04/07/201 0 1G:5 9 FA X202493514 2 FA A [glOOI/00 7

U.S . DEPARTHENTO FTEIANSP O OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C . 

# RECEIVE D

FEDERA L AVIATION , INC . Complainan t

AI RCHARTER , INC . Responden t AP: ^ 

### 0 7 201 0 

# HEARIN G Dcx:;Rir r

FA ADOCKE T NO . CP09SSO00 8 DM S NO . FAA-2009-010 0 Hon . Isaa c D . Benki n

RESPONDENT ^ S REPL YBRIE F Respondent , throug hit s undersigne d attorney , herebyreplie s t o Complainant' s appea l brief . I nwha t follows , Responden t wil l debun k th e fallacie s o f Complainant' s assaul t o nth e probativ e valu e o f th e evidenc e evince d a t tria l an dth e absolut e lac k o f any materia l error s o nth e par t o f th e Administrativ e La wJudge , a s containe di nhi s initia l decisio nserve do nJanuar y8 , 2010 . Further , i t wil l b e showntha t Complainant' s recitatio no f fact s ar e nothin g bu t a tergiversatio no f th e testimonyelicite da t th e hearin g and o f th e credibilit ygrante dbyth e trie r o f fac t t o th e witnesse s wh o gav e tha t testimony . Th e Ai r ^Ambulanc e Issu e Complainan t woul dhav e it s judgemen t substitut e tha t o f th e04/07/201 0 1B:5 8 FA X202493514 2 FA A* DM S gl002/00 7

medica l personne l an dth e physicia nwh o examine d th e patien t an d determine d t o airlif t he r t o th e mainland . A t th e tim e th e decisio n wa s made , n o on e kne wo f th e existenc e o f th e fractur e whic hwa s ultimatel ydiscovere da t th e medica l facilit yt o whic hsh e wa s take no nth e mainland . Regardless , th e testimon ywa s ampl e a s t o th e decisio nt o sen dhe r b yregula r ai r rathe r tha nb ya nai r ambulanc e o r th e U.S . Coas t Guard , wh o provide d tha t servic e whe n th e contracte dcertifie dai r ambulanc e operato r wa s unavailable . Again , i t i s o f th e essenc e t o b e full yawar e o f th e followin g underlyin g facts : Th e passenge r i nquestio nwa s sen t t o th e mainlan d o norder s fro mDr . Marangel yRodriguez . Sh e testifie d tha t sh e di d no t conside r th e passenger' s conditio nsuc ha s woul d warran t transportatio nb yai r ambulance . Tha t th e symptom s whic h sh e complaine do f wer e o f pai ni nth e hi p an d tha t sh e wa s a frequen t visito r t o th e medica l facility , havin g com e t o i t previousl yo nth e sam e date . A s ther e wer e n o radiographi c facilitie s a t th e medica l center , sh e wa s sen t t o th e mainlan d fo r furthe r evaluation . Transportatio nfro mth e Culebr a medica l cente r t o th e airpor t wa s b yambulanc e wit hth e patien t o na stretche r sinc e thi s i s th e onl ymean s available . Th e fligh t was , likewise ^ th e onl yon e availabl e a t th e tim e an d wa s schedule d t o leav e Culebr a fo r th e mainlan da t th e tim e th e passenge r wa s evaluate d a t th e medica l center . I t i s significan t t o not e tha t ther e wa s n o medica l personne l


