U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

# RECEIVED APR -8 Zni% 

## HEARING DOCKET
In the Matter ofWings Air, LLC, Respondent FDMS No. FAA-2013-0849 FAA CaseNos. 2012EA110052 Judge J.E. Sullivan AGENCY'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTFOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FORADMISSIONS

The Complainant, the Agency, by its undersigned counsel, herebyrequests that Wings Air, LLC (Respondent)provide responses to the following discovery requests withinthirty (30) days ofservice. This request shall be deemed to be continuing to the extentpennittedby Rule 26(e) ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure so as to require you to file supplemental responses.This request is intended to cover all documents in the Respondent's possession or subjectto Respondent's custody and control and includes documents in the possession ofeach individual who acts as, orhas acted at relevant times as, an employee, agent orrepresentative ofRespondent. 

### DEFINITIONS A. When knowledge or infonnation in possession of a party is requested, such request includes knowledge ofthe party's agents, representatives and, unless privileged, the party's attorneys.

### B. The pronoun "you" and "yours" refers to the party to whom these interrogatories are addressed.

C. Unless otherwise indicated, these interrogatories refer to the time, place and circumstances ofthe occurrences mentioned or complained ofin the pleadings.

D. When used with respect to an individual, corporate, business or governmental entity, "identifY" means state the name and present business or residence addresses of the individuals or entities and the employer, governmental orbusiness affiliation and position of the individual.

E. The tenns "document" and "statement" mean without limitation, the following items, whether printed or recorded or reproduced by any other mechanical process or written or produced by hand: agreements, communications, correspondence, telegrams, memoranda, summaries or records of telephone conversations, summaries or records of personal conversations or interviews, diaries, reports, notebooks, note charts, plans, drawings, sketches, maps, summaries or reports ofinvestigations, opinions or reports ofconsultants, photographs, motion picture films, tape recordings, computerized messages or data, brochures, pamphlets, advertisements, circulars, press releases, drafts, letters, any marginal comments appearing on any document, and all other writings, including electronic writings.

2F. When used with respect to a document, "identifY" means furnish the doctunent itself, or in lieu thereof, the name and date ofthe document, the name and address ofthe person or persons originating the document, the name and address, ifany, ofthe person or persons to whom the document is addressed, the names and addresses ofall persons to whom copies of the documents were or have been sent, and the organization, firm or agency with which all such persons were connected as ofthe date ofthe docwnent, and ifnot inpossession ofthe original or a copy, furnish the name and address ofthe custodian ofthe original or a copy,
or furnish the name and address of a person whom you believe is in possession of the original or a copy ofsuch document.

G. "Oral communication" means any oral exchange with words.



### H. When used with respect to an oral communication, "identifY" means state the date and place where such oral communication was made, the names of all individuals who participated in the communication, and their positions, employers, and employers' addresses, the names ofall individuals who were present atthe time the communication was made and their business affiliations and positions, the nature and substance of the communication, the nature and substance ofeach document recording or pertaining to such oral communication, and the name and present address ofthe present custodian ofeach such document.

3I. For all interrogatories to which the responding individual has an objection, state the factual and legal basis for the claimed privilege, or any other authority which provides the claimed basis for the objection. 

### J. All documents requested as to which the responding individual claims privilege or any other objection as a ground for non-production shall be identified chronologically as follows: (a) date, (b) title, (c) type ofdocument (e.g. memorandum, report, chart, etc.), (d) subject matter (without revealing the infonnation as to which privilege or statutory authority is claimed). (e) factual and legal basis for the claimed privilege, or any other authority which provides the claimed ground for non-production. K. "Aircraft N27WA" means the SNIAS AS350BA helicopter referenced in the Complaint in this matter. L. "Flight#1" means the flight referencedinparagraph 3 ofthe Complaint in this matter. M. "Flight#2" means the flight referenced inparagraph 8 ofthe Complaintin this matter. N. The tenn "maintenance" includes any inspections perfonned.



### INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OFDOCUMENTS 1. IdentifY the names, titles, business or home addresses and telephone numbers of each person whom the Respondent intends to call as awitness at thehearing ofthis matter.

42. Provide the substance ofthe testimony to be offered by each ofsaid witnesses. 3. With respect to each expertwitness identified in response to request Nos. 1 and 2 above: (a) identifY the subjectmatter on which the expert is expectedto testifY; (b) list the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expectedto testifY; (c) provide a summary ofthe grounds for each opinion; (d) ifthe Respondent intends to introduce into evidence or otherwise rely upon a written curriculum vitae or other written document iisting the expert's professional qualifications, identifY and attach copies ofall suchdocuments. 4. IdentifY and produce copies of any and all documents or other tangible exhibits on which the Respondent anticipates relying, or will rely, in support ofthe case it will present at the hearing in this matter, including but not limited to documents or other tangible exhibits it intends to introduce into evidence. 5. As a result ofthe bird strike to aircraft N27WA during Flight #I, was there damage to aircraft N27WA? 6. Ifthe answerto interrogatory 5, above, is inthe affmnative, describe the damage. 7. Did Respondent perfonn (or have perfonned) maintenance on aircraft N27W A during the period oftime between Flight#I and Flight #2?

8. If the answer to interrogatory 7, above, 1s m the affirmative, describe the maintenance.

59. IdentifY and produce copies ofany and all entries made (or caused to be made) by Respondent reflecting maintenance performed on aircraft N27WA during the period oftime between Flight#1 and Flight#2. 10. IdentifY and produce copies ofany and all entries made (or caused to be made) by Respondent in the maintenance record of aircraft N27WA, which entry or entries reflect that the damaged area ofaircraft N27W A was covered with tape on April 28, 2012. 11. With respectto Respondent's affmnative defense ofreasonable reiiance, identifY and produce copies of each section of the manufacturer's maintenance manual for aircraft N27WA upon which Respondent relied, and explain how Respondent relied
on that maintenance section. 12. With respect to Respondent's affirmative defense of reasonable reliance, identifY each authorized representative ofthe manufacturer of aircraft N27WA upon which Respondent relied, and explain how Respondent relied on each identified representative. 13. With respect to each authorized representative of the manufacturer of aircraft N27WA identified in response to interrogatory 12, above, identifY the substance of the representations made by said representative, how said representations were communicated to Respondent, and when said representations were communicated to Respondent.

614. IdentifY and produce copies ofany and all documents upon which Respondent relied with respect to any decisions made between Flight # 1 and Flight #2 relating to maintenance on aircraft N27W A. 15. State all facts to support the affinnative defense that Respondent does not have the fmancial ability to pay a $22,000 civil penalty. 16. IdentifY and produce copies of any and all documents to support the affinnative defense that Respondent does not have the financial ability to pay a $22,000 civil penalty. 

### !7. State all facts to support the affinnative defense that paying a $22,000 civil penalty would have a detrimental effect on the ability ofRespondent to continue doing 18. IdentifY and produce copies of any and all documents to support the affinnative defense that paying a $22,000 civil penalty would have a detrimental effect on the ability ofRespondent to continue doing business. 19. State the amount ofmoney that Respondent wouldbe able to afford to pay as a civil penalty. 20. State all facts to support the number stated inresponse to interrogatory 19, above. 21. IdentifY and produce copies ofany and all documents to support the number stated in response to interrogatory 19, above.

