07/0G/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L PAU L o±/i o 

# TO : -^mri n Company : Phone : Fax : 

# '^fX , 

# mjjM) . sf)^~m^^ m From : Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Regiona l Counsel' s OfficeAGL- 7 230 0 East De^w i Avenu e Des Plaines . Illinoi s 6001 8 1847-294-7^/ ^ F 847-294-749 8 Facsimile

- 

# ^/)pfll/).\lhl .07/06/201 1 15:5 5 847294B29 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L PAG E 02/l b DLR^RTMEMTO F



### . iRANSPORTATIOi^ i Serve dJul y 6 , 201 1 OOCKc T OPERATION

S D.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSFORTIO N vd l ilji I Q A iQ : 1 1 OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C . I N TH E MATTE RO F Rushmor e Helicopters , Inc . FA A DOCKE T NO . CP10GL000 2 (Civi l Penalt y Action ) DM S No . FAA-2010-002 3 Agency' s Brie f

o n Issue_o f

La w an dClosin g Argumen t Th e Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n (ComplainaTit) , throug h it s undersigne dcounsel , hereb y submit s this Brie f o n Issu e o f

Law an dClosin g Argumen t fo r th e hearin g hel do n Apri l 27 , 201 1 before Administrativ e La w Judg e Richar dGoodwi n o f th e Departmen t

o f Transportatio n i

n Rapi dCity , Sout

h Dakota . O n Januar

y 19 , 2010 , th e Complainan t issue da Final Notic e o f

Propose dCivi l Penalt

y agains t Rushmor e Helicopters , Inc . (Respondent ) fo r violatio n of

1 4 C.F.R . §9L7(a)an d14C.F.R . § 9L13(a ) i n th e amoun t

o f $25,000 . Responden t requeste daforma

l hearin g an dComplainan t submitte dit s Complain t o n February 2 , 2010 . Th e complain t allege da s follows : 1 . At al l relevan t

times . Rushmor e Helicopters , Inc. , operate dacommercia l air toij r operatio n (CA T operation ) i n th e vicinity o f Keystone,"Sout

h Dakota . 2 . ] n it s CAT operatio n Rushmor e employe dth e service s o f acommercia l pilot , Rober t Lero y Leffer

t (Leffert) an doperate daBel l 20 6 helicopter , registere da s N2268 W an downe db

y 6 8 Whiske y LLC . 3 . A t al l time s relevan t

heret o Leffer

t acte da s pilo t

i n comman dan doperate d N226 8 W a s apilo t

of , andagen t

of , Rushmor e i

n th e CA T operation .1 ,r - c c fld79q482q3 FA A AG L 7 COUNSE L P^'^t . uo , . B7/06/201 1 15:5 5 84723'4B2y j

4 . At som e poin t

durin g th e afternoo n o f

Augus t 6 , 2009 , Leffer

t discovere dtha

t th e fue l cap wa s missin g fromN2268W . 5 . Rathe r

than secur e N2268 W unti l areplacemen t fuel ca p coul db e obtained , or seek th e assistanc e o f

acertifie dmechani c t o obtai n aspecia l flight (ferry ) permh , Leffer t pu t duc t tap e ove r th e fue l fille r port andfle w N2268W , fro

mKeystone , Sout h Dakot at o th e Rushmor e andBlac k Hill s Aerial Adventure s facility , nea r Custer , Sout

h Dakota , approximatel y 1 0 mile s away . 6 . O n Augus t

7 , 2009 , Leffer

t operate dN2268 W i n Rushmore' s CA T operarion , withou t th e benefi t

o f afue l cap installe dan dwit

h duc t tap e ove r th e fue l fille r port , o n a t leas t 1 0 passenger s carryin g ai r tou r flights . 7 . N226S W di dno t

mee t th e typ e desig n o r

typ e certificat e fo

r aBel l 206 B helicopte r whe n i t di dno t hav e afue

l ca p andwhe n i t

ha dduc t tap e ove r th e fue l filler port . 8 . A t n o tim e relevan t

heret o wa s aspecial flight (feny ) permi t

issue dtha

t woul d allo w fo r th e operatio n o f

N2268 W with duc t

tap e ove r th e fue l filler por t rathe r than th e appropriat e fue

l cap . 9 . A t al l time s that

Rushmor e operate dN2268 W withou t afue l cap an dwith duc t tap e ove r th e fue l fille r

port , N2268 W wa s no t

i n a n airworth y condition . 10 . Rushmore^ s operatio n of >J2268 W withou t

afue l cap an dwith duc t

tap e ove r th e fue l filler port , a s describe dabov e wa s careles s an dendangere dth e live s and property o f

