08/28/2012 17:23 FAX 2024935142 FAA + 

### OMs· @001/013



### ..**··~··D;\qTI'·~~~qn** 

## OF )• , 1 ,I ,I I'-'
_ ,

### l\ ·

### ~·

## ...**·..,\\j~}~O~JA \_I~~J.** **,~,UNITED** STATES OF AMERICA 

# RECEI\IED

..)
..**J£1 Jh:Ht\fi~EPARTMENT**  OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OFHEARINGS "0 

## A 0

## 1:00 

## AUG 2

## 72012 

# HEARING DOCKET**z-~** 

# .- WASHINGTON,D.C. INTHE MATTER 

### OF, LEADING EDGE AVIATION, INC., 

### Respondeat. ) 

### ) ) ) 

### ) ) 

### No. FAA Case No. 

### 2011 NM 070089 

### DMS No.: 

### Not Assigned Judge Not

### Assigned Respondenfs suggested location for 

### hearing: Chicago, 

### Illinois

NOV! COMES Leadin,e Edge Avi2 .J.,
....1c. ("Leading Edge"), by and through its 

### counsel, and 

### answers the Federal 

### Aviation**Adminis~ration** ("FAA") Complair;t as

### follows:

On June 27, 2012, LeadingEdge Aviation, Inc. (T
.....eading Edge), was advised through a 

### Final Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of$33,000.· 

### On July 12,2012, 

### Leading Edge, through legal 

### counsel. submitted a written request for hearing. ANSWER: Denied that Leading Edge received a Final Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty on June 27, 2012. Admit that Leading Edge received a Final Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty 

### on June 29, 2012 and that Leading Edge, 

### through legal counsel, timely submitted a written 

### request for hearing onJuly 12, 2011. Leading Edge denies that anypenalty should be assessed against 

### it.

1. Leading Edge js now and was at all times 

### material hereto the holder of 

### Air·Agency Certificate No. L9QR350Y, and conducts its operations pursuant to Part 145 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations. 

### ANSWER: 

### Admit.**186J28l\r\22816\4n~z**OB/28/2012 17:23 FAX 2024835142 FA fl. + OMS 141002/013

2. LeadingEdgeholds a limited Airframe 

### rating. ANSWER: Admit.



### 3. Leading

### Edge has 

### a combined Repair Station & Quality 

### ManuaL ANSWER: Admit.

4. Leading Edge is only authorized to perform work on airlrames listed on its Capability I.ist. · ANSWER: Admit only that Leading Edge is authorized to work on airframes in accordance 

### with the intent of its 

### Capability List, 

### tak1ng into consideration typographical errors on 

### tl).e Capability List

### that have since 

### been corrected 

### in conformation 

### with FAA requirements. Leading Edge 

### denies the remaining 

### allegations.

5. On February 17, 2011, 

### Bell 206L·l**aircr~ft** 

### were not listed 

### on Leading Edge's Capability List. ANSWER: Admit only thafLeading Edge's Capability List contained a typographical error .such that Bell 206L-1 was not stated and that

# at all times Leading Edge was allowed to 

### perform work on Bell 206L-1 aircraft. The remainder of these allegations are denied. 

### Further answering. Leading Edge's Capability List contained a typographical error, which mistakenly listed Bell 206 AlB series, rather than simply Bell 206 series. Leading Edge discussed this tYPographical 

### error with 

### Tanya Glines, FAA Aviation Safety Inspector. Inspector Glines recommended that Leading Edge contact its PMT about the issue. Leading Edge followed Inspector Glines' recommendation and corrected the typographical error atthe direction of/to the satisfaction of FAA P:Ml Curt Cowley. 

### Further answering, no additional housing,**facilities~ equipment~**  materials, dat2., knowledge, or experience are needed for the Bell 206 series versus the Hell 206AlB series.

