8073

SERVED: December 17, 2008

NTSB Or der No. EA- 5421


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