D 

01/25/2010 14:04 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS @J 002/039 

From:RHOERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+1951 12/29/2009 1e:08 1451 Po 002/039 

nr.:DT wi,J OF_, 

fSERVED DECEIVmER 29,2009 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 


OFFICE OF ilEARlNGS 


WASIIINGTON; D.C. 


IN THE MATTER OF 

DARBY AVIATION, 


Respondent. 


FAA DOCKETNO..cP08S00026 


FAA Case No. 2008S0090020 


DMS NO. FAA 2008·1192 


Administrative Law Judge Tsaac D. Benkin 

RESPONDENT'S p.EPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THE FED~~AL 

AVIATION ADMINISTRATION'S CROSS-MOTION FOR DECISION 

COMES NOW, Darby Avia.tion and for it~ [Oeply to I,he FAA's Motion for decision, in 

accordance with DUT Rule::. ofPractice, ~iS~<'-"Tts the follOWing: 

I. 	 PROCE))UML mSTORY 

The FAA filed its compJaint. against DaTby Aviation alleging that Blton H. Darby, a 

Darby Aviation pilot., opt-TalOO Part 13S flighIS in a Lear Jet and a (iultStream b(..l,wccn October 

2007 and February 2008 without satisfying 1.bc rcquin::1l11."1lLS of FAR 135.293(a). Darby 

;Av.iation filed ito; Motion tor Summary Disposition requesting the Court t.o dismiss the PAA 

claims: as a matter of1aw pursuant to FAR 13S.Z93(c) because Elk"Jn H. DaTby w~s permitted to 

$Ubstitute hi~ achl~wl!).c:.nl of FAR 135.297 to fulfill the requirement.;; t)f FAR 135.293. Tho 
FAA + OMS ijl 003/039 01/25/2010 14:04 FAX 2024935142 

From:ANDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12129/2009 16:08 3451 P.OD3/D39 

FAA responded by asserting the sam~ arguments it unsucccssful1y asserted bc::fore this Court in 

Tn the ~er ofPafby Aviation, FAA Docket No. CPOSS00026, DMS No. FAA-2008~ 1192and 

filing a cross motioD for decision requesting the Court cn(~r ajudgm(;!nt ,igain~t Darby Aviation 

w ith()uL 11 hearing because Judge Willialu A. Pope n r.:.jcctcd this Court's previous decision in In 

tbe Matter.Qj Darby Avianon, FAA Dockl..1. No. CP08S00026, DMS No..FAA-200~;-1192 ruld 

ddennincd the regulations do not mean what they say. 

The FAA requests this Court adopt Judge Popds findings of ~'act as ()uUincd in the 

NTSB's Initial Decision datexlDeccmber 14, 2009, Docket No. S£,...18409. Interestingly, there 

arc very few factual disputes hetween lhe parties. Instead, only legal issues andconclu::;ions arc 

at issue. 

With regard to the Lear Jet, Judge Pope {'bund tha.t Elton II. Darhy satis.6cd the 

requirements ofFAl~ §§ 135.297 and 135.293(a)(2. 3) and that Elton I-L Ih.rby reasoIl<lhly relied 

upon the FANs approval of SimCom as a check aiUIlaTl (Qr Darby Aviation. (A-'O at p. 13.) 

Although a copy of this Court's order in Tn the Matter of Darby Aviation" FAA Pocket No. 

CP08S00026. DMS No. FAA-2008-1192 was provided it) Judge Pope. Judge Pope determined 

ootto adhere to stare deci~is and rejected this Court's opinion: 

The Respondent asserts tllat he wa:> current and authori7.cd to fly 

the GulfstreEUll If pn January 28, 2008 because he ll<lo passed all.. 

instrument proficiency test pursuant to FAR 135.297 in the: Gullfstream II 

given by SimuOilc on January 12, 2007, which cvul<l he substituted fOT the 

general competency test $pcdfied ill PAR Section 135.293. But, wilhQut 

autn(lniy and in c.."'Iutra,vention of FAR 135293(0). the Administrator 

argue~ that the in::JLTU1llent proficiency test cannot be substituted for the 

FAR 135.293 competency test check that tlle Respondent is accused of 

mi"siug. In support of this proposition, the Respondont cites holdings by 

an Administrative Law Judge of the Department of Transportation in a 

case eutitled 1n lh.id Matter of Dar'by Aviation. FAA Docket )',~(\, 

CPOSS00026,DMS No. fAA-200R-t.l92, to the effect that the pj,ain 

lan.bTUage of PAR 13S.293(c) allows such a sl1bstituti(Jn. Lant,.'Uage of.an 

2 

01/25/2010 14:04 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS 141 004/039 

from:AHDERSON &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7951 12129/2009 16:08 #451 P.004/039 

administrative law il.ldg~ fB..a case before 3Dvther agency 1~ not <l precedent 

in a case beto.re the Nall()nal Trdnsportatlon Safety Board. 

(A-IO, NTSB Dt:Ctmlb(,..'l" 14,2009 Initial Decision at 1)1" 'J2-13). 

In contradiction /.() lhi~ Court.'t' clct.-'lsion, AU Pope nlled that successful cOrrrp1c1.10n of 

FAR 135.297 cannot be sub:stitutcd for the reqtlirement.'l of FAR 135.293 uWe$$ the pilot is also 

l.ested on each ofth¢ subjects ofFAR 135.293. 

TIlCre i::. IIQ way dc.~l.crmin(;l from the evidence of record wb.al 

questions were a.o:;ked by Romero during tlle FAR § 135.297 check on May 

24, J..M7 [sicf, and there is nothing to indicate that they satisfied the 

requirements of § 135.293(j)(1) and (4) through (8), nor did Romero 

indicate that they did. Therefore, I Hnd that pa.'1sing the SimCom. FAR 

§135.297 check given by Romero on May,24. 2007 [sic], did not satisfY 

t.he testing requirements of PAR §135.293(1) and (4) through (8), and 

canuot be substituted for a p:rotlcicncy check on the Lear 35 under F.AR 

§13S.293(a) OT (b). 

(A-IO. Pope, J. December 14, 2009 Initial Dcdsion). 

As thi!-> Cvwt c:xplained. ALJ Pope's intc::rprctation would effectivdy rcad §B5.293(c) 

out of the regulations. If one WCTe required to take both tosts, there would be no reason to 

I>ubstitute. The language of §13S.293(c) is clear and 1lD.ambiguous: 

It allows a pilot who has successfully cOlllpkicd an instrument 

proticieclCY chcck under § 135.297 to substitute that acWevemenl for 

successful completion of the gcn("'-ral pro ficir:mcy check lUld¢ § 135-293. 

Tbc..'l"1ol is nothing in the Janguage of paragraph (0) that suggests t.hat in 

order to use the -instrument proficiency check as a substitute for the 

general proficiency check, the pilot mU$l have been tested on tl10:'-;C 

subjects, which although irrc1c::vant. to an jn:o:tnnuent proficienoy check. 

would be I>-ubjects tested during a general proticiency check. 

1 The last a.nd boJded s'::nlCDO€ of thls quote 11' contaiJ.led ill footnote 3, rad\el' than bciD.g pact of the body of the 

Initial Dt:CisiQQ as quoted het'eill. 

, The SiJ.nut1ite check: was aerually given e;n J!ln1.l."U)' 12,2007. Tlle FAA argued in its bricft\lat Darby Aviation's 

M ....L1Qll for Summary Di,;position is "frau.ght with in~cu.rIAcic~. uIlSupp<lncd a~~el'tiorl/;;, ltDd faulty conclusions" 

because the Clri~jnal MOtiOll faxed to cou.o:>lll fQr the FAA wa..~ a draft that incoJToctly used May 24, 2007 lL:S O)r= dale 

of -the check and was inuu.v~le-al1y served. This error was cnn-ccted d1."It day, bet(:l(!" all: FAA re~-pondcd, and the 

C()ITect version was serve,I UPQD the .FAA and filed with the Court. The FAA apP<lr<:.ntly c;Qntinues to refer to the d~ version IlIa! Wa.~ superceded. 

3 

FAA .. OMS 141005/039 :~ }FAX 2024935142 01/25/2010 14:05 

From:ANDERSOH ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16:08 1451 P.DGe/0!9 ! "'­ I 

If) , 

'\ t 


(Darby A'fat'iCln, Motion for Swmnary l~i~'Position and ,Brief in Support TIu ..'Tcof. Exh. 3, 

Denkin,..I. ~-26-09 Order, l:tt p. 5.) 

NOl~ethcless. D¢y Aviation can prove ami did prove that EltonH. Darby actually look 

<ll'ld !)iI..<;:>cd\tl:$ts covering 1hc SUb~~cts list.c:d ill FAR 135.293(3)(1) and (4) tllwuilh (In. exh. 

4 and S. !udge Pope first found that the ·writb.."Il tests satist'i¢d FAR 135.293(80)(1.) :.lnd (4) 

j<t4rOu~h (8):\ 

Exhibit R-40is an Ope:rali<)ns Manunl Te:;l given by Morrison to 

. the Respondent on 4/02/07. The Respondent passed with a gTade of 

100%. Moni~n said it is non-aircraft spcci fie ground test that satisfies 

the requi:remcnt of FAR 135.293(a). Tbj:s is a tE;St kept ill the pilot book. 

Exbibit R-43 is an examination givc..n conceming regulations. and appHc.~ 

t.(l any equiprncmt operated by Darby AViation, and meets tho requirements 

ofFAR 135.293(a)(1) and (4) through (8). 

(pope, J. Dccetnbet" 14,2009 Initial Decision at p. 8). 

hldge Pope later ruled, howover, that the tests were not givtm contem.poranoous'y with 

the flight portion of the competency check and Ulere[orc ignored the d(.lcumel1tafY evidence. 

l'bis ruling is contrary to the FAA'R published opinion letter (which was quoted by Judge Pope) 

tha.t provides that oral or written tests do not have to be 3i v(.:n contemporaneously Will, the fli~t 

portion ofthe §:293 competency check:. 

When an opqator adopts a. modular appr<.~ach for .to\.."'Urrt.."tlt 

traiIling, all ret.,"'UI;t'cnt trainillg element.s and even~ must be groupoo into 

spool fie modules t~'1 be adminil:JI.~'T.cd and recOTd<::d as a recurrc.."Jlt. iraining 

cumeuJurn. The mod\lles for P.ut 135 arc cvroposod of two parts. Que 

part consists ofthe written ~)r ora.! test elements, and the olhc..-:r part consi,~s 

of the f1i~1 training and checking eVCl),ls. Because the gLQ.und and f1h~ 

training, ~e:mc:nts are sepatate and distinct parl.s. they Play be com.pjc~ at 

different times. Novortheless they cOl'I1:prise a single tnodule. An opera1or 

may record when ~h module is complete or may reco:rd when all the 

modules are complete, but it is not required to record when each elem(""Jlt 

of a module is complete. 

