WASHINGTON - July 28, 2025 - PRLog -- Daryl Guberman, a 40-year quality assurance expert and Boeing shareholder, has uncovered damning evidence that federal agencies are enabling Boeing's safety failures by sitting on the board of ANSI–ANAB, the private accreditor overseeing the very certifications Boeing claims to follow.
For 22 years, Boeing Commercial required its suppliers to maintain AS9100 certification through ANSI–ANAB-accredited registrars, despite Boeing itself refusing to be certified. According to global certification databases, nearly 20,000 suppliers globally have obtained AS9100 certification—approximately 9,700 to 10,000 of them based in the U.S.
The Price of a Lie: $9 Billion in Certification Costs for Suppliers
Based on conservative industry data, the average cost of AS9100 certification per cycle—including initial audit and two surveillance audits—is $21,000. This must be repeated every cycle (typically every 3 years), with ongoing surveillance audits and administrative fees contributing to an average annualized cost of $21,000 per year.
With inflation, rate increases, re-certifications, and mandatory updates added over 22 years, the estimated total cost balloons past $9 billion—borne entirely by suppliers who were forced to comply while Boeing refused to follow its own mandate.
"This is the biggest compliance fraud in aerospace history," said Guberman. "Suppliers should sue Boeing, ANSI–ANAB, and the federal government for coercion, unequal treatment, and financial damages."
What Happened?
In June 2024, Elizabeth Lund, Vice President of Quality for Boeing, told Reuters:
"Boeing is willing and prepared to obtain an AS9100 certification—an internationally recognized aerospace standard."
She added that Boeing Commercial had been "compliant" with AS9100 for years—despite never holding actual certification.
This was not a correction—it was a corporate confession that Boeing built an illusion of quality using self-declared compliance, enabled by ANSI–ANAB, and overlooked by U.S. regulators.
"Compliant" Is not "Certified"
"Being 'compliant' without being certified is like a restaurant claiming it follows the health code, but refusing inspection," says Guberman.
Certification means independent, third-party audits. Boeing has none.
Meanwhile, Boeing Commercial:
Issued July 2002 Supplier Bulletin demanding AS9100 certification from ANSI–ANAB registrars (Send in your certification send in your parts and if the need arises Boeing will visit and perform a supplier audit)
Adopted an 'audit-by-mail' policy in April 2002 Heat treatment, welding non-destructive testing -NADCAP National Aerospace and Defense Contractors Accreditation Program, requiring suppliers to send in certs & parts, bypassing on-site audits. Also the certification will reduce redundant inspections. Only if need be will Boeing do a supplier audit)
Removed the April and May 2002 bulletins from its supplier portal in January 2025
Sat on ANSI–ANAB's board and management committee for year can grant, suspend, or withdraw accreditation—removed from ANSI-ANAB website August 2024
Helped control who gets certified, violating ISO/IEC 17011 impartiality standards
Federal Law Broken
Guberman's investigation found that federal agencies not only looked the other way—they enabled and profited from it:
18 U.S. Code § 209 –
Illegal Federal Compensation
Phil Mattson (DHS) received $262,000 from ANSI–ANAB while still drawing a federal salary
Gordon Gillerman (NIST) received $120,000 from ANSI–ANAB while still drawing a federal salary
5 CFR § 2635.702 –
Government Endorsement Violation
DHS illegally advertised ANSI–ANAB on its official website (2017–2018)
Foreign Infiltration: ANSI–ANAB's Ties to China
From 2015–2021, the IAF (International Accreditation Forum), co-founded by ANSI–ANAB, was chaired by Chinese national Xiao Jianhua—also the head of the China National Accreditation Services (CNAS) and certifier of the ill-prepared Wuhan Biolab. They did not have enough trained technicians 6 must prior to certification and 6 months after certification was issued.
Per China's National Intelligence Law (Article 7), all Chinese nationals must report information to the CCP—meaning Xiao legally had to disclose all U.S. quality oversight data he accessed since 1994.
Yet, ANSI–ANAB:
Remained partnered with IAF and ILAC
Continued using their "international equivalence" model, opening U.S. systems to foreign risk
Allowed federal agencies, including DOJ, FDA, DHS, and Dept. of Commerce, to sit on their board while buying services and receiving payments
Guberman's Demands for Action
"We've got a jet on fire, federal agencies in bed with private companies, and the public being lied to about certification," says Guberman.
