U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of Maria Taveras 

2008SW210198 

CP10SW0005 

The Honorable Isaac D. Benkin 

—?•' l - 8 2010 

hSl- A 

cihRiNG DOCKET 

AGENCY'S RESPONSE TO THE RESPONDENT'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION Og 

DOCUMENTS -i S 

~~^ 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. 13.220(d), the Agency submits the following: o 

Request for Production of Documents 1: 

Copies of any and all medical records or documents mentioning or relating in any way to the 

medical or psychological treatment of the flight attendant, concerning injuries or harm allegedly 

caused by my client. 

Response: Objection. The documentation requested would cause unnecessarily invasion of the 

personal privacy of the Flight Attendant in question. Therefore, concurrent with this response, the 

Agency is filing a Motion for Protective Order concerning this documentation. 

Request for Production of Documents 2: 

Copies of any and all exhibits you intend to introduce in evidence at the hearing. 

Response: See the attached exhibits described in the Agency's Preliminary Proposed Witness and 

Exhibit List. 

Request for Production of Documents 3: 

Copies of any and all physical evidence, including documents, in your possession which relates to 

this case. 

Response: See the attached exhibits described in the Agency's Preliminary Proposed Witness and 

Exhibit List. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Alfred R. Johnson, Jr. 

Regional Counsel 

By: LmMJ^ i %li^^hian ^ Dated: i)T^IVijiip^ (? 

Leonid Talisman ' i 

Attorney 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the Agency's Response to the Respondent's Request for Production of 

Documents was served this date as follows: 

Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested: 

Administrative Law Judge Honorable Isaak D. Benkin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested and First Class U.S. Mail: 

Alexei Schacht, Esq. 

Nalven & Schacht 

Attorneys at Law 

350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4022 

New York, NY 10118 

nldill^'iV jmAd. ^Oih]MJX^ 

Date Leonid Talisman 

Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION f-) ,•—r^ ««-, , 

FEDERAL AVLSTION ADMINISTRATION H i _ O C / X/P : r \ 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS *^ *— i ^ 

WASHINGTON, D.C. Jij ^ . g 2Q]Q 

In the Matter of Maria Taveras HbARIfsiG DOCKE T 

2008SW210198 

CP10SW0005 

The Honorable Isaac D. Benkin 

AGENCY'S PRELIMINARY PROPOSED WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST 

COMES NOW the Agency, by and through its designated representative, the Regional Counsel 

for the Eastern Region and his designated and authorized agents, and submits the following 

Preliminary Proposed Witness & Exhibit Lists pursuant to the Administrative Law Judge's Prehearing 

Order Establishing Procedures issued on May 17, 2010. 

PRELIMINARY PROPOSED LIST OF WITNESSES: 

1. Julia Sasson 

It is anticipated that Ms. Sasson will testify that while serving as a Flight Attendant onboard American 

Airlines Flight #423 from LaGuardia, NY to Miami, FL, to Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, she 

was verbally threatened and subsequently, physically assaulted by Respondent. She will testify that 

she sustained physical injuries as a result of the Respondent's assault on her. Ms. Sasson is expected 

to testify consistent with her statements and affidavits provided as part of Responses to Respondent's 

Discovery Requests. 

2. Anton Veenhof 

It is anticipated that Mr. Veenhof will testify that while serving as a Flight Attendant onboard 

American Airlines Flight #423 from LaGuardia, NY to Miami, FL to Santo Domingo, Dominican 

Republic, he witnessed Respondent's assault on Ms. Sasson at the deplaning stage of the above flight 

from close range. 

3. Jason Henderson 

It is anticipated that Mr. Henderson will testify that while serving as a Flight Attendant onboard 

American Airlines Flight #423 from LaGuardia, NY to Miami, FL to Santo Domingo, Dominican 
Republic, Mr. Henderson was threatened by Respondent, and also witnessed Respondent's verbeil 

threatening of Ms. Sasson, as well as Respondent's physical assault on Ms. Sasson. 

4. Julieta Azpurua (Keegan) 

It is anticipated that Ms. Azpurua will testify that while serving as a Flight Attendant onboard 

American Airlines Flight #423 from LaGuardia, NY to Miami, FL to Santo Domingo, Dominican 

Republic, Ms. Azpurua (Keegan) saw Ms. Sasson shortly before the Respondent's physical assault and 

immediately after Respondent's assault, and will testify that she saw physical injuries on Ms. Sasson's 

face and neck that she did not observe prior to the physical assault. 

5. Drew Blahnik 

It is anticipated that Mr. Blahnik will testify that while aboard American Airlines Flight #423 from 

LaGuardia, NY to Miami, FL to Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, Mr. Blahnik witnessed 

Respondent's physical assault on Ms. Sasson at the deplaning stage of the above flight from close 

range, and witnessed Ms. Sasson's physical injuries. 

6. Kathryn Grant 

Ms. Grant is an Aviation Safety Inspector with the Federal Aviation Administration, and will testify 

about the Sanction Guidance Table from the FAA Order 2150.3B, and recommended sanction in this 

case. 

7. Patricia Mattone 

Ms. Mattone is a Cabin Safety Inspector with the Federal Aviation Administration, and will testify 

about the duties of the flight crew and safety procedures, Sanction Guidance Table from the FAA 

Order 2150.3B, and recommended sanction in this case. 

The Agency respectfully reserves the right to supplement its Witness List in accordance with the 

Administrative Law Judge's Prehearing Order Establishing Procedures and in the event that issues 

other than those accepted for investigation are made a part of the instant matter. 

PRELIMINARY PROPOSED LIST OF EXHIBITS 

The Agency proposes the following exhibits it will rely on in the course of the hearing: 

Exhibit 1 - Pictures of Flight Attendant Julia Sasson taken by Jason Henderson and Julieta Azpurua 

(Keegan) moments after she was physically attacked by passenger Maria Taveras. 

Exhibit 2 - Timeline of events on Flight #423 written by Flight Attendant Julia Sasson. 
Exhibit 3 - Written statement from American Airlines Passenger Service Lead Agent in Santo 

Domingo, Dominicem Republic, Gustavo Licairac. 

Exhibit 4 - Two letters of Investigation sent to Maria Taveras. 

Exhibit 5 - Captain Mark Cutkomp's Debrief Report. 

Exhibit 6 - Flight Attendant Julia Sasson's Debrief report. 

Exhibit 7 - Flight Attendant Julieta Azpurua's Debrief report. 

Exhibit 8 - Maria Taveras' Passenger Name Record (PNR). 

Exhibit 9 - Passenger Seating Manifest 

Exhibit 10 - Police Report from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. 

Exhibit 11 - Santo Domingo Airport Security Report 

Exhibit 12 - Record of telephone conversations with Flight Attendant Julia Sasson. 

Exhibit 13 - Medical Examination record from Santo Domingo Airport health clinic - subject of the 

Agency's Motion for Protective Order. 

Exhibit 14 - Copies of medical prescriptions Flight Attendant Julia Sasson received after her medical 

examination in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic - subject of the Agency's Motion for Protective 

Order. 

Exhibit 15 - Workers' Compensation and physical therapy documentation - subject of the Agency's 

Motion for Protective Order. 

Exhibit 16 - Record of telephone conversation with First Officer Drew Blahnik. 

Exhibit 17 - Chapter 7 of the FAA Order 2150.3B (pages 7-1, 7-19 - 7-21). 

Exhibit 18 - Sanction Guidance Table from the FAA Order 2150.3B. 
However, the Agency respectfully reserves the right to supplement its Exhibit List in 

accordance with the Administrative Law Judge's Prehearing Order Establishing Procedures. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Alfred R. Johnson, Jr. 

Regional Counsel 

By: LL<MC< L vM^VvUit-K ^ Dated : pT^/oJZ4^d(? 

Leonid Talisman ' f 

Attorney 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the Agency's Preliminary Proposed Witness and Exhibit List was served 

this date as follows: 

Certified Mail ~ Return Receipt Requested: 

Administrative Law Judge Honorable Isaak D. Benkin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

120O New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Certified Mail ~ Return Receipt Requested: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbiu- Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested and First Class U.S. Mail: 

Alexei Schacht, Esq. 

Nalven & Schacht 

Attorneys at Law 

350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4022 

New York, NY 10118 

Date ' Leonid Talisman 

Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 
M , 

itss 

t.Wi, 

feM 

a 

a ^-4' 

^f ». 

,4-» j I*' 

-.•?. , 
'-% V 

k 
^ 

^ • ( 

FLIGHT ATTENDANT ASSAULT - AA FLIGHT 423, 11 DECEMBER 2007 

TIMELINE 

1100 Passenger Maria Tavares boards flight 423 in JFK, final destination SDQ 

* •* • m • 

1145 Scheduled departure time 

1530 Actual boarding time flight 423 in MIA after stopover enroute to SDQ 

1615 ETD - Passengers onboard, maintenance delay ensues. Passengers remain 

onboard during creeping delay. Passenger unrest despite required delay announcements. 

One passenger is issued a*Passenger Disturbance Report by #4 Flight Attendant, Tony 

Veenhof 

1730 I walked to aft galley receiving multiple requests for water, coifee, food, etc. and 

immediately returned to first class expressing the need for a total aircraft water service. 

On my return to first class, passenger Maria Tavares, one of the passengers who had just 

asked for water, left her seat 12C and followed me to the first class galley extremely 

agitated, announcing condescendingly that she is an attorney, speaks four languages, is a 

frequent flyer, knows important people in government and at AA, launching insults and 

threatening our jobs. 

Purser, Jason Henderson, immediately gave her a cup of water (which she needed to 

take a pill), asking her to drink it in the galley rather than taking it to her seat. She 

specifically singled me out in her wrath, calling me ''stupid" since I was the one she 

originally asked for the water. 

As we began preparations for the water service, Jason called the cockpit for an update 

and was asked to cancel the service and to put all supplies away. The Captain was now 

receiving clearance for imminent departure and we wanted to expedite the progress. 

1752 Actual departure time. One hour thirty-seven minutes late. 

During flight, I worked my number five position which is first class galley. I did help 

pick up refuse after the main cabin beverage service. Julieta Azpurua, the number six 

flight attendant, later advised that during main cabin beverage service Ms. Tavares 

consumed no alcohol, asking for a soft drink and a cup of water to take another pill. She 

said that Ms. Tavares slept during the flight. 

1925 Scheduled arrival time 

2134 Actual arrival time. Two hours nine minutes late. 

I disarmed my 2L door and stood there saying 'Happy Holidays", "Sorry for the 

delay", 'Thank you for flying with us", 'Good Night", etc. to passengers, all deplaning in 

haste. It was like a cattle stampede. 

As passenger Tavares approached, she launched another rampage on AA's financial 

woes, poor quality employees and my "'stupidity". Her antics secured the whole aisle, 

preventing the remaining hundred passengers behind her from deplaning. They were 

EK. ^ 
• • \ 

pushing from behind. As I asked her to calm down, she sprang at me, hitting me, 

scratching five finger nail cuts into my face and left eye and finally pushing me 

backwards, twisting and hyper extending my neck and knocking me to the floor. Two 

female passengers behind her helped me to my feet and held my right arm, blocking any 

intended defense or retaliation. The surprise, fear and anger put me in a state of 

unbelievable shock at her boldness. 

I was told that the deadheading Captain Rundle observed the attack and ran up the 

right aisle to exit the aircraft and summon police. I called to the purser to detain Ms. 

Tavares. Horrified flight attendants wiped the. blood and took cell phone pictures of my 

swollen face. 

Passenger service supervisor, Gustavo Licairac^: spoke to CCRO and police, advising 

^that if i wantesd to press charges both'parties would be detained by the police until the 

hearing which could not takfe place until the following morning. Both the purser, Jason 

HenderstA and the Spanislf speakef, Julieta Azpurua were concerned and insisted to stay 

with me throughout my quarantine to support me in necessary testimony and care for my 

injuries. The remaining crew members proceeded to the layover hotel to rest for the 

remainder of our trip. 

I was then brought first to the Airport Medical Clinic for treatment, receiving a shot 

and a prescription for inflammation. We, three, were then held in a room in solitary 

confinement. We were questioned by police multiple times with subtle intimidation to 

drop charges. Finally, at two o'clock in the morning, an angry Mr. Raphael Sanchez, AA 

Director of the Dominican Republic, arrived at the airport demanding that we be released 

in AA recognizance with the promise to return us for the hearing the next morning. The 

police complied, however Ms. Tavares was held in the airport all night. 

Mr. Licairac drove us to our hotel advising that we would be collected at eight o'clock 

the next morning to participate in the hearing. 

December 12, 2007 

SDQ Station Manager, Mr. Sergio Marmol, met us at the airport and spent the day 

trying to seek justice. The morning was filled with seemingly corrupt machinations to 

delay and cancel the hearing, knowing our flight was leaving SDQ by mid afternoon. 

There were visits to the police station in Boca Chica, then to SDQ to be seen by a state 

doctor and then back to Boca Chica at eleven thirty to be told the Colonel would not 

return from lunch until, perhaps, three thirty. We could wait, however, until the next day 

to have the case heard. Heaven only knows what road blocks the next day would bring! „ 

It became clear that justice could only be served at home in the US. 

Our flight was met by three flight service managers. I 3p>ent the next three weeks 

receiving Workers Compensation medical treatment and physical therapy. Although I 

have returned to work, I still suffer from residual neck pains, severe head aches and Post 

Traumatic Stress. 

Julia A. Sasson 22 Januar>' 2008 
Pax Maria Taverez, ( ninican Republic passport ) 

and US Permanent Resident Card , seated in liW on AA flight #423, 11 

Dec '07, from Miami to Santo Domingo, SDQ, Airbus A-JOO, Nose # 074, was one of 

approximately 20 passengers requesting water on this through flight from JFK to SDQ. 

Flight had creeping delays causing passenger stress. Minutes before departure, Ms. 

Taverez stormied into first class galley ta threaten and intimidate flight attendants sa) ing 

she is an attorney, speaks 4 languages, knows important people who will fire us upon her 

request. After receiving water, she returned to her seat for remainder of flight. 

On deplaning, she unleashed a tirade at 2L doorway, blocking all passengers behind her 

from exiting the aircraft. As I asked her to calm dov«i, she spmng at me, clawing my 

face with her fingernails, knocked me backwards, twisting and hyper-extcnding my neck. 

I have reports from 2 medical doctors in SDQ, police reports, pictures taken by cell 

phone of my face, Workers Comp doctor and physical therapy reports. 

During testiinony at the hearing in SDQ, Ms. Taverez admitted that she is NOT an 

attorney, but works with some in New York. I have been told that her return ticket to 

New York was reftinded and Francesca LaRouche, my supervisor, has advised that she 

has been placed on American Airlines "Do Not Fly" list. 

f^/L&ry) JaStXSum 
FEB 05,2008 17:39 [ ' 9544635501 / page 1 

Jan 23,2008 

To whom il may concern: 

On December 11"' I v\/^me'eting flight 423 when, the .securily pei-sonnel advised mc 

that a passenger had hit a llighl,attendant while deplaning from the aircraft, the passenger 

Ma. Tavarcz was detained by the airport authorities, when Plight Aiiendanl Sasson 

deplaned she was all scratched in her face and had a red bmisc on her neck. When we 

wont 10 ihc airport authorities the crew asked ihem if the passenger was going lo be 

detained lu what ihoy replied that if siie did not pressed charges she wiis going tu bu 

released, then we proceed to the police station to press charges against Ms. Tavarez. 

When Ms. Tavarez arrived lo the police slating that fliglit attendant Sasson had hit her 

she had no marks or scratches on any other visible body parts. 

Gustavo Licairac 

Passenger Service Lead Agent 

American Airlines 

Santo Domingo, DR 

EXHien' 

3 
••a kf) 

_ ^ o m 

' O rCM 

O O 2 

p 

;i^ | 

fe ^1 

O 

o 

I 

N 

O 

1 

3 I* 

o 3 * 

uoa TI 

I 

S S2 :| cj L 

i iicjy ,!?f!f!7 

2 ^ 

CC O 

! H 

^ O u j 

P O h-

~ CO 

X 

i 

I -

cr: 

O 

OWO HWV 

EXHIBIT 
ru 

OJ 

U.S. Postal Service , 

CERTIFIED MAIL, RECEIPT 

(Domestic Mai l Only; No Insurnnce Covemqe Proviaed) 

For delivery intormntion visit our website ,,t www.usps.com , 

OFFtCJA L U9 L 

SENDER : COMPLETE THIS SECTION 

• Complete items 1,2, and 3. Also complete 

item 4 if Restricted Delivery is deslrad. 

• Print your name and address on the reverse 

so that we can rstum the card to you. 

• Attach this card t6 the back at the mallplece, 

or on the front if space permits. 

COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY 

1. Article Addressed to: 

MS MARIA TAVERAS 

75-33 196th Place 

FRESH MEADOWS, NY 11366 

A. SIgnatum 

X 

• i 

• Agant 

D Addresaea 

B. Received by f/MntadNafna> C. Date of Delivery 

D. la delivery addieaadHfarsntftDniltamI? O Yes 

v^ If YES, ecTterdellveiy address below: D No 

3. ServtcaTVpe 

a Certified Mail 

Q Registerad 

• insured Mall 

• Expreaa Mall 

• Return Receipt for Mercharxllae 

• C.O.D. 

4. Restricted Delivery? (Brtra Fee; •U Y Ye« s 

2. Article Nui 

(Timstarfi^ 7DDM Sa^D DDDl 3310 afl^2 

PS Form 3811 , Febmary 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 1025S5-02-M-1540 
/ 

Ms. Maria Taveras 

75-33 196* Place 

Fre§h Meadows, NY 11366 
e 

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Southwest Region 

Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

New Mexico, Oklahoma, 

Texas 

AMR Certificates Management Office 

14800 Trinity Blvd.. Suite 100 

Fort Worth, Texas 76155 

(817)684-6800 Fax:(817)684-6920 

(866) 809-0089 

April 4, 2008 

CERTIFIED MAIL—RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

FileNo.2008SW210198 

Ms. Maria Taveras 

75-33 196'" Place 

Fresh Meadows, NY 11366 

Dear Ms Taveras: 

Personnel of this office are investigating an incident, which occurred while you were a passenger 

on American Airlines Flight 423 operating from Miami International Airport (MIA), to Las 

Americas Airport, Santo Domingo (SDQ) on December 11, 2007. 

It is alleged you interfered with crewmember duties and physically assaulted a Flight Attendant. 

Conduct of this type is contrary to Federal Aviation Regulations. 

This letter is to inform you that this matter is under investigation by the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA). We would appreciate receiving any evidence or statements you might 

care to make regarding this matter within 10 days of receipt of this letter. Any discussion or 

written statements fiimished by you will be given consideration in our investigation. If we do 

not hear from you within the specified time, our report will be processed without the benefit of 

your statement. 

Sincerely, 

Beau A. Morrow 

Aviation Safety Inspector 

Enclosure 

Privacy Act Notice 
PRIVACY ACT NOTICE 

This Notice is provided in accordance with Section (e) (3) of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 

Section 552a(e)(3), and concerns the information requested in the letter or form with which 

this Notice is enclosed. 

A. Authority: This information is solicited pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, 

49 U.S.C. Section 1301, et seq.. and regulations issued there under codified in Part 13 

of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Submission of information is voluntary. The request for information is intended to provide you with an opportunity to 

participate in the investigation. 

B. Principal purpose: The requested information will be used to help determine whether 

or not there has been a violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations, and if so, what, if 

any, enforcement action should be taken. 

