1 

### Kyle E. Lomazow 2 

### FAA Office ofRegional Counsel 3 

### 1601 Lind Ave., SW 

# RECEIVED NOV- 52012 4 

### Renton, Washington 98057 5 

### Telephone: 425/227-1847 6 

### Facsimile: 425/227-1007 7 

# HEARING DOCKET

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 

### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

17 

### In the Matter of 18 

### FAA DOCKET NUMBER 2011NM30039 DMS No. FAA-2012-0875 19 

### Mountain Aviation 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 

### REBUTTAL TO RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT'S MOTION FOR DECISION IDDGE RICHARD C. GOODWIN

2 8 

### TO: The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin: 29 30 31 32 33 34. 

### ·In Respondent's Answer to Complainant's Motion for Decision, Respondent argues that the "all checks" designation in the designation of check airman letter received from Principle Operations Inspector (POI) AI Hankins (Exhibit 1) somehow had the magical effect oftransforming check airman Oren Taft into an aircrew designated examiner (ADE). However, Respondent has never employed an ADE and had absolutely no reason to believe that they did. As indicated in Complainant's Motion for Decision, Respondent has not and will not be able to offer any proofthat any oftheir check airmen were designated as aircrew designated examiners because they never were and. Respondent has no evidence even remotely suggesting otherwise. Respondent knows they never employed an ADE and that is why the only· "evidence" they can offer is a letter from the FAA which refers to an "all checks" and an affidavit from Respondent's Chief Pilot indicating he "believed" the referenct? to an "all checks" conferred ADE status upon their check airmen. This is a completely meritless argument and is comparing apples to oranges. As indicated by the affidavit ofDennis Ham (exhibit 3), an "all checks" designation has nothing to do with an ADE.**'~All** 

### Checks" refers to the type ofchecks that check airmen 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51· 52 53 Motion for Decision Mountain Aviation- FAA DOCKET NUMBER 2011NM30039 KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007
DMS No. FAA-2012-0875 Page 1 of3 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23· 24 25 26 27 

### are qualified to provide. These three checks include competency checks, instrument proficiency checks and line checks. Those check airmen who are qualified to conduct all the above-mentioned checks rather thanjust one or two c;rre given a letter citing "check airmanall checks." 

### An Aircrew designated examiner, on the other hand, provides testing and services which results 14 C.F.R. Part 61 certification. That has nothin to do with an "all checks" as relating to check airmen. Instead of just assuming this letter from their POI conferred ADE status upon Respondent's check airmen, Respondent could have and should have taken extra steps to inquire as to the status oftheir check airmen and what they could and could notdo. · In summary, Respondent employed

.a flight check airman who did not receive the appropriate competency/proficiency exam from either an FAA inspector or aircrew designated examiner under FAR§ 135.339(a)(2). Instead of owning up to this mistake and rectifying it,_ Respondent has instead come up with an argument that is a complete smokescreen. If Respondent truly did not understand what an "all checks" referred to after being in business for almost twenty years then that is a competency issue on their part and not an excuse to violate the FARS, which they clearly did inthis case. For those reasons Complaint's Motion for Decision should be granted and a hearing should be held on sanction only.

28 

### DATED this 30th ofOctober 2012 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 

### Kyle E. Lomazow FAA Attorney

Motion for Decision Mountain Aviation.- FAA DOCKET NUMBER 2011NM30039 DMS No. FAA-2012-0875 Page 2 of3 KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAAATTORNEY TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425)**227~1007**

21 2 3 

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 4 5 6 

### I hereby certify that the foregoing Motion for Decision has been served via facsimile and 7 

### Certified Mail -Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 49 30 

### onora e c ar . oo wm Office ofHearings, M-20 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590 FAX: (202) 366-7536 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1 000 Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington, D.C. 20591 FAX: (202) 493-5020 KentS. Jackson, Esq. Attorney for Respondent Jackson 

### & Wade, LLC 2168 Midland Drive Shawnee, KS 66218 TEL: (913) 338-1700 FAX: (612) 977-8650

31 

### Dated this 30th, day of October, 2012.



## ANA STEPfffiNON

. Office ofRegional Counsel (ANM-7) · Federal Aviation Administration 1601 LindAve. SW

· Renton, WA 98057

(425) 227-2164 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Motion for Decision. Mountain Aviation

- FAA DOCKET NUMBER 2011NM30039 KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAAATTORNEY TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007
DMS No:FAA-2012-0875 Page 3 of3 31 

### Kyle Lomazow 2 

### FAA Office of Regional Counsel 3 

### 1601 Lind Ave. SW 

# RECEIVED NOV- 52012 4 

### Renton, Washington 98057 5 

### Telephone: 425/227-1847 6 

### Facsimile: 425/227-1007 

# HEARING DOCKET
7 8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA**----<931----------------------FE~DER*t7t~~~~~----------------------** lo OFFICE OF HEARINGS 11 12 13 MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Acting 14. Administrator, Federal Aviation 15 Administration, 16 17 COMPLAINANT, 18 19 

### vs. 20 21 MountainAviation, 22 23 RESPONDENT 24 25 26 27 

### Dennis Ham hereby attests as follows: 28 DMS. No. FAA-2012-0875

.Judge Richard C. Goodwin DECLARATION OF DENNIS HARM IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 

### 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 1. 

### I am an Aviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). I have over 20 years experience overseeing check airmen programs and over 15 years overseeing Aircrew Program Designees. Prior to employment with the FAA, I served as a check airman and chiefpilot for a 14 CFR 135 commuter air carrier for 6 years. 

### 2.

3. Check Airmen are required by 14 CFR 135.323. Check airmen approved via letter by the overseeing Principal Operation Inspector (POI) and serve at the pleasure ofthe POI normally with no specific expiration date. Check airmen qualification and training is specified in 14 CFR 135.337 and 135.339. Check airmen are limited to specific types ofchecks. Under 14 CFR 135, these include competency checks, instrument proficiency checks and line checks. Those check airmen authorized to conduct all these checks are issued a letter citing "check airman- all checks". Check Airman program guidance is provided in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 20.

Aircrew Program Designees (APD) are representatives ofthe Administrator under 14 CFR 183. They provided testing and checking services which results in 14 CFR 61 airman certification. An 

### APD functions under a Memorandum of Understanding between the employing air carrier and the FAA. The candidate APD makes a formal application on FAA Form 8710-6. After meeting eligibility, qualification, training and observation criteria, they are recommended by an

11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

### 4. overseeing FAA Aircrew Program Manager and designated by a POI and office manager. Designation is formally made on FAA Forms 8000-5 and 8430-:9 and a Letter ofAuthorization and is valid for a 12 month period. APD program guidance is provided in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 13, Chapter 

### 1. I have reviewed the Affidavit of Gary Emmerson, dated October 24, 2012, paragraph 3. Given his role and tenure as ChiefPilot, I find it lacks credibility. He should be fully aware ofthe limitations ofcheck airmen, ifnot an APD.

10 11 

### I declare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best ofmy 12 

### recollection and belief. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 

### Dated: 

## O?

# r 12 

# c:fA:J.kw- ,2012.

# ·~~

2U.S. Deportment ofTransportation Federal Aviation Administration
September 5, 2006 Mr. Richy Bje!jevig Mountain Aviation, Inc. 9646 Jeffco Airport Ave, Broomfield, CO. 80021 Dear 

### Mr. Bjeljevig: Denver Flight Standards District Office 26805 E:ast 68th Avenue.• Sufte 200 Denver, Colorado 80249

. 303-342-1144, Fax: 303-342-1176

1-800-847-38

· SUBJECT: t?esfgnation of Check Airman ·This certifies that Rodney Getty, FAA Certificate number 1965314, is approved as check

airman. This check airman is approved to conduct checks in .BE-90 BE-200 and CE-500 aircraft for employees of Mountain Aviation. This approval is applicable for the following checking functions: Checking Function: Effective date: Check Pilot

- All Checks February 12, 2002 Please retain a copy of this fetter in the airman's individual flight training records. Sincerely,

AI Hankins Principal Operations Inspector{. j

)t'

;.

:: Oct 25 2012 15;43 JETLAW. 9133381755 p. 15

·.:·

·.·: · .. ,• ., '·.:·:·' ,.:**-~·** .: ' •• ·!.. ·•·. ..**~-** -· ..**:~** :_: •·.

