U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

CERTIFIED 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue, S. W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk 

AGC-430, Wilber Wright Building 

Suite 2W1 000 

I I. 22 

800 Independence Ave., SW. 

! 1 B Washington, DC 20591 : j :'i 

Area Code 202 267-7100 

JUfJ ;( 0 2012 

EA iNG DOCKET 

Foms ;);o/~-o'-17'/ 

Re: Aviation Repair Solutions, Jnc. 

FAA Case No.: 2011WP910331 /~Q·AWA- CPP-/6'0'f'/. 

Enclosed herewith please find a copy of a request for hearing and the original and one copy of 

the Complaint in the above..:referenced proceeding. 

The FAA requests that the hearing in this matter be held in Los Angeles, CA, and expects that 

the hearing will last one day. 

Please address all communications for the FAA to the undersigned at: 

Office ofthe Chief Counsel 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Ph: 202-267-7100 

Fax: 202-267-5106 

E-mail: michael.f.mckinley@faa.gov 

Enclosures: · Request for Hearing 

Complaint 

cc: Respondent (w/copy of Complaint) 

Sincerely, 

)/~X ft/_44; 

Michael F. McKinley 

Senior Attorney 
TELEPHONE 

(626) 405-1122 

FACSIMILE 

(626) 405-8966 

GmsoN RIVERA & TOMS LLP 

LAWYERS 

527 SOUTH LAKE AVENUE, SUITE 105 

PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91101 

June 11, 2012 

YIA FEDERAL EXPRESS 

Fedeni1 Aviation Adniinistrition 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

E-MAIL ADDRESS 

rtoms@grtlaw.net 

Re: FAA v. Aviation Repair Solutions, Inc., Case No. 2011 WP91 0331 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

The purpose of this letter is to request a hearing with respect to the Final Notice of 

Proposed Civil Penalty dated June 4, 2012, a copy of which is attached for reference. 

Aviation Repair Solutions, Inc. respectfully submits that (1) it is not liable for a 

penalty in the circumstances of this matter, (2) any penalty should be in an a:w...ount less 

than $7,000, and (3) a,ny penalty should be payable without findings of violation. 

Additionally, Aviation Repair Solutions, Inc. respectfully requests that the hearing 

occur in Los Angeles. 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Ill 

Thank you for your attention to this matter. 

c;\documents and settings\jim meyer\local settings\temporary internet files\conten~!Jutlook\ofh6vpqb\fedcral aviation administration 

· lltr .doc 
'Gtu$ON:lliVImA&ToMS.tt:P LAW¥SRS. . ... .. . 

Mt. Xtm Meyer 

J1Jne 1112012 

l>ktge2 

. :~·ffAMESR:MEY 'R, . . · PRBSIDENT .. · ~.A.viAnoN' REPAIR · 'ottrnri:Ns~ me. 

·~:: ~~a.et p; M;¢Kiriiey; S·¢:riiot A:tt,qmey 

.Enfdt.cenient DiviSion, AGc;;:soo .. Office 

. . . . . . ·Gts:SO'NRlVERA&!fO.MSLLP . . . . . . .~· .. · . ' . . . ... 

~i>fthe Chief. Counsel~ SOQ ~tdep~c;U:nol;fAV:ertne~ 

sw Washingt{).n·DC21l519 (e.;niail and:regt:tlarmatl) 

,, 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. I 

2 0 20f2 

IN THE MATTER OF 

AviAtiON REP AIR. sotuti6Ns,·rnc. 

FAA DOCKET NO. (not assigned) 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS NO. (not assigned) 

FAA CASE NO. 2011WP910331 

COMPLAINT 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by counsel, hereby files its Complaint, 

pursuant to Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice (14 C.P.R. 13.208), and states as follows: 

I 

1. On June 4, 2012, Aviation Repair Solutions, Inc. (Respondent) was advised 

through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty 

in the amount of$7,000.00. On June 11, 2012, Respondent submitted a written request for a 

hearing. 

2. Respondent is, and at all times mentioned herein was, the holder of part 145 repair station 

certificate number ZY3R041M, which allowed Respondent to repair and overhaul various parts 

and assemblies, including aircraft thrust reverser cylinders. 

3. At all times mentioned herein, Respondent was subject to Operations Specifications 

paragraph A449, which certifies that Respondent complies with the Department of 
Transportation ("DOT") Antidrug and Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program requirements found 

at 14 C.P.R. part 120 and 49 C.P.R. part 40 .. 

4. At all times mentioned herein, 14 C.P.R § 120.7(£) defined "covered employee" as an 

.. individual who performs, either directly or by. contract, a safety,sensitive function. 

5. At all times mentioned herein, 14 C.P.R.§ 120.70) defined "hire" as retaining an 

individual for a safety-sensitive function as a paid employee, as a volunteer, or through barter or 

other form of compensation. 

6. At all times mentioned herein, 14 C.P.R.§ 120.7(k) defined "performing" as any time 

during which an employee is actually performing, ready to perform, or immediately available to 

perform a safety-sensitive function. 

2 

7. At all times mentioned herein, 14 C.P.R. § 120.105 defined "safety-sensitive function" to 

include performing aircraft maintenance and preventative maintenance duties. 

8. Under 14 C.P.R. § 120.105, each Respondent employee performing a safety-sensitive 

function, including any assistant, helper, or individual in a training status who performs aircraft 

maintenance and preventative maintenance duties for Respondent directly or by contract 

(including by subcontract at any tier) must be subject to drug testing under an antidrug program 

implemented in accordance with 14 C.P.R. part 120, subpart E. This includes full-time, parttime, temporary, and intermittent employees regardless of the degree of supervision. 

9. Under 14 C.P.R. § 120.215(a), each Respondent employee performing a safety-sensitive 

function, including any assistant, helper, or individual in atraining status who performs aircraft 

maintenance and preventative maintenance duties for Respondnet directly or by contract 

(including by subcontract at any tier) must be subject to alcohol testing under an alcohol testing 
3 

program implemented in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 120, subpart F. This includes full-time, 

part-time, temporary, and intermittent employees regardless of the degree of supervision. 

10. On June 24, 2011, the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") initiated an investigation 

... of Respondent's drug and alcohol testing. program,. because an inspection of the Antidrug and 

Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program at Magorien Honing and Hydraulics, aka Dave Magorien 

Co. ("Magorien") showed that Respondent was subcontracting safety-sensitive maintenance 

work to Magorien. The FAA's investigation ofRespondnet revealed the following: 

a. Respondent subcontracted with Magorien Honing and Hydraulics to perform 

aircraft maintenance and preventative maintenance duties, a safety-sensitive function, for 

Respondent; 

b. Respondent failed to verify whether Magorien had a DOT Antidrug and Alcohol 

Misuse Prevention Program in compliance with 14 C.F.R. part 120 and 49 C.F.R. part 40 

before contracting with it to perform aircraft maintenance and preventative maintenance 

for Respondent; 

c. At all times mentioned herein, Magorien did not have a DOT Antidrug and 

Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program that complied with 14 C.F.R. part 120 and 49 C.F.R. 

part 40; 

d. Before March 18, 2010, Magorien did not have an FAA contractor registration 

number, which would allow Magorien to perform safety-sensitive maintenance work; 

e. Magorien obtained an FAA contractor registration number on March 18, 201 0; 

f. On March 12, 2010, Magorien performed safety-sensitive maintenance work as a 

subcontractor for Respondent when Magorien employee Doyle House "honed" one of two 
American Airlines, Inc. cylinders that Respondent had sent to Magorien on purchase 

orders A-120796 and A-120947; 

g. Between March 12, 2010 and March 18, 2010, Magorien returned a second 

4 

AmericanAirlines, Inc. cylinder to Respondent to have an o~ring removed. before honing 

the cylinder; 

h. On March 18,2010, Magorien completed maintenance work on the second 

American Airlines, Inc. cylinder under purchase order A-120947; 

1. Magorien billed Respondent for the repairs of both American Airlines, Inc. 

cylinders on invoice number 102033. 

II 

By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, Respondent violated the following 

Federal Aviation Regulations: 

1. 14 C.F.R. § 120.105, in that ARS failed to ensure that all employees who, either 

directly or by contract, performed aircraft maintenance and preventative maintenance 

duties for ARS were subject to drug testing under an antidrug program implemented in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 120, subpart E; 

2. 14 C.F.R. § 120.215(a), in that ARS failed to ensure that all employees who, 

either directly or by contract, performed aircraft maintenance and preventative 

maintenance duties for ARS were subject to alcohol testing under an alcohol testing 

program implemented in accordance with 14 C.P.R. part 120, subpart F. 
5 

Pursuant to Title 49 of the United States Code, Section 46301, Respondent is subjectto a 

civil penalty not to exceed $11,000 for each violation a:lleged. 

Under the facts and circumstances ofthis case, a civil penalty of$7,000.00 is appropriate. 

WHEREFORE, the Agency, by counsel, respectfully requests that the Administrative 

Law Judge enter an Order that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of 

$7,000.00. 

Respectfully submitted this 18th day of June, 2012. 

Senior Attorney 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Ph: 202-267-7100 

Fax: 202-267-5106 

E-mail: michael.f.mckinley@faa.gov 
---------------~~~~~~~~~~~----------------. 

6 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Complaint has been mailed this date by Certified Mail, Return 

Receipt Requested, to: 

Original and One Copy: 

One Copy: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S·; W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk 

AGC-430, Wilber Wright Building 

Suite 2Wl 000 

Robert L. Toms, Jr. 

Gibson Rivera & Toms, LLP 

527 South Lake A venue, Suite 105 

Pasadena, California 91101 

Dated this 18th day of June, 2012.