UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHI NGTON, D. C.
Adopt ed by t he NATI ONAL TRANSPORTATI ON SAFETY BOARD at i t s of f i ce i n Washi ngt on, D. C. on t he 17 t h day of December , 2008
__________________________________ ) ROBERT A. STURGELL, ) Act i ng Admi ni st r at or , ) Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on, ) ) Compl ai nant , ) ) Docket SE- 18404 v. ) ) J ARED KYLE ANGSTADT, ) ) Respondent . ) ) __________________________________)
OPINION AND ORDER
Respondent has appeal ed t he or al i ni t i al deci si on and or der of Chi ef Admi ni st r at i ve Law J udge Wi l l i amE. Fowl er , J r . , i ssued on November 18, 2008. 1 The l aw j udge deni ed r espondent s appeal of t he Admi ni st r at or s emer gency r evocat i on or der , based on
1 A copy of t he i ni t i al deci si on, an excer pt f r omt he hear i ng t r anscr i pt , i s at t ached. 2
r espondent s al l eged i nt ent i onal f al si f i cat i on of t he l oad mani f est f or a f l i ght on Apr i l 18, 2008, on whi ch r espondent ser ved as pi l ot - i n- command ( PI C) . I n par t i cul ar , t he Admi ni st r at or char ged r espondent wi t h vi ol at i ons of 14 C. F. R. 121. 693( a) and ( c) , 2 61. 59( a) ( 2) , 3 91. 13( a) , 4 and 91. 9( a) . 5
We deny r espondent s appeal . On Oct ober 17, 2008, t he Admi ni st r at or i ssued an emer gency or der r evoki ng r espondent s ai r l i ne t r anspor t pi l ot ( ATP) cer t i f i cat e, and st at i ng t hat r espondent l acked t he
2 Sect i on 121. 693( a) and ( c) pr ovi de as f ol l ows: TThe l oad mani f est must cont ai n t he f ol l owi ng i nf or mat i on concer ni ng t he l oadi ng of t he ai r pl ane at t akeof f t i me:
( a) The wei ght of t he ai r cr af t , f uel and oi l , car go and baggage, passenger s and cr ewmember s. * * * * * ( c) The t ot al wei ght comput ed under appr oved pr ocedur es. 3 Sect i on 61. 59( a) ( 2) pr ovi des t hat no per son may make or cause t o be made, [ a] ny f r audul ent or i nt ent i onal l y f al se ent r y i n any l ogbook, r ecor d, or r epor t t hat i s r equi r ed t o be kept , made, or used t o show compl i ance wi t h any r equi r ement f or t he i ssuance or exer ci se of t he pr i vi l eges of any cer t i f i cat e, r at i ng, or aut hor i zat i on under t hi s par t . 4 Sect i on 91. 13( a) st at es t hat , [ n] o per son may oper at e an ai r cr af t i n a car el ess or r eckl ess manner so as t o endanger t he l i f e or pr oper t y of anot her . 5 Sect i on 91. 9( a) pr ovi des t hat , no per son may oper at e a ci vi l ai r cr af t wi t hout compl yi ng wi t h t he oper at i ng l i mi t at i ons speci f i ed i n t he appr oved Ai r pl ane or Rot or cr af t Fl i ght Manual , mar ki ngs, and pl acar ds, or as ot her wi se pr escr i bed by t he cer t i f i cat i ng aut hor i t y of t he count r y of r egi st r y. 3
qual i f i cat i ons necessar y t o hol d an ATP cer t i f i cat e. 6 I n t he or der , t he Admi ni st r at or al l eged t hat r espondent act ed as PI C of a f l i ght on a Saab 340 f r omLaGuar di a Ai r por t , New Yor k, t o I t haca, New Yor k, and t hat t he f l i ght had 35 passenger s. The or der al l eged t hat r espondent f al sel y or f r audul ent l y compl et ed a l oad mani f est f or t he f l i ght i ndi cat i ng t hat f ewer t han 34 adul t s, and one chi l d, and no addi t i onal cr ewmember s wer e on t he ai r cr af t . The Admi ni st r at or s or der al so st at ed t hat t he l oad mani f est f al sel y st at ed t hat t he r unway and cl i mb l i mi t wei ght of t he ai r cr af t was 30, 000 pounds, and t hat t he cr ew adj ust ment , passenger , zer o f uel , r amp, t akeof f , and l andi ng wei ght s wer e l ess t han t he wei ght s comput ed under appr oved pr ocedur es. As a r esul t , t he Admi ni st r at or s or der al l eged t hat r espondent knowi ngl y oper at ed t he ai r cr af t whi l e i t s t ot al wei ght exceeded t he maxi mumwei ght l i mi t at i ons on t he r amp and dur i ng t akeof f , as pr ovi ded i n t he ai r cr af t f l i ght manual . Based on t hese al l egat i ons, t he Admi ni st r at or al l eged t hat r espondent had vi ol at ed t he r egul at i ons descr i bed above, and or der ed r evocat i on of r espondent s ATP cer t i f i cat e. Respondent f i l ed a t i mel y appeal of t he Admi ni st r at or s
6 Thi s case pr oceeds pur suant t o t he Admi ni st r at or s aut hor i t y t o i ssue i mmedi at el y ef f ect i ve or der s under 49 U. S. C. 44709( e) and 46105( c) , and i n accor dance wi t h t he Boar d s Rul es of Pr act i ce gover ni ng emer gency pr oceedi ngs, codi f i ed at 49 C. F. R. 821. 52 821. 57. 4
or der , and t he case pr oceeded t o hear i ng. At t he hear i ng, t he Admi ni st r at or pr ovi ded t he t est i mony of Benj ami n Coat s, who ser ved as f i r st of f i cer on t he Apr i l 18, 2008 f l i ght at i ssue. Mr . Coat s st at ed t hat he of t en f l ew wi t h r espondent , and t hat hi s dut i es i ncl uded pr epar i ng t he l oad mani f est f or t he f l i ght . Tr . at 22- 23. Mr . Coat s acknowl edged t hat he and r espondent di d not have an af f abl e r el at i onshi p, and had di sagr eed on cer t ai n i ssues dur i ng pr evi ous f l i ght s. Tr . at 24- 25, 30, 32- 33, 38. Mr . Coat s st at ed t hat , f or t he Apr i l 18 f l i ght , he f i l l ed out t he l oad mani f est f or mand t ol d r espondent t hat t he ai r cr af t was over wei ght , t o whi ch r espondent r epl i ed t hat he woul d make t r oubl e f or Mr . Coat s wi t h t hei r empl oyer , Col gan Ai r , i f Mr . Coat s t ol d anyone about t he over wei ght ai r cr af t . Tr . at 42. Mr . Coat s st at ed t hat he t hen handed t he l oad mani f est f or mt o r espondent t o compl et e. Tr . at 43. The l aw j udge admi t t ed a copy of t he l oad mani f est f or mi nt o evi dence, and Mr . Coat s t est i f i ed t hat t he f or mbear s r espondent s si gnat ur e, and t hat t he cal cul at i ons on t he f or mi ndi cat e t hat t he ai r cr af t was over wei ght . Tr . at 46- 47; Exh. A- 1. The f or ml i st s t he maxi mum al l owabl e wei ght as 28, 698 pounds, but shows a l i ne t hr ough t he number , and t he number 30, 000 wr i t t en above t he 28, 698 f i gur e. Exh. A- 1. Mr . Coat s s t est i mony i ncl uded an expl anat i on of how he cal cul at ed t he per mi ssi bl e wei ght t o t ot al 28, 698 pounds. Tr . at 75. The l oad mani f est f or mal so i ndi cat es t hat 33 5