others . I n support o f it s Brie f o n Issue s o f

La w andClosui g Argument , Complainan t state s a s follows : I . BRIE FON ISSU E O FLA W Issu e of Law : Wa s N2268 W i n a n airworth y conditio n whe n Responden t operate dth e aircraf

t wit h duc t

tap e ove r

th e fue l fille r

por t rathe r tha n th e appropriat e fue l cap ? A . Statutor y an dRegulator y basi s fo r Airworthines s Th e FAA ha s astatutory re.sponsibilit y t o enforc e minimu msafet y standard s i n civi l aviation . 4 9 U.S.C . g 44701(a)(1) . A s part o f thi s endeavor , th e FAA issue s "typ e certificates " for aircraf t "whe n th e Administrato r find s tha t th e aircraft...i s properl y designe dan d manufactured , perform s properly , an dmeet s th e regulation s andminimu mstandard s prescribed. " ^

•^07/06/201 1 15:5 5 84729^829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L

4 9 U.S.C , § 44704(a)(1) . Purusan t t o 1 4 C.F.R . § 21.41 , "[e]ac h typ e certificat e i s considerer dt o includ e th e typ e design , th e operatin g limitations , th e certificat e dat asheet , th e applicable

regulations, . ,an dany othe r condition s or

limitation s prescribed " for th e produc t

or aircraft . In sum , atyp e certificat e i s adesig n approva l issue db y th e FAA whe n a

n applican t

ha s demonstrate dthat

aproduc t

o r aircraf t complie s with th e applicabl e regulations . An dtha t approval i s onl y fo r

th e exac t desig n submitte dt o th e FA A fo r atyp e certificate . Th e typ e certificat e i s th e foundatio n fo r othe r approvals , suc h a s airworthines s approval . Onc e a n aircraf t ha s receive datj'p e certificate , an y registere downe r o f aU.S . registere d aircraf t ma y appl y for

a n airworthies s certificat e fo r tha t aircraft . 14C.F.R . §21.173 . Th e FA.A . issue s a n "airworthines s certificate " for a n invidiua l aircraf

t tha t "conform s t o it s typ e certificat e a n i after inspection , i s i n conditio n for saf e operation. " 4 9 U.S.C . § 44704(d)(1) . Tlierefore , i n order to obtai n a

n airworthines s certificate , a n aircraf t mus t b e both i n conformanc e with it s typ e certificat e an di n acondifio n saf e for flight . B . Airworthines s Casela w Durin g thei r

testimony , Inspecto r

Gar y Kwasincwsk

i an dInspecto r

Jame s Ba dHors e explaine dtha t

a n aircraf t i s "airworthy " onl y whe n i t bot h conform s t o it s typ e certificat e an di s i n aconditio n saf

e for fight. Hearin g Transcrip t (HT)pp . 45-48 ; Fffpg . 95 . Thi s airworthines s tes t stem s fromth e abov e statut e andregulations , a s wel ] a s th e followin g caselaw . "Th e airworthines s standar di s clear : 'T o b e airworthy , a n aircraf t must : (1 ) confor

mt o atyp e desig n ^

, approve dunde r

atyp e certificat e or

supplementa l typ e certificat e andt o applicabl e Airworthines s ' \ Directives ; an d(2 ) b e i

n aconditio n for

saf e operation.' " I n th e Matte r o f Brenda n Airways . ^ LLC . 201 0 ^ X 232608 2 a t 5 (Jun e 7 , 2010 ) (citin g Del . Skyway s LLC , FA. A Order No . 2005- 6 ^ a t 2 (Ma r 8 , 2005 ) an dCa l Helitech , FAA Order No . 2000-1 8 a

t 2 n.. 7 (Au g 1 L 20O0)) ; In th e \r.„,„„, , ,... . pd79qdR9q 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L • ^^'^^ —- , ' 07 1 736/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 3

Matte r ofPi'hitley , 200 8 WL 44179 8 a t 6 (Jan . 30 , 200S)(statin g tha t t o b e "airworthy^ ' a

n aircral' t "mus t confor mt o it s typ e desig n ^ mus t b e i n aconditio n fo

r saf e flight . Thi s ha s bee n fo r many year s th e well-establishe dcriterio n for airworthiness) . Se e als o / « the.Matte r o f Americ a Wes t Airlines , FA A Orde r

