### Augus t 29 , 201 1

Hearin g Docket , Federa

l Aviatio n Adminisiration , Orvill e Wright

Building , 80 0 Independenc e Avenu e S . W . Washingto n D.C . 2059 1 C ' 1 . . :'; ^ 

# FZ^T^m GQOCKE T

Re ; FA A Docket No . CPIOSWOOI

O FDMSNO . FAA-2010-097 4 Cas e No . 200 9 SW91005 1 Dea r Si r o r Madam : r ^ i er a

" • r - i '" ' — r - j > ^ ^ T ^ .- - ^ " ' .'-""!, ' ' ' ' i

•— —' r. 1 ^ J ''''J''-^ \ r~ y'-^ 6 rr , -'xj'^--'^^ ^ rr-' . ^ m 

## :S>i: 5 P--=;oO ' L-^—.-"'I T



### Enclose dpleas e findth e Respondent' s Motio n to Dismis s fo r filing i n th e abov e referencedcase .

Laurenc e E . Rohl , President Air ZFlyin g Servic e Inc . 35 5 RichmondRd . Hanga r 5 Richmon dHeights . Ohi o 4414 3 216-261-299 2

SIO/LO O SW G VV d StJLSeetSO S XV J GS.& L LlOS/eO/Br j

### U.S . DEPARTMENT O FTRANSPORTATIU N 

### FEDERALAVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N 

# ''"^'CcJva D

^-- i . . •

5 jJ i 

# ^'^^TilN GDOCKET

I n th e matter

of : AIRZ FLYIN GSERVIC EINC , FA A Docket No . CPIOSWOOI

O

. FDM S NO . FAA-2010-097 4 CaseNo . 200 9 SW91005 1 JUDGE : GOODWI

N RESPONDENT' S MOTIO N TO DISMIS S ON TH

E BASI S OF LACHE S No w come s th e Respondent Ai r Z flying Servic e Inc . andmo\e s t o dismis s thi s cas e base dupo n th e equitabl e doctrin e o f laches , a s th e respondent

ha s bee n unduly prejudice dfrom defendin g th e cas e du e t o inexplicabl e andunreasonabl e dela y i n institutin g th e actio n

1 . Relevan t

Faa s On Ma y 28,200 8 th e Respondent sen t a n employe e o f

T an dGFlyin g Club Inc. , on e Ritc hKovaci c fo

r a**pre-employinent " dru g scree n s o tha t he coul dwor

k o n safet y sensitiv e function s it s (Air

Z's ) charter

aircraft . Tha

t individua l gav e aspecime n to th e collectin g agency , andi t w-a s sent t o alaborator

y an danalyzed . Normall y th e resul t i s orall y reporte dt o Ai

r Z withi n days. , an dthen followedb y awritte n cop y o f th e result Bradle y Rohl , th e designate d employe e representativ e (DER ) o f Ai r Z ha s testifie di

n deposition , andha s some writte n busines s record s o f

hi s own , tha

t confir mh e receive danegativ e resul t fo r th e subject' s specime n H e ha s slate dtha

t thi s date o f

Ma y 28,200 8 ma

y b e of f ada y o r two. . Mr . Kovaci c the n . .

SLO/^00 0 SW O ~ VV d SH5CGP30 3 XV dBZSlM0Z/e0/6 Qperforme da.safet y sensitiv e functio n o n a n Ai r Z aircraf t wel l ove r

awee k thereafter . (Jun e 6 , 2008) . However , i n thi s cas e accountin g procedure s wer e no t coordinate dproperl y betwee n th e collectini r

agency , ih c laboratoiy , an dth e Medica l Revie w officer , throug hn o faul t o f th e Respondent . S o i t

remain s questionabl e a s t o exactl y whe n th e officia l writte n cop y o f th e negativ e resul t

tha t Mr , Roh l orall y receive dat th e en do f

May , wa s sen t

ou t Righ t now , th e onl y writte n cop y o f

th e negativ e tes t

resul t i s i n adocumen t

date dJul y 17 , 200 8 an dupo n whic h th e FA Aobviousl y conclude dtha t Kovaci c ha dbee n workin g o n a n Ai x Zaircraf t (Jun e 6 . 2008 ) prio r t o tha t otficia l writte n confirmatio n o f th e negativ e tes t

resul t bein g sen t

out . How<;veT , th e cru x o f

thi s motio n lie s i n th e dal e tha t th e Administrato r

decide dt o pursu e thi s actio n an dfil e acomplaint . Th e FA A onl y sen t ou t it s "Notic e o f

