04/19/2010 11:5E) 1154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSGC PAGE 01/23 

F AX TRANSMISSION 

MICHAEL L. DWORKI N and ASSOCIATES 

Law Offices 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

SanFrancisco,Californi a 94104-1S08 

Telephone: (415)421-2500 

FAX: (415) 421-2560 

Email: law@avialex.com 

Tlie pages RompHtiit|; this ftcsimil^^ trkniii)i«ioa conlaiaetthfulflntial infamiation from Mich*«l L. I>w«i-kin and 

Asso«i»tB», Thi* iiifornation i« intended solely for u»« by th* iadrridual or cnthy named as tlic r«Eipient hereof. If you are 

utrt the intended rc<Ipi«nt, be awnrc thacaoy discUwure, wpyinf. diitribvtion. or ute ct the contents of thlJ transmusion is 

prohibited. If you have received this transmission ID error, please notijy us by telephone immediately so we may arrince 

to retrieve this transmiuion at no cost to you. 

Please deliver the follo^vi^lg page(s) to; 

Name; Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbui Wriglit Building, Suite 2W1000 

FAX: 202-493-5142 

Scott R. Morris, Esq, 

FAA 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ANM-7 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

From: Michael L. Dworkin 

Total Number of Pages: 23 (including this cover page) 

Dale: Apiil 19, 2010 

Re: Sky West Airlines, FAA Case No. 2009NM060048 

eS0/L00l?l SWQ * VVJ stLseetso s XVJ G2:0 L OLOS/SO/S O 
0<J/19/2010 11:50 415421256a DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 02/23 

Michae l L. Dworki n and Ass«;ociares 

Law Office; 

VIA FEDEX AND FAX 

465 California Snect 

Suite 210 Apiil 19, 2010 

Ssui Francisco 

Califoirijja 94104 

(415)421-1500 

F« (415) 421-2560 

liwg'avialex.eom 

Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

FAX: 1-202-^93-5142 

Re: SkyWest Airlines, FAA Case No. 2009NM060048 

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen; 

Enclosed are one original and one copy of SkyWest Airlines, Inc. '5 Answer 

to Complaint. 

We request that the hearing be held in Salt Lake City, Utah. We anticipate 

that the hearing will take three to four days. We additionally anticipate that the 

parties will undertake substantial discovery and, accordingly, request that no hearing 

be scheduled until after August 1,2010. 

2010. 

Counsel for SkyWest will not be available October 31 through November 15, 

cc: Scon R. Moiiis, Esq. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ANM-7 

FAX: 1-425-227-1007 

£S0/S00i a s wa + VVd SULSSetSOS XVd Oe:OL 0L02/S0/S 0 
04/19/2810 11:5E) 41542125G0 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 193/23 

1 MICHAEL L. DWORKIt^ 

2 MICHAKL L. DWORKIT^ and ASSOCIATES 

3 465 California Street, Suite 210 

4 San Francisco, California 94104 

5 Telephone: (415) 421-2500 

6 FAX: (415) 421-2560 

7 Email: lawOavialex-com 

8 

9 Attorney for SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. 

10 

11 

12 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

IS 

20 

21 

22 

23 

In the Matter of: 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, I«C. 

FAA CASE NO. 2009NM060048 

DocJcet No. (unassigned) 

Judge: (Not Assigned) 

ANSWER TO COMPIAINT 

24 COMES NOW, SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. (hereinafter referred to as 

25 "SKYWEST") by and through its undersigned counsel, answers the 

26 Federal Aviation Adrtiinistration ('''FAA")''s Complaint, dated April 2, 

27 2010. 

2B I. 

