel in the course of conducting the inquiry into the airline, the sources said.

One high-ranking criminal justice source told the P-I that the question facing prosecutors and agents “is how broad is (the investigation) going to be.”

A criminal investigation of the FAA would focus on whether Alaska encouraged criminally improper maintenance practices that were either sanctioned or ignored by the FAA.

The P-I reported last year that several FAA inspectors in the agency’s Flight Standards Division office in Renton say they had been pressured by superiors to take it easy on Alaska and were punished when they tried to strictly enforce federal regulations.

One Alaska mechanic working at the airline’s Sea-Tac hangar told the P-I that a San Francisco-based FBI agent questioned him a few weeks ago about the FAA and its relationship with Alaska.

“I told them, ‘The most I know of the FAA is they don’t come around very much,’” said the mechanic, who recounted the interview on condition he not be named.

The newspaper last year found many instances where the FAA appeared to have given a higher priority to maintaining a cordial relationship with the airline and operators of unrelated aircraft repair facilities than to imposing tough penalties for regulatory violations.

Some federal inspectors assigned to Alaska Airlines said they were penalized by supervisors when they were strict in enforcing federal regulations. Inspectors have been disciplined and moved to other jobs after airline managers or pilots campaigned against them.

Asked to comment on reports that local FAA inspectors, who spend all their time working with a particular airline, might get too close to the people there, Garvey defended the professionalism of her staff.

But, she added, she has begun rotating inspectors at an airline through various aspects of that carrier’s work and may move inspectors to other carriers for 60- to 90-day visits to bring in “fresh eyes.”

Regularly moving inspectors around the country, however, would be very expensive, she said.

The crash that sparked the Alaska FAA audit was Flight 261, which plunged into the ocean Jan. 31 about 20 miles northwest of Los Angeles International Airport after reporting trouble with its stabilizer trim. The reason for the crash is still unknown.

Garvey said part of the investigation included an internal audit of Alaska Airlines’ flight and maintenance systems by the FAA.

“All the facts are not yet in from the crash, so there is not a need to jump to any conclusions,” Garvey said, “But we have serious questions to ask ourselves, and this internal audit may be a basis for a change.”

She said she received a full report on June 9 from Alaska on why the agency shouldn’t suspend the airline’s ability to do heavy maintenance on their aircraft.

Alaska officials have said they expect to be able to resolve the FAA’s questions. They also say the carrier is close to wrapping up its own report. The carrier commissioned a panel of 13 safety professionals to examine its safety operations, and it could release the report in the next two weeks, according to Greg Witter, a spokesman for the company.

“It is our belief that we will be able to address all of the FAA’s concerns before any suspension of our authority to do heavy maintenance occurs,” Alaska Airlines President Bill Ayer said in a statement posted on the company’s Web site.

This copyrighted story just came from the Seattle Times website.

For those of you keeping score: I blasted Alaska Airlines with an e-mail from Melaque, accusing them of cutting corners and letting bean counters dictate airline policy. Therefore, this latest revelation comes as no surprise to me. I still have not been able to get any substantive information on my own MD-80′s emergency landing (on take-off) at Sea-Tac on January 20th. The FAA says Alaska filed “virtually nothing” on the incident that most of us thought was our last experience on earth.

In case you don’t feel like reading all the way to the end of the article, here are the last two paragraphs. They refer to the fact Alaska is under criminal indictment for falsifying maintenance records at its Oakland, CA service center in 1998. This also involved MD-80s.

In the Oakland case, the FAA, in an administrative inquiry, has proposed a $44,000 fine against Alaska, saying the airline violated federal aviation rules. The FAA also has recommended revoking the mechanic’s licenses of three Alaska supervisors.

Alaska and the supervisors are appealing.

In the criminal probe, the grand jury has requested the records of 11 MD-80 planes that were inspected and repaired at the Oakland facility and other Alaska facilities.

“Thank you for flying Alaska Airlines — for the same price you’re just seafood!”

Hasta luego,

Jefe

---

Alaska Airlines places manager on leave over repair questions

by Steve Miletich, Byron Acohido and Eric Nalder
Seattle Times staff reporters

Copyright 2000, The Seattle Times Co.

Alaska Airlines has placed a top manager on administrative leave after 64 mechanics at its Seattle maintenance hangar delivered a strongly worded letter to company officials saying they had been “pressured, threatened and intimidated” to cut corners on repairs.

Federal Aviation Administration investigators and Alaska officials this morning began jointly interviewing the mechanics after the airline notified the agency of the letter.

Alaska also notified federal prosecutors and the National Transportation Safety Board, which is investigating the Jan. 31 crash of Alaska Flight 261, which killed 88 people off the Southern California coast.

The letter refers to ongoing maintenance problems.

But according to mechanics contacted by The Seattle Times, it was triggered by mechanics’ concerns about a recent repair to the horizontal stabilizer and jackscrew assembly on an Alaska MD-80 jetliner – the same type of plane and parts that are a focus of the investigation into the fatal crash.

Mechanics interviewed by The Times said the MD-80 involved in the recent repair was only properly fixed after heated discussions.

FAA spokesman Mitch Barker said the agency was aware that there had been recent “debate” at the Alaska hangar over a horizontal stabilizer repair. He said the plane was ultimately returned to service in proper condition.

In a statement released early this afternoon, Alaska said as of 12:30 p.m. today, about 12 mechanics had been interviewed.

“The first question for each person interviewed is whether or not they are aware of an aircraft that has been returned to service in an unairworthy or unsafe condition,” the statement said, adding that so far no violation of a federal regulation or a safety concern has been uncovered warranting any action involving Alaska aircraft.

“Alaska will take whatever steps are dictated by these interviews, including immediately grounding any aircraft involved, in order that we all may have this assurance of safety,” the statement added.

The letter was delivered Thursday to John Kelly, Alaska’s chief executive, and Bill Ayer, the company president.

The airline didn’t release the letter, but a draft was provided to The Seattle Times by an Alaska employee Wednesday.

In it, the mechanics say, “Our consciences constrain us to make you both aware of an ongoing situation on the heavy check which we have heretofore brought before management in the hangar, but our pleadings have gone unheeded and have not stopped the following pattern of behavior.”

A “heavy check” is a repair to a key flight-control part.

The letter has stunned the airline, which is already the subject of a criminal investigation over alleged maintenance violations at its Oakland, Calif., maintenance base. A grand jury in San Francisco is investigating whether Alaska supervisors signed for repairs that weren’t done or they weren’t authorized to approve.

The letter specifically raises questions about the leadership of Robert Falla, manager of Alaska’s Seattle maintenance base.

Falla has been placed on administrative leave, an Alaska official and federal investigators said, but the company’s statement didn’t name him.

Falla drove up to his home late this morning, where he told a Times reporter, “No aircraft under my authority has ever gone out unairworthy or unsafe.”

He also said, “There is nothing I have to hide, and there is nothing Alaska Airlines has to hide.”

Falla said he had seen the letter and signatures but declined further comment on it.

The letter pointedly refers to the Flight 261 crash. “Amazingly,” the letter says, “in the midst of our grief and shock subsequent to the crash of Flight 261, many amongst us have been pressured, threatened and intimidated by Mr. Falla in the daily performance of our work.”

The letter, without providing specific information, alleges Falla “has directed us to do things specifically contradicting” federal aviation regulations, “not the least of which is his persistent demand that we put unserviceable parts back on the aircraft.”

During the recent repair of the MD-80, mechanics have told The Times, Falla told them not to replace worn parts on the plane.

In their letter, the mechanics said, “When confronted by groups of mechanics or by individuals, Mr. Falla cites his experience, but we have serious questions regarding his technical expertise and knowledge.”

The letter urges Kelly and Ayer to “personally address this matter immediately for the safety or our passengers, for the future of our operation as well as for our very livelihoods.”

“By our signatures, we signify to you that we believe him to be dangerous to our operation and incapable of releasing . . . aircraft into service in an airworthy manner,” the letter says.

It was signed by mechanics and inspectors over the past several days, said one mechanic who helped prepare the letter and signed it. It notes that the events since the crash “have taken their toll on all of us.”

“We are still grieving each in his own way and here in base maintenance, the effects are incalculable,” the letter says. “Let us state from the outset that paramount in our thoughts are the lives of those lost on Flight 261 as well as the flying public who implicitly puts their trust in our abilities as professionals to run a safe operation.”

In its statement, Alaska said, “These allegations . . . demanded immediate, decisive and direct action to either confirm and correct any such violations or assure ourselves, the FAA and our customers that such allegations and concerns are unfounded.”

In the Oakland case, the FAA, in an administrative inquiry, has proposed a $44,000 fine against Alaska, saying the airline violated federal aviation rules. The FAA also has recommended revoking the mechanic’s licenses of three Alaska supervisors.

Alaska and the supervisors are appealing.

In the criminal probe, the grand jury has requested the records of 11 MD-80 planes that were inspected and repaired at the Oakland facility and other Alaska facilities.