Propose dCivi l Pcnalt>' " o n Fe b 26

^ 2010 . Thi s wa s 1 9 month s afte r th e allege dviolatio n wa s know n t o th e FA A (7-23 - 2008 ) a s Slate di n th e Enforcemen t Investigativ e Repor t

(EIR) . (Exhibi t

A )

11 . La w an dArgumen t

Th e discover y document s receive dfromth e FA A giv e n o explanatio n for th e unreasonabl y dela y i n bringin g thi s action , an despeciall y fo r no t bringin g it

withi n th e tim e tram e o f 6 0 day s fromth e receip t o f th e Enforcemen t

Investigativ e Repor t

require db y thei r

ow n regulations. ' (se e Administrator' s respons e t o interrogatorie s #3 , 9 attache da s Exhibi t B) . Thei r respons e i s .simpl y tha t

i t wa s brough t

withi n th e tw o yea r

statut e o f

limitations . (Exhibi t

Ther e ar e severa l dares o n th e Ei R.bu t th e administrato

r ha s responde dtha t th e bcsi "dale" ' o

f th e repor t wouJ db e th e one s o n for m215 0 (exhibi

t A) . Althoug

hther e ma y som e qucsiio n a s t o whic hdal e woul db e th e on e whici ' constitute s the officia

l generatio n o f ih e £1R , i t is absolutel

y clea r tha t suc hdocumc mahows th

e FA A wa s awar e o f thi s allege d"violaticm " a

s o f Jun e 23 , 200 8 som

e 1 9 month

s prio r t o ih e issuanc e of th e '^Notic e o f Propose dCivi l Penalt y letter " bein

g dispatche dt o th e Respondent

, withou t an y explanatio

n fo r th e extrem e delay .

sio/eooi a 5HQ .

: ^^ ^ 2W5e6frS0 3 XV dOe.S LU0Z/6O/B Q

### B ) For th e foregoin g reason s thi s i s unacceptabl e under th e law , andbasi c principle s o f equit y anddu e process . Althoug hth e U.S . Supreme Cour t an dthe Federa

l Circui t Court s ar e ver y hesitant t o appl y th e doctrin e o f

lache s agains t

th e federa

l government

o n th e basi s o f

sovereig n immunity , it ha s never bee n completel y foreclose dfo r an y typ e o f case . Admittedly thi s cas e involve s th e enforcement

o f afedera l protectiv e dut

y t o th e publi c rather

tha n th e enforcement

o f apurely private right

o n behal f o f th e government , but

tha t doe s no t mea n tha t th e government

i s immune . Court s continu e t o refus e ablanke t prohibitio n agains t

th e applicatio n o f

th e doctrin e t o th e federa

l government

or it s agencies . CosuH o v. Unite dStates , 36 5 V.S . 26 5 (I960) : Irwi n V . Oept . o f Vetera n Affair s 49 8 U.S . S 9 (1960) ; Jan av. US^ 93 6 F2 d126 5 (1991 ) Maksy mv . Loesc h93 7 F.2 d1237 , 124 8 (7t hCir . 1991) ; K-Mar

t Corp . v. Orienta l Pla-a , 'inc. . %1 S F.2d 907 , 91 1 (1s t

Cir . 1989) : Azale aFleet , Inc . v. Dreyfu s Suppl y & Machiner

y Corp. . 78 2 F.2 d 1455 , 145 9 (gt

hCir . 1986) , UniiedState s v. Administrativ e Enterprises . Inc. . 4 6 F.3 d670 , 67 3 (7t hCir . 1995 ) A s can be see n i n th e case s reference dabove , mos t federa l cotirt s dealin g withth e issu e o f lache s never

decid e th e thr^hol dissu e o f it s applicatio n t o th e federa l government

becaus e they findtha

t th e core element s of

th e defens e coul dneve

r b e foundb

y th e fact s befor

e them . Thi s cas e i s the revers e o f

thos e however , a s th e core element s o f lache s are clearl y present . T o make acas e o f

lache s on e mus t

demonstrate th e defens e o f lache s require s ashowin g o f tw o things : (1 ) unreasonabl e an dunexcuse ddela y by th e claimant , and(2 ) prejudic e t o th e other party , either