C. Routine uses: Records from this system of records may be disclosed m accordance 

with the routine uses as they appear in System of Records No. DOT/FAA 847 as 

published from time to time in the Federal Register. 

D. Effect of failure to respond: The FAA cannot impose any penalties upon you in the 

event that you fail to respond to this enforcement investigation letter. Failure to supply 

the requested information, however, will result in enforcement determinations witiiout 

the benefit of your comments on the alleged incident. 
5£ 

i 

r^'iiim-^'s p 12:55. 

*• • . 

1 

•.=3 

• 1 

o 

I in in 

III I 

Q ? oou. 

(A 

CO 

9J > | 

i - X "^ 

(0 CO 

o 

05 CO 

2 

p ^ ^^^ .^ 

5 CO en 

00 ^11 V s- Avw mi 

•^. > 

b 

:-5 
) o -3 n 

o in 

o .-

- O Q 

s 

K» 

SI 

2 -= 

o 

- J 

2 5^. 

(5 CO o 

.2 §> 

5 CD -

^^r 2 § CO CQ 

^^ S t Q: 

Q T!- CO UL 
u s . Postal Service 

CERTIFIED MAIL, RECEIPT 

iJLiiiiiiiiimiiiiiijjiiUMimiiiAUiuM^^^^^^^^^ oFFrer/^L, USE 

' tn 

' :r 

; :T: 

ui ml K 

J ] JO ''-'^ (EhdorMmwIRaqulrad^ 

5Z E) I C3 RMbtaMdlMlvfiyFM 

'--''--' : J ] (EhddraMiMMMqMMd) 

3- 3- [5 

C3 C3I J 

CwtMsdFee 

Return RedsplFM 

Total PoUage lb Peee 

mii 3?^ 

$^-0^ 

a G3I 

CI a 

a a l^ 

a a 

Smdfo 

orPOBeaNOL 

.m*.msi&^TMMiiS^ 

3990- BRONX BLVD. ALT LC -.^ 

^jTMj.^.^,g_ JlS.u_MMIiL.XA.YJERAS.. 

orPOBoiNo. 399 0 BRONX BLVD. ALT LC , , 

V 

SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION 

• Complete Items 1,2, and 3. Also complete 

Item 4 if Restricted Delfvety Is desired. 

• Print your name and address on ttie reverse 

so that we can return the card to you. 

• Attach this caid to the back of the mallplece, 

or on the front if space permits.' 

1. Article Addressed to: 

MS. MARIA TAVERAS 

3990 BRONX BLVD. ALT LC 

BRONX, NY 10A66 

COMPLETE 

A. Signature 

X 

B. Received by (Printed Name) 

OAoen t 

DAddreeaee 

C. Date of Delivery i 

D. Is deliveiy address different ftwn Item 17 D Yes 

If YES, enter delivery addrees below: D No 

3. Service Type 

D Certmed Mall 

D Regleteied 

a Insured Mall 

D Express Mall 

n Return Receipt for Merchandise 

a C.O.D. 

4. Restricted OeHveiy? (Extra f«e) a Yes 

7aaM iifag aQD^ oqb^ 7Mb5 i-'^y^ffl<^b l 2. Article Numt>er 

(TisnsAar from seAi». 

PS Form 3811 , Felsniaiy 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102696-0a-M-164O I 
DOT/FAA/AMR CMO 

14800 TRINITY BLVD. 

SUITE 100 

FORTWORTH.TX 76155 

Ms. Maria Taveras 

X, 3990 Bronx Blvd ALT LC 

Bronx, NY 10466 
e 

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

( 

Southwest Region 

Arlonsas, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

New Mexico, Oklahoma, 

Texas 

AMR Certificates Management Office 

14800 Trinity Blvd., Suite 100 

Fort Worth, Texas 76155 

(817) 684-6800 Fax: (817) 684-6920 

(866) 809-0089 

April 4,2008 

CERTIFIED MAIL—RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

FileNo.2008SW210198 

Ms. Maria Taveras 

3990 Bronx Blvd ALT LC 

Bronx, NY 10466 

Dear Ms Taveras: 

Personnel of this office are investigating an incident, which occurred while you were a passenger 

on American Airlines Flight 423 operating from Miami International Airport (MIA), to Las 

Americas Airport, Santo Domingo (SDQ) on December 11, 2007. 

It is alleged you interfered with crewmember duties and physically assaulted a Flight Attendant. 

Conduct of this type is contrary to Federal Aviation Regulations. 

This letter is to inform you that this matter is under investigation by the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA). We would appreciate receiving any evidence or statements you might 

care to make regarding this matter within 10 days of receipt of this letter. Any discussion or 

written statements fiimished by you will be given consideration in our investigation. If we do 

not hear from you within the specified time, our report will be processed without the benefit of 

your statement. 

Sincerely, 

Beau A. Morrow 

Aviation Safety Inspector 

Enclosure 

Privacy Act Notice 
PRIVACY ACT NOTICE 

This Notice is provided in accordance with Section (e) (3) of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 

Section 552a(e)(3), and concerns the information requested in the letter or form with which 

this Notice is enclosed. 

A. Authoritv: This information is solicited pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, 

49 U.S.C. Section 1301, et seq.. and regulations issued there under codified in Part 13 

of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Submission of information is voluntary. The request for information is intended to provide you with an opportimity to 

participate in the investigation. 

B. Principal purpose: The requested information will be used to help determine whether 

or not there has been a violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations, and if so, what, if 

any, enforcement action should be taken. 

C. Routine uses: Records from this system of records may be disclosed in accordance 

with the routine uses as they appear in System of Records No. DOT/FAA 847 as 

published from time to time in the Federal Register. 

D. Effect of failure to respond: The FAA cannot impose any penalties upon you in the 

event that you fail to respond to this enforcement investigation letter. Failure to supply 

the requested information, however, will result in enforcement determinations without 

the benefit of your comments on the alleged incident. 
Pilot Debrief(s) A 

Event Date: 12/11/2007 

Flight: 423 12/11/2007 MIA 

Title: CUSTOMER MISCONDUCT 

SDQ 

CERS ID: 

Tail #: 074 Fleet: A300 

i mp#: Name: Cutkomp, Mark PA>aD: Base: LGA. 

Due to operational delays departing MIA, flight arrived destination (SDQ) late. wherea.<: nassengers were being deplaned 

when passenger in seat 12C started verbal abuse toward FA Julia Sasson about American Airiines inability to 

operate efficiently and loudly expressing her views. FA Sasson made an apologetic response to this passenger as she walked 

by when the passenger confronted FA Sasson and started to physically attack FA Sasson with her hands by scratching her 

face and upper torso. Other passengers assisted the confrontation by pulling both women apart. I was informed by crew that 

a crewmember had been attacked and that Security should be called to,the aircraft. We radioed operations to have National 

Police respond to the aircraft which they did promptly. I observed passenger at deplaning door before National Police 

removed her and observed an irrational women loudly expressing her views. CCRO was contacted and information passed 

about the event. Passenger was detained by National Police and report filed at their office. FA Sasson was escorted to 

Medical for examination and care at the airport. 

EXHIBIT 
Flight Attendant Debrief(s) ^H k 

•m 

m 

Event Date: 12/11/2007 

Fliqht; 423 12/11/2007 MIA SDQ 

Title: CUSTOMER MISCONDUCT 

Efnp #i Name: Moiica. Reinaldo 

1 was not involved 

Emp #: Name: Sasson. Julia 

PAi^D: 

PAAD: 

C^R? ID: 

Tail #: 074 Fleet: 300 

Basel IMA 

Base: IMA 

Pax denied water due to safety factors on departure. Pax followed FA to first class and complained to purser about denial of 

water. Pax stated she is an attomey, speaks four languages, knows important people, can have us all fired, needs water to 

take a pill. Purser explained safety procedures and requested she drink the water, now received.in the first class galley so 

that the other passengers, also agitated by the long delay, would not be incited to complain also. Pax took a pill at that time 

and another pill shortly thereafter during the main cabin beverage sen/ice. She had a small bag full of prescription 

medications. 

There was no contact, whatsoever, during the remainder of the flight. 

On arrival, FA Sasson was at the 2L doorway next to her jumpseat bidding farewell to all passengers. As Ms. Taverez 

approached the 2L doorway, she stopped in the aisle blocking all passengers behind her and began a tirade about the events 

during the initial pre departure delay, repeating her opinions and threats. As I calmly asked her to calm down, she sprung at 

me, surprising me by clawing my face with her fingemails and knocking me backwards into my jumpseat, thereby twisting and 

hyperextending my neck. 

The deadheading Captain Rundle observed this and ran forward in the right hand aisle to contact police and have her 

detained. 

I received immense help from the supervising agent Mr. Licairac, station manager Mr. Marmol and country director Mr. 

Sanchez, who all personally participated in negotiations and stipulations in accordance with Dominican Law. I especially 

thank Mr. Jason Henderson and Ms. Julieta Azpurua for their vigilance and support allowing themselves to 

be quasi-incarcerated with me almost all night, released in the custody of Mr. Licairac for a few hours before our required 

retum to police/court proceedings the following morning. 

EXHIBIT 
Flight Attendant Debrief(s) itk 

Event Date: 12/11/2007 

Flight: 423 12/11/2007 MIA 

Title: CUSTOMER MISCONDUCT 

SDQ 

CERS ID: 

Tail #: 074 Fleet: 300 

Emp"#: lame: Azpurua, Julieta PA/ID; Base: iMA 

I did not witness the assault. After deplaining I walked up and saw the injuries sustained by Julia Sasson. The local police 

were called and Pax. Maria Taverez was detained. I accompanied F/A Sasson to act as interprdtor. We proceeded to the 

airport clinic, and tijen to the airport police station to write her statements. I was engaged in these procedings until 3am and 

returned at 8am to further assist the F/A. If a more detailed account.is needed I will be happy fo provide that information. 

EXHIBIT 
l.lT«VSR£2/t1ARlft 

1 911.3Y .11P5B M ftVSPSO M«t 5>45P 

2 • 423 0 ilDEC T JFKSDQ HKt 114 W 

J 413V 14JftN rt SDQJPK HKl 1233P 

TKT.'riMa LIMIT I • 

1. T- U OCT-X TM7C2H< i' 

2..T5 0012129348734'TAV6H/M UTM7C2H 1322/ 1 lOCT 13»33<V20C: 

vca COUPON, DATA exrsT* «vi TO.DISPLAY I 

PHGN6S ! 

1. oFKl* t7-435-24li5-H 

4. SB0e09-5Sa-P7-2!S-H 

ADDRESS 

N/CHAND KHflM 

145A' liFS a T /E 

723J» HR3 /DCAfl»Kep-ZBP / E 

3i5 P HRS /DCAr>*KEPZ3P /E 

I 

TAVEREZ/MARIA 

. 1 TAVEBEI/MAHIA 

. 1 TAVEREZ/MAHriA 

.1 TfiVEREZ/MARIA 

VIEU 

n«ICC QUtJTE RECORO EXISTS *P9S 

FREOUEMT TRAVELSn 

1.Afl; 2304MX4 . HK AA 1.1 

SCATS/BOAROING PASS; 

2 4230 UOEC JFJitMlA HK 120. NAH 

2 423Q llOEC MIASDS; HK 12C NAH 

3 A13V 14JAN SDOJFKHH I'J'C MAH 

AA F^CTS: 

PCTC DATA S)<I3Tg-. - FLEASSB USE •P4 TO 

i.opuncHAseD ON AA.CO H io/n/2oo r 

2.QSI CORRECT LASff NAn6 13 TAVERAS MA^XA 

4.53R D0C3 AA HI^17P/0O/34446S>9/DO/lOJAN5r/F/2SAPRO9/TAVERAS C 

.^UZ/MARIA/CARIMO 

3.33R DOCA AA HK1/R/U3 

6.3SR DOCS AA HKl/C/U3/03-r&3783J/D0/10JAN37/F/l;*APRH/TAV£ftAS 

DE OLIVER/MARIA/CARIQ 

SEMARKS- ' !. 

1.-TSM»AXXXXXXXXX)iiXXl'70HH0/la 

2. H-TQHEBilT/tKT DfJlVEM FOR .416. 00/132i/ l lOGT 

3.H-TBMEDIT/IW5a5005 EDITOR SESSION 4 

4.-CMAN0 KHAM 

3.H-/T»D0C»VCrt. 

A. H-/T»Ot.V#EMAIL#CHANa. ICHAN#ATALI NTERtltATlOrWL. COmtPREE 

7.H-PTIi>l.0t-ADT-(ft0T 

S.H-SOdK^NO MAQE VIA AKERICAM AIRLINE^ UEBSItE 

3.H-/T#SP4INrL . 

10. H-UWW/AUTH/CHJA)t' 

ll.H-/T#3R 0 PARTV#PLT!*W«4732 

J2.H-/T#WIJW EAU • i • 

13. XXAUTH/141423 

14.XXTACXTMlIQCT/.i 

IS.H-TKTEg PS DELEJEO AND PLACED INTO rtlSTORY 

14.H-/T#T8MEDIT/EH<»rL SEN* J341yH0CT/fD3 

17,H^HADV TKT I S IMON REF/N«)M TRANSFE/NQN ENDORSi 

-HADV 100 CHAN«SB FEii PLU9- F/WB' DIFP 

r?.H^HAIW PAX TKT VAk,II»-ON* YEAR rRp « BATE OF ISSUE: ' ' 

20.HrHfl£<v; 2/3HRa t(* A-tC; BFtt CHeCJCIN-i • 

2t.H^HADV«2 S0LB*.i301* IN t 9«Qt 1 40l,BaKiARRVWf 

jar.Hr.HflOV'ttttoin- pouev i .• • 

33.H-HittOV: iOOOSlJC DHP 6S PtlJSP ARE DIFif 

24.H-N0NREF/CW FElt APPLIES/NO- VACUE AfTER FLT TIME • 

iS.BAO-TAO SOlMWAia-gCANNEb; 110EC2QOT OSSaL/JFK/SASHI 

24.BAC-Tfl(J 3i0O4*C«.il4 SCANNStt iiDEC2Q07p8S*U/..JFK./SflsHl 

27.H^»#PAX ASkEi}; pbl* A GLASa OF WA-TER AN B FLT ATTEND 

aa.H-MUHo ANWSfteb THBT C« X LIGH T TCILI> +« R THAT 

39.H^#*FL WAS ABdUT TO DEPHfT THS OAE. iJSHB THSM 

30.H-**wa*T TQTH6) FIRST CLASft CflLLEV AMD TOLD 

31.H-»*TH E PURSSB- THAlf TUB' FLT ftTTNDTJ. «H0 ANSWERED THE 

33.H~**Cfll.U LtOHt itM- -ft- STWIt t TH6« SHf A^KEO FQ.H^»»Ai. mAS a OF WATER AND rHB F 

34.ht^**0r MftTEK THE**. SWe STAVH0.AROUEB WitH TH8 PVB^ 

35iH-»«cfltuiN0 THBj PUT Ayrm- stcpip; swe sAip sua HCA A . 

•36.H-HM»LAwvEa* AND |j ^ (kiiwe: fa HAVE- TH^IH OOB» 

37,H-»»3He THeW.TOOk, THiS PILL AKHJ. SEAT jDDH», ., 

3e.H-*»APTeH FUi AfeRIVED AND THEY WERE QEPL 

3S».H-**SHl5 APPROACH THE Ft-T AtTMJT YEAiiNO AT HER 

40.><-*«AND AS SHS HA9 tEfcLINO HE H TO CALM EOWM THiS PAX 

41.H-«*STrtJCk. THe f=tT ATTN0T I H THE PASS AND bRAB HER 

42.H-«*BV THE NECK; AMIJTHRil* HEJ* TO THS GROUND • ' 

43.H-»*tHEN AIRPORT SECORITV UBiS CAU-EB CM THE PAX 

44;H-»»AN D THEY TbiW HEK TO THg POLICE) 

43.H-*»FLT CREU MILL MAKS A' REPORT ON'JHE INCIDEWT 

4A.H-*»AND WILL SEjviD TO THE FUT SERVICE OFFICE 

47.H-*»SD0 C3M Q.LilCAIRAG- 421&5e | 

•r3.H-«*-»«*«»*»»** CCRO EVENT 07121014 *«»»«»<*»»••«-#»••#•* 

49.H-CCRO RCVO INlTIAli. NOTIFICATION FRli« SDO OUST 3VCS UPON ARV 

L i . . 

30.H-FLT 423 THAT PSOR: TAVAREZ HAD SPTOLY ASSAULTED FA N3R FIV 

e i •• I • 

Sl.H-JULIE SASSON.. CCRO SPOKS WITH FA SAG30N MHO SEPTD THAT 

32.^H-DURIK'Q LENQTW' CREEPI^tO DELAYS OUT OF NIA PSOR HAD RQSTD 

33.H-A SEVEKAce Al^ : MAS RfrTOtiY NOT SAttsFIED WITH' HS UEVEt OP"" 

34.HT-SVC RECVO, PaW.HPTDt-V HAO 4 VERBAI : EXCHANGP WITH FA4 

35-H-SASSON ANS DlflJINO' DEPCANfthgNT OF THE FLT THE PSG^ RPTDty 

36A3SAU_TE0. PA SflSJBON, P9<SH RPTDLY KNOtkED PA SASSONi-TCt THE 

37.H-Ta THE FLOOK ipP THt AdPT AN5 SCRAtCHES HE.R: FAtJSi FA SAS^ ' . 

N '^ ^ •..,• • ! •.•••. • :•'V: " v: . ••.••••••'\. - • • , • 

Sa.H-ALSa ftPTB ft WtStef e NSCJC, Fft^WAS TAKEN TO THftMEtJ^^F^ 

3 », HH»T THB ARPt. Ftt$A*S0f|9TATEir t o <rRQ THAT SHir (to 

iCr-H-INTENDlNO TO PRESS CHflftOES. FA REPORTS WtU^: 3E ^BMITTEB. 

il.H-LC L AtltWORITIES. TOOK P30R ?NTO CUSTCDy. PSCR WILL 3 
'H 

t55H 

.^3H 

A3H 

ASH 

A3H 

ASH 

aw 

ASH 

A5H 

A3h 

ASH 

:^SH 

A3H 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

AS 

RrTW 

ASH 

(^SH 

ASH 

ASH 

A3ri 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

iSM 

ASH 

ASH 

A3H 

ASH 

A5H 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

3DCl 

RwFK 

A4a^ 

R* 

' UFK; 

M^ 

Rr-

•JFit 

AFP 

RJFK 

A3H 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

iSMt 

X# 

A? 

A1>' 

X9 

ftOHT 

X4Q 

X4a 

:<40 

A9 

ASA4S 

A4D 

A40 

A40 

=?-

•aiT 

ASH 

ASK 

ASH 

A4a 

QMt 

ASH 

RXTW 

ASH 

ASH 

ASH 

• ,. I 

I 

(-(-»«*»»«»»in»*-« CCRO £V£NT 071210161 ^t«»»#»*«»»<»«**»-»»t«. 

H-CCRO 3CVD IINITIAL MaTIFSCATtON FR« 'SDa CUST 3VC3 UPON AHf 

VL 

,W-FLT 423 TMATi PSOR TAVAREZ. HAD RPTDLV ASSAULTED .=A NSR FI 

VE , 

H-JIJLie SASSON. CCRO SPOKE WITf* FA SASSON KHO REPTO THAT 

H-DURIN* LENOTHV CJ^SEPINO DELAYS 0\(>T OF 'MIA PSCR HAD ROaTD 

H-A BP^ERAOe AND WA3 RPTDLV NOT SATISFIglTH TKS LEVEL O 

r . 1 • 

H^SVC RECvO.. PSOR RPTDLV HAD A VERBAL EXCHANOE WITH FAA 

H-SASSOW AND DURINO DEPLANEHHNT OF 

H-A3SAULTED FAJ SASSCM. P30R SPTOLY 

S 

H-TO THE'FLOOrt OP THE ACFT AND 5CR<»TCHE0 HER FACE. 