29 1. Answeriirig Paragraph I . 1. of th e Complaint, SKYWEST admits 

30 tha t on or about March 26, 2010, i t was advise d throug h a Fina l 

31 Notic e of Proposed Civi l Penalt y tha t th e Federa l Aviatio n 

1 

eso/sooia S W Q *• VVd StLSeetSO S XVd Oe:OL OL03/90/S O 
04/19/2010 11:58 "1154212550 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PfiGE 04/23 

1 Administration ("FAA") proposed to assess a civil penalty in the 

2 amount of $182,500.00, and that on or about March 29, 2010, 

3 SKYWEST, through its undersigned counsel, submitted a written 

4 request for a hearing. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 

5 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

6 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

7 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST further 

8 avers that its written request for a hearing was timely and in full 

9 compliance with the applicable rules of practice in FAA civil 

10 penalty proceedings. 

11 II. 

12 1. Answering Paragraph II. 1, of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

13 adnits that ir is now, and at all times mentioned herein was, the 

14 holder of Air Carrier Certificate No, SWIAOllA and that at all 

15 times mejitioned in the Complaint, SKYWEST was conducting its air 

16 carrier operations under pertinent provisions of the Federal 

17 Aviation Regulations, including but not limited to Federal Aviation 

18 Regulation Part 121 (hereinafter "FAR Part 121"). Except as 

19 expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and 

20 singular, allegations contained therein^ and each and every part 

21 thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and 

22 disjunctively. 

23 2 . Answering Paragraph II . 2. of th e Complaint, SKYWEST admits 

24 tha t Sectio n D072 of it s Operaiiion s Specification s ("OpSpecs" ) 

eSO/frOOia SWO + VVd StlSSetSO S XVd 08:0 L OLOS/SO/SO 
04/l9/2fil0 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 05/23 

1 requires it to maintain its aircraft in accordance with its 

2 Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program C'CAMP"), which 

3 includes, inte r alia , the provisions of its General Maintenance 

4 Manual ('"GMM") . Except as expressly adinitT:ed above, SKYWEST denies 

5 each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, 

6 and each and every part "chereof, borh generally and specifically, 

7 conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that 

8 in addition to the GMM, the CAMP is comprised of, inte r alia , 

9 Standard Practices, Maintenance/Inspection Programs, OpSpecs, OEM 

10 Manuals, Substantial Maintenance Vendors'' Procedure Manuals and 

11 Accessory Shop Processes Manuals, 

12 3. Answering Paragraph II, 3. of the Complaint, SKYWEST admits 

13 that its GMM incorporates by reference the Embraer EMB-120 

14 Maintenance and Inspection Program as well as the EMB-120 

15 Maintenance Manual. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 

16 denies each and every, • all and singular, allegations contained 

17 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

18 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST 

19 affirmatively avers that the GMM additionally includes, inter alia , 

20 SKYWEST'B Standard Practices. 

21 4. Answering Paragraph II. 4. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

22 admits that OpSpec D085 authorizes it to use N57 9SW, an EMB-120-ER 

23 civil aircraft in tl»e conduct of its FAR Part 121 Operations24 Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every. 

Eso/soolg swa * VVd stissetsos XVd oe:oL OLOS/SO/S O 
04/ig/201 0 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE eii/23 

1 all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every 

2 part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and 

3 disjunctively. SKYWEST affirmatively avers that SKYWEST currently 

4 has 55 EMB-120 aircraft in its fleet, but since 1987, has operated 

5 over 10 0 EMB-120's and that at one time, SKYWEST had 94 EMB-120's 

6 listed in its OpSpecs making it the largest EMB-120 operator in the 

7 world. 

8 5. Answering Paragraph II. 5. of the Cojnpiaint, SKYWEST 

9 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

10 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

11 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST 

12 affirmatively avers that on January 18, 2009, N5759SW's flight crew 

13 reported that the right main landing gear ^'took 3 times to come 

14 up." 