adul t s, one chi l d, and one i nf ant wer e on t he ai r cr af t . Exh. A- 1. Mr . Coat s t est i f i ed t hat t hese number s wer e i ncor r ect , because 34 adul t s and no chi l dr en wer e on t he ai r cr af t . Tr . at 81. Mr . Coat s al so st at ed t hat he copi ed t he passenger number s di r ect l y f r omt he f or mt hat t he f l i ght at t endant had gi ven hi m ( Tr . at 49) , and t hat r espondent suggest ed changi ng t he number of chi l dr en on t he f or mso t hat t he f or mdi d not i ndi cat e t hat t he ai r cr af t was over wei ght ( Tr . at 53) . Mr . Coat s t est i f i ed t hat r espondent di d not quest i on t he cal cul at i ons t hat he had i ncl uded on t he f or m. Tr . at 77, 79. Mr . Coat s al so st at ed t hat , even i f t he maxi mumwei ght was 29, 000 pounds, t he ai r cr af t woul d have exceeded t hat wei ght because r espondent had al l owed a passenger , J ef f r ey Wood, t o j oi n t he f l i ght i n t he j umpseat of t he ai r cr af t . Tr . at 79, 98. Mr . Coat s t est i f i ed t hat he r el i ed on t he di spat ch r el ease, t he ai r l i ne s OF- 11E f or m, and t he f l i ght at t endant s f or mt hat cont ai ned t he number of passenger s, when he i nser t ed t he r equi si t e i nf or mat i on i nt o t he l oad mani f est f or m. Tr . at 116- 19. The Admi ni st r at or al so cal l ed J ef f r ey Wood, a pi l ot f or US Ai r ways, t o t est i f y. Mr . Wood st at ed t hat he f r equent l y f l i es t o I t haca f r omLaGuar di a, and t hat he does not r ecal l t he f l i ght at i ssue. Tr . at 170, 173. Mr . Wood st at ed t hat he di d not bel i eve t hat anyone asked hi mt o t ake anot her f l i ght due t o wei ght and bal ance concer ns on t he day i n quest i on. Tr . at 176. 6
I n addi t i on, t he Admi ni st r at or cal l ed Scot t Robi nson, a qual i t y assur ance anal yst at US Ai r ways Expr ess, t o t est i f y. Mr . Robi nson st at ed t hat he f l i es t o I t haca ever y ot her weekend f r omChar l ot t e, Nor t h Car ol i na. Tr . at 179. Mr . Robi nson t est i f i ed t hat he knows Mr . Wood and spoke wi t h hi mon Apr i l 18, whi l e t hey wai t ed t o boar d t he ai r cr af t , and t hat he saw Mr . Wood i n t he j umpseat of t he ai r cr af t dur i ng t he f l i ght at i ssue. Tr . at 180- 82. Mr . Robi nson al so st at ed t hat he r ecal l ed one i nf ant bei ng on t he ai r cr af t , but di d not see any chi l dr en onboar d. Tr . at 184- 85; Exh. A- 10 ( summar y of conver sat i on bet ween Mr . Robi nson and FAA avi at i on saf et y i nspect or ) . The Admi ni st r at or al so cal l ed Laur a Gor e, t he Qual i t y Assur ance Manager f or US Ai r ways Expr ess Cust omer Ser vi ce, t o t est i f y. Ms. Gor e st at ed t hat she had gat her ed t he f l i ght hi st or y dat a f or t he Apr i l 18, 2008 f l i ght , whi ch i ndi cat es t hat 34 t ot al passenger s wer e on t he ai r cr af t , and t hat no j umpseat passenger had boar ded t he ai r cr af t . Tr . at 200; Exh. A- 11. Ms. Gor e st at ed t hat t he dat a i s based on t he OF- 11E f or mt hat Col gan Ai r r equi r es, and t hat , i f a j umpseat passenger was not l i st ed on t he f or m, t hen t he f l i ght hi st or y dat a woul d not l i st a j umpseat passenger . Tr . at 201. Ms. Gor e st at ed t hat t he gat e agent i s r esponsi bl e f or r ecor di ng whet her a j umpseat passenger has j oi ned t he f l i ght at t he l ast mi nut e, and t hat t he 7
capt ai n of t he f l i ght i s r esponsi bl e f or l i st i ng t he j umpseat passenger on t he l oad mani f est f or t he f l i ght . Tr . at 203- 204. The Admi ni st r at or al so cal l ed Chr i st opher Canal i a, a seni or anal yst f or ai r por t pol i cy and pr ocedur es at US Ai r ways, t o t est i f y. Mr . Canal i a st at ed t hat t he r epor t f r omt he U. S. Ai r ways comput er syst emi ndi cat es t hat t he Apr i l 18, 2008 f l i ght had 34 passenger s and one i nf ant on boar d t he ai r cr af t , and t hat no chi l dr en wer e on t he ai r cr af t . Tr . at 209- 210; Exh. A- 12. Mr . Canal i a al so t est i f i ed t hat t he US Ai r ways r epor t i ndi cat es t hat Mr . Wood was a cancel l at i on, or no show f or t he Apr i l 18, 2008 f l i ght ( Tr . at 218- 19) , but t hat i t i s possi bl e t hat a j umpseat passenger coul d have boar ded t he ai r cr af t , because gat e agent s may manual l y compl et e a j umpseat f or mat t he l ast mi nut e ( Tr . at 220) . The Admi ni st r at or concl uded hi s case by cal l i ng Avi at i on Saf et y I nspect or Dougl as Lundgr en t o t est i f y. I nspect or Lundgr en st at ed t hat he has been t he Pr i nci pal Oper at i ons I nspect or f or Col gan Ai r f or over 2 year s, and t hat he began col l ect i ng document s and i nvest i gat i ng whet her r espondent had i ncor r ect l y compl et ed t he l oad mani f est shor t l y af t er t he FAA r ecei ved a hot l i ne cal l f r omMr . Coat s concer ni ng t he i nci dent . Tr . at 256- 57. I nspect or Lundgr en st at ed t hat hi s r evi ew of Col gan Ai r s pol i ci es i ndi cat ed t hat Col gan does not per mi t pi l ot s t o i nt er pol at e number s f or t he l oad mani f est f or m, but 8
t hat pi l ot s ar e i nst ead r equi r ed t o use t he most conser vat i ve est i mat e t o ensur e t hat no ai r cr af t i s over wei ght upon depar t ur e. Tr . at 260. I nspect or Lundgr en t est i f i ed t hat he di d not under st and why r espondent woul d have wr i t t en 30, 000 pounds on t he l oad mani f est f or m, and expl ai ned how t he cal cul at i ons i ndi cat ed t hat t he ai r cr af t was over wei ght . I d. I nspect or Lundgr en st at ed t hat Mr . Coat s was cr edi bl e and answer ed hi s quest i ons consi st ent l y dur i ng t he i nvest i gat i on, but t hat r espondent s r epl i es t o hi s quest i ons wer e vague. Tr . at 262, 278, 293- 94. I nspect or Lundgr en al so t est i f i ed t hat he had concl uded t hat a l ar ge amount of ci r cumst ant i al evi dence i ndi cat ed t hat a j umpseat passenger was on t he ai r cr af t ( Tr . at 264) , and t hat t he evi dence i ndi cat ed t hat t he cr i t i cal wei ght measur ement s on t he l oad mani f est f or m, such as car go, r amp, and t axi f uel wei ght s, wer e f al se ( Tr . at 267) . I nspect or Lundgr en st at ed t hat he det er mi ned t hat t he f l i ght at t endant s passenger count sheet had been di scar ded when he began hi s i nvest i gat i on. Tr . at 275. Fi nal l y, I nspect or Lundgr en t est i f i ed t hat he checked t he US Ai r ways passenger name r ecor d f or t he f l i ght at i ssue, and coul d not f i nd any chi l dr en l i st ed. Tr . at 285- 88; Exh. R- 5. I n r esponse t o t he Admi ni st r at or s case, r espondent pr ovi ded t he t est i mony of Dean Bandabani s, who i s t he Di r ect or of Oper at i ons f or Col gan Ai r . Mr . Bandabani s st at ed t hat 9