;:,.·**.~:** . . ·:···

.· .. ·. f

.



### . , .

·. : . . . 

### :**~** ·. t :,."c-·: .·.,··

.**;-~·-.:··** ·.. __..... ·>:**~- ~'**  '. '•,**-~~-·-:** 

## ._,..:. · ..· · .. . ·.: .. ..:-.·..>:·
.. .....:·..**-:·a·-~_-::.:** ...

### ~:{·:~_-::-_,_\:.·::~. , ;··-- .. ·. . ..... .,. '_,.·:·,;·:,;"

.. 

# ·.

# ~~ ·,1{.

# ·:.·:~tt::~iNM@~··. :;;. ;'_·

# ·,J·:~; 

# .· .·::
..**~:~** 

# ..·**~"ti:n<~~~-~·** 

# .. ::i·t·

.**¥Qt!NT~A'WI,Wll'f,~Jill!:** \ , ,· .. ... ) 

# <, : , ' .' >' '

# ~!:l!;·~',

..·

·:·. ;•, · .. ·



### .. •'

.,

·:·. > .· ..
....·

.... ·:



### ...

..**'~** ·'

.**~:** ' •' '.: :

### ..Oct 25 2012 15:44 JETLAIJ

··: .· ': .· '' . 9133381755 p. 16

· •. •'

. . ',; :· ·: • •'. 1:· t. :-:::_.._ . : .......... · ......... ..: > :
. .. ;:**_:.~**...**~::·:··.: -~**  ..**~** ··.··;.**--::~·\.~~-**

• •

•• '**.·~·** •

.:. ,:••

•• ·: ... ·t,' :: : • :· : ••• : • • '• • • • ': .' •• • : •, ;! •·



## . .. .. . . '·'\,**·./<·<~-~::···** 

## ·.. .;:··.: ·,\ .:·· :·:.·
.

. .

4. · · ·

# ~:¥.~~~~;.i~~6~$::~~ir: ...·;'.''· · ·;: :?. ;:.:.·:

# :<:~y,·]he 14 

# oF. ·

# §• ·· · ·.:.. ;· · '::':·..·: ...... ·:'

..

# ::~;· ..

# :·~.~.:.:.·..

# :.,.f·:.:.;~~:.··~.·.).,: ',

...

### :::t~:s.·.l9,~~:.U'$;2!).1:~d;**~:::.:;;<h~~** .>:

### :··M..f~;~;i/::'. 

# ' .

-+------"-. -.

# --'-'--:---<,-----'-:·;....,:..:.f!!~:t;w~¥.1<~~f~•~~;L,M¥,~~~· .

# .·iJ~~"!':':.~·~7·:~~··.::""'" 

# ........... ·**':"':~/"""":** 

# ... .....;·**:.:~:** i:-i-:.:.:i:-

../""":;.._:.

---

# ~,~~~~: ' ' 

# ,: .·..

# ·.:·.:·.·.;·:···········'·;·,··.;···:'~:.·.:.:, ••

:."

;·

; L )

;**-~.** !'

; :..**~** . ..• · ·.·..



## .s.. .....· .... ·"

. .. .....,' ··**,.·.:M~a~:~on.r.m· ~~,~** 



### : :·..**:.{$·~.~:$~{~~)::tbi~.~~~** 

### :;

:··· · .

.·:

. . ..
·' .· ..

.. .. : . :... '; ... . '· ..... •,. ;:

. ·.·· · ... : .·. t·.:··.. : ·.· .

. ,' ...
f·

. ·. .·.· .· .·' 

### ...
.**~·** :. . . . . '!.

. •' : ...**~·** : . ..
.**~:** ... . 

### .

. .**~**.. ...**~.**

. . . ', \ .....
: .. ·:·.

.. ·.



### . •' ''' ·:**~** :

...
.**~** 

### . : . . .

. .'·· ·:

..... ··

. ''.:

.... ·.....

### ·:··:

__:'-::. :'·.

.': .• :·.·

... 

### · ·.·

..;=:.

. 

### ....... ·:···

. '·

,• . · .

.. ...**~.** : .

. .· .·. ·.·..

. ::··· . 

### ::·t

,•i •••

. ... ', . ·:··..

