07/18/2012 15:11 FAX 2024835142 FAA 

U.S. DeportmenT 

of TransportotJorl 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Southwest Region 

Arkansas, Louisiana, 

New Mexico, Oklahoma 

Texas 

JUN •• 20tZ 

CERTIFIED MAIL- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Boo Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1 000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

In the Matter of: Monroe Air Center LLC 

Docket No. CP 

Case No. 2011 SW030084 

Dear Sir or Madam; 

+ OMS ~001/005 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Southwest Region 

Off•ce of Regional Counsel, ASW·7 

2601 Meacham Blvd 

Fort Worth, iX 76137 

Enclosed are the original and one copy of the complaint in the above-referenced proceeding. 

The Complainant requests that the hearing in this matter be held in the Baton Rouge, LA 

area, and expects that the hearing will last one day. 

Please serve me with all documents in this matter. 

Sincerely, 

ERIC E. ANDERSON 

Acting Regional Counsel 

By: 

Tim ~~ Duff 

Attorney 

Enclosed: Complaint 

RECEIVED 

JUL f 02012 

HEARING DOCKET 
07/19/2012 15:11 FAX 2024935142 FAA ~ OMS 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

In the Matter of: 

MONROE AIR CENTER LLC 

FAA Case No. 2011 SW030084 

FAA Docket CP 

Judge Not Assigned 

COMPLAINT 

141002/005 

The Complainant files its complaint, under Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice in 

FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 14 CFR §13.208, and states the following: 

I. 

Respondent Monroe Air Center (hereinafter "MAC") was advised through a 

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

amount of $2,800.00. On June 28, 2012, Respondent MAC submitted a written 

request for a hearing. · 

II. 

1. Monroe Air Center (MAC) holds FAA Certificate No. HLWA116E that authorizes it to 

conduct air carrier operations. · 

2. From August 8, 2011 through August·12, 2011, the FAA completed a focused 

inspection of MAC facilities and operations. 

3. The inspection revealed the following discrepancies: 

a. MAC listed John 0. Shamblin as General Manager in its General Operations 

Manual (GOM) though at the time of the inspection he was not a MAC employee; 

b. MAC could not locate the Superseded Aircraft Status Log required by the 

GOM; and 

4. In an attempt to obtain new certification under the name of JPS Aviation LLC, MAC 

was granted Operations Specification (Ops Spec) A502 that became effective on March 

28, 2011. Ops Spec A502 allowed it to continue operations as Monroe Air Center while 

it completed training and developed the qualifications necessal)' to complete the new 

certification. 
07/19/2012 15:11 FAX 2024935142 FAA -> OMS ~ 003/005 

5. Ops Spec A502 indicated that the approved transition must be completed no later 

than September 1, 2011. 

6 .. MAC did not complete the requirements for transition prior to September 1, 2011 

and the FAA granted it an extension period for completion to no later than October 3, . 

2011. 

7. MAC did not complete the requirements for transition prior to October 3, 2011 and 

the FAA granted it an additional extension period for completion to no ·later than 

October 18, 2011. 

8. MAC did not complete the requirements for transition prior to October 18, 2011. 

9. By a letter dated October 20, 2011, the FAA reminded MAC that the Ops Spec for 

merger/acquisition had e):'pired. 

10. Despite lack of authorization, on October 25, 2011, MAC operated Civil Aircraft 

N800CF in charter service as JPS Aviation LLC. 

By reason of the foregoing, MAC violated the following sections of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations: 

2 

a. Section 135.21 (a) in that it as a certificate holder that uses more than one pilot failed 

to prepare, keep current and use a current manual setting forth its procedures and· 

policies that are acceptable to the administrator; and 

b. Section 119.5(g) in that it operated as a direct air carrier or a commercial operator in 

violation of its operating certificate or operations specifications. 

Ill. 

1. Under 49 U.S.C. §46301, respondent is subject to a civil penalty for each of 

the violations of the regulations cited. The ma):'imum penalty per violation is 

$11,000.00. 

2. Under the facts and circumstances of thi~ case, a civil penalty of $2,800 is 

appropriate. 

Complainant respectfully requests that the administrative law judge enter an 

order that respondent be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $2,800. 

Submitted this Z. tf-f~ day of J 1.4'\ ~ , 2 o; 2- • 
07/19/2012 15:11 FAX 2024935142 

ERIC E. ANDERSON 

Acting Regional Counsel 

Southwest Region 

~ 

By: 

Tim 

'-../,,_ 

Duff 

~ 

•Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

817 ~222-5099 

817-222-5092 

FAA ~ OMS 141004/005 

3 
07/19/2012 15:11 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Complaint has been mailed this date by 

Certified Mail, Return. Receipt Requested, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Room 2W1000 

Monroe Air Cen1er 

541 0 Operations Road 

Monroe, LA 71203 

Alan Armstrong 

Attorney at Law 

2900 Chamblee Tucker Road 

Building 5, Suite 350 

Atlanta, Georgia 30341 

~ 005/005 

4