ToddC. Emerson, #8175 

444 South River Road 

St. George, Utah, 84790 

Telephone: (435) 634-3530 

Facsimile: (435) 634-3505 

Email: temerson@skywest.com 

- and -

Michael L. Dworkin #64047 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: (415) 421-02500 

Facsimile: (415)421-2560 

Email: law@avialex.com 

Attorneys for Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

RECEIVED 

OCT 12 2011 

HEARING DOCKET 

c j -

V 

;-:--,_ HIT ! 

J^'^'~ . 

— o;o< 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

xr 

C O 

In the Matter of: 

Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

FAA Case Nos. 2011NM060033 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC.'S 

RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S 

INITIAL DISCOVERY REQUEST 

Judge: The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. (hereinafter referred to as "SKYWEST"), by and 

through its undersigned counsel, objects and responds to Complainant's Initial Discovery 

Requests in 2011NM060033, dated September 20, 2011. 
INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL OBJECTIONS 

This matter arises out Sky West Airlines' weight and balance operations and practices on 

one flight which took place on February 11,2011, Flight 4451. 

Complainant proposes assessing a penalty of $33,000.00 for alleged violations of FAR's 

119.5(g), 119.5(1), 121.693(a), 121.693(c) and 121.693(d). Specifically, Complainant has 

alleged that SKYWEST: 

1. Operated as a direct air carrier in violation of an appropriate operations specification; 

2. Operated aircraft under Part 121 in violation of its operations specifications; 

3. Operated flights without a load manifest that accurately reflected the weight of the 

cargo and baggage; 

4. Operated flights when the total weight of the aircraft was not computed under 

approved procedures; and 

5. Operated flights when the aircraft were not loaded according to an approved 

schedule. 

Considering that Sky West, in its Answer, has admitted the majority of the factual 

allegations contained in the Complaints and has averred that the baggage miscounts were the 

product of simple human arithmetic error. Complainant's Discovery appears to be excessive, and 

SKYWEST objects on the grounds that it is compound, complex, overly broad and unduly 

burdensome; it transcends the bounds of reasonable discovery; and in many instances, it seeks 

information which is already within Complainant's knowledge, care, custody and control. 

Complainant's discovery appears to have been crafted less by a genuine need for relevant 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

Sky West's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 2 
and probative information, but rather, to bludgeon SKYWEST into settling these cases. 

Complainant's statutory obligation is to determine, prior to initiating enforcement action, that 

such action is warranted. Complainant should not be free to initiate an enforcement action, and 

then, if challenged, use discovery as a substitute for the investigation that should have already 

been completed. 

It should be understood that SKYWEST's investigation is ongoing and continuing and 

SKYWEST reserves the right to supplement or amend these Responses as its investigation 

proceeds up through the time of hearing. Accordingly, these Responses should be considered 

tentative at best. 

Finally, SKYWEST, in its Answer and Affirmative Defenses ("Answer") dated August 

18, 2011, and in its First Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses, filed concurrently with 

this Discovery Response on October 11, 2011, has asserted numerous affirmative defenses and 

reserves the right to assert additionally affirmative defenses as they arise. Notwithstanding any 

response or admission contained herein, SKYWEST reasserts each and every affirmative defense 

contained in its Answer, which SKYWEST incorporates herein by this reference as if fully set 

forth herein. 

INTERROGATORIES 

The objections set forth above are hereby incorporated herein in their entirety. 

Notwithstanding these objections, SKYWEST, based on its information and belief, responds to 

the Interrogatories as follows: 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

Sky West's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 3 
Interrogatory No. 1: Identify by name, address and telephone number all persons whom you 

know to have personal knowledge of the matters alleged in the Complaint. 