r espondent had a good r eput at i on as a capt ai n at Col gan Ai r , and t hat Mr . Coat s di d not have a f avor abl e r eput at i on. Tr . at 225- 27, 237. Mr . Bandabani s al so st at ed t hat he was i nvol ved i n conduct i ng an i nt er nal i nvest i gat i on of t he f l i ght i n quest i on f or Col gan Ai r . Tr . at 227. Mr . Bandabani s t est i f i ed t hat Mr . Coat s di d not not i f y hi mof t he i nci dent , but t hat he l ear ned of t he i nci dent f r omt he Chi ef Pi l ot f or Col gan Ai r . Tr . at 229. Mr . Bandabani s acknowl edged t hat i t i s a ser i ous of f ense f or a j umpseat passenger t o be on an ai r cr af t but not be l i st ed on t he l oad mani f est , t hat he had i nqui r ed of r espondent about whet her a j umpseat passenger was onboar d, and t hat r espondent r epl i ed t hat he di d not al l ow an unr epor t ed j umpseat passenger . Tr . at 239, 245. Mr . Bandabani s st at ed t hat he had r evi ewed t he l oad mani f est at i ssue and di scover ed some i r r egul ar i t i es, such as mi ssi ng number s wi t hi n t he t akeof f wei ght cat egor y, and a mi ssi ng i ndex number . Tr . at 246. Mr . Bandabani s, however , t est i f i ed t hat he di d not bel i eve t hese i r r egul ar i t i es wer e a bi g deal . Tr . at 247. Mr . Bandabani s st at ed t hat hi s i nvest i gat i on i nt o t he i nci dent di d not uncover why someone had cr ossed out t he or i gi nal number f or t he r unway and cl i mb l i mi t wei ght and wr i t t en i n 30, 000 pounds. Tr . at 248. Respondent al so t est i f i ed on hi s own behal f . Respondent st at ed t hat hi s common pr act i ce concer ni ng t he cer t i f i cat i on of 10
l oad mani f est s i s t o compar e t he number s on t he l oad mani f est t o t he OF- 11E f or mand t he f l i ght at t endant l oad sheet and make sur e t he number s mat ch, and t hat he gener al l y r el i es on t hese document s. Tr . at 307- 308, 311. Respondent t est i f i ed t hat he has pr evi ousl y made changes t o a l oad mani f est i f necessar y t o r ef l ect a r unway change, t emper at ur e change, or t he l i ke. Tr . at 312. Respondent st at ed t hat he does not r ecal l t hi s par t i cul ar f l i ght , and does not r ecal l compl et i ng or si gni ng t he l oad mani f est f or t hi s f l i ght . Tr . at 313- 14. Respondent al so t est i f i ed t hat , accor di ng t o hi s cal cul at i ons, i f t he t emper at ur e wer e 20 degr ees Cel si us at t he t i me of t he f l i ght , and not 21 degr ees, t hen t he wei ght l i mi t woul d have been 30, 000 pounds. Tr . at 315. Respondent st at ed t hat he [ does not ] bel i eve t hat t her e s anyt hi ng wr ong wi t h i nt er pol at i ng t he number s t o get a mor e pr eci se f i gur e f or t he l oad mani f est . Tr . at 316. Respondent t est i f i ed t hat he bel i eved 21 degr ees was an ar bi t r ar y number , and t hat i t came f r omt he di spat ch r el ease, whi ch i s r ar el y r el i abl e. Tr . at 341- 42. Respondent st at ed t hat he woul d not have al l owed a passenger t o si t i n t he j umpseat of t he ai r cr af t i f t he ai r cr af t was over wei ght . Tr . at 319. Respondent t est i f i ed t hat i t s possi bl e t hat he coul d have cr ossed out t he f i gur e of 28, 698 pounds t hat Mr . Coat s had wr i t t en, but t hat he does not r ecal l maki ng such a change. Tr . at 340, 352. Respondent expl ai ned, i n det ai l , how he 11
i nt er pol at ed t he number s and concl uded t hat 29, 493 pounds was t he r el i abl e wei ght of t he ai r cr af t ; i n compl et i ng t hi s cal cul at i on, r espondent used t he f i gur e of 21 degr ees, but assumed t hat t he ai r cr af t woul d oper at e at 98 per cent power . Tr . at 343- 44. As such, r espondent st at ed t hat he does not know why t he l oad mani f est di d not l i st 29, 493 pounds as t he per mi ssi bl e wei ght . I d. Respondent acknowl edged t hat he di d not cal cul at e 29, 493 pounds at t he t i me of t he f l i ght , but i nst ead compl et ed t he cal cul at i on shor t l y bef or e t he hear i ng. Tr . at 350. Respondent st at ed t hat he was awar e t hat Col gan Ai r i nst r uct s pi l ot s t o use t he most conser vat i ve numer i cal val ues i n compl et i ng l oad mani f est s and cal cul at i ng wei ght s, but t hat he does not r ecal l Col gan i nst r uct i ng hi mt hat i nt er pol at i ng number s was not al l owed. Tr . at 353. Respondent t est i f i ed t hat he bel i eves t hat , i t s st i l l wi t hi n t he r eal mof saf et y t o r ef r ai n f r omusi ng t he most conser vat i ve val ues i n cal cul at i ng number s f or t he l oad mani f est f or m. Tr . at 354. I n r ebut t al , t he Admi ni st r at or pr ovi ded t he t est i mony of Avi at i on Saf et y I nspect or J ohn Leshok, who t est i f i ed t hat he obt ai ned t he f axed copy of t he l oad mani f est f r omt he st at i on manager at LaGuar di a Ai r por t . Tr . at 384. I nspect or Leshok st at ed t hat he has no doubt t hat Exhi bi t A- 1 i s t he l oad mani f est f or t he f l i ght at i ssue, and t hat he di d not l ear n of t he exi st ence of any ot her l oad mani f est f or t hi s f l i ght whi l e 12
he was i nvest i gat i ng t hi s i nci dent . Tr . at 384- 85. I nspect or Leshok t est i f i ed t hat t he f axed copy of t he l oad mani f est i n evi dence was t he onl y copy t hat he used f or t he i nvest i gat i on. Tr . at 386. At t he concl usi on of t he hear i ng, t he l aw j udge i ssued an or al i ni t i al deci si on, i n whi ch he concl uded t hat r esol ut i on of t hi s case r est ed on a cr edi bi l i t y det er mi nat i on. The l aw j udge descr i bed Mr . Coat s as a whi st l ebl ower , and st at ed t hat t he Admi ni st r at or sat i sf i ed hi s bur den of pr oof wi t h t he t est i mony of Mr . Coat s and I nspect or Lundgr en, combi ned wi t h t he copy of t he l oad mani f est f or mat i ssue. I ni t i al Deci si on at 428. The l aw j udge st at ed t hat t he evi dence showed t hat r espondent or der ed Mr . Coat s t o f or ge a new l oad mani f est t o show t hat a chi l d, r at her t han an adul t , was on t he ai r cr af t , and t hat Mr . Coat s r ef used t o do so. I d. at 430. The l aw j udge st at ed t hat t he l oad mani f est was t ot al l y and compl et el y wr ong, i n and of i t sel f , and t hat i t di d not cont ai n t he wei ght of t he ai r cr af t , di d not l i st t he passenger s and cr ew, and di d not i ncl ude t he cor r ect t ot al wei ght . I d. at 431, 434. Based on t he evi dence i n t he r ecor d, t he l aw j udge concl uded t hat r espondent had vi ol at ed t he r egul at i ons, as char ged. On appeal , r espondent al l eges t hat t he l aw j udge er r ed i n numer ous r espect s. I n par t i cul ar , r espondent ar gues t hat t he wei ght of t he evi dence does not suppor t t he l aw j udge s 13
