.;. DMS 141 001/004 02/03/2010 16:22 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

. t~~sP''''-~VEn UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAtrrVC i~, t:: ~', .' ~ OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. JAN 2 7 2011 

HEARB\JG DOCKET 

IN THE MATTER OF 

EVERGREEN HELICOPTERS OF ALASKA, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP09ALOOIO I

(Civil Penalty Action) \..,;.) 

DMS NO, FAA-2009·084I 

COMPLAINANT'S RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S SECOND SET 017' 

INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION 

The Complainant, though counsel, provides the following in response to Respondent's 

second discovery request served on December 14, 2009: 

Request No, 1: No. 

Request No, 2: The Complainant does contend that Respondent's HNVOO approved 

training program for in-house training required at least five flights of no less than one hour per , , - , ; 

flight ofnight vision' goggJe trai:rling while employing night vision goggles, for pilots Brabham 

and Peabody, This contention is based on page ,2·1 from Night V iSLon Goggle Training Program 

Document No. ASU~2004~5, which includes the following: 

"2. Flight training: For personne1 who have not been previously trained and 

qualified in NVG flight, a minimum of 5 flights, no less that 1 hour per flight, of 

NVG flight training, employing night vision goggles. with the' pilot receiving 

instruction at a duty station with access to the flight controls ;to include I flight 

for NVG flight check with the pilot at a duty station with a(;~ss to the flight 

controls. " 

The initial approval ofthis training program requires the use ofthis document. Further. tor each 

ofthe eight pilots trained by Mr. Poss under this program, the flight training included at least 

five flights of no less that one hour per flight. Copies ofthese documents are enclosed. 
~ OMS ~ 002/004 02/03/2010 1B:22 FAX 2024935142 FAA 

Request No.3: The Complainant contends that the flight referenced in paragra.ph 11.11 

of the complaint was a helicopter night vision goggle operation. This contention is bas,~d on the 

fact the power switches on both sets ofnight vision goggles recovered after the crash were ill the 

"on" position, and on the fact it was hasically pitch black in the area where the cra.sh occurred. 

Because the flight was over water, there were no surface reference lights available for the pilot to 

establish a horizon and fly unaided. Thus, the only way this VPR flight could have continued 

without violating § 135.207 ofthe Federal Aviation Regulations was with the aid ofnigb.t vision 

goggles. Supporting documents are enclosed. 

Request NO.4: The Complainant intends to call as witnesses Aviation Safety Inspectors 

(ASls) Donald Duncan, William S. Schweizer, and Roy Redifer. ASJ Duncan investigated the 

case. He will identify the documents he gathered, explain his calculations regarding light at the 

time ofthe flight. relate statements made, and explain his conclusions regarding the violations in 

this case. AS! Schweizer ultimately approved the HNVGO training program proposed by 

Respondent. He will testify concerning that process and specifically identify the requirements of 

the program he identified. ASI Redifer was tasked with reviewing and photographing some of 

the wreckage. He will identify hi~ photographs and testify as to what he observed. 

Request No.5: Copies of aU such statements in the possession ofComplainant have 

previously been provided. 

Request No.6: At the lime Respondent trained pilots Brabham and Peabody in Allgust 

2007, the most recent revision to Respondent's training manual was Revision 12, which 

incorporated the night vision goggle training. The only copy of the training manual Complainant 

has been able to locate incorporates all revisions through Revision 17. The copy of the training 

manual produced by Respondent in its discovery response dated December 14,2009, 

2 

~ OMS 003/004

02/03/2010 1B:22 FAX 2024935142 FAA

incorporates allrevislons through Revision 14. Hence, Respondent already has the version of the 

training manual most responsive to this request. The approved training program also included 

documents entitled "FAR Part 135 NVG Training Manual, Night Vision Goggle Training 

Program Document No. ASU-2004-5," and "FAR Part 135 Additional Personnel NVG Training 

Manual, NVG Additional Personnel Training Program Document No. ASU 2004-5A." Copies 

of these documents are enclosed. 

Request No.7: All such documents havc previously been produced. 

Submitted this 13th day ofJanuary 2010. 

HOWARD L MARTIN, JR 

Regional Counsel 

wr, 0 By:~~ 

dlenn H. Brown 

Senior Attorney 

3 

+ OMS 	 141 004/004

02/03/2010 18:22 FAX 2024935142 FAA

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

Re: 	 Evergreen Helicopters of Alaska, Tnc. 

FAA Case No. 2008AL030019 

FAA Docket No. CP09ALOOIO 

I hereby certify that on this date I served a copy of the COMPLAINANT'S RESPONSE TO 

RESPONDENT'S SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR 

PRODUCTION by hand-delivery Lo: 

Marc O. Wilhelm, Esq. 


Richmond & Quinn 


360 K Street, SuiLe 200 


Anchorage, AK 99501 


I further certify that on this date I havc served the original ofthe COMPLAINANT'S 

RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S DISCOVERY REQUESTS (without attachments) by 

postage-prepaid, certified mail, return recelpt requested, addressed as follows: 

Hearing Docket 


Federal Aviation Administration 


Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 


800 Independence Avenue. SW 


Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2WlOOO 


Washington, DC 20591 


fLt. L ~c2C'/O Date .. 

Anchorage. Alaska 99513·7587 

01lice of the Regional Counsel 

FAA Alaskan Region 

222 West 7th Avenue #14 

4