### 5

10

15

20



### 25

30 

### c

1 MICHAEL L. DWORKIN 2 MICHAEL L. DWORKIN and ASSOCIATES 3 465 California Street, Suite 210 4 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415) 421-2500 6 FAX: (415) 421-2560 7 Email: law@avialex.com 8 

### 9 Attorney for SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 11 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 12 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

13 ) 14 

### In the Matter of: ) 

### FAA CASE NO. 2009NM060048 ) 16 ) 

### Docket No. (unassigned) 17 SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. ) 18 ) 

### Judge: (Not Assigned) 19 ) ) 

### 21 ) ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

### 22 ) 23

24 

### COMES NOW, SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. (hereinafter referred to as "SKYWEST") by and through its undersigned counsel, answers the 26 FederalAviationAdministration ("FAA")'s Complaint, datedApril2, 27 2010. 28 I. 29 

### 1. Answering Paragraph I. 1. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on or about March 26, 2010, it was advised through a Final 31 Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the Federal Aviation 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ;; 

# -

Administration ("FAA") proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $182,500.00, and that on or about March 29, 2010, SKYWEST, through its undersigned counsel, submitted a written request for a hearing. Except as expresslyadmittedabove, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST further

avers that itswritten request for a hearingwas timely andinfull compliance with the applicable rules of practice in FAA civil penalty proceedings. 

### II. 1. Answering Paragraph II. 1. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that it is now, and at all times mentioned herein was, the holder of Air Carrier Certificate No. SWIA011A and that at all times mentioned in the Complaint, SKYWEST was conducting its air carrier operations under pertinent provisions of the Federal AviationRegulations, includingbutnotlimitedtoFederalAviation Regulation Part 121 (hereinafter "FAR Part 121"). Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 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. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits , S 'f't' ("OpSpecs") that Section D072 of its Operatlons pecl lca lons

2:; 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 lS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2Q

requires it to maintain its aircraft in accordance with its Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program ("CAMP"), which includes, 

### inter alia, the provisions of its General Maintenance Manual ("GMM"). Except as expresslyadmittedabove, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that in addition to the GMM, the CAMP is comprised of, 

### inter alia, Standard Practices, Maintenance/Inspection Programs, OpSpecs, OEM Manuals, Substantial Maintenance Vendors' Procedure Manuals and Accessory Shop Processes Manuals. 3. AnsweringParagraph II. 3. ofthe Complaint, SKYWEST admits that its GMM incorporates by reference the Embraer EMB-120 Maintenance and Inspection Program as well as the EMB-120 Maintenance Manual. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmativelyavers thattheGMMadditionallyincludes, 

### interalia, SKYWEST's Standard Practices. 4. Answering Paragraph II. 4. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that OpSpec 0085 authorizes it to use N579SW, an EMB-120-ER civil aircraft in the conduct of its FAR Part 121 Operations. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every,

3

# -

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24**~** all and singular, allegations containedtherein, andeachandevery part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that SKYWEST currently has 55 EMB-120 aircraft in its fleet, but since 1987, has operated

over 100 EMB-120's and that at one time, SKYWEST had 94 EMB-120's listedin its OpSpecsmakingit the largestEMB-120 operator in the world. 5. Answering Paragraph II. 5. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmativelyavers that on January 18, 2009, N5759SW's flight crew reported that the right main landing gear "took 

### 3 times to come up." 6. Answering Paragraph II. 6. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that maintenance personnel replaced the right main landing gear up-lock wire harness. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations containedtherein, and each and everypart thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that the main landing gear was inspected, adjusted and functionally tested; that all functional tests were satisfactory and that the aircraft was returned to service in an airworthy condition.

41 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 c

;; 7. Answering Paragraph II. 7. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on January 20, 2009, the pilot of N5759SW reported the forward left door on the right main landing gear did not close after thepilotput the landing gear lever to the "up"positionand that the pilot cycled the gear and retraction was normal. Except

as expressly admittedabove, SKYWEST denies eachandevery, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 8. Answering Paragraph II. 8. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that SKYWEST maintenance personnel placed N579SW on jacks but could not replicate any discrepancy. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that the main landing gear was inspected, adjusted and functionally tested; that all functional tests were satisfactory and that the aircraft was returned to service in an airworthy condition. 9. Answering Paragraph II. 9. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies that thepilot, or anyothercrewmember, reportedan "unsafe landing gear indication". SKYWEST admits that on February 21, 2009, and after takeoff, the pilot of N579SW cycled the gear three times before the landing gear indication was normal and that this