### -2
-04/07/201 0 16:5 9 FA X202493514 2 FA A+ DM S @l003/00 7

o r equipmen t o nboar dth e aircraft , tha t no t on e o f Complainant' s witnesse s examine dth e aircraf t an d tha t al l th e evidenc e asserte d wer e som e photograph s take na t a distanc e showin g th e passenge r bein g offloaded . I nfact . Complainant' s witnes s Eugen e Jeste r gav e a statemen t {Exhibi t 9 ) t o th e effec t tha t h e di d no t observ e an y Responden t personne l assistin g th e patien t o r o ni nth e aircraft . Th e mendacit yo f Complainant' s witnes s Joe l Roda s wa s ampl y demonstrate dwhe nh e testifie d tha t h e determine d tha t th e fligh t wa s operate do nth e basi s o f th e photograph s an d o f th e statemen t b yth e administrato r o f th e Culebr a medica l center . Thi s a n outrigh t falsehoo dinasmuc ha s th e complain t base d o nRodas ' investigatio ni s date dMa y27 , 200 9 an d th e statemen t i nquestio n wa s issue do nAugus t 24 , 200 9 an d submitte d t o Complainant' s counse l subsequentl ya s a resul t o f discovery . Therefore , Roda s coul d no t hav e see nth e statemen t unti l severa l month s afte r h e mad e th e determinatio no nwhic hth e ai r ambulanc e charg e i nth e complain t wa s based . Whe nth e fligh t arrive d a t Isl a Grand e th e passenge r whic hwa s bein g transporte dt o th e P.R . Medica l Cente r go t off , o f he r ow n accord , an dclimbe dont o th e stretche r provide d b yth e ambulanc e whic hme t th e aircraft . Again , sh e wa s no t assiste d b yan yo f Respondent' s personne l no r wa s an ymedica l equipmen t observe d o n th e aircraft , muc hles s b yRodas , wh o wa s no t eve ni nPuert o Ric o a t th e time . 

### -3
-04/07/201 0 1G:5 9 FA X202493514 2 FA A^ DMS g|004/00 7



### I nsu man dsubstance , th e determinatio ntha t th e fligh t i n questio noperate da s a nai r ambulanc e wa s erroneousl ybase do nth e observatio no f a stretche r bein g offloade dfro mRespondent' s passenge r fligh t fro mCulebr a t o Isl a Grande . Thi s determinatio n flie s i nth e fac e o f th e undispute dfact s whic hevidence dtha t th e Culebr a medica l cente r di d no t dee mth e passenger' s conditio nsuc h a s woul drequir e he r transpor t b yai r ambulance , tha t ther e wa s n o medica l personne l o r equipmen t assistin g th e passenge r an dtha t he r transpor t o na stretche r wa s simpl ya matte r o f convenienc e du e t o th e fac t tha t sh e wa s transporte di ntha t manne r t o th e Culebr a airport . Th e Careles s o r Reckles s Allegatio n Ther e wa s n o evidenc e presente d a t tria l tha t coul d conceivabl ysho wtha t th e Respondent , o nJun e 8 , 2008 , operate d aircraf t N906G D i na manne r suc ha s woul dendange r th e lif e o r propert yo f another . Th e aircraf t wa s loade dwel l withi nit s weigh t andbalanc e envelop e and th e fac t tha t ther e wa s a stretche r installe dha d n o bearin g o nth e safet yo f th e flight . O f cardina l importanc e i s th e fac t tha t Complainant' s ^^expert" , Joe l Rodas , wa s incompeten t t o th e exten t o f bein g unabl e t o mak e anyweigh t an d balanc e calculations- ^ suc ha s woul dsustai nth e charg e tha t ther e wa s somethin g amiss . A t n o tim e wer e th e live s o f th e passenger s o r

A s a matte r o t fact / th e Adminii^tra r i v e La wJudg e aske d Roda s t o perfor mth e calculation s and gav e hi mampl e tim e t o d o so , afte r whic hRoda s grudgingl y admitte dtha t h e wa s incapabl e o f doin g wha t ha d bee nrequeste d o f him . 

### -4
-04/07/201 0 16:5 9 FA X202493514 2 FA A+ DM S 0005/00 7

cre wo f N906G D endangered , fro mtakeof f a t Culebr a t o landin g a t Isl a Grande , I t i s likewis e ludicrou s t o hav e allege d tha t th e propert yo f anyon e wa s endangere d durin g tha t flight . Th e Administrativ e La wjudg e correctl ycharacterize d a s "outrageous " Complainant' s depictio no f th e passenge r a s someon e aki nt o a ravin g lunatic . Onc e more . Complainant , i nit s unbounde d zea l directe da t creatin g fact s ou t o f thi nair , sough t t o weav e int o it s interpretatio no f th e event s a pictur e totall ya t odd s wit hth e testiiTLon yo f th e witnesses . Th e mos t eloquen t exampl e o f thi s i s it s obstinat e attemp t t o creat e th e impressio ntha t th e fractur e wa s know nt o thos e ressponsibl e fo r sendin g th e lad yt o th e mainlan d fo r examination . Th e testimon yo f th e witnesse s coi:rectl y state d tha t sh e wa s unattende d durin g th e flight , precisel ybecaus e sh e di d no t nee dan yattention , becaus e i t wa s no t a nai r amh>ulanc e whic hwa s bein g operated . Th e Safet yBelt s Ther e wa s som e testimon yseemingl ydirecte d a t th e issu e o f th e stretcher' s belts . Whil e acknowledgin g tha t th e belt s wer e no t installe dcrosswis e a s th e manufacture r indicated , ther e wa s n o evidenc e presente da s t o ho wthi s compromise d th e operatio no f th e aircraf t o nth e fligh t i nquestion . Moreover , o nJun e 30 , 2 00 8 Complainant , throug hJoe l Rodas , issue d a lette r o f investigatio n regardin g th e allege dconversio no f th e subjec t aircraf t t o a nai r ambulance . Thi s lette r wa s identifie d a s cas e numbe r EI S


### -5
-04/07/201 0 17:0 0 FA X202493514 2 FA A+ DM S 0006/00 7

2008SO19025 6 (Exhibi t 24) . O nApri l 9 , 200 9 a warnin g notic e (Exhibi t 23 ) wa s issue dfo r th e allege d violatio ni ncas e numbe r EI S 2009SO19025 6 deemin g tha t ''thi s matte r doe s no t warran t lega l enforcemen t action" . Yet , Complainan t woul d hav e thi s matte r revisited . Th e Administrativ e La wJudge' s Analysi s Th e initia l decisio nrendere d b yth e Administrativ e La wJudg e i nth e cas e a t captio ni s full ysupporte d b yth e testimon yh e heard , hi s observatio no f th e demeano r o f th e witnesse s wh o appeare d befor e him , o f th e documentar yevidenc e presented , an d b y th e fact s elicite db yhi mthroughou t th e hearing . Ther e i s nothin g t o b e gaine db yfurthe r penalizin g Respondent . Complainant' s appea l brie f shoul db e considere da s a wishfu l attemp t t o prov e a t thi s stag e wha t i t coul dno t establis ha t trial . Th e fact s d o no t suppor t a findin g othe r tha ntha t se t fort hi nth e initia l decisio n whic hi s th e subjec t o f th e instan t appeal . Conclusio n Wherefore , premise s co:nsidered . Responden t respectfull y request s tha t th e instan t appea l b e dismisse d an d tha t th e initia l decisio ndate dJanuar y10 , 201 0 b e allowe d t o stan d i nit s entirety , I nGuaynabo , P.R. , thi s e'' ^da yo f April , 2009 . I certif ytha t befor e filin g th e above , a cop yhereo f wa s thi s da ymaile d wit hpostag e full yprepai d thereo nt o Geral d A . Ellis , 

### -6
-04/07/201 0 17:0 0 FA X202493514 2 FA A^ DM S 0007/00 7



### Esq. , t o hi s addres s o f record .

^^:>
-



### GABRIE L I . PESAGARICAN O 

### 12060 8 PMB 23 9 40 5 Ave . Esmeralda , Ste . 10 2 Guaynabo , P.R . 0096 9 287-9024 , Fax , 731-067 9 gipsl934?hotmail.co m



### -7
-