Point-1: This is nothing more than a "place-holder" in the BK process. FAA
was required to file a "claim" (just as any other potential "creditor" had to file) before the deadline to file claims expired. Another news organization publishing this story pointed out that there are now more than $94 BILLION in "claims" filed in the AMR BK case.
Point-2: This "claim" is EVERYTHING the FAA is investigating or MIGHT investigate at AA
/AMR. No action has been taken against AA
/AMR. Remembering that this is a financial claim in BK court process explains the "over valued" POTENTIAL fines that the claim is making. You're filing in BK court... claim ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you can POSSIBLY find legal grounds to support no matter how weak your claim might seem. The bigger the claim, the more potential leverage you have in the BK process.
Point-3: The FAA has returned to previous methodology for measuring its "effectiveness." Away from reducing actual incidents and back to public disclosure of the number of PROPOSED violations and dollar amounts of PROPOSED fines. Actual violations and fines enforced has historically always a very very small fraction of what is proposed. Many safety professionals have left FAA due to the drastic reduction in information coming in (airlines & people do not self-report nearly as often as under previous ASAP programs).
Point-4: Any inspector can "fail" any "inspectee" during any inspection. Especially true when government paperwork is involved.
Bottom Line: There are no new "safety violations" at AA
. Just more of the same old stuff that goes on at every airline with every government. The MD80 fiasco was created by two FAA inspectors (since "reassigned" to desk jobs) who redefined what previous FAA inspectors had approved into a "non-approved" procedure --eg: defining direction of screws when neither the AD
's original manufacturing process did not define a direction for those screws.