10/05/201 0 10:2 3 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS HOOI/OOG 

MCELROY, DEUTSCH, MULVANJEY & CARPENTER, LLP 

ATTORNEYS A T I.AW 

1300 MOUNT KEMBLE AVENUE 

P.O. BOX 2075 

MORRISTOWN, NEW JERSEY 07962-2075 

(973)99^^100 

FACSIMILE (973) 425-0161 

pEi es SAAD 

Direcrdial: (973) 42S.BBZ1 

psaadiSmd'nc-l aw.com 

Via Overnight Maij 

September 23, 2010 

I'cdcral Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

ATTN: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Kc: In the Matter of Ccnogcnics Corporation 

FAA Docket No, CP10EA0007 

MDMC No.: C0099-I000 

?M 

...n 

> 

fv3 

7'it ^ 

) • • 

goo 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

Enclosed herewith please find an original and two copies of an Amended Answer filed on 

behalf of respondent, Cenogenics Corporation, in the above captioned matter. Kindly file same, 

stamp the copy "filed' and return a copy in the self-addressed, stamped envelope provided. 

Very truly yours, 

McliLROY, DEUTSCH, MULVANEY & CARPENTER, LLP 

Peier Saad 

cc: The Honorable Ronnie A. Voder (via regular mail and facsimile, w/enclosure) 

Jeanine C. Golimer (via Jacsimile, w/enclosure) 

NEWARK, NEW/ER.SKY RIUfiKWOOfJ, MEU/jhjRShY NhW YOKK, NhW VORK IJKNVKK, COI-OHAIX' ) I'HII.AOKM'HIA . PKNNSVI.VAKjrA 

121873S 1 
10/05/2010 10:24 FAX 2024935142 FAA ^ DMS @)002/00G 

MCELROY, DEUTSCH, MULVANEY & CARPENTER, LLP 

1300 Mount Kemble Avenue 

P.O. Box 2075 

Morristown, New Jersey 07962-2075 

(973) 993-8100 

Attorneys for Respondent, Cenogenics Corporation 

•7^:P 2 h 20t0 

IN THE MATTER OF CENOGENICS 

CORPORATION 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

Case No. 2009EA700392 

FAA DockeiNo. CP10EA0007 

FDMS No. FAA-2010-0786 

AMENDED ANSWER 

Respondent, Cenogenics Corporation, by way of an amended answer to the 

complaint, hereby says: 

I 

Admit the brief procedural history outlined in Section I of the Complaint. 

II 

1. Admit. 

2. Admit. 

3. Admit that Cenogenics employee, Eileen Kerster, prepared the Shipper's 

Deciarations for Dangerous Goods for the October 27, 2008 and March 20, 2009 

shipment referenced. Denied as to the allegation that Ms. Kerster did not receive the 

required hazmat training. Ms. Kerster was trained pursuant to 49 CFR 172.702(c). 
10/05/2010 10:24 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS 12)003/006 

4. Denied. Ms. Kerster received general awareness/familiarization training 

as required by 49 CfR 172.704(a)(1). Ms. Kerster was trained pursuant lo 49 CFR 

172.702(c). 

5. Denied. Ms. Kerster received function-specific training as required by 49 

CFR 172.704(a)(2). Ms. Kerster was trained pursuant to 49 CFR 172.702(c), 

6- Denied. All employees having responsibility for shipments, including the 

manufacturing tcchrucian and the export secretary, were instructed as to the applicable 

Hazardous Material.s Regulation.";. 

7. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation provided two alternative emergency 

response telephone numbers where either Michael Katz or Nitza Katz could be reached at 

all hours of the day. Both individuals arc highly trained chemists, who were 

knowledgeable of the material being shipped and had comprehensive emergency 

response and incident mitigation information. 

8. Denied. Cenogenics complied with 49 CFR 172.202(a)(1) and (a)(2) in 

the maimer by which it described the referenced shipment. The shipment was a VDRL 

Antigen, a diagno-stic reagent for the detection of syphilis infections. Tlie product 

consists of a solution of ethanol, cardiolipin, cholesterol and lecithin. Since only the 

ethanol solution is listed as a dangerous good, the proper shipping name pursuant to 49 

CFR 172.101 and that lATA table 4.2 is ethanol solution and the UN number is UNI 170. 

Further, on September 9, 2010, Nitza Katz requested guidance on this matter from the 

U.S. Department of Tran."5portalion (DOT) pursuant to 49 CfR 105.20(a)(2). A DOT 

specialist confirmed that Cenogenics Corporation had properly classified the solution. 
H 10/05/201 0 10:2 4 FAX 202493514 2 FAA -> QMS 0004/006 

9. Admit that Cenogenics Corporation described the hazardous material on 

the Shipper's Declaration For Dangerous Goods as "UN 1170, Ethanol Solution, Class 3, 

Packing Group II." Denied as to the allegation that Cenogenics Corporation erred in its 

description of the material. Incorporated herein by reference i.s respondent's answer to 

paragraph 8. 

10. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation fully complied with the requirements of 

49 CFR I72.203(k). The product .solution consisted of specially denatured ethyl alcohol 

with toluene, hydrogen peroxide, and water. The toluene is not a separate component 

that is added lo the formulaiion, but rather it is the denaturing agent of the raw material -

ethyl alcohol. The toluene is classified as llammable and is in the same class and 

packaging group as the alcohol. The concentration of hydrogen peroxide in this solution 

was less than 8%. Pursuant to 49 CFR 172.101 and L\TA table 4.2, hydrogen peroxide 

solutions of less than 8% are not restricted. Thus, it is not a requirement to provide the 

name of this component in the description. Further, on September 13, 2010, Nitza Katz 

requested guidance on thi.s matter from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) 

pursuant to 49 CFR 105.20(a)(2). A DOT specialist confirmed that Ccnogcnics 

Corporation had properly classified the solution. 

lii 

a. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation denies the implicit allegation thai it 

violated Section 172.202(a)(1) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials 

Regulations. 
10/05/2010 10:24 FAX 2024935142 FAA ^ DMS §1005/006 

b. Denied. Ccnogcnics Corporation denies the implicit allegation that it 

violated Section 172.202(a)(2) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials 

Regulations. 

c. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation denies the implicit allegation that it 

violated Section 172.203(k) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials 

Regulations. 

d. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation denies the implicit allegation thai it 

violated Section 172.604(a) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous MateriaLs 

Regulations. 

e. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation denies the implicit allegation that it 

violated Section 172.704(a)(1) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials 

Regulations. 

f Denied. Ccnogcnics Corporation denies the implicit allegation that it 

violated Section 172.704(a)(2)(i) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous 

Materials Regulations. 

g. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation denies the implicit allegation that it 

violated Section 173.22(a)(1) & (2) of the Department of Transportation Hazardous 

Materials Regulations. 

lY 

1. Denied. Cenogenics Corporation is not liable for a civil penalty and 

disputes the method by which the alleged civil penally v^as computed. 
10/05/2010 10:24 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS 12006/006 

2, Denied. Cenogenics Corporation is not liable for a civil penalty and 

disputes the method by which the alleged civil penally was computed. 

CERTIFICATION 

We hereby certify that the within pleading is served within the time allowed by 

law pursuant to the Rules of Practice, as extended. 

We hereby certify that the matter in controversy is not the subject of any other 

pending action in any other court, the subject of any pending arbitration proceeding, nor 

is there any other action or arbitration proceeding contemplated. 

McELROY, DEUTSCH & MULVANEY 

Attorneys for Respondent, Cenogenics 

Corporation 

/7 

Dated: September 22, 2010