**·~**



## .... 1\01\"\CN\Of- 

# RECEIVED**,~:{;\::iJ~;i~fi6f~1t~TES** DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION



### .rX;\j\\"::1

## 0?\~}:;FEflE'RAL AVIATJON ADMINISTRATION 

## AUG 302013 Civil Penalty Action 7Ci1 (-CD In the

### Mattel5r~**·~!.-'** 

# HEARING DOCKET

V. FDMS No. FAA-2013-0284 Case No. 2012CE440003 AVIATION ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC., Judge: J.E. SULLIVAN



# ___________________________________/ 

### MOTION TO DISMISS FORFAlLURE TO JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTY COMES NOW, AVIATION ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC., by and through their undersigned counsel, pursuant to Title 14 CFR Part 13 section 13.218(f)(2)(ii), and hereby files their Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Join in Indispensable Party (the·"Motion") , In which to file their response to the Administrator's Amended Complaint in this cause and as grounds therefore alleges: I) On or about July 30, 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) served its Amended Complaint against Aviation Engineering Consultants, Inc. (AEC) inthis cause. 2) Said Amended Complaint is replete with allegations that Avantair, Inc. (AI) a corporation conducting on-demand air taxi operations pursuant to part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) was involved in the introduction ofthe offending parts into commerce and the installation ofthese parts onto that certain Piaggio Avanti, Model P-180, a U.S. typecertificated civil aircraft. 3) Given the allegations contained in the FAA's Amended Complaint, AI is an indispensable partyto this litigation. 4) It is unknown to respondent ifAI is also the subject of an FAA civil penalty action at this time. 5) IfAI is in fact the subject ofsuch an action, the interests ofjudicial economy would best be served byjoining the two related cases based upon the fact that the allegations against AEC and AI are inextricably intertwined and doing so would avoid inconsistent rulings and duplication discovery and penalties. 6) Additionally, AI should bejoined to this litigation as it appears on the face ofthe FAA's

-- Amended Complaint that AI may be liable, in whole or in part for the civil penalties that the FAA seeks to recover from AEC.

WHEREFORE, AEC, respectfully requests this court enter an order dismissing the FAA's Amended Complaint for failure tojoin an indispensable party.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE correct copy ofthe foregoing was served via confirmed facsimile and United States Mail receipt # 

# !{0')J 

# O(:J8 ¢,

# '/--77 ,on the 29th day ofAugust, 2013, to: Mark Camacho, Esquire, Federal Aviation Administration, Office ofthe Regional Counsel, Central Region, 901 Locust , Room 506, Kansas City, MO 64106-2641, facsimile: (816) 329-3771, and that this Motion (and one copy) and copy of the Administrator's Amended Complaint were filed this 291h Day of August, 2013, with the FAA hearing docket clerk, 800

_ Independence Ave. S.W., Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430, Wilbur Wright Building, Room 2014, Washington, D.C. 20591, and the Hon. J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge, Office ofHearings, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. S.E. (E11-310), Washington, D.C. 20590, facsimile: (202) 366-7536. 

# ..t/ -··**~t(f);',** 

# )). ' /'. 

## /,// 

# BIL)**~// /~····----**  Douglas J. Barnard, Esquire Fla. BarNo. 0928496 Plane Law, P.A. 14695 Airport Parkway, Suite 6 Clearwater, Florida 33762 Telephone: (727) 259-0224 Fax: (727) 259-0223 dougb@planelaw.com