No . 96- 3 (Feb , 13 . 1996 ) a t 8 , 2 9 n.2 6 an d2 7 (affirmin g ALJ' s findin g tha t whil e amino r

repai r ma y hav e n o safet

y implications , the ' aircraf t i s unairworih y if

, a s a resul t o f th e repair , di e aircraf

t n o longer

conform s t o it s typ e design) ; I n th e Matte r o f USAir . FA A Orde r No . 96-2 5 a

t 1 L Se e als o Administrato r v. Copsey . NTS B Orde r EA-344 8 a

t 5 (1991 ) (tes t

for airworthines s i s no t

"fiyability" ; th e aircraf

t mus t b e i n conformanc e wit h it s typ e certificate an di n conditio n fo r saf e flight) . I n th e appea l o f

In th e Matte r

o f Americ aWes

t Aii'Iines , FAA Orde r

No . 96-3, . 1 3 (Feb . 13 , 1996) , th e Administrato r foun da n aircraf t unairworth y wher e spee dtap e (a s oppose dt o a n approve dsealen t

o r a"flus h plu g patch" ) wa s tise dt o mak e repairs , no t i n accordanc e wit

h th e Stmcutra l Repai r

Manua l (SRM) . Th e Administrato r foun dthat

eve n wher e th e Complainan t di d no t introduc e a s evidenc e th e actual t>T) e certificate , i t

wa s clear

tha t spee dtap e wa s no t

i n conformanc e wit

h th e aircraft' s typ e certificat e a s i t wa s no t apar t o f th e original , approve d conditio n o f

th e aircraf

t o r a n approve drepair . Id , Th e Administrato r stated : "Althoug h Complainan t

di dno t introduc e th e typ e designs , ther e wa s ampl e evidence , nonetheless , tha

t th e 'aircraft , wit

h thi s damag e an dthes e temporary 'repairs ' wer e n o longe r i n confonmanc e wit h thei r typ e designs . Inspector s Sebrin g an dKensch e testifie d tha t th e aircraf

t wer e n o longe r

i n thei r origina l o r

properi y altere d.conditions , (citatio n omitted) . ...Also , Mr . Bororwski testified , i n effect , that th e spee dtap e wa s no t

include d i n th e typ e design s o f th e aircraft , (citatio n omitted)....[T]h e aircraft , with th e delaminalio n o r

hol e an dwit

h spee dtap e repairs , n o longe r conforme dt o thei r

origina l typ e designs. " /(/ . a

t 13 . I n Americ aWes

t Airlines , th e AL

J ha dfoun dtha t

whil e aminor , temporary repai r usin g spee d> tap e ma y no t hav e ha dextrem e safet

y implications , i t

stil l make s th e aircraf

t unairworth y i f

a s a \[ T ,.„, , , ^ ^ c Pd72q482g 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSEL - PAG E Ub/I D • ^ 07/0&/201 1 15:5 5 8 4 ^2y4H^y d

resul t o f th e repai r

th e aircraf

t n o longe r

conform s t o it s typ e design . M a t 8 . Th e Administrato r affirme dtli c ALJ' s findin g o f operatio n o f

a n unairworth y aircraf

t becaus e th e aircraft , wit h spee dtap e temporaril y coverein g certai n discrepancies , di dno t mee t th e tw^o-pron

g airworthines s tes t o f conformin g t o atyp e certificat e andhein g i n aconditio n saf e fo r flight . Id . a

t 13 . Althoug h befor e th e Nationa l Transportatio n Safet y Boar d(NTSB ) an dno t

th e Departmen t

o f Transportion , Administrato r v. Foster , 200 4 WL 179534 1 (Jun e 29 , 2004) , i s a comparabl e an dpersuasiv e cas e t o th e on e a t hand . I n Foster , amodificatio n wa s mad e t o a n aircraft' s fue

l cap . Foster , 200 4 W L 179534 1 a t ) . Th e Administrativ e Law ,ludg e foun dtha t suc h afue l ca p "modificatio n i s outsid e th e t^-p e desig n fo

r thi s aircraft . It

wa s don e b y someon e wh o i s no t a n A& P mechanic , s o a s amatte r o f law , i t i s unairworthy . Th e modificatio n a s a matte r o f la w i s unairworthy . I

t doe s no t mee t it s typ e desig n certificat e - th e fiie l cap . It ha s bee n changed , an dunles s i t ha s bee n change dan dapprove dan daccepted , i t v s unairworthy. " Id . a

t 2 , Therefore , th e Judg e foun daviolatio n o f ] 4 C.F.R . § 91.7(a ) whe n th e aircraf t i n Foste r wa s operate dwith amodificatio n t o th e fue l cap tha t wa s no t par t o f th e t)'p c certificate . Id . a t 3 . C . N2268 W wa s unairworth y whil e duc t tap e wa s place dove r

it s fue l por t rathe r tha n th e appropriat e fue l ca p an doperatio n i n thi s conditio n violate s 1 4 C.F.R . 91.7(a) . O n Augus t

7 , 2009 ^ Responden t

Rushmor e Helicopter s operate dN2268 W i n a n unairworth y conditio n o n a t leas t 1 0 passenge r

carryin g flights , i n violatio n o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 91.7(a) . Sectio n 91.7(a ) provide s tha t n o perso n may operat e acivi l aircraf t unles s i t i s i n a n airworth y condition . I

n thi s case , N2268 W wa s no t airworth y becaus e i t

faile dt o mee t

both prong s o f th e definitio n o f

airworthiness : (1 ) i t

di dno t conformt o iL

s typ e certificat e and , (2 ) i t wa s no t i n aconditio n saf

e for ftight. \ 

# VB7/06/2B1 1 15:5 5 8.728.829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L P'^S E 07/1 5

Lik e th e aircraf

t i n In th e Matte r

o f Americ aWes

t Airline s an dAdministrato r v. Foster , N2268 W wa s no t

airworth y whe n Responden t modifie dth e fue

l ca p b y usin g duc t

tap e to cove r th e fue l por t rathe r than th e typ e certificate dfue l cap . Wit

h duc t tap e ove r it s fue l port , N2268 W firs t di dno t confor mt o it s typ e certificat e and , second , wa s no t i n aconditio n saf

e fo r flight . L N2268 W wa s unairworth y becaus e i t di dno t confor mt o it s typ e certificate . First , N226S W wa s unairworth y becaus e th e aircraf t di dno t conformwith it s typ e certificate . I

t di dno t mee t it s typ e certificat e because , a s explaine db y Inspecto r

iCvvasinewski , th e ftiel ca

p i s par t o f th e aircraf

t drawing s whic h ar e par

t o f th e typ e certificate . HTpg . 4 5 lin e • 2 0 to pg . 4 6 lin e 6 . Withou t th e typ e certificate dfue

l cap , N2268 W coul dno t conformt o it s typ e desig n o r typ e certificate . A s reiterate db y Inspecto r BadHorse , th e aircraf

t i s manufacture dwith afuel cap , whic h i s part o f it s typ e desig n fo

r th e typ e certificate . H T pg . 9 5 line s 15-19 . Inspecto r BadHors e explaine dthat "th e aircraf

t i s manufacture dan di t

cam e ou t

o f th e factor

y with , obviously , i n this case , afue l cap , s o Uia

t i s par t o f typ e desig n fo

r th e typ e certificate. " H T pg . 9 5 line s 15-19 ; se e simila r compariso n i

n I n th e Matte r

o f Americ aWes

t Airlines , FA A Orde r No . 96-3 , 1 3 n . 3 0 (wimes s testifie dtliat i f aircraf t came ou t o f factor y with spee dtap e coverin g discrepancies , the n i t

woul dhav e conforme dt o it s t>'p e design) . Th e typ e design , whic h i s part o f th e typ e certificate , i s develope db y aeronautica l engineer s an deac h componen t i s designe dfo

r it s specifi c purpose . Th e b e "airworthy, " th e aircraf t mus t confor mt o thi s typ e desig n an dtyp e certicicate . Withou t

th e typ e certificate dfuel cap , N2268 W di dno t mee t it s typ e certificat e and , therefore , wa s no t

airworthy . FA A Inspecto r

Gar y Kwasnewski testifie da t th e hearin g a s to additiona l evidenc e h e gathere dsupportin g th e determinatio n tha t th e duc t

tap e ove r

th e fue l filler por t rendere d07/06/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L PAG E 68/1 5

A N2268 W unairworthy . H T pg . 49-51 . First , Inspecto r Kwasnewski testifie dtha t durin g hi s investigation , h e contacte dBel l Helicopte r technica l representative s fromColorad o and Minnesota ; H T pg . 4 9 line s 7-16 . Bot h individual s state dtha t N2268 W wa s tmairwortli y w^hil e duc t tap e covere dit s ftjel port . Id . O n Apri l 18 , 2011 , Inspecto r Kwasnewski als o spok e wit h Bel l Enginee r

Anthon y Dickerson . H T pg . 4 9 lin e ] 9 t o pg . 5 1 lin e 6 . Mr . Dickerso n wrot e a n emai l t o Inspecto r

