U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Personal Delivery April15,2014 Federal AviationAdministration 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 Re: Jett Pro Line Maintenance, FAA CaseNo. 2011WP910076 Dear Sir or Madam: ?)
- '\ "J._

' 

### ' 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591 

# RECEIVED APR 1 5 2014 

## HEARING DOCKET

Enclosed please find an executed original and one copy ofthe Second Amended complaint inthe above-referenced case.

Killingham rcement Division, AGC-300 Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Telephone: (202) 267-7728 Facsimile: (202) 267-5106 EnclosureU.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

# RECEIVED APR 1 5 2014 

## HEARING DOCKET Inthe Matter ofJett Pro Line Maintenance ) ) ) FAA Case No.2011WP910076



## ______________) 

# ,;) 13· ID Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

# lSECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT The Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") by counsel, hereby files its Second Amended Complaint, pursuantto Rules 208 and 214(b) ofthe Rules ofPractice (14 C.F.R. § 13.208 and 14 C.F.R. § 13. 214(b)), and states as follows: I. On September 7, 2011, Respondent was advised by mail through aNotice ofProposed Civil Penaltythatthe FAA proposedto assess a civil penalty inthe amount of$107,600. OnJanuary 27, 2014, Respondent requested a hearing. l.I. 1. Jett Pro Line Maintenance ("Jett Pro") is, and at all times mentionedherein was, the holder ofAir Agency Certificate No.YUJR093Y, with Repair Station privilege issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 145.

2. On or about September 24, 2004, Jett Pro opted to include paragraph A449 inits part 145 operations specifications, which required Jett Pro to comply withthe requirements of 14 C.F.R. part 120, and 49 C.F.R. 

### § 40, for its antidrug and alcohol misuse prevention program.

13. With regard to employee Randol Velasquez:
a. Onor about March 31, 2009, Jett Pro hired Mr. Velasquezto perform maintenance and preventive maintenance duties. b. Mr. Velasquez, a Senior Line Technician, performed aircraft maintenance and preventive maintenance duties on parts and/or components installed on aircraft used in operations conductedunder 14 C.F.R. part 121.
c. A records check conductedby Jett Pro directed to Certified Aviation Services revealedthat on or about September 19,2008,Mr. Velasquez's random drug testresults were verified positive for the presence ofdrugs. d. On or aboutMay 23, 2009, June 11, 2009, and June 18, 2009, while still employed by Certified Aviation Services, Mr. Velasquez had appointments with a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP). The SAP recommended that Mr. Velasquez receive six follow-up drug tests withintwelve months following returnto duty in accordance withthe following schedule: July, 2009 August, 2009 September, 2009 November, 2009 December, 2009 January, 2010
e. On or about June 29, 2009, Mr. Velasquez was administered a return-to-duty test that was verified negative on July l, 2009.

2f. On or about July 25,2009, Mr. Velasquez was administered a drug test, marked
as random onthe MRO report, designated "1st test", and verifiednegative on July 28, 2009. g. On or about December 3, 2009, Mr. Velasquez was administered a drug test, marked as random onthe MRO report, designated "Employee test #2", and verified negative on December 7, 2009. h. Jett Pro failed to direct a collection under direct observation ofMr. Velasquez for the above referenced second follow-up test. i. On or about December 28, 2009, Mr. Velasquez was administered a drug test marked as random onthe MRO report, designated "RTS Random #3", and verified negative on December 30,2009. 

### j. Jett Pro failed to direct a collection under direct observation ofMr. Velasquez duringthe above-referenced third follow-up test. k. On or about November 29, 2010, Mr. Velasquez was administered a follow-up drug test, designated 'Test#4", and verified negative on Decemher 1, 2010. 

### I. Onor about December 7, 2010, Mr. Velasquez was administered a follow-up drug test, designated "#5", and verifiednegative onDecember 10, 2010.
m. Onor about December 20,2010, Mr. Velasquez was administered a follow-up drug test, designated "#6", and verified negative onDecember 22, 20I0.
n. Contrary to the SAP'stesting plan, on or about August, 25, 2009, Mr. Velasquez was administered an alcohol follow-up test, designated "1sttest Alcohol Test".

