James R. Hammerton, Esq. 169 Ledgemont Dr. , Edmond, ok., 73013 Ca. SBN 35625 ph: 405-562-1867 Attorney for Respondent, vectair USA,LLC In association with: Kenneth R. Hammerton 11299 Airport Rd., olive Branch, Ms.38654 Ph: 901-351-6311 owner and President of Respondent Vectair USA, LLC

U.S.DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

# RECEIVED OCT 312014 

### HEARING DOCKET

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRTION complainant, ANSWERTO COMPLAINT
vs. VECTAIR USA,LLC Respondent FDMSNO. FAA 2014-0687

Comes now, Respondent vectair USA, LLC, a "small Business concern," currently in chapter 11 Bankruptcy, case no.11-22278, and in answer to the within complaint by the Federal Aviation Administration, admits, denies and alleges as follows: 1. Respondent admits the truth of allegations contained 1n paragraphs I-1; II-1 (except that Respondent gave up the possession of N100KB on or about July, 2012), and admits II-5,6,9 

### &12, Page 1otherwise Respondent denies generally and specifically each and every other allegation contained in the complaint AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 2. All actions and claims asserted in the complaint are bared by the two (2) year statute of Limitations set forth in 49 u.s.code, section 46301 (c), in that the violations are alleged to have occurred in May, 2010 whereas the complaint was not served upon Respondent until October, 2014, more that four (4) years after the alleged violations of a wing bolt inspection. 3. At all times relevant, aircraft NlOOKB was airworthy. 4. Respondent, vectair USA, LLC, referred to in the complaint as VECTOR, is and was at all times complained of, a "small Business Concern" that is, at the filing and service of this answer, regulated by the terms and conditions of the Federal Bankrkuptcy Court, under the rules of Chapter 11, case no: 11-22278. 5. Estoppel: on 6/26/07, approximatly one year before Respondent purchased N100KB, maintenance was performed including a wing bolt inspection. The entry in the record states: "AD89-25-10 wing spar inspection and 60 MONTH WING BOLT INSPECTION completed by signature Flight support Repair Station----". After Respondent purchased N100KB, it was flown to a FAA facility for a conformity check required prior to part 135 operation. FAA personel had full access to all maintenance records at that time. During the following two years, FAA personel inspected NlOOKB on no less that four separate occasions, having access to all maintenance records and did not decertify or clarify the entry in the records and did not call to Respondents attention any regulations or schedule of inspection regarding the winQ bolt inspection or the time periods for same Thus, it 1s submitted that for civil penalty purposes, the FAA, because of its failure to notify, is estopped from claiming the violations as alleged in the complaint. Page 2Wherefore, Respondent respectfully requeststhatthe complaint be dismissed andthatan orderand orjudgmentofdismissal be declared and entered inthe record, and that Respondent be awarded its costs ofdefendingagainstthis action, including but not limitedto its attorneyfees incurredto date. 

# -d;;-···

**Datet/~q** ;;dt?,ltj v James R. Hammerton, Esq Attorneyfor Respondent, Vectair USA LLC

Page 3__ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE_

Iherebycertifythata copyofRespondent'sAnswerto Complainthas been mailedthisdateby Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested,tothefollowing:
Hearing Docket Clerk FAA AGC-430, Suite2W1000 (Original and 1copy) WilburWright Building 800IndependenceAve. Washington D.C. 20591 Andto: Aundrea Michelle Harper FederalAviation Admin. Office ofRegional Counsel,AS0-7 So. Region 1701Columbia Ave. College Park, Ga., 30337

Date

### /o ·-;;;7-;;;;u/ 1 / '