Of'l 

H-AL30 HPTD A TWISTED NECK?. FA UAS 

H-AT THE ARPT.; FA SASSON STATED TOi 

Th-E FLT THS PSOR RPTOCV 

KNOCKED FA SASSON TO TH 

FA 3ASSTAKEMEO FACIIT 

CCRO THAT -JHE WA3 WAS 

H-INTE^JDI^JO Td PRESS C>4AROE3. FA REPORTS WILL SS SUBMITTED 

H-LCL AUTHORITIES tOOK PSOR I^mJ ciwTODY. PSOR WILL BE 

H-RSFliNDEO AN"* VALUE LEFT ON TKT AND AQVID MILL NOT RETURN 

H-TO .JFK ON AA PEf* SOC MOB n , BUROIIN. 

H-CCRO/RZADA/4lDEC07 } 

?I13V HFE 3 AV3FSO MM/Wtt 94SH 145A 12FEB T/S 

CCRO • • 

FTW7Ra«-21l?/l?DEC07 • 

Hw«<»PAX ASKED FOR A 0LA3S OF WATERJ AND FLT ATTE.ND 

H-*»WHO ANSWERED THE CALL LIGHT rd,D HER THAT 

H-»*FU WA3 ABOUT TO DEPRT THE GATS,..SHE THEN 

H-»*WENT TO THE FIRST CLASS GALLEVJ AND TOLD 

H-»»THS PunSErt THAT THE FLT ATTNOli MHO ANED THE 

H-*»CALL. LIOHf WA3 A STUPID THEN !S*e ASKED FOR 

H-*»A GLASS Olf WATER AND THE PURS ^ OAVE HER THE 0LA3S 

H-»»OF WATER THEN SHE STAYED AROUBD WITH THE PURSER 

H-»«CALL1N0 THE FLT ATTNO STUPID SHE SAID SHE WAS A 

H-«*l..AUYEft AND WA9 QOINO TO HAVE -rtMElB JOBS 

H-*»SHff .THEN TOOK THE PILL AND .SEAT OtUN,. . 

H.-**A^TER FLT' ARRIVED AND THE"!" WSfJEEPLAHlNO 

H-*»aHH APPROACH THS FLT ATTNOT VEALINO AT HER 

H-**ANO AS SHg WAS TELLING HER TO |CAL« DOWN THE PAX 

H-i*«STRUClC. THE FUT ATTNDT IN THE rfACE AND ORAD HER 

H-»*flV THE NECK AND THR6W HER TO TH6 GROUND 

H-*»THEJ« AIRPORT SEipjRITV MAS CALLED <M TH£ PAX 

H-*»ANB THEV: TOOK HER TO THE POtiCS 

H-«»FUT CREW WILL MAKE A REPORT OH tHE INCIDENT 

H-«*AND WILL SEND TO. THE FUT SERVfcE OFFICE 

H--««3Da C.S(t'0<.LICAIRAC 421 &S8 

SDQ7340 2046/1 IDES S3R OOCS AA HKl/C/US/037437ea'?/Da/10JAN37/F/19(>PRtl/TiVE 

3 DS OLIVER/MARrA/CARID -TAVEHe?/riARl4 

.JFK34Jf* 

.JFK34.JH 6731/1106607 

SS«! DOCA AA l*:i/R/US -TAVERgZ/M^IA 

JFK54SIH . !-•'. . 

jpkwM * oWi/iiidEEo^ -

ssf t DOC* A * HK»/P<'DS/344449S/DO/ipjANBy/P/2SAPR<»/TAVERS*: 

CPUZ/HARIA/CAR I -TAVEREZ/HARIA ; 

JFK34SIW ^ i 

JFK34JH 075I/^1DEC07 

AA 230A«Xi /HK AA 

.JPKS4M • 

JPK34JH 0748/tllOEC07 

H-HflOV 2/3HR* IN AtO BFR CHECK IN 

H-HAD<> 2 SOLSa. DOtt INT SAa 1 401.38 CARRY H-HADV LIOUID POLICY 

H-HADV lOOUS^jft: GHP SS. PLUSP Ape dff ' 

H-HONREF/CHa;f*EE APPLIES/NO VALUfi 

Mflftrft tflVERA* 

ofrriVftB idcia/joDEC07 . 

WWWl S1'7-43Sr-441 a-H 

j'FKl9ir-435-5 l 

.JF1<ft9l4r-677-2iS>5lX-B 

WWM1914'-«97-2451 X-B 

MARIA TAVERA? 

OMTIVRB 100d/i6DeC07 

4230 tlDEp jFlOtIA S3/KK 3tA N« -TAVEREZ/flARlA 

4230 IIDEC MIflSna 3S/A NW -rTAVEREZ/KARIA 

AiaV 14JAM SDOUFK 3S/HK 31J rJiM -TAVEREZ/MARIA 

.jFK<>4A-3O2-0&-a3-C 

3DOa09-5ea-?7-23-H 

3SR PCTC AA HK/Ar«ELA TAVERAS/DO^O'? 632 9044 

TAVE.=?EZ/«ARIA 

AFTER FLT TIME 

rk 

120 flfAH 

120 riAH 

19C KlAH 

EZ/MARIA -

TflVEREZ/MAHIA 

TAVEREZ/PIARIA 

4230 IIDEC MIASEO NN/3S 

4230 11 DEC .JFWIIfl NN/S3 

•iiaV 14.JAI* SDOvlFK NN/S3 

MARIA TAVARES 

OHT-YHO 0939/01N0V07 

H-HABW TKT IS MOW KEP/NOM TRANSFI 

HvHADV too. CHANGS FES. PLUS FARE i 

H-HAOV PAX TKT VALID. ONE VEAJ^ FRI 

os i CORRECT LAST NAME la TAVERAS 

QMt-YHO- 0923/01 NOVO? 

H-/T»fBMHOlT/EHAIL SENT' l341/tia^/TD S 

TDSEMAILEDIT/1341 /1 1 OCt/TDa 

XTI17ZEN t34t/lIQCT0 7 

H-TBWeOIT/TKT DRIVEN F.CR'4i6»0O/i32;?/llC}CT 

H-TBM6B1T/Q053S60S SS3iiQt( SgSSlOW 

H-TKTEB PO DELETED AND PLACED* HiStORV 

4230 1IDEC JFXmA SSt/hOt: 3tA NW -rAVEREZ/MARIA 

:/N0» ENDORS 

fIFF 

rt OATH OF ISSUE 

MAftlA 
' ^ 

"Raab, Kim" 

<Kim. Raab@aa .com> 

03/27/2008 08:06 AM 

To Beau A Morrow/ASW/FAA@FAA 

cc 

bcc 

Subject IVIanifest 423 

AA 423 11 DEC MIA E9 551P AB3 ON LIST - C16Y235 

1 TROUBETZKO NICK D SDQ 1D-F NB SC LF ADM CLUB 

PLETPOCV 

2 TROUBETZKO,NIKOL ' D SDQ 1G-F NB SC LF AG ET 

DOCV 

3 MAGADAN R0BERAV2 J SDQ~1H-F 2 IB SC LF ADM 

CLUB AD ET DOCV 

4 URTECHO MICHE'AV2 J SDQ 1J-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ETDOCV 

5 PELLERANO LUIS J SDQ 2A-F NB IB SC LF ADM 

CLUB PL ET DOCV 

6 BENSADON RODNE R SDQ 2B-F 1 SC LF PL ET 

DOCV 

7 VEGA BERNA J SDQ 2D-F 2 IB SC LF ADM 

CLUB AG ET DOCV 

8 DANGELO JEFFR D SDQ 2G-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

9 SUED LUIS J SDQ 2H-F 1 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

10 SUED MARGA J SDQ 2J-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

11 LEDESMA AUGUS R SDQ 3A-F NB SC LF PL ET 

DOCV 

12 ROSSETTI AUGUS R SDQ 3B-F NB SC LF ADM CLUB 

AP PL ET DOCV 

13 REYES RAUL R SDQ 3D-F 1SCLF ADM CLUB 

PL ET DOCV WCHR 

14 DANGELO FRANK C SDQ 3G-F NB IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

15 CASTANOS JULIO D SDQ 3H-F 1 IB SC LF ADM 

CLUB AD ET DOCV 

16 BULL PETER R SDQ 3J-F 1 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV ADC 

17 DURAN RAMON L SDQ 4A-F 2 SC LF AG'ET 

DOCV 

18 BENCOSME EMILI AC3 V SDQ 4C-F 1 SCLFADET 

CM DOCV WCHC 

19 GARCIA ROSA AC3 V SDQ 4D-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

20 LEVINE MAX M SDQ 4G-F 1 IB SC LF ADM EXHIBIT 
CLUB PL ET DOCV 

21 BEY JETAR W SDQ 5A-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

22 JIMENEZ ENRIQ CG4 Y SDQ 5C-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

INF DOCV DCVI 

23 JIMENEZ ROSYJ CG4 Y SDQ 5D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

24 VIEIRA INGRI N SDQ 5F-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

25 PERDOMO CINDY L SDQ 5G-F NB SC LF ADM CLUB 

AP AG ET DOCV 

26 MORROBEL ROBER CG4 Y SDQ 6D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

INF DOCV DCVI 

27 BENCOSME GABRI AC3 V SDQ 6F-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

28 MORROBEL GILDA CG4 Y SDQ 6G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

29 BENSADON EDUAR K SDQ 7C-F NB SC LF AG ET 

DOCV 

30 CABREJA CONSU O SDQ 7F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

31 LOPEZ PATRI Y SDQ 7G-F 1 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

32 CRUZ SIMON K SDQ 8A-F NB SC LF ADM CLUB 

AG ET CM DOCV 

33 GONZALEZ PAOLA K SDQ 8B-F 2 SC LF AG ET 

DOCV 

34 BATISTA MARIA Y SDQ 8C-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

35 MARTINEZGO ALEJA L SDQ 8G-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

36 YOUNG PAUL Y SDQ 8X-E NB SC LF ET DOCV 

EMPL 

37 JIMENEZ GISEL S SDQ 9A-F 4 SC LF ET INF 

DOCV DCVI 

38 DAVENPORT CLYDE B SDQ 9B-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

39 MAGNAGHI FERNA H SDQ 9C-F 1 IB SC LF AG 

ET DOCV PPR 

40 CACERES SORNE K SDQ 9G-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

41 JAVIER PABEL T SDQ 10A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

42 LEA LOWEL N SDQ 10B-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

43 BORDAS ENRIQ Q SDQ 10C-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

44 BORDAS IVAN Q SDQ 10D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 
45 FERNANDEZR RELAY L SDQ 10F-F 1 SCLFADET 

DOCV 

46 ARIAS ROBER S SDQ 10G-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

47 MORALES RAMON O SDQ 10H-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

48 RAMIREZ ALTAG K SDQ 10J-F 4 SC LF ET DOCV 

49 MIRANDA SANDR Q SDQ 11B-F 1 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

50 SERRANO DION! Q SDQ 11F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

51 ROSARIO JUAN V SDQ 11G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

Docy 

52 CRUZ KATER O SDQ 11H-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

53 RIVAS ANDRI Q SDQ 12A-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

54 NIVAR MANUE O SDQ 12B-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

55 ENRIQUE TERES N SDQ 12F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

56 JIMENEZ YASKAAZ2 N SDQ 12G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

57 ESCOTTO JOSE V SDQ 12H-F 1 SC LF ET DOCV 

58 RADEFELDT IRMGA O SDQ 12J-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET CM DOCV 

59 GUILLEN DOMIN O SDQ 13B-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ETDOCV 

60 ZAPATA ALEJA T SDQ 13D-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

61 PAULINO GLADY AZ2 N SDQ 13F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

62 ESTRELLA JOHAN N SDQ 14A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

63 RUNDLE RALPH Y SDQ 14B-P NB SC LF ET DH 

DOCV EMPL PS 

64 WOLFE EVELY Q SDQ 14D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

65 WOLFE TIMOT Q SDQ 14F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

66 DELFINO RAFAE L SDQ 14G-F 2 SC LF AG ET 

DOCV 

67 BLAHNICK DREW Y SDQ 14H-P NB SC LF ET DH 

DOCV EMPL PS 

68 PEREZ ANGEL BS2 Q SDQ 15C-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 
69 PEREZ ANGEL BS2 Q SDQ15D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

70 DIAZ FERNA AX2 K SDQ 15F-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

71 MORALES JULIO AX2 K SDQ 15G-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

72 BILLINI OLGA O SDQ 16A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV WCHR 

73 PEREZ KARINBW2 O SDQ 16C-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

74 PEREZ LUCY BW2 O SDQ 16D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

75 MATOS ANA L O SDQ 16F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

76 1MARDI ANTON O SDQ 16G-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

77 CORNELIO DEOGR Q SDQ 16H-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

78 HEREDIA EDGAR L SDQ 17G-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

79 ACEVEDO ELIZA BT3 Q SDQ 18A-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

80 ACEVEDO MANUE BT3 Q SDQ 18B-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

CHD DOCV 

81 DOMINGUEZ MILDA BT3 Q SDQ 18C-F 3 IB SC LF ET 

INF DOCV DCVI 

82 DISLA RICHA N SDQ 18D-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

83 ROJAS EDDY V SDQ 18F-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

84 ESMERO MELIS O SDQ 19A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

85 HERNANDEZ DOMIN O SDQ 19B-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

86 MEDINA BREND O SDQ 19C-S 2 IB SC LF AD 

ETDOCV 

87 CARDOZO KENNY Y SDQ 19G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

88 POCKELS EMIGD O SDQ 19H-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

89 MENDEZ LUIS M SDQ 19J-F 1 SC LF ET DOCV 

90 GARCIA REMIG Q SDQ 20A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

91 ROSARIO JAQUE N SDQ 20F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

92 RIOS FRANC Q SDQ 20G-F 1 IB SC LF ET 
( ; 

DOCV 

93 GONZALEZNO ENRIQ Q SDQ 20H-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

94 VASQUEZ ELVIR 0 SDQ 21H-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

95 FABIAN HANSE O SDQ 21J-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

96 KANNEE CESAR Q SDQ 22B-F NB IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

97 DAMBACHER BEVER N SDQ 22T:-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

98 LEE MOON BX2 L SDQ 22D-F NB SC LF AG ET 

DOCV 

99 CASSANI DAYLE K SDQ 22F-F 2 IB SC LF DOCV 

TKT 

100 STEFANIAK DARIU • B SDQ 22G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

101 LUGO RAFAE O SDQ 22H-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

102 BARCELO CARME Q SDQ 23A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

103 YANG DAESBX2 L SDQ 23F-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

104 NICOLAS MARCO O SDQ 23G-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

105 ACOSTA JOSE BP2 Q SDQ 24A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

106 ACOSTA JESUS BP2 Q SDQ 24B-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

CHD DOCV 

107 KADIROV lOZDJ M SDQ 24C-F 1 SC LF ET DOCV 

108 RATHKAMP UWE M Y SDQ 24D-F 1 SC LF DOCV TKT 

109 JOHN GERMA L SDQ 24G-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

110 MONTERO JUNIO H SDQ 24H-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

111 SANTANA LEONA S SDQ 24J-F NB IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

112 DOMINGUEZ YESSEAK4 Q SDQ 25A-F 2IBSCLFAD 

ET DOCV 

113 DOMINGUEZ DAYAN AK4 Q SDQ 25B-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

CHD DOCV 

114 LUPERON GREGO AK4 Q SDQ 25C-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

CHD DOCV 

115 LUPERON BRAND AK4 Q SDQ 25D-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

CHD DOCV 

116 SUERO PAOLA Q SDQ 25F-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

117 HERNANDEZ BIENV T SDQ 25J-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV WCHR 
u c 

118 POLANCO ANA S SDQ 26C-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

119 GRANSON ALFRE CL2 M SDQ 26F-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

120 BARRANCO NATAL AY2 L SDQ 27A-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV ADC 

121 CRUMP SHARY O SDQ 27G-F 1 IB SC LF AD 

ETDOCV 

122 GARSHO L KNU T K SDQ 27H-F NB SC LF ADM CLUB 

EP ET DOCV 

123 JARVIS MICHA AY2 L SDQ 27J-F NB SC LF PL ET 

DOCV 

124 SUAREZ ALEJA M SDQ 28B-F 1 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

125 GOUTY CHRIS CL2 M SDQ 28F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

126 HERNANDEZ JESEN O SDQ 28G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

127 MILLER WILLI O SDQ 28J-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

128 BARRETT PANIA BD2 S SDQ 29C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

129 STREET SHANE BD2 S SDQ 29D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

130 PEGUERO JOHAN O SDQ 29J-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

131 GARCIA CRUZ O SDQ 30A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

132 MENDEZ FRANK V SDQ 30C-F 1 SC LF ET DOCV 

133 VARGAS EMILI Q SDQ 30F-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

134 SANTOS JANNE V SDQ 30G-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

135 SANTOS DANIE AW2 K SDQ 31F-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

136 CASTRO ALEXAAW2 K SDQ 31G-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

137 BOURNE ALLIA L SDQ 31H-F NB SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

138 DELROSARI EDUAR O SDQ31J-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

139 MENDEZ OTTO Q SDQ 32A-F 1 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

140 RODRIGUEZ ALFON L SDQ 32C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

141 RODRIGUEZ KIALI L SDQ 32D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

142 JAQUEZ ANAM Y SDQ 32F-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

143 GUILLEN RANDY L SDQ 32G-F 1 SC LF ADM CLUB 

AD ET DOCV 

144 FABIAN ANGEL AI3 V SDQ 33C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

145 FABIAN PAOLA AI3 V SDQ 33D-F 2 SCLFADET 
y 

146 CISNEROS 

147 

148 

149 

150 

151 

POLANCO MARLE 

CERVANTES JAVIE 

MONTERO FRANC 

PENA RAFAE 

HERTEL JOHN 

152 BIGIO REUVE 

153 VASQUEZ . ODALI 

154 FUENTES MANUE 

155 CASTILLO JOSE 

156 

157 

BAEZ 

WONG 

ELVIS 

ARMIN 

158? NOVAS MIGUE 

DOCV 

LOURD AI3 V SDQ 33G-F 1 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

K SDQ 34A-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

K SDQ 34B-S 1 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

H SDQ 34C-F NB SC LF ET DOCV 

K SDQ 35A-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

K SDQ 35B-F 1 IB SC LF AG 

ET DOCV 

K SDQ 35C-F 1 SC LF AG ET 

DOCV 

Q SDQ 35H-F 1 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

Q SDQ 36J-F 2 IB SC LF AD 

ET DOCV 

N SDQ 37A-F 2 IB SC LF ET 

DOCV 

SDQ 37B-S 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

T SDQ 37C-S 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

S SDQ 4B-F 3 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV WCHR 

1597BALDERA ANA O SDQ 5B-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

160? PEGUERO YESEN O SDQ 7D-F 3 SC LF ET DOCV 

161? HERNANDEZ JOSE Q SDQ 8D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

162?LEGER LUIS Q SDQ 8F-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

163? DIAZ JULIO N SDQ 8H-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

Q SDQ 8J-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

O SDQ 9F-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

Q SDQ 9J-F 2 SCLF ETDOCV 

N SDQ 11A-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

T SDQ 11C-F 2 SCLFADET 

DOCV 

Q SDQ 11D-F 2 SCLFADET 

DOCV 

O SDQ 11J-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

O SDQ 12C-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

17!^? SANCHEZ TA FREDD Q SDQ 12D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

173? SANTANA FLOR O SDQ 13A-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

174?LOPEZDEDIA BARBA S SDQ 13C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

175? DIAZ MASSI O SDQ 13G-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

176? CRUZ PEDRO O SDQ 13H-F 2 SC LF ET INF 

164? TAVAREZ 

165? LOPEZ 

166? ALMONTE 

167? STENGEL 

RADHA 

DOMIN 

CINTH 

BIENV 

168? MARTINEZ VICTO 

169? ANGELES MARIA 

170? JIMENEZ HILDA 

171? TAVEREZ MARIA ] 
DOCV DCVI 

177?PEREZDELOS VIRGE O SDQ 13J-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

178? BAEZ JUAN O SDQ 14C-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

179?DARSI DORKA Q SDQ 14J-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

180? SARITA ALIA BI2 O SDQ 15A-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

181?L0PEZSURIE JESUS BI2 O SDQ 15B-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

182?GERMOSEN ZENAI N SDQ 15H-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

183? DURAN MIGUE N SDQ 15J-F 3 SC LF ET DOCV 

184? JIMENEZ CARLO O SDQ 16J-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

185? DIAZ JOSE O SDQ 17A-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

186? SANTANA RACHA BF4 Q SDQ 17B-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

187? TABAREZ SEBAS BF4 Q SDQ 17C-F 2 SC LF ET CHD 

DOCV 

188? TABAREZ IROM BF4 Q SDQ 17D-F 2 SC LF ET CHD 

DOCV 

189? TABAREZ IVERS BF4 Q SDQ 17F-F 2 SC LF ET CHD 

DOCV 

190? REYES LUIS Q SDQ 17H-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

191?BELTRE GABRI O SDQ 17J-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

192? ARIAS TOLE LUZ A03 Q SDQ 18G-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

193? TORRES TOL LUIS A03 Q SDQ 18H-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

194? TORRES LUIS A03 Q SDQ 18J-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

195?SAINZ LOREL W SDQ 19D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

196? DE SOTO MAXIM V SDQ 19F-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

197? LUGO SIRCA Q SDQ 20B-F 3 SC LF ET DOCV 

198? REYNOSO ALTAG AH2 Q SDQ 20C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

199? JOSE Y0MERAH2 Q SDQ 20D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

200? TERRERO AGUST Q SDQ 20J-F 2 SC LF AD ET 

DOCV 

201?BRITO JUAN BN2 O SDQ 21 A-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

202?BERDUGO JAIME BN2 O SDQ 21B-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

203? MOREL LEWIS BR2 O SDQ 21C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

204? DUVERGE ROBER BR2 O SDQ 21D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

205? MOLINA EILYN Q SDQ21F-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

206? GUERRERO AGUST Q SDQ 21G-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

207? CABRAL RAFAE S SDQ 22A-F 1 SC LF ET DOCV 

208? DELACRUZ AUREL Q SDQ 23B-F 3 SC LF ET DOCV 

209? PIMENTEL MILAG BY2 Q SDQ 23C-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

210?PIMENTEL FIORE BY2 Q SDQ 23D-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

211? ORTIZ JOHNA N SDQ 23H-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

212?SEPULVEDA ADA O SDQ 23J-F 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

213?BAUTISTA YONIL N SDQ 25G-F 3 SC LF ET INF 

DOCV DCVI 
0 

251? RODRIGUEZ ANTON CI2 T SDQ 37J-S 2 SC LF ET DOCV 

Safety Regulatory Affairs 

MD 5425 HDQ1 

AmericanAirlines* 

"We are American Airlines, and we know why you fly." 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use 

of the intended recipients(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please do not read, distribute, or take 

action in reliance upon this message. If you have received this in error, please notify me immediately by 

return email and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. 
(Direccidn generaCde ta (pofkia de Hunsmo 

Seccfon de fa Pdlicia de Turismo en el AILA 

"Jose Francisco Peiia G6nie«?^ 

Afid dellibroy la lectura 

Aeropi Int. de Laa Americas, 

"Dr. Jose Fco. Peiia Gdme2^ 

12 de Diciembre de 2007.-

NQTAINFORMATIVA; 

L- Respetuosamente infonmole, que siendo las 24:10 horas 

de la madrugada del dia de la feeha, nos fiie enviada mediante offcio sin 

nuinero del Supervisor General de los Servicios de Seguridad Militar y 

Policial, AILA, "Dr. JFPG", la nacional americana JUIIA ANNE 

SASSON» mayor de edad, pasaporte , ya que la misma fue 

agredida fTsicamente per la nombrada MARIA CARIDAD TAVERAS 

CRUZ, dominicana, mayor de edad, pasaporte , momento en que 

se eneantraba a bordo del vuelo ^fo. 423, de la tinea A^^ : Ainericaii 

Akljfnea^ pTQcedente de ^f0^v Yor^. con escala Tv^apii >T S^ntia^ p6iiy ^ por: 

lo; que fEie despachada pd* instrtic<?iones Supeiiorest/ y entregada af sefior 

GUSTAVO LIGAIRAC, Supervisor de la referids^ ii'nea Aerea, caiTiet de 

identificacidn AILA, No. 3085> tel^Ibno No. 809-549-0032, exfc 221 y 257, 

para que se presente en hora des la manana de esta misma fecli^ ante el 

Magistradd Prpeurador Fiscal Adjunto en Boca CHca, para los fines 

correspdndientes. 

de lugar. 

2,- Lo que informo para su conocimiento y fines que estime 

LEOPOLDGt«>yM AQUINO, 

2dom01.N. 

Oficial del Dfa Secci6ii Tatfstica «AILA, Dr. JFPG' 

PVbg. 

EXHIBIT 
.cftft 

OFlCJNA PRINCIPAL 

Telt.: S(»-5«30Zi7 

809.563-O23O 

fat.: 809-563-0253 

e-mail; • 

cu^taiurldad^Hoinitfll.tiou 

. Apulo.PntuI 11350 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

DBL/VS AMERICAS 

Oficlni de SeguridMl 

TeU.: 809-549-8211/S2U 

Fix; 809-549-2321 

AILA 

AEROPUBBrtOlNT. 

PUERTO PLATA 

Oflcini (Je Scguritlad 

Tet: 809-386-0333 

AIGGU 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

PUNTACANA 

Oficjna do Seguridad 

TBL: S09-«g8-S4«l 

AlPC 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

LAROMANA 

Oficina d« Scguridn) 

Tel.; 809-8U-9306 

AILR 

AEROPUERTO INT 

aSA O 

Oflclna de Segutidid 

Tel.: 809-273-8079 

Far 809-233-8080 

AIC 

AEROPUHRTQ INT. 

DBBARAHONA 

Ofietiw de Seguiidid 

TV:l.:809-52*4l5« 

AIMM 

AEROPUERTD INT. 

LA I3ABELA 

Dr JoaqulaBaiaguer 

Oficina dc Seguridad 

Tel.: 809-826-4031 

AILI 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

ARROYO BARRIL 

Oficina de Seguridad 

Tel.: 809-374-2979 

AIAB 

>-

AEROPUERTO INT, 

SAMANA(CATBY) 

Tel.: 809-338-0073 

ESCUELADB, 

SEOURIOAO 

Oficina de Segutidatf 

Tela;: 809-222-1400 

809-222-1401 

l-a« 809-222-0023 

REPUBLICA DOMINICANA 

CVERPO ESPECIAUZADO EN SEGURIDAD AEROPORTUARIA 

SANTO DOMINGO, D. N. 

Al 

Del 

Asunto 

Anexo 

"TODO POft LA PATRIA" 

"Afio del Libra y la Lectura" 

11 de Diciembre del 2007, 

Oficial del Dia de la Polida de Turismo, Politur, 

AILA "Dr. Jose Francisco Pefia Gomez''. 

Siipervisor General de los Servicios de Seguridad 

Mititar y PoHcial AtLA "Dr. Josi Fnmdsco Pefia 

Gomez". 

Certificacion de entrega. 

Inprme de sohrecarga^ certificado medico y copia de 

pasaporte , de la seHora JtlLIA 

ANNE SASSOi^ 

1.- Cortismente, se erwia bap cusioSa, a la senora 

JULIA ANNB SASSON, Pasaporte r de mmttatidad 

americana, axafiiia d& la aerolmea American Airlims; por el hecho de haber a # 

agredida verbal y fisicamente por la nombradt^^ AfAJRXA CAJRI^ 

TAVERAS CBUZ^ Pasaporte , d^ nadonalidtu^ dominicana, 

monuintos en que se encontraban a bor4o del vueh Na,42S/ dk Ik Unea aerea 

American Airliner, procedenfedekciuda(ideNe0^^ydrk^E.EM'U' 

RADAMESJDE 

gr/sm.' 

OSO, 

T^.t^oronet, ffAD 

EXHIBIT 
CB5 . 

OPlCINAPRINaPAt 

Telt.: 809-563-0247 

309^363-0230 

Fax: 809-3634>i233 

E-maU: 

Apldo.P(»|aI 11350 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

OB IJVS AMERICAS 

Ondna d« Saguddad 

Telt.: 309-549-821 l.'82K 

Fa.t: 8G9-J49-2321 

AILA 

AEROPUEHTTO INT. 

PUERTO PLATA 

Oflclna d* Seguridad 

Tel.: S09-386-033S 

AIGOL 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

PUNTACANA 

OflciAa de Saguildad 

T\iL: S09-488-t4»I 

AIPC 

ACROPUEKTO INT. 

LAROMANA 

OfTcfna de Seguridad 

'nsl.:809-«I3-930« 

AILR 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

aSA Q 

OficlmdaSeguddad 

Tel; S09^J73-807« 

Fav ta9-23%t6tit. 

AIC 

AEROPUECTOINT. 

DEBARAHONA 

Oflclna dc Sagnrida^ 

TeL: 309-574-4156 

AIMM 

AEROPUEKTO IN t 

LAISABBtA 

Or. J9«qu(a BalMguer 

0C^:ii»d*3eg)tridad 

161:809-826-4031 

AILT 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

ARROYO BARRIL 

Olcina de Seguridad 

Tel.: 809-374-2979 

AIAB 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

SAMANA fCATEY) 

Tel.: 809-338-0075 

ESCUELA OE 

' SEGURIDAD 

Ofloina ds Seguridad 

Telt.: 809-232-1400 

809-222-1401 

Fax: 809-222-0023 

REPUBUCA DOMINICANA 

CUERPO ESPECIAUZADOEN SEGURIDAD AEROPORTUARIA 

SANTO DOMINQOi D- N. 

.«M** 

"TODapOR LA PATRIA" 

"Ano del Libra y la Lectura" 

NQTA INFORMATIVA: 

Al 

11 de Diciembre del 2007.-

Superuisor General de los Seruidos de Seguridad 

Militar y Policial del AILA, "Dr. Josi Fco. Pefia 

G6mez" 

/.- Respetuosamente, informo a ese superior despadto, 

cfue sienda aproxtmadamJente las 21:30 horas del dfa de lafedia, recMun llamado del 

Centra de Operadones deAerodom, Sigh XXI, para soUdtarrrte que the apersonaraal 

Area de Sakliie (Bnaxh4), lugar donde desembarcaria elmteh No.^3, de la lai&t 

aerea American AtrUrtesi proadente de la dudad de Near York, con escala Miami' 

Santo Dornxngo, en razi6it de que a bordo de ta aerotuwe habut un pasajero reooltoso; 

por lo que prooedi a presentarme de inmediato al lugoT, percatmdome die que se 

trataba de una Ugera discus^ que habia sostetfido a boriia de la aeronar'. la 

nombrada MARIA CAJRJOJAD TAVERAS CRU2^ pasaporte ,. de 

nadonatida^ dOrmmma^ cofp^^J^^^ pasaporte^ 

seftora SASSOfi con hceradmtes en la cara y el cuelto, y la sefumtAVEMA? ooii 

trauma leqe en costado izquktdo, pot loque procedimos a condudtlasat dtspertsario 

medico de esta terminal aeToportuaria y luego de ree&ir la& atenddnes m^dicaa de 

lugar, la seftora TAVERAS fiie conduala a la Ofidnas de ta PottiM Nadmi^ y la 

seftora SASSON^fite amdudda a ta Oficina deJPOlJttir, para U^fine^^procedentes. 

que estime de lugar. 

. 2.- Lo que htfixrmo para, su elesjddo ednodrnimjkfy fines 

^iQr'JL' ' 

PAB£0M.MMSA MATOS, 

Capitdn Faroe, B.N. 

Oficial Inspector de los Seroidos de Seguridad Militar (S-IO) 

AHA, "Dr. Jose Francisco Pefia Gomez" 

AV/sm.-

Anexo: copia de Ofida de entrega it la. PJt. yala OJtc de Politur. 
CBS. 

Ol-ICCNA PRINCIPAL 

Tell; W»-.1(S3-0247 

:«IW-.1A3.0231> 

Fii«: .>ni'>-3ft3-0253 

R-mails 

.-<**.44 f«ri.l«l^VMmill|.«UIII 

Aptdn. Pntlal 11350 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

Oei.ASAMERICA.S 

ondna de Seguridail 

rcl.v: 809-349-821 Wg21 

FIJI : 809-349-2321 

AILA 

AEROPUURH) INT. 

PUERTO PLATA 

ondna de Seguridad 

TiO,; »l>9-.'18«-n.^35 

AIGOL 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

PUNTA tlANA 

OlVrinn Or SegnHdod 

Tul.t W)9-«I»»-«48l 

AIPC 

AFROPtfP.RTO INT. 

I.A HOMANA 

Onctn»de .Seguitdnd 

TtL-HO*-* 13-9306 

A11.R 

AltROPtJERrO INT. 

<-19A«J 

On^'ita'dci .'tegttitiiait 

Tel,: X09-273-ttn9' 

('»»•. X«9^333-l(0«0 

Ate 

AEROPUERTO INT. 

DEBARAHONA. 

OHcini da Stgiwidad 

Tafi; X09-534-4I56 

AIMK 

AFJIOPOJERTOIMT. 

LA I3ABELA 

Or. Xoaifiilii Balagvav 

OflctmileStgwhlad 

tet.: MM-826.403I 

AIU 

AEROPUERTO INT, 

.\RROrO BARRIL 

ORtinaJe Seguridad 

r d : 809-374-2979 

AIAB 

AKROPUER'rO (NT, 

S.\MANA(CATEY) 

Ttl.r W*3?8.0075 

ESCUELA DE 

SEGURIDAD 

Oncim <k Snutidad 

Telt: 809-222.(400 

"09222-1401 

F.-M; »d9-222-002J 

REPUBLICA DOMINICANA 

CUERPO ESPECIALIZADO EN SEGURIDAD AEROPORTVAKIA 

SANTO DOMINGO, D. N, 

"TODO l>OR LA PATRlA•• 

"<4«o cfe/L/iJiX) y/ a Lecfora " 

n de Diciembre del 2007. 

Al : Ofidal del Dia tk bs^Senndos Paliniilc^, AILA 

"Dr. lose L-randsco Perm Gomez". 

Del : Supervisor General de Ids Seividos de Seguridad 

Militar xj Policial AILA "Dr. Jose !-rundsca Peiia 

Gomez.".: 

Asunla : Certificacion de enlrega de pasajero. 

Anexo : Certificado medico y copia de pasapm'le 

de la nombrada MARIA CAIUPAD "TAVERAS 

CRUZ. 

I.ff::'- Cortisntent0}^ s^ermfaba^ms^ 

nombraditMAmA CARTOAT^TA^rERAimiM Posapotte de 

nadonalidad dominicana, por el heclto de haberse comportadq de tniti prtna 

inadeaiada, a bordo del vuelo No.423). de la linea aemt American AMimr'^ 

procedentede la dudad de Neco York, con escaken Mianih$anlaBomiftgi:i par 

sostener una discus^t y haber a^edido fisicamente a la setlora JULIA ANNE 

SASSON, Pasaporte: > de nadonalidad ariiermmrMafata dk la 

aeroHnea American Airline. 

RADAMES 

gr/sm.-

EXNOSO, 
Complaint Record of Telephone Conversation 

Complainants name pronounced: Julie Sasson 

Date: 1/16/2008 

Time: 2:41 pm 

Route: MIA-SDQ 

Flight date: 12/11/2007 

Airline: AALA 

Phase of flight of reported issue: Passenger De-planeing 

AMR Complaint #: CSW21 2008 0002 

Complaint topics: Passenger Maria Taverez verbally and physically assaulted flight 

attendant Julie Sasson. 

Facts related to the inspector during the call: 

1 called Ms. Sasson to introduce myself and explain the Federal Aviation Administrations 

complaint investigation process. I told Ms. Sasson that 1 had read her complaint and was 

wondering if she had anything else she wanted me to know. Ms. Sasson has been a flight 

attendant with American Airlines for 16 years and stated she had never been attacked 

before by a passenger. On 12/11/2007 Ms. Sasson was flying the number five position 

on an Airbus A300. Her assigned jumpseat was at the number 2 door on the left of the 

aircraft. Her jumpseat was aft facing, towards the flight attendants. 

Ms. Sasson's trip started in New York. In Miami (MIA) the flight experienced a two 

hour delay due to maintenance issues. Ms. Sasson stated that during the delay she walked 

to the rear of the aircraft and many passengers asked her for Water. The cabin crew was 

hesitant due to the fact that the pilots had notified them they may be cleared soon for 

takeoff. The first time Ms. Sasson noticed Ms. Traveras was when she was in the 

forward galley and Ms. Traveras came forward in an angry manner demanding a drink of 

water so she could take a pill. Ms. Traveras stated to Ms. Sasson, "you are stupid" Ms. 

Traveras took her pill and went back to her seat. Flight attendant Sasson had no 

interaction with Ms. Traveras during the flight. Ms. Sasson stated that to her knowledge 

and after talking to the other flight attendants, Ms. Traveras was served no alcohol but 

did have a bag with many prescription pill bottles in it. 

Upon de-planeing, Ms. Traveras got up and walked up to flight attendant Sasson at the 

2L door and said, "you are stupid and this is why American Airlines is in fmancial 

trouble with employees like you". Ms. Traveras then sprang towards flight attendant 

Sasson and with her finger nails. Ms. Sasson's face was scratched and her neck was 

twisted. An off duty American Airlines, Captain named Randy Rundle (Sp) ran off the 
aircraft and siimmoned the police. The police detained Ms. Traveras and Ms. Sasson was 

taken to the medical clinic at the airport where she was treated for her scratches, bruises 

and twisted neck. Ms. Sasson was asked is she wanted to press charges against Ms. 

Traveras and she said "yes". Ms. Sasson was told that if she did press charges she would 

have to stay until the next morning. 

At 0800 the next day Ms. Sasson was driven back to the Santo Domingo (SDQ) airport 

where she was met by the American Airlines, Station Manager. From there they were to 

travel to the police station where the hearing would be. Ms. Sasson was told by the police 

that to verify her injuries she would have to be examined by a state doctor. They went 

and met witii the state doctor and didn't' arrive back to the police station until 11:30am. 

By this time everybody was at lunch. The American airlines station manager made a 

phone call and was able to get a secretary to retum to the police station. The secretary 

took the report from the state doctor. 

When the hearing finally started Ms. Traveras was brought in still wearing the same 

outfit she had on the previous day. Ms. Traveras still had her bag of medications with her. 

