U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) 

# RECEI\/ED AUG 25 20!5 H!=ARING DOCKET
) FAA Docket No. FAA 2014-0864 ) (Civil Penalty Action) FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION Respondent.
The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin ) ) ) FDMS no. 2014-0864 )

ANSWER OF FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION Respondent, Federal Express Corporation, by counsel, hereby answers the Amended Complaint ofthe Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter "FAA" or "Complainant") in the like-numbered paragraphs, pursuant to Section 13.209 ofthe Rules ofPractice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.209, and asserts as follows. 1. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 1 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 2. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 2 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 3. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 3 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 4. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 4 ofthe FAA's Complaint.5. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 5 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 6. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 6 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 7. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 7 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 8. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 8 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 9. Respondent admits the allegations contained in SectionI, paragraph 9 ofthe FAA's Complaint. 10. Respondent denies the allegations contained in SectionI, paragraph 1 0 ofthe FAA's Complaint. Specifically, Respondent denies that it "knowingly" accepted hazardous material for transportation by air in commerce when the material was not properly classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled, and in condition for shipment as required or authorized by applicable requirements ofSubchapter C, ofthe Hazardous Materials Regulations, and demands strictproofthereof. 11. Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 11 ofthe FAA's Complaint. Specifically, Respondent denies tbat it "knowingly" transported hazardous materials for transportationby air in commerce when the hazardous material was not transported in accordance with the applicable requirements ofsubchapter C, ofthe Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, and demands strict proofthereof. 12. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 12 ofthe FAA's Complaint. Specifically, Respondent denies that it "knowingly" accepted hazardousmaterial for transportation aboard an aircraft when the hazardous material was not described and certified on a shipping paper prepared in duplicate in accordance withpart 172 or as authorized by subpart C ofpart 171 ofsubchapter C, ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, and demands strict proofthereof. 13. Respondent denies the allegations contained in Section I, paragraph 13 ofthe FAA's Complaint. Specifically, Respondent denies that it "knowingly" failed to inspect hazardous material and denies that itplaced it in a unit load device or a palletprior to loading it aboard an aircraft. 14. Respondent denies the allegations contained in SectionI, paragraph 13 ofthe FAA's Complaint. Specifically, Respondent denies that it "knowingly" accepted hazardous material for transportation aboard an aircraft when the hazardous material was not marked and labeled in accordance with subparts D and E ofpart 172 or as authorized by subpart C ofpart 171 ofsubchapter C, ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, and demands strict proofthereof.

15. a. Respondent denies any and all alleged violations ofsection 171.2(e) ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.F.R. § 171.2(e), and demands strict proofthereof. b. Respondent denies any and all alleged violations ofsection l71.2(f) ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.F.R. § l71.2(f), and demands strict proofthereof.
c. Respondent denies any and all alleged violations ofsection 175.3 ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.F.R. 

### § 175.3, and demands strict proofthereof.d. Respondent denies any and all alleged violations ofsection 175.30(a)(2) ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.P.R. § 175.30(a)(2), and demands strict proofthereof.
e. Respondent denies any and all alleged violations ofsection 175.30(a)(3) ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.P.R. § 175.30(a)(3), and demands strict proofthereof. f. Respondent denies any and all alleged violations ofsection 175.30(b)(2) ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.P.R. 

### § 175.30(b)(2), and demands strict proofthereof. 16. Respondent denies any and all allegations in Section III ofthe FAA's Complaint, and asserts that the penalty that the FAA seeks to impose is unduly harsh, unjust, and unsupported by the facts surrounding the allegations at issue inthe Complaint. 17. All other allegations not specifically addressed are denied.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES I. The facts set forth inthe Complaint do not, as a matter oflaw, support a violation, in whole and/or in part, ofthe ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations. 2. The Complainant fails to state a claim warranting the proposed penalty.

WHEREFORE, Respondent, by counsel, respectfully requests the ChiefAdministrative Law Judge to enter an Order dismissing the Complaint with prejudice andenteringjudgment in favor ofRespondent.Dated: August 24, 2015 Respectfully submitted, Federa1 Express Corporation

# By:,G~**Atto~**for Respondent 1700 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 950 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 393-9285 greg.stofko@fedex.comCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that the foregoing document has been sent via Federal Express to the following:

Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, SW Wilbur Wright Building

- Suite 2Wl000 Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Mr. James Archier, Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel 2601 Meacham Boulevard Fort Worth, Texas 76137 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX:202-366-7536
Dated this 24th day ofAugust, 2015.

# Ry~o~ A rney for Respondent 1700 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Suite 950 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 393-9285 greg.stofko@fcdex.com

# Fec:Ex, Express August 24,2015 Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Ave., NW Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO Washington, DC 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Re: In the Matter ofFederal Express Corporation FDMS 2014-0864 (FAA Case No. 2014SW700042) Dear Hearing Docket Clerk: Legal Department 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 950 Washington, DC 20006 

# RECEIVED AUG 25 2015 

## HEARING DOCKET

Please find enclosed an original and one copy ofFederal Express Corporation's Answer to Complainant's Amended Complaint, which we are filing in the above referenced matter. Copies ofthis letter, motion and order are also being served via Federal Express on the FAA Office of Regional Counsel and the Administrative Law Judge assigned to this matter. Sincerely,



### ':"~'CSSQORP~~~~N



## GregS~ Attorney for Respondent 1700 PennsylvaniaAve., NW Suite 950 Washington, DC 20006 202-393-9285 greg.stofko({l)fedex.com Enclosure Cc: Mr. James Archier, FAA Office ofthe Regional Counsel The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin