RECEI\lED 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

FEB 0 6 2017 

HEARII\IG nr'r'vrT " ~ ,, . ~~d· "'-..) ~' ! \._ t: [, W ASHINTON, DC 

In the Matter of: 

FELTS FIELD AVIATION 

Respondent 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

~-----------) 

Docket No: F AA-2015-3307 

Case No: 2015WP910090 

Judge J.E. Sullivan 

RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

The Respondent, Felts Field Aviation, by and through its attorneys, BENJAMIN 

L. WYBORNEY and MARK J. CONLIN, had previously moved the Court for an Order 

to Dismiss in the above referenced matter. This is a Supplemental Brief to the Motion to 

Dismiss. 

GROUNDS 

The Complainant, the FAA, provided a "Complainant's Calculation of the 

Proposed Civil Penalty" ("Calculation") pursuant to this Court's December 15, 2016 

verbal Order to Produce by January 17, 2017, See Exhibit A, Transcript of 

Teleconference on December 15,2016, Page 64, Lines 11-16, Page 66, Lines 12-13, and 

Page 67, Lines 2-6. 

BASIS 

On September 13, 2016, based on the fact that the Enforcement Investigative 

Report ("EIR") is the research and investigative product of the Expert Witness, and that 

pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.220(e) Scope of discovery.," ... [a] party may discover facts 

known, or opinions held, by an expert who any other party expects to call to testify at the 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 1 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
Hearing", the Respondent again requested, in writing, an unredacted copy of the EIR 

found in Supplemented Exhibit C-1. The FAA again refused. 

On September 16, 2016, the Respondent moved this Court for an Order to 

Compel Discovery of a more compliant version of Supplemented Exhibit C-1. 

On September 23, 2016, the FAA submitted an Opposition to the Respondent's 

Motion to Compel. 

On September 30, 2016, the Respondent submitted a Reply to the FAA's 

Opposition to the Respondent's Motion to Compel. 

On November 10, 2016, this Court conducted a Motion Conference on the 

Respondent's Motion to Compel. This Court continued the Motion Conference to 

December 15,2016 

On November 14, 2016, this Court issued an Order that continued the Motion 

Conference to December 15, 2016. The Order further required that all parties read the 

decision issued in Airborne Maintenance and Engineering Services, FAA-2013-0291, 

2014 WL 4635559 (FAA Aug. 19, 2014), and that after reading the material, the parties 

should contact each other and determine whether they might be able to agree to the 

various discovery requests. 

On November 21, 2016, the FAA, through its November 21 81 Supplemental 

Response to Respondent's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of 

Documents withdrew, without substitution, its TestifYing Expert Witness, Eric Wells. 

Mr. Wells is the same untimely identified TestifYing Expert Witness that this Court 

specifically allowed in its July 14th Order. 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 2 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
On November 30, 2016, at the Respondent's Attorneys' request and initiation, the 

Respondent's and FAA's Attorneys held a Telephonic Conference in which the FAA 

confirmed that the FAA would not change its position on the discoverability of a more 

compliant version of Supplemented Exhibit C-1. 

On December 7, 2016, in light of the FAA's November 21st withdrawal of its 

Expert Witness, the Respondent filed a Supplemental Reply to the Complainant's 

Opposition to Respondent's Motion to Compel. 

On December 15, 2016, at the Continued Motion Conference, this Court partially 

granted the Respondent's Motion to Compel and Ordered "the FAA to disclose to the 

Respondent, in detail, how the FAA calculated its proposed civil penalty, which is a total 

of ... $11,000 on the violation that it alleges that the Respondent committed" See 

Exhibit A, Transcript of Teleconference on December 15, 2016, Page 64, Lines 5-16. 

After confirming the FAA's ability to comply with the Order, this Court further Ordered 

that "on or before January 17, 2017, the Court is directing [the FAA] to provide that 

information." See Exhibit A, Transcript of Teleconference on December 15, 2016, Page 

63, Lines 16-22 and Page 67, Lines 2-6. 

On January II, 2017, the Transcript to the December 15, 2016, Continued Motion 

Conference posted on the Federal Docket Management System website, regulations.gov 

in Docket Folder FAA-2015-3307. See Exhibit A, Transcript of Teleconference on 

December 15, 2016. 

