U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

WOOLPERT LLC 

Respondent 

DOCKET NO. FAA-2015-0211 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

Honorable J.E. Sullivan 

Hearing Date: NOT YET ASSIGNED 

Hearing Location: NOT YET ASSIGNED 

RECEIVED 

SEP 2 1 2015 

HEARING DOCKET 

RESI'ONDENT'S REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THE 

~-QM-rJ-AJN ANT'S_l,J}'ITIT[.;I<:P MJLTJ QN TQ A_l\fJ:l'IP 

COMES NOW, Wool pert LLC, Respondent herein, by and through undersigned 

counsel, and hereby files its Reply in Opposition to the Complainant's untitled Motion to 

Amend. 

In support thereo.t; Respondent states the following: 

Short Summary of the Case 

On July 31, 2013, a Cessna 402B aircraft, registration number N3MZ, owned and 

operated by Woolpert, Inc., landed gear up in Caldwell, N.T (hereinafter the "subject incident or 

flight"). During an investigation by the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA"), the pilot 

stated that he forgot to extend the landing gear and that there was no mechanical irregularities 

that would have prevented its proper operation. See Exhibit 8, FAA Form 8020-23 (FAA Item of 

Proof No. I). 
Since the incident was clearly caused by pilot e!Tor, there was no reason tor the owner 

and operator of the aircraft, Woolpert, Inc., to believe that a violation of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations bad occurred by the company during the !light. Nevertheless, on June 9, 2015, 

almost two fi.tll years following the subject incident, the FAA issued a complaint against 

Respondent, Wool pert LLC, alleging that it owned and operated the aircraft on July 31, 2013. 

Now, more than two years to!Jowing the subject incident, the Complainant seeks to 

amend its complaint issued to Respondent, Wool pert LLC, and substitute the named Respondent 

to Woolpert, Inc., as the actual aircraft owner and operator. 

It is undisputed that Woolpert, Inc. never received a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty 

(''NPCP") alleging a violation within the two year period following the incident as required by 

14 C.F.R. 13.208(d) 1

• Therefore, if the FAA is permitted to amend its complaint and substitute 

Woolpert, Inc. as the Respondent, then the amended complaint against Woolpert, Inc. will be 

subject to dismissal under 14 C.F.R. 13.208(d). 

As more fully discussed herein, the FAA's flawed investigation and mishandling of the 

present action resulted in numerous factual and procedural errors, which resulted in actual 

prejudice to Woolpert, Inc., including but not limited to the following: 

1 14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d) states the following: 

(d) Motion to dismiss allegations or complaint. Instead of filing an answer to the complaint, a 

respondent may move to dismiss the complaint, or that part of the complaint, alleging a violation 

that occulTed on or after August 2, 1990, and more than 2 years before an agency attorney issued 

a notice of proposed civil penalty to the respondent. 

( 1) An administrative law judge may not grant the motion and dismiss the complaint or part of 

the complaint if the administrative law judge finds that the agency has shown good cause for any 

delay in issuing the notice of proposed civil penalty. 

(2) If the agency fails to show good cause for any delay, an administrative law judge may 

dismiss the complaint, or that part of the complaint, alleging a violation that occurred more than 

2 years before an agency attorney issued the notice of proposed civil penalty to the respondent. 

(3) A party may appeal the administrative law judge's ruling on the motion to dismiss the 

complaint or any part of the complaint in accordance with § 13 .219(b) of this subpart. 

2 
1) The FAA's complaint misidentified the ovmer and operator of the subject aircraft; 

2) During its investigation, the FAA misidentified the alleg~d violations of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations resulting ti·om the subject incident or flight; 

3) The FAA failed to provide notice to the owner and operator of the aircraft, W oolpert, 

Inc., concerning an alleged violation of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7, 91.407(a)(l), and (a)(2), as required 

by 14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d), without good cause; and 

4) The FAA's actions resulted in undue prejudice to Woolpert, Inc., as the owner and 

operator of the aircraft, because the aircraft and all of the maintenance records are now 

unavailable due solely to the FAA's unreasonable or excessive delay in initiating its case against 

Woolpert, Inc. 

Ii!c.!ll.l!i.»l!~kgr()llnd 

On August 21,2015, the FAA filed an untitled Motion to Amend its complaint more than 

2 years following the subject incident seeking to charge Woolpcrt, Inc. with an alleged violation 

of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7, 91.407(a)(l), and (a)(2). lt is undisputed that Woolpert, Inc. never 

received a NPCP regarding an alleged violation concerning the subject incident or flight. 

As a result, the FAA's proposed amended complaint against Woolpert, Inc. is tmtimely 

pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.208( d). Fmthermore, the FAA has not and cannot demonstrate good 

cause to excuse its failure to timely initiate the action against Wool pert, Inc. 

Lastly, Woolpe1t, Inc. has demonstrated prejudice tmder the defense of Laches, resulting 

directly from the FAA's unreasonable or excessive delay in initiating its case against Wool pert, 

Inc. for more than two years. 

• 

3 
Procedural History (FAA Investigation) 

On August 6, 2013, less than one week following the subject incident, the FAA sent a 

letter addressed to Woolpert LLP at 4454 Idea Center Blvd, Dayton, OH. That letter stated the 

following, in part: 

Personnel of this office are investigating an incident which occurred on July 31, 2013 at 

approximately 2215 local time, involving the operation of a Cessna 402B, aircraft N3MZ 

serial number 40280220 at Essex County Airport, New Jersey. 

As the registered owner/operator of this aircraft, under 49 USC 44709(A), we are 

requesting from you all maintenance records (to include but not limited to Flight Log 

Records, Discrepancy Sheets, Major Repairs and Alterations, Airframe logbook and 

Engine log book) for N3MZ. 

See Exhibit 1, FAA letter dated August 6, 2013 to Woolpert LLP (emphasis added). 

Clearly, on August 6, 2013, the FAA had rc<Lson to believe that the subject aircraft, 

registration number N3MZ, was owned and operated by Woolpeti, LLP in Dayton, OH. In 

reality, the subject aircraft was owned and operated by Woolpert, Inc. at the same Dayton, OH 

address. Nevertheless, W oolpert, Inc. received, acknowledged and responded to the FAA letter, 

and provided all maintenance records requested for N3MZ. 

It is important to note that the FAA's letter received by Woolpert, Inc. dated August 6, 

2013, merely requested aircraft records. However, the letter does not suggest any alleged 

violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations by Woolperl, LLP or Woolpert, Inc. 

Following the FAA's inspection of the aircraft records, neither Woolpert, LLP nor 

Woolpert, Inc. received any notice of an alleged violation as a result of the subject incident or 

Hight on July 31, 2013. Accordingly, Woolpert, Inc., reasonably believed that the fAA 

investigation concerning the incident had been resolved and closed, since the subject gear up 

landing incident was admittedly caused by the pilot's actions, rather than an aircraft 

owner/operator maintenance or airworthiness issue. 

4 
Regardless, the next time that Woolpert, Inc. received any notice of the FAA's alleged 

violation concerning 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7, 91.407(a)(l), and (a)(2), was by and tln·ough the FAA's 

untitled Motion to Amend its compliant dated August 21,2015, more than 2 years following the 

subject incident and flight on July 31,2013. 

Unfortunately, for more than the past two years, Wool pert, Inc. never received any notice 

from the FAA regarding the alleged violation of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7, 91.407(a)(1 ), and (a)(2), 

resulting from the subject incident or flight. As a result, evidence has been forever lost, resulting 

in real and substantial prejudice to Woolpert, Inc. 

Specifically, following the subject incident, Woolpert, Inc.'s insurance company, Global 

Aerospace, provided an Aircraft Proof of Loss to its insured, which stated the following: 

A loss occurred on July 31, 2013, by reason of which tl1e 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 

402B0220, N3MZ insured under said policy was damaged, as hereinafter-set f01ih in 

detail. 