(Exhihit 6. l';AA Opinion Letter at p. 1). 

4 
01/25/2010 14:05 FAX 2024935142 FAA ... OMS 141 008/039 

from:AHOEHSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/200S 16:08 1451 P.00S(039 

Judge: Pope then ruled 'l:rult it is "self evident" from the r<::;g1.11ations that FAR 

135.293(a)(t) and (4) through (8) must be; lCRl.cd ·t()r ~h lype ()f aircraft flown by the pilvL A 

q:uit;k rc(:l.ding of jhc actual regulation cstablislles that it is self evident that a pilot that flies 

multiple; aircraft need only be t~ied on \.he subje(..i:s covercd in FAR 135.293( .. )(1) and (4) 

through (8) e'd.ch ycar on one type of aircraft the pilot flies. As explained below, this ruling. alld 

many oth~rs are contrary to the law and constituted 'reversible error, tor which Darby has 

requested relief from the full National Tnmsportation Safety Board. 

A. 	 ElLon Darby Was Current. and Autb~)rize(J t2 Fly the Gulistream on October 

2001 tbrough Janllary 2008. 

1. 	 Darby May Substitute His Successful Completion Of An lnstcument 

"Proficiency Check GivelJ Under § 135.297 For The Gcntoral 

Compctcl'CY Tcst Specified Tn § 135.293. 

Blion Darby passed the instrument profici¢Jlcy lest required pursuant to § 135.297 in the 

Gulfstream on Jan.uaxy 12; 2007. (Exh. 1). TIle FAA bas not questioned the authority of th.e 

,Simuflite check airman that oertified that Darby passed both the oral and flight checks rcqulTC'-(l 

by § 135.297. Tn()te<u.i, without authority and ill direct c(mLTadicti.on ('0 § 135.293(c), the FAA 

w:gucs th'Lt the § 135.297 may not he substituted for the § 135.293 oompelcncy check that Darby 

is accused ofrnissing. 

Tn support of this faulty conclu~ion, the FA1\ attempts to argue ('1) the, § 135.297 check 

expired in six months and could not be substituted. tor the annual §135.293 rcquirements; (2) the 

clJ(~ck airman did not check the box indicating a §135.293 test was given; (3) the §B5.297 lesl 

did not cover aU of the subjects required by §135.293(a); and (4) StlCcesS:ful completion of 

§135.2971l'l.ay only he substituted to satisfytb.er~quiremcnts of §13S.293(b). 

First, there is no regulation or guidance that pr(lVidcs that hecause the §1.15.297 

in:-;tmment proficiency oheck must be completed in (jOt; I.ype (.If ml'<.:r.:l.fi ev~ six months, tbi~ 

5 

.. OMS 001/039 01/25/2010 14:05 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+2'4+7957 12/29/2009 16:08 1451 P.D07/CJ39 

check cannot be utilized to satisfy the annua.l requjrements of §135.293 [()r that type of aircraft. 

Thi$ interpretation would effectively read §13S.293(c) out orlhen~gulatio!ls_ In fael, this Court 

JUL." already ruJe<.{ to the comrary. (See In t.he Matter ~Cl?ll!by. Av;,ttion, FAA Docket No. 

CP08S0002G, OMS No_ FAA-2008-·1192). § J35.297 expressly provides that a. pilot that 11iC$ 

more than one airer-4ft ~ho:111d rotate the aircraft upon which he is tested. If a pilot flies two types 

ofinstrument rated aircraft, the piloL takes the instrument proficiency lcsl on one aircraft and six 

months later takCl'l th(;; instrument proficiency check in the other aircraft. This rotatiou :-:a.Lisfks 

the requircm<:rlts of § 135.293 for both !Ul"craO- pursuant to § j J5.2Y3(c). 

Also, the 8400,}0 Inspector's Handbook c:lCprcssly slates that the oral and writtC1l exam 

required to satisfy § 135,293(a) is not ncc~ssary if the pilot is also completing the instnunent 

pl'Otici(""llcy check required by § 135.297. 

PIC's due both a cornretency check and an instrument, proficiency check 

must complete the it<..ms lisied in the colullllls marked ··tNST PROF" in 

figures 3.2.7.3 for airplanO!> mel 3.2.7.4. for helicopters. FAR 135297 

requires PIC's to complete instrument.pro.ficjcncY check~ by rotating 

aircraft type,<;. . . 

Inspector's Handh()ok 8400.10, '1l 539 (f), Jl~current Category . 

.Fif,'Urc 3.2.7.3: referred to ~ove and attached hereto a.~ E::U:ribit 7, does not include 11 

symbol for the PIC or the SIC3 under "lNST PROF' for Written or Oral Test:, FAR § 135.293. 

Instead, tbat table illustrates tlu:Ji the Pilot ill Command i~ only required to CQmplete a written or 

oral lcst under FAR § 135.297. This i::; consistent with the plain lanj,,'Uage permitliTlg a PIC to 

substitute the § 135.297 test for the requirements ()r § 135.293. 

Second, this Court has already ruled that it is not necessary tor ,he check airman to check 

the ~ox indicati.tlg a §135.293 test was given if the pilot is sub.f:tituting the iusLrum ent prol:iciency 

check fOT the requirements of §135.293. Cllccidng the §293 box would Indicate thai the §293 

.._-._--_._----'­ 3 PIC r~fcrs to P'i1()t in Conlmal'ldj SIC refers to ~ccond in Com.tl"land. 

6 

01/25/2010 14:05 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS: 141 008/039 

From;AHDE~lm &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+1957 12/29/2009 16:09 #451 P.OOB/039 

t~st wa::; given and fuere would bc uo need to substitule. Th~ §293 box was not checked in the 

case ofIn tb.e Matter of D~Qy' Aviation, FA..A Docket No. CP08S00026, DMS No. FAA~2()08

1192 and tllis Court ruled tbatlhc pilot and check aj.mum hl«l satis11ed the regulations. 

Third. just as in In the Matter of Darby Aviation, l7AA Do(;kcl No. CP08S00026, DMS 

No. f AA-2008~1192 the FA.A argut;;S that the § 135.297 instrumont proficiency test cannot he 

substituted for the § 135,293 test because the § 135.297 instrtun<.;nt prolicicTJCY lest did not eover 

all ofthe subjtX'Xs tWIt are Nquircd Lu he tested under § 135.293(a)(1-8), Ill. both Cl1~~:S, it i::: lhe 

FAA's position that successful completioJl ()f the § 297 instrument profi("-Lcncy test docs nol 

satisfy the requirements. of § 135.293(3) unless the instrum"J.lt protjciellcy test include:; all 

elements ofthe gencrailest under § 135.293 (a). 

ThIS Court disagreed with the r'ANs interpretation am} hdJ that § 13S.293(c) was 

Ruf(icicntly clear: 

It allow!> a pilot who has success1ully completed an in.!lt11llneL1t 

proiicj<:illCY check under § J 35.297 to substitute tha.t achiCvc;Tnent for 

ffilcoessfuJ completion of the general proficiency check under § 135.293. 

There is nothing in the language of paragraph (:) lhaL suggC5IlS thal in 

order. to lise the mstrulDl.'llt proficiency ch~k as a suhstitute for thc 

general prvliciom.;y check, the pilot must have b¢on tested on those 

subjects, which although irrelevant to an iustrument profici(;:ncy check, 

wo\lld be subjccts tested during a general proficiency check. 

l!t. at p. 5. 

TI\is Court also noted that, as a practical matter, The FAA cmm:-ld's interpretation would 

"read parngrapb (0) right out of the regula.tion!? rd. at p. 6_ This Coun explaintXi that l.hLTC 

would be no purpos~ for § B5.293(c) ifthe pilot had to pa.<;s a § 2Y3(a) and a. § 297 test in order 

to substitute his § 297 test for § 293. Id.:c He would have already token. b(.)th tests and would have 

no need t(.) subl>1itutc, SC't Td. "If paragraph (c) h~ any purpose, it is to avoid such unnecessary 

·mu1l.iplc tCI,i!.lng.'· reI. 

7 

01/25/2010 14:05 FAX 2024935142 FAA of OMS @009/039 

fro~;AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+1951 12/29/2009 16:09 tJ451 P.009/039 

Fourth, dlr::! FAA argues r.hat the instrument proficiollcy test ~all only bo::: ~ub~tituled to 

satisfy tbe r~'\liremeuts of § 13 5.293 (b). Rule;s of construction, however, establish that this 

;:ll·gument is without merit. As explained ill the FAA published opinion letter quoted above, the 

competency check in §135.293 is compri::;cd or two paTts, a wnttctl or oral tc:::t and a tliglH 

maneuvering test. This is also true ofthe instrument proficiency check in §135297. §t;l.~ FAR 

§135.297(c). It makes n{) seose toat the in~tTum(,.."'T)t proOc1cncy c.heck "in §297 -is eomp,;sc<:l 0 f 

twu parL:::, l:I. kn<.)wk"dgc component and <I flight component, but th.e competency check only refers 

to the flight maneuvering portion of §293. Also, §135.293(c) rc::fc::rs. to the competency check of 

"this l:te('-non." AU of §293 is delined as a section. ,If the draft~rs only intendj:;d for the 

instrument proficiency check to be substitutable for the flight maneuvering test in paragraph (b) 

of scction 293, they woulo. have written of "for the com.pcrcncy cheCK of paragraph (h)," as I.he 

dmfters did in §297: 

Ifthe pilOt in command is assigned to pilot more than one type of airCTll.fi, 

that pilot must take the instnunent proticiency cheek required by 

l)aragnmh Ca.) of t},jS! ~ccr.lon in cal:h type of aircraft to which that pilot is 

assigned, in Totation, but not more than one flight check during each 

p(,.-ri()~ descr?-bed in. paragraph (a) ofthis section. 

FAA §135.297(e) (emphasis supplied). 

FAR §135.337 also makes clear that all of §293 is cOllsidered a competency check. 

Paral.,'Taph (0)(3) provides that in order to be a check airman, the check airman must have 

"satisfactorily completed the proficiency Or C!oTIlpeb::ncy checks that are required to serve as a 

pilot in command in operations und~r this p,m." I'AR §135.337(b)(3) (empbasis su.pplie<.[). 