deci si on, t hat t he l aw j udge er r ed i n not accept i ng r espondent s af f i r mat i ve def ense of r el i ance, and t hat t he l aw j udge er r ed by not pr ovi di ng speci f i c r easons f or each of hi s f i ndi ngs concer ni ng t he i ndi vi dual r egul at or y vi ol at i ons. The Admi ni st r at or di sput es each of t hese ar gument s, and ur ges us t o af f i r mt he l aw j udge s deci si on. We addr ess each of t hese i ssues i n t ur n. Wi t h r egar d t o r espondent s pr i nci pal ar gument t hat t he wei ght of t he evi dence does not suppor t t he l aw j udge s concl usi on t hat r espondent f al si f i ed t he l oad mani f est , we di sagr ee wi t h r espondent s cont ent i ons. Respondent s ar gument concer ni ng t he admi ssi on of t he copy of t he l oad mani f est i nt o evi dence i s not hel pf ul , because r espondent cannot show t hat t he l aw j udge abused hi s di scr et i on i n admi t t i ng t he copy of t he l oad mani f est i nt o evi dence. We have l ong hel d t hat l aw j udges have si gni f i cant di scr et i on i n over seei ng admi ni st r at i ve hear i ngs and admi t t i ng evi dence i nt o t he r ecor d. Admi ni st r at or v. Gi f f i n, NTSB Or der No. EA- 5390 at 12 ( 2008) ( ci t i ng Admi ni st r at or v. Bennet t , NTSB Or der No. EA- 5258 ( 2006) ) . Mor eover , we wi l l not over t ur n a l aw j udge s evi dent i ar y r ul i ng unl ess we det er mi ne t hat t he r ul i ng was an abuse of di scr et i on. See, e. g. , Admi ni st r at or v. Mar t z, NTSB Or der No. EA- 5352 ( 2008) ; Admi ni st r at or v. Zi nk, NTSB Or der No. EA- 5262 ( 2006) ; Admi ni st r at or v. Van Dyke, NTSB Or der No. EA- 4883 ( 2001) . When 14
r esol vi ng i ssues i nvol vi ng t he admi ssi on of evi dence, t he Boar d i s not bound by t he Feder al Rul es of Evi dence, but consi der s t hemt o be non- bi ndi ng gui dance. Admi ni st r at or v. Fer guson, NTSB Or der No. EA- 5360 at 10- 11 ( 2008) ( ci t i ng Pet i t i on of Car y A. Nei hans, NTSB Or der No. EA- 5166 at 9 n. 9 ( 2005) ) . I n t hi s r egar d, t he Boar d i s not bound by evi dent i ar y or pr ocedur al r ul es t hat appl y i n ot her cour t s. Fur t her mor e, t he Boar d i s awar e of t he wi de l at i t ude t hat t he Admi ni st r at i ve Pr ocedur e Act pr ovi des agenci es concer ni ng t he admi ssi bi l i t y of evi dence at admi ni st r at i ve hear i ngs. 5 U. S. C. 556( d) ( st at i ng t hat , [ a] ny or al or document ar y evi dence may be r ecei ved, but t he agency as a mat t er of pol i cy shal l pr ovi de f or t he excl usi on of i r r el evant , i mmat er i al , or undul y r epet i t i ous evi dence) . I n l i ght of t hi s st andar d f avor i ng t he admi ssi on of evi dence, r espondent s ar gument t hat t he l aw j udge shoul d not have admi t t ed t he l oad mani f est i nt o evi dence i s mer i t l ess, because r espondent has not at t empt ed t o show t hat t he l aw j udge s admi ssi on of t he document amount ed t o an abuse of di scr et i on. Respondent s ar gument s concer ni ng t he aut hent i ci t y of t he l oad mani f est addr ess t he wei ght t hat we shoul d af f or d t he document , r at her t han t he i ssue of i t s admi ssi bi l i t y. Respondent f ur t her ar gues t hat evi dence i n t he r ecor d cont r adi ct s t he asser t i on t hat a j umpseat passenger was i n t he ai r cr af t . I n par t i cul ar , r espondent r ef er s t o Exhi bi t s A- 11 15
( por t i on of f l i ght hi st or y dat a on t he Apr i l 18, 2008 f l i ght f r omUS Ai r ways) and A- 12 ( r epor t f r omUS Ai r ways comput er syst emt hat cont ai ns passenger l i st and f l i ght hi st or y of f l i ght at i ssue) i n suppor t of t hi s ar gument , because nei t her exhi bi t l i st s a j umpseat passenger . Thi s ar gument , however , i s i nsi gni f i cant t o our di sposi t i on of t hi s case, because t he evi dence est abl i shes t hat r espondent al t er ed t he l oad mani f est so t hat i t i ncor r ect l y i ncl uded 30, 000 pounds as t he per mi ssi bl e maxi mumwei ght . Regar dl ess of whet her a j umpseat passenger was on t he ai r cr af t , r espondent amended t he l oad mani f est f or mt o r ead 30, 000 pounds, and f al sel y l i st ed 33 adul t s, one chi l d, and one i nf ant on t he l oad mani f est . Exhi bi t s A- 11 and A- 12, i n addi t i on t o t est i mony at t he hear i ng, est abl i sh t hat 34 adul t s, no chi l dr en, and one i nf ant wer e on t he ai r cr af t . Tr . at 184- 85, 209- 210. Even assumi ng, ar guendo, t hat no j umpseat passenger was on t he ai r cr af t , t he Admi ni st r at or has st i l l shown t hat t he l oad mani f est t hat r espondent cer t i f i ed as l oaded i n accor dance wi t h t he Col gan Ai r FAA- appr oved Wei ght And Bal ance Pr ogr am was i ncor r ect . As such, t he Admi ni st r at or has f ul f i l l ed hi s bur den of pr oof wi t h r egar d t o f al si f i cat i on. For such f al si f i cat i on cases, we have l ong adher ed t o a t hr ee- pr ong st andar d t o pr ove a f al si f i cat i on cl ai m: t he Admi ni st r at or must pr ove t hat a pi l ot ( 1) made a f al se r epr esent at i on, ( 2) i n r ef er ence t o a mat er i al f act , ( 3) wi t h knowl edge of t he f al si t y 16
of t he f act . Har t v. McLucas, 535 F. 2d 516, 519 ( 9 t h Ci r . 1976) ( ci t i ng Pence v. Uni t ed St at es, 316 U. S. 332, 338 ( 1942) ) . Her e, t he Admi ni st r at or has pr ovi ded evi dence t o f ul f i l l al l t hr ee pr ongs. The l oad mani f est cont ai ned i ncor r ect val ues, and such val ues ar e mat er i al t o t he oper at i on of t he ai r cr af t : t he Admi ni st r at or appr oved Col gan Ai r s wei ght and bal ance pr ogr am, whi ch r equi r es t he compl et i on of t he l oad mani f est pr i or t o t he commencement of each f l i ght . I n addi t i on, r espondent t est i f i ed t hat he car ef ul l y checks t he l oad mani f est pr i or t o each f l i ght , and ensur es t hat t he number s on t he l oad mani f est do not exceed t he l i mi t at i ons i n Col gan Ai r s Oper at i ons Manual . Tr . at 313; see al so Exh. A- 9 ( excer pt f r omCol gan s Wei ght and Bal ance Cont r ol Pr ogr am) . Respondent al so st at ed t hat he has pr evi ousl y asked j umpseat passenger s t o di sembar k a f l i ght bef or e t aki ng of f , i f t he ai r cr af t i s over wei ght . Tr . at 318. Such evi dence est abl i shes t he mat er i al i t y of t he val ues l i st ed on t he l oad mani f est f or m. Fi nal l y, t he evi dence al so shows t hat r espondent had knowl edge of t he f al si t y of t he l oad mani f est . I n t hi s r egar d, t he l aw j udge assessed t he cr edi bi l i t y of r espondent and t he ot her wi t nesses who t est i f i ed at t he admi ni st r at i ve hear i ng, and det er mi ned t hat t he Admi ni st r at or s wi t nesses, i ncl udi ng Mr . Coat s, wer e mor e cr edi bl e t han r espondent . Gi ven our l ongst andi ng pr ecedent of r el yi ng on l aw j udges cr edi bi l i t y assessment s unl ess such 17
