04/08/201 0 14:5 2 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

DMS 21001/00 8 

IVED 

ncoT nM^vMSFORWlON 

To: 

FAA Decisionmaker - :": Do •'•. .'iCT i" "'*'2*^ 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. room 924A i u , .A ' ^ 

Washington DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk •'' 'R " :; Z^io 

From: ' ^nARiNG DOCKET 

Kyle Ponsford 

HC 60 Box 3394 

Haines: Alaska 99827 

Docket No. CP09AL0007 

Appeal to the FAA Decisionmaker Regarding Judge'^s Decision. 

March 8,2010 

I have been diligently working on this reply to ihc judge since receiving his AMENDED 

PROCEDURAL ORDER dated February 24,2010, and his previous letter NOTICE OF 

HEARING DATES dated January 13, 2010, 

These letters appear to show that this case is still going forward in its collection of 

documentation, to prepare for a judgment. 

This has me completely confused as his letter ORDER DEEMING ALLEGATIONS 

ADMITTED AND LIMITING PROCEEDING TO ISSUE OF CIVIJ. PENALTY dated 

November 9, 2009 appears to declare he has already made his determination. Yet I 

received a later letter declaring another hearing. It took weeks of reading and re-reading 

these letters to understand that the second hearing is to determine the amount that T will 

be fined. This process might be completely xmdersiandable to those in the administration 

but it has made no sense to me, a common American. 

Until just recently, I did not understand Vi'bai was going on in this apparent dichotomy, 

and therefore had no idea how to reply. 

My confusion began back when my funds were taken iiom my PFD (letter attached) on 

or before September 30, 2009, before the first hearing even took place. You can see how 

this is confusing to have my money taken, then have the hearing to determine guilt, then 

have the hearing to detennine the amount to be charged. Even after very diligently 

searching the rules of practice, I cannot understand how this order of process was lawfiil. 

Though answering all the letters was dif licult before due to other pressing personal 

issues, I found that after my funds were taken before any hearing, depression wa.<! nearly 

debilitating, and I locked up, unable to make my reply in a timely manor being 

completely conftised and frustrated with the process. 

Nearly all my previous letters were routinely ignored; letters of defense, letters requesting 

clarification, and letters requesting change of venue. It has been as if I never even wrote 

letters at all, this too created a severe discouragement and depression. 

Another point of confusion was the 'proposals' from the attorney regarding the process, 

the amount of the fine, and my need to agree to an informal meeting. None of this sounds 

like any kind of lawful process. And no explanation was provided. 1 requested to be 
04/08/2010 14:52 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 1002/008 

informed regarding the attorney's constant push for an informal meeting, but that too was 

ignored. 

• The attorney continues to send correspondence as though the 'trial' is still 

pending. 1 only recently figured out that even though this case went to the judge, I 

am again supposed to work with the attorney to "negotiate" the amount of the 

tine? 1 have not previously been familiar with this practice. 

• Money is mysteriously taken from me with no judgment. 

• And 1 am now receiving letters from both the judge and the attorney. 

Just who am I supposed to be dealing with at this point? 

T have spent these many months, daily working diligently at answering the many letters 

sent by the judge and your attorney. Since the first letter of September of 2008 this case 

has consumed my waking and sleeping life. I was able to keep up with the letters when 

they came one at a time, but once the court began sending letters beside those of the 

attorney, there began a flood of confusion in what was required of me, as well as the state 

of the process. I was both overwhelmed, and physically unable to reply to all the many 

letters in the time frame they demanded. I came to the place where 1 could no longer keep 

my frustration out of my letters no matter how many times T write and re-write them, 

which now takes more time to properly write a single letter, than the time allowed. It has 

been several weeks, and through constant tries and re-tries, I have finally calmed down 

enough to see more than 'red', and I am attempting yet another reply. 

As long as the pretence of a lawful process was in place, I was able to respond to the 

letters in an unemotional and lawful argument. But once that lawftil process was 

apparently abandon by the administration, I have come to a complete loss as to how to 

respond. This case has cone more than a year and T am completely wore down. This 

appears to violate the 6' amendment regarding a speedy trial, but not being a criminal 

ca.se, apparently 1 am not afforded this riglit? 

The administration has shown that it has the police power to do whatever it wants, 

regardless of its violation of its own rules and the Laws of these United States limited by 

the US. Constitution. 

As some examples: 

First: 

The Administration's court set the location of my hearing in Anchorage, almost 800 

miles from my place of residence. On 8/2/09 T sent a vvritten letter of objection stating 

that my financial limitations made it impossible for me to travel that far to attend, but my 

letter of objection was ignored. Appai^ently only the rich are allowed to defend 

themselves. 