economi c prejudic e o r

"defens e prejudice " —impainnen t o f the abihty to moun t

a defens e du e to circumstanc e sucha s los s o f records , destructio n o f

evidence , or

witnes s

### unavailability . Costell o v . Unite dStates , 36 5 U S 265 , 282 . 5 L . E d2 d551 . 8 1 S Ct . 53 4 (1961) . See als o Corneli av . Unite dStates , 85 1 F.2 d1372 . 1377-7 8 (Fed . Cir . 1988) . Thos e element s ar c clearly applicabl e here . Th e government ha s offeredno plausibl e reaso n fo r it s unreasonabl e dela

y o f 1 9 month s i n sendin g it s notic e o f propose dcivi l penalt

y fromthe date o f it s receip t o f th e Enforcement

Investigativ e Report . Th e depositio n transcrip t tha t wa s submitte d wit hth e Administrator' s perfunctor y "Motio n fo

r Decision " show s tha

t Bradley Rohl , th e Designate dEmploye e Representativ e (DER ) fo r Air Z obviously ha s been prejudice di n presentin g wha

t wa s orall y conveye dt o hi mb y th e Medica l Revie w Office

r (Choic e Point

or ASTS , i n accordanc e wit

hth e preferre dprocedure s o f th e FA A itsel f 4 9 CF Rsubpar t G. sectio n 40.167 . (a) (I ) ) afte

r th e dru g tes t

wa s confirme dnegative . AST S als o admit s tha t th e laps e o f time here ha s preclude dthe mfromgivin g a n accurate renditio n o f

the sequenc e o f

event s regardin g th e exchang e o f informatio n betwee n th e entitie s involved . (Exhibi t C)Moreove

T there are record s tha

t Ai i Zattempte dt o subpoen atha t hav e bee n destroye db

y th e agenc y involved , to wit , th e laborator

y whic hteste dth e specimen i n question . (Exhibi t D ) . Contrar

y t o th e fact s o f many o f th e case s cite dabov e Respondent ha s clearl y demonstrate dth e element s o f lache s to exis t i n this case , andrequest s thi s cour t t o apply th e well establishe dequitabl e doctrin e o f laches . There ha s been unreasonabl e andinexcusabl e dela y b y th e government

i n bringin g thi s cas e (whic ha s demonstrate di n th e Respondent s answer t o th e "Motio n fo

r Decision " wa s brought upo n amistake n assumptio n o f facts) , an dclea

r prejudic e t o th e respondent directl y therefrom .

SIO/SO O siv o ^ VV J 

## zn,,,no z xv

i ocs i noj/so / G O

### Respectfully Submitted , Laurenc e E . Rohl , Presiden t Air ZFlyin g Servic e Inc . 35 5 Richmon dRd . Hanga

r 5 Richmon dHeights , Ohi o 4414 3 216-261-299 2

Ceniiicat co f Servic e 

### A cop y o f thi s Motio n to dismis s wa s serve dthi s ^ / da y o f Augus t 201 1 b y regula r mai l on . 1 . Nicola s R . Millard , Attorney , Enlbrccmen t Divisio n AGC-30 0 Offic e o f Chie f Coimsel , Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S . W. Washingto n D , C . 2059 1 2 . Hearin g Docket , Federal Aviatio n Administration , Orvill e Wright Building , 80 0 Independenc e Avenu e S . W. , Washingto n D . C . 2059 1 

# .^^^-^^-^ ^ ^f?J / Laurenc e £ . Roh

l

SLo/aoo ® SIV Q VV J 

### _^^'«mo e X. J OE:S I 

### uoj/60/fi ,Respons e t o Feb . 24t h lette r 

### Pag e 1 of2

Prt vI NM t I Sfipt vI R«P* yA " I Eonwar d I j^l« n | Prfn j | Mov e t o folder. . From : Colc.Milll9rd9faa.90 vgav e Ad<lr«« a T o : IrohlOK»tn8tion.co m C C : Oflt e :Tnu , 17Mar201 1 14:26:32-040 0 Subje a : Respons e t o Pcb . 24t h latte r Hoader v

Dea rMr . Rohl : Regardin g you rlette rdate d Februar y24 , 2011 : R^ues t fo rProductio n o f Documem s Nos . 1-3 :

• TTi e deliberativ e proces s privileg e I s fong-slandin g an d well-fecognize d b yth e courts . Jorda n v . Dep t o f Justic e . 59 1 F.2 d 753 . 772-7 3 (DC . Cir . 1976 ) (e n banc) , provide s a goo d explanatio n o f th e privileg e an d som e cas ^

la w authority . A searc h o f an ycas e la wdatabas e wil l tur n u p mor e recen t invocation s o f th e privilege . • M yapologie s i f I lef t ou t th e statemen t i n Ite m o f Proo f #4 ; a PD F cop yi s attache d t o thi s email . T o th e bes t o f m yknowledge , al l othe rItem s o f Proo f wer e provide d i n ou rresponse . • Regardin g Reques t No . 2 , th e document s provide d ar e al l suc h communication s withi n th e custod yan d contro l o f th e FAA . Interrogatoriftf i Np s 3 an d 9 :

• Th e bes t infontiatio n w e hav e o n whe n th e EI R repor t wa s create d i s i n th e EI R repor t Itself , specificall y For m 215 0 • A s note d o n pag e 1- 1 o f 2150.3 B , "Thi s orde ri s a staf f manual . I t guide s FA A enforcemen t personne l i n th e exercis e o f thei rdiscretio n i n handlin g complianc e an d enforcemen t matters . However , i t doe s no t cove rever ysituation , an d ther e wil l b e situation s wher e deviatio n i s warranted. " Furthermore , a s state d i n ou rdiscover yresponse , th e Notic e o f Propose d Civi l Penalt yvra s issue d befor e th e expiratio n o f Ih e two-yea rstatut e o f limitations . InterroQator vNo . 11 :

• Base d o n th e document s yo u sen t t o m e i n you remai l o f Marc h 15 , 2011 , i t appear s yo u hav e alread y foun d (assumin g th e docurrien t i s authentic ) th e dat e o f testin g fo rth e specime n IWr . Kovad csubmitte d o n o rabou t Ma y28 , 200 6 an d th e result s o f tha t tes t Th e FA A make s n o admission s regardin g th e document s provide d i n you rMarc h 15.201 1 email , an d w e di d no t t o th e bes t o f m yknowledg e posses s th e aforementione d documen t reganlin g Mr . Kovacic' s dru g test unti l I receive d i t fro m yo u vi a email . Additionally , th e Federa l Rule s o f Civi l Procedur e an d th e Federa l Rule s o f Evidenc e d o no t appl yi n thi s forum . The yar e suggestive , Di n no t binding . Al l o f th e relevan t procedura l rulo a ma yb e foun d i n 1 4 CF.R . par t 13 . Sincerely , Cof 0 R . Milliar

d

SLO/ZOO © . ' f / - ! 1 ' L I I 

## sw a VV d ZPlSZet^ZO c XV d 0C-5 L 1102/60/6 0

### 9/28/200 9 6:11:4 8

ENFORCEMEN TINVESTIGATIV E

REPOR T (Rea d OrdG r2150. 3 fo rinstnictions ) REPOR T NUMBE R 

### 20O9SW91OO5 1 RELATE D hUMBE R AUJEGE D VIOLATO R IDENTIFICATIO N 1.NAM E 

### AI R 2 FLYIN G SERVIC E IN C TELEPHON E NUMBE R (7nc/yrf » 

### 440-953-299 2 S FA ACERTIFICAT E NUMBE R 

### ZFDA222 T 2 . ADDR£$ S (Incfud e Zi p code ) 

### AI R Z FLYIN G SERVICE . INC . 188 5 LOS T NATIO N ROA D . V\f

l 3 . DAT E O f aiRT

W

« . FA ACERTIFICAT E TYP E 

### 05 LLOUGHBY . O H 4409 4 4 SE X MAL E FEMAL E 7 AVIATIO N EMPLOYE R AIRCRAFT , ENGINE , PROPELLER , COMPONEN T O R APPLIANC E INVOLVE D a . MAK E 9 . MODE L 1 0 IDENTIFICATIO N NUMBE R 11 . OWNE R 12 . ADDRES S ff/iric/da zi p cotfo ) ALLEGE D VIOLATIO N 13 . DAT E OCCURRE D 