Does the FAA really contend that the check airman d.(JCS not have 1.0 satisty §293(a) in ()rder to , 

be a check ainnan? CQulJ.;;~l fonhe FAA argued exactly the opposite ofthil:J in In the Matter of 

Paz:by.,(\.viali()rl, FAA. D~cket No. CP08S0Ci026, DMS NQ. FAA-ZOOS-lIn aud brvught WI 

8 

01/25/2010 14:05 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS ~010/038 

From:AHOERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16:09 1451 P.010/039 

..:nfoT.ccmc.ot action because the check airman allegedJy did not satisry the requirements of 

§293 (a). It is clear the FAA has contrivt:d these inconsistent allegations for the purpese of 

harassing Dathy Aviation. 

Rcspond(...'nL's Fxh. 1> we Gulls1ream Sinlufiite test, establishes that Elton D!:1:rhy passed 

the inst.rum,.ent proficiency check under § 135.291 in the GultStream en January 12, 2007. Th~ 

alleged unauthori:/,eJ 'flights occurred between OctohC.T 2007 and Janua,ty 200R, withiTl a year of 

the t~t. Just as in Tn the Maller orDarQy,{\:v~a~iol!. Elton Darhy substituted his § 297 im;tnlrncnt 

profidency test for the test required by § 293. He did not need to take the § 135.:293(a) test also 

oTtilere would be no purpose fer § 293(c). 

2. 	 parby And Morrison 'Iestifled That DarbI Was Orally Tested And 

Correctly Allswcred The Aircraft Spec:ific Questions In 

§ 135.293(1&)(2-3) At Simg8ite. 

§ 135293(a)(2.3) provides: 

(a) 	 No certificate holder may use a pilot, nor lll<.lY allY pt..-TsOn serVj~ a.<; 

a pilot, unless since the beginning of the 12[/1 calendar mcnth 

before that service, that pilot has pa~ed a \VT.itt\.-'ll ()r oral lC~l" g1vcn 

by the Administrator or an authori:l'.ed clleck pilot, on that pilot's 

knowledge io the following <lI"e~ ­

(2) 	 For each type of aircraft to be. :t10VIID by the pilot, the 

aircraft pow¢:Iplant, major components and systems, m:;jor 

appliances, performances l:Il'ld operating limitations, 

standard and emergency operating procedures, and the 

contents of the approved Air("'Tall Flight Manual or 

equival¢l1t, as applic,able; 

(3) 	 For eacIl type of aircraft to be flown by the pilot, the 

method of determining complian,cc with weighL and 

balanci;; liDlilationli fOT takeoff, landing and ell f()utc 

operatiens; 

John Morrison testified that he personally witncss~d SimuniLc ()T'dlly tcstin,? Darby Ul 

January 2001: 

9 

01/25/2010 14:05 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS ~0'1/039 

From:ANDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/Z009 18:09 1451 P.Ol1/039 

Q. Okay. k.d whal kind ofthings - did you hear Mr. Darby 

as he was being tested oral1y? 

A. Yr::S. I was ill the salUe room. 

Q. l\nd what kind of Lllillgs - what kind of que~tions did they 

a::;k Mr. Darby? 

A. Virtually ev~;tything about the air<'Lafi, inclusive or 

systems, ofengines, the whole airplane. 

Q. So they ~skcd about G? cquipmcnt'l 

A. Yes. 

Q. Okay. And they asked about I::mcrgcnuy procedures? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Okay. And did MI. DaTby answer those qucstions' 

correctly? 

A. Yes. he did. 

Q. Okay. And also, tell mG did thi;;y ask about th.e. method of 

dctcnnin:ing compliance with weigh[ and balance limitations i()T lak.coD.? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Okay. .And that was specific to the 02; is th.1.t correct? 

A. Well, he gave him a problem with a simui-ate:d trip an.d a 

simulated fuel level and asked him to work out the weight and balance. 

Q. So he actu.uly asked him to calculate it? 

Q. And did :r-.1r. Darby answer those que::.1ions correctly? 

A. Yos, he did. 

Q. Okay. And did Simufljlc certify lhaliD fact Mr. Darhy was 

qUalified to fly th~ G,,);! 

10 
01/25/2010 14:0B FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS @012/039 

from:AHOERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12129/2009 16:09 U51 P.012/039 

A. Yes, they did. 

'(11w18-09 Tr. at p. 19-20). Mr. Dam), aloo testified that he passed the (mil test at Si..lllul1il.c on 

his kllowledge in the areas listed in § 135.293(a)(2-3): 

Q. 	 What is this? 

A. This is: the simulat(.)r check 8410 on the Gulfstrcam 2, 

Simutlite. 

Q. Iuld do you recall taking the training and the t<.,'SLN at 

&imuflite that is rel1ected by this form.? 

A. 	 y~s. 

Q. 	 And while you were tak.in:g - did you have an oral test? 

A. 	 Yes, 1 did. 

Q. And did that oral test cover equipment. ;tnd cquiprm':llt 

systems ofthe 02'1 

A. 	 Yes. 

Q. 	 Did it COVeT emergency procedures? 

A. 	 Yes. 

Q. Did yO~1 have any oml questions about weights and 

balances? 

A. 	 Yes. 

Q. 	 OftheG2? 

A. Yes. 

(11-18-09 Tr. at p. 116). 

3. 	 ~t1!()ngh Not Copsistently, Stmumtc Certified That Darby Pa$!;cd 

§ 13S.293 On Tbe Gulfstre:am. 

Although inconsistently, the Siml.1flite Check .Airm.an's 8410-3 Jonn acluaHy indicates 

that Darby satisfactorily passt;d a written (IT oral Lcst undor § 1 35.293(a). Box # 1 js marked 

11 

01/25/2010 14:06 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS ~013/039 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+2'4+7957 '2/29/2009 18:09 1451 P.013/039 

satisfactory, indicating Darby pa.'>sed the writt~ and oral tel:!t under § 135.293(<1), Y<:lL at the top 

thc check ·airman mark~d the hox that say.::; «297 only." When questiolled at the hearing ill Lhe 

Ad.l::qinistrator v. Elton H . .Q~y., Case No. SE-184091hc FAA declared lhaL jt~ l)()~jtioll is that 

when. a § 293(a) test is successfully comph:ted, \he check airman indicates the passing grad~ by 

inserting an "8" for "satisfactory" in box 1 ill the left hao.d coluron of the fOIIU~ which Simufiite 

did for Elton Darby on the Gulfstream. Coronare Exh. 1 with 11-18-09 TT. <11. p. H1. ("IT1I1c 

regulation 293 is covered. under paragrapb (1) on the left-hand side of the form....they would 

also put an S fOT paragraph mIt:: lhr pl·el1igllt."). Silllutlite celtified its form was COlTcct- (S(;C) 

Exh.l). 

The problem is tl-lat the FAA's 84lO-3 fonu is int(.-mally inconsistent, as the NTSB court 

ADMfNISTRA.TIV,E LAW JUI)<.:m POPB: 'l'hc-rc is: an ltlte:roaJ 

inconsistency in the form. But 1 don't know how we're going \.0 T~solve 

that, ospecially because the Respondeat is not ill a positioll to 'be able to 

resolve such an inconsistency. That's beLween the FAA and the check 

airman. 

(11-18-09 Tr. aL p. 28). Respolldent cannot be held responsible for the 1:-"AA's internally 

inevnsisLCTII. fhrm or for thl: check airma.n's compl("1ion oftha,1. rorrn. (;ompQUll(Uo.g Lhe probJcm 

is that the FAA has failed to instruct its operators and check airmen. how to complete the fOnD. 

Darby cannol be held Tc~;p(msibk 

The FAA'sc.ounsel claimed there were instructions somewhere, but he was n(.:ver able 10 

djrect the Court to where those instmctions maybe tound: 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE POPE: Well. <lre there 

instructions from the FAA LO check ainTlC'D on how 10 fiU ou.t the 8410-3'1 

MR. VEATCH: Y<;IS, Your Honor. 

12 

01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 ~ OMS 0 14/039 

from:AHDERSOH a ASSOCIATES, .LLC 205+214+1951 12/29/2009 '6:09 1451 P.014/039 

ADMINISTRA'l'lVE Li\.W roPOl:: POPE: Well, would you l()ok 

at those and S~ whether OJ: not th~ shed any light on tIlis particular 

problem'! 

MR. VEATCH: We will, Yow' Honor. 

ADMINJSTRATIVU LAW JUDGE POI'E: And if it docs~ l 

would like to see what the instru('1:ions t.o the check airmen say. If Lhl~y 

don't say anything that's relevant to it, well, that's OkllY too. 

Mr. Veatch never c<m}e foJ:"Wl:U'o with a.ny docwnent showing inslnlcl.ioTl$ to check 

airmI.:n, In Caut, Elton Darby, who was a <.:hcck ainmul on the Gulfsiream and tbe T ~ar Jet., 

testi~cd that be had ncVor l'eccived.anY'instrllction on'how to complete the FAA fonn 8410-3. 

Q. Mr, Darby, you are a check ainn.clll; correct? You've 

answoel'ed that qucl:ltlon. 

A. l was a ch,eck iliIman_ 

Q. You were a check ilirroan. Correction_ Did Mr. Blount. 

ever teU you how to fill ()-ut the 84.1 0 fimn? 

A_ No. 

Q. Did Mr- Fox ever tell you how to rm out the 8410 fonn? 

A. No_ 

Q. Pr. Mr. emil Cirone evc,,'T tell you how to till out the 8410 

form? 

A. NoQ. Did any~mc at the: FAA tell you how Ii) rm out an 8410 

form'! 

A. No. 

(11~18-09 Tr. at p. 145.) 

13 

01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA -+ OMS 015/039 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16:10 1451 P.015/039 

a. 	 § 135.293 (a.) 0,4-8) Does Not Require Darby To Repeat TIl<:: 

Oral Or Written Test Ii'or Each Type Of ~raft Flown. f 

There i~ no board precedent,. no policy and no 'FAA intcrprcla.jlon that distiJlti::U1$he~ or 

altt.'1"'S § 13?293(a). which by its pla:in language only TequiTes testing on the equipment, the 

emergency pn)cc.<luTcs and thc welg11ts antI balances under (a)(2-3) for each type of ai.rcrafi 

fh)WD. §135.293(a)(1), (4-8) only require 1hcl'ilQt to be rested each year on one oflhc aircratl 

that the pilot flies: 

§ 135.293(:a}: 

(a) 	 No certificate holder mel), use a pi1ot~ nOT ma.y any pcnH)n :1(::rV<:: ::t..'l a 

pilot, unless si,tJce the: beginning of1he 12th calendar month before 1hat 

::;e.rvice, that pi10t has passed a 'written or oral lest, given by the 

Administrator or an authorized ch~k pilot, on that pilot's knowledge 

il) the following areas ­

(1) 	 The appropriate provisions of parts 61, 91, and 135 of thi~ 

chapter and the operations spccillcatioILS and the manual of Ihe 

certificate holder; 

(2) 	 for e,.clt type of aitclllft to be :flown by the pilot the air<mafi 

powerplant, major compononts and systculsJ major appliances, 

pert(mnaIICCs and ()p~rating limitatiN1S, standard and 

emergency operaling procedLlres, and lhe COtlLenl,g or (he 

'approved Air<.--raft Flight Manual or eqllivalent, as applicable; 

(]) 	 For ea..:h type of llirc[uft to be l1,9wn by tbe piJQ!, tbe method 

of dctcnn.:ining compliance with weighl and balance limitations 

'for takeoff, lllllding and en route operati<ms; 

(4) 	 Navigation and use of air navigation aids appropriate to tile 

<'Tcratjon OT pilot aul.horj:r.at1oTl, including:, wben applioable, 

instrument apPl:oach facilities and procedures; 

(5) 	 Air 'traffic control procedures, including IFR procedures when. 

llpplicablo; 

(6) 	 Metoorology in gCIDCTal, inc.ludlng the principles ()f f.ontal 

systems, icing, fog, thul1deriaOTmS, and wind,'.;hcar, and, if 

appropriate for tbe: o'P¢n'\tion of the cc:rti.ficat~ holdc:r, high 

ahiLude wcath~'l'; 

14 

FAA 	 .. OMS @0 18/039 01/25/2010 14:,8 FA( 202493,'42 

205+214+1951 12/29/2009 16:10 1t451 P.01S/039 From: AHDERSOH & A~OCIATES,'t LLC >:.\."., f 

( 

(7) Procedures for­

(i) 	 Recognizing and avoiding f>evere weather situations; 

(ii) 	 13scaping .from sever~ wcaLh"T $1 Luati(")ll:=l? in case of 

jmt(Jvcrt~nlc:ncuul1ters, includillg low-altitude wind:;llear 

(except that l"Otor('Taft pilots are not required to bt: tc.'SLcd 

on escaping from low-altitude wirldshear); and 

(iii) 	 Operating in or near . thundcrslOml$ (inc.luding best 

pc:netratj"g a.ltitudes), tmb111ent air (including doar air 

turbuJ.cn¢c). icing, hail, and other potentially bai.::ardou~ 

meteorological comUt.ions; 8Jld , 

(8) New equipment, procedure!.', OT Icchni<'lucs, 3,...., approptlate. 

''It is g~neraHy pl'esumed Congress acts intentionally and pUIposely whf.."U it includes 

particular hmguage in one section of I)lalule bUL omits it ill another." See u., Dean v. U.S., 129 

S. CL 1849, 1 H53 (2009); Curr-Spec Partners, J;.,.P y, C,I.R. 579 P.3d.391 (5TIo Cir. 2009); ~ 

City of Vallojo, 408 B.R. 2g0~ 296 (9di Cir. BAP 2009). The same concept applies to 

§ 135.293(a). rf (a)(l). (4-8) were required to be tested annually fVT each typo of aircmft to be 

flown. there would be no N'd.son t() include illat particular language in (a) (2-3). Tt W()\lId hl:l.v~ 

been included:in the body of § 293(a), not included under ooly two items it) the list. Any other 

reading would effectively read thc language «Por each type of aira:aft.to be flown" out ()l' (8.)(2­

1). There is no evidence that the drallcrs accidentally forgot to include the particular language in 

(.i)(l) (4-8). The regulation is not new ::md such a cOIlulUlllio.C1 would be absurd. blterostiugJ.y. 

l'Ither than again~t Darby, f.hcrc is not a single knowll NTSB case where the FAA h3.!;; alleged or 

the Board has determined that a pilot is required to takt: 3. writlen or ora1 lc:·n: in (a)(1 )(4-8) tor 

each type of aircraft tlown. in fact, the only known Board precedent for any violation of § 293 

involved pilots that hadn't passed § 293, § 291. or § 299 and argued the flight in q'Ut:$tion wac:; 

not a Part 135 flight that req'uired the pilot to be qualified under Part 1:35 or involved .l1ilsi ficalion 

ofrc:conls. 

15 

01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS 141017/039 

From:AHDERSOH a ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12129/2009 16:10 1451 P.017/039 

Additionally. it makes sense that the draflers do not require a pilot to be lested en.ch year 

t~l:l the general itClJ)s included in (30)(1), (4-8) for each type of arn...Tdft flown. There is no 

document, leslimony> policy, board prec;ooeut or any other tlIldillgS that the questions for 

(a)(l)(4-S) would be diftereut if asked regarding a Lear Jet or a Gulf-Stream. In lact, the 

111jpecror's Handbook. 8400.1 0, '1 607 provides trutt some ofthe questions are general .::w.d do not 

have to be a..<:;ked fi))" each airplaT.u::, but tllat the equipment, em(..'rgcncy and weight::; ~l1d balance 

(CSL" UTlti(..T § 293«i)(2-3) ,U"C ri..x]u.ired to be tested for eac,h aircraft flown. According to the 

Tnspcct.or's Handbook 8100.10, the cheok airman has di::;~retiQn whether to ask qucsti<ms 

regarding each aiTcraft or wbetber t~l ask general questions wi.th regard tQ (a)(4-8), ~400.10' 

,r607; 11-17-09 Tr. at p. gO (Q. "Okay. And I'd like to ask you, as a check airman do 

you have discretion as to which questions you will ask and which questiollS you win a~k and 

which questions - how much tlct.l:Li1 to go into each subject? A Yes. I do. Q. And that authority 

is given to you by the FAA; is that tl:ue? A. That is cOlTect.) 

There is no rea...on and no evidcr.w<=, tbat the an:::wcrs to questions about the manual (a)(l); 

the use of navigational ,uds including: instrument approach procedures (a)(4); a:ir traffic control 

pTOcedures (a)(5); meteorology (a)(6); weather (a)(1) or n~w equipment (a)(8) are reqlJired to be 

di rrcrCl)t for e......ch type of aircr.,rlt In fauL, Ole NTSB cow·t n::cog:n.L;ed that John Morrison orally 

tested Darby under (a)(1)(4-8) and asked qucstioIlS that were broad enough to cover all aircraft 

flown by Dal"by. 

T unuc::rstood lh<.: w:iLucss to be saymg that he gave biannual, by 

which I mean twice a year, training sessions to pilots for Darby Aviation, 

which included qtlestions that were hroad enough to apply to both the 

Turbo Jots and to the heHcopter. 

AdclilionaIly, the NTSB coun recognized that the check 1)i1ot would nol have to a.sk qu(:s.tion~ 

about liNery subject ror cach aircraft every year: 

16 

01/25/2010 14:06 FAX 2024835142 FAA ~018/038 

From:AHOERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 18:10 11451 P.018/039 

"'Well, as 1 say, he doesn't have to ask every question at "very tiJ:ne, T would :imppose." 

(Tr., part 2 at p_ (9). 

Darhy's oral and wriUcn k'it::; by an. au.thorized check ainnan on the Lcar Jft and the 

helicopt(,,'X :::ati:dlc8 th.e requirements fOT § 135.293(a)(J)(4-8) for every aircraft flown by Dm-by, 

including the Gul£..tream. Morrisoo testified that in April 2007 Darby passed a writtl':::ll and an 

o:r<1.1 tCSL on each subj~t covel;ed by § 135.293(3)(1)(4-8). (Tr-, part 2. at pp. 73-78; R·40~ R-43), 

In lact, "Ed BlollUt ofthe Birmingham FSDO ;:md the FAA's reprc:.lcntativc, a.pproved the written 

tests for the purpose of satisfying § 135.293(a) that Jobn Mor:rison gave the pllots of Darby 

Aviation. (fr_ at p. 70). Two successor inspectors following Mr. Bloul1t also appmved 10Tm 

MoIIison giving Darby the written and oral te::.ts in order lO satisfy th~ requir,em<.."ts of 

§ 135.293(a)(l)(4-8) for c<-lCh airoraft flown. by Elton Darby, including the Culfs(TC3JT1. For 10-. 

15 YeatS, the inspectors have reviewed Darby's records and bl;lvc never obj~cted, corrcclcd or 

suggested tha1 Monison cOllld tlot give tht; oral or writt.en tc!;t to satisfy (a)(1 )(4-8) for all aircraft 

flown by Darhy_ 

Q. How long had Mr- MQrtisoll been giving yQU yow- (a.)(l) 

and (4) through (8) ofpart 293 oral and written lest? 

A_ Approxinlately 1993-1994. 

Q- .And. how IOllg has h{;'; beet) giving you your oral and written 

lests on th~ G2 for (a) (1) and (4) thTough (8) ollly'! 

A. Alk. we got the G2 on our ops sp(,.:c~, it was in '98 1 think, 

or around '98. 

Q. And have any of yOIlr previous inspectors ever told you lllat 

Mr_ Morrison was not pellnitted to give you oral ()T written tests On the G2 

for (a) (1) lil:ld (4) through (8)? 

A. No. 

17 

01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA 	 "' OMS 1(Z)018/038 


From:ANDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 18:'0 tJ451 P.019JOg9 

ADMINISTRATNE LAW JUDGE POPE: Sir, did the FAA, to 

your knowledge, ever in~p¢ct the records ofDarby Aviation'! 

THE WITNESS: Y c:x, Sir. 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE POPE: And W(.'TC thero 

records in Darby Aviation's filing syskm of the questions that MI'. 

Morrison may have asked you? 

THE WITNESS: Ye~, Sir, there was. 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE POPE: So they wen.: availahle 

for the Administrator to look at? 

THE WITNESS: y~s, Sir. 

(11-18-09 Tr. at p, 121-22). 

Darhy pas:-;e<.l oral aud written tesl'( covering all subjects of § 135.293(a)" including 

(a)(1 )-4-8). 

b. 	 § 13S.293(a) Does Not Rcqu.irc the Airmltn To Ueconl Tllt~ 

Q...~l Or Written Te~t 0" Tbe FAA's 8410-3 Form. 