"This isn't a policy problem—it's a national security crisis."
Guberman is calling for:
Full DOJ and Congressional investigation into ANSI–ANAB and its federal board members. (Issue: DOJ sits as a member on ANSI-ANAB board and is also a customer. How is the American people going to get justice!)
Enforcement of 18 U.S. Code § 209 against Phil Mattson and Gordon Gillerman
Immediate removal of all federal agencies from ANSI–ANAB's governance
Public disclosure of Boeing's AS9100 non-certification status
Ban on self-certification in aerospace and defense
"Imagine a judge, jury, and defendant all working for the same law firm—and profiting off the outcome," Guberman added. "That's ANSI–ANAB, and Boeing is the golden goose."
$9B in Damages: Boeing, ANSI–ANAB Must Repay 20K AS9100 Suppliers for 22 Years of Forced Compliance https://youtu.be/xYbO24wod3s
BUSINESS OWNERS: AS 9100 & ISO 9001 READ THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Federal Law Was Broken: Boeing, ANSI–ANAB, IAF, and ILAC Enforced a Monopoly While Remaining Un-certified for 22 Years"
By Boeing Commercial requiring AS9100 certification through ANSI–ANAB for its suppliers in July 2002—while Boeing itself was not AS9100 certified for the next 22 years—Boeing, along with ANSI–ANAB, may have violated several federal laws, procurement ethics rules, antitrust regulations, and international trade principles. Here's a breakdown of the key laws and legal theories potentially violated:
1. Federal Procurement Fraud & Misrepresentation
Relevant Laws:
False Claims Act (31 U.S. Code § 3729)
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subparts 3.1 and 52.203
Violation Explanation:
If Boeing required AS9100 certification to ensure compliance with aerospace quality standards in contracts involving the U.S. Department of Defense, NASA, or FAA, while not being certified themselves, this could constitute:
Material misrepresentation
Noncompliance with contract terms
Procurement fraud if federal funding or contracts were involved
2. Antitrust and Competition Law Violations
Relevant Laws:
Sherman Antitrust Act (15 U.S. Code §§ 1–2)
Clayton Antitrust Act
Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S. Code § 45 – Unfair methods of competition)
Violation Explanation:
By mandating only ANSI–ANAB accreditation (blocking alternatives like Guberman-PMC, LLC -G-PMC, LLC, or other bodies), Boeing and ANSI–ANAB may have:
Created a monopoly or restraint of trade
Excluded fair market competition
Engaged in "tie-in" practices, where certification is unfairly tied to a single source
This is especially problematic if ANSI–ANAB and Boeing executives had overlapping relationships, as it hints at collusive behavior.
3. Conflict of Interest and Government Ethics
Relevant Standards:
5 CFR § 2635 (Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch)
18 U.S. Code § 208 (Acts affecting a personal financial interest)
OMB Circular A-119 – Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards
Violation Explanation:
Federal agencies (like DHS, FDA, Commerce, DOJ) that sit on ANSI–ANAB's board while also contracting Boeing present conflicts of interest.
Boeing's preferential enforcement of ANSI–ANAB could violate federal neutrality requirements for standards selection
4. Fraudulent Inducement / Coercion of Suppliers
Relevant Doctrine:
Tortuous Interference with Business Relations
Coercion under Commercial Law
Violation Explanation:
Forcing suppliers to pay $20,000–$30,000 every cycle for AS9100 certification—when Boeing wasn't even certified themselves—may be:
Fraudulent inducement
Bad faith commercial conduct
Coercion in a vertical supply chain
5. International Law & WTO Principles
Relevant Standards:
World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)
ISO/IEC Code of Good Practice for Standardization
Violation Explanation:
Requiring a single-source, U.S.-based accreditation body (ANSI–ANAB) with global reach—while Boeing is not certified to the same standards—may violate:
National treatment obligations
Non-discrimination principles
Barriers to fair trade
6. Violation of AS9100 Itself
AS9100 Requires:
Internal audits
Documented quality systems
Corrective/preventive action processes
Violation Explanation:
If Boeing was not certified but enforced AS9100 on others, they were non-compliant with the standard's basic principles, and any claim of quality control through AS9100 enforcement was fraudulent or misleading.
Please note the links below and each article are critical to bring all information together:
Account Phone Number