det er mi nat i ons ar e ar bi t r ar y, capr i ci ous, or cont r ar y t o t he wei ght of t he evi dence, we wi l l def er t o t he l aw j udge s cr edi bi l i t y assessment s i n t hi s case. See, e. g. , Admi ni st r at or v. Smi t h, 5 NTSB 1560, 1563 ( 1986) . Respondent has not pr ovi ded any compel l i ng r eason f or us t o di sput e t he l aw j udge s cr edi bi l i t y det er mi nat i ons i n t hi s case, and we agr ee wi t h t he l aw j udge t hat r espondent s t est i mony was vague wi t h r egar d t o sever al i mpor t ant i ssues. Tr . at 313- 14 ( r espondent s st at ement t hat he does not r ecal l t hi s par t i cul ar f l i ght or l oad mani f est ) , 340 ( r espondent s st at ement t hat he does not r emember changi ng t he r unway and cl i mb wei ght l i mi t at i on t o 30, 000 pounds, but t hat i t s possi bl e t hat he changed i t ) . Respondent al so asser t s t hat t he Admi ni st r at or di d not pr oduce: t he OF- 11E f or mt hat woul d cont ai n t he passenger l i st and i nf or mat i on concer ni ng who was on t he ai r cr af t ; t he f l i ght at t endant count sheet ; t he or i gi nal ver si on of t he l oad mani f est at i ssue; a copy of t he j umpseat pass t hat Mr . Wood shoul d have f i l l ed out when he got i n t he j umpseat ; and any document s conf i r mi ng t he t emper at ur e at t he t i me of t he f l i ght at i ssue. I n addi t i on, r espondent ar gues t hat t he Admi ni st r at or coul d not pr ove t hat t he f l i ght at i ssue occur r ed on Apr i l 18, because Mr . Coat s, when he cal l ed t he FAA hot l i ne t o r epor t t he i nci dent , i ni t i al l y st at ed t hat t he f l i ght had occur r ed on Apr i l 16. We do not bel i eve t hat t hese ar gument s suf f i ce t o 18
pr ove t hat t he l aw j udge s deci si on was cont r ar y t o t he wei ght of t he evi dence. As di scussed above, t he Admi ni st r at or pr oduced suf f i ci ent evi dence t o pr ove t hat t he l oad mani f est was i ncor r ect . Mor eover , t he Admi ni st r at or adequat el y pr oved t hat t he f l i ght at i ssue t ook pl ace on Apr i l 18, 2008; Mr . Coat s s i ncor r ect memor y concer ni ng t he dat e of t he f l i ght does not al t er t he evi dence showi ng t hat t he l oad mani f est , whi ch i ncl udes t he dat e 4/ 18/ 2008, l i st ed 33 adul t passenger s, one chi l d, and one i nf ant , whi l e ot her cr edi bl e evi dence shows t hat 34 adul t passenger s, no chi l dr en, and one i nf ant wer e on t he Apr i l 18, 2008 f l i ght . See Exhs. A- 1, A- 11, A- 12. Respondent al so ar gues t hat t he l aw j udge er r ed i n r ej ect i ng r espondent s af f i r mat i ve def ense of r el i ance. We do not bel i eve t hat t he l aw j udge er r ed i n r ef r ai ni ng f r om anal yzi ng r espondent s af f i r mat i ve def ense of r el i ance, as r espondent s ar gument t hat hi s cer t i f i cat i on of t he l oad mani f est was j ust i f i ed because he r el i ed upon cer t ai n f or ms i n compl et i ng t he l oad mani f est does not f ul f i l l t he appr opr i at e l egal st andar d. Under t he doct r i ne of r easonabl e r el i ance, we have hel d t hat , [ i ] f a par t i cul ar t ask i s t he r esponsi bi l i t y of anot her , i f t he [ pi l ot - i n- command] has no i ndependent obl i gat i on ( e. g. , based on oper at i ng pr ocedur es or manual s) or abi l i t y t o ascer t ai n t he i nf or mat i on, and i f t he capt ai n has no r eason t o quest i on t he ot her s per f or mance, t hen and onl y t hen 19
wi l l no vi ol at i on be f ound. Admi ni st r at or v. Fay and Takacs, NTSB Or der No. EA- 3501 at 9 ( 1992) . We have al so pr evi ousl y hel d t hat t he doct r i ne of r easonabl e r el i ance i s a nar r ow one; t he doct r i ne may appl y t o cases i nvol vi ng speci al i zed, t echni cal exper t i se wher e a f l i ght cr ew member coul d not be expect ed t o have t he necessar y knowl edge. Fay and Takacs, supr a, at 10; see al so Admi ni st r at or v. J ol l y, NTSB Or der No. EA- 5307 at 10 ( 2007) . We have pr evi ousl y acknowl edged t hat i t i s cer t ai nl y necessar y f or oper at or s t o di vi de t hei r dut i es and r esponsi bi l i t i es i n or der t o oper at e t he ai r cr af t i n t he saf est , most ef f ect i ve manner . However , r espondent has not pr esent ed evi dence, ot her t han hi s own t est i mony, whi ch t he l aw j udge det er mi ned was not cr edi bl e, t o pr ove t hat he r el i ed on any par t i cul ar f or ms or i nf or mat i on i n compl et i ng t he l oad mani f est . Mor eover , r espondent di d not est abl i sh t hat t he cer t i f i cat i on of t he l oad mani f est was compl et el y t he t ask of anot her and t hat he had no abi l i t y t o ascer t ai n t he i nf or mat i on, nor r eason t o quest i on t he i nf or mat i on upon whi ch he r el i ed. Over al l , r espondent di d not f ul f i l l t he t est we set f or t h i n Fay and Takacs. Fi nal l y, r espondent s ar gument t hat t he l aw j udge di d not suf f i ci ent l y expl ai n hi s f i ndi ngs i s al so not per suasi ve. The l aw j udge cl ear l y st at ed t hat he det er mi ned t hat r espondent s 20
t est i mony was not as cr edi bl e as t he Admi ni st r at or s wi t nesses t est i mony, and descr i bed t he f act s on whi ch t he Admi ni st r at or based t he char ges. I ni t i al Deci si on at 428- 30. The l aw j udge speci f i cal l y st at ed t hat he f ound t hat r espondent knowi ngl y oper at ed t he ai r cr af t when i t s t ot al wei ght exceeded t he wei ght l i mi t at i ons, and t hat , as a r esul t , r espondent vi ol at ed t he r egul at i ons, as char ged. I d. at 434- 35. Respondent s ar gument t hat t he l aw j udge det er mi ned t hat r espondent had vi ol at ed 121. 693( a) wi t hout any di scussi on of t he f act s whi ch suppor t such a vi ol at i on i s not per suasi ve, as t he l aw j udge concl uded t hat t he f act s est abl i shed t hat t he l oad mani f est cont ai ned i ncor r ect i nf or mat i on, and excl uded some i nf or mat i on, such as t he wei ght of t he ai r cr af t , t he passenger s and cr ew, and t he t ot al wei ght , al t oget her . I d. at 431, 434. I n concl usi on, we f i nd t hat r espondent has not pr ovi ded a basi s upon whi ch t o r ever se t he l aw j udge s deci si on. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Respondent s appeal i s deni ed; 2. The l aw j udge s i ni t i al deci si on i s af f i r med; and 3. The Admi ni st r at or s emer gency r evocat i on of r espondent s ATP cer t i f i cat e i s af f i r med.
