Todd C. Emerson, #8175 

444 South River Road 

St. George, Utah, 84790 

Telephone: ( 435) 634-3530 

Facsimile: ( 435) 634-3505 

l]!J WG J b f: 51 AUG 1 2 2013 

HEARING DOCKET 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

SkyWest Airlines, Inc. 

FAA DOCKET CP: Unassigned 

FAA Case No. 2012NM060041 

Judge: Richard C. Goodwin 

ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

SkyWest Airlines, Inc. ("SkyWest"), by its counsel, hereby files its Answer, pursuant to 

Rule 209 of the Rules of Practice (14 C.F.R. 13.209), and states as follows: 

I. 

SkyWest admits that it was advised through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that 

the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of$55,000, and on July 3, 2013 SkyWest 

submitted a written request for a hearing. 
II. 

1. In response to Paragraph 1, Sky West admits that it is now and was at all times material 

herein, the hplder of Scheduled Air Ca1Tier Certificate No. SWIA011A, and conducts its 

operations pursuant to Part 121 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

2. In response to Paragraph 2, SkyWest admits that Paragraph D085 ofSkyWest's Operations 

Specifications (Op Specs) authorizes SkyWest to use N659BR, a Bombardier CL-600-

2B19 civil aircraft, in the conduct ofSkyWest's Part 121 operations. 

3. In response to Paragraph 3, SkyWest admits that Paragraph D072 of SkyWest's OpSpecs 

requires SkyWest to maintain its aircraft under a Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance 

Program (C~MP). 

4. In response to Paragraph 4, SkyWest admits that Paragraph D072 ofSkyWest's OpSpecs 

incorporates the SkyWest General Maintenance Manual (GMM) into SkyWest's CAMP. 

5. In response to Paragraph 5, SkyWest admits that Chapter 1, Section 2, Paragraph 1.5.6 of 

the GMM incorporates SkyWest Standard Operating Procedures into SkyWest's CAMP. I 

6. In response to Paragraph 6, Sky West admits that Chapter 1, Section 2, Paragraph 1.5 .1 0.1.9 

incorporates Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Fault Isolation Manuals (FIMs) into 

Sky West's CAMP. 

7. In response to Paragraph 7, SkyWest admits that SOP 2001- Mechanical Interruptions, 

Paragraph 11 .1.1 states that appropriate fault message reset procedures can be found in the 

FIM for the aircraft. 

8. In response to Paragraph 8, SkyWest admits that the Bombardier CL-600-2B19 FIM, 

section FAULT RESET, pages 105 and 113 describes the approved procedure of clearing a 

"STAB CH1 INOP" fault message. 

2 
9. In response to Paragraph 9, SkyWest admits that the approved procedure is to: 

"Push the STAB DISC switch and then push the Stab CHI and CH2 push-buttons for at 

least two seconds to engage the stab trim. 

If the above action is unsuccessful, open the two circuit breakers that follow and then close, 

them: 

CBP2-F5 STAB CHI HSTCU 

CBP4-AI STAB CH 2 HSTCU" 

IO. In response to Paragraph IO, SkyWest admits that the Bombardier CL-600-2BI9 FIM, 

section FAULT RESET, page IOI states: 

"NOTE: Do not perform the actions that are given in the tables more than once. If, after 

the first attempt the fault message is still shown, maintenance will be required. Refer to the 

specific Fault Isolation Procedure for the affected system." 

II. In response to Paragraph II, Sky West admits that the specific Fault Isolation Procedure for 

a "STAB CHI INOP" fault message is found in the Bombardier CL-600-2BI9 FIM, 

section 27-40-00. 

12. In response to Paragraph 12, SkyWest admits that on October 19, 20I1, the crew of 

N659BR observed an Engine Indicating Crew Alerting System (EICAS) "STAB CHI 

INOP" fault message. 

13. In response to Paragraph 13, SkyWest admits the crew ofN659BR entered the discrepancy 

in the aircraft maintenance log. 

I4. In response to Paragraph I4, SkyWest admits, that at the direction of maintenance control, 

the crew reset circuit breaker 2F5 without first pushing the STAB DISC switch and 

pushing the Stab CHI and CH2 push-buttons for at least two (2) seconds. 

15. In response to Paragraph 15, SkyWest admits, that at the direction of maintenance control, 

the crew powered down N659BR for three (3) minutes, then powered it back up. 

3 
16. In response to Paragraph 16, SkyWest is without sufficient information or knowledge from 

which to fo a belief as to the truth of the allegation that at the direction of maintenance 

control, the cr 3

w powered down N659BR for five (5) minutes, then powered it back up. 

17. In response to Paragraph 17, Sky West admits that the actions described in paragraphs 15 

and 16 above are not described in the Bombardier CL-600-2B19 FIM, section 27-40-00. 

18. In response to Paragraph18, SkyWest is without sufficient information or knowledge from 

which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation that the crew's actions as described 

in paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 constituted maintenance. 

19. In response to Paragraph 19, SkyWest admits that, at the direction of maintenance control, 

the Pilot-In-Command entered "Powered down Aircraft per SP8600 Repowered Aircraft, 

message cleared system checks normal. No Further Action Requires per MX Control" as 

the corrective action for the discrepancy and initialed the item closed block in the Aircraft 

Maintenance Log. 

20. In response to,Paragraph 20, SkyWest denies that N659BR was unairworthy due to the use 

of an unapproved procedure for correcting the "STAB CHI INOP" discrepancy. 

21. In response to .Paragraph 21, SkyWest admits that on October 21,2011, N659NR 

underwent a service inspection. 

22. In response to Paragraph 22, SkyWest admits that between October 19, 2011, when the 

discrepancy was entered in the log and the service inspection on October 21, 2011, 

SkyWest operated N659BR on eleven (11) passenger-carrying flights. 

III. 

SkyWest denies all remaining allegations set forth in the Complaint. 

4 
AFFIRNIATIVE DEFENSES 

1. The proposed penalty is excessive and violates FAA policy. 

2. SkyWest may have other affirmative defenses not currently known but which may 

become known through discovery. SkyWest reserves the right to allege such 

affirmative defenses as they become known. 

DATED this ~ay of August, 2013. 

Todd C. Emerson 

Attorney for Sky West Airlines 

5 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on this ~ay of August, 2013, a true and correct 

copy of the foregoing ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES was served as follows: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

{Federal Express} 

Robert Spitzer 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, vVashington 98057 

{Facsimile and Federal Express} 

6