OG/10/2010 14:49 FAX 2024935142 FAA •> DMS lglOOI/007 

Q 

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

eoo Independence Ave., S.W, 

Washington. D,C. 20591 

May 18,2010 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Atten; Hearing Docket Clerk 

Hearing Docket Room 2014, AGC-400 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Re: In the Mailer of Wisconsin Aviation 

FAA Case No. 2007SW910050 

Dear Madani: ol'O/D- K^ ^ l i 

Pursuant to Rule 208 of the Rules ofPracticc (14 C.l'.R. 13.208), the Federal Aviaiion 

Administration hereby files the complaint in the above relercnccd nxattcr. 

tpioU^jmj 

Sincerely 

/ - 1 

AutumVi^Kfllmgham 

Enforcerneni Division 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

(202) 1(,1-111% 

cc: Jeffrey Baun 

Pre.'>idenl 

Wisconsin Aviation 

Corporate Headquarters 

Watertown Municipal Airport 

1741 River Drive 

Watertown, WI 53094 
}\ OG/10/2010 14:49 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS 0002/00 7 

^ 

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

BOO Independence Avenue. S.W. 

Washington. D.C. 20591 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

) 

In the Wisconsin Aviation ) 

) FAA- Case No. 2007SW9I0050 

) 

JUDGt NOT ASSIGNED 

COMPLAINT 

The Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") by counsel, hereby files its 

Complaint, pursuant to Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice (14 CF.R. 13.208), and states 

as follows: 

I. 

On May 24, 2007, Respondent was advised through a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty 

that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penally in the amount of $20,000. On May 11, 

2010, Respondent submitted a written request for a hearing. 

II. 

1. Wisconsin Aviation is now, and at all times mentioned in this document was, the 

holder of Air Carrier Certificaie Number DBKAl 24D, issued pursuant to 14 C.l-.R. part 
OG/10/2010 14:49 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 12003/007 

119, with appropriate operations specifications under 14 CF.R. pan 135. 

2. On or about November 28, 2006, representatives of the FAA conducted an inspection 

of Wisconsin Aviation to determine its compliance with 49 CF.R. part 40 and 14 C.K.K. 

pari 121, appendices 1 and J. 

3. Wisconsin Aviation is now, and at all times mentioned in this document was, required 

by 14 CF.R. § 135.251(a) to test each of its employees who performs a function listed in 

14 C.F.R- part 121, Appendix I, in accordance with that apperidix. 

4. Wisconsin Aviation is now, and at all times mentioned in this document was, required 

by 14 C.F.R. pan 121, Appendix I § III to test each person who performs a salelysensitive function, including persons performing aircraft maintenance and preventive 

maintenance duties, for Wisconsin Aviation in accordance with Appendix 1 of pari 121. 

5. Wisconsin Aviation is now, and at all times mentioned in this document was, required 

by 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I § V.A.I, to conduct a pre-employment test and receive 

a verified negative drug tests result prior to hiring any individual for a safeiy-sensiiivc 

function listed in section III of Appendix I. 

6. Wisconsin Aviaiion is now, and at all times mentioned in this document was, 

prohibited by 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I § V.A.3 from allowing an individual 

required to undergo pre-employment drug testing under pan 121, Appendix 1 § V.A.I to 
06/10/201 0 14:4 9 FAX 202493514 2 FAA •> DMS E1004/007 

perform a safety-sensitive function unless Wisconsin Aviation has received a verified 

negative drug test result for that individual. 

7. During ihe above-described inspection, a review of Wisconsin Aviation's records 

indicated that Wisconsin Aviation failed to test for prohibited drugs and receive verified 

negative drug lest results prior to hiring one employee, failed to receive verified negative 

drug test results prior to hiring one employee, and failed to test for prohibited drugs and 

receive verified negative results for two employees after they were transferred to safetysensitive positions. 

8. On or about September 11, 2005, Mr. Patrick Hanington was hired by Wisconsin 

Aviation to perform maintenance fiinctions. 

9. At the lime Mr. Harrington was hired, Wisconsin Aviation had not received a verified 

negative drug lest result for Mr. Harrington. 

10. On or about May 1, 2006, Mr. Eric Rosenbrook was hired by Wisconsin Aviation to 

perform maintenance functions. 

11. At the time Mr. Rosenbrook was hired, Mr. Rosenbrook had not undergone a preemployment drug test, nor had Wisconsin Aviaiion received a verified negative drug test 

result for Mr. Rosenbrook. 
OG/10/2010 14:49 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 0005/00 7 

12 On or about May 25, 2005, Wisconsin Aviation transferred Mitchell E. Johnson from 

a non safety-sensitive position into a position to perform maintenance functions. 

13. At the time Mr. Johnson was transferred to a safety-sensitive position, Mr. Johnson 

had not undergone a pre-employment drug test, nor had Wisconsin Aviation received a 

verilied negative drug test result for Mr. .Johnson. 

14. On or about February 6, 2006, Wisconsin Aviation transferred Adam Wesl from a 

non safety-sensitive position into a position to perform maintenance functions. 

15. At the time Mr. West was transfeixed lo a safety-sensitive position, Mr. West had not 

undergone a pre-employmeni drug test, nor had Wisconsin Aviation received a verified 

negative drug test result for Mr. West 

111. 

1. By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, it appears that Wisconsin Aviation 

violated the followuig Federal Aviation Regulations: 

a. 14C.F.R. § 135.251(a), in tliat Wisconsin Aviation failed to test each of its 

employees who performs a function listed in 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, in 

accordance with that appendix. 
06/10/201 0 14:49 FAX 2024935142 FAA ^ DMS @|008/007 

b. 14 C.F.R, part 121, Appendix I § V.A.I, in that Wisconsin Aviation hired 

individuals for safeiy-sensiiive functions listed in section III of this appendix 

when Wisconsin Aviation had not first conducted a pre-employment test nor 

received a verified negative drug test result for the individuals. 

2. Under the facts and circumstances of this case a civil penalty of $20,000 is appropriate. 

WI1I2REFORE, the Agency, by coun.sel, respectfully requests that the Administrative 

Law/ Judge enter an order that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of 

$20,000. 

Dated this 18'^ day of May, 2010. 

Peter J Lynch 

Assistant Chief Counsel 

for Enforcement 

|(^^unm Killingpam 

Enforcement Division 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

(202)267-7728 

PLEASE NOTE: 

Pursuant to Title 14 CFR § 13.209(a), you are required to file a written answer lot his 

Complaint, or a written Motion to Dismiss il"appropriate, not later than thirty (30) days 

after the date shown on the Certificate of Service which follows. 
OG/10/2010 14:50 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS §1007/00 7 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Complaint, in the Wisconsin Aviation, FAA Case 

NO.2007SW910050, has been mailed this date by Certified Mail, Return Receipt 

Requested, to: 

Jeffrey Baum 

President 

Wisconsin Aviation 

Coiporaie Headquarters 

Watertown Municipal Airport 

1741 River Drive 

Watertown, WI 53094 

The original and a copy was also delivered to: 

Hearing Docket (Original and 1 copy) 

Room 2014, ACJC-400 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W, 

Washing;on, DC 20591 

^AAyi.^^--'