Kwasnewski regardin g th e airworthines s o f aBel l 206 , suc h a s N2268W , o n th e followin g da

y an dstated : "Th e fuel filler

cap assembl y i s a

n essentia l (a s oppose dt o optional) componen t Ihike dt o te Bel l Helicopte r

mode l 20 6 engineerin g to p drawing . Bel l Helicopte r believe s that

if flight operation s are performe dwhe n th e Helicopter s doe s no t hav e a n approve dftie] filler ca p instaDed , th e safet

y o f th e helicopte r

an di t occupant s i s compromise dan dw e conside r th e Helicopte r

i s a n unairworth y condition. " Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 7 . Th e informatio n fro mth e Bel l Enginee r agai n support s Inspecto r Kwasnewski an dInspecto r Ba d Horse' s testimon y tha

t N2268 W wa s no t

airworthy . Furthermore , i t demonstrate s tha t

th e fue l ca p i s par t o f th e typ e certificat e (enginee r drawings) . Wit

h duc t tap e coverin g th e fuel filler por t rathe r than th e approve dfue

l cap , th e aircraf

t doe s no t

confor mt o th e approve dengineerin g drawings . A s aresult , th e aircraf t doc s no t confor mt o it s typ e certificat e andi s no t airworthy . Respondent' s President , Mr . Michae l Jacobs , an dth e pilo t o f N2268 W asserte da

t hearin g that Mr . Jacob s spok e with aBel l Rcpresentafiv e o n Augus t 7 , 2009 . H T pg . 82 . 118 ; Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t

5 . The y allege dthat

Mr . Jacob s wa s advise dtha i th e fue l ca p "wa s no t

a structura l component " o f

th e aircraf

t and , "though no t

recommende di

t wa s no t a\nolatio n o f

th e regulations " t o fl

y withou t aftiel cap . Id . However , th e FA A i s no t arguin g tha

t N2268 W wa s i

n dange r o f breakin g apart

i n mid-ai r becaus e o f

a.structura l failure . Whethe r o r no t th e fue l cap i s a"structura l component " o f th e aircraf

t i s no t relevan t t o th e issu e a t

hand . Wha

t i s importan t

i s tha t withou t th e fue l cap th e aircraf

t doe s no t conformt o it s t>T>

e certificat e and , therefore , th efl479qd8293 f'A A AG L ? COUNSE L PAG E u^/i a 07/06/2B1 1 15:5 5 847294829 J

aircraf t wa s no t aiworthy . Th e aeronautica l engineerin g behin dth e unequivoca l desig n of th e Bel l 206' s approve dfticl ca p i s specifi c t o th e Bel l 20 6 an di s part o f th e typ e certificate . Th e aircraf t mus t conformwith tha t

typ e certificat e t o b e considere dairworthy . Whoeve r Mr . Jacob s spok e with , that

perso n di dno t

hav e th e compentanc e to determin e wha t i s o r i s no t aFAA regulatory violation . O n Augus t 7 , 2009 , N2268 W wa s no t i n a n airworth y conditio n whe n i t di d no t confor mt o it s typ e certificat e becaus e i t ha dduc t tape , rathe r

than it s approve dfue

l cap , coverin g th e fue

l filler port . 2 . N2268 W wa s als o unairworth y becaus e i t wa s no t i n aconditio n saf

e fo r flight . No t meetin g it s t>p e certificate , alone , mad e N2268 W unaiiworthy . H T pg . 4 6 line s 11

- 15 : pg . 9 6 line s 11-15 , However , i n additio n t o no t meetin g it s typ e certificate , th e aircraf t als o faile dth e airworthines s tes t becaus e i t

wa s no t i n aconditio n saf

e for flight. Th e safet> ' o f N2268 W wa s compromise dwhe n it s fijel port wa s covere dwit

h duc t tap e rathe r

than th e appropriat e fue

l cap . First , th e fue

l cap protect s th e fuel tank fromcontaminatio n an dusin g duct . tap e rathe r

than th e fue

l cap create s apossibilit> ' o f fijel contamination . IT

T pg . 4 6 lin e 1 8 t o pg . 4 7 lin e JO ; pg . 9 8 line s 4-15 . Fue l contamination , fi"omdirt , debris , grass , etc. , coul dleadt o a clo g i n th e fue l filter

an deve n fue

l starvation , causin g a

n accident . Id . .Additionally , usin g duc t tap e rathe r

tlia n afue l por

t als o make s a

n aircraf t unsaf e fo r flight becaus e i

t present s arisk

o f fue l spillag e i n th e cas e o f

a n inciden t

suc h a s a n aircraf t rol l over . HTpg . 4 7 line s 14-19 . pg . 9 7 line s 4-8 . A s Inspecto r

