BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

In the matter of the cancellation of the

Air Taxi authority issued to:

VIH COUGAR HELICOPTERS, INC. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket DOT-OST-2012-0022 

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION OF PETROLEUM HELICOPTERS, INC. 

NORTHERN PIONEER HELICOPTERS LLC AND 

SOLOY HELICOPTERS LLC TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD 

AND OPPOSTION TO MOTION TO STRIKE 

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to:

Jonathan Blank jonathan.blank@klgates.com 202-661-6250

John Longstreth john.longstreth@klgates.com 202-661-6271

Timothy Hobbs tim.hobbs@klgates.com 206-370-7664

K&L Gates LLP

1601 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20006-1600

202-778-9100 (fax)
1

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

In the matter of the cancellation of the

Air Taxi authority issued to:

VIH COUGAR HELICOPTERS, INC.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket DOT-OST-2012-0022 

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION OF PETROLEUM HELICOPTERS, INC., 

NORTHERN PIONEER HELICOPTERS LLC AND 

SOLOY HELICOPTERS LLC TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD 

AND OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STRIKE 

VIH Cougar Helicopters Inc.(“VIH Cougar (U.S.)”) responds to the motion of Petroleum 

Helicopters, Inc. (“PHI”), Northern Pioneer Helicopters LLC (“Northern”) and Soloy 

Helicopters LLC (”Soloy”) to supplement the record by mischaracterizing both the motion and 

the facts underlying it. VIH Cougar (U.S.) then proceeds on that basis to assure the Department 

that it need not worry itself about a transaction that Mr. Norie’s companies have entered into 

with another helicopter company, Bristow Group Inc. (“Bristow”). The Bristow transaction was 

entered into at the very same time that the Department is reviewing “restructuring” efforts that 

VIH Cougar (U.S.) claims will “moot” the Department’s finding of “overwhelming” evidence 

that Mr. Norie, a non-citizen, has illegally controlled VIH Cougar (U.S.) for years.1Those 

efforts include the purported transfer of the 76% “ownership” share of VIH Cougar (U.S.) from 

1

See Department’s Oct. 6, 2011 Letter to VIH Cougar at 1 (finding overwhelming evidence of

noncitizen control) VIH Cougar’s Motion to Dismiss the Show Cause Proceeding, Dkt. # DOT-OST2012-0022-0075 (posted Aug. 15, 2012) (“Motion to Dismiss”), at 7 (claiming its transaction with 

Construction Helicopters,. Inc (“CHI”) will moot the Department’s concerns.)
2

Mr. Norie’s lawyer, Mr. Steeper, to a holding company owned by Mr. Christopher Turner, who 

also owns Construction Helicopters, Inc (“CHI”). 

The Department has already requested additional information regarding this SteeperTurner/CHI transaction, which it is presumably now reviewing. PHI, Northern and Soloy’s 

current motion recognizes that the Steeper-Turner/CHI transaction and the role of CHI are the 

primary focus of the Department’s current review. This does not mean, however, that the 

Bristow transaction is irrelevant to review of the Steeper-Turner/CHI transaction, as VIH Cougar 

(U.S.) erroneously asserts. Particularly given the history of this matter, VIH Cougar (U.S.) 

offers no sound reason why the Department should simply take its word for that, rather than 

requiring VIH Cougar (U.S.), Mr. Norie, and the Norie-affiliated companies that are party to the 

Bristow transaction to provide full and complete information concerning it. The Department 

should also, of course, deny VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s “motion to strike,” which appears to have been 

filed primarily as a vehicle to provide the Department with more baseless rhetoric.

The primary basis for VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s opposition to the current motion is that the 

Bristow transaction concerns “certain assets and property owned by Cougar Helicopters Inc. 