SKYWEST's RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1 

Objection. To the extent that the Interrogatory seeks the names, addresses and telephone 

numbers of "all persons whom you know to have personal knowledge of the matters alleged in 

the Complaint": said Interrogatory is overbroad and unduly burdensome. Moreover, to the 

extent that this or any Interrogatory propounded by Complainant in this matter contemplates any 

person's home address or telephone number being provided, objection is made on the grounds 

that any such disclosure would be a gross invasion of personal privacy, particularly in view of 

the fact that these Responses may eventually become part of the public record or docket in this 

matter. Without waiving said objections, individuals known to SKYWEST (other than 

SKYWEST's legal counsel) that have knowledge of the matters alleged in the Complaint are: 

1. All individuals named or otherwise identified in the Complainant's Enforcement 

Investigative Report(s)(hereinafter, "EIR's"); 

2. Carl Salamone, Sky West Pilot - Flight Operations; 

3. Dave W. Faddis, Sky West Managing Director of Safety; 

4. Elaine Wolff, SkyWest Regional Performance Manager; 

5. Maggi Aiken, SkyWest Director of Customer Service Training; 

6. Jeremy Barkley, SkyWest Director of Safety Evaluation and Security; 

7. James K. Boyd, SkyWest Vice President -Customer Service; 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 4 
8. Brett Whitelaw, SkyWest Auditor; 

9. Christopher Gross, SkyWest Auditor; 

10. Inoke Katoa, SLC Ramp Agent; 

1 I.Steven Allen, FAA ASI; 

12. Noal Johnston, FAA ASI; 

13. James McKenna, FAA ASI 

SKYWEST's investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST 

reserves the right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

With the exception of Inoke Katoa, Noal Johnston, James McKerma and Steven Allen, 

the foregoing individuals are current SKYWEST employees and can be contacted through 

SKYWEST's counsel. 

Interrogatory No. 2: Identify by title, date, author, present custodian, and content, all 

documents, including correspondence, obtained by you or in your 

possession, relating to the assertions in the Complaint, your appeal, your 

answer, and any affirmative defenses which you anticipate raising in this 

matter. See Request for Production No. 1. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

To the extent that the Interrogatory seeks "documents, including correspondence... 

relating to the assertions in the Complaint, your appeal, your answer, and any affirmative 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 5 
rs 

defenses which you anticipate raising in this matter" objection is made on the following grounds: 

a. Correspondence between SKYWEST and its undersigned counsel is protected 

under the attorney-client privilege and will not be produced; 

b. The terms "documents, including correspondence, relating to the assertions in the 

Complaint, your appeal, your answer, and any affirmative defenses which you anticipate raising 

in this matter" are overbroad and unduly burdensome, vague, ambiguous and uncertain; and 

c. To the extent that any of the documents sought to be identified and/or produced 

are in Complainant's care, custody or control, or have been originated by Complainant, objection 

is made as such documents are already within Complainant's knowledge. 

Without waiving the foregoing objections, the following documents are in the possession 

of SKYWEST and/or have been obtained by SKYWEST's undersigned counsel: 

1. All documents or other materials and writings contained in the releasable portions of 

Complainant's EIRs including, but not limited to the Items of Proof which are made a 

part of said EIR's; 

2. SKYWEST's counsel's notes and memoranda, protected under the attorney-client 

privilege and attorney work product doctrine; 

3. SkyWest Weight and Balance Operations Manual Standard Practice 4100; 

4. Advisory Circular 120-27E; 

5. Operation Specification A098; 

6. SkyWest Weight and Balance Program; 

7. CLR's for the flights in question; 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 6 
8. Load Manifests for the flights in question; 

9. Dispatch Releases for the flights in question; 

10. FAA ASI statements and reports; 

11. SkyWest's responses to letters of investigation; 

12. SkyWest Customer Service Training Bulletin 2010-14, Designated Loading Agent 

Responsibilities; 

13. SkyWest Customer Service Training Bulletin 2011-04, [UPDATED] Aircraft Loading 

Procedures; 

14. Updated aircraft loading procedures to be incorporated into Station Operations Manual 

SP 5500 in Revision 18; 

15. Various Internal Procedure Evaluations/Audits; 

16. FAA Order 2150.3B; 

17. SkyWest Airlines Weight and Balance Analysis prepared by Carl Salamone; and 

18. Bombardier CRJ Weight and Balance Manuals, 01-00-60, for the subject aircraft. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. Finally, 

SKYWEST reserves the right to utilize at hearing any document not listed above for purposes of 

impeachment. 