At one point Ms. Sasson stated that the police caught Ms. Traveras in a lie and asked her 

to leave the room. At that point Ms. Traveras attomey approached Ms. Sasson and the 

other crew and American Airlines employees she was with. He apologized for Ms. 

Traveras actions. At this point the door to the room was opened and Ms. Traveras heard 

her attomey apologizing and yelled at him not to apologize to the American Airlines 

employees but they needed to apologize to her. Ms. Sasson thanked Ms. Traveras 

attomey but said she was going to report this to the Federal Aviation Administration and 

the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This seemed to make the attomey angry. 

Beau A. Morrow ^^*^ 

Aviation Safety Inspector 
Complaint Record of Telephone Conversation 

Complainants name pronounced: Julie Sasson 

Date: 3/26/2008 - ' 

Time: 2:41 pm • * 

Route: MIA-SDQ 

Flight date: 12/11/2007 

Airline: AALA 

Phase of flight of reported issue: Passenger deplaning 

AMR Complaint #: CSW21 2008 0002 

Complaint topics: Passenger Maria'Taverez verbally and physically assaulted flight 

attendant Julie Sasson. 

Facts related to the inspector during the call: 

I called and traded emails with Ms. Sasson many times during the course of this 

investigation. Mr. Sasson was very helpful and shared all the documentation she had 

with me that pertained to this case. Ms. Sasson stated she woxild like to know if we 

moved forward with an enforcement case so she could eventually use the Freedom of 

Information act to track it. I informed her that I was only able to advise her that it was 

being sent on and at that point any civil penalty action became a matter between the FAA 

and Maria Taverez. I also let her know that I may need to contact her again if I have 

questions about details surrounding her flight. I discussed with her that I would be 

closing out her complaint and she would be receiving a closure letter. 

The last call I made to Ms. Sasson was on March 26* 

Beau A. Morrow Ji^l ^ 

Aviation Safety Inspector 
PROCURADURIA FISCAL 

PROVINCIA SANTO DOMINGO 

Depanatnento Medico Leg: 

LeyN0.82l-27.Arts.dH 109 

DO MEDICO EEGAL 

Yo Dr. (a) Exequdtor No. £ ^ 

M^uco Legist* de la Froviocia Santo Don^ngcv^tuand igOj^tuando a ^ecu^ri^uentOYl ^ecH^rimiento tie. 

CiAu\4u^^Hllff//?y' ^ ^•hclf^^ o Civil 

Naci.Z^idad/^;ig^^-^^^ 

Direccidn 

oficio Na 

cettifico haber examinado a: 

Sexo 

icioNa _^2 -y4 * 

(Las condicionet est4tt sujetas a cualquier ttpo de compUcaQ^dn que se presente dentro del periodo 

de curacite esfablecid^). ••' » 

:dido aiffivCjliidad de Santo Domingo Este, Prov. Sai^' 

de ^i/-^ ^ ' del aflo'SG^ . p^^ l 

Expedido 

mes 

dfas del 

Dr. (a)/ 

Medico Lt^ista 

Av. Charles de Oaulle j[^(x. 27, Santo Dominftp Bstey Provincia Sa^to l^oniing^y; JRv 0s * Teli: 809r598-4000 
kmim k iMk k I M PilWico ]»ki\i\mm hm\ 

Tg>9.i 80g-S4g-<>350 / 309-549-0049 

. q _ ^^'-v^ <^ ^ -^ O -

• ^• • 

I 

NOMBRE:. 

FECHA: _ 

. ^ 

/ / ci^^^tx^L^^ z<iD&^ 

EXHIBIT 
kmtmkEmk kMuifiiblmy Amknm Social 

TelS.r 809-548-0350/ 809^549-004* 

JXA ^ 

^i<?/Lti ^ 

NOMBRE:. 

FECHA; _ 

i^X^ 

"^Qc^jJi^^JUiJ^^ 'ZjSimr^ 
K . 

.HAROLDDAVEHEMQlJEg^ASOC 

SoTucfoim Jurldicaff en Gmarsly Noteria* Bienes RBICM. 

AlcMlwyVentBde'CaM»r>6ilfinia»A(ftianalM' 

•Vant«d#S«guiio» 

Abogado Notarto ^ 

C/Ar?apb»>i»Port«No(S5? . T^t^SOW 482-9044 

Bsq.C/El'N&iwro.GudadNuayo Gets: (809J?t9-C220/835-9967 

Santo Domingo, 0. N. E-moif; hamU_tfe>«hehotnwil,com 

X , 
• ^ ' 

Ik CONCENTRE 

HEALTH SERVICES 

Data of Service: 12/13/2007 

Date of Injury: 10/11/2007 

Attn: SRS Adjuster 

American Airlines 

PO Box 619616 MD 5593 

FORT WORTH, TX 76155 

Dear SRS Adjuster: 

Your employee Julie A. Sasson received treatment for a new work 

related injury at our CMC - MIA Ft Lauderdale clinic on 12/13/2007. 

The billings for this injury care will be sent to Hartford Ins EDI. Please help us provide 

the best care to your injured employee by filing the Employer's First Report of Injury with 

your carrier, if not already filed. This will ensure timely reporting and management of 

this workers' compensation claim. 

If you have any questions or the above information is incorrect, please call our office or 

fax any changes to the attention of the Billing Department. 

Sincerely, 

CMC - MIA Ft Lauderdale 

Central Business Office 
Page I of2 

AmericanAirllnes* Accident Notification Report 

Print 2 cophs of this report Employ— signs both copia* and ka^ps one copy. 

**• IMPORTANT **- Please alao print a copy of the Injury-On-Duty Information Package. 

This document can also be found on the Wt)fkefs Compensation home page (under Jetnet's Policies A Procedures 

tab). 

Injured Employee Contact Information 

Empk>yee Number Employee Julie Sasson 

Employee's Base 

Home Address 

City 

State « 

Zip 

Employee 

Cost Center 

Home Phone Number 

Cell/Other Phone 

Wofic Phone Number 

MIA 

12/11/2007 10:15:00 PM 

Accident Data 

Accident OateHlme 12/11/2007 9:30:00 PM Station Reporting Injury 

Supervisor Notified 12/11/200710:00:00 PM SOC Notified 

Report Completed 12/12/2007 3:51:00 PM (Central Time) 

Employee Injuriea resulting in fataiity(s), hospKtalizatlon, broken liones, property damage of $25,000 or more or an event 

that involves tiospltal emergency room medical (not flrat aid) treatment of 3 or more employees must be reported 

Immedletely to Syeteme Operation Control at (817yiCS 967-7200. Do not report minor injuries to SOC. 

Injured Employee Accident Information 

Acthrity When Injury Occurred/>sss«ng«rt deplaning/standing at 2L door 

Body Part Injured 

Body Part Injured Before? 

Nature of Injury 

Cause of Injury 

Location of Incident 

Equipment/Object Involved 

Aircraft information 

Aircraft Type 

Right Number 

Flight Data (MIWDCVYY) 

Neck 

No 

Contusion, Bump or Bruise 

MISCELLANEOUS- AssaiMed 

Aircraft (anywhere on aircraft except the belly) 

AA Employee 

— An aircraft is involved in the incident. — 

A300 Phase of Flight 

423 Aircraft TaU No. 

12/11/2007 City Pair 

Load/Taxl/Unload 

N074 

MIASDQ 

Vendor Information 

Outside Vendor involved? Mo 

Vendor/Employee Name 

Injured Employee Additional Information 

Numt>er of Other Employees Injured 

How did you provide Employee with the Injury on 

Duty Report and Information Letter? 

Is/Has employee sought medical treatment? 

Name of doctor/medical treatment facility 

Address of doctor/medical treatment facility 

Phone number of doctor/medical treatment ^iiit y 

Has/Old the injury result in tost time? 

First date missed 

Employee placed on transitional duty (TD)? No 

Vendor equipment involved 

Vendor/Employee Phone 

Handed to employee 

Yee 

R Lauderdale 

No 

Date of treatment 12/12/2007 

Returned to wor1( 

First date on TD 
I, 

Injury on Duty Report - Paoe 2 

IJEmployee: Julia Sasson fEmployee 

Supervisor information 

- ~ Person Completing Accident Report — 

Employee Number 

Name 

Worit Phone 

Email 

( _, 

1 injury Date: 12/11/2007 9:30:00 PM 

—• Injured Employee's Suoervlsor — 

Employee Number 

Name 

Wortc Phone 

Email 

Page 2 of2 

i 

Additional email addresses to receive a copy of this accident report: 

Employee's Statement/ description of Accident/ Injury - What happened? 

F/A was assaulted by passenger Maria Taverez wNte aircraft deplaning in SDQ. F/A received injuries in her face and 

neck F/A was struck in (he neck and was thrown backward. 

Employee's recommendations) to prevent future occurences of same incident 

Awaiting lOD investigation. 

Witnesses Involved 

E Employee Number B First Name g Last Name II Phone Number None Reported — 

Supervisor's Investigation: (who, what, when, where, how, equipment #, equipment condition, weather conditions, 

lighting condiUons, contributing factors, were procedures followed, are procedures adequate, etc.) 

Pending lOD Investkxitkjn 

^Siipervlsora rscommendatlon for what could have been donate prevent this injury: 

Pending lOa Investlgatkm. 

Date 

A 
• m Nurnbfr: 

Patient: Sasson, Julie A. 

SSN: 

Address: 

Home: 

Work: Ext.: 

Copcentra l\/ledical Centers (FL) 

Physician Activity Status Report 

Service Date: y2Jyir/{}{i7 

Case Date: 1flKl/2007 

jA/fi/juxyf 

Employer Location: 

Address: 

Auth. by: 

Role: 

Phone: 

Fax: 

Ext.: 

This Visit; Time in: 09:00 am Time Out: 10:38 am 

Treating Provider. Allen D. Long. ARNP 

Recordable: N/A 

Diagnosis: 847.0 

910.0 

919.0 

920 

Visit Type: New 

Medications: 

Cervical Strain ® Dispensed Prescription Medication lo Patient 

Abrasion Or Friction Bum Of Face, Neck, And Scalp Excep Q Dispensed Over-The-Counter Prescription 

Abrasion Or Friction Bum Of Other, IVIultiple, And Unspecifl D Written Prescription given to Patient 

Contusion Of Face, Scalp, And Neck Except Eye(S) 

Patient Status: 

Modified Activity - Returning for follow-up visit 

Restricted Activity (In effect until next physician visit): 

Retum to work on 12/13/2007 with the following restrictions 

No repetitive lifting over 20 lbs. 

No pushing and/or pulling over 20 lbs. of force 

No reaching above shoulders 

Rwnarks: 

nolovf Notice: The prescritsed activity recommendations are suggested guidelines to assist in Itie patient's treatment and rehabilitation. Your 

employee has been intbrmed that the activity prescription Is expected to be followed at work and away from work. 

ndclpatsd Date of Maximum Medical Improvement: 12/30/2007 Actual Date of Maximum Medical Improvement: 

Next VlsitiS^: Ptlent Notice: It Is essential to your recovery that you keep your scheduled appointments, but shoukj you need to 

reschedule or cancel your appointment, please contact ttie dtnlc. Thank you for your cooperatton. 

Visit Date: Wednesday December 19, 2007 8:15 a 

Provider/Facility: Rafael Cardella, MD 
t. ;.„ -t •-

tOENTIFICATiON STRIP: Please I'll in ail blanks lo ensuie return ol sirio. NO RECORD WILL BE KEPT OF YOUR IDENTITY 

This section wiH tM relutned lo vou 

•SPACE flElOW Btsenvtl ) f OH ASHS OAFE.»IME STAMP) 

TELEPHONE NUMBERS where we may reach you for further 

details oi this occurrence: 

I40ME 

ALTERNATE 

NAME -J(A.L/i^, 

AOORESS/PO BOX .. 

/ / Ji?.f?^vi/ , TYPE OF EVENT/SITUATION 

DATE OEOCCURRENCE 

/ • 

CITY LOCAL TIME (24 hr. clock) - ^ I S O 

DO NOT REPOnr AinCnAFT ACCIDENTS AND CHIMINAL ACTIVITIES ON THIS FORM. 

ACCIDENTS AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ASR^ PROGRAM AND SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED TO NASA. 

ALL lOENTIVES CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT WILL BE REMOVED TO ASSURE COMPLETE REPORTER ANONYMITY. 

PLEASE FILL IN APPROPRIATE SPACES ANO CHECK ALL ITEMS WHICH APPLY TO THIS EVENT OR SITUATION 

REPORTER EXPERIENCE 

9 Flight Attendant (FA) " Trainee 

' FA in charge OH-Duty FA 

o Extra FA 

) Other 

Total years as Flight Attendant 

Total years as FA with your current airline 

Number of airaalt types currently qualified to work on 

Percent oi duty time in past year on aircraft type involved 

/ 6 

/.D.^^ „ . _ 

Type of aircraft 

Flight segment 

Cabin activity 

(Check all that 

apply) 

___ , FLIGHT IWFOBIiATIOH 

(Make/Model) ^ r b oU. „ . A.3iOnumber ot seats 

number of exits: Moor level 

numtMT of pax on board j^jU' ' number in cabin crew f 

j f window O lailcone u 

flight origin /M. destination oi)<^. 

time since takeoff ;_Yr-^0<J hrs/mins nearest city/slate (il known) oi W 

.•^£ ^ departure i\me Jjc}p ^ 

• t)oarding 

• deplaning 

safety related duties, specify 

> beverage servk:e 

> meal service 

carl service 

Iray service 

movie 

other 

OPERATOR FUQHT PHASE WEATHER LIQHTINO 

e air carrier 

> commuter 

corporate 

charter 

' other 

• predeparture 

•taxi 

takeoff 

> climb 

cruise 

^'descent 

J approach 

^> landing 

• gate arrival 

' other 

<: clear 

erain 

' turbulence 

' thunderstorms 

• unknown 

cloudy 

fog 

snow 

ice 

CABIN 

• bright 

medium 

dark 

OUTSIDE 

>'> daylight 

a night 

EVENT CHARACTEBISnCS 

Reporter's location in aircraft at time of event 

Reporter's activity at time of eveni J^ldd l A^_,. Sc/Jlii^i L i C 'f t z^^liX^Vt^V ^.l i 

Was fire/smoke involved in the event? 

No 

Was a passenger directly involved 

in ihe event? #Yes 

Did this event result m an in|ury? 

to passenger? 

to crew? 

• Yes 

Yes 

• Yes 

No 

• No 

'No 

Yes • No 

Was there an evacuation during or 

j s a result of this event? Yes eNo 

DESCWIBE EVEPiT/amJATIOiil 

Keeping m mmd the lopics shown below discuss ll'Ose which yoo teal are retevdoi and anything else you llnnH is imporljnt Include whiil you behave really caused tfi« 

(iroblem, and what can be done lo oteveni a recurrnrce or correct Ihe situation (CONTINUE ON THE OTHFR SIDE AND USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF I^EEDEO) 

''jLy ..'^:7l^ .jijL.^^iu(L LL'-tX^t!L\~- X<-U-. h> J^/U^^i.1 /A<i./<K. 

/. ... .. 

i- I-/ .t.*, //< ..y..^..Qn. . , .-. y. 
Complaint Record of Telephone Conversation 

Complainants name pronounced: Drew Blah-nick 

Date: 3/26/2008 . 

Time: 10:10am 

Route: MIA - SDQ 

Flight date: 12/11/2007 

Airline: AALA 

Phase of flight of re^prted issue: Deplaning 

AMR Complaint #: CSW2120080002 

Complaint topics: Flight Attendant Julia Sasson was attacked by a passenger. Mr. 

Blahnick was listed as a dead heading pilot who witnessed it. 

Facts related to the inspector during the call: 

I called Mr. Blahnick to obtain his witness statement. He was not at home on March 27*'' 

so I left a message for him to call me back. 

March 28,2008,10:10am. I called Mr. Blahnick and was able to talk with him. Mr. 

Blahnick is a First Officer for American Airlines and flies the Boeing 757 and 767 

aircraft. 

Mr. Blahnick stated that he remembered the attack on Flight Attendant Sasson. Mr, 

Blahnick stated that when Flight Attendant Sasson was attacked he was on a 45 degree 

angle from her. Flight Attendant Sasson was at the 2L door and his attention was brought 

to that area when he heard Ms. Tavares yell, "You touched me, don't touch me". Then 

he witnessed Ms. Tavares aggressively scratch Ms. Sasson on the face. He noted that Ms. 

Sasson stumbled backwards and two passengers caught her. Other passengers pulled Ms. 

Travares off Flight Attendant Sasson, Mr. Blahnick noted that Flight Attendant Sasson 

had a stunned look on her face and yelled out" I want her arrested" to which Ms. Tavares 

yelled, "Fine arrest us both". When Mr. Blahnick was deplaning he noted that Ms. 

Tavares and Flight Attendant Sasson were on the Jetway with the local Police being 

questioned. Again he heard Ms. Sasson state, "I want her arrested" to which Ms. Tavares 

said "Fine.arrest us both". Mr. Blahnick then noted Ms, Tavares being escorted to the 

terminal. 

Beau A. Morrow 

Aviation Safety Inspe 
u 

07/26/07 2150.3B 

suspend the privileges of the certificate or rating pending demonstration of qualification or 

compliance with statutory or regulatory requirements. FAA generally uses remedial suspension 

when an individual does not voluntarily surrender his or her certificate pending reexamination. 

See chapter 5. 

(2) Certificate revocation - general. The FAA revokes a certificate when a certificate 

holder lacks the qualifications to hold the certificate. The certificate holder's continued exercise 

of the privileges of the certificate in such circumstances would be contrary to safety in air 

commerce or air transportation and the public interest. Revocation is appropriate whenever a 

certificate holder's conduct demonstrates a lack of the technical proficiency or a lack of the 

degree of care, judgment, or responsibility, required of the holder of such a certificate. Orders of 

revocation are issued on an emergency basis when the certificate holder lacks qualification and is 

reasonably able as a practical matter to exercise the privileges of the certificate. Legal counsel 

does not allege a lack of qualifications to avoid dismissal of charges under 49 C.F.R. § 821.33, 

the NTSB's st^le complaint rule. 

(3) Certificate revocation - individuals. The FAA generally revokes an individual's 

certificate or rating whenever he or she demonstrates a lack of willingness or ability to comply 

consistently with statutory or regulatory requirements. A lack of willingness or ability to comply 

may be demonstrated by such things as repeated or deliberate violations or by violations that 

involve grossly careless or reckless conduct. Even a single violation may be sufficient to warrant 

a conclusion an individual lacks qualifications. The FAA ordinarily revokes all certificates of a 

person who commits a violation involving intentional falsification. 

(4) Certificate revocation - entities. Revocation is normally appropriate when a 

certificate-holding entity deliberately or flagrantly violates the statute or regulations or falsifies 

records. Revocation also is generally appropriate when the certificate holder has committed the 

same or similar violations in the recent past demonstrating a lack of qualification, or when the 

certificate holder no longer has, and does not obtain in a reasonable time, the personnel or 

equipment to conduct its operation in full compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. 