ROSENKER, Act i ng Chai r man, and HERSMAN, HI GGI NS, SUMWALT, and CHEALANDER, Member s of t he Boar d, concur r ed i n t he above opi ni on and or der . 299 UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA
NATI ONAL TRANSPORTATI ON SAFETY BOARD
OFFI CE OF ADMI NI STRATI VE LAWJ UDGES
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I n t he mat t er of : * * ROBERT A. STURGELL, * ACTI NG ADMI NI STRATOR, * Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on, * * Compl ai nant , * v. * Docket No. : SE- 18404 * J UDGE FOWLER J ARED K. ANGSTADT, * * Respondent . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Nat i onal Tr anspor t at i on Saf et y Boar d 429 L Enf ant Pl aza, S. W. Boar d Room Washi ngt on, D. C.
Tuesday November 18, 2008
The above- ent i t l ed mat t er came on f or hear i ng, pur suant t o Not i ce, at 9: 30 a. m.
BEFORE: WI LLI AM E. FOWLER, J R. , Chi ef Admi ni st r at i ve Law J udge
Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947 300 APPEARANCES: On behal f of t he Admi ni st r at or : CHRI STI AN LEWERENZ, Regi onal Counsel Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on Of f i ce of t he Chi ef Counsel Ai r por t s Di vi si on, AEA- 600 1 Avi at i on Pl aza J amai ca, NY 11434
On behal f of t he Respondent : J OSEPH MI CHAEL LAMONACA, ESQ. The Commons at Chadds For d 127 Commons Cour t Chadds For d, PA 19317 ( 610) 558- 3376
Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ORAL I NI TI AL DECI SI ON AND ORDER ADMI NI STRATI VE LAWJ UDGE FOWLER: Thi s has been a pr oceedi ng bef or e t he Nat i onal Tr anspor t at i on Saf et y Boar d, hel d pur suant t o t he pr ovi si ons of t he Feder al Avi at i on Act of 1958, as t hat Act was subsequent l y amended, on t he Appeal of J ar ed Kyl e Angst adt , f r oman Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on i ssued by t he Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at or dat ed Oct ober 17t h, 2008, whi ch pur por t s t o r evoke Respondent Angst adt ' s Ai r l i ne Tr anspor t Pi l ot Cer t i f i cat e Number ( omi t t ed) . The Admi ni st r at or ' s Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on, as dul y pr omul gat ed i n accor dance wi t h t he Boar d' s Rul es of Pr act i ce i n Ai r Saf et y Pr oceedi ngs, was i ssued by t he Regi onal Counsel , East er n Regi on of t he Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on, and dat ed Oct ober 17t h, 2008. Thi s mat t er has been hear d bef or e t hi s Uni t ed St at es Admi ni st r at i ve Law J udge, and as i s pr ovi ded by t he Boar d' s Rul es of Pr act i ce, speci f i cal l y Sect i on 821. 56 of t hose r ul es, i t i s mandat or y, as t he j udge i n t hi s pr oceedi ng, an emer gency pr oceedi ng, t hat I i ssue an Or al I ni t i al Deci si on on t he r ecor d, whi ch I amgoi ng t o do at t hi s t i me. Fol l owi ng not i ce t o t he par t i es, t hi s mat t er came on f or t r i al on November 17t h and 18t h, 2008. The Respondent was ver y abl y r epr esent ed by J oseph Lamonaca, Esqui r e. The Admi ni st r at or , was al so ver y abl y r epr esent ed by Chr i st i an Lewer enz, Esqui r e, of Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 t he Regi onal Counsel ' s of f i ce, East er n Regi on of t he Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on. J UDGE FOWLER: Bot h par t i es i n t hi s pr oceedi ng have been af f or ded t he oppor t uni t y t o of f er evi dence, t o cal l , exami ne and cr oss- exami ne t he wi t nesses. I n addi t i on, t he par t i es have been af f or ded t he oppor t uni t y t o make f i nal ar gument i n suppor t of t hei r r espect i ve posi t i ons. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DI SCUSSI ON I have r evi ewed t he t est i mony and t he evi dence t hat we' ve had dur i ng t he cour se of t hi s t wo- day pr oceedi ng, whi ch has consi st ed of seven wi t nesses on behal f of t he Admi ni st r at or , coupl ed wi t h 13 exhi bi t s by t he Admi ni st r at or . Respondent has had t wo wi t nesses i ncl udi ng hi msel f and f i ve exhi bi t s. Al l of t he exhi bi t s have been dul y admi t t ed i nt o t he r ecor d, as pr esent l y const i t ut ed. When you have an or der , and her e, i t ' s an Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on, i t ' s a ver y ser i ous mat t er because i t means, i f t he Admi ni st r at or i s successf ul , t hat t he Respondent i s gr ounded f or t hwi t h and i s or der ed t o sur r ender hi s cer t i f i cat e i mmedi at el y. As ment i oned, I have r evi ewed t he t est i mony and t he evi dence, coupl ed wi t h t he document ar y exhi bi t s. I t i s my det er mi nat i on and concl usi on t hat t he Admi ni st r at or has successf ul l y pr oven vi r t ual l y each and ever y al l egat i on set f or t h i n t he Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on of Oct ober 17t h, 2008. Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thi s i s a st r ange case, i n a manner of speaki ng, and I ' m speaki ng f r ommy own per sonal vi ewpoi nt , because i f ever t her e was a wi t ness t hat was deemed t o be a whi st l ebl ower , i t woul d be Wi t ness Benj ami n Fr ankl i n Coat s. The t est i mony of Wi t ness Coat s and Avi at i on Saf et y I nspect or Lundgr en, coupl ed wi t h Exhi bi t A- 1, I bel i eve i s devast at i ng t o t he Respondent ' s def ense i n t hi s pr oceedi ng. Her e, t he bur den of pr oof i s upon t he Admi ni st r at or and t he Admi ni st r at or has t o show and pr ove by a subst ant i al amount of r easonabl e, r el evant mat er i al and r el evant evi dence. Thi s i s not t o deni gr at e i n any sense what I deemt o be a ver y speci f i cal l y el oquent gr i eved ar gument by Respondent ' s counsel , t hr ough t he cour se of t hi s pr oceedi ng, i n def ense of hi s cl i ent . But as I sai d, I have r evi ewed t he t est i mony her e and t he Admi ni st r at or ' s case, whi ch consi st s of al l 15 par agr aphs cont ai ned i n t he al l egat i ons agai nst Respondent Angst adt , have been now pr oven by t he t est i mony of Wi t ness Coat s, I nspect or Lundgr en and t he Admi ni st r at or ' s Exhi bi t A- 1, whi ch i s r eal l y what t hi s case i s al l about , because basi cal l y t hi s i s a f al se st at ement case. The Admi ni st r at or has t o show, by a f ai r and r easonabl e pr eponder ance of t he mat er i al , r el evant and subst ant i al evi dence, a mat er i al f act and st at ement was made, t he t i me i t was made, and t he Respondent knew i t was f al se, and t he Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on has r eason t o r el y on such st at ement . That al l of Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 t hose cr i t er i a ar e met her e, i s my ul t i mat e det er mi nat i on and concl usi on. The t est i mony of Wi t ness Coat s, of cour se, and i t ' s qui t e obvi ous t hat t her e was a deal of i r r i t at i on and f r i ct i on bet ween hi msel f , as f i r st of f i cer , and t he Respondent , J ar ed Kyl e Angst adt , as capt ai n of t hi s f l i ght of Apr i l 18t h, 2008, f r omLa Guar di a Ai r por t t o I t haca, New Yor k. Ther e had been i r r i t at i on, as set f or t h i n t he t est i mony, and t he exhi bi t s of such f r i ct i on on pr evi ous f l i ght s. You may r ecal l t he al l egat i ons cont ai ni ng t he al l eged machi ne guns and concer ni ng Wi t ness Coat s, and t he al t i t ude devi at i on and so f or t h. These wer e sour ces of f r i ct i on. But t hi s does not t ake away, or l essen i n my det er mi nat i on, f r omt he t est i mony of Wi t ness Coat s or I nspect or Lundgr en. Respondent ' s R- 2 i s an exhi bi t r eal l y admi t t ed as t he t el ephone conver sat i on I nspect or Lundgr en had wi t h Benj ami n Coat s on J une 4t h, 2008, and I nspect or Lundgr en says i n t hi s conver sat i on t hat Wi t ness Coat s sai d t hat by hi s cal cul at i ons concer ni ng t he f l i ght i n quest i on t hat we' r e deal i ng wi t h her e on Apr i l 18t h, pr el i mi nar i l y, he deemed t hat t hey woul d' ve been over wei ght wi t h ei t her one or t wo mor e passenger s. Wi t ness Coat s st at ed t hat Capt ai n Angst adt had t he i dea of t aki ng al l of t he 33 passenger s t hat had boar ded t he ai r cr af t , but t o show t hr ee passenger s, on t he l oad mani f est , as chi l dr en, whi ch woul d make t hemcount as hal f t he wei ght of adul t s. Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Wi t ness Coat s sai d, i n hi s conver sat i on, accor di ng t o Wi t ness Lundgr en, t hat Coat s obj ect ed and he sai d t he f l i ght at t endant ' s passenger count di d not show t hat any of t he passenger s wer e act ual l y chi l dr en, and t hat t he capt ai n or der ed hi mt o wr i t e up a new l oad mani f est usi ng t he f i ct i t i ous chi l d wei ght s and t hat he, Coat s, r ef used. The new mani f est , Coat s sai d, showed t he ai r cr af t t akeof f wei ght and zer o f uel l i mi t s j ust bel ow t he al l owabl e l i mi t s, but at t hat poi nt , Coat s est i mat ed t hat t he pl ane was act ual l y over wei ght by appr oxi mat el y 200 pounds. He sai d t he capt ai n t hr eat ened hi m, t o make t r oubl e f or hi mwi t h Col gan Ai r management , i f he di d not go al ong wi t h hi m. Coat s f ur t her sai d t hat by t hat t he ai r cr af t woul d' ve been - - f our t o f i ve hundr ed pounds over t he al l owabl e t akeof f wei ght . I nspect or Lundgr en sai d, l at er on, i n t hi s t el ephone conver sat i on, t hat Coat s had sai d t o hi m, t el ephoni cal l y, t hat he f i l ed wi t h t he NASA Avi at i on Saf et y Repor t i ng Syst em. He r epor t ed t he i nci dent shor t l y af t er t he f l i ght , but he di d not t hi nk t o f i l e t he ASAP r epor t t o hi s company, whi ch he l at er says was a mi st ake. We have had t he f i nal anal ysi s by t he Admi ni st r at or ' s exhi bi t s and document s on t he Admi ni st r at or ' s si de of t hi s case. The f i nal anal ysi s by t he Admi ni st r at or was t hat t her e wer e 34 peopl e on boar d t hi s f l i ght , al l wer e adul t s, and t her e was one i nf ant . Ther e was a j umpseat occupant whi ch was not i ncl uded i n Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 t he wei ght s of t hi s l oad mani f est , whi ch means t hat , on i t s f ace, t hi s l oad mani f est , some of whi ch, maybe even t he maj or i t y of whi ch, was compi l ed by Wi t ness Coat s, but i t was si gned of f on, as t he capt ai n' s si gnat ur e, by J ar ed Kyl e Angst adt , whi ch i s a st andar d oper at i ng pr ocedur e on al l of t hese l oad mani f est s. But t hi s one i s t ot al l y and compl et el y wr ong, and f al se. I al so f i nd and hol d t hat i t suppor t s, as subst ant i al evi dence, and const i t ut es a f al se st at ement , whi ch Respondent Angst adt knew was f al se when he si gned i t , and i t ' s cer t ai nl y mat er i al l y r el evant t o t he Feder al Avi at i on Admi ni st r at i on, because t hey r el y on al l ai r men, but par t i cul ar l y ai r l i ne t r anspor t pi l ot s, t o exer ci se t he maxi mumdegr ee of car e, j udgment and r esponsi bi l i t y at al l t i mes. Ther e wer e sever al event s i n quest i on t hat ar ose dur i ng t he cour se of t hi s pr oceedi ng, none of whi ch i n my est i mat i on wer e i mpor t ant enough t o def er or negat e f r omt he Admi ni st r at or ' s bur den of pr oof . The Admi ni st r at or has br ought f or t h seven wi t nesses and 13 document ar y exhi bi t s, whi ch t he Admi ni st r at or and hi s counsel have adduced dur i ng t he cour se of t hi s pr oceedi ng. To i nt er j ect a per sonal not e, Respondent , her e, i s a young man, 26 year s of age. He' s onl y been a pi l ot f or a f ew year s and ATP- r at ed si nce - - wel l , mor e r ecent l y, i n t he l ast t wo t o t hr ee year s. Whi l e r evocat i on i s t he supr eme sanct i on t hat t he Admi ni st r at or can i nvoke dur i ng t he cour se of an enf or cement Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 pr oceedi ng, t aki ng i nt o account Respondent ' s age, t hi s i s not t he end of t he wor l d f or hi m. As t he Admi ni st r at or has sai d, i n hi s or der her e, t hat af t er an expi r at i on of a year per i od, t hat Respondent ver y wel l may be consi der ed and possi bl y even r ei ssued anot her pi l ot cer t i f i cat e of some t ype subsequent l y. So l adi es and gent l emen, at t hi s t i me, I ' msur e you f ol l ow t he dr i f t of my det er mi nat i on i n t hi s pr oceedi ng. I wi l l now pr oceed t o make t he f ol l owi ng speci f i c f i ndi ngs of f act and concl usi ons of l aw, based on t he t est i mony of t he wi t nesses and t he document ar y exhi bi t s t hat have been i nt r oduced bef or e me dur i ng t he cour se of t hi s t wo- day pr oceedi ng: ( 1) The Respondent , J ar ed Kyl e Angst adt , admi t s and i t i s f ound t hat he was and i s t he hol der of Ai r l i ne Tr anspor t Pi l ot Cer t i f i cat e Number ( omi t t ed) . ( 2) The Respondent admi t s and i t i s f ound t hat , on or about Apr i l 18t h, 2008, Respondent oper at ed a Saab 340 ai r cr af t , I dent i f i cat i on Number N350CJ , as pi l ot i n command f r omLa Guar di a Ai r por t , New Yor k t o I t haca, New Yor k. ( 3) The Respondent admi t s and