On January 17, 2017, the FAA produced a pleading entitled "Complainant's 

Calculation of the Proposed Civil Penalty" ("Calculation"). 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 3 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
On January 25,2017 via telephone, the Respondent informed the FAA that it did 

not find the FAA's Calculation responsive to this Court's December 15, 2016 verbal 

Order. The FAA responded to the effect that disagreements as to the substantive 

responsiveness of its Calculation would be determined at the February 3 teleconference. 

On January 26, 2017, this Court issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying in 

Part the Respondent's Motion to Compel. The Order provided: 

On or before January 17, 2017, the FAA shall specifically disclose 

to the Respondent how each of the "Factors Affecting Sanction" 

headlined in the EIR, as well as any other data it considered pursuant 

to FAA Order 2150.3B, had been considered in the FAA's final 

determination of the proposed $11,000 civil penalty in its Complaint 

(see Dec. 16, 2016 Tr, 64:11-67:6)." 

On January 30, 2017, as of the date of this Supplemental Brief, the FAA has not 

produced a pleading substantively responsive to the December 15, 2016 verbal Order or 

the January 26, 2017 written Order. 

Comes now, this is the FAA's third failure to comply with an Order issued by this 

Court and the Respondent Moves to Dismiss. 

ARGUMENT 

The FAA did produce a pleading entitled "Complainant's Calculation of the 

Proposed Civil Penalty" on January 17, 2017. That Calculation is so substantively 

unresponsive to this Court's Order that it constitutes a failure to produce. 

At the December 15, 2016 Motion Conference, this Court Ordered the FAA to 

disclose "how the FAA calculated its proposed civil penalty." See Exhibit A, Transcript 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 4 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
of Teleconference on December 15, 2016, Page 64, Lines 12-13. This Court further 

Ordered that the FAA should: 

And the calculation information that is disclosed by the FAA 

should include and address all factors in affecting the sanction which 

should be, and is not limited to, the nature of the violation, including 

how safety was affected, whether the violation was inadvertent and not 

deliberate, the attitude of the Respondent as the alleged violator, the 

degree of hazard, the action taken by the employer or other authority 

regarding the alleged violation, the use of certificate. 

That FAA should also identify what, if any, decisional law it 

utilized in calculating and coming to the proposed civil penalty. 

It should identify whether or not it utilized multiple violations 

or acts in calculating the proposed civil penalty, as well as considering 

the Respondent's ability to absorb the sanction, whether the violation 

was voluntarily reported, and whether the Respondent took corrective 

action, and whether such action was included in the calculation of the 

penalty. 

If there were any mitigating, extenuating, or aggravating 

factors that the FAA took into consideration in calculating the 

proposed penalty, the FAA should say so and identify them 

specifically. 

The FAA should also identifY any exculpatory evidence it had 

in its possession, or does have in its possession at this time, that could 

be utilized by the Respondent in defending against the proposed civil 

penalty. 

See Exhibit A, Transcript of Teleconference on December 15, 2016, 

Page 64, Line 17 through Page 66 Line 4. 

The transcript to the December 15, 2016 Motion Conference was available on 

January 11, 2017, six days prior January 17, 2017. The FAA had notice of this Court's 

Order both from its appearance at the December 15 Motion Conference and the Motion 

Conference's transcript being posted on the Federal Docket Management System. 

On January 26, 2017 this Court produced a written Order that echoed the 

transcript above. Specifically: 

On or before January 17,2017, the FAA shall specifically disclose to 

the Respondent how each of the "Factors Affecting Sanction" 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 5 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 9920I 

(509) 624-3020 
headlined in the EIR, as well as any other data it considered pursuant 

to FAA Order 2150.3B, had been considered in the FAA's final 

determination of the proposed $11,000 civil penalty in its Complaint 

(see Dec. 16, 2016 Tr, 64:11-67:6). 

The "Factors Affecting Sanction" as presented in the EIR are: Nature of the 

Violation, Including How Safety Was Affected; Whether the Violation Was Inadvertent 

and Not Deliberate; Certificate Holder's Level of Experience and Responsibility 

(previously disclosed); Attitude of the Violator; Degree of Hazard; Action Taken by 

Employer of [sic] Other Authority; Use of Certificate; Violation History (previously 

disclosed); Decisional Law; Multiple Violations/ Acts; Ability to Absorb Sanction; 

Consistency of Type of Sanction; Was the Violation Voluntarily Reported; What 

Corrective Action Has Been Taken. See EIR, Exhibit B, Pages 3-6. 

This Court transmitted its written Order via facsimile on Thursday, January 26, 

2017. The FAA reasonably should have expected a written Order. Based on the 

December 15, 2016, Motion Conference Transcript, published on January 11, 2017 The 

FAA reasonably should have been able to predict the contents of the written Order. 

The FAA has had 46 days since the verbal Order at the December 15, 2016 

Motion Hearing, 19 days since the Motion Hearing Transcript published, and 5 days 

since the confirmatory written Order published to produce the required material. The 

Calculation that the FAA has produced is substantively unresponsive and is little more 

than a declaration by the FAA's counsel. Considering the volume of redacted 

information that is Ordered to be produced, approximately two single spaced pages; a 

double spaced declaration that is a one and a half pages long, cannot possible comply 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 6 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
with this Court's disclosure intent. See Exhibit B, Pages 3-6. A table of the required 

information, as set forth by this Court's Order, and the FAA's production of it follows: 

No Heading/Item Production 

1. How the FAA Calculated its proposed civil penalty in detail Yes, but not in detail 

2. Nature of the Violation, Including How Safety Was Affected Yes, not specifically 

3. Whether the violation was inadvertent and not deliberate No 

4. Certificate Holder's Level of Experience and Responsibility Previously Disclosed 

5. Attitude of the Violator No 

6. Degree of Hazard No 

7. Action Taken by Employer of [sic] Other Authority No 

8. Use of Certificate Yes, not specifically 

9. Violation History Previously Disclosed 

10. Decisional Law No 

11. Multiple Violations/ Acts No 

12. Ability to Absorb Sanction No 

13. Consistency of Type of Sanction No 

14. Was Violation Voluntarily Reported No 

15. Whether the Respondent took corrective action No 

16. What Corrective Action Has Been Taken No 

17. Other/Mitigating, Extenuating, or Aggravating Factors Yes, aggravating 

(December 15 verbal Order) factors only 

18. Any Exculpatory Evidence [FAA] had or has in its No 

possession (December 15 verbal Order) 

The FAA's delays, late submission and then withdrawal of expert witnesses, and 

now refusal to comply with a Court Order have unfairly wasted the Respondent's time 

and money. The Respondent's alleged violation does not begin to rise to the level of the 

FAA's lapses in pursuing its Complaint against the Respondent. 

In light of the FAA's refusal to timely produce the material it was Ordered to 

produce, by the date the FAA requested to produce it, pursuant to 14 C.F .R. § 

13.218(±)(2), the Respondent respectfully moves this Court to Dismiss the FAA's 

Complaint in its entirety. 

In the alternative, as the FAA has failed to timely produce discoverable 

information from the EIR that it is Ordered to produce, pursuant to 14 C.P.R. § 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 7 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miiier 

42 I W. Riverside Ave., Ste 9 I I 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
13.220(n)(3), the Respondent respectfully moves this Court to preclude the admission of 

the EIR, and any information that stems from it. 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, this Court should grant the Respondent's Motion to 

Dismiss or, in the alternative, preclude the admission of the EIR and any information that 

stems from it. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 30th day of January, 2017. 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

CONLIN, MALONEY & MILLER 

Benjamin L. Wyborne , WSBA # 50070 

Attorney for Respondent 

421 W. Riverside Avenue, Suite 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Page 8 of8 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Motion to Dismiss has been served via U.S. Priority 

Mail on January 30,2017 to the following: 

Judge J. E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Phone:202-366-6941 

Fax: 202-366-7536 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Fatimah Stokley, Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Enforcement Division, Western Team 

P.O. Box 920007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

Fax: (31 0) 725-6816 

DATED this 30th day of January, 2017 

\~~~ GwennKubik 

Legal Assistant 

421 W. Riverside Avenue, Suite 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBIT A 

Transcript of Teleconference on December 15, 2016 

Extract of Pages I and 64-67 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

FELTS FIELD AVIATION 

FDMS No. 

FAA-2015-3307 

1 

Respondent RF,...I=:IVED 

Thursday, 

December 15, 2016 

DEC 3 0 2016 

ri!:AHii\JG DOCKET 

The teleconference convened, pursuant 

to notice, at 1:30 p.m. 

BEFORE: 

THE HONORABLE J.E. SULLIVAN, 

U.S. Administrative I1aw Judge 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005·3701 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit A: Page I of5 

{202) 2344433 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBIT A 

Transcript of Teleconference on December 15,2016 

Extract of Pages 1 and 64-67 

64 

1 Now, the FAA certainly has a -- and 

2 maybe I could do it differently, because we r re 

3 talking about a motion to compel. Give me a 

4 minute as I look at this material again. 

5 I think I can short change this, 

6 excuse me. Based on the materials that the 

7 parties have provided in the arguments that have 

8 been presented, I'm going to grant the 

9 Respondent 1 s motion to compel discovery partially 

10 at this time. 

11 And I will direct the FAA to disclose 

12 to the Respondent/ in detail, how the FAA 

13 calculated its proposed civil penalty, which is a 

14 total of-- have to do that right away-- $11,000 

15 on the violation that it alleges that the 

16 Respondent committed. 

17 And the calculation information that 

18 is disclosed by the FAA should include and 

19 address all factors in affecting the sanction 

20 which should be, and is not limited to, the 

21 nature of the violation, including how safety was 

22 affected, whether the violation was inadvertent 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE !StAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005·3701 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit A: Page 2 of 5 

(202)234--4433 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBIT A 

Transcript of Teleconference on December 15,2016 

Extract of Pages 1 and 64-67 

65 

1 and not deliberate, the attitude of the 

2 Respondent as the alleged violator, the degree of 

3 hazard, the action taken by the employer or other 

4 authority regarding the alleged violation, the 

5 use of certificate. 

6 The FAA should also identify what, if 

7 any, decisional law it utilized in calculating 

8 and coming to the proposed civil penalty. 

9 It should identify whether or not it 

10 utilized multiple violations or acts in 

11 calculating the proposed civil penalty, as well 

12 as considering· the Respondent's ability to absorb 

13 the sanction, whether the violation was 

14 voluntarily reported, and whether the Respondent 

15 took corrective action, and whether such action 

16 was included in the calculation of the penalty. 

17 If there were any mitigating r 

18 extenuating, or aggravating factors that the FAA 

19 took into consideration in calculating the 

20 proposed penalty, the FAA should say so and 

21 identify them specifically. 

22 The FAA should also identify any 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. F AA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit A: Page 3 of 5 

{202) 234-4433 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBIT A 

Transcript ofTe1econference on December 15, 2016 

Extract of Pages 1 and 64-67 

66 

1 exculpatory evidence it had in its possession, or 

2 does have in its possession at this time, that 

3 could be utilized by the Respondent in defending 

4 against the proposed civil penalty. 

5 When do you think you can get that 

6 information out, Ms. Stokley, to the Respondent? 

7 MS. STOKLEY: Your Honor, it's going 

8 to take some time for me to meet with the Drug 

9 Abatement Office and coordinate a response to 

10 that -- is this an order -- to your order? And 

11 so --

12 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Yes. I 1m directing 

13 you to provide this information. And it really 

14 is the kind of information that should be 

15 disclosed in any of these cases. 

16 MS. STOKLEY, Your Honor, I _can 

17 provide those when -- I 1m looking at my calendar 

18 -- by the week of the 16th of January. 

19 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Well, I 1m looking at 

20 that calendar time as well. So the 16th is a 

21 holiday. Can you have this information provided 

22 to the Respondent by January 17, 2017? 

{202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-20I5-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit A: Page 4 ofS 

(202) 234-4433 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBIT A 

Transcript of Teleconference on December 15, 2016 

Extract of Pages I and 64-67 

57 

1 MS. STOKLEY: Yes, Your Honor. 

2 JUDGE SULLIVAN: So noted. so as of 

3 -- on or before January 17, 2017, the Court is 

4 directing you to provide that information. The 

5 Court is denying the motion to compel, in part, 

6 for disclosure of the actual EIR. 