15 6. Answering Paragraph II. 6. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

16 admits that niaintenance personnel replaced the right main landing 

17 gear up-lock wire harness. Except as expressly admitted above, 

IS SKYWEST denies each and every, ail and singular, allegations 

19 contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally 

20 and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST 

21 affirmatively avers that the main landing gear was inspected, 

22 adjusted and functionally tested; that all functional tests were 

23 satisfactory and that the aircraft was returned to service in an 

24 airworthy condition. 

eso/90oi g^g ^ VVd 21?L9e61?302 XVd OC-OL 0103/SO/SO 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAG^ 07/23 

1 7. Answering Paragraph II. 7. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

2 admits that on January 20, 2009, the pilot of N57 59SW reported the 

3 forward left door on the right main landing gear did not close 

4 after the pilot put the landing gear lever to the ''up" position and 

5 that the pilot cycled the gear and retraction was normal. Except 

6 as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and 

7 singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every part 

S thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and 

9 disjunctively. 

10 8. Answering Paragraph II. 8. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

11 admits that SKYWEST maintenance personnel placed NS'^SSW on jacks 

12 but could not replicate any discrepancy. Except as expressly 

13 admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, 

14 allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, 

15 both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

16 SKYWEST affirmatively avers that the main landing gear was 

17 inspected, adjusted and functionally tested; that all functional 

18 tests were satisfactory and that the aircraft was returned to 

19 service in an airworthy condition. 

20 9. Answering Paragraph II. 9. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

21 denies that the pilot, or any other crewmember, reported an ''unsafe 

22 landing gear indication". SKYWEST admits that on February 21, 

23 2009, and after takeoff, the pilot of N579SW cycled the gear three 

24 times before the landing gear indication was normal and that this 

GZO/iOOia SWO <• VVd SfrLSeetSOS XVd oe:oL OLOS/SO/S O 
04/19/2010 11:50 41542125B0 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE E)8/23 

1 occurred approximately 32 days and 94 flights/cycles following the 

2 mainte;nance performed on January 20, 2009, as alleged in Paragraph 

3 8 of the Complaint. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 

4 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

5 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

6 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

7 10. Answering Paragraph II, 10. cf the Complaint, SKYWEST 

8 admits that SKYWEST maintenance personnel adjusted the right main 

9 landing gear up-lock proximity switches and removed and replaced 

10 the main landing gear handle assembly. SKYWEST affirmatively 

11 avers that the landing gear was then functionally tested and that 

12 all functional tests were satisfactory and that the aircraft was 

13 returned to service in an airworthy condition. Except as expressly 

14 admitt'Sd above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, 

15 allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, 

16 both generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

17 11. Answering Paragraph II. 11. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

18 admits that on February 25, 2009 and on arrival at Portland, 

19 Oregon, (some 4 days and approximately 12 flights/cycles following 

20 the accomplishment of maintenance alleged in Paragraph 10 of the 

21 Complaint), the pilot of N579SW reported that upon departure on 

22 that leg, the gear would not retract and that the crew cycled the 

23 gear 3 times. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies 

24 each and every, all and singular, allegations contained therein. 

£30/800ia SWQ <• VVd SfLS8Gt202 XVd Oe:OL 0L02/S0/S0 
01/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 09/23 

1 and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

2 coiijunctively and disjunctively, and specifically denies that the 

3 crew held the landing gear retraction handle in the up position for 

4 over one minute. 

5 12. Answering Paragraph II. 12. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

6 admits that on February 25, 2009, and in response to the pilot's 

7 report alleged in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint, SKYWEST performed 

8 maintenance on N5759SW and executed an airworthiness release. 

9 Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, 

10 all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every 

11 part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and 

12 disjunctively. 

13 13, Answering Paragraph II. 13. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

14 admits that on February 25, 2009, SKYWEST maintenance personnel 

15 removed and replaced the right main landing gear up-lock actuator. 