Yet after this hearing to determine guilt, which I was not able to attend, the court found it 

in their heart to set the next hearing, to determine the amount of the fine, in Juneau, only 

114 miles from my home. This is further insult to injury. 

The hearing location was in direct violation of 14 C.F.R. 13.221(b) regarding a 

reasonable location. Further the notice for the hearing did not specify a date and time as 

required, but only 'on or before' the given date, with no time specified. 
04/08/2010 14:53 FAX 2024835142 FAA * DMS 0003/008 

Second: 

Even before judgment was made in my present case by Order served November 9, 2009, 

the Attorney General's OflQce seized funds from my PFD on or before September 30, 

2009 with no explanation. All these months later, March 11,2010, the amount of my fine 

has still not been decided, yet these funds were already taken. 

I was only informed of this seizure, by the Permanent Fund Division, alter the fact. 

No lawful document for this seizure was provided by the court, the attorney, or the 

Attorney General's Office. On October 03, 2009 I wrote the Attorney General's Office 

(letter attached) in search of the authorizing documents, but my demand to show lawful 

documentation for the seizure has been ignored to this day. I made mention of this seizure 

to the court in an attempt to explain my confusion, but the court also ignored the topic. 

The Judge^s ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE dated October 22, 2009 was answered on 

October 28,2009 to show I was conflised by his letters, and the events, Eind therefore 

unable to understand what the court was requiring or demanding, but this too was 

ignored, as all my other letters. 

Third: 

According to the rules of practice 14 C.F.R. 13.209(a) of which the judge found me in 

violation, I did in fact send my timely reply dated October 28, 2009. That letter explained 

that I had already answered each line item from the complaint, which clearly fulfilled the 

requirements of this rule of practice. My letter al.so fulfilled part (e) of the same rule, 

explaining that I was confused and could not figure out what T was supposed to do 

fiirther. Finally, this same rule, part (f) allows for a person to fail to file a timely answer if 

there is good cause. According to the rule, there is not a limitation on the production of 

evidence for good cause, only that good cause must exist. 

I am declaring now, that good cause did exits in addition to the above: Attached is my 

recent letter in a separate issue which has consumed whatever of my life that this issue 

has not consumed. There simply is not enough time in my life to maintain the dvuration 

and complication of these issues which I did not willingly or knowingly involve myself. 

These explanations show that I have acted in good faith, and v^thin the parameters 

required by the rules of practice. 

Fourth: 

In spite of 1-1/2 years of many letters back and forth between the accusing attorney and 

myself the defendant. In spite of my meticuloiis line by line reply to each point of 

complaint, and the strange requirement to repeat my line by line arguments to more than 

50 line item accusations, consuming many, many hours of my life. 

The judge was willing to ignore all of my defense letters in this case, to determine that I 

had confessed to all points of the complaint. 

It appears my 1-1/2 years of letters in reply to the attorney were just practice, and not to 

be entered into the record as my defense, even though 1 specifically wrote the court, that 

they must be. I fulfilled the rule of the administration to respond to all line item 

arguments. The repeal of the line item accusations three times does not change my 

answers. 
04/08/2010 14:53 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

'^^'^ * DMS 21004/008 

Due to the above arguments, T request the use of 14 CFR 13.234 Petition to reconsider or 

modify a final decision and order of the FAA decisionmaker on appeal, or some odier 

obscure rule that might more accurately apply to my desire tor an appeal. 

This year J made $6539-64 (W-2 attached). For the first time in my life I am unable to 

find work. I moved out of my hou5e and am living in my garage, because I could not 

afford the utilities. I sold my retirement funds at a huge loss, and am selling my personal 

possessions in an effort to keep my home mortgage payments in this economic downturn, 

I am diligently trying to stay off food stamps because I believe a man should stand on his 

own feet as far as possible, but I am finding that ever harder to do. I understand this is 

"not your problem" but the rules of your administration allow the judge to take this into 

account in determining the amount of the fine, but neither the attorney nor the judge 

made me aware of this rule. 14 C.F.R. 13.16 (ii). Since the court has ignored all my 

defense to date, am I to beg the court for mercy in determining my fine? I am shamed to 

be forced to expose my financial difficulties but looking for even a glint of relief, I enter 

my financial situation information itito the record. 

I live 34 miles from the nearest po.st office. 

Tn my financial straights, I normally drive to town about once a month for supplies. 

