BEFORE THE 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION" 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

v-»* 

r\ " 

« ' •" 

rfj^= . rv 

CKET 

IN THE MATTER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA Docket No. CPlOSWOOll 

FAA Case No. 2009SW270058 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0978 

Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

ANSWER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

no po o 

— cri 

Pursuant to Rule 209 of the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions (14 

C.F.R. Part 13, Subpart G), Continental Airlines, Inc. ("Continental" or 

"Respondent"), by the undersigned, files this Answer to the Complaint of the Federal 

Aviation Administration ("FAA") in the above-captioned case that was served by 

certified mail on October 13, 2010, and states as follows: 

Admissions and Denials 

1. The procedural history recited in Complaint section identified as I is 

ADMITTED. 

2. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 1 are ADMITTED. 
Answer of Continental AirHnes, Inc. 

Page 2 

3. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 2 quote firom 

Continental's aircraft maintenance log, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence 

of its contents. Continental is without svifficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the remaining allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II 2 at this time 

and intends to conduct discovery in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil 

Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

4. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 3 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of the aircraft maintenance log referenced in that paragraph, 

which speaks for itself and the best evidence of its contents. Continental is without 

sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the remaining allegations in 

Complaint paragraph identified as II 3 at this time and intends to conduct discovery in 

this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA CivU Penalty Actions and 

the Procedural Order. 

5. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 4 are ADMITTED. 

6. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 5 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of, and quote from, a Work Card, which speaks for itself and is 

the best evidence of its contents. 

7. Continental is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 6 at this time and intends 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 
Answer of Continental Airlines, Inc. 

Page 3 

8. Continental is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 7 at this time and intends 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

9. The allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II 8 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of MEL 22-04, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence 

of its contents. 

10. Continental has insufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny the 

allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 9 at this time and intends to 

conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil 

Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

11. The allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as IIlO constitute the 

FAA's characterization of Continental's operations specifications, which speak for 

themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. 

12. The allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II1 1 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of Continental's General Maintenance Manual and CAMP, 

which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. 

13. The allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II12 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of Continental's maintenance program and operations 

specifications, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. 

14. Continental is without sufficient information to admit or deny the 

allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II 13 and intends to conduct 
Answer of Continental AirHnes, Inc. 

Page 4 

discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty 

Actions and the Procedural Order. 

15. Continental is without sufficient information to admit or deny the 

allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II14 and intends to conduct 

discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty 

Actions and the Procedural Order. 

16. Continental is without sufficient information to admit or deny the 

allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II 15 and intends to conduct 

discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty 

Actions and the Procedural Order. 

17. Continental is without sufficient information to admit or deny the 

allegations of Complaint paragraph identified as II 16 and intends to conduct 

discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty 

Actions and the Procedural Order. 

18. Continental DENIES that it violated the regulations in paragraphs a-c 

following Complaint paragraph identified as II16, pending discovery in this matter. 

Answering further. Continental states that the regulations cited in those paragraphs 

speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. 

19. Continental ADMITS that the maximum penalty per violation under the 

regulation(s) cited in paragraph III 1 of the Complaint is $25,000, but Continental 

DENIES that it violated the regulation(s) cited in the Complaint, pending discovery in 

this matter, or is otherwise subject to a civil penalty in this case. 
Answer of Continental Airlines, Inc. 

Page 5 

20. Continental DENIES any allegation in the Complaint not specifically 

addressed in this Answer. 

Affirmative Defenses 

1. For its first affirmative defense, Continental asserts that the FAA has 

failed to state a claim upon which relief can be based. 

2. For its second affibrmative defense. Continental asserts that the proposed 

civil penalty is excessive, not appropriate and unwarranted under the circumstances 

presented. 

Rehef Requested 

Continental respectfully requests that the Complaint be dismissed with 

prejudice. 

Place of Hearing 

Continental requests that the hearing in this matter be held in Houston, Texas, 

which is the corporate headquarters for Respondent and the place from which most 

Continental witnesses wiU Hkely be called to testify. 

Duration of Hearing 

Continental expects at this time that the hearing will last three days, but may 

take substantially longer depending on the witnesses to testify and the evidence to be 

presented. 
Answer of Continental Airlines, Inc. 

Page 6 

November 16, 2010 

DCrWDMS: 13752687_1 

Respectfully submitted, 

CONH5?JENTAL^RZ&ES, INC. 

Thomas Newton Boiling 

Managing Attorney, RegulatorylAlfairs 
Answer of Continental AirUnes, Inc. 

Page 7 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that on this 16*^^ day of November 2010,1 caused a true copy of the 

foregoing Answer to be served: 

by U.S. certified mail (original and one copy), return receipt requested, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

and by U.S. certified mail (one copy), return receipt requested, to: 

Tim Duff, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel, ASW-7 

Southwest Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 Meacham Boulevard 

Fort Worth, TX 76193-0007 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building, Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

'^^^^.d . SUJ^^2^€<:^ 

Judi1;h A. Dabney ^