6. Paragraph 8.11 of Leading .Edge•s Repair Station & Quality Manual states "Annual 

### inspections will be performed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and will not

### be less than required by 14 Code ofFederal Regulations 

### (C.F.R) Part 43." -2- 18632111\I\22816\4925208/28/2012 17:23 FAX 2024935142 FAA -> OMS ll!003/0 13

ANSWER: Adm1t only that Section 8 "QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM" contains subsection 8.11 which inclucles the quoted language in paragraph 6, but is not limited to the quoted language. Leading Edge denies theremaining allegations.

7. Paragraph 8.12 ofLeading Edge's Repair Station 

### & Quality Manual states "Before the repair station**g~nerates** an approval for return to service, an appropriately qualified person... shall perform a fmal inspection
... The 

### tinal inspection will include an audit of the article and the Shop Order to determine whether
... Any discrepancies in work and/or records are appropriately dispositioned. ANSWER: Admit only that Section 8 "QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM" contains subsection 8.11 which includes the quoted language in paragraph 7, but is not limited to the quoted language. Leading Edge denies the remainine allegations.

8. Civil aircraft NS758H, a Bell 206L-1, is maintained in accordance 

### with an inspection programrecommendedbythe manufacturer. · ANSWER: Leading Edge lacks sutlicient knowledge to admit or deny the allegations in this paragraph anddemands strictproofthereof.

9. The manufacturer's inspection program requires a 100 hour inspection to "be accomplished each 100 hours offlight time and each 12 calendarmonth." ANSWER: Assuming the FAA is referring to manufacturer Bell Helicopter's inspection program, Leading Edge admits that Bell requires a 100 hour inspection to be accomplished each 1

00 hours offlight time and each 12 calendar month. Leading Edge denies that the FAA has provided any citation for its quote. 1

0. On or about February 17, 2011, Leading Edge performed a 100 hour aidrame and 150 hour engine inspection on N5758Il in accordance with the manufacturer's recommended inspection program. ANSWER: The allegations in paragraph 10 do not contain the names ofthe manufacturer's ofthe airframe or the engine. but assuming.the FAA is referring to airframe manufacturer Bell Helicopter and engine manufacturer Rolls Royce, these allegations are admitted. Ifthe FAA is



### - 3- I!163281\1\221116\4925208/28/2012 17:24 FAX 2024835142 FAA "' OMS**~** 004/013

referring to other manufactl.lrers, Leading Edge lacks suflicientknowledge to admit ordeny these allegations as it is unknown which "manufacturer"the 

### FAA is refe1ring to inparagraph 

### 10. 11. The manufacturer's 

### 1 00·bout inspectionrequires the following action:
a. ''Inspect forward cowling 

### for condition and attachment
... b. "
...Inspect all control .tubes, links, rod end bearings, bellcranks, supports, and. 

### attaching bolts for corrosion, wear, or mechanical damage, and 

### for security of attachment.
__ c. .....Inspect transmission moWlts for obvious damage, bushings for wear, 

### a:nd for security ofattachment. Inspect pylon support 

### assembly to ensure tha:t all bolts 

### ate installed 

### in the correct location. Check torque on head ofholts only (bolt must not rotate). 

### Ifa bolt 

### !s loose, remove nut. Install new nut 

### and torque 

### 75 to 

### 95 inch-pounds._. 

### d. '"
.. .Inspect main driveshaft as follows:
___ a For 

### 20611 and 206Ll Engine Upgrade helicopters, inspect for visual damage and couplings for grease leakage. Check driveshaft for freedom and smoothness of axial movement Inspect bolts for security
... e. " Inspect 