51 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 occurredapproximately 32 days and 94 flights/cycles following the maintenance performed on January 20, 2009, as alleged in Paragraph 8 of the Complaint. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 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 

### II. 10. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that SKYWEST maintenance personnel adjusted the right main landing gear up-lock proximity switches and removed and replaced the main landing gear handle assembly. SKYWEST affirmatively

avers that the landing gear was then functionally tested and that all functional tests were satisfactory and that the aircraft was returnedto servicein an airworthy condition. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 11. Answering Paragraph 

### II. 11. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on February 25, 2009 and on arrival at Portland, Oregon, (some 4 days and approximately 12 flights/cycles following the accomplishment of maintenance alleged in Paragraph 10 of the Complaint), the pilot of N579SW reported that upon departure on that leg, the gear would not retract and that the crew cycled the gear 3 times. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein,

61 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 a

and each and everypart thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically denies that the

crewheldthe landinggear retractionhandle inthe upposition for

over one minute. 12. Answering Paragraph II. 12. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on February 25, 2009, and in response to the pilot's report allegedin Paragraph 11 of the Complaint, SKYWEST performed maintenance on N5759SW and executed an airworthiness release. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each andevery, all and singular, allegations containedtherein, andeachandevery part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 13. Answering Paragraph II. 13. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on February 25, 2009, SKYWEST maintenance personnel removed and replaced the right main landing gear up-lock actuator. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that following this work, maintenance personnel functionally tested the gear and executed an airworthiness release. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 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. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on February 25, 2009, when a company mechanic affixed his or her initials and employee number on N579SW's maintenance

7

### 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

### 11 12 13 

### 14 15 16 

### 17 18 19 20 

### 21 22 23 24 

# =

log, such employee certified that no known condition existed that made the aircraft unairworthy and that the procedures set forth in SKYWEST's manuals hadbeen followed. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies eachandevery, all and singular, allegations contained therein, andeach and everypart thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 15. Answering Paragraph II. 15. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers the Embraer Maintenance Manual, includingbut not limited to Section 32-32-09, speaks for itself. 16. Answering Paragraph II. 16. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies each and every1 

### all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers the Embraer Maintenance Manual, including but not limited to Section 32-32-09, speaks for itself. 17. Answering Paragraph II. 17. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies that a hydraulic hand pump was not available. SKYWEST admits that a hydraulic hand pump was not used in performing the subject maintenance on February 25, 2009. Except as expressly q.dmitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof,

81 both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 2 SKYWEST affirmatively avers that in lieu of the hydraulic hand 3 pump, SKYWEST availed itself of other procedures, including its 4 StandardPractices andGMM consistent with the EMB-120 Maintenance 5 Manual and SKYWEST's GMM. 6 18. Answering Paragraph II. 18. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 7 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained B therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 9 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 10 19. Answering Paragraph II. 19. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 11 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 12 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 13 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 14 20. Answering Paragraph II. 20. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 15 admits that one of its PortlandMaintenance Supervisors contacted 16 SKYWEST's EMB-120 Fleet Coordinator. Except as expressly admitted 17 above, SKYWEST denies each andevery, all and singular, allegations 18 containedtherein, and each and everypart thereof, both generally 19 and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 20 21. Answering Paragraph II. 21. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 21 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 22 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 23 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 24 22. Answering Paragraph II. 22. of the Complaint, SKYWEST

9

### 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

### 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 

### 15 16 

### 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 23. Answering Paragraph II. 23. of the Complaint,SKYWEST admits thaton February26, 2009, itdispatchedandoperatedN579SW

on eight flights, the last one of which terminated at Spokane, Washington. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 24. Answering Paragraph II. 24. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that onFebruary27, 2009, itdispatchedandoperatedN579SW

. from Spokane, Washington. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations containedtherein, and each and everypart thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 25. Answering Paragraph II. 25. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on February 27, 2009, during the departure of N579SW, the right main landing gear did not retract after the crew cycled the gear threetimes andthat the aircraft returnedto Spokanewith the gear extended. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively.