Interrogator/ No. 3: Identify by name, address and telephone number, all persons whom you 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 7 
intend to have testify as a factual or expert witness in your defense at the 

hearing in this matter, and for factual witnesses, provide a detailed 

summary of each person's anticipated testimony. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

At this point in time, SKYWEST contemplates calling those persons whom SKYWEST 

has identified in its Response to Interrogatory No 1 above. Summaries of their respective 

testimonies are set forth below: 

1. Carl Salamone, SkyWest Pilot - Flight Operations. Mr. Salamone will testify as an expert 

as to the procedure involved with his creating the SkyWest Weight and Balance Analysis 

for the subject flights and findings and opinions contained therein, including, but not 

limited to the fact that the baggage count discrepancies did not, in any way, affect or 

hamper aircraft weight and balance, performance or safety. 

2. Dave Faddis, SkyWest Managing Director of Safety. Mr. Faddis will testify as to the 

formal response and internal investigation initiated upon receiving the subject LOI (dated 

February 23, 2011, from Noal J. Johnston, POI, regarding flight 4451 on February 15, 

2011). 

3. Elaine Wolff, SkyWest Regional Performance Manager. Ms. Wolff will testify as to her 

internal investigation of the FAA's voiced concern over weight and balance issues. 

4. Maggi Aiken, SkyWest Director of Customer Service Training. Ms. Aiken will testify as 

to her communications with the FAA and her March 9, 2011 response to POI Noal 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 8 
Johnston's February 23, 2011 LOI. Ms. Aiken will testify as to the implementation of an 

initiative to ensure all SKYWEST stations are physically staffed to allow one agent to 

directly account for the aircraft loading process on each SKYWEST flight. Loading agent 

oversight in this initiative includes ensuring accurate physical baggage counts, cargo 

weights, and weight and balance communication with the flight deck crew; 

5. Jeremy Barkley, SkyWest Director of Safety Evaluation and Security. Mr. Barkley will 

testify as to his communications with John Linginfelter in being proactive in investigating 

the discrepancies and avoiding future mishaps. 

6. Shawn Johnson, Regional Elite Airline Services Station Manager. Mr. Johnson will 

testify as to his internal investigation resulting from POI Noal Johnston's February 23, 

2010 LOI into flight 4551 on February 15, 2011. 

7. James K. Boyd, SkyWest Vice-President -Customer Service. Mr. Boyd will testify as to 

his implementation of an initiative to ensure all SKYWEST stations are physically staffed 

to allow one agent to directly account for the aircraft loading process on each SKYWEST 

flight. Loading agent oversight in this initiative includes ensuring accurate physical 

baggage counts, cargo weights, and weight and balance communication with the flight 

deck crew. Mr. Boyd will additionally testify concerning corrective actions taken by 

SKYWEST, including, but not limited to CST Bulletin 2010-4; 

8. Inoke Katoa, SLC Ramp Agent. Inoke Katoa will testify as to the offloading process in 

general, and specifically, of FUght 4451 on February 15, 2011. 

9. Brett Whitelaw and Christopher Gross, SkyWest Auditors. Messrs. Whitelaw and Gross 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 9 
will testify as to SKYWEST's internal auditing of Ramp Agents to confirm compliance 

with SKYWEST's required loading and unloading procedures; 

10. Various FAA personnel will be called to testify as to their involvement in the 

investigation, including, but not limited to Steven Allen, FAA ASI; Noal Johnston, FAA 

POI; James McKenna, FAA ASI. 

In addition, SKYWEST may call representative(s) of Bombardier, the aircraft 

manufacturer, who will testify that the alleged baggage count discrepancies did not in any way 

affect or hamper aircraft weight and balance, CG, aircraft performance and/or those 

computations contained in the dispatch releases, and flight plans. 

SKYWEST further reserves the right to call as its witnesses any persons identified in 

Complainant's EIR's, any persons now or hereinafter identified by Complainant as its witnesses 

and any persons who may be called to testify by Complainant in this matter. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Interrogatory No. 4: Identify by title, date, author, present custodian, and content, all 

documents which you anticipate offering into evidence at the hearing in 

this matter, and through which witness or witnesses. See Request for 

Production No. 2. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 10 
SKYWEST's Response: 

Please see SKYWEST's response to Interrogatory No. 2 above, which SKYWEST adopts 

and incorporates as a partial response to Interrogatory No. 4. As of the date of this response, 

SKYWEST anticipates that the following documents will be offered into evidence through the 

witnesses identified below: 

Document Title: Advisory Circular 120-27E 

Author: The Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Date: Current 

Custodian: Public Record 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: SkyWest Weight and 

Balance Program 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: Current 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: Operation Specification 

A098 

Author: SkyWest Airlines, Inc. 

