To: Pag., 2 of 7

0 

### 5l 2 '5 a.{/}::1': ...J**-~** ....J iU'g 0**~** ro d ... n :I:roro u"-> <nlllw r z r--&,..; 0**~** ro 0::: _:x: 

### g ><-o>**O~m** u.;:ro o-' :r; 0 0 

### "' M 2014--05-1:2 17:4-1:03 EDT Fox Rothschllel LLP From: H<Onsen, Theresa IVL

MARK

### J. CONNOT (10010) 

### FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP 2 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 500 Las Vegas, NV 

### 89!69 3 

### Telephone: 702.262.6899 Facsimile: 702.597.5503 4 mconnot@foxrothschild.com 

### S Atwrneys forRespondent GREAT WESTERNAIR, LLC 6 

### 7 8 

### 9 U.S. IJEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OFHEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.



### 10 11 

### 12 13 14 15 

### 16 17 18 In

### the Matterof GREAT WESTERN AIR, LLC, FAA Case No. : 20!3WP9101239 DMS No. : FAA-2014-0114 ChiefAdministrative LawJudge Richard C. 

### Goodwin

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT



### GREAT WESTERN AIR, LLC by and through FOX ROTHSCHILD, LLP, its' attorneys, hereby answers the FAA Complaint, 

### as follows: I 

### 19 20 Answering Section I 

### of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent admits each and every allegation contained therein, except that part which states that Respondent submitted its request 21 for hearing on April3, 2013. Therequest for hearing was submitted on April3, 2014.

23 

### 1. Answering Section II, 

### sub-paragraph 1 of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent 24 admits that it is the holder ofAir Carrier CertificateNo. N2UA274Lbut states thatthe remainder 25 ofthe allegations in this paragraph are not allegations offact but rather are conclusions oflaw, 26 and do not require an admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. 27 

### 28 Pagel of6T<>" Page 3 of' 7 2014-05-12 17:41 '03 EDT Fox Rothschild LLF' FrotTl: Hansen, There.,.., !VI.

2. Answering Section II, sub-paragraph 2 of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent 

### 2 stateR that the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations offact bm rather are conclusions 3 oflaw, and do notrequire 

### an admission ordenial, but

### are otherwise denied. 4 

### 3. Answe1ing Section 

### IJ, sub-paragraph 3a, Respondent admits that Mr. Campbell 5 was hired by Great Westem on November 19, 2012, but states that the remainder of the 6 allegations in this paragraph are not allegations offact but rather are conclusions oflaw, and do 7 notrequire an admission ordenial, butareotherwise denied. Asto sub-paragraphs 3b through 3e, 8 Respondent admits each and every allegation contained therein. As to sub-paragraphs 3f(l) 

### 9 through 

### (9), Respondent admits that Mr. Campbell was present on flights operated by Great 10 Western onthe dates set forth inthose allegations, but states that the remainder ofthe allegations 1 1 

### 12 13 14 15 

### 16 17 in this paragraph are not allegations ofltlCt but rather are conclusions oflaw, and do not require

an admissionordenial, but are otherwise denied. 

### 4. Answering Section 

### II, sub-paragraph 

### 4a, Respondent admits 

### that Mr. Ford was hired by Great Westem on March l, 2013, but states that the remainder ofthe aliegations in this paragraph are not allegations of fact b.ut rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. As to sub-paragraphs 4b through 4d, Respondent admits each and every allegation contained therein. As to sub-paragraph 4e(l) through (8), 18 Respondent admits that Mr. Ford was present on flights operated by Great Westem on the dates 19 set fmih in those allegations, but statesthat the remainderofthe allegations in this paragraph are 20 not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions oflaw, and do not require an admission or 21 denial, butare otherwise denied. 

### 22 5. Answering Section 

### II, sub-paragraph 5a, Respondent admits that Mr. 

### Blake was 23 hired by Great Western on March 1, 2013, but states that the remainder ofthe allegations in this 24 paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an 25 admission or denial, but arc otherwise denied. As to sub-paragraphs Sb through Sd, Respondent 26 admits each and every allegation contained therein. As to sub-paragraphs 5e(l) through (6), 27 Respondent admitsthat Mr. Blake waspresent onflights operated by Great Western onthe dates 28 set fo1ih in those allegations, but states that the remainder ofthe allegations in this paragraph are Page 

### 2 of6To: P.,.ge 4- of 7 2014--05-12 17:4-1:03 E:O"DT

not allegations of fact but rather lu-e e-ondusions of lmN, and do nOt require an admission or 

### 2 denial, but are othe1wisedenied. 3 

### 6. Answering Section II, sub-paragraph 6a, Respondent admits that Ms. Rindon was 4 hired by Great Western on April 16, 2013, but states that the remainder ofthe allegations in this 

### 5 paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an 

### 6 admission or denial, but are otherwise

..denied. As to sub-paragraphs 6b through c, Respondent 7 admits each and every allegation contained therein. As to sub-paragraphs 6d(l) through (4), 8 Respondent admits that Ms. Rindon was present on J:1ights opemted by Great Western on the 9 dates set f01ih in those allegations, but states that the remainder of the allegations in this 10 paragraph are not allegations offact but rather are conclusions oflaw, and do not require an 11 l2 13 14 15 

### 16 17 admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. 7. Answering Section ll, s'1b-paragraph 7a, Respondent admits that Mr. Walker was hired by Great Western on June 27, 2013, but states that the remainder ofthe allegations in this paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an admission or denial, butare otherwise denied. Asto sub-paragraphs 7b through 7c, Respondent admits each and every allegation contained 

### therein. As to sub-paragraph 7d, Respondent admits that Mr. Walker was present on a ilight operated by Great Western on July 