10

### 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 

### 24 26. Answering Paragraph II. 26. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that on February 27, 2009, it ferried N579SW from Spokane, Washington to Portland, Oregon. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each andevery, all and singular, allegations containedtherein, and each and everypart thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 27. Answering Paragraph II. 273. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits that subsequent to N579SW's arrival at its Portland Maintenance facility, SKYWEST maintenance personnel removed and replaced the right main landing gear drag and locking strut. Except as expressly admittedabove, SKYWEST denies each and every, all andsingular, allegationscontainedtherein, andeach andevery part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 28. Answering Paragraph II. 28. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that prior to the ferry flight, SKYWEST had determined that the uplock hook had seized and had made an entry into the aircraft maintenance log. III. 1. Answering Paragraph III. 1. a. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained

11

### 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

### 8 9 

### 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 

### 21 22 23 24 

### therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively·and disjunctively, and specifically denies that it violated Section 119.5(g) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, or anyotherpertinent law, rule, regulationororder, and further denies that it operated in violation of an appropriate operations specification. 2. Answering Paragraph III. 1. b. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 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 Section 119.5(1) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, oranyotherpertinentlaw, rule, regulation or order, and further denies that it operated aircraft in violation of its operations specifications. 3. Answering Paragraph III. 1. c. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 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 Section 121.153(a)(2) of the Federal AviationRegulations, or any otherpertinent law, rule, regulation

or order, and further denies that it operated an aircraft when it

was not in an airworthy condition. 4. Answering Paragraph III. 1. d. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained

121 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and· specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically denies that it violated section 121.605 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, or any otherpertinent law, rule, regulationor order, and further denies that it dispatched an aircraft under FAR 121 when it was not airworthy. 5. Answering Paragraph III. 1. e. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 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 Section 121.709(b) (2) (i) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule, regulation

or order, and further denies that it operated an aircraft after maintenance, preventive maintenance or alterations were performed but had not executed the required certification that the work was performed per the requirements of its manual. 6. Answering Paragraph III. 1. f. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 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 Section 121.709(b) (2) (iv) of the Federal Aviation Regulations, or any otherpertinent law, rule, regulation

or order, and further denies that it operated an aircraft after maintenance was performed when the airworthiness release or log

131 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 entry did not include a certification that no known condition exists that would make the airplane unairworthy. 7. Answering Paragraph III. 2. of the Complaint, SKYWEST

avers that 49U.S.C. Section 46301(a) and (d) speakfor themselves, but denies that it is subject to a civil penalty in any amount. 3. Answering Paragraph III. 3. of the Complaint, SKYWEST denies that (i) the facts and circumstances of this case warrant a $182,500.00 civil penalty, (ii) a $182,500.00 civil penalty is warrantedor appropriate, or (iii) a civilpenalty in anyamount is warranted or appropriate. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate and distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: I. Certain of the acts complained of were in part those of parties independent of SKYWEST.II. The right main landing gear on N579SW had recently been overhauled by an FAA-certi"ficated repair station and one of SKYWEST's qualified vendors. III. SKYWEST's EMB-120 fleet, and N579SW in particular, had never experiencedlandinggearproblems ofthe type, nature andfrequency alleged, until afterthe installationofthe newlyoverhauledright main landing gear.

14

### 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 

### 14 15 16 17 

### 18 19 

### 20 21 22 23 

### 24 IV. Subsequent investigation has revealed that the main landing gear problem alleged was caused by an irregular internal bushing surfacewhichhadnotbeendetectedduringoverhaul andwhichcould not have been detected by SKYWEST during its acceptance of the landing gear, installation of the landing gear or operation of the aircraft. This condition, in and of itself, was not sufficient to

cause the gear retraction problems. However, when combined with the cold and wet conditions in which the aircraft was operated on the pertinent dates and flights, the main landing gear experienced retraction problems, which could not be replicated in a heated hangar. V. 

### As a result of this investigation, andtoprevent recurrence, SKYWEST and its approved vendor have developed additional repair and overhaul processes. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate and distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: I. 

### SKYWEST and its maintenance personnel were actively troubleshooting the main landing gear problem. II. After each reported discrepancy involving the right main landing gear, SKYWEST maintenance personnel performed appropriate

151 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 troubleshooting and corrective actions, including adjustments and replacements of parts and components. SKYWEST personnel also functionally tested the main landing gear before approving the aircraft for return to service. In no instance, were SKYWEST's maintenancepersonnel able toreplicatethedisorepancyreportedby the flight crews. III. The nature, type or frequency of this discrepancy had never before been encountered by SKYWEST, despite over 22 years of operating experience with the EMB-120. IV. The nature, type or frequency of this discrepancy was not addressed in the Aircraft Maintenance Manual, the Component Maintenance Manual or any other manufacturer's publication or instruction for continued airworthiness. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate and distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: I. At all times mentionedherein, SKYWEST was in full compliance with its CAMP and its Operations Specifications. II. Included in SKYWEST's CAMP are its Standard Practices

. . III. SKYWEST's Standard Practices, among other things, establish

161 2 3 4 5 6 

### 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 criteria for alternatives to the tools,: fixtures and support equipment specified in the manufacturer's manuals. IV. Under said Standard Practices, the use of a hydraulic hand pump is not required to verify the correct installation and operation of the uplock hook and actuator assembly. 