(“Cougar [Canada]”)(which as the Department knows, is a separate, independent, and unrelated 

company from VIH Cougar [(U.S.)]), none of which is owned, used or operated by VIH Cougar 

[(U.S.)].”2 This assertion is quite remarkable. What Department actually "knows" is precisely to 

the contrary – it is that, despite the claims of VIH Cougar (U.S.), it and Cougar (Canada) are not

in fact “separate, independent, and unrelated” entities. Rather, as noted above, the Department 

has found “overwhelming evidence” that VIH Cougar (U.S.) has been controlled by Mr. Norie, 

who also controls Cougar (Canada). The Department must, in light of its prior findings, proceed 

2 VIH Cougar Opp. at 6 (emphasis added). 
3

on an assumption directly contrary to VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s assertion that VIH Cougar (U.S.) and 

Cougar (Canada) are separate, independent and unrelated, namely that VIH Cougar (U.S.) and 

Cougar (Canada) are instead under the common control of Mr. Norie. And once the baseless 

assertion that the two companies are “separate, independent, and unrelated” is disregarded, as it 

must be, there is simply no rational reason for the Department not to make a full and complete 

inquiry into the Bristow transaction.

VIH Cougar (U.S.) concedes, as it must, that the Department has before it the issue of 

whether Mr. Norie continues to control the company notwithstanding the Steeper-Turner/CHI 

transaction and the other machinations it has undertaken in an effort to “moot” this proceeding.3

VIH Cougar (U.S.), which contrary to the overwhelming evidence before the Department has 

continued to assert that Mr. Norie has never controlled it, says these transactions should resolve 

the Department’s concerns. The Department, rightly skeptical of VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s 

assertions, has sought more evidence concerning the purported transfer of Mr. Steeper’s interests 

to Mr. Turner’s holding company.

4 PHI, Northern, and Soloy simply ask the Department to be 

similarly skeptical of claims by VIH Cougar (U.S.) that the transactions Mr. Norie’s companies 

have entered into with Bristow bear no relationship to the issue of his control over VIH Cougar 

(U.S.), despite the fact that they were entered into at the same time that the Department is 

considering the matter, and despite the fact that VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s restructuring, contrary to its 

prior representations to the Department does not in fact “reduce (and possibly eliminate) Mr. 

Norie’s ownership interest in and business relations with VIH Cougar [(U.S.)].” 5

3

Id. at 1, 4, 6 (describing the “salient issue” as whether CHI’s owner Mr. Turner controls VIH 

Cougar (U.S.) after his “purchase” of Mr. Steeper’s interest). 

4

See Order 2012-8-32. [REDACTED]

5 VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s Nov. 17, 2011 Response to the Department’s Oct. 6, 2011 Letter, Dkt. # 

DOT-OST-2012-0022-0048 at 3.
4

In any event, VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s assertion that the Bristow transaction simply involves 

the sale of “certain assets and property owned by Cougar [Canada]” is inaccurate. For example, 

the Bristow 8-K filing attached to VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s response discloses that the asset sellers 

include VIH Aviation Group (“VIHAG (Canada)”) and VIH Helicopters USA, Inc, 

[REDACTED]. Nor, contrary to VIH Cougar’s (U.S.) assertion, is the 8-K disclosure sufficient 

to fully illuminate the effects of the Bristow transaction on VIH Cougar (U.S.). For example, the 

8-K states that the transaction involves Cougar’s (Canada) IFR business, but does not describe 

that business or its relationship to VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s IFR business in the U.S., which is the 

basis of the Steeper-Turner/CHI transaction.6

VIH Cougar (U.S.) states that it, and Mr. Turner and his companies, are not parties to the 

Bristow transaction.7 This does not mean, however, that the transaction bears no relationship to 

the issue of Mr. Norie’s control over VIH Cougar (U.S.). VIH Cougar (U.S.) has engaged in a 

series of transactions, which the Department is now reviewing to assess VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s 

contention that they “moot” its Order to Show Cause concerning Mr. Norie’s control of the 

company. These transactions include, in VIH Cougar (U.S.)’s words, efforts to “reorganize the 

company’s remaining IFR business line.”8It is improbable, to say the least, that transactions 

entered into at the same time by Norie-controlled companies to sell assets used in Cougar 

(Canada)’s “IFR business” to Bristow are entirely irrelevant to this transaction. This is 

6 VIH Cougar (U.S.) takes umbrage at the observation that that it did not disclose this transaction to 

DOT, noting that Bristow's 8-K filing is public. VIH Cougar Opp. at 5. The point is unclear, unless VIH 

Cougar (U.S.) means that the Department is obligated to troll the 8-K filings of the entire industry.