(5) Mandatory certificate revocation. Under 49 U.S.C. § 44710, the FAA is required to 

revoke the certificates of any airman who has been convicted of violating certain federal or state 

statutes relating to a controlled substance when an airplane was used in the commission of the 

offense and the airman served as an airman, or was aboard the aircraft, in connection with 

commission of the offense or the facilitation of the commission of the offense. Even when there 

has been no conviction, revocation is required when an airman has knowingly carried out an 

activity punishable under these criminal statutes. The Administrator may waive the revocation if 

a law enforcement officer requests the waiver and the Administrator decides the waiver will 

facilitate law enforcement purposes. See 49 U.S.C. § 44710(f). Under 49 U.S.C. § 44106, the 

FAA also must revoke the registration certificate of any airplane used in the commission of such 

an offense when the use was permitted by the owner of the aircraft with knowledge that it would 

be used for such purpose. Under 49 U.S.C. § 44726, the FAA must revoke the certificates of any 

certificate holder or an individual vnho has a controlling or ownership interest in the holder who 

was convicted of a violation of federal law relating to the installation, production, repair, or sale 

of a counterfeit or fraudulently-represented aviation part or material or knowingly, and with the 

7-2 
07/26/07 2150.38' 

intent to defraud, carried out or facilitated an activity punishable under such a law. The 

Administrator may waive that sanction to facilitate law enforcement purposes or amend, rather 

than revoke, a certificate under certain circumstances. See 49 U.S.C. §§ 44726(f) and (g), 

(6) Mandatory certificate action for security concerns. Under 49 U.S.C. § 46111, the 

Administrator is required to issue an order amending, modifying, suspending, or revoking any 

FAA-issued certificate if the Administrator is notified by the Under Secretary of Border and 

Transportation Security (BTS) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that the 

certificate holder poses, or is suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to 

airline or passenger safety. Under 49 U.S.C. § 44924, the. Administrator is require*d, at the 

request of the Under Secretary of BTS, to suspend or revoke foreijgn repair station certificates in 

connection with security audits. 

3. Applicability and Exclusions. The sanction guidance table (table) in Appendix B provides 

types of sanctions and general ranges of sanction amounts for violations of 49 U.S.C, subtitle VII 

and 14 CF.R, parts 1-199 and 49 U.S.C. subtitle IX, chapter 701 and 14 C.F.R. chapter III, 

Once the agency has determined that legal enforcement action is warranted for a violation, FAA 

enforcement personnel use the table and paragraph 4 of this chapter, as well as any other 

sanction guidance in this order, to determine a proposed sanction. The matters described in 

chapter 7, subparagraphs 3a.-d. are some types of agency action that fall outside the scope of 

paragraph 3 and the table. 

a. Decisions to Take Administrative Action (Warning Notices or Letters of 

Correction). An administrative action does not constitute either a formal adjudication of the 

iricident or a finding of violation. For that reason, FAA investigative personnel do not propose a 

sanction using the table. 

b. The FAA's Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion. The decision whether to prosecute a 

particular case is based on a review of the evidence and relevant policy and litigation 

considerations. The agency exercises broad discretion in both the initial decision to bring a legal 

enforcement action, and in any later determination to compromise or settle a case based on 

various considerations. The FAA's discretion in these areas is absolute and presumed to be 

immune fi-om review. Heckler v. Cheney, 470 U.S. 821, 831 (1985). 

c. Hazardous Materials Violations. Actions involving violations of the federal hazardous 

materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. chapter 51, or the Department of Transportation's 

Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 C.F.R. parts 106 through 185. Enforcement sanction 

guidance for these violations is found in Appendix C. 

d. Violations by Members of the U.S. Armed Forces. The FAA is required to forward 

reports of these violations to the Secretary of the department concerned under 49 U.S.C. 

§ 46101(b), whenever the violator is acting in the performance of official duties. The FAA, 

however, takes remedial action in addition to referring a report when the violator, whether or not 

7-3 
07/26/07 2150.3B 

acting in the performance of official military duties, holds an FAA certificate, and the violator's 

qualifications are at issue. The FAA may take punitive action against a member of the U.S. 

Armed Forces for a violation committed when the member is not performing official duties. 

4. Mitigating or Aggravating Factors and Elements. The factors in chapter 7, subparagraphs 

4.a. through m. have been developed over years of policy making and case adjudication. They 

have proven useful and appropriate for determining the seriousness of a violation and for 

selecting an appropriate sanction. Elements for evaluating and weighing each factor are also 

described. These factors and elements provide a framework for determining sanctions for 

violations specifically listed in the table as well as those not specifically listed. All the factors 

and elements, however, may not apply to each violation. Only those factors and elements that 

are relevant to a violation are considered in determining a sanction for the violation. This list of 

factors and elements is not intended to be exhaustive; other factors may be relevant as well. 

a. Nature of the Violation. Three elements define the nature of a violation: first, whether 

the violation was operational or non-operational; second, whether the violation involved careless 

or reckless conduct; and third, whether the violation involved any special aggravating or 

mitigating factors. 

(1) Individuals. When an individual who holds a certificate improperly exercises the 

privileges of that certificate, the natural consequence of that act should be loss of privileges for a 

period of time commensurate with the violation. The FAA, therefore, primarily uses certificate 

actions to enforce operational regulations against individuals who hold certificates. The 

potential adverse impact that certificate action may have on an individual's livelihood does not 

alter this principle. Non-operational violations may warrant a different type of sanction. 

(2) Entities. The FAA ordinarily takes civil penalty action against a certificate-holding 

entity (for example, an air carrier) when it determines there would be a substantial adverse 

impact on the public interest from disrupted service by that certificate holder and the impact is 

not outweighed by safety considerations. Even when a substantial adverse impact would occur, 

when there is a need to prevent continuing violations or other egregious conduct by any 

certificate holder, when any certificate holder lacks qualification, or there is a reasonable basis to 

question the qualifications of any certificate holder, the FAA takes remedial action, for example, 

revocation or indefinite suspension, as necessary. 

(3) Careless or reckless conduct. Violations that involve careless or reckless conduct in 

violation of 14 C.F.R. §91.13 may warrant more severe sanctions. Carelessness connotes 

conduct that falls below the standard of care or prudence expected of a reasonable person, or 

holder of the relevant certificate, acting under the same or similar circumstances. Recklessness 

connotes conduct that demonstrates a gross, or even callous or flagrant, disregard for safety. 

Aircraft operations that do not otherwise result in a violation of a specific regulation should be 

evaluated in light of these standards to determine whether they constitute careless or reckless 

operations in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 91.13. When a person operates an aircraft in violation of a 

specific regulation other than 14 C.F.R. § 91.13, however, that violation constitutes a careless or 

reckless operation in and of itself In these cases, the misconduct may also result in a violation 

of 14 C.F.R. § 91.13 if it actually or potentially endangers the lives or property of others. 

7-4 
07/26/07 2150.38' 

When calculating the amount of sanction based on this factor, a distinction generally is drawn 

between instances where 14 C.F.R. § 91.13 is an independent violation and those where it is 

residual to another violation. When a 14 C.F.R, §91.13 violation is residual only, a higher 

sanction generally is not warranted unless the conduct is also reckless. 

b. Whether the Violation was InadVtsrtenf and Not Deliberate. If a violation is 

deliberate or not inadvertent, a sanction at tKeupper end'of the range or exceeding the range for 

that type of violation generally is appropriate. A deliberate violation generally warrants a 

sanction that is more severe than one that is jusjt not inadvertent'. 

(1) Not deliberate. This element means a lack of the degree of deliberation found in 

intentional misconduct. Deliberate or intentional misconduct is ah aggravating circumstance and 

includes deliberate conduct that leads to a violation as well as circumstances indicating intent to 

commit a violation. 

(2) Inadvertence. An act is inadvertent when it is the result of both inattention and lack 

of purposeful choice. For example, an inadvertent act occ\irs when a pilot flies at an incorrect 

altitude because he or she misread the aircraft's instruments; however, it is not an inadvertent act 

when a pilot flies at an incorrect altitude as a result of choosing not to consult the aircraft's 

instruments or choosing not to use other available means to verify altitude. The test to be applied 

is whether the conduct, not the factual or legal consequences, is inadvertent and uruntended, 

Ferguson v. National Transportation Safety Board. 678 F.2d 821, 828-829 (9th Cir. 1982), 

c. Certificate Holder's Level of Experience. 

(1) Level of experience refers primarily to the type of certificate and ratings held (for 

example, student, private, commercial, airline transport pilot, or certified flight instructor), and 

the number of hours flown, by the certificate holder. Certificate holders with greater levels of 

experience may be held to a higher standard. Thus, for example, commercial pilots may be held 

to a higher standard than private pilots and airline transport pilots may be held to an even higher 

standard than commercial pilots, 

(2) In determining an appropriate sanction, the FAA may consider the extent to which 

the certificate holder's action deviated from the degree of care and diligence normally expected 

of a person with the certificate holder's level of experience. A significant deviation from the 

degree of care and diligence expected of the holder of that certificate may warrant a more 

aggravated sanction. 

d. Attitude of the Violator. 

(1) A good compliance attitude is the norm and does not warrant a reduction in sanction, 

A prior violation history may suggest that a person has a poor compliance disposition, which is 

an aggravating factor. Furthermore, a person who commits an act or omission contrary to 

statutory or regulatory requirements after receiving notice through a prior administrative action 

or counseling that such conduct is in violation of those requirements might well be regarded as 

having a poor compliance disposition. In evaluating compliance disposition, the FAA does not 

7-5 
07/26/07 2150.38 

view an alleged violator as having a poor attitude because the alleged violator fails to respond to 

SL letter of investigation, chooses to be represented by coimsel, or contests the violation. 

(2) In assessing the attitude of an alleged violator, the FAA may consider the declaration 

of an emergency to air traffic control. When an emergency is genuine and not of the person's 

own making, the emergency is exculpatory imder 14 G.F.R. § 9'L3(b). However, this situation is 

distinct from the situation where a declaration of emergency is not exculpatory but is a factor that 

might be appropriate to consider in determining:sanction. In emergency situations, the FAA 

views declaring an emergency to air traffic controlas a sign of good judgment and a constructive 

attitude. When an emergency is of a person's own making, that person's declaration of an 

emergency may be considered mitigatihg in determining the sanction to be imposed for any 

violations committed, in much the same way it is considered mitigating if a^person voluntarily 

reports a violation. 

e. Degree of Hazard. 

(1) The degree of hazard may be increased as a result of the interplay of the operational 

environment (for example, weather conditions, congested vs. sparsely populated areas) and the 

nature of the threat to safety (to the life or property of another, including those in the aircraft 

being operated, to other aircraft, or to persons or property on the surface) that the misconduct 

presents. The safety threat is based on the reasonably foreseeable consequences of the 

misconduct. For example, operating 500 feet below the minimum altitude poses a greater hazard 

than operating 100 feet below. Similarly, if an aircraft operator fails to comply with an 

airworthiness directive by operating 10 hours past a required inspection, the degree of hazard is 

probably not as great as when the aircraft is operated 100 hours beyond the required. And it is 

not mitigating when a violation does not result in actual harm; that is simply fortuitous, 

(2) The sanction ranges reflect the degree of danger normally inherent in an average 

violation of a regulation, without aggravating circumstances. As discussed in chapter 7, 

subparagraph 5.b., an increase in the degree of hazard may form the basis for exceeding the 

sanction ranges. For example, the range for an unauthorized low flight does not assume extreme 

departures from required altitudes, for example, flying an airplane over a crowded assembly of 

persons at 50 feet 

f. Action Taken by Employer or Other Authority. This factor ordinarily involves the 

following elements: whether the alleged violator's employer has taken disciplinary action and 

whether criminal prosecution is involved. 

(1) Employment discipline. Where the violation would normally call for a certain type 

of enforcement action, the FAA takes that action regardless of any action taken by the violator's 

employer. Generally, the FAA does not credit an employer's disciplinary action toward a period 

of suspension the FAA imposes against the violator's certificate, because of the different 

purposes of government-ordered, as contrasted with employer-ordered, actions. 

(2) Criminal prosecution. When arising out of the same conduct, local, state, or federal 

prosecution does not preclude the FAA from taking appropriate remedial enforcement action; nor 

7-6 
07/26/07 2150.38 

does it preclude the FAA from taking appropriate punitive enforcement action. For cases where 

federal, state, or local authorities prosecute criminally, the FAA generally does take remedial 

enforcement action if that is warranted despite the criminal prosecution. However, the FAA does 

not generally take punitive legal enforcement action for the same conduct, unless it believes the 

criminal sanctions are not sufficient to provide an adequate deterrent for future violations by the 

violator and others similarly.situated, or when the FAA wants to establish a violation history 

record. If the FAA decides, to -proceed with a punitive civil enforcement action in addition to the 

criminal prosecution, it generally considers the criminal penalties incurred in those proceedings 

in determining the; appropriate" amount ofsanction to be sought in the FAA's punitive 

enforcement action. 

g. Use of a Certificate. -This factor relates to the nature of kind of activity or operation 

involved at the time the violation was" committed. Whether the certificate holder was engaged in 

student, private, commercial, or airline activity bears on the severity of the sanction. Air carriers 

are held to the highest standard of care. Likewise, persormel engaged in air transportation are 

held to the highest safety standard. 

h. Violation or Incident History. 

(1) A violation-free history is the expected norm, not the exception and, therefore, is not 

a mitigating factor. Sanction ranges in the table generally represent the normal range ofsanction 

for a single, first-time, inadvertent violation. Given the expected norm, a prior violation record 

can be evidence of a poor compliance disposition or of a pattern of disregard for the FAA's 

regulations, which are aggravating factors. As a result, a violation history can justify imposing a 

sanction at the higher end of the normal range or a sanction beyond the normal range. It might 

also justify revocation rather than suspension if the pattern of violation reflects a lack of 

qualification. In addition, a violation history might justify a certificate suspension if previously 

issued civil penalties have not produced the desired deterrent effect. In deciding whether a 

violation history justifies aggravating the sanction or changing the usual type ofsanction, the 

FAA considers the length of time that has elapsed between violations, whether the violations 

involved the same or similar regulations, and whether the violations are factually similar. 

(2) The following actions constitute violation history when they involve regulatory 

violations and become final: orders of amendment, modification, suspension, or revocation of an 

FAA certificate; orders assessing a civil penalty; findings of violation contained in a consent 

order, order of compliance or denial; and findings of violation made by a federal court. In 

addition, a party may agree as part of a settlement that the FAA may consider alleged violations 

as findings of violation for future sanction determinations. 

i. Decisional Law. Decisions of the FAA decisionmaker represent the FAA 

Administrator's position on issues arising in civ^spenalty assessment actions, including issues 

regarding sanctions. The'policy in this order also represents the /^.dministrator's position on 

sanctions in legal enforcement actions. To the extent that this document conflicts with FAA 

decisionmaker decisions published before this document's issuance, the sanction guidance policy 

in this order supersedes those decisions. However, FAA decisionmaker decisions published after 

7-7 
Iv5 

QilllQIOl 2150.38 

the issuance of this document that conflict with the policy in this order supersede this document 

and are controlling. 

j . Ability to Absorb Sanction. Sanctions should be deterrent. While punitive sanctions 

should not be unduly harsh, they should be substantial enough to prevent violators from profiting 

from their violations, that is, the sanction should be high enough to remove any profit incentive 

for violations. Penalties should never be permitted.to be a cost of doing business. Air carriers, 

in particular, ar6 required by law to have the financial wherewithal to operate according to 

established safety standards. While the FAA does not allow financial circumstances to excuse 

any violation, it does consider a carrier's size and financial strength in choosing the appropriate 

sanction amount. The difference in the penalties fixed in the law for large and'small business 

concerns recognizes this fact,. A civil penalty that may be a mere cost of doing business to a 

major air carrier might compel a small air carrier to go out of business. Therefore, the FAA uses 

air carrier size as one means of ensuring a relatively equivalent deterrent effect on each air 

carrier that violates the same FAA regulation. The resulting classification of air carriers by size 

and ranges of civil penahies are set forth in part one, section A of the table. For all entities and 

individuals, the FAA considers ability to pay a civil penalty and the effect a civil penalty will 

have on a person's ability to continue in business to the extent it knows such information, 

k. Consistency of Sanction. One of the agency's goals is to achieve relative consistency in 

imposing similar sanctions for similar violations. The FAA pursues this objective to assure 

fairness and so the sanction's impact has an equivalent degree of deterrent or disciplineiry value 

to others similarly situated. This goal may not always be achieved, however, because of the 

inherently subjective nature of the exercise of judgment in setting sanctions. 

1. Whether the Violation was Reported Voluntarily. 

(1) The FAA has programs that allow persons to report voluntarily apparent violations 

and receive lesser enforcement action provided certain criteria are met. These programs include 

the aviation safety reporting program, the voluntary disclosure reporting program, and the 

aviation safety action program. Besides these programs, the FAA may grant special enforcement 

consideration under certain circumstances to a person who, incident to his or her report of 

another's violations, voluntarily discloses his or her own participation in the same or related 

violations. This special enforcement consideration may range from mitigating the sanction to 

determining that no enforcement action is required. 

(2) If a person is not covered under one of these programs but nonetheless voluntarily 

reports an apparent violation to the FAA before the FAA discovers it, takes immediate action to 

correct the noncompliance, and works with the FAA on steps to preclude recurrence 'of the 

apparent violation, the FAA may consider such actions in mitigating the Unction for th^ 

violation. 

m. Corrective Action. The FAA considers corrective action a mitigating factor in 

determining sanction provided the corrective action exceeds the minimum regulatory or statutory 

requirements. The amount of credit given in setting a sanction depends on the extent and timing 

of the corrective action, that is, how extensive was the corrective action and how quickly was it 

taken. Implementing new procedures that are above those required under the FAA's regulations 

7-8 
07/26/07 2150.38-

to prevent future violations ordinarily is considered a mitigating factor in determining an 

appropriate sanction. Corrective action taken after the alleged violator first becomes aware of a 

deficiency but before FAA discovery of the violation ordinarily warrants greater mitigation than 

corrective action that is taken only after the alleged violator receives notice of the FAA's 

enforcement action. Corrective action taken by an alleged violator that simply brings that person 

••' into compliance with the statutory or regulatory requirements is not considered in mitigation of 

' sanction,. To mitigate a sanction based on such corrective action would put at an economic 

disadvantage competitors who have expended the resources necessary to maintain compliance. 

5. Use of the Table of Sanctions. 

:-a. General. Sanction determinations are not accomplished through a strict mathematical 

formula; rather, sanction determinations result from a judgment of where a case lies along a 

spectrum of gravity. Ultimately, the circumstances of each case are evaluated in terms of the 

needs of safety and the public interest, 

b. Single, First-time, Inadvertent Violations. 

(1) Part II of the table specifies both the normal types ofsanction (certificate action, civil 

penalty action, or other type) and the normal ranges within those types the FAA ordinarily seeks 

to impose in a legal enforcement action for a single, first-time violation that is generally 

inadvertent (the table includes ranges of sanctions for several violations that usually are 

intentional, for example, interference with a crewmember, smoking on an aircraft). In addition, 

the table generally reflects a presumption that the alleged violator wants to comply with the law 

and to remedy any noncompliance and that the alleged violator, therefore, has a constructive 

attitude. 

(2) For factors b, d, or h of paragraph 4 (that is, inadvertent and not deliberate conduct, 

attitude, and violation history), the FAA does not normally deviate from the ranges listed in the 

table solely based on the inadvertence of the violation or on the alleged violator's good 

reputation, past public service, violation-free history, or constructive attitude. Any mitigating 

circumstances are to be found in the facts and circumstances of the violation itself 

(3) Applying ranges within a sanction type. In determining where, within each range, a 

sanction should be imposed, the FAA generally considers factors a, c, e, f, g, i, j , k, and m of 

peiragraph 4 (that is, nature of the violation, level of experience, degree of hazard, action by 

employer or other authority, use of certificate, decisional law, ability to absorb sanction, 

consistency of the sanction with similar cases, corrective action), to the extent they are applicable 

^ or relevant. When determining a specific sanction amount within a range, FAA enforcement 

personnel begin with.an amount, in the middle of the range and increase that amount toward the 

- higher end of the range for aggravating factors or decrease that amount toward the lower end of 

the range for mitigating factors. "' 

(4) Deviating from ranges within a sanction type. The FAA might impose sanctions 

below the normal ranges based on justifiable mitigation under factors j , 1, and m of paragraph 4 

(that is, the ability to absorb the sanction, voluntary reporting, corrective action). The FAA may 

7-9 
07/26/07 2150.38 

impose sanctions above the normal ranges when the following circumstances, relating to factors 

b, d, e, and h of paragraph 4 are present: the violation is other than inadvertent'*, the violator has 

a violation history, the violation involves a significant degree of hazard, or the violator has a 

poor compliance disposition. The ranges also may be exceeded when the case involves multiple 

violations, (Sift;, chapter 7, paragraphs 6 and 7), 

c. Typfes of Sanction. 

(l)jGeneral. The FAA ordinarily does not initiate punitive civil penalty and punitive 

certificate actions (that is, fixed-period certificate suspensions) against a certificate holder for the 

same offense. While electing to impose one sanction is not a legal bar to a concurrent 

proceeding to inipose another, pursuing both actions -solely for punitive purposes usually is not 

necessary. The FAA takes remedial and punitive actions in the same case, however, when 

warranted. 

(2) Selecting types of sanctions. Except in exceptional circumstances, the FAA uses the 

type ofsanction recommended in the table. The FAA must impose any sanction mandated by 

statute (for example, revocation under 49 U.S.C. §§ 44106(b), 44710(b), and 44726(b) unless 

waived by the Administrator). 

6. General Guidance on Multiple Acts or Multiple Violations. 

a. Description of Multiple Violations. Enforcement actions often involve multiple 

violations; multiple violations of a single regulation; a single violation of multiple regulations; 

or multiple violations of multiple regulations. In addition, under 49 U.S.C. § 46301(a)(2), if a 

violation is a continuing one, each day the violation continues, or each flight for which the 

violation was committed, constitutes a separate offense. 

b. General Sanction Guidance. Multiple violations ordinarily result in high sanction 

amounts. Such sanction amounts ordinarily are not determined by simply adding up the 

individual penalties for multiple violations set forth in the table, however. Simply adding up the 

individual penalties for each violation could result in compounding a sanction in a 

disproportionately harsh manner for the conduct involved. Conversely, multiple violations may 

be so serious in their consequences for safety and the public interest as to require a penalty 

greater than the sum of the recommended amount of penalty provided for in the table for each 

violation. 

c. Single Act of Noncompliance Resulting in Multiple Violations. When a single 

instance of noncompliance results in multiple violations of general and specific regulations 

involving the same or similar conduct, the FAA ordinarily does not compound the sanction to 

reflect the amount of sanction recommended in the table for each regulatory violation. In 

calculating the amount-ef sanction for multiple violations, FAA enforcement personnel consider 

"* When the violation is one that is generally inherently deliberate (e.g., interference with crewmember or smoking 

violations), factor b. is not considered in determining whether the sanction should be above the range in the table. 

The ranges in the table for such violations already have taken into consideration the inherently deliberate nature of 

the violation. 

7-10 
07/26/07 2150.38 

the totality of circumstances relating to the multiple violations, including the alleged violator's 

degree of culpability, and whether the alleged violator had taken steps, although unsuccessful, to 

prevent the violations. 

d. Type of Legal Enforcement Action. Where this guidance designates the type of legal 

enforcement action for a single violation, the FAA ordinarily selects the same type of sanction 

for multiple violations of a similar nature. The seriousness of multiple violations, however, may 

require changing what is normally a civil penalty action to a certificate action or, sometimes, a 

punitive certificate suspension to a remedial revocation action, 

7. Special Considerations for Numerous Multiple Violations Resulting From an Initial Act 

or Omission. To determine penalties for numerous multiple violations that result from an initial 

act or omission, the FAA applies the special considerations and guidance in chapter 7, 

subparagraphs 7.a. through e. These cases involve such a high number of multiple violations that 

if FAA enforcement persoxmel were simply to add the recommended amounts of penalty for each 

flight or day that constitutes a separate violation, the resulting sanction amount could be 

disproportionately harsh for the misconduct involved, in an average case. 

a. Determining Proposed Penalty. To determine an appropriate civil penalty in a case 

involving numerous multiple violations resulting from an initial act or omission (for example, an 

aircraft operated on a dozen or more flights after being improperly returned to service), FAA 

enforcement personnel: 

(1) Identify each initial act or omission that caused or resulted in the multiple violations 

(for example, improper maintenance plus improper retum to service; failure to maintain a quality 

confrol system). 

(2) Consult the table in Appendix B and the general guidance in chapter 7, paragraph 4, 

on aggravating and mitigating factors to determine the amount of penalty appropriate for each 

initial act or omission that caused or resulted in the multiple violations (for example, in 

airworthiness cases, a penalty for the act of improper maintenance or inspection; in 

manufacturing cases, a penalty for the act of failing to maintain a quality control system). 

(3) Determine the amount of penalty for the numerous multiple violations by applying 

the guidance in chapter 7, subparagraphs 7.b. through d. Of particular importance in determining 

an appropriate sanction for numerous multiple violations is the degree of the alleged violator's 

culpability for the multiple violations, A lower degree of culpability is present when the alleged 

violator neither knew nor was likely to discover the continuing violations. For example, once 

improper maintenance was done there were no signs of it from such things as discrepancies 

reported by the crew, and no inspections that would have led to its discovery were scheduled. A 

nlore significant degree of culpability is present when factors such as the following are present: 

• the initial act or omission was entered in records that should have led to 

immediate detection and correction; 

• the initial act or omission remained undetected and continued through required 

inspections or checks designed to reveal such discrepancies; 

7-11 
07/26/07 2150.38 

• the alleged violator was not following maintenance or inspection procedures the 

FAA had approved or accepted; 

• the level of the alleged violator's organization that was aware of, or involved in 

the noncompliance included management (for example, management implemented policies that 

contributed to the violations), although an alleged violator's culpability does not require 

management involvement; 

• the alleged violator has a history of similar violations or a history of systemic 

deficiencies. 

Knowing and willfial violations connote the highest degree of culpability, 

(4) Add the penalties arrived at for the initial violation to the penalty for the multiple 

violations. 

b. Limitations on Total Civil Penalty Amounts for Numerous Multiple Violations. 

(1) In an average case involving numerous inadvertent, multiple violations resulting from 

a single act or omission, that is, not one that is covered by chapter 7, subparagraphs 7.c. or 7.d., 

the total civil penalty for the multiple violations ordinarily falls within the ranges provided in 

either Figure 7-1 or 7-2. The group classifications are defined in part I of Appendix B. 

(2) The term isolated in Figures 7-1 and 7-2 typically describes a single instance of an 

employee's failure to follow a statutory or regulatory requirement, contrary to the company's 

own practice or procedure. A case may involve a number of isolated and unrelated violations. 

Each group of the multiple violations resulting from each isolated violation ordinarily is subject 

to the isolated, inadvertent ranges in Figures 7-1 or 7-2. 

(3) Inadvertent failures are considered .systemic if they are repetitive or otherwise 

demonstrate an underlying deficiency in the alleged violator's system, practices, or procedures. 

Systemic failures generally warrant more substantial penalties and indicate a need for corrective 

action. 

(4) The aggravating or mitigating factors and elements in chapter 7, paragraph 4. are 

considered to determine an appropriate civil penalty within the applicable range in Figure 7-1 or 

7-2, for the multiple violations resulting from the initial act or omission. Of particular 

importance is an evaluation of the seriousness of the potential hazard caused by the violation and 

the degree of culpability of the alleged violator for the multiple violations. 

7-12 
07/26/07 2150.38 

Figure 7-i. Ranges of Penalties for Air Carriers, Commercial Operators, Part 125 Operators 

Type of 

Violations 

Inadvertent, 

Isolated 

Violations 

Inadvertent, 

Systemic 

Violations 

Group 1 

Large 

Business 

$200,000-

$400,000 

$300,000-

$500,000 

Group I 

Small 

Business 

$100,000-

$300,000 

$200,000-

$400,000 

Group II 

or Part 

125 Large 

Business 

$150,000-

$300,000 

$250,000-

$400,000 

Group II or 

Part 125 

Small 

Business 

$100,000-

$200,000 

$150,000-

$300,000 

Group III 

$75,000-

$150,000 

$100,000-

$200,000 

Group IV 

$50,000-

$100,000 

$75,000-

$150,000 

Figure 7-2. Ranges of Penalties for Air Agencies, Airports, Manufacturers* 

Type of 

Violations 

Inadvertent, 

Isolated 

Violations 

Inadvertent, 

Systemic 

Violations 

Air 

Agency 

Large 

Business 

$150,000-

$300,000 

$250,000-

$400,000 

Air 

Agency 

Small 

Business 

$100,000-

$200,000 

$150,000-

$300,000 

Airport 

Operator 

Large 

Business 

$200,000-

$400,000 

$300,000-

$500,000 

' Airport 

Operator 

Small 

Business 

$100,000-

$300,000 

$200,000-

$400,000 

Manufacturing 

Large Business 

$200,000-

$400,000 

$300,000-

$500,000 

Manufacturing 

Small Business 

$100,000-

$300,000 

$200,000-

$400,000 

Individ 

$50,0< 

$100.( 

$75,0 

$150, 

c. Penalties Outside the Ranges. 

(1) Penalties lower than the ranges. It may be appropriate to select a civil penalty amount 

below the ranges in Figures 7-1 or 7-2 if the degree of culpability is minimal, the degree of 

potential hazard is extremely low, and there are no other aggravating circumstances, 

(2) Penalties higher than the ranges. It may be appropriate to select a civil penalty higher 

than the ranges, up to the statutory maximums: 

• If the alleged violator was significantiy culpable in permitting the initial act or omission; 

• If the violations involve significant safety risks; 

• If there was an absence of corrective action by the alleged violator over an extended 

period of time; 

• Where it is necessary to provide an economic disincentive for regulatory noncompliance; 

or. 

• If the alleged violator has a poor compliance disposition or history. 

d. Intentional Violations. When there is substantial and reliable evidence that the alleged 

violator knew of the violations resulting from the initial act or omission and allowed them to 

7-13 
07/26/07 2150.38 

occur, the ranges set forth in Figures 7-1 and 7-2 do not apply. For example, operation of an 

aircraft when there is evidence the operator knew the aircraft or flight was not in compliance 

with statutory or regulatory requirements, yet deliberately operated it anyway, is most serious, 

and apart from civil penalties, requires consideration of remedial certificate action. For multiple 

violations in these circumstances, any civil penalties sought may be up to the statutory maximum 

penalty for each violation, regardless of the number of violations. 

e. Civil Complaints. The guidance in chapter 7, paragraph 7 does not limit the amotmt of 

civil penalties that may be sought in a civil complaint filed in U.S. district court. 

8. Modification. 

a. Type of Sanction. Except when the FAA exercises its prosecutorial discretion to settle 

an enforcement action, the FAA generally does not modify orders suspending or revoking a 

certificate to provide for a civil penalty. The FAA also generally does not modify orders 

assessing a civil penalty to provide for a certificate action. The FAA modifies the type of 

sanction only in those cases involving extraordinary circumstances (beyond the normal 

aggravating or mitigating factors and elements listed in chapter 7, paragraph 4). New facts 

discovered after the original order has been issued may provide a basis for modifying the amount 

of sanction, but would not ordinarily provide a basis for modifying the type of sanction. 

However, if newly discovered facts raise new issues, such as the alleged violator's qualifications 

to hold a certificate, or if they implicate a statutorily-mandated penalty, the FAA modifies the 

type of sanction. 

b. Amount of Sanction. The FAA does not apply the factors listed in chapter 7, paragraph 

4. in a manner that would double their effect. Once the FAA has fairly considered the relevant 

mitigating and aggravating circumstances, it generally does not modify the amount ofsanction. 

The FAA modifies the amount of sanction normally only when new information indicates the 

factors or elements were not fairly applied, or when other clear and compelling reasons are 

articulated, 

9. Special Emphasis Enforcement Programs. At times special situations arise that dictate the 

need for more effective enforcement action through increased sanctions or other measures in a 

particular regulated area or segment of industry. When these circumstances arise, the FAA may 

set up a special emphasis enforcement program, designed to focus on a particular area of 

noncompliance on a national or local geographical basis, 

10. Small Entities. 

a. General. 

(1) Under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 

the FAA is required to have a policy or program to provide for the reduction, and under 

appropriate circumstances waiver, of civil penalties for statutory or regulatory violations by 

small entities. Under the law, such a policy is to contain certain conditions. Those suggested by 

Congress are: requiring the small entity to correct the violation within a reasonable correction 

period; limiting the applicability to violations discovered through participation in a compliance 

7-14 
07/26/07 2150.38 

assistance or audit program operated or supported by the agency; excluding small entities that 

have been subject to multiple enforcement actions by the agency; excluding violations involving 

willful or criminal conduct; excluding violations that pose serious health, safety or 

environmental threats; and requiring a good faith effort to comply with the law. The SBREFA 

also provides that under appropriate circumstances, the FAA may consider ability to pay in 

determining the penalty to assess a small entity. 

(2) Congress intended that agencies have the discretion to develop the limits of their 

enforcement policies for small entities and the specific circumstances under which penalty 

reductions or waivers would be granted. Because the statute requires an agency, subject to the 

requirements and limitations of other statutes, to place conditions or exclusions on its 

enforcement policy under SBREFA, it does not appear Congress intended agencies to reduce or 

waive penalties solely because an alleged violator is a small entity. Ratherj the statute 

contemplates that certain criteria be met before an agency reduces or waives a penalty against a 

small entity. Although the SBREFA imposes a requirement on agencies to establish penalty 

reduction and waiver programs for small entities. Congress recognized that some agencies 

already have formal or informal policies or programs that would meet this requirement, 

b. FAA's Policy under the SBREFA. 

(1) The FAA's compliance and enforcement program includes several policies that meet 

the requirements of, and are consistent with the intent of, SBREFA, Taken together, these 

policies constitute the FAA's policy mandated by SBREFA, 

(2) Under the FAA's compliance and enforcement program, for example, FAA 

investigative personnel have the discretion to address alleged violations by any person, 

including small entities, with lesser enforcement action than a civil penalty, that is, 

administrative action, provided the criteria in chapter 5 are met. There are two forms of 

administrative action: a warning notice and a letter of correction. A warning notice brings to the 

attention of the regulated person or entity the facts and circumstances that indicate that a 

violation has occurred, identifies the regulatory provision at issue, and requests future 

compliance, A letter of correction is similar but is intended for use when there is an agreement 

with the regulated party that corrective action acceptable to the FAA has, or within a reasonable 

period will be, taken. Administrative actions are less onerous than a waiver of penalty in that 

they neither carry a sanction nor resuh in a finding of violation, 

(3) Under the agency's voluntary disclosure reporting program, the FAA takes 

administrative action instead of civil penalty action against most regulated entities, including 

small entities that voluntarily report certain apparent ^violations to the FAA, complete corrective 

action satisfactory to the FAA to prevent their recurrence, and meet certain other criteria. 

(4) The FAA's sanction policies have historically provided for reductions of civil 

penalties in appropriate cases based on the mitigating factors listed in chapter 7, subparagraph 4,, 

which include ability to pay and whether a penalty would prevent the entity from continuing, iii 

business. 

7-15 
07/26/07 2150.38 

(5) For air carriers and commercial operators, the FAA also takes company size into 

consideration in determining the appropriate amount of civil penalty. The sanction ranges in Part 

I. Definitions and Abbreviations of the table for single, inadvertent, first-time violations by U.S. 

air carriers and U.S. commercial operators differentiate among various sizes of such entities as a 

means of providing a relatively equivalent deterrent for the same violation against each air 

carrier and commercial operator. While the FAA has not specified such sanction ranges for other 

certificate holding entities, it is the FAA's policy to seek penalties generally relative to the size 

and revenue of the operation for repair stations, manufacturers, airports, aind other entities 

holding certificates. 

(6) Although the FAA does not reduce or waive the penalty of an alleged violator solely 

because it is a small entity, the FAA appropriately reduces a civil penalty, or elects to take 

administrative action rather than legal enforcement action, against a small entity if ajppropriate 

under the policies described in chapter 7, subparagraphs 10. b.(l)-(5). -

c. The Small Business Ombudsman. 

(1) The Small Business and Agricultiu-e Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 10 

Regional Fairness Boards were established to receive comments from small businesses about 

federal agency enforcement actions. The Ombudsman annually evaluates the enforcement 

activities and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. 

(2) Each FAA employee who conducts an inspection of a small business concern that is 

regulated by the FAA provides the small business concern with an information sheet. The 

information sheet informs that entity that it may submit complaints or comments regarding unfair 

FAA regulatory enforcement to the National Ombudsman, The information sheet contains the 

following language: 

Our objective is to ensure a fair regulatory enforcement environment. If you feel that you 

have been treated unfairly or unprofessionally, you may contact the FAA by calling the 

FAA's Office of Rulemaking at (202)-267-3404 or by mailing your comments or 

complaints to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 800 

Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 808, Washington, D.C, 20591. You also have a 

right to contact the Small Business Administration's National Ombudsman at 1- 888-

REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247), or vvwvy.sba.gov/ombudsman regarding the fairness of the 

compliance and enforcement activity of the FAA. The FAA strictly forbids retaliatory 

acts by its employees. As such, you should feel confident that you will not be penalized 

for expressing your concerns about the FAA's compliance and enforcement activities. 

11. Remedial Sanction Guidance Policy. 

a. General. 

(1) The FAA statute requires the Administrator to promote "safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce .... " 49 U.S.C. § 44701(e). As one means of achieving this goal, the statute 

specifically authorizes the Administrator to issue various certificates. These certificates include 

7-16 
07/26/07 2150.38 

airman certificates, type certificates, production certificates, airworthiness certificates, air carrier 

operating certificates, airport operating certificates, air agency certificates, and air navigation 

facility certificates. 49 U.S.C. § 44702(a). For most of these certificates, the statute requires the 

Administrator to investigate and make appropriate findings regarding qualifications to hold the 

certificate applied for before the certificate is issued. For example, the Administrator is required 

to investigate and make findings that persons applying for airman certificates are qualified to 

hold those certificates; that aircraft and aircraft engine parts are properly designed and 

manufactiied, perform properly, and Wet the regulatidfis and minimum standards prescribed 

before issuing a type certificate, and so forth, 49 U.S,C, §§ 44702-44706, Once the 

Administrator finds the applicant is qualified for the certificate applied for, the Administrator is 

required to issue the certificate in question, 

(2) Because the Administrator's responsibility to promote safety in air conunerce and air 

transportation is constant, the Administrator must also take appropriate action when the 

Administrator finds, or has reason to believe, the certificate holder no longer possesses the 

qualifications required to hold a certificate. Thus, the statute provides that the Administrator 

"may reinspect at any time a civil aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, air navigation 

facility, or air agency or reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 44703 of 

this title," and that the Administrator "may issue an order amending, modifying, suspending or 

revoking ,.. any part of a certificate issued under [chapter 447 of the statute] if... the 

Administrator decides after conducting a reinspection, reexamination, or other investigation that 

safety in air commerce or air transportation requires that action," 49 U.S,C, §§ 44709(a) and (b) 

(1)(A), 

(3) Revocation is the appropriate remedy for conduct that demonstrates that a certificate 

holder lacks either the technical proficiency or the degree of care, judgment, and responsibility, 

required for the certificate and ratings held. The proper standard for revocation is not whether 

specific violations demonstrate a failure to exercise the necessary qualifications of a certificate 

holder, but rather whether the violations demonstrate that the holder has never possessed or no 

longer possesses such qualifications. Similarly, suspension until demonstration of qualification 

is appropriate when the agency has reason to believe the certificate holder may lack the required 

competence to hold a certificate and generally when the certificate holder fails or refuses to be 

reexamined. In either case, using the factors normally applied to select a sanction in punitive 

suspension cases is neither required nor appropriate, 

b. Misconduct Generally Warranting Revocation. 

