OG/15/2010 15:32 FAX 2024935142 FAA DMS 1001/009 

.Sir v'l N n MA|>JMM'. 

T)\ r.r.r-. H KAVS 

AMIKJN T I i-Miiiin 

tUCEMft r. ft.\Mini^. 

l.,\wiy;f:f;Ei;. Brii s 

MiiiJki I) K O'LllMN "• 

Tlli-iMi>K Oll.i. 

Al l HI .1 M rn I,\ »7l\U2 

tKM N A Kinj,vni< I V I 

Liti \ \ 1\ .Mo^^ Irm-iiiur w I'lstMiiii. 

[i 11 iLi'V M. I r\'j;nv 

,VJM'.i'Ul.li.lJl. Lll'U |r>,\AK' 

I'll IK P M-\UIM) 

Minn i I I. SMiiit 

L0U1> W. Pnl'l'A', 

Gui.i'M' |. Hr;,\>' 

PCAlllLLtN A. llu.Ni " 

SiiviN J Rj;MCi; 

PA I III'. H I. I-(MI[| I V 

]AMi> K. C;lHl1l>^^ 

L>/\>ill K Hl.R.firi'il " 

KiN/il'U h.'nr-n-l;NJtii 

Ml<'ll'MJ J. GlII.I.N 

DMH N I Wl Sv| I *v 

L.'('lU-.vi.JnOlU.\lM 

CiiJinanA CL\MJ- I 

^(•ivri W M Uf\vrNinp.T 

PI nil ; K^»ni n \ 

iu/Jll/./ifHAP.lB'W.IX t 

HiiNALD r*. Urti" 

Al.^siT.jMiUN* 

D. HMi'TuirfiNj; 

TlMJ MM [. KitM 

kHIVIIl '\ HIHUIIM.MJN 

Mlf:il.iUl.A. Wl l^M/>^^(I:[. 

Urnimi d ZLLMSi-

[AMI 1 10 Ji.UlK-' 

C'll'tlM'^S UlMRth.-v./.tM. 

Jans M HLiriMlftUMj-il 

ANTHON I i . ^^1IA^;II,\\^^ j 

ANDWVJ . iFMUIHIK" 

Juui M. l-i.tMINC 

KW/rEN A. iJiJtiAHjLi 

RnnruT C MliKi'Hi •• 

Tri m K TitiiMA'! 

N.N'A Ru ( I PiirtN< i',cn 

K-IRIK. 1)1 iwji.i.LS * t 

kMisH , Loim i 

LlSiA. ^-'iiiASi.r-iriii, 

TIW:IL L CHl1JJ^ 

MviitJ/MHTrr PCRER 

Cllni>'iurni IL R AI rr.n \ 

i>*.\jAiii n. pM K 

<.'rtND.\i. I'. I-'. 1S./MH1I 111. 

SiiAnn^ ^ jEFFiiEr 

\K. Ar v>i ^11 l^^JN 

SiJAf TllALKAK 

DAVJII R. KI 1 1)1 It -f 

LimiMfN.\ M "I'/tl-u 

MANNBSTG ^MARDER 

KASS, ELLROD, RAMIREZ UP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

1.5'I"H I^LOOR AT 801 TOWf.K 

801 SOUTH pi<:;ui"ROA SMU:ET 

LOS ANGr.I.F.S, CALIh'ORNIA 90017 

Tnt.Rl^'HONE: (111) ^24-6yuO 

l-ACSIMII.r.: (71 J) 62'l-6y99 

wEb srrt: VV\VW.MMKTR,COM 

Junes, 2010 

Via Certified/Return Receipt Requested 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avcmic, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Re: In the Matter of S/P Resources, Inc. 

Case No.: 2009WP700017 

VK.KJ H ftocMA 

bWANj. I'lftN 

•iMOMrtSr LUa.lU 

JOsMUA li. liriA'TNi: 

LADLLLll. Mu m [-vcnv 

.M.-Miif II lli;M.K0i-ri7. ' 

Iuii ^ P t\K:Kii i 

l-TlTkC.Curti.^'.Dii i 

M.M3tJNS-> A. HliftMAN 

PAULllANM/N 

Ki s;wrTu^ KrtW.LLViA 

L\lil() S. DuMiki.^ 

SI VAN f;(i|i| t 

)A-.ON I. HMII-11 

]M^\t. L TUMI M 

MAB,T|X KOSLA " 

k.On.Koi'l(.I.NKO 

ANNTMAW E M(.;Ui jwi ] I 

|i N^•|l I'll ^MrMf\N' 

5LJS'\S F_('"<ll IMAM 

Ml.^A.^SAM^Jl JI \N 

"lONTM. iA.N 

K.rviN hlir,i;^r S.MfTir 

CHWi'njl*iimKi\] o 

.Si I VKITI- 5 FARAC 

AMJUJ ^'l'H'•.v|.K 

Mrcni-f| I ri\\f^\Ay In 

Lilllls. \'.1.N HIM'I \' 

MATTHEW i)OlJii,vi/\M'*MIK 

bli\.M I. llniwiAK" 

lAMll-n TAHKO 

ANIIll»KT0l4nl',M I II III 

LliWB. V/AI. I 

M K I11-.U.I-':' i.mSfdj-j D LuNC 

1 jM(>f:«ljc[,\ 

PI ii.il ft. KiiMiN" 

Aru.:Lii.Ciiis 

jiii>miA, wii:r.j-.ninii»N 

N|VV U.\vii>oi.'lcii 

MrnAPin c, Lj^ry;i". 

GK\« I M hM)IIA 

tKli'M. nuum.i 1 *• 

\V;MI V f;, .Mil II u 

CHWST0PH|: » lO. N'l^M^i 

MiifTiLLLA WftOM'ii 

lli^.^^lJ<!^.•^. TAK.^1IASHI 

p-i'.i K:. LM.I.-I 

C'llrtlll ti Fll 

R^:^Al n j ^i i-.PiAni 

DiASr riijui-. 

JnA^-k:M, L^l-LEUli 

Ciiuiui A. Airri i \ 

jAMiST. GH/..NT 

(IiViiYiU l 

CrtTll l ] I'l 11) (1 

STI.VI N IT AMIIMCH N 

l.MiH-\ M, SP'^\I^.^^^'^ 

JOH.-HU. ll.MU}T 

Kt)ii\--;I^tkKJ-H£IBEIlL 

TulMiA J•^l^u^ 

C"itiJis*ifiJ Ml li W Ovi.ni'ir 

DA"II ) M . (.'ImiiM 

Knm.'BTl^ WARi-L.* 

SCu'i'r A. Al l r.s I 

M,M"rAW.*rA IC.Uv. 

'i'llUMrt'JA T|<AJ'/V^I 

Ri iH t 1 ^-Nii v/ii n > 

Ci QHIN-.H 

nnMATrTTTMiTH"' 

Tii<iivirt*.H WA(;S].14 

• A<llLllll(-|lltHl,lll|'b 1.1..Mil' 

I rvU,lM^.h,.('.^i.,.l-,.l.. 

^ ' '^^^ \^j ' Q^ * o 

S—i .s.,. 

iG DOCKET 

Cp/i l^Pms-/<^o/6'- 63/f 

Enclosed please tlnd the originals and it copy of S/P Resources, Inc.'s Answer to Coniplaint a]i| 

Notice of Represcnlation with respect to the above-mentioned matter. " " 

Very truly yours, 

MANNJISG & MARDER 

KASS, ELLROD, RAMIREZ LLP 

P 3 . 

