To: Pag.

, 2 of 7 2014--05-1:2 17:4-1:03 E D T 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 for Respondent
GREAT WESTERN AIR, LLC
6

7 U.S. IJEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

8 OFFICE OF HEARINGS
WASHINGTON, D.C.
9
In the Matter of FAA Case No. : 20!3WP9101239
10 DMS No. : FAA-2014-0114
GREAT WESTERN AIR, LLC,
0 11 Chief Administrative Law Judge
5l Richard C. Goodwin
2
'5 12
a.{/}::1':
...J -~
....J iU'g 13 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
0 ~ ro
d ... n
:I:roro
u"-> 14
<nlllw
r z
r--&,..;
0 ~ ro 15
0::: _:x: g
><-o>
O~m
u.;:ro
o-' 16 GREAT WESTERN AIR, LLC by and through FOX ROTHSCHILD, LLP, its'
:r;
0
0
17 attorneys, hereby answers the FAA Complaint, as follows:
"'
M

18 I
19 Answering Section I of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent admits each and every
20 allegation contained therein, except that part which states that Respondent submitted its request

21 for hearing on April3, 2013. The request 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 of Air Carrier Certificate No. N2UA274L but states that the remainder
25 of the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law,
26 and do not require an admission or denial, but are otherwise denied.
27
28

Pagel of6
 2 0 1 4 - 0 5 - 1 2 17:41 ' 0 3 E D T Fox Rothschild LLF' FrotTl: Hansen, There.,.., !VI.
T<>" Page 3 of' 7

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

2 stateR that the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations of fact bm rather are conclusions

3 of law, and do not require an admission or denial, 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 of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do

7 not require an admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. As to 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 on the dates set forth in those allegations, but states that the remainder of the allegations
11 in this paragraph are not allegations of ltlCt but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require

12 an admission or denial, but are otherwise denied.

13 4. Answering Section II, sub-paragraph 4a, Respondent admits that Mr. Ford was
14 hired by Great Westem on March l, 2013, but states that the remainder of the aliegations in this
15 paragraph are not allegations of fact b.ut rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an

16 admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. As to sub-paragraphs 4b through 4d, Respondent
17 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 states that the remainder of the allegations in this paragraph are

20 not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an admission or

21 denial, but are 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 of the 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 admits that Mr. Blake was present on flights operated by Great Western on the dates

28 set fo1ih in those allegations, but states that the remainder of the allegations in this paragraph are

Page 2 of6
To: 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 othe1wise denied.

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 of the 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 of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an

11 admission or denial, but are otherwise denied.

l2 7. Answering Section ll, s'1b-paragraph 7 a, Respondent admits that Mr. Walker was
13 hired by Great Western on June 27, 2013, but states that the remainder of the allegations in this
14 paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are conclusions of law, and do not require an

15 admission or denial, but are otherwise denied. As to sub-paragraphs 7b through 7c, Respondent

16 admits each and every allegation contained therein. As to sub-paragraph 7d, Respondent admits
17 that Mr. Walker was present on a ilight operated by Great Western on July 1, 2013, but states

18 that the remainder of the allegations in this paragraph are not allegations of fact but rather are

19 conclusions oflaw, and do not require an admission or denial, but are otherwise denied.
20 8. Answering Section 11, sub-paragraph Sa through 8c of the FAA's Complaint,

21 Respondent admits each and every allegation contained therein.

22 9. Answering Section ll, sub-paragraph 9 (a through b) of the FAA's Complaint,

23 Respondent denies the allegations contained therein.

24 10. Answering Section II, sub-paragraph 1Oa, Respondent admits that Mr. Duvai! was

25 hired by Great Western on July I, 2013, but states that the remainder of the 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 I Oe,

Page 3 of 6
To; F'"lge 5 of 7 .:2014-05-12 1 7 : 4 1 : 0 3 E D T 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 of law, and do not require ~n admission or denial, 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 of fact but rather are

6 conclusions of law, and do not require an admission or denial, 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 of fact but rather are

9 conclusions of law, and do not require an admission or denial, but are oll1erwise denied.
10 3. Answering Section lll, Sllb-paragraph 3, of the FAA's Complaint, Respondent

II denies each and every allegation contained therein.

12 AFJ!lRMATIVEDEFENSES

13 FIRST AF.FIRMATIVE DEFENSE

14 Respondent has operated for several years and has always been in compliance with FAA
15 requirements.

16 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE 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 of Respondent continued to .be called in for random drug testing.

24 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

25 As a consequence of all of the above, Respondent logically and reasonably believed it

26 was operating in accordance with all FAA requirements.
27 Ill

28 II I

Page 4 of6
 2014--05-1 Z 17:41:03 E D T

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2 As soon as Respondent became aware that there was an issue with the drug testing

3 company it retained, Resp(mdent took immediate steps to resolve the situation.

4 FIFTH AFI<'IRMATIVE DEFENSE

5 The total 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 blow to Respondent.

8 SIXTH A.FFIRMA TIVE DEFENSE

9 Any penalty would violate due process and be an undue burden on Respondent.
10
WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for relief as follows:
]]
l. That the FAA take nothing by virtue of its Complaint and that the same be
12
dismissed with prejudice; and
13
2. For such other and further reliefas may be deemed just and proper.
14
15
Dated this \~ day of May, 2014.
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

jfg~~--
16

17
MARK 1. CONNOT(10010)
18 3800..H.oward Hughes Parkway, Suite 500
Las Vegas, NV 89169
19 Telephone: 702.262.6899
Facsimile: 702.597.5503
20
Attorneys for Respondent
21 GREAT WESTERN AIR, LLC
22

23

24

25
26

27

28

Page 5 of6
To Page 7 of 7 2014-0$-1 2 17:41 : 0 3 E D T Fox Rothschllcl LLP From; Hansen, Theres"' M.

.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 I hereby certify that the foregoing ANSWER TO COMPLAINT has been served via
3 facsimile and Certified Mail- Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following
4
The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin
5
Office of Hearings, M-20
6 U.S. DepartmentofTransportation
1200 NcwJcrseyAve, S.E. (Ell-310)
7 Washington, DC 20590
Telephone: (202) 366-5121 (Staff Assistant)
8 Facsimile: (202) 366-7536
9
Administrative Law Judge

10
Jeffrey M. Harper
0
0
11 Dana Stephenson
"'~ Office of Regional Counsel (ANM-7)
"m 12 Federal Aviation Administration
"-(/)"'
...J ~ .....
_J~~ 13 1601 Lind Ave, S.W .
0"'~ Renton, W A 98057
:::!'1-op

"'~"
()Q.>
14 Telephone: (425) 227-2161
<n"'"
:z:"'"'
1-"' - Facsimile: (425) 227 -I 007
0 gq~
0:: J: ~ IS Complainant's Counsel
><-o>
o~,
u. ~ 16
J::
Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430
0
0
17 Federal Aviation Administration
"'
M
Wilbur Wright Building -Suite 2Wl 000
18 800 Independence Ave, S.W.
Washington, DC 20591
19 Facsimile: (202) 493-5142
20
21 Dated this/~# day of May; 2014.

22
23

24
25
26
27
28

Page 6 of6