Flying High LLC 

POBox 1005 

Higle~, AZ 85236 

Phil: 480) 252-0021 

Fax: 877) 849-0021 

RECEIVED 

MAR 2 7 2012 

HEARING DOCKET 

United States of America 

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

In re the Matter of 

FEDERAL AVIATION 

ADMINISTRATION, 

Petitioner, 

and 

Flying High LLC, 

Respondent, 

) Docket No. TBA 

) FAA Matter No. 2011WP0701l6 

) 

) RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO j ADMINISTRATOR'S COMPLAINT 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

RESPDNDENT'S ANSWER 

Respondent, Flying High LLC, hereinafter "Respondent," hereby files his Answer 

to Administrator's Complaint as follows: 

l. Respondent affinns the information contained in paragraph 1 in part and denies currently 

owning the subject aircraft. 

2. Respondent affirms the information contained in paragraph 2. 

3. Respondent affirms the information contained in paragraph 3, but adds that at the time 

Mr. Bell made such entry Flying High LLC was not the registered owner of the subject 

aircraft. 

4. Respondent affirms the information contained in paragraph 4, but adds that the FAA 

made no recommendation on arriving at an accurate Prop total time with out having such 

records available from the previous registered owners. Respondent made numerous 

attempts at contact Mr. Portillo with no success. Additionally, the respondent was in 

contact with the Albuquerque FSDO, Las Vegas FSDO as well as McCauley Propeller 

1 
Systems. A letter dated October 12, 2011 was drafted and sent to Mr. Adam Runkle 

detailing the findings. See attached exhibit A. 

5. Respondent affirms the information contained in paragraph 5. 

6. Respondent affirms the information contained in paragraph 6 in part and adds that after 

Mr. Bell researched the aircraft times a corrected entry was made; however, the Prop total 

time could not be established accurately based on the log books that had been kept 

through out the life on the subject aircraft. 

7. Respondent aftirms the information contained in paragraph 7. 

8. Respondent affirms the information contained in paragraph 8. 

9. Respondent affrrms the information contained in paragraph 6 in part and adds the 

complete response from Flying High LLC to the FAA as follows: "This is in response to 

your letter concerning irregularities with the total time in service for the listed propeller 

and the status of airworthiness directives for N8087S, dated April 11th 2011. The 

propeller was installed at the time of engine overhaul. No record of the total time in 

service or time since overhaul was made in the current logbook or any logbook thereafter. 

When I purchased the aircraft an entry was made stating the total time in service was 

"unknown" in compliance with 14 C.ER. 91.417. At the time of the next annual 

inspection the prop will be removed and sent off to be overhauled. A new record will be 

kept from that point forward indicating time since overhaul". This is in accordance with 

AC43-9C. 

10. Respondent denies it violated 14 C.F.R. 91.417(b)(2), as well as, 14 C.F.R 91.203(a)(l). 

AFFIRMATIVE DEfENSES 

The Administrator has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 

The Administrator's interpretation of Federal Aviation Regulations is arbitrary or 

capricious and contrary to law. 

PRAYER 

Based on the foregoing, Respondent prays that this matter proceed before an 

Administrative Law Judge and that the FAA Administrator's Order of Civil Penalty, which serves 

as the Complaint in this matter, be reversed. 

2 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have on this date sent via facsimile one copy and mailed, by regular 

U.S. Mail, an original and one copy of the foregoing Respondent's Answer addressed to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur-Wright Building, Suite 2W I 000 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Fax: (202) 366-7536 

And further, that I have this date sent via facsimile one copy and mailed, by regular U.S. 

Mail, a copy of the foregoing Respondent's Answer addressed to: 

Adam Runkel, Esq. 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Western-Pacific Region 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

Fax: (310) 725-6816 

Dated: March 21, 2012 

@nB~ ean B. Cooke, Manager 

4 
10/12/2011 

Mr. Adam Runkle, 

After much research Into the time and what to put for Total Time for the Propeller times as per FAR 93.417 (a) 

(1). These are the results. 

1. I talked with Mr. Gary Peak, Field Service Engineer for McCauley Propeller Systems, (316-831-3844); 

Mr. Peak said this Is a common problem with the older aircraft where propeller time was not always 

tracked as were the engines and airframe times. He further stated that an entry as to "Total Time 

Unknown" has been a common and appropriate entry. He also stated that these propellers were 

certified to a 70,000 hour life, over the years they will wear, mechanics filing on the leading edges 

would over time take them out of specs causing replacement of the propeller before the time has 

reached the 70,000 hours. 

Mr. Peak also said it would be possible to come up with an "Estimated Total Prop Time", take the 

propeller to a propeller shop and let them take the measurements of the said propeller to make sure It 

is within limits and then they would figure out how many hours a year are flown and subtract that from 

the 70,000 hours and come up with an "Estimate" on the time left on the propeller; however, that is not 

an accurate record for Total Prop Time and that that the record should still be kept at "TT Prop: UKN, 

Est. TT Prop xxx· 

2. I have talked to several propeller shops, Warner Propeller, in Tucson, AZ, johnson & Sons Propeller, 

Shafter, CA, Santa Monica Propeller, Santa Monica, CA. These shops all came up with the same answer, 

"Total Time Unknown" if the propeller is sent out for "Overhaul" they will sign of as "Total Since 

Propeller Overhaul" if total time is unknown they will enter "Total Time Unknown or Estimated Total 

Time". 

3. I have talked with numerous lA's and have come up with the same answer, "Total Time Unknown". My 

lA has spoken with his PMI from the SOL FSDO and explained the same scenario and was told that was 

a suitable answer and log entry. 

4. To best of my knowledge I have complied with the Propeller time In question. Additionally the aircraft 

In question has been relocated to Bullhead City. The lA who just recently completed the annual 

Inspection has also signed off the logbook entry as "Prop TT: UNK", as it has been recorded this way by 

numerous owners and lA's in the past and have been told by those mentioned above that this does not 

affect the "airworthiness" of the aircraft. 

5. Mr. Johnny Portillo had never responded to my letter indicating our findings to his list of discrepancies 

or offered an alternative solution. 

6. Due to the outcome of the trial and the loss of income over the past six months I am sincerely asking 

that this civil penalty be reduced to $0. I can provide documentation as Indicated on AWP-7 Form 

2150-25, showing that I am financial unable to pay the proposed civil penalty. In addition, Mr. Peak 

from McCauley Propeller Systems agreed to speak with you concerning the entry if this letter did not 

suffice. 

Thank you, 

;;;~~ Sean Cooke