### In the \laner of: l'.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSI)ORTATIOl\ FEDER<\L 

### AVIATION**AD~lll\ISTRA**

### TJ01'i 

### Served: 

### July 30. 2013 FDiviS No.: 

### FAA-20 13-0284 _A_,·_i a_t.....;i o_n.....;E_-: I_.Hii...:!' i..:....n.....;ec_, r.....;i1;..:.,1 

### c.._•-=C.....;o.....;n:.::.s.....;ul.:...:.t.::.....a 1:.;:.:1



### t:.::.s:.....

### :.::.ln.:...:.c..:..._.___J 

### Administrative Law 

### Jud g

### c: 

### J . E. 

### Sullivan



### AMENDED COMJ 1 

### LAINT

The 

### Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by 

### counsel, hereby files 

### its Amended (: 

### Compiaint, pursuant t(l 

### Rule 208 ofthe**Rule~** 

### of

### Practi<.:e (14 

# c.r.R. 13

..208), 

### a:1c the Order 

### served 

### in this matter dated 

### J

### u'Jy 16. 

### 2013, 

### and states as 

### follows: J.t> 1. On March 28, 20J2, Respondent A''iation 

### .Engin.eering Consultants, lnc. (AECI)

was 

### advised through a Notice 

### ofProposed Civil 

### Penaltythat the FAA proposedto 

### assess a civiI 

### penalty in the amount of$44,000. 

### On April 

### 22. 2013, Respondent Company submitted a 

### \\7inen request for a hearing. 

### II. I. At all times hereinafter mentioned, AECI 

### was the producer ofvarious replacement parts for type certificated aircraft with facil.ities located 

### at 2159 

### McMullen Booth Rpad and 2750/2754 Suhset Point Road, Clearwater, Flo.tida. 2. ln 201

### b AECI.manufacture-d two types

### :ofeleVator hinge fining.s, outboardhinge fittings, 

### part

### number{PIN) 80-393

### J03-407AEC, and center

### binge fittings, 

### PIN 80-393103- 405AEC, eac.h 

### with accompanying straps. 3. Both hinge fittings identified above were intended for sale to be installed 

### an9 used on t11e 

### elevator loc.ated on a 

### Piaggio Avanti Mode1**P~** 180, a U.S.**type~certificated** ci,·il 

### aircraft. 4. Incident to AECI's 

### manufac:turing ofthe 

### subject .hinge 

### fittings, two center hinge fittings arid two outboard hinge fittings, with ac.companyjng straps, were combined lb become 

### 'AECI i\·1odification Kit. 

### PIN SB-80-0262. produced for sale and installation on the elevator of 

### Piaggio Avanti !\·lodeIP-180 civil aircraft. 5. On nr ahout December 23,2010. AECI scdd and shipped four ofthe subject kits to A\'antair. Inc.. tAl) located at 4311 General Howard Drive, Clearwater, Florida. 6. AI, an exclusive fractional aircraft ownership provider ofthe Piaggio Avami. also otTers private aviation services primarily in North America, including aircraft related management and maintenance services under its Part 145 repair station certificate. and provides limited fixed based operation services in Cleanvater, Florida. 7. The four .kits sold to AJ noted above consiste.d ofa total ofeight elevator center hinge fittings. PIN 80-393103-405AEC, eight elevator outboard hinge f1ttings, 

### PIN 80-393l03- 407AEC, eight straps PIN 80M000095-003, and eight straps PlN 80M000095-00I. 8. Each ofthe hinge .fittings identified above \vere marked 

### ''FAA-PMA''. 9. The acronym ''FAA··**r~presen_ts** Federal Aviation Administration. 10. The acronym 

### ·'Pl\1A' represents Parts ManufacturerApprovaL 11. The holder ofa PMA has obtained FAA 

### <l:pproval to manufacti.lre,a 

### part and mark 

### it "'PMA". 12. A part marked "PMA" is authorized 1o be installe.d in a ty.pe.;certificated aircraft and such aircraft can be found to be airwonh>'relati\'c to the installed PMA part. 13. Based on 

### the fore_going, the use ofthe acronym 

### "fAA-JiMA"marked on the ele\1atorhinge fittings sold by AECl to Al for installation and use on the elevators ofAl's Piaggio Avanti Model P-180 civil aircraft denoted**th~t** AECI 

### had applied to; and recei\•ed an official grant ofapproval from, the 

### FAA to ri1anufacturer and sell the subject parts, and fu.riher, that such parts were suitable for insta1latjon on the elevators ofAl's P,iaggio AvantiModel P-180 

### civil aircraft such that theaircraft in 

### question \>muld retain 

### its airworthiness status relative t·b the ·installed parts.

### 1-i. AI installed one of

### the AECI Modification Kits. P.'"\! 

### SB-80-0262 it 

### purchased from AECI L)!1 

### the 

### de,·awr ofCi,·il Aircraft 

### 1\ 13-tSL. uPiaggio ;\\anti 

### !\·1odd P-180**ain.:r<~ft.** 

### and 

### subsequently operated the same aircraft. 15. Tht> installed subject kit 

### consisted oftwo elevator center hinge Jinings. 

### P/N 80- 393103-405AEC, 

### each with accompanying strap, and two elevator outboard hinge 

### linings. PfN 80-393103-407AEC. each with accompanying strap. I6. In Dcc.ember 

### 2010 AECI 

### had not applie-d to the FAA for P1v1A approval to manufacture and sell the hinge fittings identified herein marked 

### '·fAA-PMA" lor installation on the elevator of

### any Piaggio 

### Avanti Model 

### P-180 aircraft. 

### 17. ln December2010 

### AECI did not hold 

### aPMA approval granted to it 

### by the 

### FAA for the manufacture and sale ofthe hinge fittings identi11ed herein such that they could be marked "FAA-PM.A" (or "PMN') and be installed on the elevator·ofanyPiaggio Avanti Mode] 