I drive an old '/i ton pickup, which gets 8 miles to the gallon. 

Gas in Haines has been around $3.70 per gallon for some time. I have beer forced to 

drive to town for the sole purpose of mailing these letters in my defense. 

Round trip I pay about $31.45 in gas to mail my letters certified or delivery confirmation, 

i pay between $6 and $11 to mail them plus copies. 

For all the letters I have been required to send in my defense, I have paid about $600.00 

so far. 

With $165.00 already "seized" from my PFD, plus $12.00 administrative fee, this case 

has already cost me $777.00 in on effort to defend myself. So far ALL my defense has 

been completely ignored by the court, and the court deemed I had confessed guilt to all?! 

According to the judge's apparent police power, and bis willingness to ignore the 

defendants pleas, only a fool should dare enter a defense. Where then is my constitutional 

right of redress beyond the illusion? And if the cost of defense is greater than the fine, 

where is .Tustice? This comes very close to violating the 1'* amendment guaranteeing me 

the right of redress, and not j ust the illusion of redress. 

This also seems to be about to violate the 5*^ amendment regarding excessive lines. 

Finally: 

The willingness of this administration to first, declare I "conlessed guilt to all points", 

then knowing my financial poverty, "olfcr" me to place myself in employ of said 

administration as an indentured servant, to "pay part of my debt", is beyond imaginable 

by any government organization of the United State of America. This is something I 

would expect to read about in 18* century England, and comes very, very close to 

violating the 13* amendment. 

I have spent a year and half and more than $700.00 fighting for my life, all because I 

mistakenly submitted my baggage with some coffee maker fuel in my luggage. 
04/08/201 0 14:5 3 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS 0005/008 

It is my conclusion that this administration is at best a government sponsored mafia, not 

actually intending to keep America safe from terrorism, but as a revenue collection giing 

of thugs terrorizing honest, well meaning, vYmericans who accidentally cross it's shadow. 

I am aware that Congress has given the administration this power, but that does not 

lawfully authorize it to violate the restraints of tlie U.S. Constitution. 

This administration has fully deprived me of my piusuit of happiness by the length of this 

case, and its consumption of my life. 

It is about to deprive me of liberty by claiming I have confessed to the charges, and now 

attempting to make me an indentured servant without a fare trial. 

I only today found in the FAA rules the option to appeal to a decisionmaker, which I am 

domg now. I am seeking a reversal of the judge's decision, and restitution of the costs for 

defense, due to the breaches li.sted. 

Unless you can show that I am in error, I have laid out here many serious violations of 

both the administrations ovirn rules, as well as my protections and rights secured by the 

Constitution of these United States and its Bill of Rights. 

Sincerely, 

Kyi. 

HC 60'eox 3394 

Haines AK 99827 

c.c. 

FAA 

ITic Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Hearing Docket, FAA, 

600 Independence Ave. S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building - Room 2014 

Washington, DC 20591 

ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

c.c 

FAA 

Senior Attorney 

Glenn IL Brown 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

222 West 7"'Ave. #14 

Anchorage AK 99513-7587 
04/08/2010 14:53 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 

1195-1 

Alaska Department of Revenue 

^^ Permanent Fund Dividend Division 

PO Box 110462 

Juneau, AK 99811-0462 

^14^1'^ 

ih,|,||i).||,.„ii.ii|j.i||i}|.„...ii,i|t..||i..H.|i.t.,,|.ii 

WILLIAM KYLE PONSFORD 

HC 60 BOX 3394 

HAINES AK 99827-9604 

21006/008 

D12Q3 

ALN: 200*10150713 

"X*'^ » - "^j *^ V l^«Tr. * 

October 8, 2009 

Dividend IMitribation Form 

l«99Mixc 

Part or all of your 2009 Permaaent Fund Dividend was assigned or donated by you, seized under a writ of execution, or 

withheld by the agency or agencies below. 

