03/10/201 1 1G;3 5 FA X 202493514 2 FA A + DM S 0001/01 2

1 2 3 4 5 S 7 B a 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 I S 1 7 I B I B ? n 2 1
Z 2 2 4 2 5 2 e 2 7 S B 2 5 

### a o a i
S i 3 e
i s 4 0 4 1 <ia 4 3 4 4 4 S •i S 4 7 4 9 i n 5 1 

### Scot t R , Morri s F A AOffice o

f Regiona l Counsel 160 1 Lin dAve , S W Renton , Washington 9805 7 Telephone ; 425/227-141 7 Facsimile ; 423/227-1007 

# RECEIVE D
HEARIN GDOCKE T UNITE D STATE S O FAMERIC A FEDERA LAVIATIO N ADMINISTltATIO N

OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D. C

I n ihe Maue T of EMPIR EAIRLINES , INC
. FA A DOCKE

T NO
. CP09NM0009 DM S NO
. FAA-2009-058 6 FA A Cas e No
. 2007NM70015 5 COMPLAINANT' S REBUTTA LBRIE F
TO : .ruDO

t RICHAR

D C
. GCX)DWI

N 

### INTRODUCTIO N I n essence . Re-spondent' s brie f nttempt ^ to trfinpfc r its rcspDwihilit

y a s a n ai r earne r t o it s CTiTtOTTicr, FcdcTfi l BieiTrrs' ? (FrrlP.r)
. It ^ bnr f onl y foniiSrt s o n (.li e ar.c*!pt3nc e Jlllegation ? s o Complainaii t

assume s tha t

i t i s concedin g th e transpor t violfHon,?
. AWGlTiyTF-N T
A
. RrspnnHrn t

i s m \inf^rpryir^mt
. ai r r.Firrir T rcsTmn^iH e fn r f^rr-Piptinp:
. insper.ting,Jn;)jdinp
. an d t^:^^sponi•^ E'whjtrvr r p?irV^yr s 7\vr
. pln.r.r dti n il. y Hmxyiii
. 

### Respondeat' 6 brie

f attempts 1 o Burgu e that , becaus e FedE

x o^vn s the aircraf

t Responden

t operates , i t equate s to operationa

l contro l o f the aircraft
. Thi s argumen

t i s simpl y vronf l as a matte r of law
. Fj-npir

e Airline s (Empire

) ow n Directo r o f Qualit y Assuranc e admine

dcha t the

COMPLAIKWIT'

E REBUTTM

. BSI W- CPOSNHOOQS , ?.007HM7()01.5 5 EMPIR E AlRUNTi

S P n qr - 1 o f

T Z !'H1. ; (115.327.11 3 7 ; PAX : -IS K .227.10D ^ : ; - '-': >


### > ^ •t f j = r

- O , - • ' J ••:"v.^:^- J 

### ~~''4i'x } 

## '.^di= ! m^r n rP'^ ^ 

# S § ^
o - j03/10/201 1 16:3 5 FA X 202493514 2 FA A * DM S 21002/01 2

1 2 3 ^ S F 7 B 9 I D 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 I K \- t 1 8 1" » 2 0 7: i 2 2 2 1 2 4 2 5 2 C 2 7 2 A as "
3 1
^ 7
? 1 'J S 'i & 3 7 2 8 1 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 6 4 7 4 S 4 9 5 0 5 1 5 2 5 3 compan y ha doperationa l contro l o f th e aircraft
. B y rei?uIaiions , Empire' s nam e i s o n eac han d
every aircraf

t iha [ i t operates . Se e 1 ^ C.F.R

- § 119.9(b)
. Th e Responden t i s in n o diflt'eren

t situatio n than an y other

independen t

ai r carrie r conductin g operation s fo r othe r ai r carriers
. Fo r example , SkyWcs t

i s th e world' s larges t

refilona l air carrie r ye i i i operate s th e vas t

majorit y o f it s aircraf t withth e pain t

scheme s an droutin g cod e infoimaTion fo r it s cUenus ; majo r

airline s suc ha s Delta , United , aii dAirTran Airhnes. " A n ai r carrie r i s responsibl e t o kno w wha t i s loade do n it s aircraft
. Unde r Respondent'.> ; air carrie r certificate , th e pilo t

i n comman di s responsibl n ib r siupcrwisin

g individual s loadin g th e aircraf t - regariiles s o f

whether the y are Responden t

employees , FedE x employees , o r som e othe r contrac t en^ployees.' ' Despit e Respondent' s contention , ther e i.< ! n o suc hthin g i n di e sututc s o r i n th e federa

l aviaxion regulation s calle dor identifie da s "regional ai r carg o support, " I n facr , n o suc hter

mexist s i n asingl e federa l sLatuia, regulation , o r

federal case." * Wl.ifi

t Responden t

wa s doin g wa s "all-cars o air transportation." ^ Thes e aperaiion s FIT C governe d primaril y b y 1 4 C.F.R
. Pari s 119,135 , and121
. Dtirin g stir hoprT7irinn,<, ^ s a

n ai r carrirr
. iti. s responsibl e for

th e action s tha i occu r

durin g loading , aft-loading , an dtrfinspnrtin ^ tViroiig hn^ e o f it s aircraft
. Responden t

argue s tliat

"Empir e simpl y flic s th e plan e carryin g th e FedPj c ExiTrc. « shipment s fromon e poin t t o another. " Respondent' s Brie f M 4
. h, ^ s n speciou s an ddangerou s argumen t fo r Responden t

l o assor i iha l it ha s ri o responsibility for

th e item s that

it transport s o n

^ Tr
. a i 186 , line s 1-19 , ^ Ss e hitpV/ww w alivwe.^ r co mlas i vijire dFebruar y ,28 , -Oil
. ^ S« « Exhibi t