Ba dHors e explained , "i f fo r any reaso n ther e wa s a

n engin e flame out , shu t down , o r a n emergency , andh e ha

dt o se t i t down , an dh e se t

i t dow n an dth e aircraf

t wa s t o rol l over , no w you'v e go t that fue l comin g ou t

o f tlii s port . And , wit

h aho t engine , tha

t ftiel. specifically , wit

h aho t engine , i s - coul db e caus e for afire." H T p g 105 line s 9-16 .r 07/06/201 1 15:5 5 8.729.829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L Respondent' s President , Mr . Jacobs , even testifie dthat h e wa s specificall y advise db y aBel ] representativ e tha t

th e "fue l ca

p wa s i n plac e t o preven t contaminants , an dto preven t spillag e i n theevcn t o f adynami c rollover. " HTpg . 11 8 line s 17-19 . Lastly , duc t tap e i n plac e o f

afiiel cap coul dals o mak e a

n aircraf t unsaf e becaus e i f

afue l cel l ha s avente dca p an dth e operato r use s duc t tap e t o completel y sea

l th e fue l port , no t

allowin g an

y venting, afiiel cel l collaps e coul d occur , leadin g t o fue

l starvation . IT

T pg . 48 , pg . 9 7 line s 11-20 . However , i n thi s case , th e aircraft' s typ e certificat e di dno t requir e avente dfue

l ca p so , i n hindsight , this di dno t

presen t a safet> ' issue . H T pp . 47-48 , 97-98 . Whethe r Responden t

considere dthi s whe n h e covere dth e fiiel port wit h duc t tap e i s no t

clear but , regardless , th e us e o f duc t tap e present s significan t

safet y issue s renderin g th e aircraf t unairworthy . Th e Bel l Engineer' s email . Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 7 . als o support s th e FAA Insepctors ' testimon y tliat

N2268 W wa s no t

i n aconditio n saf

e fo r flight whe n it s fiie) por t

wa s covere dwith duc t tape . Bel l Enginee r

Anthon y Dickerso n state dthat "th e safet

y o f th e helicopte r

andi t occupant s i s compromised. " Id . Th e component s an dengineerin g behin dth e fue l ca p o n th e Bel l 20 6 ar e know n t o anddesigne db y th e Bel l aeronautica l engineers , no t Respondent . Th e difference s betwee n th e approve dfue l ca p an dth e duc t

tap e Responden t

use dt o cove r

th e fiiel filler por t ha s safet y implication s tha

t obviousl y wer e no t

considere db y Responden t o n .Augus t

7 , 2009 . A t th e hearing , Responden t attempte dt o argu e tha

t becaus e N2268 W wa s operatin g wit h aless-thaii-ftjllfue l lank , th e us e o f duc t tap e rathe r

than th e typ e certificate dfue l ca p di dno t presen t asafet y issue . However , a s Inspecto r Ji mBadHors e explained , regardles s o f ho w muc h fue l N2268 W carrie do n Augus t 7 , 2009 , th e aircraf

t wa s no t airwortli y becaus e i t

di dno t mee t it s typ e desig n an dbecaus e i t wa s no t i n aconditio n saf

e fo r flight. HTpg : 9 8 lin e 1 6 to pg . 9 9r - . . c c c fld79q4fl7q3 PA A AG L 7 COUNSE L PAG E il/i: ^ L Q7/0&/201 1 15:5 5 3472948^9 3

/;n g 2 . Moreover , regardles s o f ho w muc h fijel th e aircraf t wa s holding , th e safet

y issue s ar e stil l present . I f

th e aircraf

t ha drolle dover , th e ris k o f asmal l o r

larg e fue l spill^ e aitdsubsequen t fire, woul dstil l b e present . Additionally , whethe r asmal l amoun t

o f ftiel o r alarg e amoun t

o f fijel i s contaminate ddoe s no t negat e th e safet

y concern s testifie dabou t b y th e FA A Inspectors . N2268 W wa s no t

i n aconditio n saf

e fo r flight and , therefore , i t

di dno t mee t th e tw o pronge d airworthines s test . Respondent' s aircraf

t faile dt o mee t

eithe r pron g o f

th e tw o pronge ddefmitio n o f airworthines s whe n i t

wa s operate dwith due l tap e covering it s fue l port o n Augus t

7 , 200 9 o n a

t leas t 1 0 passenge r

carryin g flights. Therefore , th e aircraf t di dno t mee t th e airworthines s standardrequire db y 1 4 C.F.R . § 91.7(a) . Eac h flight Responden t

operate do n .Augus t

7 , 200 9 wa s aseparat e violatio n o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 91.7(a) . D . Operatio n of

N2268 W wa s i n violatio n o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 91.13(a ) Pursuan t t o FA A Orde r