### V. Under MM 32-32-09 (uponwhichComplainantrelies), a handpump is not used to verify ormeasure clearances of the uplockhook and roller mechanism. VI. MM 32-32-09 is not and was not intended to serve as the exclusive guidance in functionally checking the landing gear for operation. TheEMB-120 AircraftMaintenanceManual ("AMMlf), andthe EMB-120 manufacturer, authorize landing gear functional tests utilizingthe aircraft'selectrical system. In addition, MM 32-32­ 09, on its face is incomplete as it fails to specify the make, model or capacity of the hand pump, how the hand pump is to be connected to the aircraft or how the hand pump is to be disconnected from the aircraft. VII. SKYWEST, in accordance with its Standard Practices and the AMM, utilizedthe aircraft'selectricalsystemto functionallytest the operation of N579SW's main landing gear.

171 2 

### 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

### I. In performing all work alleged, SKYWEST, by and through its maintenance personnel, executed all required certifications that the work was performedper the requirements of SKYWEST's pertinent manuals and that no known condition existed that would make the airplane unaitworthy. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: I. This matter came to Complainant's attention through the a report made to the FAA by a SKYWEST Maintenance Supervisor under the Aviation Safety Action Plan (ASAP) in effect between the FAA, SKYWEST and the SkyWestAirlinesMaintenanceAssociation ("SAMA"). II. Under FAA AdvisoryCircularAC 120-66B, the statedpurpose of

anASAP is toencourage aircarrieremployees tovoluntarily report safety information and to resolve safety issues through corrective action ratherthan throughpunishment ordiscipline. In itsAC, the FAA has acknowledged that without ASAP, much of this information would not otherwise be obtainable and is necessary to develop corrective actions for safetyconcerns andpreventrecurrence. The AC states: 181 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 TheASAP is based on a safetypartnership that will includes the FAA and the certificate holder, andmay include a thirdparty, such as the employee's labor organization. III. A fundamental component of the ASAP is the Event Review Committee ("ERC"), comprised of a representative from each party, in this case, the FAA, SKYWEST and SAMA. The ERC reviews and analyses reports submitted under the ASAP, identifies actual or potential problems and proposes solutions for any perceived problems. TheERC is requiredtogovernby consensus when deciding

on corrective actions and in making recommendations. IV. Initiation andprosecutionofanenforcement actionbasedupon

anASAP report, defeats the FAA's statedpurpose underlying anASAP program and undermines the integrity of all FAA-industry data sharing programs. IV. Initiation andprosecutionofanenforcementactionbasedupon

anASAP andenforcementinvestigative reportspreparedbythe FAA's· ASAP ERC representative, defeats the FAA's stated purpose underlying anASAPprogramandundermines the integrityof allFAAindustry data sharing programs. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

19

### 1 As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 2 I. 3 

### The sanction sought by Complainant is unwarranted by the 4 facts, safetyin commerce and thepublicinterestandis excessive. 5 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6 As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

### 7 I. 8 The Complainant's case, is unwarranted and without basis or 9 jurisdiction in law or fact. 10 WHEREFORE, it is prayed that the Administrative Law Judge not 11 enter an order that SKYWEST be assessed a civil penalty in the 12 amount of $182,500, 

### or in any amount; that the Complaint be 13 dismissed withprejudice, and for such other and further relief as 14 may be deemed appropriate.

Attorney for 15 Dated: April 19, 2010 16 17 18 19 

### SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. 20

20

### CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE (49C.F.R.§821.8;14C.F.R§13.211)

IherebycertifythatIhavethisdays.ervedthefollowingdocument: 

### AnswertoComplaint (SkyWestAirlines,FAACaseNo.2009NM060048) viaFAXandFEDEXstandardovernightdelivery,tothepersonsandattheaddressesindicated below:HearingDocketClerk,AGC-430 FederalAviationAdministration WilburWrightBuilding,Suite2Wl000 800IndependenceAvenue,S.W. Washington,D.C.20591 FAX:1-202-493-5142 (ExecutedOriginalplusonecopyviaFEDEX;onecopyviaFAX)

ScottR.Morris,Esq. FederalAviationAdministration OfficeoftheRegionalCounsel,ANM-7 1601LindAvenue,S.W. Renton,W A98057 FAX:1-227-1007 (OnecopyeachviaFAXandFEDEX) Executedthis19thdayofApril,2010atSanFrancisco,California.

Jolen

.Brown

.

# ~ Secretary