C-II , pag e 11-dl
. * .TpK49U,i5.C
. §40)0 2 an d1 4 C.F.R
. §1. 1 tor definitions
. Ther e iaon e ol dCivi l AcronuuLic aBoar dcas e tha t \i6a s th e phras e "ai r

eai^ o support" , i n referencin g acompany' s foreig n ai r rrantporcatioT i functiont
. .Te e Ala>:k a Iiuernational
. Charie r

Autho r iiy , S 4 C.A.B
. 72

R(1979)
. 197 9 WL1913 3 (D.O,T,) , Foreis n ai r trun.iporlttlio n i s define di n th e ululub : rindregulations
.

COMELAINMII

' S REEUTTJU

i BRIE F" CPOSNMOCJOJ , 2Q07KM7D01S 5 P&c^ a2 o f

1 2 SCOT T K , MORKI.? , PA A XTTOKNE! ^ TEL : •425.227,1417 ; PAX.

- 1 2. ?
. 22 7
. 1 0O 703/10/201 1 16;3 5 FAX 202433514 2 

### FA A * DM S 003/01 2

1 2 3 4 5 e 7
9 1 0 

### n . 1 2 t. 3 1 4 I S I S 1 7 3 6 1 9 2 D 2 1 2 2 2: < a s 7 P 2 7 2 B 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 2 e 3 7 3 S 3 3 4 0 I T 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 £ 4 7 1 6 4 9 5 0 £ 1 3 2 5 3 it s ttircrafi. EssenliiJl y Responden t want s th e Administrativ e La w Judge (ALJ ) t o rul e that it can contrac t avya y it s regulatory responsibihl y for th e conduc t

o f it s operations
. I

n th e Matte r

o f WeitAir Commuter , FA A Orde r

96-1 6 (May 13,1995) , 199 6 W L325903 , WestAi r attempte dt o mak e thi s very argument . I n thi s case . Respondent' s Brie f goe s ou t o f it s way t o attemp t

t o clai m tha t the y wer e no t

involve dor

provide dan

y ovcisi^ t

t o th e activitie s o f

th e contractor'i i i t

use d t o performth e hazardou s material requirements
. In WnjstAir , th e Administrato r

dispense dwit

h (hi s argumen t

b y pointin g ou t

that : Th e recor dfail s to sho w an y aLtemp i o n WestAir' s par

t t o monito r

whethe r Unite d wa s keepin g it s agreemen t t o provid e traine dgrotmdsecurity coordinator s for West/Sir' s flights,..
. A s th e lawjudis? © pointe dout , an ai r

carrier' s responsibilitie s arc to o critical t o permi t

it t o transfer

it s obligation s t o another
. It make. s n o differenc e tha t

Westair' s relianc e wa s o

n anothe r air carrier. ' Thi s logi c equall y .Tpplie s here
. There i s n o evidenc e o n Empire' s par t t o monito r

whethe r FedE x wa s keepin g it s agrrrmfrrit t n provid e th e correct'Notic e to Pilot-iii-Comman d(NOPTC)
o r loadin g intbimatio n t o R.cspondcnt' s flight cirw
. Thi. ^ i ^ nor th e firs t tim e that a n air carrier haaailcmptc dt o avoi dresponsibility ib r it s oblijjntion. s nnrlr

r it ^ ?I.I T cfirric r ccrti.fi.catc , whethe r

i l b e obhgalion s for

th e maintenanc e performe do n it s aircraft , th e documentatio n o f pilo t flight an dduly lime /

or th e transportatio n
o f ha?,arrloii s materials
. "Th e court s an dth e Administrator..
. hav e indicate drepeatedl y i n pas t
ca.se s tha t a n ai r carrier' s duties , whic hinclud e aslalulory duty t o exercis e th e highes t possibl e ficcrc c o f care , m e non-dclegable. " Alask aAirlines , Inc. , FA A Orde r 2004-8 , at

1 (Oct
. 4 , 2004)
. .lart

a ? i n th e Alask aAirline s cose , a s th e ai r carrie r operatin g th e aircraft
. Responden t

' d 9 U.S.C
. 40102(10

) provides : "'all-caris o airiransportation ' mean." ; th e rraniiponalio

n b y aircraf t i nlinerstat e ai r inmsporLalio

n o f onl y propert y o r onl y mail , <7 r both. " ° WasLAir , xupra , a t *3
. ' Sti
. e.g. . Admmmaior

v . Gtihsrtso n an dMartin , NTS

B Orde r EA-1252 , 3 NTS

D 168 3 (1979) , roMPWiNANT'

5 REBUTTA

LBRIE F- cpofWMOOO?

