U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

Complainant, 

vs. 

Docket No. FAA-2013-0288 

FAA Case No. 2012S0190209 

AVIONICS MASTERS, INC., 

Respondent. Judge Sullivan 

AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT 

In Respondent's Amended Answer (filed March 14, 2014) and Summary Judgment 

Response (filed March 20, 2014), Respondent admitted that (contrary to its original Answer and 

its discovery responses) it was not authorized to perform repairs on the directional gyro. It, 

instead, squarely presented a defense that it had not actually done any sort of repair, but had 

instead incorrectly filled out the Form 8130-3. However, as described below, if Respondent's 

characterization of events is accurate, it had admitted to violating a different section of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations. If the Respondent performed a repair, it violated§§ l45.5(a) and 

l45.20l(b). If Respondent described performing a repair, even though it had not, then it violated 

§§ 43.5(a) and 43.9(a)(l). 

Accordingly, the FAA hereby amends its Complaint to charge that, in the alternative, that 

Respondent violated §§ 43.5(a) and 43.9(a)(l). The original Complaint is amended and 

superseded as described below. Section I is unchanged. Some changes have been made in 

sections II and III of the Complaint in order to provide additional clarity as to the distinction 
between the two alternative allegations. Sections IV and V are entirely new, and contained the 

new, alternative, allegations. 

I. 

I. On May 14, 2013, Respondent, Avionics Masters, Inc. was advised through a 

Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the 

amount of$7,150. On May 27,2013, the Agency Attorney received a written request for a 

hearing from the Respondent. 

II. 

2. At all times material herein, Avionics Masters was and is now the holder of Air 

Agency Certificate No. VIMR095K. 

3. Avionics Masters, Inc. is authorized to perform maintenance on Radio, Limited 

Airfame and Limited Instruments, as defined by the Operation Specifications and the Accepted 

Capability List. 

4. On or about December 22, 2011, Avionics Masters approved for return to service 

as repaired a Bendix/King directional gyro, model KG 1 02A, serial number X32301. 

5. Avionics Masters was not authorized by its Operations Specifications or its 

Accepted Capability list to perform maintenance, including repairs, on the directional gyro. 

III. 

6. By reason of the facts and circumstances described in paragraphs 2-5 of this 

Complaint, Respondent violated the following sections of the Federal Aviation Regulations: 

a. Section 145.5(a) in that no person may operate as a certificated repair 

station without, or in violation of, a repair station certificate, ratings, or operations specifications 

issued under this part; and 

b. Section 145.201(b) in that a certified repair station may not maintain or 

alter any article for which it is not rated, and may not maintain or alter any article for which it is 

rated if it requires special technical data, equipment, or facilities that are not available to it. 

7. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sections 46301(a)-(d), Respondent is subject to a civil 

penalty not to exceed $11,000 for each of the violations alleged. 

8. Under these facts and circumstances case, a civil penalty of$7,150 is appropriate. 

IV. 
9. Regardless of whether or not Respondent actually performed a repair of the 

Bendix/King directional gyro, model KG102A, serial number X32301, Respondent executed an 

FAA Form 8130-3 approving the gyro for return to service as repaired and describing the work 

as a repair. 

10. In the event that no repairs were performed on the directional gyro, Respondent 

falsely certified on the Form 8130-3 that repairs had been performed. 

11. In the event that no repairs were performed on the gyro, Respondent did not make 

an accurate description of the work performed on the directional gyro. 

v. 

12. In the alternative to the allegations in part III of the Complaint, by reason of the 

facts and circumstances described in paragraphs 9-11 of this Complaint, Respondent violated the 

following sections of the Federal Aviation Regulations: 

a. Section 43.9(a)(l) in that ,except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of 

this section, each person who maintains, performs preventive maintenance, rebuilds, or alters an 

aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part shall make an entry in 

the maintenance record of that equipment containing the following information: a description (or 

reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of work performed; 

b. Section 43.5(a) in that no person may approve for return to service any 

aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance, that has undergone maintenance, 

preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless the maintenance record entry required by 

43.9 or 43.11, as appropriate, has been made. 

7. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sections 4630l(a)-(d), Respondent is subject to a civil 

penalty not to exceed $11,000 for each of the violations alleged. 

8. Under these facts and circumstances case, a civil penalty of $4,042 is appropriate. 

WHEREFORE, the Agency, by counsel respectfully requests that the Administrative Law 

Judge enter an order that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $7,150, as a 

result of Respondent's violations of§§ 145.5(a) and 145.201(b). Alternatively, the Agency, by 

counsel respectfully requests that the Administrative Law Judge enter an order that Respondent 

be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $4,042, as a result of Respondent's violations of 

§§ 43.9(a)(1) and 43.5(a). 

itted this ~ --.Jl day of April, 2014. 

c SON 

Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Amendment to Complaint has been sent this date by 

the following methods: 

original and one copy via certified mail: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Attention:Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

one copy via certified mail: 

Mohammad Ahmed Faruqui, Esq. 

Trial Lawyers Building 

633 SE 3rd Avenue, Suite 4R 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 

Honorable Judge J.E. Sullivan 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Date