### P--180 ain:raft. 18. AECl did

### n:ot submit 

### an application 

### for such .PMA approvalto the FAA's Aircraft Certi:fication Office (ACO) in Atlanta, Georgia: until January 21, 2011, less than a month afte-r AECI sold the four AEC1 Modification Kits, 

### PIN SB-80-0261, containing hinge fittings marked "FAA-PMA",to AI as described herein. 19. To date the FAA·s ACO has not issu(!.d AECI any approval fo:r the manufacture ofthe hinge finings identified**h~rein.** 20. On or about October 14.2011, 

### FAA personnel conducted an inspection ofthe Al repair station. 21. lnciaent to the noted inspection FAA personnel discovered that four ofthe parts described in paragraph 14 above {two .elevator :eenter hinge fitting$, 

### PIN 80-393JOS-405AEC, and two elevator outboard hinge fittings, PIN**80~393103-407AEC)** sold io Al by AECJ on .., 

### _,Decembt'r 

### 23. 2010. were installed 

### on the eJe,·ator 

### ofCi,·il Aircraft 

### N134SL. a Piaggio ;\vanti Model P-180 aircraft. 

### 2.2. The installed 

### hinQe littin12s 

### bought b,· AI from AECL and installed 

### bY AI. were '- ..... ..... .. . .. marked '·F**AA-P~·1A.··** 

### 23. The FAA had 

### not granted 

### Pans Manufacturer Approval to Aviation Engineering 

### Consultants, Inc. to produce and sell the subject pans installed on Ci,·il Aircraft N134SL 

### by Al. 

### 24. The four hinge finings 

### bought 

### by AI from 

### .A.ECJ marked ·'FAA-PMA.,_ 

### and installed 

### by AJ on 

### Ci\·il Aircraft 

### N134SL. were unapproved parts, and upon installation rendered 

### Civil Aircraft 

### NJ34SL unairwonhy. 25. The installation ofthe unapproved parts in question resulted in a severity determination by the FAA's ACO engineer 'vho reviewed the degree ofhazard .involved with the 

### subject installation as critical, i.e

.. having the potential for severe injury or substantial damage in the event offailure ofthe part(s). 26" The actions ofAECJ**~** as aJleged herein: are significantly aggravated by the fact that the production, and sale, ofthe**part~** in question were accomplished deliberately and with full knowledge by the Respondent Companythat it did not have P.MA approval from the FAA to mark thehinge fittings in question that it sold to 

### Al aFAA-PMA". 27. The fDregoing isevidenced 

### by the fact that lessthan a month after semng and shippingthe parts in**questioil1~** Al, AECJ submitted its application t0 the FAA's ACO in 

### Atlanta, Georgia, for 1he

### very approval h did 

### not have; an 

### application by

### which the Respondent Company sought a formal grant of(lpproval to 

### legally produce the very parts ithadjust sold to AI- an 

### approval the Respondent 

### Company hasyet 

### to receive as 

### it pertains to the subje.ct parts. 

### 111 1. 

### By reason ofthe foregoing facts and circumstances, the Respondent Company delibe-rately circumvented nnd violaled the following sections ofthe Federal Aviation' 

# .

Regula1ions:



### a. Section:; l.l)(aH:Zl. which 

### states in rcle\·ant pan that that 

### ifa pi."rsc1n knows. or should know. 

### that a replacement or modification article is**reasonahl~** likely to be installed on a type-certificated product. that person may not produce the article unless it is produced under an FAA production approval. b. 

### Section 21.9(b). 

### '"'hich states in relevant part that 

### a person 

### who produces

a replacement 11r modification articll- fM sale may 

### n01 represenl that part as 

### suitable f0r 

### installation on a type-certificated product. 2. 

### Pursuant to Title 49 U.S.C. 46301. 

### Respondent is subject to a civil 

### penalty not to exceed SI 1,000 for each ofthe violations alleged. 

### 3. l.Jnderthe 

### facts and circumstances 

### ofthis case, 

### a civil penalty 

### of$44,000 is**appropriat~,** warranted, andjustified. 

### WHEREFORE. the Agency,**b~·** counsel, 

### respectfiilly requests 

### that the 

### Administrative Law Judge enter an order that Respondent Company be assessed a ci\·il penalty in the amount of $44;000.



### Dated this 301 h day ofJuly 

## ·ion Respect1ull)' submitted, 

### A. LesterHaizlip 

### Regiomil Counsel**~y:**



### ORIGINAL SIGNED BY 

### MARK G. CAMACHO Mark G. Camacho 

### Senior 

### Enforcement Anorney Federal Aviation Administration 901 Locust S1., Room 506 Kansas City, MO 64106-2641**816~329-3765;** 

### Fax (816) 329-3771 ATTORNEY FOR COivlPLAINANT



### ..