, 2007NM70015 S EMPIR I AIRLINE S Pag e 3 o f

1 2 SCDT T R , M0RR7* , PA A ATTORKTi r
TEL ; 425.227.1417 ; FAX : 425.227.1QD 703/10/201 1 16:3 5 FA X 202433514 2 FA A + DM S 0004/01 2

1 2 2

, 1 5 fi 7 F 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 I S 1 • / 1 8 2 0 7. 1 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 B 2 9 3 0 3 1 " l 7 2 3 •^ 4 -K ^ 2 6 3 7 2 S 3 5 ! J O 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 G 4 7 4 9 4 S S O .S I S 2 5 3 wa s responsibl e for

th e aircraft' s contents , howeve r the y wer e place daboar dit s aJTx:rafl
. Thi s i s consisten t

wit hlon g establishin g liability case s i n commo n carriage. ' Responden t ha dfiiJ l knowledg e that

carg o wa s bein g place daboar dit s aircraft
. It s ow n procedure s provid e tha t it s crewmember s ''mus t

supervis e th e loadin g o f

D G[dan^jerou s goods]. " Exhibi t C-11 , a t 11-41 , Appendi x G , para . A(2)
. "Durin g loadin g th e D Gi s separate dfro mothe r freight s o ih e crewmembe r

ma y accomplis hth e pre-loa dinspection. " Exhibi t C-11 , a i 11-41 , Appendi x G , para . A(l ) (emphasi s added)
. Th e manne r i n whic hit

choose s t o liav e hazardou s materia l shipment s processed , soned , identified , an dplace di n th e aircraf t wa s it s decisio n an di s it s ultimat e responsibility
. Complainan t agree s tha t

Responden t

can contrac t

th e abilit y t o perfor mthes e functions , bu t it adamantl y maintain s (ha i th e Responden t

canno t cnntr2.c i awa

y it s ultimat e responsibilit y fo r complianc e o f

th e regulation s for

action s tha t

occu r o n it s aircran
. bein g operate dtinde r it s ai r carrie r cerrificate
. Responden t

wa s th e operato r

o f th e aircraf

t here
. 4 9 C.F.R.
. § 175, ] (b)(l ) provides : Thi s subchapte r

applies ; I D any perso n wh o perfonns
. ?itirmpf.< ; l o p«rfoTm , o r i s reqtiire dt o performany functio n subjec t t o thi s subchapter , inrliKlin g — {\)Ai r carriers , indirec t

air carriers , andfreight

forwfirdcr s nn dthei r

fligh t an dnon-jllgh i employees , agents , subsidiary ?»n dcontractpar^orme l (includin g cargo , passenge r

an dbaggag e acceptance , handling , loadin g an dvnbadin s personKel)..
. (italic s added ) Thi s provisio n make s i t

clear tha i th e ai r

carrie r i s responsibl e no t

onl y fo r it s employees , bu t fo r personne l i t

contract s wit ht o performthos e furciiona. Responden t

attempt s t o distinguis hth e Alask aAir lin e o f case s fro mthi s cas e b y claimin g i t

wa s th e perso n performin g th e servic e functio n an dtha t Complainant' s cite dcase s

^ 5e e Alask aAiriinef, Inc
. v . Swccf , 56 8 P.2 d916 , ?2 6 (1977) , for th e lin e o f

cMc ainvolvin g nii i ftnditioio r carrie r operaiion j wher e th e court s hel dtha t thi s rcsponsibiUt y Js non-deJegabie
. Th e Ala.skaSuprcmi ; Ct>ur
. exicnclec l thes e
ConpijMHfiNT' s REBUTTA LBriTj r - CP09NMQ009 , 2007miJ70015 S Ppg o 4 a i 1 2 SCOT' J R
. MORMa , FA A ATTORHtr

f TEL : 425.227,1417 ; ^'A X : la.i ; . 2 2 7
. 10 0 703/10/201 1 16:3 5 FA X 202433514 2 FA A • > CM S 21005/01 2

1 2 3 4 s i 1 S

. 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 l- i 1 5 1 6 1 7 3 9 1S < 2 D 2 1 '/•J
. 2 3 7 a 2 9 -^e 2 7 2 8 2 3 3 0 a x 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 e 3 7 3 8 ^^ ^ 4 0 i : 4: ^ 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 <1 7 4 8 4 9 5 0 5 1 ?i7
. 5 3 "d o no t

say much , i f

anythin g at

all, abou t th e relate denforcemen t

action s afiains l th e partie s pcrfoimir g rh r

.services... " Respondent' s Brie f at 5
. First , Court s hav e lon g hel dth e decisio n
o n whethe r

o r no t pro:5f;r,utoria

l discretio n i s exercise dagainij i anothe r entit y i s no t

relevan t t o th e violation s aeei-ns t

Acharge drespondent
. I n th e Maile r ofHi^ hExpoavre , Inc. , FA A Orde r 2001- 2 (.Ma

y 16 , 2,001) , at

'4 , 200 1 WL629389 ; I n iht i Mane r ofCosiello , FA A Orde r

93-1 0 (Mar
. 25 , 1993) , at

*3 , 199 3 W L«3S110
. Se e H&ckle r v . Cheney , 47 0 U.S
. 821 , 83 1 (1985)
. Second , RcspoiiHent

as,surrir. 5 tha

t every Responden t

o n appea l woul dattemp t t o rais e a s a defens e th e actio n take n again.s t othe r relate dentitie s a s abasi s for mitigatio n o r

exoneration
. Third
. Respondent' s argnmml. , in part , misstate s th e cas e law
. /; ? th e Matte r o f Alask a Airliner
. FA AOrde r