2150.3B , "Whe n aperso n operate s a n aircraf t i n violatio n o f

a specifi c regulatio n othe r

tha n 1 4 C.F.R . §91.13 , .. . that violatio n constitute s acareles s or reckles s operatio n i n an do f itsel f I n thes e cases , th e niisconduc t ma y als o resul t

i n aviolatio n o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 91.1 3 i f

i t actuall y o r

potentiall y endanger s th e live s or property ' o f

others.' ' Respondent' s violatio n o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 91.7(a) , operatin g a n unairworth y aircraf t o n a t leas t 1 0 separat e passenge r

carr>'in g flights, constitute s careles s operatio n i n ando f itsel f unde r 1 4 C.F.R . §91.13(a) . HTpg . 4 0 line s 17-21 , pp . 7B-17 ; pg . 118 ; Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 4 , Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t

5 . I n this case , Respondent' s operatio n o f N2268 W wa s no t

merel y alechnica l violatio n o f

1 4 C.F.R . 91.13(a) , bu t

th e operatio n wa s aseparate , independen t violation . Respondent' s operatio n wa s no t onl y no t i n a n airworth y aircraft , bu t

i t wa s no t safe . Responden t place dit s passenger s a

t risk. 1 007/06/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L ^"^" ^

11 . CLOSIN G ARGUNtEN T A . Statemen t

o f Undispute dFact s 1 . At al l relevan t

times , Rushmor e Helicopters , Inc . (Responden t o r Rushmore) , operate dacommercial ai r tou r operatio n (CA T operation ) i n th e vicinity o f Keystone , Sout

h Dakota . Complain t

an dAnswer . 2 . I n it s CA T operatio n Rushmor e employe dth e service s o f acommercial pilot , Robert Lero y Leffer

t (leffert ) an doperate daBel l 20 6 helicopter , registere da s N2268 W an dovme db y 6 8 Whiske y LLC , Complain t an dAnswer . 3 . A t al l time s relevan t

heret o Leffer

t acte da s pilo t

i n comman dandoperate d N2268 W a s apilo t

of , andagen t

o f Rushmor e i

n th e CA T operation . Complain t andAnswer . 4 . O n Augus t

6 , 2009 , Leffer

t discovere dtha

t th e fue l ca p wa s missin g fi-om N2268W . HTpp . 70-72 ; Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 5 . 5 . Rathe r

than secur e N2268 W unti l areplacemen t ftiel ca p coul db e obtained , o

r see k th e assistanc e o f

acertifie dmechani c t o obtai n aspecial flight (ferr^' ) permit , Leffer t pu t duc t tap e ove r th e fue l filler por t an dflew N2268W \fro

mKeystone , Sout h Dakot at o th e Ru.t;hmor e andBlac k

Hill s Aeria l Adventure s facility , near . Custer , Sout

h Dakota . HTpp . 70-73 , 118 ; Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 5 . 6 . O n Augus t

7 , 2009 , Leffer

t operate dN2268 W i n Rushmore' s CA T operation , withou t th e benefi t

o f aftiel ca p installe dan dwith duc t

tap e ove r th e fue l filler port , o n a t leas t 1 0 passenger s carryin g ai r tou r flights. HTpp . 73-77 . 118 ; Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t

1 , Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 2 . Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 4 , Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t

5 . 7 . N2268 W di dno t

mee t th e typ e desig n o

r typ e certificat e for

aBel l 206 B helicopte r whe n i t di dno t hav e afue

l ca p an dwhe n i t

ha dduc t tap e ove r th e ftiel filler port . HTpg . 45 . lin e 2 0 topg . 46 , lin e 15 ; HTpg . 95 , line s 15-19 , Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t

7 . 8 . A t n o tim e relevan t

heret o wa s aspecia l flight (ferry ) permi t

issue dtha

t woul d allo w for th e operatio n o f

N2268 W wit

h duc t tape.ove r th e ftiel filler

por t rathe r than th e appropriat e ftjel cap . HTpp . 52-53 , B . Violation s Th e Complainan t

prove db y apreponderanc e o f

th e evidenc e eac h factua

l allegatio n i

n it s Complaint . I

n additio n t o th e undispute dfact s above , (h e evidenc e presente da t hearin g \ \QH79qdR9q ^ PA AAG L 7 COUNSE L ^«^ ^ ^^ ' 07/0&/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 ^