7 VIH Cougar Opp. at 7. PHI, Northern, and Soloy’s Motion to Supplement, at 2, stated that the 

transaction was entered into with “a number of Norie-controlled entities, including VIH Aviation Group, 

Ltd. ("VIHAG") and Cougar Helicopters, Inc. ("Cougar (Canada)"), both of which are Canadian 

companies, and VIH Helicopters USA, Inc., an Idaho company that is controlled by VIHAG.” VIH 

Cougar does not contest that all of these entities are controlled by Mr. Norie.

8

Id. at 4. 
5

particularly so since, as the Department has previously found,9 VIH Cougar has been dependant 

on Cougar and other Norie companies for its operations. 

[REDACTED]

VIH Cougar (U.S.) raises several procedural objections that are likewise of no merit 

whatsoever. It suggests that providing information on the Bristow transaction would violate 

confidentiality restrictions in the agreements.10 But parties cannot insulate themselves from 

regulatory orders by agreement, which is why, as VIH Cougar (U.S.) must well know, such 

agreements routinely provide expressly that any confidentiality restrictions do not apply to 

production pursuant to such orders VIH Cougar (U.S.) also repeats its prior suggestions that PHI 

and the Department cannot protect its supposedly confidential information.11 The Department 

has soundly and rightly rejected such arguments.12 And VIH Cougar (U.S.) states that the 

information is not in its possession, but even if that were true it is surely in the possession, 

custody, or control of Mr. Norie, whose conduct is directly at issue in this proceeding. 

Finally, VIH Cougar (U.S.) closes with two pages of rhetoric, styled as a “Motion to 

Strike,” suggesting that there is no basis for PHI, Northern and Soloy’s motion and that it was 

brought for improper purposes. Much of this is based on a rehash of the bogus confidentiality

point discussed above. The Motion is properly based on the information available to PHI, 

Northern and Soloy, and asks the Department to assure that it has all the information necessary

to inform its decision. The Department has dealt appropriately in the past with VIH Cougar 

9 Order 2012-3-7, at 6-7 (outlining “VIH Cougar’s dependence on VIH Group.”)

10 VIH Cougar Opp. at 7 n.1.

11 Id. at 9 n.4

12 See Order 2012-4-26.
6

(U.S.)’s efforts to take the focus off its own conduct by making overheated and baseless charges 

of misconduct against others, and should do so again by denying the motion to strike.

Respectfully submitted, 

_______/s/_______________

Jonathan Blank

John Longstreth

Timothy Hobbs

K&L Gates LLP

1601 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20016

Counsel for Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.

Dated: October 4, 2012
7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that I have on this 4th day of October, 2012 served the foregoing Motion of Petroleum 

Helicopters, Inc. to Supplement the Record upon the persons listed below, and have also filed a 

redacted version electronically in the docket of this proceeding:

Susan L. Kurland

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Aviation and International Affairs

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Room W96-495

Washington, DC 20590

Lauralyn Remo

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Aviation and International Affairs

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Room W96-495

Washington, DC 20590

Peter Lynch, AGC-300

Asst. Chief Counsel for Enforcement

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Ave. SW

Washington, DC 20591

William J. Weber

Certification Section Manager

FAA AFS-900

45005 Aviation Drive Suite 131

Dulles, VA 20166

Roy Hardie

Aviation Safety Inspector

Federal Aviation Administration

1601 Lind Avenue SW, Suite 260

Renton, W A 98057 
8

David M. Nadler

David Y. Yang

Andrew E. Smith

DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP

1825 Eye Street, NW

Washington, DC 20006

Telephone: (202) 420-2200

Facsimile: (202) 420-2201

nadlerd@dicksteinshapiro.com

yangd@dicksteinshapiro.com

smitha@dicksteinshapiro.com

Counsel to VIH Cougar Helicopters, Inc.

________/s/______________________

John Longstreth