14 C.R..F. 135.293(a)·provides that no person may serve as a pilot ofVarL 135 operations 

unlcs!l within the previou:\ yar that person 1Ia.-. pa..~ed a wI'itten or oral test on tl1at pilot's 

knowledge in eight listed areas. Nowhere in § 293 does it require that the pilot evidence his 

passing ofthe oral or written test on ~y form, let alone on the 8410-3 issued by the FA.A. 

When the COUrt asked the Administrator for authority for his olaiIll that Elton Darby must. 

cau:>e the check airman to use the 8410-3 form. the Administrator's cOWlscl could only direct tlle 

Court to § l35.63 This regulatiun, l\owever, docs not require the \J~rtil1(:atc hold<:r to uSe \)t 

retain an 8410-3 form, it merely req'aires the cerrlficatt:: hoMer to retain Lhe date and result of 

each competency test; 

18 

01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS ~ 020/039 

from:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+79157 12/29/2009 '6~'D 8451 P.020/039 

§ 135.63 RECORDKEEPING REQUlREMJ£:NTS. 

(a) Each ('.;CJ;1:iI1ca.1e holder shall keep at its principal bUSiI:Lt:S$ 

office or at other pll:l.cel'i approved by tj)C Adminis:trator, and shall 

make available for inspection by the AdminiS\nltor the following­

(vi) 	 'Dle date and result 001' each of the initial and 

recurrent competency tosts and proficiency and 

rouLe checks required by this part and the type vf . 

.<lin"Taft flown during that test Of check. 

Finally, th~~ FAA's own inspector handbook docs not Tequire the use of the 8410-~,alld 

encourages the operators to pcrsonaliz.<: the t(mn" so long ClS it complies with § 135.63(a)(vi) 

above. 

1. Recording Checlcs. The checks· tor those op<"Tators whose fhght 

crew mcmhcr~ get all their checks from FAA inspectors (single p:ilol, 

slllgle PtC, and basic operalors) may be recorded on FAA Fonn :.t410-3. 

POI'g should encourage all ot.1:J.<..T, (1p(..TaLt)rs: lO create specifically tailored 

fonns. 1.0 TCWr:d. Lhese chocks. which reflect the requircmen1.$ listed in the 

operator's curriculum outline. 

See Inspector's Handbook. 8400.10, " 539 (1); lttfC<' !J,t.sQ Id., ~I 1809 (D) ("OperalOTs may 

depersollalize rsicl those recOl'ds not requiTed by the rcgula.tl()TIs.). 

Finally, the Administrator's counsel admitted that there is no requirement for the check 

allman.to ket:p r~CQrds oftht: particular quostions &..::ked for the oral or written test: 

. MR.. VEATCH: Your Honor, there is no such requirem~t for a check 

airm.an 10 ke"P separate rec.ords of the qtlestions they askcd~ the ora t or 

writt(ln tel't that he gavc. 

(ll-17-09 T:r. <It p. 86). 

B. 	 Elton Darby Was Curr.ent and Anthocized to Fly the Lear Jet 0111 February 

11. 2008. 

BUOD Darby has conclur::ivcly c~f.l:ibJisllcd !.hat he ha;;: satisfied the requiremellts of 

{} 13S.Z93(a) and has passed the oral and wriU<"'U 'lcsls under § 29::1(1:1.) qu.ali fying him to fly tIl<=: 

19 

01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024835142 FAA + OMS 1410211038 

From:AHOERSON &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16:11 1451 P. 0211039 

. Lear Jc..:t on February 11, 2008 under Part 135. First, as explained above, ,Darby's :-;utlccssful 

passing of the § 297 flight check in the Lear J(.1; at SimCom may be ~ubstiLuted by Darby to 

satisty tbe requ.irements of § 293(a). Second, Darhy passed the OJ'a] te..;;t given' by SimCoDl 

.which expressly sa.t.is!ied (a)(2-3) according the R41 O~3 Ivmt complcted by SimCoIll. (R-3). 

Third, Darby ::iu~cc::;::;fully prossed the Qral and writt<..'ll tc.::sl.S giv(...'1l by Jobn Monl.st1n, wh() bas 

proven he: was rul approved check ainnan otl the Loar Jet at the time ofthe test ill Apnl 2007. (RMorri~on's qUl?'stions CQvcrutl.al1 of § 135.293(a)(1-8). (Tr- at Pl'. 35-36, n.-79.; R-40, 43). 

The Administrator merely ax-gues that (he fOm:Hl were not filled oot properly and that 

1~9me:ro, tbe check aimuu1. a.t SimCODl, was not properly authorized by Fox before conducting 

the § 293(a)(2-3) tests. Both. of these arguments are without merit. As explained above, fonns 

arc not required under § 293(a). NOileiliel¢ss, Moml;)on indkaled on the June 25,2007 form tl~al 

the oral or written tests were pas~ed 'and any In<.;on&ist,."ncy iN L() he con:stru.cu (1gainst the FAA, 

which drafted the fonn, Also. Fox's testimony regarding his alleged lack of evidence was not 

credible, wa..;; 1nconsj~tcnt with his previous tC'stimony and practice. and makes no scm.c. Finally. 

SimCom's. lettc.::rs conclusively eS1ablish that rox's aI'!:"lIment'regarcling Romero, which was:first 

alleged during opening statements, cannot be reasonably believed and. was conl.Ta:ry to· the FAA's 

practice for maay years. 

1. Darby Passed the Oral and W..-itLen Tests Given By Morris(LI!. 

Morrigoo restifioU that Darby pQS~ed the oral an.d written tests givellby Morrison in 2007 

and the FAA can ofter no contrary evidence. (TI'., pad 2 at Jlp. 35-36, 72-78; R-40; R-43). 

Darby passed the Wlitten tests approved by EJ Blount and dated ApTil 2007 and the $410-3 

signed by Dick Parker dated April 6, 2007 and June 25. 2007 show the recordings oftheso tests. 

The tests covered all subjects required under § 135.293(a). Morrison W?I.... an authorizoo cbcc.:k 

llinUaIl on the'Lear Je1. This cvidL.'1lce is undisputed. 

20 

01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024835142 FAA -+ OMS 141 022/038 

From:AHDERSON &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16:11 tJ451 P.022/039 

2. Romero Was Authorized as I:l Chcc,k Airman for Dar'by Aviat[on. 

Fox claims that he. did not autl.onze Rich<ud Romero, an employee of SimCom. <'.Ii'> a 

check airman for Darby Avia,tl()n. Fox, however, faxed written approval to Morrison while the 

Darby A viatiuIJ pilots were at SimCOTIl f()t trai:niug. (Exh. S). During the first two days of the 

NTSB hearing, Fox testified that Monis<rn called (lQd said the Darby Aviation pilots were in 

OrJando, but that 8imCom would rH)t begin training until receiving aUl.b.orization from Fox. 170x. 

claimed) n()wevc::r, that where the form sl:l.y~ to authorize the individual as a check pilor.., "sign 

below," that did not refer to the portion below (hal ~ays "approved by the Principal Operation;::: 

lnl>'PeClOl'." efr., part 2 at p. 24R). Instead, 1::'0-": claims (hat "be]ow" means "besid(,)" and that. if 

he wert: approving '\.he individual as a check airm~n he would sign beside the individLI.al's name 

and if he were approving fue individual only as an fnstmctol." Pilot, he wOllld not sign b<:::;ide the 

munc, but wculd only sign below. (Tr. at pp. 81, 24S). Tills testllT.lony, however, wa~ ekarly 

contrivc:d ailer the f."l.Ctalld was proven not to bo credible because Rc.<;pondent introduced 

evidence that Fox slgned beside and below even when only approving the individual as atl. 

Instruclor Pilot. (A-I?). 

Fox's t.estimony that h~ thQl.l.ght MQrriSO~l Wld D;u-by were asking t~)[· his npproval beforc 

taking Parts 61 and 91 testing is also not YTedible. (i;cc Tr., part 2 at 234). 

. Q. Are you teStifying under oath that you did nol. know that 

1huy were down there to get their traiIllngaud checking in the Lear Jet'? 

A. I didn 'I. ~ay that.. '" 

(I 1-18-09 Tl'. at p. ~4). Mon'isoD lCSLifioo tha.t he called Fox an.d told him the pilots were 

there for their Pali 135 training and testing: 

Q. Shortly bdore you wore - when you went down to 

SimCom did you have a conversalioll with MT. F()x? 

,- i 

21 
01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA ., OMS 141 023/038 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2008 1S:" 1451 P.023/039 

A. Yes, we did.... 

Q. Did you tell him what kind oftraining and testing you were 

going t() SimCom to receive? 

A. Ce1tainly, 293. 

ADMINTST'RATTVE LAW JUDGE POPE: Tho qu~~Lion related 

to what cODversation did you have with him, presumably by te1eph'):ne, 

from SimCom? What did you ask him to do? What did you say to him? 

What did he say to you? 

BY THE WITNRSS: 

A. Okay. l' confitmed that he was availabl<: to receive a fax 

that, mdeed, had a list ofinstructors and check ailman on this form that I 

needed his signarure, '7~ well as my own signaiUTc, to affect the completion 

oftht: requirements to l:Ittend class, 

Q. And also to have your tests and your checks? 

(11-18-09 Tr. at p. 113-'114). 

No approval from Fox is needed for testing under Parts 61 and 91. (Tr. at p. 239). No 

approval from Darby's Director of Opera6ons is nc?dcd for Parts 61 or 9] either. (Tr. at p. 240). 

It makes no sense that Morrison would have called and said that S:imCom would not start 

tTainillg under T~art" 61 and 91 until receiving an unnecessary approval from fmc. 

Fox approved Romero~ inducing Dam)' Avial.lon into sp<..'Uding $4000-$4500 for each of 

the four Darby Aviation pilolS to take their § 135.297; § 135.293 training and tests. (8t:e Tr., 

part 2 at p. 11 g). Later, Fox con.trived this argument to ~LtteInpl to .;;lUpport his cl:lim that Darby 

was not properly authorized to conduct the Fchrw:try 11, 200~ Lear Jet flight. The 

Administrator's claim lias flO merit and i:-; dUf;; to be dismissed. 

22 

01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS f4l 024/039 

from:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LL~ 205+214+7957 12129/2009 1&:11 1451 P.024/039 

WHEREFORE, PRnMISl!S CONSIDERED, Darby Aviation respectfully roquests tb.i$ 

Court grant ~ummary judgment in its favor and deny the Adrninistrator's Motion for Decist()IJ. 

ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC 

J)~"""f.~h~-~=::::"""""::::"""""'Q____._____ Deanna L. Wd<1ner (WEI03S) 

COUNSEL FOR DARBY AVIATION 

OF COUNSEL: 

ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC 

Financial Cemer 

50520tll Street Notth, Suite 1450 

Rinnioe.ham. AI., 35203 

Telephone: (205) 324-1230 

Telecopier: (205) 322-3890 

c1h~ntlcr:.;oll@da vj(lb(1Iltler~()n 18.!V.Ci)1I1 

dlwci.dnerCtlJ.9<lYi4Rf!lldersonlaw.cora 

23 

01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS 025/038 

rrom:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+1951 12J29J2009 16:11 11451 P.025/039 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVIC}!; 

J hereby certify lhat a copy of 1bjs Respondeot's Reply in Opposition to the Federal 

Aviation Administration's Cross-Motion for Decision has bec.."Il ::;crved ·upon the follotJ..'ing via 

facsimile aod by certified U.S. Mail, rerum receipt rcqucstc-d: 

Raymond Veatch . 


omc\.' of the Regional Counsel 


Federal Aviation Administration 


800 Independence Avenue S. W. 


Washjng[on, DC 20591 


Telephone; (2.02) 267-9676 


Facsimile: (202) 267-5769 


E-mail: ra;ymond.veatch(ZUfaa. gOY 


The Honorable Isaac D. Denkin 


A(hnini:)tratiVI; Law Judge 


Office ofHearings, M-20 


U.S. Department ofTrs.llsportation 


1200 New Je.t"!;cy Av~uc, S.H. 


r~1: Bp.iJding Oround PIO()T, R~lom H12-320 


Washingto~ DC 20590 


Telephooe: Attomey: (202) 366·2139 


Legal A~~istanl: (202) 366-2132 


Fax: (202) 366-7536 


E-mail; david. ben1cin@dot.gov 


Federal Aviation Admirlistration 


800 Ind(.:pcndcnce Avenue, SW 


Washington, DC 20591 


AUcnLion; Hearing Docket CkTk, AGC-4~() 

Wilbur Wright Building - ~uite 2Wl 000 

Fa,,: 202-493-5142 

Datal this the 29th day (,~fDcccmbcr, 2009. 

~~ t)canoa L. Weidner 

COUNSEL FOR DARBY AVIATTON 

24 

.. OMS 	 028/038 01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

12/2912009 18:11 3451 P.02B/039 FrQm:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7857

Name:........:!~-..-I-3.......,r-4_.,......--\:---"__ 

Dale:._~-t-.J..,....::::::::1.0£.::::r->':Jf-+---~ 

a:,. rr ta" fo Operations Mauual Te~t 

1- ;~~:';::::::,:::d""" all flighL crew members are within dress code requiremen~' for. 

r'!a.ch individual crew member 

C. The Chil;fPilo1 

D. 	 Who cv'er It t.akes 

2. When does the Second in Command assUnIo the responsibilities of the Pilot in Comnumd7 

A. On Mondays 

B. 	 When he sits in the left seat 

C, When directed by the Captain ' 


@ When the FHot in Command becomes jncap~citatC!d 

3. 	 Is smoking permitted in company aircraft? 

A. Yes 

lCiDNo 

C. Only by tlle ChiefPilo[ 


D, Only intlight with. the cabin dept"cssurized 


( 4. 	 How long after a blood donation 'must a flight crew membl.T wait before accepting flying status? 

A 24 Hours 

B. 8 Hours 


lC;) 72 Hours 


1'(.30 Days 


5. 	 Which is not a requirement to be briefed to passongers before takeoff? 

A. Smoking 

B. Location offire extinguishers 

C. Location of emergency exits 


@Location offIrst aid kit 


6. 	 Darby Aviation has a sterile cockpit rule below what altirude? 

A. 25,000 feet 


3,000 feet 


t 0,000 feet 


D. Within 20 miles of.airport 

-;. 	 What is the minimum altitude permitted for use of an auto piJot? 

A. 500 feet 

B. On a non·precision appro~ch. 50 feet below MDA 

C. For rLS approaches, SO feet above the:: terrain
 <t!3- All 0 f the above 


KXHIBIT4 
+ OMS 	 Iii! 027/038 01/25/2010 14:07 FAX 2024835142 FAA 

12/29/2009 16:11 8451 P.0211039 From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+79Jj7 

8. 	 ~o find authorized areas ofopetations~ what section of the operations specificatiom~ woultI you 

look? 

( 

.~ 

Part A 

. @JPartB 

C. 	 Part C 

D. 	 PartD 

9. 	 To find authorized instrument approaches. what section ofthe {)pcrations sp¢cifications WI,)uld you 

look? 

A. 	Part A 

l:t: Pari B 


© Parte 


D. 	Part D 

10. To find requirements for Lower Than Standard TakeoffMinimums, what section of the operations 

specifications would you look? . 

A. Part A 


A PartB 


~PanC 

D. Part D" 

11 . If an aircra.ft. accident OCOllrs, who will the Pilot in Command notlfy? 

A. 	The FAA 

B. 	The Director of Operations 

C. 	 The Chief' Pilot .( ® Both B and C are correct 

12. DoeS Darby Aviation carry H~dous Materials?
 & y~s . 


B. 	 No 

C. 	 Yes, ifproperly packaged and labeled 

D. 	yes, but not nitroglycerin offresh sperm 

13. Where would you find ifit is pennissible to dispatch a flight with an inoperable landing light? 

A. The. aircraft flight manuaJ 


The minimum equipment list 


C. 	The Director ofMaintenance 

D. 	The Chief Pilot 

14. Which item.s ilre required to be on board the a.ircraft? 

A. 	Flashlights 

B. 	Operations Manual 

h Deferred maintenance Jog 


«.fJ2J All ofthe above 


15. Men is it permissible to fuel the aircrafi with passengers on board? 

A. 	Never 

tJj) On. a..'1 Air A~;;u!ance fligh1 
 .\ . C. At remote airports 


D. 	When using a ground power·unit 
01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024835142 FAA -+ OMS IitJ 028/039 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 18:11 #451 P.028/039 

16, At remote airports, i.':i it permissible to depart VFR and pick up a clearance later? 
 .4KJ Yes, if clearancr; iii pickcJ up ss soon as possible . 


n. 	No, it is not permissible 

c. 	 Yes, but clearance must be received within 3 miles 

D. 	Only on Lifeguard flights 

'. 

l7. When maya Pilot in Command llSC Lower 1han Standard Taka OffMinimLJm5? 


f,.. When needed 


D. After 100 hours as PIC 


fc) After] 00 hours as PIC in make and model 


'"6. On a bad day and only in Turbojet aircraft 


1&. 	When mU5t a weight and ba1a.nce be .completed'! 


A.' When passengers or cargo arc on bot'lrd 
 > 

B, When passengers arc on board 


(fD Always when conducting a Part 135 flight
 b. 	On hot days and high altitude 

19. What is the lowest allowable visibility for a NDB approach? 

A. 	Whatever is specified on the approach plate 


I mile 


, >'. 3/4 mile 

. 1/2 mile 

20. Is Darby Aviation authorized to conduct IFR operations outside controlled airspace? CKJ Yes 	 . 

B. 	No 

C: 	Only out ofcontinental U. s. 

D. 	 Only in Turbojet aircraft " 
01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA 	 .. OMS 141 028/038 


From:ANDERSOH a ASSOCIATESj LLC 205+214+7957 '2/29/2009 16:12 1451 P.029/039 

DaIC'_~~p.L:~>d--\.-I.r-_____ 

Orr .F~\r Test Pnrt 135 

1. 	 If flying from Los Angeies to Ontario at 5>000 MSL, what wouid not be required to be briefed to 

the passengers before takeoff? 

A. 	Use of seat belts 

B. Locariun·of emergency exits 


Usc of oxygen 


D. 	None ofthe above 

2. What is a requirement for pressurized aircraft in regards to oxygen when above 25,000 feet? 

@ 	 A 10 minute: supply for each oc~upant . 

B.· A 10 minute supply for the piluts 

C. 	 Oxygen for the duration ofthe flight 

D. 	 30 minute supply if aircraft is above FL 410 

3. 	 Which statement is true rtgarding flight time limits? 


.A. 500 hours it! any quarter 


B. 800 hours in any two consecutive quaItc::rs 


. C. 1.400 hours in any calendar year


@. An ofthe above are COrTcct 


4. 	 Who is required to file rnechnnical reHability reports? ( 

A. 	The Pilot in Command . 


The Director ofMaintenance
 ( , 	 The certificate holder 

.. TheFSDQ 

S .	 .What are the requirements to be VFR in uncontrolled airspace? 

A. 1,000 - 3 


@ .1,000- 2 


C. 	 Cl~ of clouds 

D. 	2.000· I 

6. You depart BurbaIlk and the weather is ceiling zero, and visibility 600 RVR; which is [nlc? 

A. You are 3n violation ofFARs. 


~. You mu:!lt have an alternate for y01..ll' destination. 


C. Nav light~ must be on. 
 ® An alternate nHl.~ k within one. hour. 


7. 	 What is the flight time limit for pilots? 

A. 	8 hours within 24 hours for single pilot 

B. 	 10 hours within 24 hours fOT two pilots 

C 12 hours within 24 hours for three pilots 


All ofthe above are correct 

01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA 	 + OMS 141 030/039 

From:AHOERSOH a ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/2912009 18: 12 #451 P.030/039 

8. 	 What is UIC rule regarding fuel requirements'{ 

A. 	IFR Destination +45 minutes 

D. 	 VFR -- DestiIl::l.tion + 30 minutes 

C. 	 V.FR -- Alternate + 30 minutes ( @ Both A & B are correct 

9, 	 A Second in Command has a First Class Medical on November II, 19')0. Whell will hi::; medical 

expire? . 

A. 	 March 15, 1991 

(B. 	 Nov, 30. 1991 


C, April 11. 1991 


D. 	April 30, 1992 

10. A Pilot in Comtn.andhas a First Clas.."i Medical On March 15, 1991 When will his medical expire? 

A. 	March 15, 1992 

B. 	 March 31. 1992 

C, September IS, 1991 


@ September .30, 1991 


) L A pilot who has not been to an airport within the bast 90 days shall: 

A. Go there flrst. 


U:'h 13ecomc familiar with available infomlation first 


C. 	Take a more experience experienced pilot 

D. 	·Need nOl worry 

12. A VOR check must be done: 


f.&) Within the preceding 30 days 


B. 	 30 days from last flight 

C. 	 At every airport with VOT 

D. 	At the annual inspection 

13. Flying under in Class 8 akspace, the maximum spced is: 

A. 250 k15 
 ® 200kts 


C. 	 156 kts 

D. 	 300 k'tS 

14:~ airport has no control tower or markings, which way should you fly the pattern· to land? 

't.Q.;) Lefl 

B. 	 Right 

C. 	Doesn't malter 

D. Left on odd days,. :right on even 

IS. J:s special VPR allowed for 135 operations? r{f;) Yes 	 . 

B. 	 No 

C. 	Maybe 

D. 	Sometimes 
01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS ~031/039 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12129/20091B:12 lt451 P,D311039 

16. When would the Second in Command be in command of a flight? 


EN When rho PIC becomes incapacitated


\~ When the. SIC is in the left !>cal 


(' - C. When the PIC assigns it to the STC 

\ D. At the discretion ()f the PIC 

17. Are IFR operations approved within uncontrolled airspace? 

A. No 


(QJ) Y ¢s, if approved by the administrator 


C. Or~ly if making a approach to an airport 

D. Yes. but only in foreign countries 

18. Who is responsible to make Sure an ailCrafl is airworthy for a flight? 

A. The Director ofMaintenance 

B. The registered OwnCT 

The eertiticate holder 


tQJJ The Pilot in Command 


19. When arc passengers allQwcd to consume booze? 

A. When in dire need 

B. Las Vegas flights 


e Only when served by the crew 


D. OnJy when joined by the crew 

20. You ar~ soheduled to' arrive SFO at 1 650Z, lIt ]700, the airport is forecasted to be 7..ero. Whlchis truc:? ' 

~ You cannot depart for gPO 

Al} You can depart for SPO 

C. You triust have an altemate''Within 30 minutes 

D. You can depart only in turbojet aircraft 
01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA ~ OMS 141 032/039 

From:AHDER80H &ASSOCIATES, llC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16: 12 #451 P.032/039 

~-. 

aqo Indepl'.nd<mceNJe., S.W. U.s. Department Wl!lSllington. D.C. 20591 or Transportatiol"l 

Federal Aviation 


AdminIstration 


Mr. Gregory S. Winton, Esq. 

334 Oak Knoll Drive 

'Rod(viJIc, Ml) 20R50 

RE: Request for Interpretation ofFAA Order 8400.10 and Title 14 C.F.R. §§ 135.293 and 135.297 

Dear Mr. Winton., 

This is in response to your letter ofMay 11,2006 requesting.an interpretation ofFAA Order 8400.10 

and §§ 135.293 and 135.297 of the Federal AvjatiQTI Regulations. 

Spet?ifieally, you a~kcd ifrecurrent training lS administered ill modules, must the operator: J)'recol'd 

each element ofthe module as it is completed. 2) :record each module as it js completed, or 3) n1(1ke 

one record when all ofthe modules aTC complete. You provide the following example: in FebrualY 

2005 a ("'-Tcwmcmber completes nIl initial training program and UlC airman. co.ll1pete11(.~y check 

required by § 135.29:1. One month later. the ainnan attends an FAA approved aviation training. 

ccnWi-l and completes the recurrent tra.itting required by § § 135.293 and 135.297. Ba.~e:d on thv.t 

scenano, you asked ifthe operator could make a single record ofthe entire curriculum in March 

2005, or is the o~n:J.tor required to note when each individual elcmc.,ilt or each individual mouule is 

completed'l 

Modu1ar Approach to Recurrent Training . 

As you stated in your letter., operators may administC'r the required reCllrrent training ill modui(')s. 

\\Then an operator adopts a llWdular appToach for .recurrent training, all recurrent training e!emcTlts 

and evt:-nts must be grouped into specific m.odules t.o be administered and recordc:d as a reCU11'ollt 

training curriculllm. The lTlo(f"1.11es f()T Part 135 are composed oftwo parts. One part cOl1sh::t.s ofthe 

written or oral test elements, and the other pad consists ofth~ Oig.ht lrainitlg .and checking events. 

Because the ground and t1ight training elements are distinct and separate parts, they may be 

compleled at differellt times. NcvCltheless, they cOlnprise a sing1e module. An op<"Talo! TIlay record 

wheu each module:: is complete or may record when all ofthl:: modul~ arc complete, but is not 

required. to record wh(:."1l each element ofa module it) complete. 

Recurrent. Trainjng and Eligibility Period 

To answer your question, it is helpful to .first e;.l(plain recurrent training and eligibility period. 

Recurn;nt training is the training conducted for .I1ight crcwmembers who have been previously 

trained and qualified by the operaior, who arc C(mtinll1ng to ~erve;n the same duty posjtion <1nd 

I Attem]:mce at an FAA approve(l aviation training center is p.-:mlittcd ifthe person comh!ctir\g the 

training is authorb:ed by the FAA. See 14 C.F.H.. § 13.5.321 (a)(I) (2006). 

EXHIBIT 6 
1 

01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS lit! 033/039 

from:AHDERSOH a ASSOCIATES, llC 205+214+7957 1212912009 16:12 8451 P.033/039 

.. 


<lircraIl r,Ype, and who m.ust receive recuning training and/or checking 'Within a sp~~cific eligibility 

period to lllalTl£ain currt-ncy. The eligibility period i::; a thre:e~ll1onth period compriste,j Ofillc month 

before the month in which training is due, the month in which training is due C'b.ase Tn,,)ntb"), and 

the mOl1th a.£l:cr the mOlltl) in which trahring is due e"grace mouth',). Recurrent training or checking 

that is cMnplctt:d any time during the eligibility period. is considered to hl:lve been co;~npleted durilJg 

the base month. A crcWTn("'''ID.bcT who has not oompleted ,.Ill reCurrent training or che(~king 

rey,uin.;.rnents in the base month may be scheduled and continue to st"IVe in revenue s~~rvice during 

the remainder ofthe ~Jigibility pttiod (i.e.. until tl1e end ofthe grace montJ), but may not Q:.orve after 

the end ofthe g.race ll1onlh. A flight crewm.embc:r who fails to complet.e all n:quired tr<lining and 

qualitiCl:!.tion modules before the end ofthe cligibjlity period rnu::.1: complele requalitl,:::atiOI1 tntining 

before serving in revenue operation~_ 

Recurrent training may occur pcri(')dical1y throughout the. year, and the operator must record the 

actual date that the training is completed. Howe.vcr, f<')f purpose:; of ca1culatjng when recu.rrent 

training is due ne)';x. the base month does not change as long as the trnining is completed bd~)re the 

end ofthe eligibility period. In the exmnple above, the pilot completed initial training in .rebruary 

2005. Th<.,,"Xefore, the pilot's base montll is February, and the pilot must complete recurrent training 

no later than March 31, 2006 (i.e. [2 months plus the grace month). The pilot must ai~o complete 

the ill!>1ru.tncnt ptoficiency check requi.red by S135.297 no later than September 30. 2005 (i.e. six 

month... pIns the grace month). If the pilot undergoes recurrent training in March 2{)0.5 after 

completing initial trainillg ill Fehruary. 2005, the oP(;"'Hl.torhas lWO optionS. The oreralor could 

change the ha:)c month from February to Mare~ Clnd 'the pilot would hI.; required to cQmpl~te 

recurrent training again no lau.."T thm April 30, 2006 (Le. 12 months plus the grace month). The 

operator must record the actual date that the trnlning i~ comph~{.~d> but should designate March as the 

ba<:e month for recuITCllt training. Altemativeiy. the operator could keep February as Lhc pilof So base 

tnonth since initial training was c()llJp1cl~<.l in that month. In that case, the pilot would be required to 

complete recurrent training no later than March 31, 2006. Again, the opcratonnust record the actual 

date that the training was completed, but would dc:::;igna~ Febnl<u)" as the base month for recurrent 

training. ' 

Your second question involves whet11er a.ll operator may adjust a crewmember's base month by 

administering recurrent training before it is du¢. As explained above, the Wl$Wcr to tbat question is 

yes. Operators may "rescc" the recurrent trairung clock at any time by giving recurrent training 

earlier than it is requir(;."<i. The opcr'.d.tOt n\U~t ensure, however, that all required recurr(~nt training is 

completed within the 12 calendar monthtl preceding service in 'Part 135 opc;:rations as required by the 

regulations. F(Jr example:, if a pilot completes initial training in Febnnrry 2005; the pilot would be 

due for recurrent training no later than March 2006, However, the pilot could undergo rOCllIrcnt in 

June 2005 a:Q.d change: the base Illonti) fmm :Ft"bruary to june. In that case, recurrent training wo'Uld 

no[ be due again unlil July 31. 2006. 

TIle same tu1es apply tOt the LT)Srnlm~:nt proficiency check, except that th~rc is a !';ix month look· 

back period as opposed lo the 12 month look·back p(..-riod applicahle to recurrent training. 

TIlerefor~. tho operd.tor Illld pilot must enSUre that the instmment proficiency check ha$ occurred 

within the six months preceding service ill JFR operation::: under part 135. 
01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024835142 FAA + OMS 034/038 

From:AHDERSON &"SSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 1212912009 16:13 1451 P.034/039 

This interpretation was prepared by the Operations Law Branch of the Office ofthe Chief COWls.;i 

and coordinat¢d with the Air TraI1~'Portation and Aircraft Dispatch Divi::>ions ofFlight Standards 

Service. We trusl that dUs respOl1se adequa.tely addresses YOllrrequest. Please contact Joe Conte of 

my staff at the addrtl::lR provided above, or by phone at (202) 267-3073, jfwe can be offulth~r 

assislance. 

Sincerely, 

Rebecca MacPherson 
.. OMS I4J 035/039 01/25/2010 14:09 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 16: 13 6451 P.035/039 

9130/92 8·100.\0 CHG 7 

FICORF. 3.2.7.3. 


,PA"kT 135 CHECKING MODULES 


AIRPLANES 


EVENTS 

rw-~lne:N OR' ORAL TeST 


FAR 1:l5.:W7 


·'-c-=-ro-S!f-,w..,..;n-ra----··,-----+-"----=-­

...'" ~ I 

"1­

1 

P '----p--­ Powerplo.nl lailura p 


·2~·ng·rnlilolnop.. approach .. - ._-.- ..... - .._...-p--.-.--.. j----;:::p-----+---." p 


flNSTRlIMENTPR6t.·ED.:iU-;;R;:;-;E:;S==----+---o--.. '., ____-;-____o__:___-;:p.:-.___ 

Area arrival . . 

HOlding. .•..-......,'--------1----,------t----. 'F' -... 


Norma! ILS approacr, ---+---.----.- "---;-L- ---1--'-­

Eog;nlK)ut ILS ... -.---'--- ..+--------I--.,.-...,p=-----I----_:_
 I, OouPJ6d approach ---- P 

~~~~~~~------.--~~-----------+----~~---, Nonpre:eision approach !3 

H==-=;===~~:-:;---" ~--------.---+-- .. , .. '--' Seeond nonpreelsion l'IPPr.;'loch + 

'"Misi!.ed ilpplo'.ioh""fr""o""'m-a-n-:I~I.S::------j- ----,-.--- .. .. .... . P "I-' """1 

'~::;:-:g-;-d_:~_:_:o_e:_Ca~hP_p_ro_Il_Ch_ '".,___..;....; ..____..~-_~-1_-_-1,.~---=_-- ..-:. ... : ~=-i3.-. ~ 

-----------,._---'--_._._-- .- I ...___.__ ._ .. t_ ..J 

EXflIBJl'7 

---;p·,---f----'--.,.,p----;'---o---::-:10:::---­

=±'3 f.. 4 E)~{I. 

Aircraft' 

-+­___ . _.-­--­

. '. , 

- ----­
01/25/2010 14:08 FAX 2024935142 FAA .;. OMS I4J 038/038 

From:AHDERSOH I ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 12/29/2009 18:13 8451 P.D36/0S9 

, , 

.:Ie77373aa7 SIW.1JI1 PAGE fU/fl2

S/MeDM rrrAIJV/.i"'WD' Ce,../TS;;RS 

April 1, ?009 

Birmingham, AL FSDO 

Via'fax: 20S 816-13:5& 

Attn: Mr. Ed Blunt, FAA Snpervis(}I 

Dear lIr.!r. Blunt; 

1 would like to clarify the use ofthe Record ofApptuvcd InstructQI'3tChccl.. Airm.en form. 

u.'}ed by SimCom. 

It has b~A!:n our ,policy to sUpply'this list ofapproveO, li:Lstructors and TeEs to operators as 

m~aDe: .ofhaving tho1!ir POb approve check ail:meD. The intQnt is far the pal to approve 

all indieated reBs as check airmen by 5iiDics in the space at the bottom ofthe fonn ' 

marked PlUNCIP AL OPERAnONS .INSPECTOR APPF.QVAL. tithe POI \'IIat1ted to 

approve -only'spe'eifiQ TeEs as check 3irmcn they 'WQuld mctil;~ so by sigo.ing :tl~110 

the individuals name Hnd not signing the bottom ofthe form. ' 

We Iecei:v~ a [Otm oom :Mr. FQX rO( Alpha Jets signeQ. aI. the,bottom... We too~ this to 

D:).(l8D. that all. indica.ted TCEs were approved as check airmen. SiDc~\l'ccc::ivins tbis form 

back' on july 3 I. 2007 we have nOt reeeived my other approvals for check i1in:nen" eithc:r 

in the form of an updated list Qr: individual letter fur any of oUr TeEs from. Mi', Fox or 

anyone from Alpha I~. ' 

1£ you need any :fbtther a.S5istance~ do n~t hcsit~ to' ~t me. 

Vj~~ 

H~dx. ~ DIrector ofTraining 

EXHfSIT8 
01/25/2010 14:09 FAX 2024935142 FAA .. OMS 037/039 

From:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+7957 1212912009 19:13 1451 P.037/039 

AlrMe:d 1ntl.\m3t!c.nal u.c SlmuL'itt>r; 67'~ 

Mr>~' Type & Mo4eI; BeechJet .cOOA 


Reeord. of ~ved Level: C 


lns1rUctorsi Tee's! Check PIi013 r"age 1 of 1 


Thill following SIMOOM EIlmpl'ayeE:s haV1l) bElon traine.d and qualified 111 accordano: with 14 CPR P:;u1 '4:(.: en4 ,have bee:n apPrtI'tIj)d /)y the IeI'M to 

coocluct lrai.\ir\!J. i2Gling. imd checking lor graduates ofthe SIMCOM lnternatiooE11 Inc. Tminlng centor, SIMCOM TeE's{ ChQ.:;!c PilaU; irI!stroctors 

I'lll\/(;: L>~Jl <lpprovOO by ~cilic; quaJinlt'd FAA im:ip~ors. SIMCOIlt wil! cn:sul<:1: ~:;r:: Il'I$trl.laors (1 Ce'sf Check PrIors will toe current and q:~Ji!ltili"" 

in accordance wim lne applicaDIe sectiOl\S of '4 CFR Pail 142 intne alreralt iO WhiCh mey exc:en:::iz.o auf::flority. 

I~;mGom Emplcye:e C.rtificate-N'umbe( If' TeE 11 this 'tCEJC:I\Cd( P~ot is opprovad 

Ctle~Pi/ot iii Check:~ The por !;ion! below 

R:ay Rut! 2204993­ ·X ·~;-?lfJ "" ,Y ~;;~~ , ... -.. ,~-.~~ 

Tom Phelps :m)921l3 X /' ,-(~ /4/// ;" ~., ~ --_..._-­ I)fego~sc , 2e1Hil63 X ".. 

~(/..I/lf'" -( 

.. 

1----' ,. ---­ ... '.­ ,-_'1'­

, .. _....,.. 

- -- -~~---

,~ 

~- i 

II-, ___],.-------l--_------1-1.

Tr.dniriq Center APf!lO~ _ 

--­ -. ­ ... ---

FEDERAl AVlA110N ADM1N1STRATION 

fllghl $JandarCs Dl::!rlel OIlice 

161llUrwn Centar V!t~. S~~e ,51) 

~Qll:G ~~j~s. Ai '}';:'12 

AlrMed Intemotionol, lie 11000 Urban C~nter Dr. Suite 470 I ~ifn)k'ehom. AL 352.<12 

'70!:>...u3..1I:1.6.Q Toll free: 1-8Q0..356-Z16' fAX: 205-443.4941 
141 038/038

" OMS FAA 01/25/2010 14:09 FAX 2024935142 11451 P.038/039 12/29/2009 'G~'3 205+2'4+7957 Froll1:AHDERSOH &ASSOCIATES, LLC 

FU..E Na.:lB9 O~k()l '00 09:.37 \D: 

')t\i'h)' A viatkm dba 

A!l\ha lel.~ 

I A villop /\ \'enu~' 

Mwocll! Stroal~"AL 35661 


~n I~fet.cl)c::- £et our ..II1yetsflti:o;p. d1i~ J1l.ornitiS ~'ng c~t: I~ flppt'(!'V'tlti D)I yoU' 

VOl to ent~L cN;ck;n~ lW' 'yOW" ",ilO"i, - . • I •• 

'., 'IlI!!!.prot:~ m!.he pw hAs i\!) ?'lj.PP~'Y ~~ "lith 0: !is-[ O'rmSk'ti."~ yjl&t,~ qWiJifkd 

...,I.(!..~1\dUa uw <IIpprOp.'-i$ UtioiCli- F~.~ l~!:W$ \'.hat a(e !:UsO qwaifltd a:.; TeE!; 

. Lllliler l'~~ thc.':,)" I1l'e ffld~&I.tid Mder me eoliU~ 1'CElC~ECK. PelOt. 1b!$ iri.dic~s llu!.:1­

.' .. blw~ l~OIt ~u~jfic;d TCf'..s J>y our·~M.__ ifyou.r· POI "PUw b.otf('lm Qf.~ 

..... 'It.rrQ is $(.-co;;::pt~ ~jr Tet: qW:t.lif~catio.nf: a; lun~$. ofappa~ them ~k ilirmo:..-n 

f.or l'(iui' Q~tiolll ".me POI caD i:i~n fOt' aN) ~6~ ,lIdilJi_.. he.\(( to tbeU Dame, o. 

ail i7'ldMdual$..~y"8i:tl;DS.H' the boUarnCi>fth~ fonn. , 

...·l"hi$ J'tI(a¢'f~,,-e hlftil ill use far ~y Y~a:f$., 

N~w' gui<hlll,l.;~:~!O been. impleme:ritl!d 11m FAA. inSitUCling POI's I)n wtw the F A.A·' 

. 11.(.''';'' ~de.t:i lJ), ?mpcr ~"I'Iiy \.0" iS~ze r:h~t: airmen.. This ~'bj~ a.l~( \ioI!th .. 

specifV:, !;heC;khlg .ltUEborit)l. l'b~ J~ may Hst·JU'utDp!c. cbei:k airmen. or b(' ~ 

individua.ll&tttJ;1 pc;r. ol,ar.ck Bi..rm;au. That.'i~ r.t,e: 1101's choi~.:. . 

Tn!! \f.lSt "!Jlllorii:etinn \Afe' have i~ fto.ol;n }mlfl POL Mr. JamtlS Pm;, ~l.IDd, 0113ll.2OOj; 


ArtlN~ o~<tn; it 1Wthorized' Mr. flj.c;~ocd [{a:nam Uld r.4r. J~"l)yC. 

Ul\til Wi; "'-te: JW)Litted rx~~•. we'beJteve ·this ts cu,,-re-nt Ust oC a~,n:hOri~ IAstnu::r:..,r 


and dim airlnJ!,n fur )'01U' o~~tiori. . 

-

------ Illll!'Ji:l. I Ii ~ P1~::l ,I: i X I 

FAA 

01/25/2010 14:09 FAX 2024935142 12/29/200916:14 1451 P.039/039 

From:AHDERSOH & ASSOCIATES, LLC 205+214+1951 

F!LE No.469 04/01 '09 OO;~ 10: FfIX:/J,rr(~' 

}BI:I~r..l't.ilm [ p$ 1. '..., .. , 

, 

A,"!p'23a7"J41. i ~ ) ;It 1 j~.nlio.,~: 

;, , .r" "'! ATP185~1~S " 'I !t j 

" 

1 ~ f _-1,f 

..,-... 

A,.?a~i§· x j ' I !'~~"~il', 11'. "

! ... - , "'---j 1~(1C,~1 I

I ?A1~~1S()!';;12J ! X - .. 'f

x j "'I " , 'l 'ftel'it.i,,! R~ , I A'"J1"J8GE29~ '1 X . 1 ' ' , " 

l~e~Q,~lr fAtPl111!1~'MJ ] X- X

'\ ~ ;n9~. Lpn"',i' ..... " ' J 

. . .-=.. , A"{P2ti53t1!2 r X' ! X