7REQUEST FORADMISSIONS 

### 1. During Flight #1, aircraft N27WA sustained damage to its nose shell as a result ofa bird strike. 2. During Flight#1, as aresult ofabird penetrating the canopy nose skin ofthe aircraft,
ahole was made in the canopy nose skin ofthe aircraft. 3. Between Flight #1 and Flight #2, a mechanic employed by Respondent, one Louis Yara (hereinafter "Mr. Yara"), covered the hole (referenced in request for admission 2, above)**wit.~** tape. 4. Any maintenance performed by Mr. Yara on aircraft N27WAbetween Flight #1 and Flight#2 was perfonned with the approval ofmanagement ofRespondent. 5. Any maintenance entries made by Mr. Yara with respect to aircraft N27WA were made withthe approval ofmanagement ofRespondent. 6. Between Flight #1 and Flight #2, there was no maintenance record entry made indicatingthatthe damage ofaircraft N27WAhad been covered withtape. 7. Between Flight #1 and Flight #2, Mr. Yara, on behalf of Respondent, approved aircraft N27WA for returnto service. 8. The covering ofthe damaged area ofaircraft N27WA between Flight # 1 and Flight #2 constituted a temporaryrepair. 9. The copy ofthe log entry (attached herein as Exhibit A-!) is genuine. 10. The document attached herein as Exhibit A-1 is a copy ofthe entry made by Mr. Yara on behalf of Respondent incident to the maintenance that he perfonned on aircraft N27WA on April 28, 2012. 811. In the document attached herein as Exhibit A-1, it does not state that the damaged
area ofaircraft N27WA was coveredwith tape. 12. The copy ofthe two-page letter dated May 2, 2012 (attached herein as Exhibit A-2)



### . . IS genume. 13. The signature of Javier Diaz (hereinafter "Mr. Diaz") that appears on the second page ofthe document represented by Exhibit A-2 is genuine. 14. During the period April-May 2012, Mr. Diaz was the Director of Operations of Respondent. 15. The signature of Kevin Stavola (hereinafter "Mr. Stavola") that appears on the secondpage ofthe document represented by ExhibitA-2 is genuine. 16. During the period April-May 2012, Mr. Stavola was the Director ofMaintenance of Respondent. 17. The signature ofMr. Yara (hereinafter "Mr. Yara") that appears on the second page ofthe document represented by Exhibit A-2 is genui11e. 18.Duringtheperiod April-May 2012, Mr. Yarawas employed as an Airframe and

9Powerplant mechanic by Respondent.

Respectfully submitted, Alfred R. Johnson, Jr. Regional Counsel

By:

# ~u&- Zachary

# MB rman Attorney FederalAviationAdministration 

### 1Aviation Plaza Jruuaica, NY 11434 TEL:718 553-3258 FAX: 718 995-5699 Date: March 26,2014

10

## EXHIBIT A-1I[@ 0**-~** 

# "' if» 0**'{~** 

## E**~** 

### '"' (lJ lil( nQ "' '1)1, 

## ?:'**[l~** 

### a IlL!**=~** © -1 ij) 0**~** 

# "'**~ <iii~**  <:);;.,**-~** 

# "'**~** 

## Wings({ffir**IEum!Cop~eir J!.~S~35016A**  

## [

# RliGi~slrnAT!ON~i

# f-**s~:!u""rr:!JIJMI:IER:** 

# T-**Acrr:--=r-----u;los~:~s:** ·-_ 

# .L
_

# ~J)lr.,-s:=r=_- ____ .

# --~AfE-::--= [ i\127WA 2792 · 4602.9 I 2583.9 [ 13015 4/28/12

-..

### ·~~·--~-~--·-~-~**-~--** -- - . - - _____

### j___·--~----·--- --

### ---~-**-·~..** ··------·--......__ .., __,. Utrli:£d1!eli/ggffedl

## Maln~em:nu:e: dnspectedlain::mjtnose sectionforr

## {JQssibi~t damag«: due to birdstrike. ifflspe-.:tedinsidl! of I'III(J:£1': rwnejorr othcr::rpo:o;:o;iblcr:: damage. No

