11/24/201 0 10.2G FAX 2024935142 FAA ^ OMS 0001/00 6 

^''"ARTMENTOF 

:v-\r^SPORTATION 

•COOPERATIONS 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 7; 0 ^DV 9I4 A iQ: 2 8 

OFFICE OP HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

IN THE MAITER OV 

FLIGHTSTAR AIRCRAFT SERVICES, INC. 

FAA Docket No. 2008-OL-05-0022 Cx ]u tf L[Jt>i3 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-XXX-XXXX ^^^ ^ ^ fO l / 

Judge Not A.ssigned 

Hearing Location: Not assigned 

Hearing Date: Not assigned 

ANSWER ANI> AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

1. 

COMES NOW, FLIGHTSTAR AIRCRAFT SERVICES, INC. (hereinafter 

"FLIGHTSTAR"), by and through undersigned counsel pursuant to Rule 209 of the Rules of 

Practice (14 C.F.R. §13.209), and hereby liles its Answer to the Complaint filed by the Federal 

Aviation Administration dated October 26, 2010. 

On October 6, 2010, FLIGHTSTAR submitted a written request for a hearing pursuant to 

14 C.F.R. §13.16. 

I. 

1. FLIGHTSTAR admits the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint. 

2. FLIGHTS FAR admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the Complaint. 

COUNT 1 

3. FLIGHTSTAR admits the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint. 
* DMS 12002/008 

11/24/2010 10:26 FAX 2024935142 FAA UH^ 

4. 1-LIGH rSTAR denies the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Complaint. 

5. FLIGIFFSTAR lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the tnith or 

falsity oi'Lhe allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Complaint and therefore, denies 

same and demands strict prooi" thereof. 

6. FLIGHTSTAR denies the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Complaint 

7. FLIGHTSTAR admits the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint. 

8. FLIGHTSTAR denies the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Complaint. 

9. FLIGHTS'FAR denies the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of the Complaint. 

10. FLIGH rSTAR denies the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Complaint. 

COUNT 2 

11. FLIGH'ISTAR admits the allegations contained in paragraph 11 of the Complaint. 

12. FLIGHTSTAR denies the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of the Complaint. 

a. FLIGHTSTAR denies that it violated 14 C.F.R. §43.13(a). 

b. FLIGHTSTAR denies that it violated 14 C.F.R. § 145.205(a). 

FLIGHTSTAR denies that pursuant lo 49 U.S.C §46301, it is subject to a civil penalty not 

to exceed $1 ,lOO for each of the violations alleged. 

FLIGH TSTAR denies that under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of 

$2,200.00 is appropriate. 

Any maner not specifically admitted by FLIGHTSTAR shall be deemed denied. 
nA* + nM^ 01003/OOG 

n/24/201 0 10:26 FAX 2024935142 FAA L)Mi "£1 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

1. In determining the civi I penalty amount, the Complainant has failed to consider (1) the 

nature and circumstances of the violation; (2) tlic extent and gravity of the violation; (3) the 

re.$pondent's degree of culpability; (4) the respondent's history of prior violations, if any; 

(5) the respondent's ability to pay the civil penalty; (6) the effect on the entity's ability to 

stay in business; and (7) other matters as justice may require. See 49 U.S.C. §46301(e)(2); 

See also Folsom'x Air Service. Inc.. FAA Order No. 2008-11 (November 6, 2008), p. 11. 

2. In determining the civil penalty amount, the Complainant has failed to determine whether 

the violation was inadvertent or deliberate. 

3. In determining the civil penalty amount, the Complainant has failed to consider the 

Respondent's size, particularly in determining the alleged offender's ability to absorb the 

sanction. 

4. The proposed civil penalty fails to reflect the totality of the circumstances surrounding the 

violations. See Fol.wm's Air Service, inc., FAA Order No. 2008-11 (November 6,2008), p. 

12; Eastern Air Center, Inc., FAA Order No. 2008-3 (January 28, 2008). 

5. FLIGHTSTAR does not have the financial ability to pay the proposed civil penally. 

6. The proposed civil penalty would have a detrimental elTect on the ability of FLIGHISTAR 

to continue doing business. 

7. FLIGHTSTAR relies upon the affirmative defense of reasonable reliance. 
11/24/201 0 10:26 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS Ig)004/006 

8. The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA'S) interpretation of its Federal Aviation 

Regulations in this case is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in 

accordance with law. See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2) (A); Watkin.<i v. NTSB, 178 F.3d 959, 961 (8th 

Cir. 1999). 

9. The FAA'S interpretation of its aviation regulations is unconstitutionally vague. See 

Thomas v. Hinson, 74 F.3d 888, 889 (8th Cir. 1996); see also Trans Suites Airlines, Inc. v. 

FAA, 439 F.3d 863, 864-865 (8ih Cir. 2006); Heath v. SEC, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 24128 

at *53-55. 

10. The I'AA's application of its Federal Aviation Regulations in this case is contrary lo the 

regulation's plain language. Sc^Advanta USA, Inc. v. Chao, 350 F.3d 726, 728 (8th Cir. 

2003), quoting Gardebringv. .Imkins, 485 U.S. 415,430, 108 S. Ct. 1306,99 L. Ed. 2d 515 

(1988). See also Trans States Airlines. Inc. v, FAA, 439 F.3d 863, 864-865 (8th Cir. 2006). 

11. Respondent as.serts that the Complainant has failed to state a claim upon which the relief 

requested may be granted. 

12. Respondent asserts that the Complainant lacks substantial basis in law and fact to continue 

prosecution of this matter against it. 
11/24/201 0 10:2 6 FAX 2024935142 FAA •> DMS g|005/00e 

Dated; November 17, 2010 

Respectftilly Saomitted, 

WINTON, ESQ. 

fion Law Firm 

Court 

Suite 450 

Rockvilic, MD 20850 

Tel: (301) 294-8550 

Fax:(301)294-2525 

G re iz(q)A vi ati onLa wLxperts. com 

Counsel for Respondent 
11/24/2010 10:27 FAX 2024935142 FAA DMS glOOG/OOG 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have this date served by regular U.S. mail, postage prepaid, an original and 

one (1) copy of the foregoing Answer addressed to: 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Suile2W1000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

And, further, that I have this date served via facsimile and regular U.S. mail, postage prepaid, a 

copy of the foregoing Answer addressed to: 

Glenn L. Brown 

Senior Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7 

2300 Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, IL 60018 

Tel: 847-294-7063 

Fax: 847-294-7498 

Dated: November 17, 2010 

)RY S. WINTON, ESQ. 

/Aviation Law Firm 

'ne Research Court 

Suite 450 

Rockville, MD 20850 

Tel: (.301) 294-8550 

Fax:(301)294-2525