### t1rewall for cracks. distortion, 

### and missing rivets 

### and hardware
... 

### f. "
...Check aft fuselage structure for condition, damage, cracks and working rivets
... Open access door

### in overhead baggage compartment... g. "
...

### CAUTION- ANY 

### CRACK, CORROSION, OR 

### LOOSE OR SHEARED RIVET IS 

### CAUSE FOR 

### IMMEDTATE GROUNDING 

### OF THE HELICOPTER UNTIL 

### THE PROBLEM IS CORRECTED
...Open access door on the right side of aft fuselage and inspect the four tailboom attachment fittings on fuselage aft bulkhead and tailboom attachment fittings and bolts, and to fasteners between the intercostal. Particular attention must be given to inspection of the upper left 

### fitting
... h. ••...Inspect elevators and auxiliary fans for conditions and security of attachment
... i. "
...Check segmented driveshafts and Thomas couplings for condition and security. Torque check Thomas coupling retention bolts/nuts and apply torque seal... J- " •••Start the helicopter and conduct grotmd run at 

### tOO% NR to ensure all systems are operational and parameJ.eTs are withir1 Flight Manual Limitations."

•4- 18()3Z81\1122816\492S'208/28/2012 17:24 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS 141005/013

ANSWER: In 

### answer:ir1g this paragraph and**~ubparagraphs** (a) through (j), Leading .Edge admits only that manufacturer inspection requirements speak for themselves. Leading Edge lacks sufficient knowledge to admit or deny these allegations as the "manufacturer" is not identified 

### by the 

### .FAA in the allegations and the 

### FAA has failed to provide 

### any citation to 

### any manufacturer documentcontainingthe alleged quotations reflected inparagraphs (a) through 

### G). 12. Leading Edge returned N5758H to service on February 17, 2011, certifying that 

### N5758H had been inspected in accordance with 

### a 100 hour inspection, and referred to work order

### SV-10-3988 for additjonal details. · ANSWER; Admit. 13. Work order SV-10-3988 lists as a discrepancy "A/C leak." 

### ANSWER: Admit onlythat work order SV-10-3988 includes under the section "Work Scope Description or Discrepancy", in item #16, "A/C leak". Leading Edge denies any remaining allegations inthis paragraph and demands strictproofthereof. 14. Work order SV-10-3988 lists the corrective action for the A/C leak as "Unable to service due to ambient airtemperature." 

### ANSWER: Admit only that work order SV -10-3988 states, inpart, "unable to service due to low ambient temperature" under the heading ''Item Work Scope/Specific Description of Work Performed". All remaining allegations inthis paragraph are denied. 15. N5758H was subsequently operated for 38.3 hours. 

### ANSWER: Leading Edge lacks, sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the allegations in this paragraph and demands strict proofthereof. 16. OnJuly 7, 2011, the following discrepancies were noted in the logbook for N5758H:
a. "
...Left cowl access panel latch does not engage to the airframe plate retainer. Plate retainer**ha.~** worn through
... b. "
...Bolt on 

### R/H cyclic control tube at transmission beH crank improperly installed
...•• and
.....Cotter pin on Tail rotor control tube 10 bellcrank. hydraulic



### . 5- 1!163281\1122816\4925208/28/2012 17:24 FAX 2024835142 FAA -> OMS 

### Ia! 008/013

suppon area cabin roof panel, installed 

### with head down and not bent over for retention
... c. "
...Incorrectly installed transmission restraint, (206-033-506). Bolt (NAS6606H60) is a drillec.t boltthat used a lockingnut (MS21042L6) and a cotter pin (MS24665-73). Too many washers were installed under the nut. The cotter point 