2004-8 , actio n -wa

s take n agains t

eac hrepai r

elatio n tha t

performe dth e maintenance
. Id. , a

t 4. ' Responden t

the n nrgue s tha t

th e WnxiAi

r case' " i s distinguishabl e becaus e th e Adminisiralo r foun d".sqiaratr

nn ddistinc t violaLions. " Respondent' s Brie f at.5
. Bu t that i s exactl y th e cas e here
. Tli c action s allege dai e fo r i.h e action s require db y th e Responden t

no t FedEx
. Al l o f

ih e allegation s her e pen.ni n t o it s rcsponsibililie s a s an ai r cerrier
. Grante dsom e oflhos e action s t o implenim t it s responsibility may hav e bee n contracte dt o FedEx , bu t the y arc stil l squarel y th e ohligatio n unde r th e regulation s o f

th e Respondent.' ^

z-Afe s to air carrie r operation s holding , AliLik

aAirline s liabl e fo

r the neglicenc e of

it s coiilraciors
. ^ "Jn r?ir, hcase . Alask

auit da n FAA.cerrifledrepair

ttation , an

dthe KA A file dchftrgc n ligainst t eachrepair

station
. hi th e AL.r

g vjew , the FAA' s pursur

f o f enforcemen

t action asains i th

e repair siaiion s flilfillecl Th

e public' s interes t

i n •"HfeTy. " fd

. ' " I n th e Matter ofWatAir , FA AOrde

r No
. 9(5-1 6 (Ma

y 3 , 1995)
. " Responden

t asser o thi t

th e facts i n FA A Docket CP09NM001 0 ar

c th e sam e or sijnileii , Thiai.-

i imprope r ttrgurreni becaus e there ar e n o faciai

n th e recor dtha t penai n t o the othe r case , Notwiihsiarniing thi.s , th e ftcis I n th e cas e agaJfts

i FedE x ar e differen t violation s becaus e the acceptanc e an dtranspor t ollee;e di n tha t cas e involvedI'cdE x employct j i n BMibnorc , M

D an dMemphis , I N an

dPonland , OB , au

dInvolvct l flights fo r aircraf t operate dimia r FedEx' s ow

n »l r carrie r certificate
.
2007NM70015 5 Paqc
. 5 cv

f 1 2 BBTE F- CPQSNMO0D9 , SCOT T R, MDXKI S , FAA ATTOKNFV TEL : 425.227.1417 ; TAX : 423.227.100 703/10/201 1 16:3 5 FA X 202493514 2 FA A + DM S @iooe/oi 2

: 2 4 5 6 7 e
3 C I 1 1 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 5 1 6 1 7 If l 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 3 6 2 7 2 9 2 5 3 0 3 1 .I S 1 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 S 3 S 4 0 4 1 4 2 ,43 4 4 4 9 11 ^ 4 7 4 R 4 9 s n 9 J 5 2 B
. Responden t

hadat leaiit constructive , i f

no t actual
. laiQwlcdg e thai ih c shipment s place do n it s aircraf t containe dhay^ardou s niaierials
. Responden t

canno t wiccessfti l clai mtha t

inattentio n b y it s flight

crew , o r tha t o f it s conlractors , eliminate." ^ i.(.< ; flut y imde r th e hazardou s materia l regulations
. Th e photograph s
an dtestimon y o f

th e Agcnt- s proviti e overwhelmin g evidenc e th e shipment s wer e clearl y marke do r

labele d& s hazardou. ? -mntrrial
. Despit e Respondent' s contcniion , i t ha dth e opportunit y t o hav e see n th e ORM- D marking s o n th e boxes
. Th e individual s loadin g it s aircraf t an dth e flight

cre w that

wer e reqiiire dt o monito r th e loadin g o f

it s aircraf t eac hha da

n opportunit y t o observ e markings , Thrs c marking s wer e literall y inches fro mth e very label. i tha t it s contractor. ^ woul dus e t o scan ait dtnr k th e shipment s fo r

th e flighl. s a t

issue
. I t beg s credibilit y t o argu e otherwise
. Likewis e Rciipondcn t

claim. n tha t

i t doc s no t accep t th e shipment
. Responden t i s confusin g th e requirement s for acceptanc e und«-,

r 4 9 C.F.R
. § 171. 2 wit hth e additiona l acceptanc e requirement s i n 4 9 C.F.R
. § J 75.30
. Fac h"aircral l operator " mus t inspec t th e shipmen t prio r t o transport . Thi s inspectio n include.- ? vcrificaLio n o f th e markings , labels , an d requu-e dshippin g papers . 4 9 CF.R
. § 175.30(a)
. Thr , wor d"operator " i s defme da s " aperso n wh o coniro hth e us e o f

anaircrafit , vessel , o r

vciiiclc."' ^ 4 9 C,F..R , § 171. 8 (emphasi s added)
. Responden t

controlle dth e us e o f

it s aircraf t i n th e conduc t

o f th< r Jlight s at i-ssue
. Therefore , prio r t o acceptanc e fo r

agive n flight , th e ai r

carrie r (wh o i. ^ th e ai r operator ) mus t

inspec t th e shipmen t t o ensur e complianc e withth e hazardou s malena l rejTtiUlinn s unde r 4 9 C.F.R
.