16 SKYWEST affirmatively avers that following this work, maintenance 

17 personnel functionally tested the gear and executed an 

18 airwor-ihiness release. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 

19 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

20 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

21 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, 

22 14. Answering Paragraph II. 14. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

23 admits that on February 25, 2009, when a company mechanic affixed 

24 his or her initials and employee number on N57 95W'5 maintenance 

eso/eoo® swa * vvd 2tL9e6i?203 xvd LS:OL OLOS/SO/90 
04/13/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 10/23 

1 log, such employee certified that no known condition existed that 

2 made the aircraft unairworthy and that the procedures set forth in 

3 SKYWEST's manuals had been followed. Except as expressly admitted 

4 above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

5 contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally 

6 and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

7 15. Answering Paragraph II. IS. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

8 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

9 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

10 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST 

11 affirmatively avers the Embraer Maintenance Manual, including but 

12 not limited to Section 32-32-09, speaks for itself. 

13 16. Answering Paragraph Ii, 16. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

14 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

15 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

16 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST 

17 affirmatively avers the Embraer Maintenance Manual, including but 

18 not limited to Section 32-32-09, speaks for itself. 

19 17. Answering Paragraph II. 17, of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

20 denies that a hydraulic hand pump was not available. SKYWEST 

21 admits that a hydraulic hand pump was not used in performing the 

22 subject maintenance on February 25, 2009. Except as expressly 

23 admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and ©very, all and singular, 

24 allegations contained therein, and each and every part thereof, 

8 

SSO/OLOia SWQ * VVd 21?LS8ei?S02 XVd Le:OL 0L02/S0/S0 
04/19/2010 11:59 41542125G0 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 11/23 

1 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 Standard Practices and GMM 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 

8 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 Portland Maintenance Supervisors contacted 

16 SKYWEST's EMB-120 Fleet Coordinator. Except as expressly admitted 

17 above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

16 contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally 

19 and Kpecificaily, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

2D 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 

eSO/lLOl l SWO * VVd Z1?LSe61?202 XVd LE-Ol 0L03/90/S0 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 12/23 

1 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

2 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

3 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

4 23. Answering Paragraph II- 23. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

5 admits that on February 2 6, 2009, it dispatched and operated N57 9SW 

6 on eight flights, the last one of which terminated at Spokane, 

7 Washington. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies 

S each smd every, all and singular, allegations contained therein, 

9 and each and every part thereof, both generally and specifically, 

10 conjunctively and disjunctively, 

11 24. Answering Paragraph II. 24. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

12 admits that on February 27, 2009, it dispatched and operated N579SW 

13 from Spokane, Washington. Except as expressly admitted above, 

14 SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

15 contained therein, and each and overy part thereof, both generally 

16 and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, 

17 25. Answering Paragraph II. 25. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

18 admits that on February 27, 2009, during the departure of N579SW, 

19 the right main landing gear did not retract after the crew cycled 

2 0 the gear three times and that the aircraft returned to Spokane with 

21 the gear extended. Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST 

22 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

23 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

24 spscifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

10 

£20/210 0 SNQ <• VVd 2t?L9eGt20S XVd Le:OL OlOS/90/9 0 
04/13/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 13/23 

1 26. Answering Paragraph II. 26. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

2 admits that on February 27, 2009, it ferried N57 9SW from Spokane, 

3 Washington to Portland, Oregon, Except as expressly admitted 

4 above, SKYWEST denies each and every, all and singular, allegations 

5 contained therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally 

6 and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. 

7 27. Answering Paragraph II. 273. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

B admits that subsequent to N579SW's arrival at its Portland 

9 Maintenance facility, SKYWEST maintenance personnel removed and 

10 replaced the right main landing gear drag and locking strut. 

11 Except as expressly admitted above, SKYWEST denies each and every, 

12 all and singular, allegations contained therein, and each and every 

13 part thereof, both generally and specifically, conjunctively and 

14 disjunctively, 

15 28. Answering Paragraph II. 28. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

16 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

17 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

18 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively. SKYWEST 

19 affirmatively avers that prior to the ferry flight, SKYWEST had 

20 determined that the upiock hook had seized and had made an entry 

21 into the aircraft maintenance log. 

