US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERALAVIATION ADMINISTRATION ) 

# RECEIVED FEB 20 2014 

## HEARING DOCKET

In the matter of: ) ) SOLUTIONS AIR CHARTER, LLC ) ) FAA DocketNo. CP-[to be assigned]

### ~D \

### ~ · 

# 0 

# 8 S**~** CaseNo. 2011SW910191 Judge 

### J.E. Sullivan

RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Respondent Solutions Air Charter, LLC (Solutions Air) responds to the complaint. I. Respondent admits numbered paragraphs I, 2, 3, II, subsections a, c, d, e, f, i. 2. Respondent admits numbered paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7 onlyto the extent that 14 C.F.R. 120.7 is cited. Respondent denies that thepilot was a covered employee for this flight; denies that he had beenhired for Part 135 operations; and that hewas performing safety-sensitive functions inrelation to Part 135 flights. Respondent denies that the flight was conductedunder Parts 135 or 119. 3. Respondent admits numbered paragraph 7 onlyto the extent that the cited regulation applies to flight crew duties on flights conducted under Part 135; it does apply to Part 91 flights. Respondent denies that the flight was conducted underParts 135 or 119. The flight was conducted under Part 91 for an owner ofthe aircraft, as advised by owners. 4. Respondent admits numbered paragraph 8 only to the extent that the cited

·, regulation applies to flight crew duties on flights conducted under Part 135; it does not apply to Part 91 flights. Respondent denies that the flight was conducted under Parts 135 or. The flight was conducted under Part 91 for an owner ofthe aircraft, as advised bythe owners.Respondent denies that the flight was c'onducted pursuant to any air carrierprivileges, orbythe certificateholderunder Parts 119 or 135. The flight was conducted under Part 91 for
an owner ofthe aircraft. 5. Respondent admits numberedparagraph 9 only to the extentthatthe cited regulation applies to flight crew duties on flights conducted under Part 135; it does not apply to Part 91 flights. Respondent denies that the flight was conducted under Parts 135 or 119. The flight was conducted for an owner ofthe aircraft, as Respondent was advised. 6. Respondent admits numberedparagraph 10 onlyto the extentthat the cited regulation applies to flight crew duties on flights conducted under Part 135; it does not apply to Part 91 flights. This flight was conducted for an owner ofthe aircraft, as Respondent was advised bythe owner. Respondent denies that the pilot was providing safety-sensitive functions for a flight under Parts 135 or 119, and denies that the flight was conducted underthose Parts. 7. Respondent denies numbered paragraph II b, h; and paragraphs 12, 13 and 14. 8. The October II, 2009 flight was conducted under Part 91 as a flight for an,
orthe, owner ofthe aircraft. 9. Respondenthas a demonstrated and significant inabilityto pay any civil penaltyin any amount. 10. StevenAbel was drug-free onthe date ofany flight conductedunder Part 91
orPart 135 in N19CP. Abel had been employed by a Part 135 operatorwith a drug and alcohol programbefore applying to Solutions Air. Abel was not hired, or assigned to any Solutions Air Part 135/119 operations. Abel was not assigned to any Part 135 flights until after a negative drug test was received.- 11. As a result ofsuggestions from, and coordination with, FAAFlight Standards andFAA Drug & Alcohol personnel, Solutions utilizes a personnel document that advising prospective employees for Solutions AirPart 135 operations that employment will not start until afterreceipt ofa negative drug test. AtFAA'srequest, the notice includes assignment of thatpilot to anyPart 91 flight conducted for, and/or at the request ofthe owner. Respondent concurs that the hearingbe held in Indianapolis, Indiana. WHEREFORE, Respondent requests that the Administrative Law Judge deny enforcement ofthe Administrator's Complaint.

J.C. -ehler (3743-49) Ji
.S. McGinnis (24216-64) L. Craig Turner (603-49) BUEHLERASSOCIATES, ATTORNEYS 777 East 86th Street Indianapolis, IN46240-0924 317-253-8686 317-253-9371 (Fax) Attorneys for Respondent

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1certifythat we served the original and one copy ofthe Respondent's Answerto Complaint, addressed as below, and to agency counsel at his approptiate address. Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Ave., S.W. Wilbur Wright Building- Suite SW1000 Washington, D.C. 20591 ATTN: Heming Docket Clerk, AGC-430