12/06/2011 16:0B FAX 2024935142 

\2/Ql/2Cl l 12:5d J252271007 

FAA 

AMM7 

- QMS @]OO2/0O9 

PAGE 02/0 9 

O 

U.S Departrnent 

Of Transportation 

Federffcl Aviation 

Administration 

Office of Regional Counsel 

Northwesc Mountain R«gion ICOI Lind Avenue S.W. 

Colorado, Idaho. Montana, Reman. Wasb.ingron 98057 

Oregon, Utah, Washinglon, Tel: (425") 227-2165 

Wyoming Fax: (425) 227-1007 

DAVID.F.SHAYNT=@FAA.GOV 

December K2011 

VLA FACSIMILE AND CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

r n 

— I— r.-- •*—^, 

J=-. 

> • • 

CO 

Aan: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

(Wilbur Wright BIdg " Room 2W1000) 

SOD Independence Avenue S.W. 

Washington. D C 20591 

Re: In the Matter of Medford Air Service, LLC, Case No. 2011NM090054 

Enclosed herewith please find a copy of a request tor hearing and the original and one copy of 

the Complaint in the above-referenced proceeding. 

The Federal Aviation Administration (F/VA) requests that the hearing in diis matter be held in 

Portland, Oregon, and expects that the hcari.ng -wil] last one (1) day. 

For scheduling purposes. FAA attorney, David F. Shaynewill be unavailable in year 2012: March 5 

to 9, April 12 to LV May 28, September 17 to 18, September 26, Oct I to 2. and Oct 8 to 9, 2012. 

Please address all communications for the FAA to the undersigned at; 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Northwest Mountain Region. ANM-7 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W." 

Renton. Washington 98057 

Telephone: (425)227-2165 

FAX: (425)227-1007 

Davrd F. Shayne 

FAA Attorney 

DFS/ds 

Enclosures: Request for Hearing (Appeal) 

Complaint 
12/06/201 1 1G:0G FAX 202493514 2 

12/01/201 1 12:5-4 '11'522710Q7 

FAA - DMS 

AMM7 

121003/009 

PAGE 33/0 "3 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

-5 

19 

ro 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

11 

2B 

29 

30 

31 

32 

13 

34 

35 

36 

3-? 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

f3 

44 

45 

4G 

^ 1 

49 

49 

SO 

51 

52 

53 

DAVTD F. SHA^VNE 

F A A OFFICE OP REGIONAL COUNSEL 

1601 L[NDAVE.,SW 

R£NTON. WASHINGTON9S057 

TELEPHONE: (425) 2:^7-21 65 

FACSIWILJ^,; (425)227-1007 

UMTED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

J, RANDOLPH BABBITT 

Federal Aviation Administration. 

Complaint. 

V, 

MEDFORD ATR SERVICE, LLC, 

Respondent. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM090054 

CQMPLATT^T 

The Federal Aviation Administration (F.AA), by counsel, hereby files its Complaint, 

pursuant to Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice (14 C.FR. § 13.208), and states as follows: 

T. 

On November 23, 2011, Medford Air Service^ LLC, was advised through a Final 

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

amount of $11,000. On November 29. 2011, Medford Air Service, LLC, through its legol 

counsel, submitted a written request for & hearing. 

COMPLAINT 

P A ^ V. Medford Air Sen-icc. U,C 

Pope 2 of "J 

D A VID F, SHAYNE , FA A .ATTQRf/FV 

TEL: (i7i) ::37-21C5; FAX: (42r') 527-10t>7 
12/06/201 1 1B:08 FAX 2024935142 

12/01/'291 1 ISrS' i (:?522710B7 

FAA - DMS 

Ahl*17 

@]004/009 

PA5E gi/n g 

1 

7. 

3 

4 

s 

6 

7 

0 

1 0 

13. 

:.2 

1 3 

14 

1 5 

1 6 

1 7 

I S 

19 

2CI 

2 1 

2 2 

2 3 

2 4 

2 5 

2 6 

2 7 

2fl 

29 

3 0 

3 1 

3 2 

3 3 

34 

3 5 

2& 

3 7 

3 6 

3 9 

4 0 

4 1 

4 2 

4 3 

4 4 

4 5 

4 £ 

47 

46 

4 9 

50 

51 

52 

53 

IL 

1- Medford Air Service, LLC (MAS) is now, and at all times mentioned herein was, the 

owner and/or operator of a Cessna Model CE-550 aircraft, N9DC. 

2. On or about A^ril 15, 2011. MAS operated N9DC on a flight that was conducted as a 

dirccT air carrier operation, carrying passengers for compensacion or hire. 

3. MA S operated the flight referenced above without holding, or v-ithout ever having 

obiained. a direct air carrier certificate with appropriate Operations Specifications and 

economic authority from the Department of Transponation. 

4. MAS operated Llie flight referenced above without having prepared and having kepi 

rurrent a rnanual setting forth the procedures and policies acceptable to the 

Administrator. 

5. For the flight referenced above, MAS used a pilot in command who: 

a. had not passed a written or oral test, given by the y\dministrator or authorised 

check pilot within the preceding twelve (12) calendar months, on the subject 

specified in 14 C.F.R. § 135.293fa). 

b. had not passed a competency check, given by the Administrator or authorized 

check pilot, in the type of aircraft idcnti f\ed in paragraph 1, within the 

preceding twelve (12) calendar months. 

c. had not, within the preceding twelve (12) calendar monthjs, passed a flight 

cheek given by The Administrator or authorized check pilot, consisting of at 

least one flight over one route segment, and including takeotTs and landings at 

one or more representative airports. 

in. 

I. By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, MAS violated the following 

Sections of the Federal Aviation Regulations (H C.F.R,): 

a. Section 11?.5(g), in that NtAS operated as a direct air carrier without an 

appropriate certificate or appi-opriate Operating Specifications. 

b. Section 119.5(1), in that MAS operated an aircraft under Part 135 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations in violation of its Operations Specifications. 

COMPlAfNT 

7,\A V. ?yiedford Air Service, LLC 

Page 3 of 7 

DAVI:. » f. Sri'^•T'^'T?, FA.A ATroR.v;EV 

TEL: (42.11 227-2165; FAX ; (125) 227-1007 
12/06/2011 16 06 FAX 2024935142 

12/ei/2011 12:5^ a25227l007 

FAA - DMS 

ANM? 

@]OO5/003 

=AGE 05/1) 8 

1 

2 

3 

5 

(i 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

15 

16 

17 

13 

13 

20 

21 

22 

23 

:?-! 

25 

26 

21 

23 

25 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

39 

39 

4C 

41 

42 

43 

\-i 

4 5 

4£ 

47 

46 

49 

5C 

51 

!,2 

= 3 

d. 

c 

c. Section 119.5(i), in that MAS operated as a direct air carrier wiiliout 

holding appropriate economic authority from the Department of 

Transportation. 

Sectior 119.33(b)(2), in that MAS operated as a diteci air carrier for 

compensation or hire without having obtained an operating certificate. 

Section 119.33(b)(3), in that MAS operated as a direct air carrier for 

compensation or hiie w-ithout having obtained Operations Specifications that 

prescribe the authorizations, limitations, and procedures under which each 

kind of operation must be conducted. 

Section 135.21(a), in that MAS operated as a direct air caiTier Tor 

compensation or hire and used more than one pilot without having prepared 

and having kept current a manual scning forth the procedures and policies 

acceptable to the Administrator. 

Section 135.95(b). in that MAS used a pilot, in a direct air carrier operation, 

who was not qualified for the operation for which he was used. 

Section ! 35-293(a), in that MAS used apilot, in a direct air carrier operation, 

without having passed a v-ritten or oral test; giver, by the Administrator or an 

authorized check pilot, ^^Hthin the preceding twelve (12) calendar months^ on 

the subjects specified in this section. 

i. Section 135.293(b), in that MAS served as apilot in commercial operations 

when you had not passed a competency check, given by the Administrator or 

authorized check pilot, in an aircraft that is the same type as a Cessna Model 

CH-550, within the preceding twelve (12) calendar months. 

j . Section 135.299(a), in that MAS used a pilot in command of a flight, without 

having within the preceding twelve (12) calendar months, passed a flight 

check given by the Administrator or alithorized check pilot, consisting of at 

least one flight over one route segment, and including takeoffs and landings at 

one or more representative airports. 

2. In accordance with Section 46301(a) and (d) of Title 49 of the United States Code 

(Transportation) [49 U.S.C § 46301(a) and (d)], M.'\S is liable for a civil penalty not to 

exceed Si 1,000 for each of the violations noted. 

Bh. 

COMPLAINT 

FAA V. Medford Alf Service LLC 

Page 4 o f 

DAVID F. SHAY>;E, VAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (dli) 217-2165. FAX; (425) 227-1007 
12/0G/2011 1B:0G FAX 2024935142 

12/81/2011 12; 5A 'll'5':'27ia&7 

FAA - DMS 

ANM7 

21006/006 

PAGE ae/Q3 

IC 

11 

12 

13 

14 

IS 

16 

17 

l a 

li 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

35 

26 

27 

2& 

29 

3C 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

3e 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

^ ' 7 

43 

49 

SG 

51 

52 

53 

3. Under the facts and circumstances ofthis case, acivil penalty of Si 1,000 is 

appropriate. 