### 2008/05/2 8 14 . TIM E 1 S DAT E KNOW N T O f A A 

### 2008/07/2 3 1S . REGrO N O F DISCOVER Y 

### G L l7 . LOCATIO N 16 . REGULATION S BELIEVE D VIOLATE D RELATE D DATA 19 . TYP E 

### 0 5 20 . su e TYP E



### 0 3 21 . CATEGORY 

### 2 2 22 . SOURC E 

### 3 3 23>CCIDEN T

ASSOCIATE D 

### 0 0 2 4 SECURfT

YPROGRA M INVESTIGATIN G FIEL D OFFIC E RECOMMENDATIO N 2S . SANCTIO N TYP E ACTIO N 26 . SAMCTIO N AMOUN T



## l^trloJi-i-t A 28 . fNVESTlGATlN G OFRC E 

### SW9 1 REPORTIN G INSPECTO R (Typs d flflm#) 

### ARMIJO . WILLIA M (817 ) 222-433 5 CHIE F {Type cflflffltf an d sJgnttun ) 

### Tea m Coordinafo rPratt , Jeffer y REGIONA L DIV^IO N REVIE W 29 . REGULATION S BELIEVE D VIOLATE D

32.DAT t 33 . REGJO N 

## s w 31 . RECOMMENDE D SANCTIO N AMOUN T TYPE D NAME/TITLE^IGNATUR E O F 

### C& E Manager : R^rtan . Jame s \ \ 

# V \ 

# B . 5L0/80 0 SH O VV J 2MSC6t20 3 XV J oe-S L UOS/60/6 0ANSWER S T O INTERROGATORIE S

} . Stat e th e nam e an dtitle , an d jo b descriptio n o f

th e perso n answerin g thes e interrogatories . Answer : Nichola s R . Milliard , Attorney , Enforcemen t Division , Offic e o f

th e Chie f Counsel , Federa l Aviatio n Administration . H e perform s lega l work relate dt o th e enforcemen t o f th e Federa l Aviatio n Regulations . 2 . Stat e ho w th e Complain t [sic ] agenc y becam e axuare o f th e allege dviolation s state di n th e complaint , whe n thos e fact s wer e discovered , enforcemen t action s taken , an dwha t yvas don e i f anythin g t o notif

y th e responden t

o f an y violations . Includ e th e date s an dperson(s ) takin g actio n fo r al l suc hevents . Answer : Th e Adniinistrato r object s l o thi s interrogatory , a s i t i s irrelevant , overl y broad , an dseek s informatio n tha t i s privilege da s th e deliberativ e proces s o f employee s an dofficial s o f th e FAA . Insofa r

a s thi s reques t

i s prope r

an dpermissible , th e releasabl e portion s o f th e EI R contai n th e requeste dinformation . 3 . Stat e why ther e wa s n o actio n take n o n thi s cas e fro mth e lim e th e allege d"violatio n " wa s discovere db y th e complainan t unti l Februar y 2010 . Answer : Unde r

4 9 U.S.C . § 4630Ud)(7XC ) an d1 4 C.F.R . § 13.208(d) , aNotic e o f Propose dCivi l Penalt y mus t b e issue dwithi n tw o year s o f th e dat e o f

th e violation . Th e violatio n occurre do n Ma y 28 , 2008 , an dth e Notic e o f Propose dCivi l Penalt y wa s issue do n Februar y 26» 2010 , thre e month s an dtw o day s befor e Ma y 2S , 2010 , whe n tw o year s woul dhav e elapse dfro mth e dat e o f violation . 4 . Durin g tha t

perio do f

tim e fro mth e "discover y o f th e allege dviolation(s ) " unti l Februar y 2010 . stat e what , i f an y procedura l o r

substantiv e action s wer e take n b y th e FA A o r it s employee s concernin g thi s case . I n you r anywe r pleas e referenc e (andprovid e pe r th e accompanyin g reques t

fo r productio n o f

documems) . an y specifi c action s whatsoeve r (ha t wer e take n b y th e F.4A o r

it s agent s tha t

wer e take n i n th e processin g o f thi s case , o r

an y specifi c action s o r

problem s tha t

cause dan y delay . Includ e th e dat e o f an y action . 

# Ii4^. f ^ ^^Q^g^Ql g sw a- ^^ J •2n&£6t'20 2 XV J 0S'5 l U02/60/6 0Answer : Th e Administrato r object s t o thi s interrogatory , a s it i s irrelevan t

an dseek s informatio n tha t

i s privilege da s th e deliberativ e proces s o f employee s an dofficial s o f th e FAA , attorne y wor k

product , and/o r

attorney-clien t

comraunications . I n addition , se c th e answe r t o Interrogator y No , 6 , supra . 8 . Stat e th e natur e o f an y typ e o f

remedial , disciplinary , o r correctiv e communicatio n o r actio n take n b y th e FA