An asterisk (*) beside a garnishment indicates that your dividend was seized under a writ of execution. If your dividend 

was seized under a writ of execution by mistake, you have 30 days from the date of this notice to file a written objection 

with the court or the government agency hsted. Your objection must include the case number and thearaouBl/Seized. The 

PFD Division cannot assist in the is.sue. "^ 

Ageicy/AddresB 

PFD ADMINISTRATIVE FEE 

PO BOX 110461 

JUNEAU AK 99811 

Phone: (907) 269-0370 Amount: $ 12.00 

DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC 

ANCHORAGE AK 99501 5903 

Phone: (907) 269-5205 Case #: 4FA-08-07465MOD 

1031 W.4TH, SUITE 200 

Amount: $25.00 

DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC 

ANaiORAGE AK 99501 5903 

Phone: (907) 269-5205 Case #: 4FA-08-07466MOD 

1031 W.4TH, SUITE 200 

Amount: $25.00 

DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC 

ANCHORAGE AK 99501 5903 

Phone: (907) 269-5205 Case #: 4FA-08-07465MOD 

1031 W.4TH, SUITE 200 

Amount: $15.00 

DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC 

ANCHORAGE AK 99501 5903 

Phone: (907) 269-5205 Case #: 4FA-08-07466MOD 

1031 W.4TH, SUITE 200 

Amount; $75.00 

012Q3 

thvidend InfoTmadnn; Fmji) - ctor.pf<:1.info<aialask.iL|iOv 

Anchowec (9071 209-0370 / Fairbunks (907) 431-2S20 / Juneau (907) 465-2326 

( CoBtinBMl OB back...) 
04/08/2010 14:54 FAX 2024935142 FAA •> DM S 21007/008 

2009 PFD Eligibility 

William Kyle Ponsford 

Page 2 of2 

ALN: 50aiD1507i e 

6' DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC 1031 W. 4TH; SUITE 200 

ANCHORAGE AK 99501 5903 

Phone: (907) 269-5205 Case #: 4FA-08-07466MOD Amount: $25.00 

7* DEPARTMENT OF LAW 

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC 1031 W. 4111, SUITE 200 

ANQIORAGE AK 99501 5903 

Phone; (907) 269-5205 Cafie #: 4FA-08-074G5MOD Amount: $10.00 

8 APPLICANT PORTION 

PO BOX 110463 

JUNEAU AK 998110463 

Case #: AppPortion Amount: $1118.00 

Total Distribution for: WILLL\M KYLE PONSFORD 

SSN: ^^m ^ Amount: $1305.00 

Importaat Federal Tax iBfomatioa 

Keep this letter for your tax records. This important tax informatioD is being furnished to the Internal Revenue Service. If 

you fail to report the PFD on your Federal income tax return, a negligence penalty or other sanction may be imposed. 

Report the amount of your PFD on the IRS fomi 1040 on die hne for OTHER INCOME. If you are otherwise eHgible to 

file the simpler foims 1040A or 1040EZ, you may report this amount on die line for UNEMPLOYMENT 

COMPENSATION (see instructions for those forms). 

Fedend Baciisp WltUMriding 

Federal Law requires the Department of Revenue to withhold 28% of your PFD if you did not provide a valid Social 

Security Number and if the amount of the PFD is $600 or more. If taxes were withheld from your PFD, report the 

withheld amount on IRS form 1040 on die line for FEDERAL TAX WITHHELD. The IRS will issue any refiind due. 

ipartment of Revenue 

Fund Dividend Division 

D. Box 110462 

Alaska 99811-0462 

JG SERVICE REQUESTED 

'JM i fv 

^r'D^ ]or 

is 

H.LL 

M 

m 

(".-I .-. i\v<. :;J . . 

1 -in II. •. I.i |^f-/l s 

U.S.POSTAGE 

$00367 

yEPSozoos ZIP 90801 

O.J U 

2 7 •:! T .'. i i 

Important Tax 

Information Enclosed 
04/08/2010 14:54 FAX 2024335142 FAA •» DMS 01008/008 

To: Department of Law 

Attorney General's Oflice 

1031 W. 4* Suite 200 

Anchorage AK 99501 -5903 

5cJr oc^ ^'^' 

October 2, 2009 

Dear Attorney general, 

1 received notice ALN: 20090150712 on Oct. 1,09 from the Alaska PFD department 

informing mc that the DEPARTMENT OF LAW ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFC with 

the address shown as 1031 W. 4*, Suite 200 Anchorage AK 99501-5903 has .seized under 

writ of execution, $165.00 fix)m my Dividend through 6 garnishments with case numbers 

that do not seem to exist. 

I have no knowledge of any such cases, nor have I received any information or 

documentation regarding any of these so called cases, or their judgments. 

Further, there are no finalized cases regarding me with your department which would 

suggest such charges are legal or appropriate. 

To date, no judgment related to the Attorney General's Office has been found against me. 

Therefore the seizure of my fiinds by your office is unwarranted and unlawful. 

1 would like to offer you the opportunity to explain the actions of your office in this issue. 

And hopefully correct this error. 

Please return the funds to me immediately. 

Kylie Ponsford 

HC 60 Box 3394 

Haines AK 99827