7 I would agree that, Ms. Stokley, that 

8 this particular information can be deemed as a 

9 work -- under the work product privilege, but it 

10 is disclosable in a different way, as the Court 

11 has directed it to be disclosed. 

12 As a result, I'm denying the 

13 Respondent 1 s request for an on-camera review of 

14 the EIR. I don 1 t think that's necessary. I'm 

15 also finding that the EIR is not fully 

16 disclosable simply because Mr. Wel-ls was 

17 -potentially identified as an expert witness and 

18 is now withdrawn. 

19 I understand what the Respondent's 

20 argument is about that, but I simply don 1 t 

21 completely agree with the Respondent as to the 

22 scope of how much disclosure may be involved, 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit A: Page 5 of5 

(202) 234-4433 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBITB 

P;tgl~ l 11i 

Exhibit C-·t Docket No FAA-2015-3307 

ENFOf:CEMENT INVEST!GA TIVE 

F!E;:JORT 

Oreier .2150 3 Tor instwctions) 

FEL T3 Fi: '-D AVii\TION INC 

t. SEX 

I MA:.E fEMALE 

- .~,ViATiGN EMPLOYER 

FVA247i' 

-'~'.L... ',"''o:c,_,, -;=-_=-~~]~~~ -----~-----·- -- " !),~:-! OU,.:I li\11_ 

2013/0410'. : ?O"i 5/04107 

i'Ji ; U'i I!'Vf:C \:Oi A :F!l 

Eric (310) 725-3782 

,, RECOMMENDED SAr-;CTION AMOUNT 

WP Tearr: Coordi 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc, 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit B: Page 1 of6 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBITB 

D Ab D. . . Exhibit C"l Docket No FAA-2015~3307 rug atement !VISion 

SINGLE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION 

SECTION B 

Case Number: 2015WP910090 

Statement of Case 

Felts Field Aviation, Inc. is a 135 certificate holder (GFVA247E). Operations 

Specification A449 certifies that the operator will comply with the requirements of 14 

CFR part 120 and 49 CFR part 40 for its Drug and Alcohol Testing Program. (lOP 1). 

On April?, 2015, an inspection of Felts Field Aviation, Inc.'s Antidrug and Alcohol 

Misuse Prevention Program was conducted. As a result of the inspection Letter of 

Investigation (file number 2015WP910090) was issued on April16, 2015 (lOP 2), and 

Response dated April27, 2015 was received (lOP 3). 

According to 14 CFR 120.105: 

Each employee, including any assistant, helper, or individual in a training status, who 

performs a safety-sensitive function listed in this section directly or by contract 

(including by subcontract at any tier) for an employer as defined in this subpart must be 

subject to drug testing under a testing program implemented in accordance with this 

subpart. This includes full-time, part-time, temporary, and intermittent employees 

regardless of the degree of supervision. The safety-sensitive functions are: (a) Flight 

crewmember duties. 

According to 14 CFR 120.215(a): 

Each employee, including any assistant, helper, or individual in a training status, who 

performs a safety-sensitive function listed in this section directly or by contract 

(including by subcontract at any tier) for an employer as defined in this subpart must be 

subject to alcohol testing under a testing program implemented in accordance with this 

subpart. This includes full-time. part-time, temporary, and intermittent employees 

regardless of the degree of supervision. The safety-sensitive functions are: (a) Flight 

crewmember duties. 

Violation Description: 

On July 2, 2007, Richard Webber completed the Ground Training Program for aircrafts, 

Cessna T-210 and Cessna C182RG. (lOP 4) Mr. Webber submitted to a Department of 

Transportation (DOT) pre-employment test and was verified negative on May 28, 2008. 

