Q 

OEI-ARTMENTOF 

iHA.NSPOflTATION 

^JOGKET OPERATIONS 

U.S. Department 

of Transportolion 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

HAND DELIVERY 

September 29, 2011 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building^Suite 2W1000 

Washington, D.C. 2059! 

AT'l^N: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Office of Ihe Chief Counsel7[]H nPT .1 O p 800,lr>dependence Avenue, S.V/. 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 ' ' ~ r ^ Wasiiingtori, D.C. 20591 

Rb.w^ 

SEP 2 9 2011 

HEARING DOCKET 

RB: Liberty Flying Service, Inc., FAA Docket No. Unassigned, Case No. 2009SO950490 

FP,A5~Ol5l- f^^ft'(^''^C>3o4-

DcarSir: Ft:>ifv>s .^-Dii-ioO^ 

Enclosed are the original and one copy of the Complaint in the matter referenced above. 

Complainant expects the hearing in this case to last one (1) day and is amenable to Respondent's 

suggested hearing location of Charleston, West Virginia. Please direct all correspondence to the 

undersigned counsel at the address below. 

Sincerely, 

Nicholas R. Milliard 

Attorney 

lEnforcement Division, AGC-300 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Telephone: (202) 267-3452 

Facsimile: (202) 267-5106 

cole.milliard@faa.gov 

Enclosures: Complaint; Respondent's Request for Hearing 

Cc: Robert Spcra (Respondent) 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

) 

In the matter of ) FAA Docket No. Unassigned 

) Case No. 2009SO950490 

LIBERTY FLYING SERVICE, INC. ) Law Judge Unassigned 

) 

: ) 

COMPLAINT 

Complainant, the Federal Aviation Administration, hereby files its Complaint pursuant to 

Rule 13.208 ofthe Rules ofPractice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 14C.F.R. § 13.208, and 

states as follows: 

I, 

1. Liberty Flying Service, Inc. ("Liberty" or "Respondent") was advised by a Notice 

of Proposed Civil Penalty dated July 28, 2010, and by a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty 

dated August 18, 2011, that the FAA proposed to assess Liberty a civil penally in the amount of 

$5,400.00. 

2. By a letter dated September I, 2011, Respondent requested a hearing. 

3. The Enforcement Division ofthe FAA Office ofthe Chief Counsel received 

Respondent's written request for a hearing via U.S. First-Class Mail on September 8, 2011. 

II. 

1. Liberty is now, and at all times mentioned in this document was, the holder of a 

Letter of Authorization issued by the FAA, authorizing Liberty to conduct commercial tour 

operations under 14 C.F.R § 91.147, effective July 31, 2007. 
2. At alltimcs mentioned in this document, a person who performed, directly or by 

contract, aircraft maintenance and preventative maintenance duties for an employer, as defined in 

14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section II (now codified at 14 C.F.R. § I20.7(i))/ was 

performing a safety-sensitive function under 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section III.E and 

Appendix J, Section II.A.5 (now codified at 14 C.F.R. §§ 120.105(e) and 120.215(a)(5)). 

3. At all times mentioned in this document, a person who perfomied, directly or by 

contract, aircraft maintenance and preventative maintenance duties for an employer, as defined in 

14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section II (now codified at 14 C.F.R. § 120.7(i)), was a "covered 

employee" pursuant to 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section II (now codified at 14 C.F.R. §§ 

120.7(0). 

4. At all times mentioned in this document, 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section 

III (now codified at 14 C.F.R. § 120.105), required that an employee who perfomis aircraft 

maintenance or preventive maintenance, directly or by contract, for Liberty on its authorized 

aircraft be subject to drug testing under an antidrug program implemented in accordance with 

said appendix (now codified at 14 C.F.R. part 120, subpart E). 

5. At all times mentioned in this document, 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix J, Section 

II (now codified at 14 C.F.R. § 120.215), required that an employee who perfomis aircraft 

maintenance or preventive maintenance, directly or by contract, for Liberty on its authorized 

aircraft, be subject to alcohol testing under an alcohol misuse prevention program implemented 

in accordance with said appendix (now codified at 14 C.F.R. part 120, subpart F). 