3

### o. Contrary to the SAP's follow-up testing plan on or about November 29, 2010, December 7, 2010, and December 20,2010, Mr. Velasquez was administered follow-up drug tests-allbeyondthe first twelve months afterbeing returned to duty. p. Consequently, contrary to 49 C.F.R. § 40.307(d), the number and frequency of Mr.Velasquez's follow-up testing did not comply with the drug-testing schedule determined by Jett Pro's "SAP" or Certified Aviation Services' SAP, and did not consist ofat least six tests in the first twelve months following Mr. Velasquez's return to duty. q. On or about May 8, 2009, Mr. 

### Velasquez performed a safety-sensitive function in that he performed maintenance on civil aircraft N625CA, an aircraft operated by ComAir, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under Part 119 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) and appropriate operations specifications, issued under Part 135 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. parts 119 and 135).
r. On or about November 9, 2010, Mr. Velasquez performed a safety-sensitive function in that he performed maintenance on the AFT Portable 02 Bottle for civil aircraft N642RW, an aircraft operated by Shuttle America, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under Part 119 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) and appropriate operations specifications, issued under Part 121 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. parts 119 and 121). s. On or about January 18, 2011, Mr. 

### Velasquez performed a safety-sensitive fimction in that he performed maintenance on the internal cabin WIFI system removed and replaced on civil aircraft N347NW, an aircraft operated by Delta Air Lines, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under Part 119 of the Federal

4

### Aviation Regulations (FAR) and appropriate operations specifications, issued under Part 121 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. parts 119 and 121). t. On or about January 19, 2011, Mr. Velasquez performed a safety-sensitive function in that he performed maintenance on the internal cabin WIFI system on civil aircraft N126AT, an aircraft operated by AirTran Airways, Inc., an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under Part 119 ofthe FAR and appropriate operations specifications, issued under Part 121 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. parts 119 and 121).
4. With regard to employee Paul Downey:
a. On or about February 24, 2010, Jett Pro hired Mr. Downeyto perform maintenance and preventive maintenance duties. b. Mr. 

### Downey, a Senior Line Technician, performed maintenance and preventive maintenance duties onparts and/or components installed on aircraft used in operations conducted under 14 C.F.R. part 121.
c. Prior to employment by Jett Pro, Mr. 

### Downey was employed by USA Jet Airlines, Inc, holder ofAir Agency CertificateNo. Y2PR154Y, dba Active Aero Services. ("Active Aero"). d. USAJet Airlines is an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued underpart 119 ofthe FAR and appropriate operations specifications, issued underparts 121 and 135 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. parts 119, 121, and 135).



### 5e. A records check conducted by Jett Pro directed to USAJet Airlines revealed that on or about May 8, 2008, Mr. Downey's random drugtestresults were verified positive for the presence ofdrugs. f. On or about May 12, 2008, while still employed byUSAJetAirlines, Mr. Downey completed his initial SAP substance abuse assessment. The SAP's recommendation required follow-up drug and alcohol tests twice each month for six months, followed by a drug and an alcohol test each month for 18 months, followed by a drug and an alcohol test each quarter for the following 24 months. g. Mr. Downey completed five ofthe six months oftwice-monthlytesting for drugs and alcohol recommendedbythe SAP before USAJet Airlines terminated his employment onAugust II, 2009. h. Priorto his termination at Active Aero, Mr. Downey completed five ofthe eighteen once-monthly drug and alcohol tests recommended by the SAP. i. Atthe time Jett Pro hired Mr. Downey, Mr. Downey was still requiredto compete thirteen drug and alcohol tests administered eachmonth and eight drug and alcohol tests administered each quarter in accordance with the SAP's testing plan. 

### j. JettPro failed to complete the follow-up testing planrecommended by the SAP after Jett Pro hiredMr. Downey. k. Jett Pro did not begin administering to Mr. Downey follow-up drug and alcohol testing until August 5, 2010, five months after Jettpro hired Mr. Downey. 

### I. On or about March 12, 20I0, Mr. Downeyperformed a safety-sensitive function inthat he performed maintenance on civil aircraft N625CA, an aircraft operatedby Comair, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under part 119 ofthe

6FAR and appropriate operations specifications, issued under part 121 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.F. parts 119 and 121).
m. Contraryto the SAP'stesting plan, Mr. Downey was not administered drug and alcohol follow-up testing inMarch, 2010, April, 2010, May, 2010, June, 2010, or July, 2010.
n. Contrary to the SAP'stesting plan, during the time Mr. Downing was required to be administered monthly follow-up drug and alcohol tests, twice during the same month (September 14, 2010, and September 28, 2010), Mr. Downing was administered follow-up drug and alcohol tests. o. Contrary to the SAP'stestingplan, Jett Pro failed to administerto Mr. Downing follow-up drug and alcohol tests inNovember, 2010. p. Mr. Downing was administered a follow-up drug and alcohol test onDecember 13, 2010. q. All ofthe follow-up tests identified inparagraphs 4k, 4n, and 4p above were initiatedbyMr. Downey and notbyJett Pro. r. Onor about October 20, 2010, Mr. Downeyperformed safety-sensitive functions when he performedmaintenance on civil aircraftN601AW, an aircraft operated by US Airways, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under part 119 ofthe FAR and appropriate operations specifications, issued under part 121 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. parts 119 and 121).
s. On or aboutDecember 15, 1010, Mr. Downeyperformed safety-sensitive functions whenhe performed maintenance on civil aircraft N562RP, an aircraft operated by ChautauquaAirlines, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued

7underpart 119 ofthe FAR and appropriate operations specifications, issued under part 121 oftheFAR(14C.F.R.parts 119and 121). t. On or about January 18, 20II, Mr. Downeyperformed safety-sensitive functions whenhe performed maintenance on civil aircraftN592AA, an aircraft operated byAmerican Airlines, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under part 119 ofthe FARand appropriate operations specifications, issued under part 121 of the FAR (14 C.F.R. Parts 119 and 121).

5. Withregardto employee Sean Ponce:
a. On or about AprilS, 2010, SeanPonce was administered aNon-DOT preemployment test and Jett Pro received a verifiednegative result. b. On or about April 6, 2010, 

### lett Pro hired Mr. Ponce to performthe safetysensitive duties ofa Senior Line Maintenance Technician.
c. Atthe time Jett Pro hired Mr. Ponce, Jett Pro hadnot conducted a DOTpreemploymenttest onMr. Ponce. d. Atthe time Jett Pro hired Mr. Ponce, Jett Pro hadnotreceived a DOTpreemployment verified negative drug test result for Mr. Ponce.
e. On or about April12, 2010, Mr. Ponce performed a safety-sensitive function in thathe performed maintenance on a civil aircraft identified as AircraftNo. 4631, an aircraft operated by United Airlines, an air carrier with an air carrier operating certificate issued under Part 119 ofthe FAR and appropriate operations specifications, issued under Part 121 ofthe FAR (14 C.F.R. Parts 119 and 135.)

8f. On or about Aprill2, 2010, Mr. Ponce was administered a DOT preemployment testthat was verified negative on Aprill3, 2010.

6. With regard to employee Wilson Guerrero:
a. On or about October 7, 2009, Mr. Guerrero, an aircraft maintenance technician,
was added to Jett Pro's random pool and available to perform safety-sensitive functions. b. Pursuant to 49 C.F.R. 

### § 40.25(j), Jett Pro did not ask Mr.Guerrero whether he hadreceived a verified positive on a pre-employment testfor a DOT employer that did nothire him.
c. On or about September 8, 2009, Mr. Guerrero completed a consent form permittingU.S. Airways Express, his former employer, to release to Jett Pro confidential drug/alcohol testing information as part ofa record check. d. The above-referenced form included Mr. Guerrero's response to the question requiredby49 C.F.R. §40.25(j), asking ifherefused to test on any pre-employment drug
or alcohol test administeredby an employer to whichthe employee applied for, but did not obtain, safety-sensitive transportation work covered by DOT agency drug and alcohol testing rules during the past two years. e. Jett Pro released the above-referenced form with the referenced medical information identified inparagraph 6d above to U.S. Airways Express without Mr. Guerrero's specific written consent.

97. Withregard to employee John Freuler:
a. Mr. Freulerhandled support equipment and ground service equipment usedto
access aircraft and support aircraft repair and was not a covered employee subjectto drug and alcohol testing in accordance with 14 C.F.R §§ 120.105 and 120.215. b. On or about January 6, 2011, Mr. Freuler was added to Jett Pro's random drug and alcohol pool.

8. Withregardto employee Charles Hass:
a. Mr. Haas washedthe exterior surfaces ofcommercial aircraft with water and
was not a covered employee subject to drug and alcohol testing in accordance with 14 C.F.R §§ 120.105 and 120.215. b. On or about January 6, 2011, Mr. Haas was added to Jett Pro's random drug and alcohol pool.

9. Byreason ofthe foregoing, Jett Pro violatedthe following Federal Aviation Regulations:
a. 14 C.F.R. 

### § 120.5 in that it failed to comply with49 C.F.R. 

### §40.309(a), when Jett Pro failed to carry outthe SAP's follow-up testing requirements. Moreover, Jett Pro allowedtwo employees to continue to perform safety-sensitive functions when follow-up testing had not been conducted as directedbythe SAP.

10b. 14 C.P.R. § 120.109(a)(l) inthat Jett Pro hired an individual for a safetysensitive function listed in 14. C.P.R. §120.105 when Jett Pro had notfirst conducted a pre-employment test and received a verified negative drug test result for that individual.

c. 14 C.P.R. §120.5, in thatit failed to comply with 49 C.P.R. §40.25(j), whenJett Pro failed to conductDOT-regulated pre-employment drug and alcohol records checks on all employees by not asking an employee whether he had testedpositive, orrefused to test, on anypre-employment drug or alcohol test administered by an employer to which the employee applied for, but didnot obtain, safety-sensitive transportation work covered by DOT agency drug and alcoholtesting rules during the past two years. d. 14 C.P.R.§ 120.5 in that it failed to comply with 49 C.P.R.§ 40.347(b)(2), when Jett Pro allowed employees not covered by DOT agencyregulations to bepart of the same random pool with DOT covered employees.

e. 14 C.P.R. 

### § 120.5 inthat it failed to comply with 49 C.P.R.§ 40.321, when Jett Pro released individualtest results ormedical information about an employee to third parties without the employee's specific written consent. f. 14 C.P.R. 

### § 120.5 in that it failed to complywith 49 C.P.R.§ 40.67(b), when JettPro failed to direct a collectionunder direct observation ofan employee whenthe drug test was a return-to-dutytest or a follow-up test.

11III. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 4630l(a)(l)(A) 1 , Jett Pro is subjectto a civil penaltynotto exceed $25,000 for eachviolation ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations. By reason ofthe foregoing facts and circumstances, the FAA finds that a civil penalty in the amount of$ I07,600 is appropriate for the allegations set forth inthis Complaint.
WHEREFORE, the Agency, by counsel, respectfullyrequests that the Administrative LawJudge enter an order that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty inthe amount of $107,600.
Dated this 15'h day ofApril, 2014.

Peter J. Lynch Assistant ChiefCounsel for,ce ent B 

## 1 tu n Killingham

nforcement Division Office ofthe ChiefCounsel (202) 267-7728
PLEASE NOTE: Pursuant to Title 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.209(a), you are requiredto file a written answer to this Complaint, or a written Motionto Dismiss ifappropriate, not later than thirty (30) days after the date shown onthe Certificate ofService which follows.

1The Complainant stated in error in the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty (NPCP) and the Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty (FNPCP) that the amount ofthe proposed civil penalty was authorized in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 4630l(a)(5)(A). 12CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify thatthe foregoing Second Amended Complaint, inthe Matter ofJett Pro Line Maintenance, FAA Case No. 2011WP910076, has beenmailedthis date via overnight mail, to: John Craig Weller, Esq. Aerlex Law Group 2800 28'h Street Santa Monica, CA. 90405 Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 The original and a copy was also personally delivered to: Hearing Docket (Original and I copy) Federal AviationAdministration 600 Independence Avenue, S.W. Room 2Wl000-AGC-430 Washington, DC 20591



# 9rui""**~** April 15, 20 4

13U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration 

### Personal Delivery Aprill5, 2014 Honorable Richard C. 

### Goodwin Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, D.C. 20590 Re: Jett Pro Line Maintenance, FAA CaseNo. 2011WP910076 DearJudge Goodwin: 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20591



### Enclosedplease find one copy ofthe Second Amended complaint in the above-referenced case. Also, it appears from the certificate ofservice ofthe Amended Complaintthat your office did not receive a copy ofthat document. A copy is enclosed herein. Re ectfully, 

# //J ngham

# ~Division, AGC-300 Office ofthe ChiefCounsel Telephone: (202) 267-7728 Facsimile: (202) 267-5106 Enclosures