### hold ofthe 

### bolt is under the self-locking nut. Suggest 

### the bolt is scrapped for possible elongation 

### inthe area ofa drill hole
... 

### d. "
...Main Drive 

### Shaft found previous installation 

### using incorrect hardware buildup, 

### washers 

### found under head of

### the bolts 

### and shou.ld 

### be under 

### each nut... 

### e. " Engine forward 

### tlrewall has cracks in the pocket, providing clearance to the 

### bleed valve, and broken spot welds between the pocket and the 

### firewall resulting 

### in diminished fire protection betwee.n the engine and the transmission compartments... 

### f. ''
...Tailboom/fuselage access panel installed with incorrect hardware, many screws 

### were too longand 

### bottoming on

### nutplates
... g. "
...Tailboom inspected, the attachmeitt fittings have a number ofworking rivets 

### in upper 

### RH, lower

### LH and lower

### RH fittings
... h. "
...L./H vertica.l fin damage. bent inward at the 

### top believed from the roll-over 

### onto left side, Aug. 2000
... 1. " ••.Tail Rotor Drive 

### Shaft, 

### two bolts 

### too short (no exposed Threads) at 

### au condition 

### compressor drive pulley. J. ·"
...Customer reports low rotor tpm 

## and engme out audible warnings are crossed
..." ANSWER: As the 

### allegations as 

### asserted do not ask Leading Edge to admit or deny the accuracy ofthe purported "discrepancies" in the aircraft's log 

### book and only alleges 

### that certain 

### log book entries exist, that were not created 

### by Leading Edge, in answering this paragraph and subparagraphs (a) through (j), Leading 

### Edge answers that the existence of

### any log book entries speak for themselves and that**J~eading** Edge lacks sutlicicntknowledge t() admit or deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph. Further answering, Leading Edge denies the characterization ofthe 

### purported log 

### book:**entri~s** ao; 

### '"discrepancies". 17. N5758H was 

### not returned to service on Jtily 7, 2010, as the above discrepancies rendered it

### unairworthy. -6- 1863281\I \221! 16\4')25208/28/2012 17:24 FAX 2024935142 FAA**~** OM.S**~007/013**



### ANSWER: Denied. 

### ill 1. By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, Leading Edge violated the following sections ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.P.R.);
a. Section 43.13(a), in that it 

### performed maintenance on an aircraft, engine, propeller or appliance without using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the current manufacturer's maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness preparedby its manufacturer. b. Section 43.13(b). in that 

### it**p~rformed** 

### maintenance on an aircraft, and failed to perform the maintenance in a manner such that the condition ofthe aircraft was at least equal to its original orpropedy altered condition.
c. Section 43.15(a)(1). in 

### that 

### it performed an inspection required under 

### Part 91 and failed to petform it so 

### as to determine whether the aircraft, or portion thereof under inspection, met all ap..,!ica1

### )le airworthiness requirements. d. Section 145.201(c)(l), in 

### tl-..at 

### !: approved for return to service an article when the maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alteration was not performed in accordance 

### with the applicable approved technical data or acceptable to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
e. Section 145.207(a), inthat 

### it failed to follow its approved repair station manuaL f. Section 14S.2ll(b), in tha::. it 

### failed to follow its quality control system when performing maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations under its repair stationcertificate. g. Se:r.:tion 145.215(a), 

### i:n. that it, as a certificated repair station with a limited rating, performed maintenance, preventative maintenance, or .alterations on an article which was 

### not listed on its current capability list orits operations specifications. ANSWER: Leading Edge denies this paragraph and subparagraphs (a) through (g).

2. In accordance with Sections 4630l(a) and (d) of Title 49 ofthe United States Code (U.S.C.) (Transportation) [49 U.S.C. Sections 46301(a) and (d)]. Leading Edge is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed**$27~500** 

### for each ofthe violations noted 

### ANSWER: Denied.

3. Under the facts and circumstances ofthis case, a civil penalty of$33,000 is appropriate. ANSWER: Denied.

18632g1 \I\22816\49252 

### AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES



### . 7-08/28/2012 17:24 FAX 2024835142 FAA + OMS**~** 008/013

NOW COMES Leading Edge Aviation, 

### Inc_ ("Leading Edge''), by and through its COWlsel, and asserts the follo'wi.ng affirmative defenses to the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA'') 

### Complaint as foJiows: 

### AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE #1 1. Priorto LeadingEdge 

### completing the 100 

### hour inspection ofN5758H 

### o.r;t or about February 11, 2011, the FAA had completed a Part 135 confonnity inspection of N5758H. Moreover, several repair stations ·completed inspections of and repairs to the aircraft before LeadingEdgecompleted its 100hourins1"lectio:1 onor about February II,201 L 

### 2. Because N5758H was investigated 

### by the FAA, repaired 

### by various repair 

### stations. and approved for 

### 135 operations

### ~y**t~le** FAA, Leading Edge reasonably 

### believed that 

### a hidden damage inspection ofN5758H was unnecessary, and Bell Helicopter's guidelines do not require 

### ahidden damage inspection, at the time 

### Leading Edge performed its 100 hour inspection ofthe aircraft, that was completed oraboutFebruary 11, 20ll. 3. On infonnation and belief, in July 11, 2011, another repair station, Helicopter Services of Utah, allegedly performed a hidden damage inspection of the aircraft and noted various issues with the aircraftthat

### the FAAis relying upon in this Complaint. 

### 4_ The 

### FAA is wrongfully seeking certain violations 

### and penalties against Leading Edge for alleged discrepancies raised by a competing repair station that only could have potentiaUy be discovered in a hidden damage inspection ofN5758H, which was not 

### required at the time 

### Leading Edgeperformed its 100hourinspection inFebruary 2011. 

### 5. The FAA is also wrongfully seeking 

### certain violations and penalties. against Leading Edge tbr alleged discrepancies that do not 

### exist

I363281\J\22816\49252 

### -8----------------------------------------------,-------- 08/28/2012 17:25 FAX 2024935142 FAA**~** OMS 141 009/013

6. The FAA is also wrongfully seeking certain violations and penalties against Leading Edge for alleged discrepancies for workthat

## was not perfonned, and**wa_~** notrequired to be performed, byLeading Edge. AFFIRMATiiVE DEFENSF. 

### #2 1. Leading Edge relied upon work performed by others, including 

### Part 145 certificate**holder~,** including·their.retumto service ofN5758H. 

### AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

### N-3 1. Leading Edge self-reported issues related to the issues referenced in paragraphs 16( c) and (d) and therefore should enjoy immunity with respecttothoseissues. AFFIRM 

### I..

### TIVR DEFENSE #4 1. The FAAhas failed to state a cause ofaction. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE#S I. Leading Edge was authorized to perfoJm work on Bell 206L-l aircraft. Leading Edge's Capability List contained a typographicel error, which mistakenly listed Bell 206 

### AlB series, rather than simply Be'I 206 series. Leading Edge discussed this typographical error with Tanya Glines, FAA Aviation Safefl; Inspector. Inspector Glines recommended that Leading I Edge contact its PMl aboutthe issue. Leading Edge followed Inspector Glines' recommendation and corrected the typographical error at the direction of/ to the satisfaction of FAA PMI Curt Cowley. Further answering, no ad.ditional housing, facilities, equipment, materials, data, knowledge, or experience are needed for the Bell 206 series versus the Bell 206 AlB series. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE#6



### -9- I!1632111\I\22816\4?,25208/28/2012 17:25 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS**~010/013**

1. An 

### air conditioning leak is not required to be repaired jn connection with a 100 hour inspection by manufacturer BeH Helicopter and has no bearing on the airworthiness ofthe 

### aircraft. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE#7 1. 

### The purported "discrepancy" 

### in paragraph 

### 16(a) of

### the Complaint is incorrect because the latch engaged appropriately during Leading Edge's 100 hour inspection when the 

### aircraft was returned to service. AFF!RM:A T1IVE DEFENSE#8 1. Leading Edge did not perform the work referenced in paragraph 16(b) of the Complaint and hadno obligation to inspect this part ofthe aircraft during its 100hour inspection. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE#9 1. Thepurported "discrepancy" inparagraph 16( e) ofthe Complaint was not present when Leading Edgeperformed its**ins~ection.** 

### AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE #10 1. The purported "discrepancy" in paragraph 16(f) ofthe Complaint docs not exist. The screws are nottoo long orbottoming onnutplates. 

### AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE #11 1. The purported '"discrepancy" in paragraph 16(g) ofthe Complaint does not exist. "Working" rivets are notrequired tobe corrected perDell Helicopter's inspection checklist. 

### AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE #12 1. The purported ••discrepancy" in paragraph· I6(h) does not 

### exist The fin damage
was very slight. If the fin damage was caused during an accident that occurred in 2000 as speculated bythe FAA, the damage was visible to the FAA during its conformity inspection and

• 10- 186328 I\I1228 Ifi\49251.08/28/2012 17:25 FAX 2024835142 FAA + OMS 141011/013

inspections by other service providers as discussed in Affirmative Defen5e

### #I. Leadjng Edge did notremove orinstall the fin. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE #13 1. The purported discrepancy 

### in paragraph 16(i) of the Complaint docs not exist. The hardware installation is correct perthe instructions for the STC to allow proper clearance of the compressordrive pulley. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE#14 1. The pUiported discrepancy in paragraph 16(i) docs not exist. The system is operational and was checked during the post 100 hour run up. There is no requirement to verify the frequency ofthe two alerts in the run up checklist. Further, several very experienced pilots have flown the aircraft since Leading Edge's J.OO hour inspection and never noted 

### any abnormalities with the horns.
STATEMENT OFRELIEF SOUGHT Leading Edge requests that this matter be dismissed as Leading Edge has complied with all applicable laws and requirements in

### connect~on with the subject aircraft. Leading Edge has incurred attomey's fees andexpenses associated withthis matter as well as spent significanttime 

### in connection with this matter. Ifthis matter is required to proceed to hearing, Leading Edge respectfully requests that this matter proceed to hearing in Chicago, Illinois as that would signiticantly reduce the attorney's fees and expenses that Leading Edge would have to incur given that Leading Edge's counsel is located in Chicago, Illinois. 

### LEADING EDOE AVIATION, INC.

1&632SI\I\228l6\49252 

### -11-08/28/2012 17:25 FAX 2024835142

Fred C. Begy Carri A. Conlon 

### CIIUHAK & 

### TECSON,**P.C~** 30 S-- WackerDrive Suite 2600 

### Chicago. IL 60606 (312) 444-9300

1863281\1122816\49252 FAA + OMS**~012/013**



### One of

### Its Attorneys

- 12-08/28/2012 17:25 FAX 2024935142 FAA + OMS 141013/013



### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath, certifies that a true and correct copy ofthis Respondent's Answerto Complaint was served upon counsel-of-record as indicated aboveby**dcpositin~** same, properpostage prepaid, in the

### U.S. mailbox located at 30 South WackerDrive, Chicago,.Illinois 

### 60606 at or about 

### 5:00p.m. 

### this 22"d day of

### August, 2012 

### and also sending "ia Federal Express on

### this**22n~** day 

### ofAugust, 2012.



# s
Notary

### Public Federal AviationAdministration 

### 800 Independence Avenue 

### SW Washington, D.C. 

### 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket**Cieri::~** 

### AGC-430 WilburWright Building- Suite 2Wl000 Jeffrey M. Harper, FAA Attorney 

### Dana Stephenson, 

### FAA Attorney FAA Office ofRegional Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

### 1601 Lind Ave. 

### SW Renton, W A 

### 98057

# ~~n~t~,-------

re me 

### on this 22nd day of

### August, 2012.

Mycommission expires:**~~~~~.-:::~,........::~~~~~o-:::::FF:::-::Ic~rAL~SEA** __ L
__ _ OENISEGORE Nobiry Public •State of Illinois My Commission Expires Nov 12,2013



### -13- !863281\1 1221116\49257.