Date: Current 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: CLR's for the flights in 

question 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: As depicted in Complainant's EIR 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 11 
Document Title: Load Manifests for the 

flights in question 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: As depicted in Complainant's EIR 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: SkyWest's responses to 

letters of investigation 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: As depicted in Complainant's EIR 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: Maggi Aiken 

Document Title: FAA ASI statements and 

reports 

Author: As depicted in Complainant's EIR 

Date: As depicted in Complainant's EIR 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: Dispatch Releases for the 

flights in question 

Author: 

Date: As depicted in Complainant's EIR 

Custodians: FAA and SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: SkyWest Customer Service 

Training Bulletin 2010-14, Designated 

Loading Agent Responsibilities 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: November 9, 2010 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: Maggi Aiken and 

James Boyd 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 12 
rs 

Document Title: SkyWest Customer Service 

Training Bulletin 2010-04, [UPDATED] 

Aircraft Loading Procedures 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: April 7, 2011 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: Maggi Aiken and 

James Boyd 

Document Title: SkyWest Airlines Internal 

Evaluation - Load Audit Report 

Author: Brett Whitelaw 

Date: June 1,2011 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: FAA Order 2150.3B 

Author: Federal Aviation Administration 

Date: Current. 

Custodian: Public Record 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: Updated aircraft loading 

procedures to be incorporated into Station 

Operations Manual SP 5500 in Revision 18 

Author: SKYWEST 

Date: To be incorporated into Station 

Manual SP 5500 Revision 18 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: Maggi Aiken and 

James Boyd 

Document Title: SkyWest Airlines Internal 

Evaluation - Load Audit Report 

Author: Christopher Gross 

Date: August 5, 2011 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 13 
Document Title: SkyWest Airlines Internal 

Evaluation - Load Audit Report 

Author: Brett Whitelaw 

Date: August 12,2011 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

Document Title: SkyWest Airlines Weight 

and Balance Analysis 

Author: Carl Salamone 

Date: September 15,2011 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: Carl Salamone 

Document Title: Bombardier CRJ 200 

Weight and Balance Manual 01-00-60, April 

28, 1999 

Author: Bombardier 

Date: April 28, 1999 

Custodian: SKYWEST 

Sponsoring Witness: As yet undetermined 

In addition, SKYWEST reserves the right to utilize at hearing any documents, records, 

information or materials contained in Complainant's EIR, or any documents, records, 

information or materials introduced into evidence, or sought to be introduced into evidence, by 

Complainant. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Finally, SKYWEST reserves the right to utilize at hearing any document not listed above 

for purposes of impeachment. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 14 
rs 

Interrogatorv No. 5: With respect to each expert witness identified in response to Interrogatory 

No. 3, specify their specific area of expertise, and provide a synopsis of 

their credentials, background, training and experience. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

SKYWEST will call First Officer Carl Salamone. Please see the attached Production of 

Documents for Mr. Salamone's curriculum vitae. 

SKYWEST will call Mr. Jeremy Barkley, SkyWest Director of Safety Evaluation and 

Security. His curriculum vitae will be forthcoming under separate cover. 

In addition, SKYWEST may call representative(s) of Bombardier, the aircraft 

manufacturer, who will testify that the alleged baggage count discrepancies did not in any way 

affect or hamper aircraft weight and balance, CG, aircraft performance and/or those 

computations contained in the dispatch releases, and flight plans. 

In addition, SKYWEST reserves the right to call as expert witnesses at hearing (i) any 

persons identified in Complainant's EIR, including but not limited to the evidentiary portion of 

said Report, (ii) any person who may be called by Complainant to testify as an expert, (iii) any 

person who may testify at the hearing as an expert on behalf of Complainant, (iv) any person 

called to testify by, or who may testify as expert at the request or order of the Administrative 

Law Judge, and (v) for purposes of impeachment, any other persons not identified above. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 15 
r% 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Interrogatory No. 6: With respect to each expert you expect to call as a witness, state the 

subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify, state the 

substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to 

testify, and provide summary of the grounds for each such opinion. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Mr. Carl Salamone will testify as to the weight and balance analysis of the subject flights 

based upon environmental conditions on the dates of flight, manufacturer calculated operating 

envelopes for subject aircraft (Bombardier Weight and Balance Manuals), aircraft takeoff 

weight, aircraft takeoff center of gravity, aircraft climb performance and maximum operating 

altitude. 

Mr. Jeremy Barkley will testify as to SKYWEST's proactive investigation of alleged 

violations and steps taken to avoid discrepancies and future mishaps. 

In addition, SKYWEST may call representative(s) of Bombardier, the aircraft 

manufacturer, who will testify that the alleged baggage count discrepancies did not in any way 

affect or hamper aircraft weight and balance, CG, aircraft performance and/or those 

computations contained in the dispatch releases, and flight plans. 

In addition to the persons identified above in this Response, SKYWEST reserves the 

right to call as expert witnesses at hearing (i) any persons identified in Complainant's EIR, 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 16 
including but not limited to the evidentiary file of said Report, (ii) any person who may be called 

by Complainant to testify as an expert, (iii) any person who may testify at the hearing as an 

expert on behalf of Complainant, (iv) any person called to testify by, or who may testify as 

expert at the request or order of the Administrative Law Judge, and (v) for purposes of 

impeachment, any other persons not identified above. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Interrogatory No. 7: Describe with specificity all of the facts which you anticipate presenting in 

the course of the hearing in this matter pertaining to the avoidance or 

mitigation of the sanction sought by the FAA in this case. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Objection is made to Interrogatory No. 7 to the extent that it seeks privileged and confidential 

information which is protected by the attorney-client privilege and attorney work-product 

doctrine. To the extent that Interrogatory No. 7 seeks information which is not otherwise 

privileged, objection is made on the grounds that it is premature as the parties are only in the 

pleading and discovery phases of the proceeding and the hearing is still several weeks away. 

Without waiving said objections, the matters alleged in the complaint have been the subject 

of extensive investigation and numerous conversations within SKYWEST's organization, and as 

reflected in the documents produced herein, were also the subject of conversations and 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 17 
communications between SKYWEST and Regional Elite Airline Services. 

SKYWEST intends on presenting the following facts in the course of the hearing in this 

matter pertaining to the avoidance or mitigation of the sanction sought by the FAA in this case: 

1. SKYWEST has taken all necessary corrective actions to avoid repeated mishaps such that 

additional penalties are redundant and will not result in any increase in safety. Specifically, 

2. SKYWEST has: 

a) Counseled all personnel involved in the loading and counting of the bags following each 

of the alleged incidents; 

b) Issued SKYWEST Customer Service Training Bulletin 2010-14, Designated Loading 

Agent Responsibilities, directed at providing additional training in avoiding bag count 

discrepancies; 

c) Issued SKYWEST Customer Service Training Bulletin 2010-04, Aircraft Loading 

Procedures, directed at providing additional training in avoiding bag count discrepancies; 

d) Updated and revised the aircraft loading procedures set forth in its Station Operations 

Manual SP 5500 to specifically address said problems and ensure future compliance; 

e) Implemented initiatives to ensure all stations are physically staffed to allow one agent to 

directly account for the aircraft loading process on each SKYWEST flight, to ensure 

accurate physical baggage counts, cargo weights, and weight and balance communication 

with flight deck crews; 

f) Performed internal evaluations of cargo load reporting and determined that compliance 

had been achieved. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 18 
3. The sanction sought by Complainant is unwarranted by the facts, safety in commerce and 

the public interest and is not only excessive, but, far exceeds policy, precedent and 

Complainant's own Sanction Guidance Table. Further, the sanction is compounded, in violation 

of the Complainant's own Sanction Guidance Table. 

4. The Complainant's case, is unwarranted and without basis or jurisdiction in law or fact. 

5. The average weight programs contemplated by AC120-27E flilly contemplate that the use 

of actual baggage and passenger weights are impractical, and by their very nature, permit some 

discrepancies between what is contained in the load manifest and the actual weight of the 

aircraft. 

6. Any and all discrepancies upon which these actions are based are the product of simple 

human arithmetic error and in no way are indicative of SKYWEST's regulatory compliance 

disposition as all relevant employees were adequately trained and qualified and have since 

received additional training and internal audits have shown adequate compliance levels has been 

reached. 