WHEREFORE, the Agency, by counseL respectfully requests that the Administrative 

Law Judge enter an order that MAS be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $11,000. 

Respectfully submitted this l" day of December, 2011. 

Da-ii^^-^hayne 

FAA Attorney 

COMPLAFKT 

F-\A ^.Medford Air Service. LLC 

Page 5 of 7 

DAV[ D r. SHAY7CE, FA A ATTORSFV 

T^L. (425) 227-2165: FAX: (425) 227. jnn? 
12/06/2011 16:07 FAX 2024335142 

12/01/2011 12: S'l 4252271Q07 

FAA ^ OhS 

ANM? 

2)007/003 

PAGE 37/09 

10 

11 

12 

• 1 

14 

IS 

1€ 

17 

19 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

2€ 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

J5 

36 

37 

3B 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

^e 

17 

46 

49 

50 

> -. 

c 2 

£3 

ANSWER 

In accordance with Section 13.209 of :hc Federal Aviation Regulations. MAS, must answer 

this Complaint noi later than 30 days from the time it is served on it. Failure to file an 

Answer within 30 days without good cause shall be deemed an admission of the truth of each 

allegation contained in the Complaint [I4.C.F.R. § 13.209(f)]. 

COMPLAfNT 

?AA V. Medford Air Serwice, LLC 

Page C of 7 

DAVID F. SHAT? ^ FA A ATroRyEv 

TEL; (425) 227-2165; FAX: f4:5;i 227-1007 
12/06/2011 16:07 FAX 2024335142 

^ ^ , ^^ . ^^j . J. i^.-ju i-^DVl^/lljU? 

FAA - QWS 

^,NM7 

gi008/003 

PAGE 38/09 

3 

4 

5 

£ 

•J 

a 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

i^ 

IS 

IS 

17 

le 

19 

50 

2i 

22 

33 

24 

25 

26 

::7 

23 

2? 

30 

31 

32 

3? 

34 

35 

3G 

37 

ja 

39 

43 

41 

4 2 

43 

44 

4S 

46 

47 

46 

4S 

50 

51 

s?. 

53 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

1 hereby certify that the foregoing Complaint has been served via facsimile and certified mail 

- Returr. Receipt Requested this date, to the folloTA-ing: 

Federal Aviation Administration (Original and 1 copy) 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washinglon. D.C. 20591 

AttTt'. Hearing Docket Clerk. AGC-430 

WiLbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Fax: 202. 493.5142 

Stuart W. Smith 

Miller & Associates 

500.S SW Meadows Rd., Suite 405 

Lake Oswego, OR 97035 

TEL; ("503)398-1966 

FAX; (303)598-9595 

I also certify that the foregoing Complaint has been served via Regular and Certified Mail -

Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following; 

Dated this l" day of December, 2011. 

J<w01^^^fjjyr?(>. 

sphcnson 

Office of Regional Counsel (ANM-7) 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Ave. SW 

Renton, WA 98057 

(425)227-2164 

COMPT.ArNT 

FAA V. Medford Air Service. IXC 

PojcTof ? 

DAVID F. SHAY^PE, FA A ATTORNE r 

TEL: (425) 227-2]fii; TAX: (4251 227-)00' 
12/06/20U 16:07 FAX 2024335142 FAA 

ANM7 

TioKJ 29 2011 5: 19PM nille r & Hssociate s 

r QMS 

503-539-989 3 

@]009/009 

PAGE 39/89 

P - 2 

LtNITBD STATES Of AMERICA. 

NATIOI^AL TRANSPORTATION S.AFETY BOARD 

WASHINCTON , D.C. 

ADMINISTRATOR 

Federal Aviation AdministratioTv, 

Complainant, 

V . 

MEDFORD AIR SERVICE, LLC, 

Respcr^icnt. 

) 

FAA Case Ko. 2011>:M090054 

REQUEST FOR HEAWNG 

Respondent, through undCTsigaed coutjsci, and pursuani to FAR 15.16 § (g)(2)(ii), hCT^eby 

requests a hearing in response to the Federal Aviation AdminiBtration's Final Notice of Propoaed 

Civil Penahy dated November 23,2011. a copy of >»^hich is oncloaed. AH further Notices, 

PlcadingB and Documents should be sent lo the undcreigned counsel. 

DATED this 29*^ day of November, 20 U. 

l^flLLER & ASSOC 

Page 1 of 1- REQUEST FOR HEARING 

^TcSw^Smith, OSB No- 044209 

spj artsaTUth(23roUl erandassofii at eg av n. com 

Timothy E. Miller, OSB No. 820910 

tJmrqjU&rfgjfnilterandassooiatesav'n.com 

Of Attorneys for Respondent 

MILLER 4 ASSOCIATES 

Lite OiwtTJi Or^ n ?703 i