# RECEI\/ED U.S. DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION 

## JAN 262017

In the Matter of: FELTS FIELD AVIATION Respondent OFFICE OFHEARINGS WASHINGTON, D.C. 

## HEARING DOCI<ET ) ) ) ) ) DocketNo: FAA-2015-3307 Case No: 2015WP910090



## _________________________) Judge J.E. Sullivan COMPLAINANT'S CALCULATION OFTHEPROPOSED CIVILPENALTY

Complainant, by and through counsel, provides the following calculation ofthe proposed civil penaltypursuantto Judge Sullivan's Order onDecember 15,2016. During the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) investigation of Case No. 2015WP910090, the FAA discovered that Felts Field Aviation (Felts Field) failed to comply withthe requirements of 14 C.P.R. Part 120 and 49 C.P.R. Part40 for its drug and alcohol testing program. Specifically, Felts Field hired Richard Webber-a pilot- in 2008, but failed to add Mr. Webberto its random drug and alcohol testingpool until April 6, 2015. Mr. Webberwas not included in the random selection pool during selections made in July 2013, October 2013, January 2014, April2014, July 2014, October 2014, and January 2015. Prior to adding Richard Webber to its random drug and alcohol testing pool, Felts Field allowed Mr. Webber to perform
over 60 part 135 flights. According to FAA Order 2150.38, Appendix B, fig. B-5-b(l), a moderate to maximum civil penalty is recommended for failing to include a safety-sensitive employee in FAA mandated drug and alcohol testing programs. A pilot is a safety-sensitive employee. Under the FAA's classifications of operators, Felts Field is considered a Group IV operator; and the sanction range for a moderate civil penalty is $2,200 to $4,399 and a maximum civil penalty is $4,400 to $11,000. FAA Order 2150.3B, Appendix B, p. B-3- B-4. In this case, Felts Fieldfailed to include Richard Webber in its drug and alcohol program for years and allowed Mr. Webber to operate over 60 part 135 flights onits behalf. Failing to subject a flight crew member to random drug and alcohol testing for years could lead to the performance of safety-sensitive work in an impaired state. Felts Field's failure to include Richard Webber in its random drug and alcohol testing program for such au extended period oftime and allowing 

### Mr. Webber to operate part 135 flights on its behalf were careless acts that posed a substantial threat to air safety. As a result, such acts are considered aggravating factors. See Id. at Ch. 7, para. 4. Consequently, the FAA assessed a maximum civil penalty of$11,000 for this case. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a maximum civil penalty is consistent with the FAA's guidance inFAA Order2150.3B.
Respectfully submitted, Naomi Tsuda Assistant ChiefCounsel for Enforcement



# ~~ Fatimah Stokley Enforcement Division, Western Team P.O. Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 Email: fatimah.stokley@faa.gov Telephone: (310) 725-7112 Facsimile: (310) 725-6816

2DocketNo. FAA-2015-3307 Case No. 2015WP910090 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this date I have sent by U.S. First Class Mail and facsimile, the COMPLAINANT'S CALCULATION OF THE PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY, addressed as follows: Judge J.E. Sullivan U.S. AdministrativeLawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAve, S.E. EastBldg., RoomE11-310 Washington, D.C. 20590 Fax: 202-366-7536 Federal AviationAdministration Hearing DocketClerk,AGC-430 WilburWrightBuilding, Suite 2WIOOO 800 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Fax: 202-267-1293 MarkJ. Conlin 421 W. Riverside Ave., Suite 911 Spokane, WA 99201 Fax: 509-623-1650



# 101!}~ Debbie Reed ManagementProgramAnalyst FederalAviationAdministration Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Lawndale, California
Dated: January 17,2017



### 3