Boeta v. Federal Aviation Administration
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 14280
| 5th Cir. | 2016Background
- Richard Boeta, a pilot employed by Capital Aerospace, flew N497RC (owned by Redi-Carpet) on Sept. 8, 2011; USAC previously had operational control and RVSM authorization for that airplane but had removed the aircraft from its OpSpecs months earlier.
- Boeta received a trip sheet from Capital (not USAC), filed a flight plan indicating RVSM authorization, and flew in RVSM airspace; FAA inspectors performed a ramp check on landing and discovered USAC’s OpSpecs had been amended to remove N497RC.
- FAA suspended Boeta’s air transport pilot certificate for 60 days for operating in RVSM airspace without operator authorization; an ALJ upheld the suspension and the NTSB affirmed.
- Boeta had filed a timely Aviation Safety Report (ASR) with NASA within ten days after the flight and argued for waiver of sanctions under the ASR program, claiming the violation was inadvertent.
- The ALJ and NTSB found Boeta’s failure to verify current operator authorization before flight was not inadvertent and rejected his waiver defense; the Fifth Circuit majority reversed only on the ASR-waiver issue and ordered expungement of the suspension.
Issues
| Issue | Boeta's Argument | FAA/NTSB's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limitation on cross-examination | ALJ improperly curtailed cross-examination of witnesses | Rulings were within ALJ discretion and did not prejudice Boeta | Affirmed — no reversible error |
| Reasonable-reliance defense | Boeta reasonably relied on prior OpSpecs/agency relationships | Boeta had reason to question USAC’s authority and did not reasonably rely | Affirmed — defense rejected |
| Waiver under ASR (inadvertence) | Filing a timely ASR shows the violation was inadvertent and merits immunity from sanction | Failure to verify documents before flight made violation not inadvertent | Reversed — Court finds error; violation was inadvertent and waiver applies |
| Remedy / sanction | Suspension should be vacated if waiver applies | Sanction appropriate absent inadvertence | Reversed and rendered: 60-day suspension vacated; NTSB instructed to expunge suspension |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. Nat’l Transp. Safety Bd., 866 F.2d 805 (5th Cir. 1989) (appellate review is highly deferential to NTSB factual findings)
- Ellis v. Liberty Life Assur. Co. of Bos., 394 F.3d 262 (5th Cir. 2004) (definition of "substantial evidence")
- Ferguson v. Nat’l Transp. Safety Bd., 678 F.2d 821 (9th Cir. 1982) (defining "inadvertent" for ASR waiver context)
- Cent. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Alameda Cty., 284 U.S. 463 (U.S. 1932) (presumption that existing conditions continue)