### into~maldamagefound. iEJd:l':riorcracking,rxm:sid<l!redlminor

### ~:mdairwartfly fP«!:rA5350BA SfiM. "Repairing elements notdirectly contributing to thestiffness ofthe cabin structure {o11erheodpone/ andbubble). Thefollowing is at.Jthorized: cracks ofvarious directions, stopping cracks as soon as theyare detected, canving outrepairs as soon as the aircraftis grounded. Figure Crackchecks andrepairs within thelimit of criteria definea in the table abo11e, thefollowing is authorized:stopping ofinitialcrackdevelopment {DETAILSA andD). In this case, carry o11t daily monitoring (ofter.flight) in order to ensure 1chat t'he crackdoes notdevelop bevondthestop hole, slopping of secondwvcrackdevelopment {DETAILSBand C). In both cases, twocracks maximum are auihorizerfovera length of 500

### mm (19.68 in.}"**l>lnll"Uillu'~ u-~Wm~IIJ1** **~@ §~ll"IIDJC~**  ;m!IJ1**p<ewmilllJe!l~ F<ep<~iw**  wiii l'!e pmformedl ASAI>, I f d d deta. 1ied ,·n thic entry has· been pe_.r .. med in**-~ccord·~-~ce witi~tfi-~**  I Ff th·-'t all the won ner orme**~n** , .. ..---

## cero.~ 'I - "' ,. . _ _ _ -M -<· · ---"
. ···e-")l: '"

## <~· nee and the Aircraft is returned**app~icable** Maintenance**lnstnJ~~:;rjlf&J.£~~--:::'- ~cia** **t:-~** 

## ' · __ .. to service.

# ~"**.~-- ~~~-** **~,~:;t'~_.Lul~~araA/1'2** ___79:796 ··--· /7

## ""'~~.~~,.-~~ . : '"· 

# -·=**---·-~------~- Jit::::,.,~~.::.**  ' ' i_..

- .:F': ,-**~~~------** -**~~.--**

## EXHiBIT A-2May 2. 2012 Flight Standards D'lstrict Office Republic Airport Farmingdale, NY Attn. inspector John Gall'1gan CC. Insp. James Ciccone JCJP # 8 Response to Letter of JnvestigBtion

Ref. \Vings Air, LLC \NiZA367L-Blrd Strike on N27WA on 4-28-12
Mr. Galligan,
As per your request, we are writing thls letter to describe the events th2t occurred this past April 28, 2012 following a bird strike to one of our helicopters. N27VVA, while conducting tours around Manhattan. Our purpose is to (i) lay out a timellne ot events, (il) explain what th5- reasoning ;.vas behind conducting the flight back to base and, {!i!) lessons learned from the experience as a whole. Timing of Ev'ents: J. 13:57: I received notification of the bird strike. Helicoptei" is immediately ground,sd at JRB pe-nding deterrnin.stian of our 2bility to fly it back to basG at KHPN 2. -14:05: I placed a call to Jim Ciccone, our PO\ to iniorm h":m of lncldent. ln this can he mentioned that h·.s would cal! John Ga!i;gan to discuss the incident and that he wou\d get back to me shortly, Hs asked me abcu! the specific:= of the damage and I told him that there was a whole ln the d--,i,n b'Jb'ole of the alrcrait and some cracks. 3. 14:07-1415:\ called both our DOi\il, Kevin Stavola and our EurocopterTech Rep
. .Scott Dodge to inform them of incident and to describe damage. Pictures are sent to both to determine airworthiness and the p0S3ibility of saf-ely nying he!lcopter back to base. 4,**~14:50:** I calied Insp. Ciccone agairL He told me thnt he h2d spoken to lnsp. Gallig2.n. He advised me that in orde( to fly the he:icopter back. our maint-enance personnel**~Jvould** have to determine alruorthiness and safety and that as long as that was the case, and the proper log enlries**~;vere** mad-3: ir; the aircraft's records, the air-craft cou!d be fiown. Jf ttat -.,vs.s not the c2se, he assured me th-2.t V/e cou!d get 2 fsrry permit first thing**~;l.crlday** morniJ1g. 5.**-~18:3C:** Fol!owing mu!t!p!e conversations artongst ou:e mslntenance personnel a thorough 1/rsua! ·rnspection, the decision is mad-s to Tli the helicopter back to KHPi\i (12 after covering t:-:e darn2ge wiJr, tape

13 Har:g_ar Rvad. 2utte 200 '·Nl-'.ite P!,a:,ns, NY 1QISO"'- Tei i-Sl-4-202:-3..:!40 Fax i-814-274-9855Reasoning by maintenance for detsrn1ining airwoithiness and safety (Kevin) Lu!s and Eurocopter Tech rep): Following the visual inspection, referencin,g the stru<:tura\ manual and Kevin's 30 plus year of experience with this type of aircraft, we determined that a ferry permit was not ne-eded. Scott Dodge of Eurocopter was also contacted and concurred. i\lo structural damage was involved, no systems were 'moperatlve: no Effect on aircraft flight vvas involved, and the aircrcJt was not overdue any Inspections. The aircraft cabin is not a primary structure: The aircraft can be legally flown v;1th the doors removed etc. A!so. on the exact spot ot the damage, a landing light can be installed by cutting a 12 x12 hole: !his was deemed to be no d'1iierent than then the damage to that area except lt was not covered, which we covered lor the ilig:1t bacil to KHPN. Them is no question the aircraft was safe and airworthy in our eyes.
Conclusions/Lessons Learned: The decisions made were taken with the best information that we had avcilable on Saturday and taking into consicleration the conversations and conclusions of our maintenance personnel, Eurccopter and the FAA. We had nothing to gain or lose: we didn't try to hide anything from the FAA or anyone e!se, and thought 'Ne were actlng wlth\n the boundaies of the regulations. However. knowing vvhat we no'N know, you can rest cssured that none of our aircraft \tVili ever move agaln \l\iit\1out a ferry peimit if anything is darnaqed or inop.srativs
. .t\s ahvays, we remain fully committed to comply!ng with the**F/~.Rs** and to maintaining a sa1e operation; VVe believe that our track record and our V/yvern Certification are proof of our commitment to safety. We ate sorry for any inconvenience tills may have caused your office. Rsgaras.

Ke\iln Stavola Lu.is Yara Di(ector o·f i\:l2!r:tenance FJP J\-lechsn\c

13 Hangar F.oad, Su:te 20C, \1Vf1i·te Pia ins.**~iY** 1020.± :-cl**i~SH-202-"3.440** Fax 1-814-274-9855CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certifY that the foregoing AGENCY'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

AND REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS,AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS have been sent via first class mail and facsimile to the following: JaredM. Allen, Esq. Gregory S. Winton, Esq. The Aviation LawFinn One Research Court, Suite 450 Rockville, MD 20850 JudgeJ.E. Sullivan U.S. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTraJlsportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 FAX: (202)366-7536 I hereby certifY that the foregoing AGENCY'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

AND REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUJ\1ENTS, AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS have been sent via first class mail to the following:
FederalAviation Administration (Original and one copy via first class mail) 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Attn: Hearing DocketClerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Room 2014

Date:

------- Lisa Hooks Paralegal Specialist Federal Aviation Administration Office ofRegional Counsel 1Aviation Plaza Jamaica, NY 11434
12CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certifY that the foregoing AGENCY'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

AND REQUESTFORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS have been sent via first class mail and facsimile to the following: Jared M. Allen, Esq. Gregory S. Winton, Esq. The AviationLaw Finn One Research Court, Suite 450 Rockville, MD 20850 Judge J.E. Sullivan TT" Arlmu'..,.j"'t.......t·,-.rc. T an.r**T~ld~e** l...J,U, \..1-! .!.UJ!...!U_v.,_,D.... n uU- i5 Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 FAX: (202)366-7536 I hereby certifY thatthe foregoing AGENCY'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS have been sent via first class mail to the following:
Federal Aviation Administration (Original and one copyvia first class mail) 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Room 2014



### M.4R 27 

### 7014 Date:

------- i ooks Paralegal Specialist FederalAviation Administration Office ofRegional Counsel
II