^ ' Rfspondenr'. ^ ow n managemen t acknowledge dtha t

i t ha doperalionii l contro l ove r al l o f it s aircraf

t unde r it s operation s specifications
. .SecT r a t 186 , Cn«reiAIWM)T'

S RrnvTTH

LBRIB f - C^O!»NMO00

3 , 20n7r^Tnni=i.= ; EMPIR EAiRLTsii-,)

i Pag e ROJ : \ ? TF.T, : 425.227.1417 , FAJC i 425.227.100 703/10/201 1 16:3 6 FA X 202493514 2 FA A + DM S 0007/01 2

1 3 3 4 S 6 7 B 9 3f l 1 1 1.7
. 1 3 1A I S l b 1 7 l a I S 3 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 5 5 2 6 7. 7 ? S 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 J- 1 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 8 3 9 a n 4 1 4 7 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 £ 4 7 4 6 4 3 5 0 5 1 9 2 5 3 ."subchapte

r C
. ' ^ Thi s onl y make s sens e i n th e contex t o f maintainin g th e highes t

leve l o f safety i n ai r

commerce . Unde r

4 9 C.F.R
. § 171.2 , acceptanc e doe s occu r at th e tim e ashippe r tender s fo r

placemen t

in commerc e - no t

ai r commerc e —

commerce . Bu t

Par t 17 5 further requires , prio r

t o acceptanc e o n a

n aircrall , th e packag e b e inspecte do r re-inspeae danew . Thi s heightene drequireraen i Btands t o reaso n for on e canno t

simpl y pul l ove r

at 35,00 0 fee t du e t o afire , o r

exi t aboa t i n alife-raft.' " Incredibly , Responden t

attempt s t o minimiz e it s calpabiUi y b y arguin g "i i woul d actuall y compromis e safet y to cxpee, ! acrewmembe r i n asingl e pilo t

operatio n t o perform packag e acceptance , inspectio n andloadin g funciions. " Responden t believe s "i t

woul d impede , commerc e an dinterfer e wit hacrewmeinber' s pre-fligh t responsibilitie s concernin g mriintenanc e an dairwonhiness... " .Respondent' s brie f at 7-8 , Responden t

convenicnily omit s tha t it i s th e on e that

decide s the , numbe r

o f crewmember.' ; o n ii. s aircrall
. I t i s trti e tha i th e ifgiilan'or s onl y requir e on e crewmembe r forrJi e Cessn aCarava n operation ; however , i f RrKpnnHm

t i s s t a.1 1 r.onrrmr dwit

hsafety , ther e i s n o impedimen t t o it requirin g s co-piiot
. Fiirthrr
. Rpijot' s prc-fligh t dutie s ar c no t

limite dt o maintenanc e an dairworthines s issues
. Ultimately , th e pilot-in-cnrrman di„> ; rc.sponsibi c for

cvcryrhin g nco^ssai y t o cnndu aa,safp
. flight
. HowKVer
. hrr p apilot
. \ n ?iflHrf:^«;in

g m n riirwoT+hinr^: s issu r

i n tjn r loJ^din g o f hi s or her

^ ^ Natethatthereqiiirennentsof49C.f,K. , Par r 17.' ! ar e I n additio n T O those o f 171.17?. , ]7i , ]7

X an d)K0
. i ^ C.F.R , § 175.1(a)
. ^ ' .Tudff e Kolk o prohaW y bes t describe) rh

t uniquenes s o

f problem s wlr haircraf l wiiil e i n f)igh r i n I n th e Matte r q f Norlhw ^ Ah-linci
. Inc. , FA A Docke t No
. CP98GL0028 , 199 9 WI , 337^89.^ 7 (D.O.T.) : On e woul dordinaril y hav e acon.iidcrabl y hctle r chanc e o f

avoiding , asrroldcrin

j fir e i n th e honne , o n th e groun dIhan i

n avoi<Img suc hafire aboar dameta l tub e hurtlin g throug hth e ai r a t .10,0^ 0 feet , In th e hom e on e ma y b e abl e t u Dec throug hB dot>

r o r b y openin g o r

eve n breakin c awindow ; a n airlin e passenge

r ha s n o suc hoption
. Furthe

r mipllcaiing the publi c safet y i.- ! th e fac t tha t afir e i n fligh t vv'oaldgenerall y clai mman y mor e potonlia ! viciim s than i n afire i n ahome
. COMPlAIfAlT

' S R.EBDTTM

. BRlU r - CP 0 5NMD0 0 9 , 2nn7NM7noi5 5 CKPIR E ,MIU,T>^ 3 Pag e 7 o f

1 2 SCOT T ft. Moutis , ?A

A ATTOIUIE

I TEL : 425.227.1417 ; FAX : 425.227.100 703/10/201 1 16:3 6 FA X 202493514 2 

### FA A + DM S 1008/01 2

1 2 2 4 b 6 7 a 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 If i 1 7 I B 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 S 2 3 2 4 2 S 2f i 3 7 2 S 2 9 3 0 3 1 :i ? 3 3 1 4 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 a 3 9 1 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 fl7 4 S i i 5 0 5 1 5 2 E 2 aircraft
. Stayin g viithi n a n aircraft' s weigh t an dbalanc e envelop e i s an aircraf t operatin g limitatio n impose db y th e ai.rcratl' s flight numual
. Se e 1 4 C.F.R
. § 91.9(a)
. Whe n Responden t

use s th e p.hra>;

K 'imped e commerce" , it

reall y mean s i t

slow s dow n it s operations
. Th e haztirdo mrnalt-ri?!. ! regiilatior.<; , especiall y i n th e ai r mode , wer e pu t

i n plac e t o trum p th e "spee di s kinj; " approac ht o certai n cargo . Th e traged y an dhistory o f th e consequence s that

resulte dfro

mth e tinrhf-cke dapproac hpropose db y Responden t are th e ver y
rea-son s thes e regulation s wer e promulg^le dan dnee dno t b e recounted
. C
. Responden t

ha dat leas t corbib-uctivc
. i f

no t actua l kneiwledae o f

th e manifest , loa dohantJ e mit3.Fi'^ha678-22
. Complainan t

wil l no t rehas hit s earlie r

argument s o n thi s point
. I t merel y ask. ^ ihf

t
rour t t o conside r

A ) th e Mana r

o f WestAi r CommuTSr

, FA A Orde r 96-1 6 (May 3
. 1995)
. 199 6 "WT
. 325903
. I n shon , th e act s o f one' i contractors , or

affirmativ e ignorance , i s no t a defense. ' D
. Responden t

i s oblicate dunde r

th e Federa l Aviatio n Regulation s t o provid e 1 material.' ; tPiinin g for

it s lliah i crew . First , not e that

Responden t

i n thi s par t

o f it.^ argumen t

admit s tha i i t

i s awill-can y cenillcai e holder , Re-spondent' s Brie f a t 12
. SeconH , Responden t attempt s t o limi t

J K responsibilit y unde r

th e hazardou s materia l regulation s h y claimin g tha t it s fligh t crew s ar e no t require dt o receiv e acceptajic e training
. Bu t a, 5 a n ,iir ram'rr
. Respondent' s trainin g

" Reapondcii l cite s In th e Matte r qfF.mptr aAir!inns , FA A Orde r 2000-1 3 (Jun e g , 2OO0

) Fo r th e propositio n tha t '•[a] n A U ha s hel dtha t

apart y i n Empire' s positio n i s no t liabl e for

regulator y vjolaxion s resultin g fTo mSUC H reliance. " Rcsptmdcni'. i Brie f ai 1 0 - 11
. Tha t

cas t doe s no t stan dat al l for tha i proposition
. I n feci, it stand s fo r th e opposit e position
. Ther e i s dict ai n tha t cas e t t pag e 6 wher e th e AdminisiniTo r refer." ! t o a n earlie r

initia l decisio n aCftins t th e ca,>i e ai r rflirii T i n a

n eve n eaxlier

cas e whic huphel dsuc haproposition
. However , th e Adminijtrato r cIe<-Lrl y point s ou t

tha t iha t wa s no t t o b e pive n ony precodcntia l weight
. Further , i n tli e case s siib.<iequen T t o I'A A Orde r 2000-13
. ch

c Administrator' s deeision i haw t mad e i t ver y clear

tha t reUauc e upo n awor k

o f othe r entitie s a s a n excus e l o avoi dresponsibilit y wil l uo i reveal , .^ee , e.jr.
. irt th e Mane r

c f Alask aAlrltniS
. inc. , 1"A A Orde r 2004

- 8 ; J n (h e Mane r

o f Federa l Express : Corporcainn , FA A Orde r 2003- 2 (Mn y 6 , 2003) , 200 3 W L21403977
. rOMHiiiMANi' s EaouTTX L SBIE F- CI'06NM00[I9 , 2007NM70015 5 .EvinREAIRUWE

i P^g e 8 o f

1 2 SeeT T R
. MrJHRTS

, TA A ATTOkuE

Y TEL : 425.227,1417 ; FAK : 4Z5.227.100 703/10/201 1 16:3 6 FA X 202493514 2 FA A •i - DM S 12009/01 2

1 2 4 B 6 7 a 9 1 0 1 1 1/ 1 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 B 1 7 I B 1 3 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 ;: 5 3C 2 7 2 a 2 9 •J O 2 1 3 2 3 3 .1- 1 3 t 3 6 3 7 3f l 3S> o n 4 1 4 7 4 3 4 1 4 5 4 e 4 7 4G 4 9 £ 0 5 1 5 3 3 3 requirement s ar e no t merel y limite dt o th e trainin g o f it s fligh t crews . Th e Responden t want s th e AL J t o ignor e th e contrac t groun dhandler.^ ; fi

t Portland , Orego n tha i actuall y loade d Re.'spondcni' s aircraft
. Furthermore , i f it s fligh t crcw.^ ; performth e dutie s o f on e that accept s a shipment , i l i s stil l require dt o provid e tha t (raintr £t o it s nigh t

crew . .Se

e 1 4 C.F.R
. Part

121 , Appendi x O , Tabl e 1 , Note s 1,2
. & 3
. Th e Prcflmblr r t o th e Pa n 12 1 rule s provides : Will-carr y certificat e holder s will hav e t o conduei in-depthtrainin g fo r person s directl y supervisin g o r

performin g an y o f

th e followin g jo b function s involvin g item s fo r (rajispor t o n aircraft

- acceptance , rrjcction , handling , storag e incidenta l t o transport , packagin g o f compan y maleriaj< ; owne do r use db y th e certificat e holde r (know n a s COMAT) , an dloading." * I n it s argiimeri, , F.espondcn i agai n conftise dth e acoeptanc e requirement s se t fort hi n 4 9 CF.R
. § 171.?withthoscin49C.F.R , § 175-30 , A caj-efu l loo k a t Appendi x 0 t o ?ar t

12 1 clarifie s Respondent' s eonfu.';ion
. Responden t onl y refer s th e AJ J L

o th e colum n pcrt.ainin g l o th e ''fligh t

crcw.-i an dloadplanners. " Fligh t crewg , actin g solel y a s fligh t crews,' ' a s a iTunimum , arc requiri=dt

n rrre.iv c trainin g abou t

Ih e genera l philo.<!ophy , limitations , lis t o f hazardou s materials , labelin g unc i marlcing , recogniilo n o f undeclare dhazardou s matcnab , storag e an dloadin g procediirK.^ , pilot' s notiiicaiion , provi.<;jons fo r passenger s an dcrew. , an d emergenc y procedure^, " S o ther e i s agrea t deal o f infonratio n tha t

fligh t crew s ere , at

a minimum , require dt o know. " Th s regulation s specificall y requir e tha t th e flight cre w an d

" 7 0 Fed
. Reg
. 58797 , cftlurru ) 2 , 1 " fil l pai-a

, (Oei
. 7 , 2005)
. I

n additio n ilie preambl e detloe s asupervisor a s "wa s mean

t to include indiyidual.' ; wiT

han y (Segre e o f direc t overtlghl ove

r aJunction addressedby th e propose drule
. I da r colum n 1 , las t sentence . • " Tleferrin

g t o the table s an

dthe co.liirni

i name s Th e preambl e provider : "Itpi e typ e of hazma t ^rtiininjE ; a n employee receive s i s basedo

n th e jo b function s he a

r .sh e perform s fc>r

, o r o n behalf of tli c par t 12 1 o r pa n 1 ^' S operator , no t hi e or her jo b dc.icriprion. " 7 0 Fed
. Rep.
. R i 5*7''S , colum

n 2 , Se i oh o id
. a

t colum n 3 (i'ocuai s o n jo b functio n no r Jn b flesci'lption)

. ^ ^ Sc i 1 4 C.F.R
. Par

t 121
. App
. 0
. Triblr
. 1 , ' " "Th e praciici

e tha t a n operator' s statfb c adequately traine dto assis t the mt n identif y anddetec t

Uildeclart d dan.a:erou agood. i ho s bee

n a n industr y stundar di n th e lAT A DG Rfo r over 10 years . Th e TAT

A DC Rinformatieii i s CoMPlJiiKAfiT ' s REUinTJi LfiRIEr - rD0?NMD0D9 , 2007Mlil7001£ £ £h-fflR E AnU-INl£.'

i Pag e S o f

1 3 STOT I R
. MORXIO, FA ^ AnORNE V TE1 [ 425
. SJ7 , 1417 ; PAX : 425.227.100" ^03/10/201 1 16:3 6 FA X 202493514 2 FA A + DM S 010/01 2

1 2 3 4 5 fi 7 a 1 0 1, 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 i s I C 1 7 I B 1 0 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 7, 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 B 2 J 3 0 3 1 3. 2 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 S 3 7 3 0 3.1 5 4 Q 4 1 4 2 •1: 1 4 4 4 S 4 5 4 7 -If i
' 9 S O 5 1 5 2 5 3 groun dcre w b e knowledgeabl e abou t recognitio n o f

undeclare dhazardou s materials
. F.ven Rcspontlent' s ow n progra macknowledge s the t th e flight crr w mus t

know , an di s responsibl e for , th s rorapatibility , separatio n distances , accessibility , .security , an dpackag e orientatio n o f it s ha7.ardoii s materia l cargo . Bu t on e mus t als o loo k a t th e onl y locatio n wher e acceptanc e procedurr;, ^ w c marke dwitha n "X"
. Tlia

t colum n i s entitle d"Operation s an dground-handlin g agent' ; sta.£

f accepun g hazardou s material.i. " An dthe n loo k at Nnt R3
. Th e acceptanc e procedure. ^ bein g reference dar e thos e activitie s that occu r a t th e tim e ashipmen t

i s initiall y offere dimdr r

Par t 171 , no : th e acceptanc e reference dunde r Part 175
. Recall , th e acceptanc e requirement' ^ for

th e ai r carrie r ar e in additio n t o thos e i n Pfir l 171,2 , Th e Responden t wan K 4 9 C.F,R
. § 175.3 0 t o readth e initia l aircraf t operato r ensure s compliance
. What th e regulatio n provide s i s th e aircraf t operator . Prio r

t o a n aircmf

t operato r placing , or

havin g placed , aboar dii, s aircraf

l ahazardou s material , i t mus t conduc t a n inspectio n n s set

fort hi n Sectio n 175.3 0 prin r

t o it s acceptanc e for

transpor t i n air commerce . E
. Th e proopse dcivi l penalty i s appropriat e under th e fact s an dcircumstance s o f thi'^ : cfisc
. Complainan t

largel y rest s upo n it s initia l brief
. Complainan t doc s tak e i.5su

r wit h RespondcnL^ s reprr.'se.ntatiDn s o f th e We.uAI

r Commute r

case , bu t ha s addresse dthos e concern s above
. Responden t

attempt s t o argu e certai n factor s that th e Administrato r

ha.'s clearl y :?tatcd
ar e no t mitigating
. Complainan t remind s th e cour

t tha t alac k o f aprio r violatio n hi.ttor

y i," ? no t mitigatin g a s a n unblcmi^^hr drecor di." ! th e expecte dnorm . See , e.ji. , Pon y Expre,<; x CatirK- r Corporation , FA A Orde r 94-1 9 (Jun e 22 , 1994)
. "Th e fac t tha t n o damag e occurre da s a

intenae at o preven t

undeclare ddan^erou- i sood s i n carg o fro mbein g iMdc do n a n aircraft.... " 7 0 Fed , Reg
. a i ,^8«03
. cohiia n 2
. I " fi

i 11 paragrap h ^ ^ L'xhibi t

C- ] ] , pag e 11^1 , App
. G , para . A (2)
. GtiMPuiijnkwr' e REBUIIJU
. BUTE P- CP03NMO0OS
. 2007NM70015 ^ rji,rP|RBAlIU.iNE S Pog e 1 0 o r

\7 , SCOT T R , MOUKT.S , FA A ATTOims r TEL : 425.227,1417 ) PAJ t ; 425.227.100 703/10/201 1 16:3 6 FA X 202493514 2 FA A * DM S @1011/01 2

1 2

• t 5 G 7 B B 1 0

• J 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 I S 1 6 1 7 I B 1 9 7, 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 e

•>. f 2 S 2 3 3 0 3 1

..' 4 3 5 3 e 3 7 3 9 1 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 G 4 6 4 7 IP , 4 9 n n 5 1 =; 7 5 3 resul t

o f th e shipmen t

i s no t amitigatin g factor. " 4 9 Fed
. Reg
. 19445 , colum n 3 , para , 3
. An y corrciciiv e actio n b y Responden t mus t no t jus t r,oTT«-, t H problem , bu t

mus t excee dth e minimu mrequirements
. Id
. a t 19444 , colun m3
. T*

^ ftiH paTEigraph
. CONCLUSrO N Fo r al j ofili e reason s se t

fort hi n Complainant',' ; initia l brie f an dthi s rebutta l brief

, th e Huding s o f

violation s shoul db e establislje dan dth e sanctio n propose dha s bee n demonstrate d t o b e asufficien t

deterrent
. Complainan t

maintain s tha t

th e $20,00 0 requeste di s appropriat e ?in< ^ warrante dby th e circumstances
. Th e fact that Rcsponilcn i ms4 e r

i busines s dedsio n to rel y upo n th e action s o f

anothe r ai r carrier' s acceptanc e an dtitickin g syslf. mdoc s no t reliev e i t fro m it' ; ovm . independen t

responsibihty under

th e Hazardoa s Matcri.fi

l Rrgulations
.
Rcspccifull y submitte dthi s 4t hda y ofMarch , 2011
.

col t R
. Morri s F A AAttorne y

COMm,»iHA»T'. i BriUTTM
. BnjEi ' - CP09NMnnn=i , 2007wiTnnn.'? 5 HwPtWiAIJiLINr s Pag e i. i o r

1 2 scoriB
. MoRRia , PA A ATTORjin

f TEL : 42S.227 , 1417 ; ?K/, : 425.227,100 703/10/201 1 16:3 6 FA X 202493514 2 FA A DM S @012/01 2

1 2 4 5 6 7 H V i 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 i' y 1 6 1 7 I B 1 9 7 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 e 2 7

. 7 8 2 3 3 0 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 2 G 3 7 3 6 3 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 I S 4 9 n n 5 1
^ 7 S 3 CERTIFICAT EO FSERVIC E
I hereb y certif

y tha t th e foregoin g Cornpl«Tnani.'' s Rebutta l Brief , ha s bee n serve dvi aFacBiinil e an dCertifie dMai l (hi s date , t o th e following :

Th e HonorsH r

RjcijardC
. Goodwi n Offic e o f hearings , M-2 0 120 0 Mew >T";r

y Avenue , S.E
. Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , RmE l 2-32 0 Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 FAX : 202.366.753 6 Attn : Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-43 0 Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 hidepcndenc e Av e S W Wilbu r Wrigh t Bldg
. • Suit e 2

W1.00 0 Washington , D.C
. 2059 1 FAX : 202.493.514 2 Courtne y E
. Felt s Staf f Attorney , Federal Express , Inc
. 362 0 Hack s Cros s Roa d Buildin g B,3'' ^ Floo r Memphis , T N 38125-880 0 FAX : 901.454.i;28 3

Date dthi s 4t

hday ofMarch
. 201)
. 

## l/ltl ^ MOIFAI RCHI N Offic e o f Regiona l Counse l (ANM-7 ) Federal Aviation
. Aflministratia n 160 1 LindAve
. S W Renton , W A9fi05 7 TEL : 425,227.21<5 0 FAX : 425.227.100 7

CoMPtiAINAlJl-' s RlSOTTJl LBxic r 2nfiTi<rNi7nni5 5 P.MPIR E Anu-INE S Pag e \ 7 o r

1 2 crosNMoon^ , Sco w ti , MBSHIS , PA> , JSTTORHZ V TEL : ,1^5.227.1417 ; FAX : 42. 5
. S?, 7
. 100 7