22 III. 

23 1. Answering Paragraph III. 1. a. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

24 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

11 

^^^/^^^^ SWO . vvj znszsmz t u iS-Ol oioi/^o/i^a 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 14/23 

1 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

2 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically 

3 denies that it violated Section 119.5(g) of the Federal Aviation 

4 Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule, regulation or order, 

5 and further denies that it operated in violation of an appropriate 

6 operations specification. 

7 2. Answering Paragraph III. 1. b, of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

8 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

9 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

10 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically 

11 denies that it violated Section 119,5(1) of the Federal Aviation 

12 Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule, regulation or order, 

13 «nd further denies that it operated aircraft in violation of its 

14 operations specifications. 

15 3, Answering Paragraph III. 1. c of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

16 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

17 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

18 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically 

l £ > denies that it violated Section 121.153(a)(2) of the Federal 

20 Aviation Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule^ regulation 

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

22 was not in an airworthy condition. 

23 •=:. Answering Paragraph III. 1. d. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

24 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

12 

^^(>/^^^® SWO * VVd SnseGfr202 XVd LG-OL 0L02/90/90 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DUJORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 15/23 

1 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

2 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically 

3 denies that it violated Section 121.605 of the Federal Aviation 

4 Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule, regulation or order, 

b and further denies that it dispatched an aircraft under FAR 121 

6 when it was not airworthy. 

7 5. Answering Paragraph III. i.e. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

8 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

9 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

10 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically 

11 denies that it violated Section 121.709 (b) (2) (i) of the Federal 

12 Aviation Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule, regulation 

13 or order, and further denies that it operated an aircraft after 

14 maintenance, preventive maintenance or alterations were performed 

15 but had not executed the required certification that the work was 

16 performed per the requirements of its manual. 

17 6. Answering Paragraph III. 1, f. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

18 denies each and every, all and singular, allegations contained 

19 therein, and each and every part thereof, both generally and 

20 specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, and specifically 

21 denies that it violated Section 121.709(b) (2) (iv) of the Federal 

22 Aviation Regulations, or any other pertinent law, rule, regulation 

23 or order, and further denies that it operated an aircraft after 

24 maintenance was performed when the airworthiness release or log 

13 

^^'^^510 0 SWQ * VVd SnseefrZOS XVd Le:OL OL03/90/9 0 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 16/23 

1 entry did not include a certification that no known condition 

2 exists that would make the airplane unairworthy. 

3 7. Answering Paragraph III. 2. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

4 avers that 49 U.S.C. Section 46301(a) and (d) speak for themselves, 

5 but denies that it is subject to a civil penalty in any amount. 

S 3. Answering Paragraph III. 3. of the Complaint, SKYWEST 

7 denies that (i) the facts and circumstances of this case warrant a 

8 $182,500.00 civil penalty, (ii) a $182,500.00 civil penalty is 

9 warranted or appropriate, or (iii) a civil penalty in any amount is 

10 warranted or appropriate. 

11 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

12 As and for a separate and distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

13 I, 

14 Certain of the acts complained of were in part those of 

15 parties independent of SKYWEST. 

16 II. 

17 The right main landing gear on N579SW had recently been 

18 overhc-uled by an FAA-certificated repair station and one of 

19 SKYWEST's qualified vendors. 

20 III. 

21 SKYWEST's EMB-120 fleet, and N579SW in particular, had never 

2 2 experienced landing gear problems of the type, nature and frequency 

23 alleged, until after the installation of the newly overhauled right 

24 main landing gear1 4 

^^^/^^(> ^ SWO ^ VVd Sn9S61'S0S XVd 2e:0L 0L0S/90/S0 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 17/23 

1 IV. 

2 Subsequent investigation has revealed that the main landing 

3 gear problem alleged was caused by an irregular internal bushing 

4 surface which had not been detected during overhaul and which could 

5 not have been detected by SKYWEST during its acceptance of the 

6 landing gear, installation of the landing gear or operation of the 

7 aircraft. This condition, in and of itself, was not sufficient to 

8 cause the gear retraction problems. However, when combined with 

9 the cold and wet conditions in which the aircraft was operated on 

10 the pertinent dates and flights, the main landing gear experienced 

11 retraction problems, which could not be replicated in a heated 

12 hangar. 

13 V. 

14 As a result of this investigation, and to prevent recurrence, 

15 SKYWEST and its approved vendor have developed additional repair 

16 and overhaul processes. 

17 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

18 As and for a separate and distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

19 I. 

20 SKYWEST and Its maintenance personnel were actively 

21 troubleshooting the main landing gear problem. 

22 II. 

23 After each reported discrepancy involving the right main 

24 landing gear, SKYXTCST maintenance personnel performed appropriate 

15 

^^'^^^^^ ^ SWO . VVd 2n9SGt20 2 XVd 28:0L 0L03/90/S0 
04/]9/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 18/23 

1 troubleshooting and corrective actions, including adjustments and 

2 replacements of parts and components. SKYWEST personnel also 

3 functionally tested the main landing gear before approving the 

4 aircraft for return to service. In no instance, were SKYWEST's 

5 maintenance personnel able to replicate the discrepancy reported by 

6 the flight crews. 

7 III. 

8 The nature, type or frequency of this discrepancy had never 

9 before been encountered by SKYWEST, despite over 22 years of 

10 operating experience with the EMB-120. 

11 • IV. 

12 The nature, type or frequency of this discrepancy was not 

13 addressed in the Aircraft Maintenance Manual, the Component 

14 Maintenance Manual or any other manufacturer's publication or 

15 instruction for continued airworthiness. 

1 6 THIRD AFFIRt<lATlVE DEFENSE 

17 As and for a separate and distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

18 I. 

19 At all times mentioned herein, SKYWEST was in full compliance 

20 with its CAME and its Operations Specifications. 

21 II. 

22 Included in SKYWEST's CAMP are its Standard Practices. 

23 III. 

24 SKYWEST's Standard Practices, among other things, establish 

IS 

eS0/8L0ia SWO * VVd StLSGGtSOS XVd S8:0L 0102/50/90 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154217560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 19/23 

1 criteri a for alternative s to the tools, fixtures and support 

2 equipment specified in the manufacturer's manuals. 

3 IV. 

4 Under said Standard Practices, the use of a hydraulic hand 

5 pump is not required to verify the correct installation and 

6 operation of the upiock hook and actuator assembly. 

7 V. 

8 Under MM 32-32-09 (upon which Complainant relies), a hand pump 

9 is not used to verify or measure clearances of the upiock hook and 

10 roller mechanism. 

11 VI. 

12 MM 32-32-09 is not and was not intended to serve as the 

13 exclusive guidance in functionally checking the landing gear for 

14 operation. The EMB-120 Aircraft Maintenance Manual ("AMM"), and the 

15 EMB-l2o manufacturer, authorize landing gear functional tests 

16 utilizing the aircraft's electrical system. In addition, MM 32-32-

17 09, on its face is incomplete as it fails to specify the make, 

18 model or capacity of the hand pump, how the hand pump is to be 

19 connected to the aircraft or how the hand pump is to be 

20 disconnected from the aircraft. 

21 VII. 

22 Sf^YWEST, in accordance with its Standard Practices and the 

23 AMM, utilized the aircraft's electrical system to functionally test 

24 the operation of •N579SW's main landing gear. 

17 

^^"^/^^^ ^ SWO . VVd Sn9eGtS0 2 XVd Se:O l OLOS/90/9 0 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 20/2J 

1 FOURTH j^FFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

2 As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

3 I4 In performing all work alleged, SKYWEST, by and through its 

5 maintenance perso.nnel, executed all required certifications that 

6 the work was performed per the requirements of SKYWEST's pertinent 

7 manuals and that no known condition existed that would make the 

8 airplane unairworthy. 

