MICHAEL L. DWORKIN #64047 

MICHAEL L. DWORKIN and ASSOCIATES 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: (415) 421-02500 

Facsimile: (415) 421-2560 

Email: law@avialex.com 

Attorneys for TANGO AIR, INC., d/b/a SCHUBACH AVIATION 

In the Matter of: 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

FDMS No. unassigned 

":j ,., 

TANGO AIR, INC. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

d/b/a SCHUBACH AVIATION 

Judge: Unassigned 

TANGO AIR, INC., d/b/a SCHUBACH AVIATION (hereinafter "TANGO"), by and 

through its undersigned counsel, hereby files its Answer to Complaint, pursuant to Rule 13.209 of 

the Rules of Practice, (14 CFR § 13.209), and states as follows: 

I. 

TANGO admits that it was advised through a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, dated 

March 20,2015, and by Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, dated January 28, 2016, that the 
Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of 

$47,000, and avers that on February 1, 2016, TANGO submitted a timely written request for a 

hearing. Except as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

II. 

1. Answering Paragraph ILl., TANGO admits that it is now, and all times mentioned 

herein was the holder of Air Carrier Certificate No. LOMA488T, authorized to conduct ondemand air carrier service under Part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations ("FAR"). Except 

as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively 

and disjunctively. 

2. Answering Paragraph II.2., TANGO admits that on or about December 2, 2014, it 

operated N54 7TW, a Cessna 525, on an FAR Part 135 passenger carrying flight which landed at 

Palomar Airport, Carlsbad, California at approximately 10:12 p.m. local time. Except as 

expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and 

disjunctively. 

3. Answering Paragraph II.3., TANGO admits that incident to said flight, N547TW's PIC, 

former Chief Pilot James Panknin, remained on duty until approximately 10:30 p.m., local time. 

Except as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

2 
contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively 

and disjunctively. 

4. Answering Paragraph II.4., TANGO admits that its former Chief Pilot Panknin reported 

for duty on December 3, 2014 at approximately 7:30a.m. local time. Except as expressly 

admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, 

and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

5. Answering Paragraph II.5., TANGO admits that on or about December 3, 2014, at 

approximately 8:14a.m., its former Chief Pilot Panknin departed Palomar, California for 

Concord, California as PIC of Cessna 525B, N329BH on a passenger carrying FAR 135 flight 

and landed at Buchanan Field, Concord, California at approximately 9:28 a.m. local time. Except 

as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively 

and disjunctively. 

6. Answering Paragraph II.6., TANGO admits that its former Chief Pilot Panknin did not 

have at least 10 consecutive hours of rest during the 24-hour period that preceded the planned 

completion time of the December 3, 2014 flight. Except as expressly admitted above, TANGO 

denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part 

thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. TANGO avers that (i) 

its former Chief Pilot Panknin, unbeknownst to TANGO, deviated not only from the 

requirements of applicable FAR's, but also TANGO's applicable requirements, policies and 

procedures; (ii) had Panknin advised TANGO of the fact that he was not going to have at least 10 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

3 
consecutive hours of rest during the 24-hour period that preceded the planned completion time of 

the December 3 flight, TANGO would have either assigned another PIC or would have delayed 

the flight so as to have ensured that PIC Panknin would have received 10 consecutive hours of 

rest; and (iii) when this was brought to TANGO's attention, it dealt severely with Panknin. 

7. Answering Paragraph II.7., TANGO admits its Aircraft Flight Logs and Pilot Duty Logs 

are required to be kept, made or used to show compliance with FAR Part 13 5 requirements. 

Except as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively 

and disjunctively. 

8. Answering Paragraph II.8., TANGO admits that former Chief Pilot Panknin certified 

that pilot David Sparks had completed Initial New Hire Training. Except as expressly admitted 

above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each 

and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

9. Answering Paragraph II.9., TANGO admits that former Chief Pilot Panknin certified 

that pilot David Sparks had completed Emergency Ground Training. Except as expressly 

admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, 

and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

10. Answering Paragraph ILl 0, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

4 
11. Answering Paragraph II.!!, TAN GO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

12. Answering Paragraph II.12., TANGO admits that on or about December 21,2014, it 

operated N258MS, a Hawker HS-125, on an FAR Part 135 passenger carrying flight with Kenny 

Shepherd as PIC and David Sparks as SIC, departing Palomar Airport for Vail, Colorado, at 

approximately 10:34 a.m. local time and returning to Palomar at approximately 5:28p.m. local 

time. Except as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

13. Answering Paragraph II.l3., TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

14. Answering Paragraph II.14., TANGO admits that no entry was made in N258MS's 

maintenance log concerning an allegedly inoperative EFD switch. Except as expressly admitted 

above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each 

and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

15. Answering Paragraph II.15., TANGO admits that it operated N258MS on FAR Part 

135 passenger-carrying flights on November 25, December 19 and December 22,2014. Except 

as expressly admitted above, TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

5 
and disjunctively. 

16. Answering Paragraph II.16., TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

17. Answering Paragraph II.17., TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

18. Answering Paragraph ILlS., TANGO avers that the provisions of its General 

Operations Manual ("GOM") speak for themselves. Answering the remainder of Paragraph 

I.18., TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each 

and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

19. Answering Paragraph II.l9., TANGO avers that the provisions of its General 

Operations Manual ("GOM") speak for themselves. Tango admits that Mike Dawson, at the 

times alleged in the Complaint was not TANGO's Director of Operations, Chief Pilot or Director 

of Maintenance. Answering the remainder of Paragraph I.l9., TANGO denies each and every, 

all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally 

and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

20. Answering the remainder of Section II. of the Complaint, TANGO denies each and 

every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both 

generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively and specifically denies that its actions 

were careless or reckless so as to endanger the lives or property of others. 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

6 
III. 

1. Answering Paragraph III.!., Subparagraphs a throughj, inclusive, TANGO denies 

each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, 

both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically denies that it 

violated 14 C.P.R. Sees. 135.267(d), 135.263, 135.323(a)(l), 135.33l(c), 135.95(b), 135.65(b), 

119.5(1), 119.69(3)(2), 135.77, 91.134(a) or any other provision of the FAR's or any applicable 

law or regulation. 

2. Answering Paragraph III.2., TANGO avers that the provisions of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 

46301(a)(l) speak for themselves. Except as otherwise admitted or averred to, TANGO denies 

each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, 

both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

3. Answering Paragraph III.3., TANGO denies each and every, all and singular, 

allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

conjunctively and disjunctively. 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

As and for a separate and distinct defense, TANGO alleges: 

I. 

The sanction sought by Complainant is unwarranted by the facts, safety in commerce and the 

public interest and is not only excessive, but, far exceeds policy, precedent and Complainant's 

own Sanction Guidance Table. 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

7 
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

As and for a separate distinct defense, TANGO alleges: 

I. 

The Complainant's case, is unwarranted and without basis or jurisdiction in law or fact. 

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

As and for a separate distinct defense, TANGO alleges: 

I. 

The acts complained of, including but not limited to the alleged actions of Tango Air's 

former Chief Pilot James Panknin, as alleged in Paragraphs II.2-ll and alleged actions of PIC 

Kenny Shepherd as alleged in Paragraphs II.l2-14 were contrary to TANGO's policies, 

procedures and manuals, contrary to the training and guidance that TAN GO's employees were 

provided and unbeknownst to TANGO until after such alleged acts had occurred and are in no 

way indicative of TANGO's regulatory compliance disposition. 

II. 

TANGO, in response to the actions of former Chief Pilot James Panknin, as alleged in 

Paragraphs II..2-ll, dealt with Mr. Panknin severely, immediately suspending him from his 

Chief Pilot position, pending TANGO's full investigation and then terminating his employment. 

III. 

TANGO, in response to the alleged acts set forth in Paragraphs II. 12.-14. issued 

guidance to its flight crews and maintenance personnel reiterating and clarifying long-standing 

Company policy that all maintenance or airworthiness discrepancies need to be recorded and 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

8 
cleared, or otherwise properly deferred, prior to further operations. 

IV. 

Moreover, TANGO in an immediate response to the matters giving rise to this case, took 

numerous corrective actions, including but not limited to: 

a. Revising and updating its GOM; 

b. Revising and updating its policies, procedures and manuals; 

c. Counseling all flight department and operations personnel in the interests of 

preventing recurrence of such incidents; and 

d. Providing its personnel with additional training so as to prevent recurrence of such 

incidents. 

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

As and for a separate distinct defense, TANGO alleges: 

I. 

To the extent that the Complainant has relied upon FAA Order 2150.38 in 

determining the sanction in this case: 

1. Complainant seeks civil penalties in excess of those suggested in said 

Order's Appendix C, Figure C-1, in further contravention of said 

Order; 

2. Complainant has further contravened said Order in not taking into 

consideration the considerable corrective action that was immediately 

thereafter talcen by TANGO; and 

3. Complainant has failed to consider that TANGO is a small business. 

IV. 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

9 
WHEREFORE, it is prayed that the Administrative Law Judge not enter an order that 

TAN GO be assessed civil penalties in the amount of $4 7,000 or in any other amount; that the 

Complaint be dismissed with prejudice; and for such other and further relief as may be deemed 

appropriate. 

Dated this 8th day of February 2016, 

MICHAEL L. DWO~IN AND 

ASSQCIATES 1 .~ 1 /' ;f /;1;, 't/j/.lll> y(:._, __ , ---- Michael L. Dworkin 

Attorneys for TANGO AIR, INC., d/b/a 

SCHUBACH AVIATION 

FAA Case No. 2015WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

10 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 8th day of February, 2016, a true and correct 

copy of the foregoing ANSWER TO COMPLAINT was served as follows: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

(Original plus one copy via FED EX) 

Robert Spitzer, Esq. 

Attorney, Enforcement Division, Western 

Team 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW 

Renton, WA 98057 

FAX: 1-425-227-1007 

(One copy via FED EX; one copy via 

FAX) 

Jolina R. Barsanti 

FAA Case No. 20l5WP090037 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

ll