AprilS, 2013 Hearing Docket 

## RoyJ. Transit Attorney at Law

P.O. BOX 1578 Royal Oak, Ml48068-1578 586-491-6822

Attention: HearingDocket Clerk- AGC 430 Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, SW. WilburWright Building- Suite 2Wl000 Washington, D.C. 20591 RE: DocketNo: FAA-2013-0047 Case No. 2012NE700128 IntheMatter of: Facility Solutions, Inc. Judge J.E. Sullivan Dear Hearing Docket Clerk: 

# RECEIVED APR- 92ti3 

## HEARING DOCKET

Please find enclosed for filing in the above referenced matter the Respondent's Answer to the Complaint, and appearing on the last two pages my ProofofService ofthe Answer. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

cc. Judge J. E. Sullivan U.S. Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearing, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200New Jersey Ave, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 Brian K. Khan Federal Aviation Administration Office ofRegional Counsel 2300East Devon Ave., AGL-7H Des Plains, lilinois 60018 Facility Solutions, Inc.

# RECEIVED U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

## APR_ g

## 2813 OFFICE OFHEARINGS
Inthe Matter of: Facility Solutions, Inc. Respondent WASHINGTON, DC 

## HeARING DOCKET ) ) 

### ) ) ) 

## DocketNo. FAA-2013-0047 Case No. 2012NE700128 Judge J.E. Sullivan

## --------------------------------------------~' Roy J. Transit roytransit@corneas!.net Attorney for Respondent: Facility Solutions, Inc. P.O. BOX 1578 Royal Oak, MI 48068-1578 586-491-6822 Fax: 248-564-0940 Brian K. Khan Federal Aviation Administration Office ofRegional Counsel 2300 EastDevon Ave., AGL-7H Des Plains, Illinois 60018 847-294-7652 Fax: 847-294-7498

_____________________________________________________ .! RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT Now comes Facility Solutions, Inc., by and through their attorney, Roy J. Transit and makes the following response to the Complaint Dated 3/14/2013 ofthe Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and states as follows in regards to each ofthe paragraphs set forth in the Complaint: Section I The Respondent admits the allegations ofthis paragraph.Section II

I. Respondent denies this paragraph for the reason that the passenger, Jeffrey Dwyer was not acting on behalfofthe Respondent, Facility Solutions, Inc. 2. Respondent denies this paragraph for the reason that the passenger, Jeffrey Dwyer was not acting on behalfofthe Respondent, Facility Solutions, Inc., and as to what baggage
was check, the Respondent has no way ofknowing, and therefore denies the paragraph and leaves the Petitioner to theirproofs 3. Respondent is without sufficient information or personal knowledge to admit or deny this claim and therefore leaves the Petitioner (FAA) to their proofs. 4. Respondent is without sufficient information orpersonal knowledge to admit or deny this claim and therefore leaves the Petitioner (FAA) to their proofs. 5. Respondent is without sufficient information orpersonal knowledge to admit or deny this claim and therefore leaves the Petitioner (FAA) to theirproofs. 6. Respondent is without sufficient infonnation orpersonal knowledge to admit or deny this claim andtherefore leaves the Petitioner (FAA) to theirproofs. 7. Denied. 8. Denied. 9. Denied. 10. Denied. II. Denied. 12. Denied. 13. Denied.14. Denied. Section III Facility Solutions denies that it acted in violation ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Material Regulations in that the passenger Jeffery Dwyer, was the ticketed passenger and was not acting in the course or scope ofhis employmentifthe said violations occurred, and in response to each ofthe subparagraphs the Respondent states as follows:


### a. Denied. b. Denied.
c. Denied. d. Denied.
e. Denied. f. Denied. g. Denied. h. Denied.
1. Denied. J. Denied. k. Denied. 

### 1. Denied.
m. Denied. Section IV I. Thatthe Respondent did not violate the provisions of49 CFR 171, 172 or 173 and as such should not be subject to any civil fine under the circumstances. Further, the FAA has whole ignored the responsible party, JefferyDywer, and has notmade himaccountable in any way for the alleged violations ofthe CFR and seeks to impose liability on anon-responsible party. 2. Ifthe Respondent is found to beresponsible for one or any violations ofthe CFR then the proposed civil penalty is outrageous and extreme in consideration ofthe fact that this is a first offense, the cargo was found before shipment and the Jeffery Dwyer was acting outside the course and scope ofhis employment with the Respondent. Wherefore, the Respondent respectfnllyrequests that the court make a finding that Facility Solutions is not in violation ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Material Regulations, or in the alternative, assess the minimum civil penalty allowed for each violation.

PROOF OF SERVICE A copy ofthis: Respondent's Answerto the Complaint was served upon, Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 WilburWright Building- Suite 2W1000 By Federal Express Courier, and upon the following: Judge J. E. Sullivan U.S. Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearing, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Ave, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590Brian K. Khan Federal Aviation Administration Office ofRegional Counsel 2300EastDevon Ave., AGL-7H Des Plains, Illinois 60018 On April 8, 2013, by US Mail, postage prepaid, by the undersigned.

Dated: April 8, 2013