Effective July 13, 2009, ihc FAA's drug and aicoliol regulations in 14 C.F.R. part 121, appendices I and J were 

recodified wiili no subsianlive changes at 14 C.F.R. pari 120, subparts E and F, respectively. See Final Rule, 74 

Feci. Reg. 22.649 (May 14,2009). The references herein are to 14 C.F.R. part 121, appendices 1 and J as they were 

in effect at the time ofthe alleged violations, but references to H C.F.R. part 120 arc included for convenience. 
6. At all times mentioned in this document, 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section 

V:B.6.(a)(2) (now codified at 14 C.F.R. § 120.109(b)(6)(B)), required that all safety-sensitive 

employees must be included in Liberty's random drug testing pool. 

7. At all times mentioned in this document, 14 C.F.R. pai1 121, Appendix J, Section 

III.C.6.(a)(2) (now codified at 14C.F.R. § 120.217(c)(6)(B)), required that all safety-sensitive 

employees must be included in Liberty's random alcohol testing pool. 

8. Complainant's inspection of Liberty revealed the following: 

a. James Jackson performed aircraft maintenance or preventive maintenance 

duties for Liberty on its authorized aircraft, bearing Aircraft Registration number 

N75640, on the following dates: 

i. August 27, 2007; 

ii. November 6, 2007; 

iii. February 19,2007; 

iv. May 28, 2008; 

V. October 6, 2008; 

vi. March 17,2009; 

vii. May 6, 2009; 

viii. May 22, 2009; 

ix. June 1, 2009; and 

X. Junes, 2009. 

b. Liberty did not include Mr. Jackson in its ratidom drug testing pool until 

June 15.2009. 
c. Liberty did not include Mr. Jackson in its random alcohol testing pool 

until June 15,2009. 

d. Liberty did not include all safety-sensitive employees in its random drug 

testing pool, as required by 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendix I, Section V.B.6.(a)(2) (now 

codified at 14 C.F.R. § 120.109(b)(6)(B)). 

e. Liberty did not include all safety-sensitive employees in its random 

alcohol testing pool, as required by 14 CT.R. part 121, Appendix J, Section III.C.6.(a)(2) 

(now codified at 14 C.F.R. § 120.217(c)(6)(B)). 

III. 

1. By reason ofthe foregoing, Liberty violated the following Federal Aviation 

Regulations: 

a. 14 C.F.R. § 91.147(d), in that Liberty failed to test all individuals who 

performed safety-sensitive functions, directly or by contract, for drug and alcohol misuse 

in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 121, Appendices I and J (now codified at 14 C.F.R. 

part 120, subparts E and F). 

b. 14 C.F.R. § 91.147(c), in that Liberty failed to comply with the provisions 

of its Letter of Authorization. 

2. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46301(a)(5)(A), Liberty is subject to a civil penalty not to 

exceed $11,000 for each violation ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations. 

3. Under the facts and circumstances of this case and in accordance with FAA Order 

2150.3B, Appendix B, a civil penalty in the amount of $5,400.00 is appropriate for the violations 

in this case. 
4. Complainant is amenable to Respondent's suggestion that the hearing in this 

matter be held in Charleston, West Virginia. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Nicholas R. Milliard 

Attorney 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

Office ofthe Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Telephone: (202) 267-3452 

Facsimile: (202)267-5106 

cole.inilliard@faa.gov 

Date: September 29, 201 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I delivered by hand the original and one copy ofthe foregoing 

Complaint in In ihc Matter ofLiberiy Flying Service, Inc. FAA Docket No. Unassigned, Case 

No. 2009SO950490, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

In addition, I hereby certify that I sent a copy ofthe aforementioned Complaint by 

U.S. Certified Mail, return receipt requested, addressed to: 

Mr. Robert Spera 

President 

Liberty Flying Service, Inc. 

Lonesome Pine Airport 

6225 Airport Road 

Wise, VA 24293 

Name: fipi^iA <j^A?>^ 

Date; ^Vg-fve^rM^ I j . IT)] 
y^M*yd^t,tfj^iirtf^VJt'*^w^Tr-^ 

y 

X 

September 1,2011 

Fcdfcral Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Dear Hearing Docket Clerk: 

Bv this letter I am requesting a hearing before an administrative law judge. I have 

rc^el^ed a "FINT L NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY" from the FAA 

(case No. 2009SO950490). 

I request that the hearing take place at the Flight Standards District Office, 

Charleston, WV. The majority of witness that I will call to testify are FAA 

Inspectors at the Charleston FSDO. 

I am available for a hearing after October 31, 2011. 

Sincerely, 

/OF 

Robert J.'^pera, Principal 

Liberty Flying Service, Inc. 

cc: Nicholas R. Milliard 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

Larrj' L. Lagana, Manager 

Flight Standards District Office -AE A FSDO-09