i t i s f ound t hat t he f l i ght descr i bed above was oper at ed under Par t s 119 and 121 of t he Feder al Avi at i on Regul at i ons; a U. S. Ai r ways Expr ess Fl i ght 4803, wi t h passenger s and cr ew aboar d. ( 4) I t i s f ound t hat , speci f i cal l y aboar d t he f l i ght , t her e wer e 34 passenger s, no chi l dr en and one i nf ant , and t hr ee Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cr ew member s, i ncl udi ng t he Respondent , and one addi t i onal cr ew member , her eaf t er r ef er r ed t o as an addi t i onal cr ew member , who was r i di ng, i n t he j umpseat . ( 5) I t i s f ound t hat pr i or t o t akeof f of t he f l i ght descr i bed above, t her e was a l oad mani f est pr epar ed, whi ch i ndi cat ed t hat t he t ot al wei ght of t he ai r cr af t exceeded cer t ai n maxi mumwei ght l i mi t at i ons, as pr ovi ded i n t he ai r cr af t f l i ght manual . ( 6) I t i s f ound t hat even t hough t he f i r st of f i cer advi sed t he Respondent t hat cer t ai n maxi mumwei ght l i mi t at i ons wer e exceeded, as descr i bed above, Respondent decl i ned t o de- pl ane any of t he passenger s or t he addi t i onal cr ew member . ( 7) I t i s f ound t hat i nst ead, Respondent compl et ed t he l oad mani f est or caused one t o be made. ( 8) I t i s f ound t hat , speci f i cal l y, Respondent compl et ed a l oad mani f est , or caused one t o be made, t hat f al sel y st at ed t hat aboar d t he f l i ght t her e wer e - - and I ' mi ncor por at i ng by r ef er ence Par agr aphs A, B, C i n Par agr aph 8, whi ch di spl ays t he adul t s and one chi l d, as f or t h on t he l oad mani f est . ( 9) I t i s f ound t hat , f ur t her , Respondent compl et ed a l oad mani f est , or caused one t o be made, t hat f al sel y st at ed t hat t he r unway and cl i mb l i mi t wei ght was 30, 000 pounds. ( 10) I t i s f ound t hat as a r esul t , Respondent compl et ed a l oad mani f est , or caused one t o be made, t hat f al sel y st at ed t hat t he f ol l owi ng wei ght s wer e l ess t han t he wei ght s comput ed Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 under appr oved pr ocedur es. And I ' mi ncor por at i ng by r ef er ence, t hat i s, Par agr aphs A t hr ough F, whi ch set s f or t h, i n t he Admi ni st r at or ' s Or der of Revocat i on, al l t he wei ght s, i n t ur n, f r omt he cr ew adj ust ment wei ght t o t he l andi ng wei ght . ( 11) I t i s f ound t hat Respondent t her eby made, or caused t o be made, i nt ent i onal l y f al se ent r i es i n a r ecor d or r epor t t hat i s r equi r ed t o be kept , made or used t o show compl i ance wi t h any r equi r ement s f or t he i ssuance or exer ci se of t he pr i vi l eges, of any cer t i f i cat e, r at i ng or aut hor i zat i on under Par t 61 of t he Feder al Avi at i on Regul at i ons. ( 12) I t i s f ound t hat , i n addi t i on, t he l oad mani f est f ai l ed t o cont ai n t he f ol l owi ng i nf or mat i on concer ni ng t he l oadi ng of t he ai r pl ane at t akeof f t i me, comput ed under appr oved pr ocedur e: ( a) t he wei ght of t he ai r cr af t ; ( b) passenger s and cr ew member s, and ( c) t he t ot al wei ght . ( 13) I t i s f ound t hat as a r esul t of Respondent ' s act i ons, t he Respondent knowi ngl y oper at ed t he ai r cr af t whi l e t he t ot al wei ght of t he ai r cr af t exceeded cer t ai n maxi mumwei ght l i mi t at i ons, as pr ovi ded i n t he ai r cr af t f l i ght manual , speci f i cal l y ( a) on t he r amp, and ( b) dur i ng t akeof f . ( 14) I t i s f ound t hat , i n oper at i ng t he ai r cr af t , as descr i bed above, t he Respondent oper at ed t he ai r cr af t i n a car el ess manner , so as t o endanger , or pot ent i al l y endanger , t he l i ves and pr oper t y of ot her s. ( 15) As a r esul t , i t i s f ound t hat by Respondent ' s Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 act i ons, t hat Respondent appear s t o l ack t he qual i f i cat i ons t o cont i nue t o hol d an ai r l i ne t r anspor t pi l ot cer t i f i cat e. ( 16) I t i s f ound t hat as a r esul t of al l of t he above, t he Respondent , J ar ed Kyl e Angst adt , vi ol at ed t he f ol l owi ng Feder al Avi at i on Regul at i ons: Sect i on 121. 693( a) ; I ' m i ncor por at i ng by r ef er ence, as set f or t h i n t he Admi ni st r at or ' s Or der of Revocat i on, what t hat sect i on says. Sect i on 121. 693( c) ; I ' ve al so i ncor por at ed what t hat sect i on says, by r ef er ence. Sect i on 61. 59( a) ( 2) , i ncor por at i ng by r ef er ence what t hat r egul at i on says and spel l s out . Sect i on 91. 13( a) , whi ch of cour se i s a der i vat i ve vi ol at i on, because of t he ot her vi ol at i ons deal i ng wi t h oper at i ng t he ai r cr af t i n a car el ess manner , so as t o pot ent i al l y endanger t he l i f e or pr oper t y of anot her . Sect i on 91. 9( a) . I ' mi ncor por at i ng t hat sect i on by r ef er ence, as t o what i t spel l s out i n t he Admi ni st r at or ' s Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on. ( 17) Thi s J udge f i nds t hat saf et y i n ai r commer ce or ai r t r anspor t at i on and t he publ i c i nt er est does r equi r e t he af f i r mat i on of t he Admi ni st r at or ' s Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on dat ed Oct ober 17t h, 2008, i n vi ew of t he Respondent ' s vi ol at i ons of t he af or esai d Feder al Avi at i on Regul at i ons Sect i on 121. 693( a) , Sect i on 121. 693( c) , Sect i on 61. 59( a) ( 2) , Sect i on 91. 13( a) , and Sect i on 91. 9( a) .
Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ORDER I n vi ew of t he af or esai d vi ol at i ons of t hese r egul at i ons, I T I S ORDERED AND DECREED THAT: The Admi ni st r at or ' s Emer gency Or der of Revocat i on dat ed Oct ober 17t h, 2008, be and t he same i s af f i r med. Thi s Or der i s i ssued by Wi l l i amE. Fowl er , J r . , a Uni t ed St at es Admi ni st r at i ve Law J udge.
__________________________ EDI TED AND DATED ON WI LLI AM E. FOWLER, J R. NOVEMBER 21, 2008 Admi ni st r at i ve Law J udge Fr ee St at e Repor t i ng, I nc. ( 410) 974- 0947
Paula Salinger Fraud on the Court - Violations of State Law, Court Rules, Attorney Ethics, Moral Turpitude - Woodruff, O'Hair, Posner & Salinger Inc Sacramento - California State Bar Chief Trial Counsel Jayne Kim - California Supreme Court - Paula D. Salinger Judge Pro Tem Sacramento Superior Court - Sacramento Bar Association Family Law Section Officer Family Law Executive Committee - Judge Robert Hight - Judge James Mize Sacramento County Superior Court
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas