03/2G/201 0 13:5 1 FA X 202493514 2 FA A + DM S 21002/00 6 ^^ , c^ t i.' j \' j i>,.i o rn A eq r^ra t (ig u hA A KE G COUNS L AGL 7 0002/00 6

U S DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C ! " I

IN TH E MATTE RO F MIDWES T HELICOPTE RAIRWAYS , INC . FAA DOCKE T NO , CP09GL00 7 (Civi l Penalty Action ) DM S No . FAA

- 2009-084 6

I N TH E MATTE RO F MIDWES T HELICOPTE RAIRWAYS , INC , FAA DOCKE T NO . CP09GL00 9 (Civi l Penalt

y Action ) DM S No . FAA

- 2009-097 3

COMPLAINANT' S RESPONS E T O RESPONDENT' S MOTIO N FO RRULIN G A S T O TESTIMON Y O F GERR Y F . VENTRELL A AN D SECON D MOTIO N FO RCONTINUAN E Complainant , by andthroug h th e undersigne dcounsel , hereb y request s tha t tli e U.S . Administrativ e La w Judg e ente r apre-heahn g rulin g denyin g th e opinio n testimon y o f Mr , Gerr y F . Ventrell a(Mr . Venirella ) at th e Hearing s regardin g thes e matters . Further , th e Complainan t

respectfull y request s that th e Cour t no t continu e th e Hearing s schedule dfo

r Apri l 2 9 an dApri l 30,201 0 o n th e basi s that th e witnes s wil l no t

b e availabl e o n thos e dates . I n support o f th e objections , th e Complainan t state s a s follows ;03/26/201 0 13:5 1 FA X 202433514 2 FA A* DM S glOOS/OO G 03/25/201 0 14:1 9 FA X 84 7 29 4 749 8 FA ARE G COUNS L A6L 7 0003/00 6

1 . Th e FA A object s t o th e us e o f Mr . Gerry F , Ventrell aa s a n exjjer t witnes s givin g opinio n testimon y o n th e basi s o f 4 9 C.F.I t § 9.7(b ) whic h states ; (b ) A n employe e ma y testif y fo r th e Unite dState s both a s t o fact s withi n th e employee' s persona l knowledg e an da s a n expert o r opinio n witness . Excep t a s provide di n paragrap h (c ) o f thi s section , a n employe e ma y no t testif y a s a n expert

o i opinio n witness , with regar dt o any matte r arisin g out o f th e employee' s officia

l dutie s o r

th e function s o f

th e Department , for an y part y other

tha n th e Unite dState s i n an y legal proceedin g i n whic h th e Unite dState s i s aparty . A n employe e wh o receive s ademan dt o testif y o n behal f o f aparty other

tha n th e Unite dState s ma y testif y a s t o fact s withi n th e employee' s personal knowledge , provide dthat th e testimon y b e subjec t to th e prio r

approval o f

agenc y counse l an dt o th e Federal Rule s o f Civi l Procedur e an dan y applicabl e claim s o f privilege . 2 . Mr , Ventrell awa s employe db y th e FA A a s an Aviatio n Safet y Inspecto r

fo r 3. 5 years , 2 0 year s ago . Th e FAA submit s that 4 9 C.F.R . § 9,7(b) , applie s t o hir o an d bar s hi s testimon y becaus e h e wa s former employee . Th e definitio n o f "employee " whe n i n term s of th e applicabl e statut e i s mad e clea r b y 4 9 C.F.R . § 9.3 , whic h states : Employe e o f

th e Departmeai t

o r Employe e mean s an y curren t o r former office r o r employe e o f

th e Department ; an y activ e duty , retired , o r former office r o r enliste dmembe r

o f th e Coas t Guard ; or

an y curren t

o r former contracto r (includin g any corporatio n o r othe r entit y an dany employe e o r subcontractor) . 3 . Th e Responden t

argue s that

i s ha s bee n 2 0 year s sinc e th e cessatio n o f Mr . Ventrella' s employmen t

with th e FAA , Th e tim e perio dtha t ha s lapse dsinc e hi s employmen t

with th e FA A doe s not

negat e o r mitigat e th e fac t

tha t h e wa s a n employe e o f

th e FAA an di s no w considere da"forme r employee" . Ther e are n o provision s o r

exception s in th e regulatio n that allo w fo r th e passag e o f

tim e betwee n bein g employe db y th e Unite dState s andth e testimon y bein g afacto r in th e decisio n o f

whethe r o r not th e statut e applie s t o th e particular witness .03/2B/201 0 13:5 1 FA X 202493514 2 FA A• » DM S 12004/00 6 03/25/201 0 14:1 9 FA X 9<l 7 23 d 749 8 FA ARE Q COUNS L AGL 7 12lOO4/O0 e

4 . Mr , Ventrell ai s bein g offere da s a n exper t witnes s to testif

y t o whethe r

o r no t th e tw o area s i n questio n wer e congeste darea s an di n nee do f acongeste dare aplan . Th e FAA Fligh t

Standard s Distric t

Office s (FSDO ) that

hav e jurisdictio n ove r

th e are ai n whic h a

n operatio n wil l b e conducte darc th e determinin g official s tha t giv e approval fo r

th e congeste dare aplan . Thi s determinatio n i s mad e b y th e Aviatio n Safet

y Inspector s a

t th e FSD O an dthi s determinatio n arise s i n thei r officia l dutie s an dth e function s o f th e department . 5 . Durin g th e tim e perio dMr . Ventrell awa s employe db y th e FA A h e wa s an Aviatio n Safet

y Inspector . I n Respondent' s Exhibi t A , Mr . Ventrella , state s tha t durin g hi s employmen t

wit h th e FAA h e wa s th e helicopte r specialis t a t th e Dupag e Fligh t

Standard s Distric t

Office . H e goe s o n to stat e tha t h e wa s traine d by othe r experience dhelicopte r

pilot s i n th e agenc y tha t

ha dperforme dexternal lifts . H e als o stale dtha t

durin g thi s tim e perio da s a n Aviatio n Safet

y Inspecto r on e o f th e function s o f

hi s jo b wa s t o evaluat e congeste darea s plans . H e stated , "W e woul devaluat e helicopte r operato r congeste dare aplan s for

safet y concernin g th e public. " I t wa s an officia

l duty o f hi s a s a n Aviatio n Safet

y Inspecto r t o mak e th e sam e detennination s that th e Responden t

i s requestin g that h e testif y t o i n thes e matters . Hi s testimon y ha s adirec t nexu s t o hi s former dutie s a s an Aviatio n Safet y Inspecto r

wit h th e FA A andnot

onl y i s i t relate dt o hi s forme r duties , bu t

i t actuall y wa s aforme

r duty , 6 . Accordingly , th e FAA object s t o any an dal l testimon y offere db y Mr . Ventrell a o n th e basi s tha t

hi s testimon y i s barre db y 4 9 C.F.R . § 9.7(b) .03/26/201 0 13:5 1 FA X 202493514 2 uo/^o/<iui w ia:ii u hft xai f :ia 4 r49 8 FA A FA A RE G COUNS L AGL7 * DM S @l005/00 6

@ioo5/oo e

Wherefore , th e Complainan t respectfull y request s that Mr . Ventrell ab e barre dfrom offerin g an y opinio n o r

expert testimon y i n th e abov e tw o hearings . Th e Complainan t als o object s t o acontinuanc e o f th e tw o hearing s base dupo n th e availability o f Mr . Ventrella , i f

h e i s fac t barre dfromtestifyin g at

th e hearings . Date dthi s 25th da

y o f Marc h 2010 . Respcctfiill y Submitted ,

Jeffrey Klan g Regional Counse l

it e Barbe r Attorne y Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 230 0 E . Devo n DesPlaines,I L 6001 8 (847 ) 294-7862 ; Fax (847 ) 294-786 2 ATTORNE Y FO RCOMPLAINAN T03/26/201 0 13:5 1 FA X 202493514 2 FA A * DM S @l006/00 6 oy/ii5/201 0 14'2 0 FA X 64 7 29 4 743 8 FA A FlE G COUNS L AGL7 0006/00 6

CERTIFICAT E O FSERVIC E I hereb y certif

y tha t I hav e thi s dat e place dacop y o f th e COMPLAINANT' S RESPONS E T O RESPONDENT' S MOTIO N in th e Unite dState s mail , postag e prepaid , an db y Fax addresse dto :

HofifandHerra n 13 5 S . LaSall e Stree t

Suit e 330 0 Chicago , X

L 6060 3 Fax:312-853-392 4 I n addition , I hereb y certif y tha t 1 hav e thi s dat e provide dacop y vi afacsimil e transmission , an dplace da n original i n th e Unite dSlate s mail , postag e prepaid , addresse d to : Th e Honorabl e Richar dC , Goodwi n

Administrativ e La w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-5 0 Roo m541 1 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 40 0 Sevent

h Street , S W Washington , D C 2059 0 FAX : (202 ) 366-753 6 Hearin g Docke t FAA , AGC-40 0 60 0 Independenc e Ave. , S W Roo m201 4 Washington , D C 2059 0 FAX : (202)493-302 0 TEL : (202 ) 385-822 9

Date dthi s 25' " da

y o f Marc h 2010 .