### 1, 2013, but states 18 that the remainder ofthe allegations in this paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are 19 conclusions oflaw, anddo not requirean admission ordenial, butare otherwise denied. 20 8. Answering Section 

### 11, sub-paragraph Sa through 

### 8c of the FAA's Complaint, 21 Respondentadmits each andevery allegationcontained therein. 

### 22 9. Answering Section ll, sub-paragraph 9 (a through b) of the FAA's Complaint, 23 Respondent deniesthe allegations contained therein. 24 10. Answering Section

### II, sub-paragraph 

### 1 Oa, Respondent admits that

### Mr. Duvai! was 25 hired by Great Western on July I, 2013, but states that the remainder ofthe allegations in this 26 paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an 27 admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. As to sub-paragraphs 1Ob through 1Od, 28 Respondent admits each and every allegation contained therein. As to sub-paragraph IOe, Page 3 of6To; F'"lge 5 of 7 .:2014-05-12 17:41:03 EDT Fo"' RothschOid LLP From: Hansen, Theres"' IV!

.

Respondent states that the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations of

### tact but rather 

### are 2 conclus.ions oflaw, and do not require**~n** admission ordenial, but are otherwise denied. 3 

### Ill. 4 

### l. Answering Section 

### III, sub-paragraph la through 

### 1 of the FAA's Complaint, 

### 5 Respondent states that the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations offact but rather are 6 conclusions oflaw, and do notrequire an admission ordenial, but are otherwise denied. 7 

### 2. Answering Section lll, sub-para!o,'Taph 2 of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent 

### 8 Respondent states that the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations 

### offact but rather are 9 conclusions oflaw, and do notrequire an admission or denial, butare oll1erwise denied. 10 3. Answering Section lll, Sllb-paragraph 3, of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent II denies each and every allegation containedtherein. 

### 12 AFJ!lRMATIVEDEFENSES 13 

### FIRST AF.FIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 Respondent has operated for several years and has alwaysbeen in compliance with FAA 15 requirements. 

### 16 SECONDAFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 Respondent retained 

### a drug testing company to perform required random drug testing. 18 That company assured Respondent that 

### a program was in place that was compliant with all FAA 19 requirements. Consequently, all perso11I1el and management 

### at Respondent operated under the 20 assumption that 

### a program tor random drug testing was in place. Moreover, pilots hired by 21 Respondent are verified as drug-free through a pre-employment screening p1ior to pilots 22 pertorming any safety sensitive functions. Further, even during the subject timeframe, some 23 employees ofRespondent continuedto.be called infor random drug testing. 24 

### THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25 As a consequence ofall ofthe above, Respondent logically and reasonably believed it 26 was operating in accordance with all FAA requirements. 27 Ill 28 II I Page 4 of62014--05-1 Z 17:41:03 EDT



### FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 As soon as Respondent became aware that there was an issue with the drug testing 3 company itretained, Resp(mdent took immediate steps to resolve the situation. 4 

### FIFTH AFI<'IRMATIVE DEFENSE 

### 5 Thetotal taxable income 

### for Respondent 

### in 2012 was $46,176. 

### The proposed penalty of 

### 6 $35,925 goes far beyond any reasonable penalty to deter the alleged conduct and rather may 

### 7 result in a crippling blowto Respondent. 

### 8 SIXTHA.FFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 Any penalty wouldviolate due process and beanundue burden on Respondent. 

### 10 ]] 

### 12 13 

### 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

### 25 26 27 28 WHEREFORE,Defendantprays

### for relief

### as follows: 

### l. That 

### the FAA take nothing by virtue of its Complaint and that the same be dismissed

### with prejudice; and 

### 2. For 

### such otherand

### further reliefas maybedeemedjust and proper. Dated this

# \~ day 

### of

### May, 2014. FOXROTHSCHILD LLP

# jfg~~-·-··· MARK

### 1. CONNOT(10010) 3800

..H.oward Hughes Parkway, Suite 500 LasVegas, NV 89169 Telephone: 702.262.6899 Facsimile: 702.597.5503 

### Attorneys for Respondent GREAT WESTERNAIR, LLC

Page 5 of6To Page 7 of 7



### .1 2 

### 3 4 5 6 7 

### 8 9 10

0 11 0 

### "'**~·** 

### 12 

## "m "-(/)"' ...J**~** .....**_J~~** 13**0"'~** :::!'1-op**"'~"** ()Q.> 

### 14 

### <n"'" :z:"'"' 1-"'

- 0**gq~** 

### IS 0:: J:**~** ><-o>**o~,** 

### 16 u.**~**

J:: 0 17 0 

## "' M 

### 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2014-0$-1 2 17:41 :03 EDT Fox Rothschllcl LLP From; Hansen, Theres"' M.



### CERTIFICATEOF SERVICE 

### I hereby certify that the foregoing ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

### has been served via facsimile and Certified Mail- Return ReceiptRequestedthis date, to thefollowing

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. DepartmentofTransportation 1200NcwJcrseyAve, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-5121 (StaffAssistant) Facsimile: (202) 366-7536 

### Administrative LawJudge

Jeffrey M. Harper DanaStephenson Office ofRegional Counsel (ANM-7) Federal AviationAdministration 1601 Lind Ave, S.W

. Renton, W 

### A 98057 Telephone: (425) 227-2161 Facsimile: (425) 227

### -I007 

### Complainant's Counsel Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Federal Aviation Administration Wilbur WrightBuilding -Suite2Wl000 800 Independence Ave, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Facsimile: (202) 493-5142

Dated

# this/~#day ofMay; 2014.

Page 6 

### of6