C3 

Dictated but not read 

Christopher D. Nissan 

Enclosures 

cc; Couitney Adolph - Regional Counsel, Western-Pacific Region 

l'.J&UIJMJl.'^^llllJ^n^-(1^1ll^ 

]'hul«. lillil) 1 in.ivnW 

IIIINIT 

«.I>[1 • liHii'-. ''A "2612 

1.1V ('»J'M 'l'--l.r,'t'M 

.SnN l-'HANCIKtyi •nriMiiMJ i 

\^ ^., i-2IH> • Si.vll*iLlv,.v'. /iS2:j 
OG/15/2010 15:32 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 1^1002/009 

ORIGlia 

Christopher D. Nissen, Esq. State Bar No. 202034 

MANNING & MARDER 

KASS, ELLROD, RAMIREZ LLP 

15th Floor at 801 Tower 

801 South Figueroa Street 

Los Angeles, CA 90017 

lelephone: (213) 624-6900 

Attorneys for Respondent, S/P Resources, Inc. 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

REGIONAL COUNSEL 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

In the Matter of: 

S/P Resources, Inc., 

Respondent. 

) FAA DOCKET 

) 

) FAA CASE NO.: 2009WP70'0017 

) 

) S/P RESOURCES, INC.'S 

) ANSWER TO COM PLAIK T 

ANSWER 

The Respondent, S/P Resources, Inc., ("SP") answers the complaint herein in accordance 

with 14 C.F.R. 9 13.209 and respecttilly states as follows: 

I. 

SP admits that on April 22, 2010, by a Final Act of Proposed Civil Penalty, SP was 

advised that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount or$35,796.00. 

On April 9, 2010, Respondent provided a written request for a hearing in this matter. 

II. 

i. In response to paragraph 1 of the complaint, SP denies the averments of 

pai-agraph 1. SP admits that on or before October 15, 2008, SP presenred to Air/Sea Fomarders, 
OG/15/2010 15:3 2 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS @1003/009 

Inc., a tjpe of product having the name "Envieoat" hereinafter referred to as the "Product" or a 

'type of the Product," in a box or container for shipment. However, SP respectllilly denies that 

SP provided Air/Sea Forwarders, Inc., with any authorization to place the Product into the stream 

of commerce without prior transfer of the ownership (and risk) of the Product to the purchasing 

agent/owner. S/P further respectfully denies "knowingly" or "intentional ly"placing the Product 

into the stream of commerce or attempting to ship "hay.drdous materials" as alleged in the 

complaint. 

2. SP admits the averments of paragraph 2 in that the Product in that 

SP did allow the Product to be maintained the warehouse of Air/Sea Forwarders; however SP 

denies that the Product was offered on a Air-Sea Forwarders Warehouse On Hand Notice No. 

310463 and identified as "not restricted, non-hazardous". 

3. SP denies that the Product is properly categorized by the FAA in their complaint. 

The complaint identifies the Product as "flammable liquid, N.O.S. (Dimethycarbinol), 

Identification No. UNI993, Hazard Class #, Packing Group II." SP admits that the Product 

properiy categorized: as "UN 1993" carries a designation of "Packing Group 1", not Packing 

Group il. Further, the designation "UN 1993" does not contain the descriptor 

"Dimethycarbinol". That was added by Respondent for descriptive purposes only. 

4. SP denies that it offered the Product for air transportation in commerce when it 

was not properly classified, described, packaged, marked, labeled and in condition for shipment. 

SP further alleges the Air-Sea Forwarders was never provided authorization to ship the Product. 

Air-Sea Forwarders, at all relevant times, was charged solely with storing the Product, pending 

further authorization and classification for .shipment. 
OG/15/201 0 15:3 2 FAX 202493514 2 FAA + DMS 0004/009 

4. (a). With respect to the type of ihe Product offered for shipment, SP is 

without sufficient information to admit or deny the averments of paragraph 4(a) of the 

complaint. However, SP respectfully avers on infomiation and belief that the Product is not 

properly classified as "hazardous material." 

4, (b). With respect to the type of the Product allegedly offered for shipment, SP is 

without sufficient infonnation to admit or deny the averments of paragraph 4(b) of the 

complaint. However, SP respectfully avers on information and belief that the Product is not 

properly classified as "hazardous material." 

4. (c). With respect to the type of the Product offered for shipment, SP is 

without sufficient infonnation to admit or deny the avennents of paragraph 4(c) of the 

complaint. However, SP respectflilly avers on information and belief that the Product i.s not 

properly classified as "hazardous material." 

4. (d). With respect to the type of the Product offered for shipment, SP is 

without sufficient information to admit or deny the avennents of paragraph 4(d) of the 

complaint. However, SP respectfully avers on information and belief that the Product is not 

properly classified as "hazardous material." 

5. SP denies the averments of paragraph 5 of the complaint. 

6. SP denies that James Trato is a Hazmat Employee or that SP is a Hazmat 

Employer, as defined by 49 CFR 171.8, Further, SP denies that James Trato did not have general 

awareness/familiarization, fiinction-specifie, security awareness, safety, etc., training in 

accordance with subpart H of 49 CFR 172. 
OG/15/2010 15:33 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 0005/00 9 

In further response to the averments in paragraphs I through 6 of the complaint, which 

contain legal conclusions as to which it is believed no answer is required, SP respectfully denies 

that it knowingly or intentionally offered any "hazardous material" for shipment. 

In further response to the complaint, SP respectfully avers on information and belief that 

the FAA regulation.s cited arc not applicable to the Product and that, fiirthemiore, all of the cited 

regulations relate to one alleged shipment. SP did not knowingly or intentionally violate any of 

said FAA regulations, 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 13.209 (d), SP sets forth its Affirmative Defenses but rescTves the 

right to amend its Answer and Affimiativc Defenses during the course of the proceedings. 

First Affirmative Defense 

The complaint fails to state sufticicnt facts upon which a claim for relief may be granted. 

Second Affirmative Defense 

The complaint is uncertain in that the civil penalty sought is uncertain. At pages 1 and 6 

of the complaint, petitioner seeks a civil penalty of $35,796.00; however, at page 5 of the 

complaint, pefitioner seeks a different civil penalty of $39,756-00. Accordingly, respondent is 

uncertain as to the amount sought by petitioner in this complaint. 

Third Affirmative Defense 

The complaint is uncertain in that the Product that is the subject of this complaint is not 

properly classified as a hazardous material or flammable liquid under relevant CFR Regulations. 

Specitically, the complaint identifies the Product as "flammable liquid, N.O.S. 

(Dimethycarbinol), Identification No. UN1993, Hai^ard Class #, Packing Group II." No such 
OG/15/2010 15:33 FAX 2024935142 FAA ^ DMS 0006/00 9 

specific designation exists. Also, the FAA designation "UNI 993" does not contain the 

descriptor ^'Dimethycarbinol". 

Fourth Affirmative Defense 

The complaint is barred or recovery should be reduced because any injuries or damages 

were proximately caused by the negligence and other legal fault of persons or entities other than 

this an.swering respondent. 

Fifth Affirmative Defense 

Assuming, arguendo, that there was any violation of any KAA regulation in regard to the 

shipment alleged in the complaint, SP did not knowingly or intentionally attempt to violate any 

said FAA regulation. 

Sixth Affirmative Defense 

On information and belief, and assuming, arguendo, that any FAA regulation applied 

to the shipment as alleged in the complaint, there was adequate or sufficient indication on the 

Product to wam a user of the Product that it was "hazardous material" and/or that its shipment 

required compliance with one or more FAA regulations cited in the complaint. 

Seventh Affirmative Defense 

On being contacted by the FAA's representative (and later by FAA Nofice) SP promptly 

and fully cooperated with the FAA's investigation into the alleged shipment, SP provided copies 

of requested documents and presented James Trato for infonnal meetings with the FAA. 

Without admitting any infi-aetion of any FAA regulation as alleged in the complaint, SP 

has implemented additional procedures. Among other things, SP novv requires all documents to 

be signed by its up-to-date safety inspector before delivery to the carrier. SP now delive:ig the 
OG/15/201 0 15:3 3 FAX 202493514 2 FAA * DMS 0007/009 

cargo and all documents regarding that cargo at the same time. SP's employees are trained in 

accordance with f ATA dangerous goods regulations. 

Eighth Affirmative Defense 

SP's cooperation during the FAA's investigation and SP's implementafion of new 

procedures, regardless of whether SP committed any violation as alleged, the penalty sought to 

be imposed is excessive and/or unreasonable. Moreover, the complaint, regardless of the 

outcome herein, is the first allegation of any violation by SP. SP did not attempt to conceal in 

any way the identity of the Product allegedly offered for shipment and cooperated tlilly with the 

FAA's representative at all times. There should be no paialiy assessed herein, but if any penalty 

is assessed it should be for no more than the minimum amount authorized by law. 

Ninth Affirmative Defense 

Respondent's liability for non-economic damages, if any, is limited to that percentage of 

those damages which in direct proportion to Respondent's percentage of fault, if any. 

Tenth Affirmative Defense 

The injuries or damages set forth in the complaint, occurred, if at all, because of the 

negligence and other legal fault of persons or entifies other than Respondent. 

Eleventh Affirmative Defense 

The injuries or damages set for in the complaint were proximately caused by the acts, 

omissions, negligence, fraud and/or breach of obligations by persons other than Respondent, and 

beyond Respondent's supervision and control. 

Twelfth Affirmative Defense 

The complaint, and any recovery therefi-om, should be diminished because of an 

intervening and/or superceding cause. 
OG/15/201 0 15:3 3 FAX 202493514 2 FAA * DMS 0008/009 

Thirteenth Affirmative Defense 

The complaint is barred or recovery should be diminished because Respondent failed to 

receive timely notice of the injuries or damages and was not provided an opportunity to cute. 

Fourteenth Affirmative Defense 

The complaint is barred or recovery should be diminished because Respondent's 

performance of any duty or obligation was excused. 

REOUEST FOR RELIEF 

SP respectflilly requests the following relief: 

1. That the complaint be dismissed, and the petitioner take nothing; or, in the 

alternative, 

2. That the alleged penalty be reduced to the minimum amount allowed by law for 

one alleged violation or as permitted in the interest of justice. 

Dated: June 8, 2010 MANNING & MARDER 

KASS, ELLROE/RAMIRE Z LLP 

Christtpher D. Nissen 

Attorney^lor Respondent, S/P Resources, 

Inc. 
OG/15/2010 15:33 FAX 2024935142 FAA * DMS 0009/00 9 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

I am employed in the Coimty of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 

and not a party to the within action; my business address is 801 S. Figueroa Street, 15th Floor, 

LOS Angeles, California 90017. 

On June 8, 2010, I served the document described as S/P RESOURCES, INC.'S 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT on all interested parties in this action by placing true copies 

thereof enclosed in scaled envelopes addressed as follows: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2WI000 

Facsimile: (202)493-5020 

Courtney Adolph 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

AWP-7.4, Federal Aviation Administration 

We.stem-Pacific Region 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

Telephone: (310)725-7128 

Facsimile: (310)725-6819 

SI (BY CERTIFIED MAIL) 1 placed such envelope for collection to be mailed with 

postage thereon prepaid in the United States mail at Los Angeles, California. 1 am 

"readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for 

mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. postal service on that 

same day with postage thereon fiilly prepaid at Los Angeles, California in the ordinary 

course of business. 1 am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed 

invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of 

deposit for mailing in affidavit. 

SI (BY FACSIMILE) I telecopied such document to the Office of the Regional Counsel at 

(310)725-6816 and to the Federal Aviation Administration at (202)493-5020. 

Executed on June 8, 2010, at Los Angeles, California.