(lOP 5) A review of Felts Field Aviation, Inc.'s Duty and Flight Time Records from April 

9, 2013 to March 20, 2015 shows Mr. Webber performed a safety-sensitive function as 

a Pilot. (lOP 6) Mr. Webber was never added to the random drug and alcohol testing 

pool until April 6, 2015. (lOP 7 & 8) As a result, Mr. Webber missed random selections 

since May 2008 but more recently on quarterly selections conducted on April 5, 2013 

(lOP 9 & 17), July 5, 2013 (lOP 10 & 17), October 4, 2013 (lOP 11 & 17), January 3, 

2014 (lOP 12 & 17), April4, 2014 (lOP 13 & 17), July 4, 2014 (lOP 14 & 17), October 3, 

2014 (lOP 15 & 17). and January 2, 2015 (lOP 16 & 17). Mr. Webber was not in the 

random testing pool for these selections, so he had no chance of being selected. (lOP 

7) 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

Public availability to be determined under 5 USC 552 

1 2 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit B: Page 2 of6 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBITB 

D Ab t D ... Exh•b•t C·1 rug atemen !VISIOn 

Docket No FAA-2015-3307 

SINGLE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION 

Supporting Evidence: 

• Richard Webber's ground training record dated July 2, 2007 for aircrafts, Cessna 

T-210 Nand Cessna C182RG. (lOP 4) 

• First Advantage pre-employment verified negative test result dated May 28, 

2008, specimen ID # 0446011565 (lOP 5) 

• Felts Field Aviation, Inc.'s Duty and Flight Time Records for Richard Webber 

from Apri19, 2013 through March 20, 2015. (lOP 6) 

• Felts Field Aviation, Inc.'s active employee list from First Advantage dated May 

14, 2015. (lOP 7) 

• Letter from DERILarry Schmedding dated April 7, 2015. (lOP 8) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the second quarter of 2013, dated April 5, 2013 .. (lOP 9) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the third quarter of 2013, dated July 5, 2013. (lOP 10) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Fells Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the fourth quarter of 2013. dated October 4, 2013. (lOP 11) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the first quarter of 2014, dated January 3, 2014. (lOP 12) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Fells Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the second quarter of 2014, dated April 4, 2014. (lOP 13) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the third quarter of 2014, dated July 4, 2014. (lOP 14) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the fourth quarter of 2014, dated October 3, 2014. (lOP 15) 

• First Advantage enrollment history summary report for Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

for the first quarter of 2015, dated January 2, 2015. (lOP 16) 

• Random Selection dates for Felts Field Aviation from January 2013- April 2015 

from First Advantage (lOP 17) 

Factors Affecting Sanction 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

Public availability to be determined under 5 USC 552 

2 3 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit B: Page 3 of6 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

42 I W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBITB 

Drug Abatement DivisioWh,blt C1 

SINGLE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION 

Certificate Holder's Level of Experience and Responsibility 

Docket No FAA-2015-3307 

Felts Field Aviation, Inc. is a 135 certificated air carrier based in Spokane, WA under the 

parent company of Empire Lumber. They are also associated with Idaho Chip & Fiber 

and Park Ranch Land & Cattle Company. This was the company's fourth inspection, the 

last being on April 9, 2013. They have two aircraft. N2AK and N616EL, on their 0085. 

Felts Field Aviation, Inc. also has a Part 145 certificate and has two Forest Service J 

contracts with the State of Washington. 

Attitude of the Violator 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

Public availability to be determined under 5 USC 552 

3 4 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit B: Page 4 of6 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBITB 

• . Exhibit C-1 Docket No_ FAA-2015-3307 Drug Abatement Dovosion 

SINGLE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION 

Violation History 

Felts Field Aviation, Inc. does not have a history of violations involving its Drug and 

Alcohol Testing Program. 

I • • 1 • • l 

Other Information 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

Public availability to be determined under 5 USC 552 

4 5 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In tbe Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. FAA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit B: Page 5 of6 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, WA 99201 

(509) 624-3020 
EXHIBITB 

Exl1lbit C·1 Docket No. FAA-2015-330l Drug Abatement Division 

SINGLE LEGAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION 

Reasons Justifying Recommendations for Enforcement Action and (Type of) 

Sanction 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

Public availability to be determined under 5 USC 552 

5 

MOTION TO DISMISS, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

In the Matter of Felts Field Aviation, Inc. 

Docket No. F AA-2015-3307 

Case No. 2015WP910090 Exhibit B: Page 6 of 6 

Conlin, Maloney & Miller 

421 W. Riverside Ave., Ste 911 

Spokane, W A 9920 I 

(509) 624-3020