U.S. Department Southwest Region DEPT OF TRrNSPORT!\M~ of Regional Counsel 

of Transportation Arkansas, Louisiana, r{[l(f.:r::' Southwest Region 

New Mexico, Oklahoma ,.',,; "...•} 2601 Meacham Boulevard Federal Aviation Texas Fort Worth, TX 76137 Administration 

January 8, 2010 

CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

In the Matter of Central Flying Service, Inc. 

Docket No. CP 10 :$u.) ObOI t:: h 

FAA EIR No. 2009SWll00ll,:Af\ :,t6/t~()()" 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Enclosed are the original and one copy of the AMENDED COMPLAINT in the 


above-referenced proceeding. 


I respectfully request that the hearing not be scheduled between March 30, 

2010, and April 20, 2010, because I must~avel overseas for essential 

family matters. 

Sincerely, 

LYNETTE WORD 

Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region ___-?~fJ~~~~~~ 

By: 

$ Williams, Esq. 

~S y Enforcement Bran 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0007 

Telephone: 817-222-5081 

Facsimile: 817-222-5092 

stellamaris.williams@faa.gov 

ErVED 

JAN 15 2. HEAf~5NG DOCKET 

5 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 


I hereby certify that an original and a copy of the foregoing AMENDED 

COMPLAINT, have been mailed this date by Certified Mail, Return Receipt 

Requested, to: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

And a copy of the AMENDED COMPLAINT has been mailed by the same means tQ: 

Central Flying Service, Inc. 

Attention: Richard N. Holbert, President 

1501 Bond Street 

AR 72202 


501-375-3245 


50 -375-7274 


Program Ana 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0007 

Date: /- 7-/0 

5 

..JAN 15 2011 

U.S. 	 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HEARING DOCKET FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 	 * 

* 

In the 	Matter of: * 

Central Flying Services, Inc. 	 * FAA Case No. 2009SWI10011 

* Docket No. 

* Judge Not Assigned 

* 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

COMPLAINT 

The Complainant files its Complaint, under Rule 208 of the Rules of 

Practice (14 C.F.R. § 13.208), and states the following: 

I. 

On August 18, 2009, Respondent, Central Flying Services, Inc., was 

advised through a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, and on November 18, 

2009, through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, that the FAA 

proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $33,000. 

Respondent's request for a hearing was received on November 23, 

2009. 

II. 

1. 	 At all times pertinent herein, Central Flying Service, Inc., held 

Air Agency Certificate No. HBKA587E, authorizing it to operate as an 

Air Carrier under Part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(FAR) . 

2. 	 Central Flying Service, Inc., has been issued an Approved Aircraft 

Inspection Program (AAIP). 

3. 	 At all times pertinent herein, Central Flying Service Inc., operated 

a Learjet Model 35A, civil aircraft N35SA, Serial Number 326, the 

property of another. 

4. 	 At all times pertinent herein, the Operations Specifications, 

Paragraph D073, issued to Central Flying Services, Inc., authorized 
3 

Central Flying Services, Inc., to maintain civil aircraft N35SA in 

accordance with the AAIP issued August 28, 2008. 

5. 	 Central Flying Services, Inc.'s AAIP requires that lead acid 

batteries be serviced at three (3) calendar months after the last 

service of the batteries. 

6. 	 The Concord lead acid batteries installed on N35SA were serviced on 

October 3, 2008, and the next service was due on or before January 

31, 2009. 

7. 	 The Concord lead acid batteries of N35SA were not serviced on or 

before the due date of January 31, 2009, and instead, they were 

serviced on February 26, 2009. 

8. 	 Central Flying Services, Inc.'s AAIP requires inspection of the 

NiCad emergency power supply batteries at three (3) calendar months 

after the last inspection. 

9. 	 The NiCad emergency power supply batteries were inspected on October 

3, 2008, and the next inspection was due on or before January 31, 

2009. 

10. 	 The NiCad emergency power supply batteries were not inspected on or 

before the due date of January 31, 2009, and instead, they were 

inspected on February 26, 2009. 

11. 	 Between February 5, 2009, and February 22, 2009, Central Flying 

Services, Inc., operated N35SA on approximately ten (10) revenue 

flights. 

12. 	 At the time of the revenue flights noted aboVe, the Concord lead 

acid batteries of N35SA had not been serviced and the NiCad 

emergency power supply had not been inspected, as required by 

Central Flying Service's AAIP and its operations specifications. 

3 

4 

By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, Central Flying 

Service, Inc., has violated the following section of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations: 

a. Section 119.5(1), which states that no person may operate an 

aircraft under this part, part 121 of this chapter, or part 135 of 

this chapter in violation of an air carrier operating certificate, 

operating certificate, or appropriate operations specifications 

issued under this part; and 

b. Section 135.419(g), which states that each certificate holder who 

has an approved aircraft inspection program shall have each aircraft 

that is subject to the program inspected in accordance with the 

program. 

III. 

1. 	 Under 49 U.S.C. § 46301, Respondent, Central Flying Services, Inc., 

is subject to a civil penalty of $11,000 for each of the violations 

alleged. 

2. 	 Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of 

$33,000 is appropriate. 

Complainant respectfully requests that the administrative law judge 

enter an order that Respondent, Central Flying Service, Inc., be assessed 

a civil penalty in the amount of $33,000. 

Submitted this 8TH day of January 2010. 

LYNETTE WORD 

Regional Counsel 

Southwest Regio 

tellamaris Willi 

Safety Enforcem nt Branch 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0007 

Telephone: 817-222-5081 

Facsimile: 817-222-5092 

stellamaris.williams@faa.gov 

4 
. 
 "

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 


FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 


* * * 	* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

* 

In the 	Matter of: * 

Central Flying Services, Inc. 	 FAA Ca'se No. 2009SWllOOll * 

Docket No. * 

Judge 	Not Assigned * 

* 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

COMPLAINT 

The Complainant files its Complaint, under Rule 208 of the Rules of 

Practice (14 C.F.R. § 13.208), and states the following: 

I. 

On August 18, 2009, Respondent, Central Flying Services, Inc., was 

advised through a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, and on November 18, 

2009, through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, that the FAA 

proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $33,000. 

Respondent's request for a hearing was received on November 23, 

2009. 

II. 

1. 	 At all times pertinent herein, Central Flying Service, Inc., held 

Air Agency Certificate No. HBKA587E, authorizing it to operate as an 

Air Carrier under Part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(FAR) . 

2. 	 Central Flying Service, Inc., has been issued an Approved Aircraft 

Inspection Program (AAIP). 

3. 	 At all times pertinent herein, Central Flying Service Inc., operated 

a Learjet Model 35A, civil aircraft N35SA, Serial Number 326, the 

property of another. 

4. 	 At all times pertinent herein, the Operations Specifications, 

Paragraph 0073, issued to Central Flying Services, Inc., authorized 
3 

• 

". 

. Central Flying Services, Inc., to maintain civil aircraft N35SA in 

accordance with the AAIP issued August 28, 2008. 

5. 	 Central Flying Services, Inc.'s AAIP requires that lead acid 

batteries be'serviced at three (3i calendar months after the last 

service of the batteries. 

6. 	 The Concord lead acid batteries installed on N35SA were serviced on 

October 3, 2008, and the next service was due on or before January 

31, 2009. 

7. 	 The Concord lead acid batteries of N35SA were not servioed on or 

before the due date of January 31, 2009, and instead, they were 

serviced on February 26, 2009. 

B. 	 Central Flying Services, Inc.'s AAIP requires inspection of the 

NiCad emergency power supply batteries at three (3) calendar months 

after the last inspection. 

9. 	 The NiCad emergency power supply batteries were inspected on October 

3, 2008, and the next inspection was due on or before January 31, 

2009. 

10. 	 The NiCad emergency power supply batteries were not inspeoted on or 

before the due date of January 31, 2009, and instead, they were 

inspected on February 26, 2009. 

11. 	 Between February 5, 2009, and February 22, 2009, Central Flying 

Services, Inc., operated N35SA on approximately ten (10) revenue 

flights. 

12. 	 At the time of the revenue flights noted above, the Conoord lead 

aoid batteries of N35SA had not been servioed and the NiCad 

emergency power supply had not been inspeoted, as required hx 

Central Flying Servioe's AAIP and its operations speoifications. 

3 

--------------~

4 


By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, Central Flying 

Service, Inc., has violated the following section of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations: 

a. 	 Section 119.5(1), which states that no person may operate an 

aircraft under this part, part 121 of this chapter, or part 135 of 

this chapter in violation of an air carrier operating certificate, 

operating certificate, or appropriate operations specifications 

issued under this part; and 

b. 	 Section 135.419(g), which states that each certificate holder who 

has an approved aircraft inspection program shall have each aircraft 

that is subject to the program inspected in accordance with the 

program. 

III. 

1. 	 Under 49 U.S.C. § 46301, Respondent, Central Flying Services, Inc., 

is subject to a civil penalty of $11,000 for each of the violations 

alleged. 

2. 	 Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of 

$33,000 is appropriate. 

Complainant respectfully requests that the administrative law judge 

enter an order that Respondent, Central Flying Service, Inc., be assessed 

a civil penalty in the amount of $33,000. 

Submitted this 8TH day of January 2010. 

LYNETTE WORD 

Regional Counsel 

Southwest Regio 

, Esq. 

Safety Enforcem nt Branch 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0007 

Telephone: 817-222-5081 

Facsimile: 817-222-5092 

stellamaris.williams@faa.gov 

4