9 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

10 As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

11 I. 

12 This matter came to Complainant's attention through the a 

13 report made to the FAA by a SKYWEST Maintenance Supervisor under 

14 the Aviation Safety Action Plan (ASAP) in effect between the FAA, 

15 SKYWEST and the SkyWest Airlines Maintenance Association ("SAMA"). 

16 II. 

17 Under FAA Advisory Circular AC 120-66B, the stated purpose of 

18 an ASAP is to encourage air carrier employees to voluntarily report 

19 safety information and to resolve safety issues through corrective 

20 action rather than through punishment or discipline. In its AC, the 

21 FAA has acknowledged that without ASAP, much of this information 

22 would not otherwise be obtainable and is necessary to develop 

23 corrective actions for safety concerns and prevent recurrence. The 

24 AC states : 

18 

820/030® SWO * WW.I , . -

^^_^_ _ ^^^ 2M98Gt30S XVd 28:0L OLOS/SO/SO 
04/19/201 0 11:5 0 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 21/2 3 

1 The ASAP is base d on a safet y partnershi p tha t 

2 wil l include s th e FAA and th e certificat e 

3 holder, and may includ e a thir d party , such as 

4 th e employee's labo r organisation . 

5 III. 

6 A fundamental component of the ASAP is the Event Review 

7 Committee C'ERC"), comprised of a representative from each party, 

S in this case, the FAA, SKYWEST and SAMA. The ERC reviews and 

9 analyses reports submitted under the ASAP, identifies actual cr 

10 potential problems and proposes solutions for any perceived 

11 problcrriB. The ERC is required to govern by consensus when deciding 

12 on corrective actions and in making recommendations. 

13 IV. 

14 Initiation and prosecution of an enforcement action based upon 

15 an hSAF report, defeats the FAA's stated purpose underlying an ASAP 

16 program and undermines the integrity of all FAA-industry data 

17 sharing programs. 

18 IV. 

19 Initiation and prosecution of an enforcement action based upon 

2 0 an ASAP and enforcement investigative reports prepared by the FAA's 

21 ASAP ERC representative, defeats the FAA's stated purpose 

22 underlying an ASAP program and undermines the integrity of all FAA23 industry data sharing programs. 

24 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

1 9 

ESO/UOi a SWO * VVd Sn986t20 2 XVd Se:OL OLOS/90/90 
04/19/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 22/23 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

IS 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

I. 

The sanction sought by Complainant is unwarranted by the 

facts, safety in commerce and the public interest and is excessive. 

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

As and for a separate distinct defense, SKYWEST alleges: 

I. 

The Complainant's case, is unwarranted and without basis or 

jurisdiction in law or fact. 

WHEREFORE, it is prayed that the Administrative Law Judge not 

enter an order that SKYWEST be assessed a civil penalty in the 

amount of $182,500, or in any amount; that the Complaint be 

dismissed with prejudice, and for such other and further relief as 

may be deemed appropriate. 

Dated: April 19, 2010 

MICHAEL L. DWORKIN 

Attorney for 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC, 

20 

sso/ssoii SWO + VVd 2^1988^302 XVd 28:0L 0L02/90/90 
04/1S/2010 11:50 4154212560 DWORKIN AND ASSOC PAGE 23/23 

CERTUICATE OF SERVICE 

(49C.F.R. §821.8; 14 C.F.R §13.211) 

I hereby certify that I have this day served the following dociimeni: 

Answer to Complsdnt 

(SkyWesi Airlines, FAA Case No. 2009NM060048) 

via FAX and FEDEX standard overnight delivery, to the persons and at the addresses indicated 

below: 

Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2W1000 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W, 

Washington. D.C. 20591 

FAX: 1-202-493-5142 

(Executed Original plus one copy via FEDEX; one copy via FAX) 

Scott R. Monis, Esq. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ANM-7 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Remon, WA 98057 

7 AX: 1-227-1007 

(One copy each via FAX and FEDEX) 

Executed this 19* day of April, 2010 at San Francisco, California. 

Joleog-€!^Srown 

Secretary 

820/820 ® S W Q -i- VVd 2t?L986t'202 XVd 28:0L 0L02/90/9 0