Pilot was distracted during the landing approach and forgot to lower the landing gear in 

insured's 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 402B0220, N3MZ. 

Scoe Exhibit 2, Aircraft Proof of Loss at p.1, ~1. 

Joshua T. Heid, Treasurer and CFO of Woolpert, Inc. signed the Aircraft Proof of Loss. 

,)'ee Exhibit 2, Aircraft Proof of Loss at p.2. Along with the signed Aircraft Proof of Loss, 

Wool pert, Inc. provided a sibmed Aircraft Bill of Sale for the subject aircraft, N3MZ. See 

Exhibit 3, Aircraft Bill of Sale. 

As a result of the total loss claimed by the insurance company, Woolpert, Inc. 

relinquished any and all ownership and control of the subject aircraft salvage and maintenance 

records. At that time, Woolpe1i, Inc. had not received any notice of violation from the FAA and 

therefore, did not have any reason to believe that the subject incident or flight was operated in 

5 
violation of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7, 91.407(a)(l ), and (a)(2). See Exhibit 4, Affidavit of Joshua T. 

Heid, Treasurer and CFO ofWoolpe1i, Inc. of Dayton, OH. 

FAA Factual and Procedural Errors 

LOI dated August 29, 2013, Significant Factual Errors --Insufficient Notice 

On August 29, 2013, a letter of investigation ("LOI") was mailed to Wool pert LLC at 5 

Falcon Drive, Suite 102, Peachtree City, GA 30269, which stated the following, in pmi: 

See Exhibit 5. 

Wool pert LLC operated an un-airwotiby aircraJl: N3MZ, a Cessna 402B, serial 

number 402B0220. The aircraft was un-airwmihy because it did not conform to 

its type design. The aircraft bad a Standard Airworthiness Certificate, and it was 

altered for aerial surveying which requires a Special Airwmihiness Certificate; 

Restricted Category. 

At that time, the FAA already knew that Wool pert, Inc. was the registered ovmer of the 

subject aircraft because the maintenance records had been requested and received from 

Woolpert, Inc. located in Dayton, OH. 

Nevertheless, the FAA directed an LOI to Woolpeii LLC in Peachtree, GA, containing 

allegations (i.e., that "Wool pert LLC operated an w1-airwo1ihy aircraft"), which were not 

supported by fact or law. Specifically, there is absolutely no evidence in the record that 

Woolpert LLC ever ovmed or operated the subject aircraft. 

Fmthennore, although the FAA's August 29,2013 LOI erroneously alleged that 

''Woolpe1i LLC operated an un-airworthy aircraft'' because the aircraft "was altered for aerial 

surveying which requires a Special Airworthiness Certificate; Restricted Category," the FAA 

never fonnally charged Respondent, Woolpe1i LLC, for a violation concerning the wrong or 

inappropriate Airworthiness Certificate. 

6 
Not surprisingly, the FAA completely abandoned the Airworthiness Certificate charge in 

its NPCP issued to Woolpert LLC on June 18,2013, as well as in its complaint issued Woolpert 

LLC, because the allegation was not supported by fact or law, 

Thus, it is lUldisputed that the facts alleged in the August 29, 2013 LOI were eiToneous 

and ilTelevant to the charged violations, 

NPCP dated June 18, 2014, Significant Factual Errors-- Insufficient Notice 

Almost one year following the subject incident on June 18,2014, Woolpert LLC was 

advised through a NPCP that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $7,000 

for operation of the Cessna 402B aircraft, identillcation number N3MZ, on July 31, 2013, 

allegedly in violation of 14 C,F,R, §§ 91.7, 9L403(b), 9L407(a)(1 ), and (a)(2). 

The NPCP alleged the following, in pmi: 

At all times relevant herein, Woolpert, LLC (hereinafter ''Woolpe1i"), owned and 

operated a Cessna 402B aircraft, identification number N3MZ (hereinafter "the 

aircraft"). 

On or about July 31, 2013, Woolpert operated the aircraft on a tlight from Eagle 

Creek Airpark (KEYE) in Indianapolis, IN to Essex County (KCDW) in Caldwell, 

NJ. 

During the above-described Hight, the following items were installed on the aircrafl 

without the required FAA approvals and maintenm1ce/alteration entries. 

See Exhibit 6. 

The NPCP was never issued to Wool pert, Inc. and therefore, insufficient notice was 

provided to Woolpeti, Inc. concerning tl1e alleged violation of 14 C.P.R. §§ 91.7, 91.403(b), 

91.407(a)(l), and (a)(2). 

7 
The FAA's Complaint 

On August 8, 2014, an infonnal conference was held during which the parties were 

unable to reach a resolution. On March 25, 2015, Respondent submitted a \Vritten demand for a 

hearingpmsuantto 14C.F.R. § 13.16. 

The complaint dated June 9, 2014 --lnst~fficient Notice to Woo/pert, Inc. 

On June 9, 2015. almost two years following the subject incident, the FAA served a 

complaint upon Woolpert LLC for the alleged violation of 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.7, 91.407(a)(l ), and 

(a)(2), as the owner and operator of the aircraft. However, the registered O'.'mer and operator of 

aircraft N3MZ on July 31,2013, was Woolpert, Inc. See Exhibit 4. 

More than two years following the alleged violation, the FAA now seeks to amend its 

complaint issued to Woolpert LLC and instead issue the complaint to Woolpert, Inc. 

AJ>J>LIC::A~!-J<; LAW 

The issue in this case concerning whether the FAA may amend a complaint to name 

Woolpe1i, Inc. as the Respondent, alleging a violation that occlmed more than 2 years before an 

agency attorney issued a notice of proposed civil penalty to Woolpert, Inc., appears to by one of 

first impression. 

However, a recently issued Opinion and Order In the Matter of Mississippi Air Express. 

LLC, Docket No. FAA-2014-0866 (2015 LEXIS 176), rendered by the Honorable J.E. Sullivan, 

U.S Administrative Law Judge, granting the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, may prove to be 

instructive. Coincidentally, the Honorable J.E. Sullivan has also been assigned to the present 

matter. 

The issue in Mississippi Air Express. LLC involved whether the FAA had complied with 

the two year time limitation period pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d), and if not whether the 

FAA had good cause for any lilltimely filing. 

8 
ARGUMENT 

I. The FAA's Proposed Amended Action Against Woolpert, Inc. Is Untimely Initiated. 

Although the FAA issued a NPCP to Woolpert LLC on June 18,2014, the FAA never 

timely issued a NPCP to Woolpert, Inc., the actual aircraft registered owner and operator. 

In the instant case, similar to Mississippi Air Express. LLC, the FAA did not allege that it 

had beenmmble to issue a factually correct NPCP or complaint against Woo.lpert, Inc. within the 

two year period. In fact, the FAA does not assert that it had not, or could not have been 

reasonably expected to be aware ofWoolpert, Inc.'s alleged violations within two years of the 

violation date (i.e., July 31, 2013). 

Furthermore, the FAA did not argue that its investigation had failed to tmcover facts 

regarding the identity of the owner or operator of the subject aircraft. To the contrary, it is 

undisputed that the FAA bases the allegations of its proposed amended complaint upon the facts 

discovered during its investigation of the alleged incident in July 2013. See Exhibit 7, 

FlightAware live flight tracking ofN3MZ from KEYE to KCDW (FAA enforcement 

investigative report Item ofProofNo. 11), which indicates that Woo]pert, Inc. was the registered 

owner and operator of aircraft N3MZ on July 31, 2013. 

Moreover, an FAA Accident/Incident Report prepared by FAA Inspector Watson 0. 

Joseph was included in the FAA· s enforcement investigative report (EIR) prepared in this matter, 

which states the following, in part: 

ON JULY 31,2013 ACESSNA402B, N3MZ, LANDED GEAR UP IN CALDWELL, 

NJ (CDW) AT 2214L. IN A REPORT THE AIRMAN STATED THAT HE MADE A 

NORMAL DOWNWIND ENTRY TO RUNWAY 22. APPROACH. FLAPS WERE 

SET AND THE PILOT TURNED FOR HIS BASE LEG. THE PILOT OVERSHOT 

THE RUNWAY. THE AIRCRAFT WAS 25 TO 30 DEGREES OFF FROM 

CENTERLINE AND THE AIRMAN ADJUSTED HIS FINAL AND APPLIED FULL 

FLAPS. THE AIRCRAFT THEN LANDED WITH THE LANDING GEAR STOWED. 

9 
THE PILOT FURTHER STATED THAT HE FORGOT TO EXTEND THE LANDING 

GEAR AND THERE WAS NO MECHANICAL IRREGULARITIES THAT WOULD 

HAVE PREVENTED ITS PROPER OPERATION. THE AIRCRAFT WAS LATER 

PLACED ON JACKS AND THE LANDING GEAR WAS EXTENDED NORMALLY. 

See Exhibit 8, FAA Form 8020-23 (FAA Item ofProofNo. 1). 

At the time of the FAA's accident/incident investigation referenced above, the subject 

Cessna 402B aircraft, registration number N3MZ, was exclusively 0\;med, operated and 

registered with the FAA by Woolpert, Inc. located at 4454 Idea Center Blvd., Dayton. OH 

45430. See Exhibit 4; See also Exhibit 7, FlightAware live flight tracking ofN3MZ from KEYE 

toKCDW. 

Accordingly, the FAA knew or had reason to know that Woolpert, Inc. and not Woolpert 

LLC was the registered owner and operator of aircraft N3MZ on July 31, 2013. As such, the 

FAA has not and cannot allege that it had been unable to issue a factually correct NPCP or 

comp.laint against Woolpert, Inc. within the two year period required by 14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d). 

Therefore, the FAA's untitled Motion to Amend its complaint against Woolpert, Inc., 

alleging a violation that occurred on or after August 2, 1990, and more than 2 years before an 

agency attorney issued a notice of proposed civil penalty to Wool pert, Inc., must be denied. 

II. The FAA Has Not Demonstrated Good Cause To Excuse Its Failure To Timely 

Initiate The Action. 

In the present case, similar to Mississippi Air Express, LLC, the FAA has not and cannot 

demonstrate good cause to excuse its failure to timely initiate the action within two years 

following the subject incident on July 31, 2013. 

As noted by Judge Sullivan in Mississippi Air Express, LLC, 

The two (2) year statute of limitations runs from the date of the alleged violation to the 

date of the Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty 14 C.F.R. § 13.16(£). Thus, 49 U.S.C. § 

46301 (d)(7)(C) and 14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d) require the FAA to initiate a civil penalty 

10 
proceeding no later than two years after the violation occurred unless the FAA can show 

good cause for any delay beyond two years. 

See In the Matter o(Mississippi Air Express, LLC, Docket No. FAA-2014-0866. 

In the present case, it is undisputed that FAA failed to initiate a civil penalty proceeding 

against Woolpert, Inc. no later than two years after the violation occurred. Therefore, the FAA 

must show good cause for any delay beyond two years. 

Clearly, on August 6, 2013, less than one week following the subject incident, the FAA 

issued a letter to Woolpert, LLP at the Wool pert, Inc. Dayton, OH address, requesting aircraft 

maintenance records, as owner of the subject aircraft. 

Nevertheless, the FAA has not and cam10t explain why no other notices of an alleged 

violation were properly issued to Woolpert, Inc. in Dayton, OH within two years following the 

subject incident on July 31, 2013. As such, the FAA has not demonstrated good cause to excuse 

its failure to timely initiate the action against Woolpert, Inc. 

Therefore, the FAA's untitled Motion to Amend must be denied 

III. Woolpert, Inc. Has Demonstrated Prejudice Under The Defense Of Laches. 

In the present case, it is undisputed that a NPCP was not issued to Woolpert, Inc. within 

the two-year limitation period. 

As noted by Judge Sullivan in lvfississippi Air &cpress, LLC: 

[T]he relation back of the amendments of pleadings contemplates that parties may correct 

technical deficiencies or expand facts alleged in the original pleading, [but] it does not 

permit an entirely different transaction to be alleged by an1endment. 54 C.J.S. Limitation 

of Actions§ 332 (2015). 

In the present case, FAA's proposed amendment to the complaint does not merely expand 

facts that had already been alleged in a NPCP issued to Wool pert LLC. Instead, the FAA's 

11 
proposed amendment to the complaint creates an entirely new action against Woolpe1t, lne,, 

which crumot be deemed to "relate back" to the NPCP issued to Woolpc1t LLC. 

By its proposed mnendment, the FAA must now amend the complaint to allege that 

Woolpert, Inc. rather than Woolpert LLC, "owned and operated a Cessna 402B aircraft, 

identification number N3MZ (hereinafter "the aircraft")." Such an amendment would permit an 

entire.ly different transaction to be alleged by the FAA. 

It is undisputed that during the FAA's investigation of the subject incident in July 2013, 

the agency had discovered all of the necessary factual information concerning the proper identity 

of the actual aircraft owner/operator, which the agency now seeks to amend in its complaint. 

Thus, there is no factual or legal support for any assertion that the FAA could not have 

acted earlier to correct its own errors in the NPCP, or the complaint, at any time throughout the 

statatory two-year period. 

As held by Judge Sullivan in Mississippi Air Express, LLC, it should be pointed out that 

the Respondent is not required to show prejudice when it moves to dismiss for untimely 

initiation of a civil penalty proceeding. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d), a respondent need 

only show that the FAA issued the NPCP more than two years after the alleged violation(s) 

OCCUlTed. 

In the present case, once it is established that the FAA failed to timely initiate the action 

against Wool pert, Inc. within the two year time period, the burden shifts to the FAA to either 

prove good cause for the delay (14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d)(1)), or suffer "the pain of dismissal or 

forfeit." 55 Fed. Reg. 27548,27555 (Jul. 3, 1990) (Discussion afFinal Rule) (emphasis added); 

14 C.F.R. § 13.208(d)(2). In this case, the FAA has failed to prove good cause for the delay, and 

must suffer the "pain of dismissal." 

12 
Nevertheless, assuming arguendo, that the FAA in this case had proven good cause to 

excuse an untimely initiation of its action against Woolpert, Inc. In that case, Woolpeii, Inc.'s 

claim of laches must be considered. A Respondent that raises a laches defense must demonstrate 

that it has suffered prejudice rising to a level that it is "unable to adequately defend a civil 

penalty action." See Mississippi Air Express, LLC. 

As noted by Judge Sullivan in Mississippi Air Express, LLC: 

[t] he FAA acknowledged that in "rare" cases, agency delay in prosecuting an action 

could result in "actual prejudice" to a respondent's case (citation omitted). Therefore, in 

such cases, dismissal of the action, or a portion of the action, could be requested: 

[I]t is possible that a respondent would be unable adequately to defend a civil penalty 

action because documents or witnesses become tmavailable due solely to the agency's 

unreasonable or excessive delay in initiating a case. In such a case, it is possible that a 

respondent could make such a showing of actual prejudice and petition ... to dismiss ... 

on the basis of such prejudice. 

See In the Matter ofMississippi Air Express, LLC, Docket No. F AA-20 14-0866. 

As discussed above, Woolpert, Inc. has demonstrated that it has suffered prejudice rising 

to a level that it is "unable to adequately defend a civil penalty action," because the aircraft and 

all of the maintenance records are unavailable due solely to the agency's unreasonable or 

excessive delay in initiating its case against Woolpert, Inc. 

Accordingly, Woolpert, Inc. has made a showing of actual prejudice and the FAA's 

untitled Motion to Amend must be denied. 

Conclusion 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.208, and consideling the record in this case against 

Respondent Woolpcrt LLC, which consists of all pleadings and motions, all relevant case law, 

statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, it is undisputed that 1) the FAA failed to initiate an 

action against Wool pert, Inc. \\ithin the two year limitation period pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 

13 
46301 (d)(7)(C) and 14 C.P.R. § 13.208(d); and 2) The FAA has failed to prove good cause for 

initiating the action against Woolpert, Inc. beyond the two year limitation period. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, Woolpert LLC respectfully requests that the Honorable 

J.E. Sullivan, U.S Administrative Law Judge, deny the FAA's untitled Motion to Amend and 

&'rant such other and further relief as may be deemed just and proper. 

Dated: September 18, 2015 

Grego nto , Esq. 

The viation L Firm 

19 Annapo 1s Exchange Parkway, Suite 300 

Annapolis, MD 21401 

Tel: (301) 294-8550 

Fax: (301) 294-2525 

Counsel for Respondent 

14 
Exhibit 1 
flight Standards District Office 

Park 80 West, Plaza One 

250 Pehle Avenue, Suite 003 

U.S. Deportment 

of Transportation 

Federal Avlafion 

Adrninistrafion 

Saddle Brook, New Jersey 07663 

201-556-6600, Fax: 201-55<6-~~~~= 

August 6, 2013 

CERTIFIED MAIL- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Mr. Russell Gebhart 

Chief Pilot 

Woo/pert, LLP 

4454 Idea Center Blvd 

Dayton, OH 45430-1500 

Dear Mr. Gebhart: "" 

approximately 

Personnel of this 

2215 

office 

local 

are 

time, 

investigating 

involving 

an incident which occurred on July 31, 2013f;~;;;;o;;.;w;;;­

the operation of a Cessna 4028. aircraft ""'''v'L serial number 40280220 at Essex County Airport, New Jersey. 1------

As the registered owner I operator of this aircraft, under 49 USC 44709 (A), we are 

requesting from you all maintenance 

Records, Discrepancy Sheets, Major 

records (to include but not limited to Flight Log 

Repairs and Alterations. Airframe 

Engine 

logbook and 

log book) for N3MZ. Please furnish these records to this office within ten 0\1----

days following receipt of this letter. 

Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. 

Sincerely, 

• Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Alse complete Item 4 ~ Reslrlcted Oellvart Is desired. 

• Print your name and address on the reverse so that we oan return the card to you. 

u Attach this l:lal<l to the back of the mallpiece, 

or on the front if space permlts. 

1. Article Addres~ to~ 

Mr. Russell Gebhart 

Chief Pilot 

Woolpert, LLP 

4454 Idea Center Blvd 

OH 45430-1500 

00.0.0. 

q~MaQ ~mRecelpttorMen:;handlse -'::====::!_-~·~L..--~ 

7011 3500 0001 7252 1625 

F'S Form February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 

' 

"' 

-
Exhibit 2 
GLOllAL AEROSPACE 

1972 CessaP 402, SIN 402B0220, N3MZ 

AIRCRAIT PROOF OF LOSS 

AIRCRAFr: 197Z C..ma 402, SIN 402B0226, N3MZ 

INSURED VALUE: Sll4,000,UO 

COMPANY: Global Atrospace Fool (and its member-companies) 

INSURED: W O<llpcrt, Inc. 

GLODAL AEROSI'ACE CLAIM NO.: 665418 

By your Policy oflnsurance No. 13000271 beginning April 1, 2013 and expiring April 1, 2014, you insured 

!be 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 402B0220, N3MZ aguinst the perils specified in tbc above numbered policy. 

1. A loss occun:ed on July 3!, 20U, by ,..,.n of wbicb the 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 40280220, N3MZ lnsured 

under said policy was damaged, as hereinafter~set fonh in dttaiL 

Pilot was distracte<l during the laodlng approach and forgot to lower the liUiding gear in insured's 

1972 Cessna 402, SIN 40280220, N3MZ. 

2. 'J'be said 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 40290220, N3l>',Z aircraft, was purcba.sed on the· _ _,_ __ day of 

.Jamwy . Un.3 . 

3. At the time the- obo\"o policy wc:s offcck:d und atlhc time of the abov~;; ro~utioned loss or aamag~ lho said 

1972 Cessna 402, SIN 402BOZZO, N3MZ, belonged exclusively to the Ulldcrs!gned iUid no other person, 

fmo or corporation had any interest therein or has had any interest, mongage or otherwise, therein during 

the currellcy of this insura:ncet c~tcept as foUows.: 

US '&tnk blo.fl ke,t lieo on 

4. The actual amount of the total loss sustained by Waolpett~ Jnc was SlZ4,00D.OO. The full and tim! amount 

claimed of Global Aerospace Pool (and Its memb~:r tornpa•des) under the terms ofth~ above PoUey of 

Insurance by reason of said loss i• Sl23,000.00, net of the $1,000.00 in-motion dedUclible. 

S. Woo!pcn, Inc. ltereby directs and authorius tbe Global Aerospaee Pool (and Its member eompanlos) to 

pay all sums owing en aCOOWlt of this claim directly to Wootpcrt. Inc. Furthennore, Wool pert, Inc. 

represents and warrant:!!: that it has the s:ole authority to direct where payments on account of this claim 

shourd be made and that no third party has an interest in these proceeds. 

Page I o£2 
A lrcrnft Proof of Loss 

6. There was no other insurance on said aiieraft lllld engines during tho currell<y of the above mcntioocd 

Policy except as follows: 

7. Tbe above mentioned los& did not originate by lli'ly act. desip or ptO®tero~nt ou the part of tho ln&urcd, 

nor on the part of any one havine: UD)' hrten::st in the property Insured. nor in said Policy of \nSurante~ and 

nothing hlls been done by or wilh tho privity or consent of tile !nsure4 to violote the oond~ions of this 

iPSurance and no attempt has been made to dcc:civc snid GlDbal Aerospace 'Pool (and Its member 

compaule~), ofthisloss or othcnvisc. 

S. It is expre,.ly understood and agreed that tho furnishing of this Airc:aft Proof of Loss to the Insuned, or 

asslst.!nco In making oftlw Aircraft Proof of Los. by the Adjuster or any other penon, is an act of coumsy 

and is not a waiVer of any rights or admi!lion of liability by said Global Aerospace Pool (and its member 

companie11). Any other information ond other documents required by said Globtl Ael"Qspace Pool (and 

its member companie$) shall be furnished on request. 

Its: -, r u . .sv r c.r f (/F o 

I 

PrintNII1Qe 

STATE OF 01-tlO COUNTYOF M0f.!T73rOt1.?1-<{ 

PERSONALLY APPEARED ::]Qs!!yA ..., if[t!) signer oftlw foregoing 

statement and made oath that the same is true, and that no material fact is withheld of which said G1obaf 

Aeroapa<e Pool (and Us mcmb<r companie•). should be advised. SubJCribed and sworn to before me, the 

day aud dato abov. written. 

Witnes. my hand and officiahealberetoaffixed this I~ day of :Se:pr 

TERESA COCKREll, Notary Public 

(seoQ In and for the Sl.lte of Onto 

My commfs~n Explrn Nov. Z4. Z016 

Page 2 of2 

.;/.013 . 
Exhibit 3 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FORM APPR0\11:0 OMB NO. Z1Zil<l04Z 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fl!lll;IV.I.AVIATIOIIAilMINISTRAnON 0813112008 

AIRCRAFT BILL OF SALE 

FOR AND IN CONSIDEAATION OF$ THE 

UNDERSIGNED OWNER(S) OF THE FULL LEGAL AND 

BENEFICIAL TITLE OF THE AIRCRAFT DESCRIBED AS 

FOLLOWS: 

UNITED STATES 

REGISTRATION NUMBER N3MZ 

AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURER & MODEL 

Cessna402B 

AIRCRAFT SERIAL No. 

40290220 

DOES THIS DAY OF ' HEREBY SeLL, GRANT, TRANSFER AND 

DELIVER ALL RIGHTS, TITLE, AND INTERESTS 

IN AND TO SUCH AIRCRAFT UNTO: Do Not Wrft.t tn 1llls Slod;. 

FORFAAUSEONLY 

NAME ANO ADDRESS 

'(lF IN.OMDVAl.{S), GIVe LAST NAME. FIRST NAME. AND MIOOI..E INITIAL) 

0::: 

UJ 

~ :r:: 

() 

0::: 

::::> 

a. 

D!Af.ER:CER11F1CATE NWBER 

A'IDTO El<l!CI11'0R$, oiOMIII STRATORs 

SlNGl.ILARl Y THE SAJD AIRCRAFT FOREVER AND WARRANTS THETllt.E T.HEREOF! 

D GN8 W:AND TO HOLD .AN ASSI TOHA 

HAND AND SEAL THIS OA.YOF 

NAME(S) OF SELLER SIGNATURE($) TITLE (TYPeD OR PR.,lTI!O) 

~P

(IN li\6Q{IF EXEC\JTEO FOR ('T"fPEOOFtPA~fl:C} 

At.lMUST SIGN.) 

WOolpelt, In<:. 

I<;/~-) lr~c.svrcJ { c,.Fo 0::: 

UJ 

...J 0 

...J 

UJ 

(/') 

VAl.IOOYO'"TH'e 

ACI<NOVv'L.EDGMENT 

INSTRUMENT,) (JIOT ACQUIRED FoR PURPOSES OF FAA REcoRDING~ HOWEVER. NAY BE REc.tnREn BY LOCAL lAW FOR 
Exhibit 4 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MATTER OF 

WOOLPERT, LLC 

Respondent 

DOCKET NO. FAA-2015-0211 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE 

Honorable J.E. Sullivan 

Hearing Date: NOT YET ASSIGNED 

Hearing Location: NOT YET ASSIGNED 

AFFIDAVIT OF JOSHUA T. HElD 

My name is Joshua T. Heid; 1 have personal knowledge of the following facts, and make 

the following statements under the penalties of pe!jury. 

l. I am the Treasurer and CPO of Woolpert, Inc. located at 4454 Idea Center Blvd., 

Dayton, OH 45430. 

2. On July 3 I, 2013, Wool pert, Inc. om1ed and operated a 1972 Cessna 402 aircraft, SIN 

402B0220, registration number N3MZ. 

3. A loss occurred on July 31, 2013. by reason of which the above-referenced aircrnft 

insured under an insurance policy issued by Global Aerospace, was damaged, and 

rendered a total loss by the insurance company. 

4. Following the incident on July 31,2013, Wool pert, Inc.'s insurance company, Global 

Aerospace, provided an Aircrafl Proof of Loss, which stated tl1e following: 
A loss occurred on July 31,2013, by reason of which the 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 

40280220, N3MZ insured under said policy was damaged, as hereinafter-set forth 

in detail. 

Pilot was distracted during the landing approach and forgot to lower the landing 

gear in insured's 1972 Cessna 402. SIN 402B0220_ N3MZ. 

See Exhibit I, Aircraft Proof of Loss at p.L ,!. 

5. I as Treasurer and CPO of Wool pert. Inc signed the Aircraft Proof of Loss. See 

Exhibit 1, Aircmft Proof of Loss at p.2. 

6, Along with the signed Aircratl Proof of Loss, Woolpert, Inc .. provided a signed 

Airc.raft Bill of Sale for the subject aircraft, NJMZ. Se? Exhibit 2, Aircraft Bill of 

Sale. 

7. Accordingly, the above-referenced aircraft salvage and all of its maintenance records 

were transferred from Woolpert, Inc. to Global Aerospace in exchange for insurance 

proceeds in the amount of$!23,000. 

8. As a result, Woolpert, Inc. no Ionge•· has possession or control oftl1e aircl'llft or its 

records. 

9. At the time that the aircraft and its records were transferred to Global Aerospace, 

Woolpe.rt, Inc. had not received notice from the FAA that it was i11 violation of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations concerning the flight and/or incident that occurred on 

July 31.2013. 

10. I am competent to testify as to the matters stated herein. 

2 
Exhibit 1 
GLOBAL . - - . ~ - . . AEROSPACE ... . . . ' . ' 

1972 Cessna 402, SIN 402B0220,N3MZ 

AIRCRAFT PROOF OF LOSS 

J\.IRCRAFT: U7Z Cessna 4Gl, SIN 40230220, N3MZ 

INSURED VALUE: Sll4,000.00 

COMPANY: Global Aerospace Pool (and ito mtmber <Ompaoies) 

INSlJRElJ: Woolpert,lot. 

GLOBAL AEROSPACE CLAIM NO,: 665418 

By your Policy of Insurance No. 13000271 beginning April!, 2013 and expiring April!, 2014, you insured 

tho 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 402B0220, N3MZ against tbe perils sp<cifled in the abow numb<red policy. 

I. A loss occurred on July 31,2013, by reason ofwbioh tbe 1972 Cessna402, SIN 40280220, N3MZinsured 

under said policy was damaged, as bereina!ler-set forth in detail. 

Pilot was distracted during the landing approach and forgot to loVIl:r the landing gear ill insured's 

1972 Ce5Srnl 402, SIN 4G2B0220, N3MZ 

2. The said 1972 Cessna 402, SIN 402B0220, N3MZ aircraft, was purchased on the· _ _,_ __ day of -Juove.ry ,:Uif3. · 

3. At the time the above policy was effected and at the time of the above mentioned lo" or damage, the said 

1972 Cessna 402, SIN 40280220, N3MZ, belonged exclusively to the undersigned and no other person, 

finn or corporation had any interest therein or bas had any interest. mortgage or otherwise, therein during 

the currency of this insurance, except u follows: 

4. The actual amount of the toto! loss sustailled by Woolpert, Inc was $124,000.00. The full aod final &nount 

claimed of Global Aerospa~e Pool (and Jts mentber comp.anles) under the terms of the above Policy of 

Insurance by reason of said loss is Sl23,000.00, net of the $1,000.00 in-motion deductible, 

5. Woolpcrt, Inc. hereby directs and authorius the Global Aerospaoe Pool (and lls member comp•nlas) to 

· pay all sums owing on account of this claim directly to Woolpert. Inc. Furthennore, Wool pert. Inc. 

r.epresents and warrants that it has the sole authority to direct where payments on account of this claim 

should be made and that no third party has an interest in these proceeds. 

Page I (l{2 
Aircraft Proof of Loss 

6. There was no other insuill!lce on said aircraft and enginas during the currency of the abov~ mentioned 

Policy except as follows: 

7. The above mentioned loss did not originate by nny act, design or proourement on the part of the Insured, 

nor on the part of any one having any interest in 1IJC property insured, nor in said Policy of Insurance, and 

nothing has been done by or with tho privity or consent of the Insured to violate the conditions of this 

insurance and no attempt bas been made to deceive said Global Aerpspace Pool (and in member 

eompa~Ies), ofthls: loss or otllerwise. 

8. It is expressly understood and agreed that the furnishing of this Aircraft Proof of Loss t9 the Insured, or 

assistance in making of the Aircraft Proof o-f Loss by the Adjuster or any other penon~ is an act or courtesy 

end is nota waiver of ony rights or admission of liability by said Global Aerospace Pool (and its member 

companies). Any other information and otbe·r documents required by said Global Ael"Q.space l"ool (and 

its member companies} shall be futnish<d on request. 

Print Name 

STATE OF 0 l-I-tO COUNI'Y OF f10I{@Ott(i{L'{ 

PERSONALLY APPEARED J'Os«uA- l tf'e!o signer ~!the furegoing 

statemont and made oath that 1IJC oame is true, end that no m-lai fact is withheld of which said Global 

Aerospace Pool (and Its member companies), should be advised, Subscnbed and sworn to before me, the 

day and date above written. 

Witlless rny hand and official seal hereto affixed this I :;:tJ. day or_,Sei=:.cP_,-r _ _, . ...::,;.:::0:..:..1 "'3_ .. 

TERESA COCKRELL, Holall Pohllc (S¢al) In and for the State of Ohio 

My Co111111lssfon Expires Nov; 24, %016 

Page 2 of2 
Exhibit 2 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FORM APPROVED 

u.s. DEPARTMENT OF OMB NO. 2121>0042 

TRANSPORTATION FEDERALAV!ATJONAD'IINISTAATJON 0813112008 

AIRCRAFT BILL OF SALE 

FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION OF$ THE 

UNDERSIGNED OWNER[S} OF THE FULL LEGAL AND 

BENEFICIAL TITLE OF THE AIRCRAFT DESCRIBED AS 

FOLLOWS: 

UNITED STATES 

ReGISTRATION NUMBER N3MZ 

AIRCRAFT MANUFACnJRER & MODEL 

Cessna402B 

AIRCRAFT SERIAL No. 

40280220 

DOES THIS DAY OF . HERESY SELL, GRANT, TRANSFER AND 

DEUVER ALL RIGHTS, 71TLE. AND INTERESTS 

IN AND TO SUCH AIRCRAFT UNTO: co Not Write In This a~ 

FOR FAA USE ONlY 

NAME AND ADDRESS 

(IF INDMDUAI.(S), GIVE LAST NAME. FIRST NAME. AND MIDO!.E INIJW...) 

a:: 

w 

~ ::r: 

~ ::) 

a. 

DSALER CERn.FrCATE NUMBE~ 

ANOTO EXECUTORS. AOMJNJSTRATORS.AND ASSlGNS TO AAVEANO TO HOI..D 

SINGUI..ARLY THE SA1D AIRCRAFt FOREVER ANI> WARRANTS THE lrn.E iHEREOF: 

INTESTIMONYWHEil!lOF HAVE SET HAND ANO SI!AI. THIS llAYOP" 

NAME(S) OF SELLER SIGNATURE{S) TITLE (l'YPI!D OR PRINTED) (IN INI<){IF EXECUTED FOR (T\'!'EO ORPII~O) 

CC)OWNERSH!P, ALL MUST SIGN.) 

Woo!pelt,lnc. 

-9'~- ) "Tr-ecsvrcJ { C. I= 0 a:: 

w 

...I • ...I 

w 

(/) 

ACKNOWlEDGMENT 

VALJDOY OF TilE (NOT REOUIR&O FOR I=URPOSe8 OF FM R£COROINO. HOWEVER, MAY BE REQUIRED B'fL.OCAt.lAW FOR 

INSTRUMSNT,} 

ORIGINAL: T6 fAA: 

AC Form 0050-2 (911)2) (NSti 005:!~0-62~003) SUp""'edes FrGvlous Ed! ion 
Exhibit 5 
~~- S De-..... ··o:"!rr:EX1! 

cf 7:c;nsoonrn:m 

Federal Aviotlott 

Administration 

.O:...ugust 29_ 20 'i 3 

f;l'}~·:: :S\G:ldatds Dr$r;;;;;: iJ:'I:':~:.~-: 

P.ar~:. C(; \".!r;:s~ Pi;:::.:.: a (.::·,.::.· 

2:~,-_; r.:~:;'lt!;: ,:,_.,:,;:,,~:~~- S:.;·.t;:: ';G.: 

No. 

CERTIFIED MAIL- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

2013EA250068 

Mr Bob Shelton 

O:sciplme Manager 

Aerial Data Acquisition 

\!Voo!per!.. LLC 

5 Falcon Drive 

Suite 102 

Peachtree City GA 30269 

Dear Mr. Shelton: 

Duling a recent incident inve.srigation on Ju!y 3'1. 2013. of fFI aircraft operated by 

Vl/oolperL LLC, the Federal Avlativn Adn;in:s!ration 

com::erning \1'-Joolpert. LLC_ 

(FA-1,) Cisccvered irreguiar~t!t;;-.s 

aircraft ~~3MZ Specific:-a!\y, ,;---;,:_; ;:;::.,;":, fo-l!Ci'.:i· 

1

Nc:.o!pert. LLC operatt:;d an u~-airvjortby ai~craft N~:.MZ. a Cessna 4028. S2tL3~ 

nurnbei 40280220 The ,;:p,rc1·att \Na:S ur·l~airv'Jorthy because i; d~t-: mJt ·,:';•)nfor:-~; \(' 

ds l'fD€ design. The aircraft had a Standard Airworthiness Cen!ficate. and :r -·.~as 

altered 

Rest:ic\ed 

fo; 

Category. 

aerial surve-ying 

This 

vvhlch requires a Spec1a! J:.;ir .. vorthiness Cer!lffcate.. 

is required by 14 CFR part 21 25 {b)(3) 

This;,~ to infcrm you t11at the FAA is investigating this matter We wis!1 to oife;· yo,_,¥' 

opportunity to discuss the incident in person or submit a written sta~ement \iVltr~in ·: G ,::Bi'S 

following receip1 of lh1s letter. Your statemen.t should contain all p·znine~'it facts ana any 

rr:itigaf1ng circumstances you believe may have a bearing on tilt:: incident If we de no:. 

hear from you within the specified time. we ;Nil! process th'1s withm.1t the benefit of your 

statement. 

1~:;;, p~rt of our ir.vestiga~iDn, we n"ius;: deterr1\nE- whethe:rV\.'oo:p.9rt. LLC is a sma!! 

Dusw;ess cone err, und.zr appil·:.able 

pleas~· ad vis~ :J·s ~r 

)a'N To assist us in rna king th:s. C•zterm!nahcn. 

the ann·ua\ receipts of \;'VcoiperL LLC are b~\c·..v s·1 .::~ ;-;~,);!,_:;;--:_ 
Exhibit 6 
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

JUN 18 Z014 

Eastern Region 

Regional Counsel 

Telephone: 718 553-3266 

Facsimile: 718 995-5699 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

CERTIFIED MAIL· RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED. AND REGULAR MAIL 

Woolpert LLC 

5 Falcon Drive 

Suite !02 

Peachtree, GA 30269 

Docket No. 2013EA250068 

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY 

TAKE NOTICE, that this office has received an investigative report from which it appears 

that Wool pert, LLC violated the Federal Aviation Regulations by reason of the fol!O\\ing: 

!. At all times relevant herein, Woolpert, LLC (hereinafter "Woolpert"), owned 

and operated a Cessna 402B aircraft, identi t1cation number N3MZ 

(hereinafter "the aircraft"). 

2. On or about July 31, 2013, Woolpert operated the aircraft on a t1ight from 

Eagle Creek Airpark (KEYE) in Indianapolis, IN, to Essex County (KCDW) 

in Caldwell, NJ. 

3. During the above-described flight, the following items were installed on the 

aircraft without the required FAA approvals and maintenance/alteration 

entries: 

a. Leica Computer Processor Unit, model SC70 

b. Leica camera controller, model ALS CC105 

c. Leica operation controller, model OC52 

d. Leica camera, model RC30 

e. Lidar scanner, model LS70-LP 

f Power Bright400-watt power inverter. model ML400-24 
4. By reason of the above, Woolpert opemted the aircraft when it was not in an 

airworthy condition. 

5. Wool pert thus, as owner or operator of the aircraft, pelfomJed maintenance. 

preventive maintenance, or alterations on the aircraft other than as prescribed 

in this subpart and other applicable regulations, including part 43 of this 

chapter. 

6. Woolpert thus, as owner or operator of the aircraft, operated an aircraft that 

had undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration 

when it had not been approved for return to service by a person authorized 

under Section43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

7. Wool pert thus, as owner or operator of the aircraft, operated an aircraft that 

had undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration 

when the maintenance record entry required by Sections 43.9 or 43.11, as 

applicable, of the Federal Aviation Regulations had not been made. 

By reason of the foregoing, Woolpcrt violated the following section(s) of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations: 

a. Section 91.7(a), which states that no person may operate a civil aircraft unless 

it is in an airworthy condition. 

b. Section 91.403(b), which states that no person may perform maintenance, 

preventive maintenance, or alterations on an aircraft other than as prescribed in 

this subpart and other applicable regulations, including part 43 of this chapter. 

c. Section 9l.407(a){l), which states that no person may operate an aircraft that 

has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration 

unless it has been approved for renu·n to service by a person authorized under 

Section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

d. Section 9!.407(a)(2), which states that no person may operate an aircraft that 

has undergone maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration 

unless the maintenance record entry required by Sections 43.9 or 43.11, as 

applicable, of the Federal Aviation Regulations has been made. 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 4630 l(a)(5)(A), Wool pert is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed 

$1 LOOO for each violation of the regulation(s). After reviewing all of the infonnation 

2 
contained in our investigative file, we propose to assess a civil penalty in the amount of 

$7,000 for these violations. 

Enclosed is infonnation on Woolpert's options in responding to this Notice. The options 

include parti.cipating in an infonnal conference with an FAA attorney and submitting 

information to the FAA for consideration. Wool pert must submit, in \\Titing, its choice of 

the alternatives explained on the enclosed information fonn on or before thirty (30) days 

after it receives this Notice. If Wool pert fails to submit its choice within that time, it will 

have no further right to participate in the informal procedures. 

Alfred R. Johnson, Jr. 

Regional Counsel 

(!_ ~< By: --~--~-· --·--- Dan Kohlmeyer 

Attorney 

Enclosure 

Information Sheet 

Option Selection Form 

lnfbnnal Conference Location List 

3 
Exhibit 7 
,--~ FlightA:ware uvE FLIGHT TRACKING 

Live Flight Tracker + NJMZ 

ACTIVITY LOG 

Date A"tr<::raft Origin 

12/1312013 10:36:30 Alv 

Join FlightA'Nar;:. [Why Join?I t.cg:r, English (USA) 

Destination 

like 

N3MZ 

'NOOLPERT INC· DAYTON OH {'~<:;;~:~at .. ~.'-) 

Eagle Creek Airpark (KEYE- mfo} Essex County (KCOW- inio) 

Indianapolis, IN 

07;03?M EDT 

SCheduled: 06:45PM EDT 

Cll!dwell. NJ 

H1:1SPM EDT 

Sclledulert 10:13PM EDT 

i Status 

! Aircraft 

I

. Speed 

Altit~;ae 

I Dlstance 

( Rotue 

Duration: 3 hours 13 minutes 

Wodn•sdily, July 31,2013 

Lancteo:: 1i wo&ks ago. (.rae:.:. '.cg;:. grt::?r,) 

Cessna 402 (twin~piston) {C4C'":G- :or:ctos) 

Filed: 160 kts (gra;=r:) 

Filed: 11,000feet(~r.a;li':) 

Direct: 637 sm Planned: 643 sm f!lcwn: 649 srn 

DON V12l-tAA ETX (C"'.::::.ee) 

,-----------------, G~t notJiied of this fl,l;ht's a(tlviry - [ 

Vl/ar.t ~full history search for N3MZ elating oaci<; tv 1998'~ Buy r.o-.'i Gei it •m!hm :::-r.e hour 

Oeparted Arrival Duration 

No History Data (searched last 14 days) 

Raglstorod users (reg~t&ring is &ee an7!) view 4 monthS bistooy. Jc>o 

15,j(!Oflr------------------7 ,'----------------..., 2!0 il!s 

Aili1t:aE _, 00000 II 

Speec "' 000 -~:s .• ~ 

~-;,_;..: ; :e:;1s.:i~ i E:~-~,s~ ,;t..;i':}j E~.lf•i~l· (US<'-.;; Ei~<Hicl (Esp::~;.;) i \":r.r.>;.a,s.l. :>·"=:;;..' \!~l!.;;r.C·: ·: .r •. ;~ i j;;l ;,;); f ,'<t;::s<il!!"c<:!~ · ~·:r!l.'"-';:~~.o;; O:';r.~:r .. ~; Sv;ns:.:n i ":"(I~~~; ,. ;_ .• ;:-: .• , . , 

;;) ;!'.)!.1 ~ii[;i':.J..Wil!"O 

N3MZ + FlightAware 

SOl!.~ 

0 i<t$ 

Page I of2 
Exhibit 8 
0 FAA ACCIDENT I INCIDENT REPORT DA I YR IJ 

It Af'CIDENT w " [Z] '. l.lil 

, E ,I i1 , 

1 '· DATE OF EVENT ~ .. CWJ CWJ 

lc_ FAA OFFICE 

IJB 

I>. NTSB!D t I I I OJ [.[] l 

X1ffi 

~ ,:~RD "" i PRIMARY 

J 0 \ \Li"ITEO 

ll:!!_ I .,,, 

fF~A~I~RiF~I~E;L~D~N~J~0:7~0~0~4----------r=~f=r=r+l~·o~~e~~~~roDI~ LJ' ~ 

' LQC,\T!Oii;CITY/STAT[IZ!P ~~·":~WERPLAN'I· . Ytsn NO[)() .• ;:,.; 

f, OP£RATORNHIEN/A I I I I 1

1

,'<· . ,. ii~~~~b r- ' 

TCTAL 

"'· 

"C 

IX. 

i PJREP 

'OTHER 

ICING I 

6110 

',I.F.R 

X 

GUSTY WINDS 

FA!' Foll'n 8020·23 (01-10) 

I 2fb 

_OVER• 

. CG OUT OfLIMITS 

• STRUCK ANIMAL 

.PAX 

' STOLEN AIRCRAF1 

FT 

I 'J,{f,;T~)'."i;"~~ -C 

TION 

~ 

2 

22. TYPE OfOPERATIO;<iS 

L l!""'. 

lPICOTf 

:f>ILOTINCP. 

[_H_A.I\I) LANDING 

rRUNWAY X 

TAKEOFF 

». PHASE OF !'UGH' 

! DE>CENl 

LANDING 

CARGO 

I 

BUSINE>S 

f'EF.RY 

;IAIREVAC 

I . 

I DANNER T()W_ 

I AIR SHOW 

I AIR TOUR 

OTHER 

Sl/PERSEDts FAA FORMS: 8020-S ao<f 8020-16 lS PRJ::LlMINA.RV "'NDSUlUECTTO CHANCE NSN' 
AfQA REPORT NU!'.IRER l 

r"::.· .:P.:I=Lc::Oc:T:_T.:.:R:::A:.;l:..N:::INc:c::G:__c<C_HE,c~K=Al.rL 

• ' E ! A I 2 Is ]1 3 lo [s I 6'. · 

::c";::"::'::~"'~' y.:· "'.:::.:.co_"'.:_':.:"':..TW,.:O::.M::"':::r::"'::<::'::"":.TIWNl::;:.:::.· :::":c::•v:.:'::.":.:'::· 

1-c--c-,-:---,_--:c::--+YE:_S-f 

IF:_:A:':.:'L::IC::.' ':::"::"::';:v '::'l.A;:.'::";'-,--_JO ALL UN KN 0 WN 

j>N:_O+UN:_K+..!C!!!MO>ele<,O,Af.:IY(!R;cl -+-~"M!QO,JUA/Ylt YI:S NO UNK! 'M(l/D !YR o.IOfD.IiYR 

SAFETY SEMINAR/CliNIC X 

~~~~------T-~r-r------t-------E~=-=~~~~~+·~~~~-+--------t WINGS PROGRAM 

AJR CARRIER. TRANSITION X I I X SlMULATOR 

AIR CARRIER IN"ITJA.L 

'X : 06/30/13 

)( COMMITHIRD PARTY 

AIR CARRIER RECUAAENT X (CON1'RACT TRAINING) X 

OTHER X 

AIR CARRIER RE·QUAL!f!CATION X 

:;G. EVACVATIONOVERVIEW (AJRC"-RRIERoNLYJ EVACUATlONTNITIATED OvEs QNo EVACUATION 

" PILOT 

INJURIES n YES 

NAME 

INFORMATION NOT APPLICABLE 0 CERTIFICATE TYPE SECOND PILOT 

WILLIAM D O'CONNOR RECREA T\O!•ML 

I oJ,r III!:Kl 1 s111 STUDENT LJ,J L.W LJ._J :J5A 

DATE OF BIRTH 

ITJCOCIJ f>R!YATE CIJ q:J + MO --rt,. Ylt 

l3lol2l7l7i i 

I I I I I I 

DATE HIRED I' 

~(A~I~R~CA~RR~IE~RC:O~N=LY~)~---1·----r=~=F=T~~~~-----t--r---------1--i----r=~~~~=,--~-----1 DOMICILE ZIP CODE I 

COMMERCIAL 

HOURS IN MAKE AND MODEL I I blslo\oi!SJSJ X fLIGHT !NST. I I i I I I[SJSJ 

I I I )611IISJSJ X ATP I I i 

I I I ![SJSJ 

HOURS IN LAST 90 DAYS 

I I !3\4\4\lSlSJ FOREIGN PILOT I I I I OISJSJ li}4 ' !1 171 o I tSISJ I I I I l ![SJSJ .SPORT I TO_T:~A~L~H~O~U~'RS:_ ________ +-__ _J=:~±=~~~J=~~---i--~------~--+--+----~~~~==~ib~~----~ 

----· CERTIFCCATENO. , 3213112 NON·PILOT 

OTHER [QITI CQli] [ill] MO DA Vl\ 

REGULATORYCHECKRJDE i l!. CORREC"rJVEACTlON(S) f>LANI'I"ED OR INITIATED NONE 0 >I017!!9Rt.L1U.!>l~ SbR 0 COIJNSELING 0 t.IRO 

MAUt"NCTION OR D!F£C'tfl,.£1"01\1'" 0 OTHER-o' 

" NARRATIVE {A1TACH ADDITIONAL SUEETS AS NECEsSARY) 

ITJ [I] ITJ MO D.U. YR 

(0Jiil..'V ST.\Tf.YACTSOR StQt!£NCEOFn'E1'1TSTHAT .\ltll rttU:VANTTOTII!:ACCIDENTOR INCIDENT] 

*See Appendix• 

CONDUCT OF INVESTIGATION 

:-;~. NTSB P ARTICIP,•\ TION ON-SCENt. 0 ~; __ ... f.v. l?-.1TlAL NOTIFICATION 

l.l!l.llTtD 0 NON:_L~J .! H. FMPARTIC!Pi\TIOO ON-SCEftiF. ~NOT(IN...SC£NEO SCEN£NOTo\CC€SSJDL£l] 

C2T2J't;oi1Tlill:J n. FSDO NOTIFICATION F"A.4. IIC ARRIVAL ON SCENE 

I

" ~tA~L "1'~-r::-1 I LSU2J 11.llJ !l.liJ I 

~Eymr<:yr~ 

I..2J._lU 0 2 \1i3l MO rM YR i\10 DA V~ 

12\212\ 0 I ><· UOURCLOCK 

MO lM VR ~ 

121212151 U·HOURCLOCK \ Ill 0 I 0 I 0 I O>HRCLO<:>< 

"'I Ill 61 ~ 

~ FAA ltOIJRS US£D FOR 

TOTi\t.lNVEST!GATION "I I ! 6j ~ TOTALtWURSVSI;D I' 41.1 • . . ~ A.TACOOENTSCENE · 

l2l ~ TOTAL TIIA\'£1,..fl0URS 

• . •~ l'O&FIH>Mset:NE 

FAA Nll't"E RESPONSIBILITlES 

ID!Nlli'ICA"OON Oil" RESPO~"liiBILffiES IS THE 1Nvt!M10ATQRS OPINION 8A5E.D ON HlSJfiEQ. fi'IY£STIGATION 

l. FAA FACiliTIES mO NO [8] l.f, AIRMAN/AIR AGENCY COMPETENCE YESI2J NOO!_i. SECURITY mO ~0 [81 

·---;;=;- l. NONFM FACILITIES YES 0 NO [Rjl' FAR CHANGE NEEDED YESO Nol8Ji• 1-----·--·· 

Al~'-IAN MEDICAL QUALIF YESO NO (8J 

3. A!RWORTHl:-.'ESS -· YES 0 NO~ I'· AIRPORT C:ERTlflCAT!ON YESO NO [8] I'· FAR VIOLATION YESn ~ NO~ 

4"3. BRtEF EXPLANA TIONOf ISSUES INVOLVED 

4. 

PROPER 

THE AIRMAN 

PROCEDURES 

DID 

WERE 

NOT PUT 

NOT 

THE LANDING GEAR DOWN CAUSING THE GEAR UP Lk~DING. 

REQUIRED TO REEVALUATE THE 

FOLLOWED BY THE PILOT. A 709 RIDE WILL BE R 

AIRMAL~'S COMPETENCE. 

FSDO. 

09/04/2013 AIRMAN SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED 709 REEXAMINATION BY THE 80-11 

" FAA l!C NAME WATSON 0 JOSEPH DATE08/27 /2 013 REGION EA DISTRICT OFFICE 

IN"IiORMATlON IS PREL!~JNARY ANOSllBJECTTO CHANGE 

25 
Appendix Report Number: AEA2513050 

16. POWER PLANT MAKE/MODEL/SERIES 

CONT MOTOR TSI0-520 SER 218947 & 509357 

17. PROPELLER MAKE/MODEL/SERIES 

MCAULY 3AF32C* 981844 & 981271 

33. NARRATIVE 

ON JULY 31, 2013 A CESSNA 402B, N3MZ, LANDED GEAR UP IN CALDWELL, NJ 

ENTRY 

(CDW) AT 2214L. IN A REPORT THE AIRMAN STATED HE ~~E A NORMAL DOWNWIND 

BASE LEG. 

TO RUNWAY 22. APPROACH FLAPS WERE SET AND THE PILOT TURNED FOR HIS 

BEING 

THE PILOT OVERSHOT PINAL DUE TO MANY GROUND LIGHTS AND NOT 

CENTERLINE 

ABLE TO SEE THE R~~AY. THE AIRCRAFT WAS 25 TO 30 DEGREES OFF FROM 

AIRCRAFT 

&~D THE AIRMAN ADJUSTED HIS PINAL AND APPLIED FULL FLAPS. THE 

THEN LANDED WITH THE LANDING GEAR STOWED. 

THERE 

THE PILOT 

WERE 

FURTHER STATED THAT HE FORGOT TO EXTEND THE L.'\NDING GEAR AND 

NO MECHANICAL IRREGULARITIES THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED ITS 

GEAR 

PROPER 

WAS 

OPERATION. THE AIRCRAFT WAS LATER PLACED ON JACKS AND THE ~~ING 

EXTENDED NOR~ALLY. 

THE INITIAL REVIEW OF THE AIRCRAFT RECORDS INDICATE THERE MAYBE 

ADDITIONAL AIRWORTHINESS VIOLATIONS TO BE HANDLED AS A SEPARATE MATTER. 

Appendix Page 1 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certifY that I have this date sent via FED EX delivery, postage pre-paid, an original and 

one copy of the foregoing Respondent's Reply to the Complainant's Untitled Motion to Amend 

addressed to: 

ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

And further, that I have this date served a copy of the foregoing Respondent's Reply to the 

Complainant's Untitled Motion to Amend via facsimile and FED EX delivery, postage pre-paid, 

to the following: 

ONE COPY VIA FACSIMILE NO. 202-366-7536 

Hon. J.E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Tel: 202-366-6941 

Fax: 202-366-7536 

ONE COPY VIA FACSIMILE NO. 718-533-5699 

Dan Kohhneyer 

Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration, AEA -7 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

Tel: 718-553-3266 

Fax: 718-533-5699 

Counsel for Complainant 

Dated: September 18, 2015 

15 

Gregory S. Winton, Esq. 

The Aviation Law Firm 

1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway 

Suite 300 

Annapolis, MD 21401