7. Notwithstanding any discrepancies in the bag counts contained in the CLR's, any weight 

discrepancy was nominal, at best and had absolutely no effect on aircraft weight and balance, 

CG, aircraft performance or aircraft performance computations; 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Interrogatory No. 8: State by name, address, telephone number, date of conversation, and 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 19 
substance of conversation, all persons, other than legal counsel or your 

spouse, with whom you have discussed the matters alleged in the 

Complaint. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

SKYWEST objects to Interrogatory No. 8 on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome, 

serving no other purpose than to inconvenience, or for that matter, bludgeon SKYWEST. 

Moreover, the Interrogatory, as propounded, seeks information that would otherwise be protected 

under the attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine and critical self-examination 

privilege. Without waiving said objection, as SKYWEST's LOI responses clearly indicate, 

SKYWEST, through its management and employees, fully investigated each and every one of 

the alleged discrepancies, verified that all persons involved had been adequately trained, 

counseled such persons and provided remedial training and after engaging in a full deliberative 

process and internal evaluations and audits took other appropriate and responsive corrective 

actions. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Interrogatory No. 9: For any of the requests for admissions below that is denied, state with 

specificity the facts that are the basis for that denial as well as the inquiries 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 20 
taken to determine that the facts in the request for admission are not 

correct. See Request for Production No. 5. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

SKYWEST's Responses to the Requests for Admissions clearly speak for themselves. 

Interrogatory No. 10: Describe with specificity all facts or evidence you intend to rely upon in 

support of any affirmative defenses raised in any Answer to the 

Complaint, to include identifying the specific FAA policy you claim is 

violated by the proposed penalty in these cases. See Request for 

Production No. 3. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Please see SKYWEST's Responses to Interrogatory No 7, which SKYWEST adopts and 

incorporates at is responses to Interrogatory No. 10, as if fully set forth herein. In addition see 

FAA AC 120-27E and FAA Order 2150.3B. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION 

The objections set forth above are hereby incorporated herein in their entirety. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 21 
Notwithstanding these objections, SKYWEST, based on its information and belief, responds to 

the Requests for Production as follows: 

Request for Production No. 1: Provide a copy of all documents referred to in your answer 

to Interrogatory No. 2 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Under separate cover, SKYWEST will provide copies of all documents (other than (i) 

correspondence between SKYWEST and its undersigned counsel which is protected under the 

attorney-client privilege and will not be produced, (ii) SKYWEST's counsel's notes and research 

which is protected under the attorney work-product doctrine and will not be produced and (iii) 

documents which are already in Complainant's care, custody or control, and/or which have been 

originated by Complainant). See SKYWEST's Production of Documents attached hereto. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Finally, SKYWEST reserves the right to utilize at hearing any document not identified in 

these Objections and Responses to Request for Production for purposes of impeachment. 

Request for Production No. 2: Provide a copy of all documents referred to in your answer 

to Interrogatory No. 4. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 22 
/ > 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Please see SKYWEST's Response to Request for Production No. 1 above, which 

SKYWEST adopts and incorporates as if fully set forth herein as its Response to Request for 

Production No. 2. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Request for Production No. 3: Provide a copy of all documents that support your answer 

to Interrogatory No. 10. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Please see SKYWEST's Response to Request for Production No. 1 above, which 

SKYWEST adopts and incorporates as if fully set forth herein as its Response to Request for 

Production No. 3. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Request for Production No. 4: Provide a copy of all documents that support your answer 

to Interrogatory No. 9. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 23 
Please see SKYWEST's Response to Request for Producfion No. 1 above, which 

SKYWEST adopts and incorporates as if fully set forth herein as its Response to Request for 

Production No. 4. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

Request for Production No. 5: Provide a copy of all exhibits that you intend to offer or 

will use during the hearing on this matter. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Please see SKYWEST's Response to Request for Production No. 1 above, which 

SKYWEST adopts and incorporates as if fully set forth herein as its Response to Request for 

Production No. 5. 

Investigation and discovery are ongoing and continuing, and SKYWEST reserves the 

right to amend and/or supplement these responses up through the date of hearing. 

REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 

The objections set forth above are hereby incorporated herein in their entirety. 

Notwithstanding these objections, SKYWEST, based on its information and belief, responds to 

the Requests for Admissions as follows: 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 24 
Request for Admission No. 1: Admit that, for the 12-month period ending September 2010, 

SkyWest Airlines had operating revenues in excess of $100 

million, as shown by the Airline Quarterly Financial Review (3'^'' 

Quarter 2010) published by the Department of Transportation, 

Office of Aviafion Analysis, Competition and Policy Analysis 

Division. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit 

Request for Admission No. 2: Admit that, as of December 31, 2010, SkyWest Airlines employs 

more than 1,500 employees, as shown by SkyWest Airlines' 2010 

Annual Report. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit 

Request for Admission No. 3:Admit that SkyWest Airlines has the financial ability to pay the 

$33,000 requested civil penalty in FAA Case No. 2011NM060033, 

FDMS No. FAA-2011-0779. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 25 
SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit 

Request for Admission No. 4:Admit that SkyWest Airlines was assessed a $24,000 civil penalty 

on March 2, 2011 in FAA Case No. 2010NM060106 for violations 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R.) §§ 119.5(g), 

119.5(1), 121.693(a), 121.693(c), and 121.693(d), involving 

improperly documented baggage loading on two aircraft in 

September 2010. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit that the FAA original proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $90,000, and 

SKYWEST settled the matter, paying a civil penalty of $24,000 

Request for Admission No. 5:Admit that SkyWest Airlines was assessed a $144,000 civil penalty 

on March 2, 2011 in FAA Case Nos. 2010NM060068 & 

2010NM060076 for violafions of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 C.F.R.) §§ 119.5(g), 119.5(1), 121.693(a), 121.693(c), and 

121.693(d), involving improperly documented baggage loading on 

five aircraft in April and May, 2010. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 26 
SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit that the FAA originally proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $220,000, and 

SKYWEST settled the matter, paying a civil penalty of $144,000. 

Request for Admission No. 6:Admit that SkyWest Airlines was assessed a $45,000 civil penalty 

on March 2, 2011 in FAA Case Nos. 2010NM060020 & 

2009NM060124 for violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 C.F.R.) §§ 119.5(g), 119.5(1), 121.693(a) and 121.693(c), 

involving improperly documented baggage loading on five aircraft 

between August and November 2009. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit that SKYWEST ultimately paid a civil penalty in the amount of $45,000. 

Request for Admission No. 7: Admit that SkyWest Airlines was assessed a $10,000 civil penalty 

on February 16, 2011 in FAA Case No. 2010NM060100 for 

violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R.) §§ 

119.5(g), 119.5(1), 121.693(a), 121.693(c), and 121.693(d), 

involving improperly documented cargo loading on one aircraft in 

August, 2010. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 27 
rs 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit that the FAA originally proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $20,000, and 

SKYWEST settled the matter, paying a civil penalty of $10,000. 

Request for Admission No. 8:Admit that SkyWest Airlines was assessed a $10,000 civil penalty 

on September 28, 2009 in FAA Case No. 2009NM060050 for 

violations of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R.) §§ 

119.5(g), 119.5(1), 121.693(a), and 121.693(c), involving 

improperly documented baggage loading on one aircraft on March 

17,2009. 

SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit that the FAA originally proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $12,000, and 

SKYWEST settled the matter, paying a civil penalty of $10,000. 

Request for Admission No. 9: Admit that SkyWest Airlines was assessed a $ 10,000 civil 

penalty on September 28, 2009 in FAA Case No. 

2009NM060023 for violafion of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 C.F.R.) § 119.5(g), involving improperly 

documented baggage loading on three aircraft in December, 

2008. 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 28 
SKYWEST's Response: 

Admit that the FAA originally proposed a civil penalty in the amount of $17,500, and 

SKYWEST settled the matter, paying a civil penalty of $10,000. 

ith DATED this 11"" day of October, 2011. 

Co-Counsel for SkyWest Airlines 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 29 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 11* day of October, 2011, a true and correct 

copy of the foregoing SKYWEST'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT'S INITIAL 

DISCOVERY REQUEST was served as follows: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor 

Room El2-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

{Federal Express} 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

{Federal Express} 

Jeffrey M. Harper 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057 

FAX (425) 227-1007 

SG 

{Ftxcstifnle and Federal Express} 

SUA I d^ • ^Jc ^ 

Sheri L. Becker 

FAA Case No. 2011NM06003 

SkyWest's Objections and Responses to Complainant's Discovery 

Page 30