What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
On June 20, 2021, at 1400 UTC, N770RS, a Diamond DA40, single engine reciprocating-engine aircraft, registered to richard benito, was cleared for takeoff RWY22 at intersection K1 (10,900? Rwy remaining) at kelp airport by the local ATC tower; however, the PIC attempted to depart in the opposite direction on RWY04 at K1 (900? Rwy remaining). The aircraft exited the runway pavement/threshold onto the RWY04 overrun. No FAA flight plan was filed. VFR conditions prevailed at kelp. The solo commercial pilot was not injured. The airport threshold lighting was damaged, and the aircraft sustained damage to propeller and gear.
The pilot was unwilling to make any formal verbal or written statement regarding his actions contributing to this incident either directly to the FAA abq FSDO or indirectly through his aviation attorney of record due to "legal liability concerns".
The pilot clearly took off in the wrong direction (contrary to his ATC takeoff clearance) with insufficient runway to get airborne on a hot and high density altitude summer day at the El Paso airport, kelp, with just 900 ft of runway. Simple POH performance calculations confirm this fact. This sole action (the root cause) resulted in the incident. The reason the pilot decided to takeoff in the wrong direction cannot be determined and the pilot is unwilling (for "legal reasons") to provide any explanation to the FAA for his actions resulting in the incident.
As the FAA filed it
ON JUNE 20, 2021, AT 1400 UTC, N770RS, A DIAMOND DA40, SINGLE ENGINE RECIPROCATING-ENGINE AIRCRAFT, REGISTERED TO RICHARD BENITO, WAS CLEARED FOR TAKEOFF RWY22 AT INTERSECTION K1 (10,900? RWY REMAINING) AT KELP AIRPORT BY THE LOCAL ATC TOWER; HOWEVER, THE PIC ATTEMPTED TO DEPART IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION ON RWY04 AT K1 (900? RWY REMAINING). THE AIRCRAFT EXITED THE RUNWAY PAVEMENT/THRESHOLD ONTO THE RWY04 OVERRUN. NO FAA FLIGHT PLAN WAS FILED. VFR CONDITIONS PREVAILED AT KELP. THE SOLO COMMERCIAL PILOT WAS NOT INJURED. THE AIRPORT THRESHOLD LIGHTING WAS DAMAGED, AND THE AIRCRAFT SUSTAINED DAMAGE TO PROPELLER AND GEAR.
THE PILOT WAS UNWILLING TO MAKE ANY FORMAL VERBAL OR WRITTEN STATEMENT REGARDING HIS ACTIONS CONTRIBUTING TO THIS INCIDENT EITHER DIRECTLY TO THE FAA ABQ FSDO OR INDIRECTLY THROUGH HIS AVIATION ATTORNEY OF RECORD DUE TO "LEGAL LIABILITY CONCERNS".
THE PILOT CLEARLY TOOK OFF IN THE WRONG DIRECTION (CONTRARY TO HIS ATC TAKEOFF CLEARANCE) WITH INSUFFICIENT RUNWAY TO GET AIRBORNE ON A HOT AND HIGH DENSITY ALTITUDE SUMMER DAY AT THE EL PASO AIRPORT, KELP, WITH JUST 900 FT OF RUNWAY. SIMPLE POH PERFORMANCE CALCULATIONS CONFIRM THIS FACT. THIS SOLE ACTION (THE ROOT CAUSE) RESULTED IN THE INCIDENT. THE REASON THE PILOT DECIDED TO TAKEOFF IN THE WRONG DIRECTION CANNOT BE DETERMINED AND THE PILOT IS UNWILLING (FOR "LEGAL REASONS") TO PROVIDE ANY EXPLANATION TO THE FAA FOR HIS ACTIONS RESULTING IN THE INCIDENT.