A wit hrespec t

t o an y perso n o r

entit y i n thi s case , includin g bu t no t limite dto , thos e entitie s liste di n M 5 above . Answer : Se e th e answe r t o Interrogator y No . 6 , supra . 9 . Stat e th e dat e th e FA A receive dth e Enforcemen t Investigativ e Repor t

(EIR ) an dth e .specific , articulabl e reason s why th e FA A di dno t meet it s ow n targete dtim e o f initiatin g enforcemen t

actio n withi n 6 0 day s o f th e receip t

o f suc hEI Rreport . Se e FA A orde r 2150.3 B Chapte r 6 , sectio n 25 . Answer : Th e FA A i s unabl e t o stal e th e dat e th e FA Areceive dth e EI Rbecaus e th e questio n i s vagu e an dbecaus e th e FA A generate dth e EI Rbase do n it s investigatio n o f Ai r Z Flyin g Servic e Inc . Se e als o th e answe r t o Interrogator y No . 3 , supra . JO . Stat e th e reason s an dth e calculation s o f th e requeste dpenalt y amount , includin g an y law s o r administrativ e regulation s tha t for mth e basi s thereof . Includ e wha t aggravatin g an d mitigatio n factor s wer e considered . Answer : Th e Administrato r object s t o thi s interrogatory j a s i t i s irrelevan t

an dseek s informatio n tha t

i s privilege da s th e deliberativ e proces s o f employee s an dofficial s o f th e FAA . Insofa r a s thi s reques t

i s prope r

an dpermissible , relevan t portion s o f

th e FAA' s sanctio n guidanc e fro mOrde r

2LS0.3 B ar e include di n thi s respons e J J . Stat e th e dat e upo n whic hih e dru g tes t fo r th e specime n provide db y subjec t Ritc h Kovacic , o n o r

abou t Ma y 23 , 2008 , wa s confirme dnegative . Answer : Se e Ite mo f

Proo f # 3 mth e releasabl e portion s o f th e EIR . 12 . Stat e al l method s (i.e . telephone , fax . "downloadfeed" , e-mai l [sic ] lette r etc. ) th e FA

A o r an y o f it s employee s receive s informatio n regardin g an y dru g testin g procedure s o r result s fro m(I ) specime n coUetin g agencies . (2 ) Medica l Revie w Officers , an d(3 ) laboratories .

sto/oi o s w o + V¥ i 

### in^i^no z XV I ^^-^ ^ no^/eo/Rn

### MTERNATIV E /AFETY& TE/TIN O /OLUTION /

SLo/n o Jun e 30,201 0

Kaic D L . Leamo n Manager , Speci f

InvestigatioD S Branc h Dru g Abatemen t

Divisio n Offic e o f Aerospac e Medicin e Ms . Leamon , Thi s i s arespons e t o you r reques t regardin g ates t

resul t fo r Ai r Zprovide db y Ritc h Kovac k (SS N 279-56-9352 ) o n 5/2g/08 , reporte db y Advance dToxicolog y Networ k (ATN ) fo r

specime n #105602188 . I "wil l respon dt o you r

question s i n th e sequenc e provide di n you r e-mai l date d6/29/10 > wit habrie f

introductio D t o th e relationshi p betwee n Concentr aMedica l Cente r (Concentra ) an dAST S Inc . AST S provide s MR O an drando mselectio n service s t o approximatel y 15,00 0 clien t companie s fo r

Concentr ai n approximatel y 3 0 Concentr aMedica l Centers . Man y o f thes e ar e smal l companie s tha t sen da n employe e t o Concentr ao n rar e occasions . Whe n th e Concentr aCente r

(I n thi s cas e th e Concentr ai n Willoiighby , OH ) obtain s ane w client , the y complet e aset-u p forman dforwar dth e informatio n (compan y name , location , contac t

person , metho do f

resul t delivery , etc ) t o bot hAT N an dASTS . AST S the n create s ane w clien t i n ou r dat abas e an dawait s ates t result . I n man y Instances , paiticulaii y wit hsmalle r coixq>anies , th e firs t

indicatio n tha t

th e compan y i s ane w clien t t o th e Concentr aCente r i s th e arriva l o f

adono r attemptiii g t o provid e aspecime n fo r

adru g scree n collection , wit hn o advanc e notice . I f thi s compan y i s subjec t t o DO T testin g regulations , th e Concentr aCente r wil l collec t th e specime n an dlis t

AST S a s th e MR O for

tha t collection . Th e staf

f a t Concentr ai s the n instructe dt o complet e th e ne w clien t informatio n for man dforwar dt o AST S an dATN . AT N the n processe s th e specime n an dreport s th e resul t t o ASTS . I n th e specime n i n question , th e ne w clien t informatio n for mwa s no t forwarde dt o ASTS . Th e specime n wa s collected , AST S wa s name dth e MRO , an dth e specime n wa s forwarde dt o AT N an dreporte dt o ASTS . I n th e even t

tha t AST S receives aresul t

fromAT N withou t

amatchin g clien t

compan y i n ou r database , i t

i s ou r procedur e t o e-mai l th e Concentr aCente r tha t collecte dth e AST S Inc . 1853 R.W. Berend

s Dr. Wyoming . N

O 4951 9 Phone:616-531-666 1 FAX : 616-534-5545 

# EAl t ' C SH Q VV i £_W_5eet30 Z XV j iC-S t ILO2/ 6 0/6 0specime n an dreques t aset-u p formt o allo w u s t o repor t th e tes t result . Typically , th e ' : § reques t receive s immediat e respons e an dAST S i s abl e t o report th e resul t

i n atimel y v::^ i manner . O n ver y rar e occasions , th e reques t doe s no t receiv e aresponse , whic hresult s i n ;;? ; repeate drequest s t o th e Concentr aCenter - Thes e request s ar c sen t o n adail y basi s listin g ever y compan y an dspecime n tha t require s informatio n t o report. AST S understand s A e importanc e o f

timelines s i n th e reportin g o f specimens , whic hrequire s u s t o monito r tes t result s no t

repone do n adail y basis . Questions : AST S contacte dConcentr aMedica l Cente r i n WiUoughb y requestin g informatio n o&.tb e clien t compan y cha

t woul dallo w u s t o repor t th e tes t resid e vi ae-mai l o r

fa x o n numerou s occasions . Ou r

audi t trai l o n ou r

ne w syste morigitiate do n th e dat e ou r ne w syste mwa s j installe di n 2009 , therefor e w e ar e unabl e t o repor t th e numbe r

an dtim e o f

eac hrcque ^ Th e convcreation s betwee n ASTS-and-Concentr awer e vi ae-mai l an dfex an dpertaine d onl y t o th e requeste dinformatio n tha t woul dallo w u s t o repor t th e resul t

t o Ai r Z . N o informatio n wa s exchange dregardin g th e actua l result . AST S contacte dth e Cente r Administrato r

a t th e WiUoughb y Concentr aMedica l Center . ^ W e ar e no t

certai n o f

th e nam e o f

th e Cente r

Administrato r

bac k i n Ma y o f

2008 ^ AST S wa s unabl e t o contac t Ai r Za s w e di dno t

hav e th e address , phon e number , o r th e nam e o f th e DE Rfo r

thi s company . Th e onl y informatio n w e ha da t tha t tim e wa s derive d fromth e tes t

resul t reporte db y AT N an dth e CCF . Ai r Zdi dno t

contac t AST S durin g th e tim e tha t th e resul t

wa s receive dfromAT N an d th e tim e tha t

AST S reporte dth e result . A s AST S di dno t

hav e an y compan y information , an dsinc e th e regulation s prohibi t th e MR O fromreportin g t o anyon e excep t th e DE Rfo r

Ai r Z , w e wer e unabl e t o repor t th e tes t result . AST S receive dal l o f

th e informatio n (th e tes t resul t an dth e CCF ) t o verii y th e tes t result; however , w e di dao t

hav e an y informatio n regardin g th e company . Th e verificatio n proces s i s no t

initiate dunti l w e hav e infonnaxio atha t allow s u s t o repor t

th e result . Unti l tha i time , th e resul t

remain s i n "limbo' ' whil e ever y reasonabl e effort i s mad e t o obtai n th e appropriat e compan y infonnation . Whe n AST S receive dcompan y contac t infonnation , w e verifie dth e resul t an dimmediaiel y contacte dth e DE RfromAi r Zo f th e tes t resul t A s AST S MR O service s ar e aclien t o f Concentr aMedica l Centers , acharg e i s generate d a t th e en do f

ever y mont hfo r

eac hspecime n receive dfromAT N collecte da t eac h Concentr aMedica l Center , A t th e en do f

May , th e WiUoughb y Concentr awa s invoice d fo r th e specime n receive dlistin g th e dat e o f collection , donor' s name , an dSSN . AST S Inc . 185 3 JLW . Berend s Dr . Wyotning . M J 4951 9 Phone : 61^531-^66 1 FAX : 616-534-554 6

### At

n o poin t di dAST S repor

t th e resuht o Air

Z , Concentr ao r

an y other party , verball y o r written , unti l th e set-up shee t wa s receive dvi aFa

x transmissio n o n July 15 , 2008 . AST S then verifie dth e resul t

an dforwarde dth e resul t

l o th e DE Ra t Air Z . I hop e thi s informatio n i s useful andpleas e contac t u s i f w e ma y b e o f furthe r assistance . Sincerply/ ' ^/^/ . Vc mJones;»Preside

m

ASTS Inc . 185 3 JLW.Drrend s Dr . Wyoming , Kf l 4951 9

Phone : 616-5J 1 -666 1 FAX : 616-534-554 5 

### V . SLO/eLO © Sf^ O ^ VV d 2H5e6fr20 2 XVJ IGS L UOS/60/6 0

### U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N FEDERA LAVI

A HO N ADMINISTRATIO N CIVI LPENALT Y SUBPOENA J ) (JCC S TddO/K . I n th e Matte r

of : Docket No. : CPIOSWOOI

O AI RZFLYIN GSERVICE . TNC . • DM S No. : 2011M)97 4 FA A Cas e Number

2009-SW-91005 1 Issue dOD : KIA A t mJI/}/ / To : ^/^/./V/.? i t^//?frJT>,'/< i -/]c//J0JlO ^ '^cJ/l/\Af.y , h^tJj^ A Unde r 14 C.F.R . 5 13.228(a) . YO U ARE REQUIRED : /^-i/yvt-LS ^ /CULtS^C C 3 ? o p j T o appea

r an diCElif y befor r a n Adminislmtiv e La

w Judg e o f the Dcparanen i o f

Transportatio n ai : _ ^ . ^ . inUieciiyo f

o n the , da y o f 2 0 a t a

m I I To appea

r an dtestif y a t adepositio n t

o b e conducte dby : . , . at : • i n th e cit y o f o n the ^^

_da y o f \2 0 a t ai

n

I f yo u havean y question s al^jfu t thi s suftpocna , cdniac f

L^uJ^f} ^ JO

J .,J<AJ^ I /

^.^uAlfti . a t thi&.addre&s andtelephon e numbe r r jf^- < Rir k

ir^nifJP ^ /fdLff. g g % W ^ . i __ ^ 

# /ifyl ^ tWC/. ^ Stephani e McClai n Hearing Docke

t Cler k AuUiority : 1

4 C.F.R. J 13.228 ; 4

9 U.S.C . $f i 512 1 an d1.47(jXI) . o

r 49 U.S. C 6 § 4610

4 an J 106(g)(1 ) AN Y PERSO N WH O DOE S NO T OBE Y THI S SUBPOEN A I S SUBJEC T T O FIN E O RIMPRISONMEN T O RBOT H UNDE R4 9 U.S. C § 46313 .

V ^CERTIFICA l IO N O FN O RECORD S

Custodia n o f

Record s for : Advance dToxicolog y Networ k 356 0 Ai r Cente r Cove , Suit e 10 1 Memphis , T N 3811 8 Record s PertEiinin g to : Ritc hKoraci c D.O. B 02-24^195 4 1D#10560218 8 A thoroug hsearc holou r files, carrie dou t

unde r m y directio n reveale ddocument s yo u requeste dhav e reache dit s maturit y dat e an dhav e bee n destroye dDO T guideline s require s u s t o kee p record s fo r 2 4 months . At

thi. s poin t

i n tim e w e ar c no t

abl e t o hel p yo u withthi s request . I DECLARE , UNDE RPENALT Y O FPERJURY . THA T TH EFOREGOIN GI S TRU EAN D CORRECT . Signatur e Jr<^<:.»-^ ^ ,l A Printe dNam e <r-e*'*ic"C\Mnt^^' y Execute do n (;datc ) .

• \(A.- ^ •9

> ^ . ^'^ _ I I

3£ L •AciTor n t o bcfortjn ci n fn, Y rhl i a^'<l, vo f Jc-^-. ^

. • Nou n Publi rIn mi l To rth i Qmrtjr^^^il^lLu SiiiMif~~~ / J ^ ignSlur l M ycoramniio n cip<rn _ Noitr yPuMl f Jul y 6 , 201 3



# 1 )

SLO/SL O SHO VV j Zn^ZZn u XV i i£:5 i I I o?/eo/R n