/ • demonstrate s that N2268 W wa s no t

i n aconditio n saf

e for flight whe n it s fue

l por t wa s covere d b y duc t tap e rathe r

than th e approve dfue

l cap . HTpg . 46-48 , 97-98 , 105 , Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 7 . Therefore , a s previousl y discussed , o n Augus t 7 , 2009 , N2268 W wa s no t i n a n airworth y conditio n fo

r tw o separate , independen t reasons . First , th e aircraf t di dno t conformt o it s t>p e certificat e and , second , th e aircraf t wa s no t i n aconditio n saf

e fo r flight. Consequently , th e Responden t

operate di n violatio n o f

th e Federa l Aviatio n Regulation s (1 4 C.F. R§ 91.7(a ) and1 4 C.F.R . § 91.13(a) ) whe n i t operate dN2268 W o n Augus t 7 , 200 9 o n a t

leas t 1 0 passenge r carryin g flights whe n th e aircraf t wa s no t airworthy . C . Th e Agency' s propose dsanctio n i s appropriat e an d•withi n th e rang e provide dfo r

b y th e Agency' s sanctio n guidance . Th e propose dcivi l penalty o f $25,000.0 0 i s sustainabl e for th e cite d\^olation s andi s i n accordanc e wit

h th e Agency' s Complianc e an dEnforcemen t Programa s outline di n FA A Orde r 2150.3B , Appendi x B . Sanctio n Guidanc e Table . Agenc y Hearin g Exhibi t 6 . FA A Orde r

2150.3B , Appendi x B , Sanctio n Guidanc e Table , paragrap h B-3-d-(7) , pag e B-2 0 provide s for

asanctio n i

n th e rang e o f

moderat e t o maximu mcivi l penalty fo r operatio n o f a n unairworth y aircraft . Fo r asmal l busines s concern, suc h a s Respondent , th e Sanctio n Guidanc e Tabl e set s ou t

th e civi l penalty rang e fo r eac h violatio n a s follows : moderate , S2,20 0 t o $4,39 9 an dmaximum , $4,40 0 t o $11,000 . Therefore , for th e te n violatin g flights, th e Sanctio n Guidanc e Tabl e call s fo

r atota l penalty betwee n $22,00 0 an d$110,000 . Th e Agenc y seek s acivi l penalty o f $2,50 0 fo

r eac h o f th e te n passenge r

carrynn g flights operate di n a

n unairworth y condition , totalin g $25,000 . Thi s propose dcivi l penalt y i s wel l withi n th e rang e provide dfo r b y th e Sanctio n Guidanc e Tabl e andi s appropriat e fo r th e cite d violation s wher e Responden t operate da

n unairworth y aircraf

t o n a t leas t 1 0 passenge r

carryin g

1 207/06/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L

flights. Th e Agenc y request s tha t th e Administrativ e La w Judg e issu e acivi l penalt> ' i n accordanc e wit h th e Agency' s Sanctio n Guidanc e an dth e Agency' s Final Notic e o f Propose d Ci\i l Penalty . m.CONCLUSFO N I n sum , Responden t

ha s violate d1 4 C.F.R . § 91.7(a ) and1 4 C.F.R . § 91.13(a ) b y operatin g a

n unairworth y aircraf

t o n a t leas t 1 0 separat e passenge r

carryin g flight

o n Augus t

7 , 2009 . Th e propose dcivi l penalty o f 525,00 0 i s sustainabl e for th e cite dviolation s an di s i n accordanc e with th e Agency' s Complianc e an dEnforcemen t Progra ma s outline di n FA A Order 2150.3B . WHEREFORE , Complainan t respectfiill y request s th e Admiuisti'ativ e Law Judg e issu e a n Initial Decisio n finding aviolatio n o f 1 4 C.F.R . § 9L7(a ) and1 4 C.F.R , § 91.13(a ) an d finding that

th e propose dcivi l penalty ' o f $25,00 0 i s appropriat e givie n th e regulatory violations .

Respectfull y submitted ,



## a^dn ^ cjah aMartin o Attorney . Federal Aviatio n Administratio n Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counse l Great Lake s Regio n 230 0 Eas t Devo n Avenu e De s Plaines , E

L 6001 8 (T ) 847-294-731 3 (F J 847-294-749 8 briana.manino@faa.go v

\ 307/06/201 1 15:5 5 847294829 3 FA AAG L 7 COUNSE L PAb b LD / i.~ i

CERTIFICAT E O FSERVIC E ] hereb y certif

y that I have , thi s date , serve dth e foregoin g Agenc y Brie f o n Issue s o f

La w an d Closin g Argumen t

b y mailin g copies t o th e followin g addresse s a s follows : Origina l an dOn e Cop y (Facsimil e an dRegular Mail ) Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigli t Building . Suite 2W100 0 F.AX : 202-493-514 1

Mr . Michae l Jaco b Rushmor e Helicopters , Inc . 2456 4 Highway 16/38 5 Custer , S D 5773 0 Th e Honorabl e Richar dC . Goodwi n Administrativ e La w .Tudg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloo r Roo mE l 2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 FAX : 202-366-753 6 On e Cop y (Regula r an dCertifie dMail )

(Facsimil e an dRegular

Mail )

-t h Date dthis 6 ' da

y o f ,Tuly , 201 1

Yol^d aQuile s Lega l Technician

1 4