·" 00 oh

. :'', ... · .. . ,•. .·.:·.·

. ..**~:·** ..**-~**

. ::**:~.** i"

. .**~.** .

.. .. : ,,_,.:·..

. ·:·. ,·· .. ··

### ..... . .. ' . :·'.**::_~:.:** ...**:>·:.;.~---~·: :~··.··** **.~;·:·**..\·: ::/::**~-:;·:** . ..... :'.· .····.:· ..: 

### :··
. . .':::·\

...··::., !

.· ·

.. . .. · ..

·.·:
.. .:: .... ·.· .·.· . ';': · . . . . ::.. :_...**}:~·**.

. .. ·· 

### :-:·:

.

.,.... ,. ,• ... • ,' .·,, e' ,•,,. •'. :: .·• :}:

### ~·, 

## ·:···'::'

..

i ·..•. : •. ' 

# j. 

# <;<**;~1'''** ·. :·· .. .• ·.· ... ..

.·>-: ::;.·:/ :·:·)·.'·.

# :.::.:::':/{~<(:':/:{·; !. :··=

...··'.**~** . : . :**-~·:** ...· ...



### .. >
..... ···:

..**:~.::.:·::**.. :1 Kyle Lomazow 2 FAA Office of· Regional Counsel 3 1601 Lind Ave. SW 4 Renton, Washington 98057 5 Telephone: 425/227-1847 6 Facsimile: 425/227-1007 7 s UNITED STATES OF AME;RICA 9 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION J.O OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

### u 12 13 MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Acting 14 Administrator, Federal Aviation 15. Administration, 16 DMS. No. FAA-2012-0875 17 COMPLAINANT, 18

.Judge Richard C. Goodwin 19 vs. 20 21 Mountain Aviation, DECLARATION OF DENNIS IIARMlN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 22 23 RESPONDENT 24 25 26 21 Dennis Hatn hereby attests as follows: 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 5J. 52 53 1.

2.



### 3. I am anAviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 

### r have over 20 years experience overseeing check airmen programs and over 15 years overseeing Aircrew Program Designees. Prior to employment with the FAA, I served as a check ainnan and chiefpilot for . a 14 CFR 135 commuter air carrier for 6 years. Check Airmen are required by 14 CFR 135.323. Check airmen approved via letter by the overseeing Principal Operation Inspector (POI) and serve at the pleasure ofthe POI nom1ally with no specific expiration date; Check airmen qualification and training is specified in 14 CFR 135.337 and 135.339. Check airmen are limited to specific types ofchecks. Under 14 CFR 135, these include competency checks, instrument proficiency checks and line checks. Those check ainnen authorized to conduct all these checks are issued aJetter citing "check airman

- all checks". Check Airman program guidance is provided in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 20.

Aircrew Program Designees (APD) are representatives ofthe Administrator under 

### 14 CFR 

### 183. They provided testing and checking services whichresults in 

### 14 CFR 

### 61 airman certification. An APD functions under a Memorandum of Understanding between the employing air carrier and the FAA. The candidate APD makes a formal application on FAA Form 8710-6. After meeting eligibility, qualification, training and observation criteria, they are recommended by an1 2 .3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

. 32 33 34 35. 36 37 38 39

# ~~- 40 41 "'-**~** 42 43**~.44** .. 4s. 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 overseeing FAA Aircrew Program Manager and designated by a POI and office manager. Designation is formally made on FAA Forms 8000-5 and 8430-9 and a Letter ofAuthorization and is valid for a 12 month period. APD program guidance is provided in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 13, Chapter 1. 4. I have reviewed the Affidavit ofGary Emmerson, dated October 24,2012, paragrap . IVen 1s ro e an tenure as Cliief"Pilot, I**fimtit-tla<:i'lc<tJrs"t"7'c'l'lre""~'d:ilt1'bi-riiitlintyr-.**-------- He should be fully aware ofthe limitations ofcheck airmen, ifnot an APD.

I deClare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best ofmy recollection and belief. ··

Dated: 

### d 

## tf 0 

# dobv '2012.

# D~2:7'= ASI, Operations Specialist Flight Standards; ANM-240 1601 Lind Ave SW Renton, W A 98057

2