:FOLEY 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

ATTN: FAA Part 16 Docket Clerk 

AGC-600 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

9-A WA-AGC-Part-16@faa.gov 

September 16, 2014 

AITORNEYS AT LAW 

111 HUNTINGTON AVENUE 

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02199 

617.342.4000 TEL 

617.342.4001 FAX 

WWW.FOLEY.COM 

WRITER'S DIRECT LINE 

617.342.4033 

dbannard@foley.com EMAIL 

CLIENT/MAITER NUMBER 

103341-0104 

Re: Skydive Myrtle Beach, Inc. v. Harry County Dep 't of Airports 

FAA Docket No. 16-14-05 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

We represent Respondent Horry County Department of Airports ("HCDA") in the 

above-referenced action. A copy of this letter is also being served on counsel for Complainant 

Skydive Myrtle Beach, Inc. ("SDMB"). 

We are in receipt of a document entitled "Complainant's Statement of Material 

Facts," which SDMB electronically filed on September 8, 2014. The rules promulgated at 14 CFR 

Part 16 ("Part 16 Rules") do not identify or provide for the filing of such a "Statement." We are 

therefore uncertain whether and how to respond, and through this letter seek the FAA's guidance in 

absence of a rule on the subject. 

If the aforementioned "Complainant's Statement of Material Facts" is an Answer to 

HCDA's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to 14 CFR § 16.26(b)(3), then it was filed over a week late, 

and should not be considered. SDMB filed its Part 16 Complaint electronically on July 1, 2014, and 

therefore waived its right to service by any method other than email. 14 CFR § 16.13(h)(4). HCDA 

filed and served its Motion to Dismiss electronically on August 22, 2014. SDMB's Answer was 

therefore due on September 2, 2014. 14 CFR §§ 16.26(b)(3); 16.17(b). No further response from 

HCDA would be necessary. 

Ifthe "Complainant's Statement of Material Facts" is not an Answer pursuant to 14 

CFR § 16.26(b)(3), then it is an unauthorized filing and, for that reason, should not be considered. 

See 14 CFR § 16.19(a) (providing that"[a]n application for an order or ruling not otherwise 

specifically provided for in this part shall be by motion"). No further response from HCDA would 

be necessary. 

BOSTON 

BRUSSELS 

CHICAGO 

DETROIT 

JACKSONVILLE 

LOS ANGELES 

MADISON 

MIAMI 

MILWAUKEE 

NEW YORK 

ORLANDO 

SACRAM ENTO 

SAN DIEGO 

SAN FRANCISCO 

SHANGHAI 

SILICON VALLEY 

TALLAHASSEE 

TAMPA 

TOKYO 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

4833-4970-7294.2 
:FOLEY 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

September 16, 2014 

Page 2 

If the "Complainant's Statement ofMaterial Facts" is intended to be an entirely new 

Part 16 Complaint, HCDA would be entitled to a response under the Part 16 Rules. 

In light of the uncertainty caused by the filing of "Complainant's Statement of 

Material Facts," we respectfully request guidance on how the FAA will treat the document so that 

we can determine whether a response is necessary or allowed under the Part 16 Rules. Thank you in 

advance for your cooperation. 

cc: Robert G. Eastman, Esq., Attorney for SDMB 

Patricia Apone, Director of Airports 

Jason Terreri, Assistant Director of Airports 

Arrigo Carotti, Esq., County Attorney 

H. Randolph Haldi, Esq., Deputy County Attorney 

Jeffrey R. Blease, Esq. 

Jaclyn V. Piltch, Esq. 

4833-4970-7294.2 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing letter regarding "Complainant's 

Statement of Material Facts" on the following persons at the following email addresses, by 

electronic mail in accordance with 14 CFR Part 16 § 16.13(h): 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

ATTN: FAA Part 16 Docket Clerk 

AGC-600 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

9-AWA-AGC-Part-16@faa.gov 

Dated: September 16, 2014 

4823-8331-4974.1 

Counsel for Skydive Myrtle Beach, Inc. 

Robert G. Eastman, Esq. 

Eastman & Associates, LLC 

P.O. Box. 180 

Charleston, SC 29402 

robertgeastman@msn.com 

David Y. Banna?t, Esq.