(1) The FAA has concluded that by their nature, some acts of misconduct are so 

egregious as to demonstrate the certificate holder never possessed or no longer possesses the 

qualifications required to hold any airman certificate and other certificates. Therefore, such acts 

of misconduct warrant revocation of all airman certificates and other certificates held by the 

certificate holder. Such acts include: making a fraudulent or intentionally false statement; 

operating an aircraft while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or with an alcohol 

concentration of .04 percent or above, or within 8 hours of consuming alcohol, in violation of 

14 C.F.R. § 91.17(a); operating a civil aircraft witiiin the United States with knowledge that 

narcotic drugs, marijuana, and depressant or stimulant drugs or substances as defined in federal 

7-17 
QiTllQIOl 2150.38 

or state statutes are carried in the aircraft, in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 91.19(a); refusing to submit 

to a drug or alcohol test; and conviction for the violation of any federal or state statute relating 

to the growing, processing, manufacture, sale, disposition, possession, transportation, or 

importation of narcotic drugs, marijuana, depressant or stimulant drugs or substances involving 

the use of an aircraft, the exercise of the privileges of the alleged violator's airman certificate to 

further the prohibited conduct, or more than one drug conviction of any kind within the scope of 

14 C.F.R. §§ 61.15(a), 63.12(a), or 65.12(a).^' / ^ • 

(2) Except for eases under 49 U.S.C. §§44106,44710,44726, and 46111, there may be 

unique circumstances for which a sanction other than revocation is warranted. Because 

of the serious implications for aviation safety raised by these cases, however, FAA legal counsel 

coordinates any decision to seek^a sanction other than revocation with the Assistant Chief 

Counsel for Enforcement.- In addition, legal counsel documents the basis for that decision in the 

case file. ,,,, 

i . ' .• • • . ••.,• • ;•••'- -

c. Intentionally False or Fraudulent Statements. 

(1) In general, the FAA considers the making of intentionally false or fraudulent 

statements so serious an offense that it results in revocation of all certificates held by the 

certificate holder. See, for example, Administrator v. Twomey, 5 NTSB 1258 (1986), ajf'd 

\ 821 F.2d 63 (1st Cir. 1987) (violation of 14 C.F.R. § 67.20(a)). Falsification has a serious effect 

on the integrity of the records on which the FAA's safety oversight depends. If the reliability of 

these records is undermined, the FAA's ability to promote aviation safety is compromised. 

I (2) The FAA has handled differently one area of intentional falsification - omitting 

<;; information related to alcohol- or drug-related convictions, and other similar convictions, from 

5 v__J applications for airman medical certification. InFAAOrder 2150.3A, Complianceand 

d ^11/0 Enforcement (C & E) Bulletin No. 90-2, issued on February 6, 1990, the agency's policy called 

\;\ for the following sanctions: revoking the alleged violator's current medical certificate, if any, 

II and suspending any airman or ground instructor certificates for 60 days when the falsification 

p: involved omitting from the application for medical certification information on a single driving 

j while intoxicated or driving under the influence (DUI) conviction; revoking any current medical 

certificate and suspending any airman or ground instructor certificates for 180 days when the 

I falsification involved omitting information on a single drug conviction for simple possession 

I s from the application for medical certification; and revoking any current medical and any airman 

* ; or ground instructor certificates when the falsification involved omitting information on more 

\ \ than one DUI conviction, or a conviction for more than simple possession, or more than two drug 

r ' convictions of any type. 

I: (3) The FAA has reevaluated the sanction guidance contained in C & E Bulletin 

^ A drug conviction within the scope of 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.15(a), 63.12(a), or 65.12(a) that does not involve the use of 

an aircraft or the exercise of the privileges of the alleged violator's certificate also can warrant revocation in some 

circumstances. Revocation is appropriate where the totality of the circumstances underlying the conviction indicates 

that the alleged violator lacks the judgment, responsibility, and compliance attitude required of an airman. This 

determination must be made on a case-by-case basis. 

7-18 
07/26/07 2150.38 

No, 90-2, and has concluded that the sanction guidance for fraudulent or intentional falsification 

should be the same regardless of the type of case involved. The FAA has determined that 

falsification in the cases described in C & E Bulletin No, 90-2 has the same potentially adverse 

consequences for aviation safety as does falsification of any other record. In essence, a person 

who fraudulently or intentionally falsifies these records demonstrates the same lack of care, 

judgment, and responsibility as a person who falsifies any other aviation safety-related records. 

To correct the anomaly created by C «fe E Bulletin No, 90-2, the FAA rescinds the sanction 

guidance regarding intentionally false or fraudulent statements in that bulletin and withdraws the 

Notice of Enforcement Policy found at 54 Fed. Reg. 15144 (1989), 

12. General Guidance for Using the Sanction Guidance Table for Unruly Passenger 

Conduct Under 49 U.S.C. § 46318. 

a. General Purpose and Policy. 

(1) The table at Appendix B, part III, Q,(2)-(6) provides the suggested sanction ranges 

for a single act of unruly conduct by a passenger subject to the maximum civil penalty of 

$25,000 ($27,500 for violations after June 15,2006) under 49 U,S,C, § 46318. See also Crew 

Interference (Unruly Passengers), chapter 4, paragraph 14. They provide general guidance only 

about how to apply the agency's civil penalty authority under 49 U.S.C. § 46318. The sanction 

guidance tables do not supplant the agency's judgment or its prosecutorial discretion in 

evaluating a particular case for enforcement action. 

(2) Whether a particular passenger's unruly act warrants a sanction within or outside the 

sanction range, or in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion a decision not to proceed with 

enforcement action depends on the totality of the circumstances in a particular case. Where the 

mitigating and aggravating factors described in chapter 7, paragraph 4 are also present in a 

49 U,S,C, § 46318 case, FAA enforcement personnel applying the sanction ranges at Appendix 

B, Figure B-3-p consider those factors in selecting an appropriate sanction within or outside the 

range. The variety of conduct subject to 49 U.S.C. § 46318 and the varied facts and 

circumstances within which unruly conduct may occur, may also warrant consideration of other 

mitigating and aggravating factors unique to unruly passenger conduct. Some of these additional 

factors are set forth in chapter 7, subparagraphs I2.b. and c, 

b. Additional Aggravating Factors to Consider. In addition to the factors described in 

chapter 7, paragraph 4, FAA enforcement personnel consider other potentially aggravating 

factors in chapter 7, subparagraphs 12,b,(l)-(7) in die selection of an appropriate sanction within 

or outside the sanction range, 

(1) The severity of the unruly conduct. The severity of the conduct may be indicated by 

several factors, including: 

• The physical characteristics of the individual committing the unruly conduct 

contrasted with those of the victim, 

• The nature of the conduct itself 

• The extent of any injury inflicted, 

7-19 
^ 

Q1I2QI01 2150.38 

(2) Whether the unruly conduct occurred when the aircraft was in flight or while 

passengers were boarding or deplaning. Certain unruly conduct that occurs during flight or on a 

crowded boarded flight may be more aggravating than the same conduct that occurs while 

passengers are deplaning. 

(3) Whether the unruly conduct was directed at a crewmember or a passenger. Because 

"a crewmember has safety duties to perform oh a flight, unruly conduct against a crewmember 

may be more aggravating than the same unruly conduct directed at an individual who does not 

have any safety duties to perform on the flight. 

(4) Whether the unruly passenger provoked the situation that resulted in the unruly 

"conduct. For instance, a passenger who instigates a confrontation, or a passenger who mixes 

alcohoTwith prescribed or over-the-counter drugs that the passenger claims precipitated the 

uruaily conduct. 

(5) Whether the unruly conduct necessitated that the flight be diverted from its intended 

destination. 

(6) Whether the unruly conduct necessitated that the flight crew call ahead for law 

enforcement to meet the flight on arrival. 

(7) Whether the unruly conduct was inflicted with malice or in anger. 

c. Additional Mitigating Factors to Consider. The factors listed in chapter 7, 

subparagraphs 12.c. (l)-(3) may justify a sanction below the sanction range, or in the agency's 

prosecutorial discretion, may justify a decision not to prosecute a passenger's unruly conduct. 

(1) Whether the unruly passenger has already served a criminal sentence for the same 

conduct or has already made monetary restitution in the context of a criminal prosecution for the 

same conduct. 

(2) Whether the passenger's unruly conduct was caused by a diagnosed medical or 

mental condition for which the passenger was receiving medical treatment. 

(3) Whether the unruly conduct was a reasonable response to a provocation by another. 

However, a passenger's use of unreasonable force in response to a provocation by another 

individual on the aircraft would not constitute a mitigating factor. 

d. When to Apply the Sanction Range for Acts Posing an "Imminent Threat" to Safety 

of the Aircraft or Others on Board the Aircraft. 

(1) The sanction range at Appendix B, part III.Q.(6) for an act that poses an imminent 

threat to safety of aircraft or other individuals on the aircraft applies when there is an imminent 

threat to the safety of the aircraft or to the collective safety of others on board the aircraft. For 

example, a passenger attempting to open an emergency exit door would be an imminent threat to 

the safety of the aircraft. If the imminent threat to safety is directed to specific individuals on the 

7-20 
07/26/07 2150.38" 

aircraft, then the sanction range for physical assauU or threatened physical at Appendix B, part 

III.Q. (2)-(5) applies. 

(2) In selecting an appropriate sanction within or outside the sanction range for an act 

posing an imminent safety threat, FAA enforcement personnel consider whether the resultant 

imminent threat was the unintended consequence of the passenger's careless or reckless act or 

whether the passenger intended the consequences. TheTormer would justify a sanction toward 

the low end of the range, while the latter would justify a sanction toward the maximum range. 

e. Applicable Sanction Ranges for Security Officers or Others Assigned a Law 

Enforcement Function on a Flight (for example, Federal Air Marshab Assigned to the 

Flight). FAA enforcement personnel apply the sanction range applicable to physical assauhs or 

threatened physical assaults on crewmembers (Appendix B, part III.Q. (2) and (4)). 

f. Applying Unruly Passenger Sanction Guidance Tables to Multiple Acts. 

When applying the table to multiple acts by an unruly passenger, FAA enforcement personnel 

consider not only the individual unruly acts committed, but also the collective consequences of 

all the unruly behavior. FAA enforcement persormel do not approach the sanction determination 

for multiple acts as a mechanical exercise of multiplying the number of separate acts of unruly 

behavior by a sanction amount in the range for a single act. Instead, they use the guidance in the 

table and exercise their judgment as to the seriousness of the conduct, given the totality of 

circumstances, to determine an appropriate sanction amount that will deter future violations by 

the imruly passenger and others similarly situated. 

7-21 
10/01/07 2150.38 

Fig. B-3-n. Miscellaneous Civil Penalty Certificate 

Action 

(I) Allowing unauthorized manipulation of controls by 

uncertificated individual attempting to set record under 

49 U.S.C. § 44724(a) 

Mandatory 

Revocation 

(2) Carriage of illegal drugs (controlled substances) on 

aircraft 

Revocation 

(3) Conducting operation without required operating 

certificate 

60-to 120-

day 

Suspension 

(4) Misuse of an airport-approved identification medium Moderate to Maximum 

(5) Making an incorrect statement on an 

application for a medical certificate 

Indefinite 

Suspension 

(pending 

correction of 

application 

and 

determination 

of 

qualification) 

or 

Revocation 

of medical 

certificate 

(6) Refusal to produce pilot certificate, log or records 30-day 

Suspension, 

and until 

produced to 

Revocation 

Fig. B-3-0. Operations at Airports Requiring Slots 

(1) Operation without a reservation from ATC 

(2) Operation with a reservation from ATC, but at the wrong 

time 

Civil Penalty 

Minimum to Moderate 

Minimum to Moderate 

Certificate 

Action 

Fig. B-3-p. Unruly passengers 

(1) Interference with crewmember (14 C.F.R. 91.11, 121.580, 

125.328, 135.120) 

(2) Physical assault of flight or cabin crewmember 

under49 U.S.C. §46318 

(3) Physical assault of individual other than a crewmember 

under 49 U.S.C. §46318 

(4) Threaten to physically assault flight or cabin crewmember 

under 49 U.S.C. §46318 

(5) Threaten to physically assault individual other than flight 

or cabin crewmember under 49 U.S.C. § 46318 

Civil Penalty 

MaxirnUm 

$1,100-$8,000 

$500 - $5,000 

$1,100-$5,000 

$500 - $5,000 

Certificate 1 

Action 

8-28 

EXHIBIT 

•l£ 
10/01/07 2150.38 

Fig. B-3-p. Unruly passengers cont. 

(6) Acts in a manner that poses imminent threat to safety of 

aircraft or other individuals on aircraft under 49 U.S.C. § 

46318 

Civil Penalty 

$5,000 - $25,000 

($5,000 - $27,500 for 

violations after 6/15/2006) 

Certificate 

Action 

Fig. B-3-q. Other Violations by Passengers 

(1) Smoking while No Smoking sign is lighted J ' • 

(2) Smoking in aircraft lavatory :•'::" 

(3) Tampering with smoke detector 

under 49 U.S.C. § 46301(b) 

(4) Failure to fasten seat belt while seat belt sign is lighted 

(5) Failure to occupy an approved seat or berth with a safety 

belt, and, if installed, shoulder harness properly secured during 

movement on the surface, takeoff, or landing 

(6) Operating a portable electronic device 

(7) Drinking alcoholic beverage not served by carrier 

Civil Penalty 

Maximum 

Maximum 

$1,800 to 

$2,200 

Minimum to Moderate 

Minimum to Moderate 

Maximum 

Maximum 

Certificate 

Action 

4. DUI/DWI PROGRAM. FALSIFICATION OF DRUG CONVICTIONS AND AIRMAN 

MEDICAL CERTIFICATE VIOLATIONS 

Fig. B-4-a. Sanctions related to DUI/DWI Program 

(1) Intentionally fajse or fraudulent entry on medical 

certificate application regarding a DUI conviction or 

administrative action under 14 C.F.R. § 67.403(a)(1) 

(2) Making an incorrect statement on a medical certificate 

application regarding a DUI conviction or administrative 

action under 

14 C.F.R. § 67.403(c)(1) 

(3) Failure to report a motor vehicle action (MVA) under 14 

C.F.R. §61.15(e) 

(4) Two MVAs arising from separate incidents within 3 years, 

and reported both under 

14 C.F.R. §61.15(d) 

Civil Penalty Certificate 

Action 

Revocation 

of all airman 

and medical 

certificates 

Indefinite 

Suspension 

(pending 

correction of 

application 

and 

determination 

of 

qualification) 

or 

Revocation 

of medical 

certificate 

15-to 45-day 

Suspension 

ofallpart61 

certificates 

90-to 120-

day 

Suspension 

of all part 61 

certificates 

8-29 
Complaint Record of Telephone Conversation 

Complainants name pronounced: Ralph Rundle 

Date: 3/26/2008 

Time: 9:23am 

Route: MIA - SDQ 

Flight date: 12/11/2007 

Airline: AALA 

Phase of flight of reported issue: Passenger de-planeing. 

AMR Complaint #: CSW2120080002 

Complaint topics: Flight Attendant Julia Sasson was attacked by a passenger. Mr. 

Rundle was listed as a dead heading pilot who witaessed the attack. 

Facts related to the inspector during the call: 

I left a message with Mr. Rxmdle on 3/26/2008 at 8:29am, I asked him to call me back, 

Mr. Rimdle called me back and left me a message. In that message explained that he 

didn't actually witness the attack because he was seated in the back of the aircraft. 

I called Mr. Rundle back and asked him to fill me in on the details of what he saw that 

day. Mr. Rundle stated that he doesn't know flight attendant Sasson and that he didn't 

see the actual attack. He was seated in the back of the aircraft and was waiting for the 

passengers to deplane. A male flight attendant in the back of the Airbus A3 00 answered 

an interphone call. After this flight attendant hung up the phone he informed Mr, Rundle 

that a flight attendant in the fi'ont of the aircraft had been attacked by a passenger. Mr, 

Rundle stated that upon de-planing he didn't see flight attendant Sasson, I told Mr, 

Rundle that a report indicates he was the one who notified the local authorities of the 

attack, Mr. Rundle stated that this was not true, 

Mr. Rundle has been employed by American Airlines for 20 years. He is a 767 captain. 

I thanked Captain Rundle for his time and the called ended. 

Beau A, Morrow^ 

Aviation Safety Inspector 
( ) 

i 

• i 

• i 

i •'S 

.'• : 

^1 

"I 

i i 

3 

r | .• 

^1 

:] :| 

/i? 

•'J 

•3 

•• i ? 

ri 

NS/4 2,i5/i;lDEC/MIA 

42.^/:! :l 40 NO74 

riEP 

ARy 

MIA 

BASE 

LGA 

LGA 

:i.MA 

IMA 

IMA 

XMA 

IMA 

IMA 

IMA 

ST A 

MIA 

<JD» 

SDQ 

SKD 

FR(.iM 423/11 IN 1450/11 AS OE 08JAN08/073b 

LATEST 

:l6:lb/i:i uur i7S2/:ll 

;L 925/1.: L IN 2134/11 

A;^OO ::foo;i5 sp LANGUAG E 

SEAT SEN 

CA 

Ft] 

o:i 

02 

03 

04 

Ob 

06 

OV 

230V 

706a 

13635 

3791 

14793 

9909 

1209b 

16523 

11007 

DEADHEADIN6 

I4ASE 

MIA 

MIA 

; SEAT NAME 

xCA 

JtFO 

NAME 

CUTKOMP ME 

KOWALSKI EP 

HENDERSON J 

MOJXCA R 

AZPURUA J 

VEENHOF r 

SASSON .JA 

BAQUERO LF 

SANTIAGO Kf 

RUNDLE RA 

BLAHNICK DA 

GATE S/R 

E9 

a 4 

REOUiREMENTS OK 

EMP SE« RMKS LAN 

0H4002 ;l 6268/11 

;;-J47986 16268/11 

447239 14513/:ll 

040154 14513/11 

533276 14513/11 

196077 14513/11 

173826 14513/11 

565707 14513/11 

321274 14513/11 

EMP SEQ RMK 

048615 310/9/11 

548393 31079/11 

85.51 

79.38 

* 

M 

R 

» 

TKT 

AID 

AID 
HSS/4/14513/1IDEC 

SEW 14513 BASE IMA SEL 5207 

SP LANGUAGE REtHJIREMEN IS OK 

INT 300 

1 

Fh4 

FA6 

1-A7 

SKD 

ACT 

SKD 

4AUT 

SKD 

ACT 

ll/P 

HALF 

SKD 

ACT 

SKD 

ACT 

SKD 

ACT 

Ii/P 

HALh 

SKD 

ACT 

SKIi 

ACT 

SKD 

ACT 

SKD 

Acr 

D/P 

HALI 

SKD 

ACT 

u/s 

SEQ 

VEENHOF r 

BAQUERO LF 

SANTIAGO V 

DT EQ FLT STA 

11 49 2369 FLL 

11 XX 2369 FLL 

11 40 627 SJU 

11 40 627 SJU 

11 40 423 MIA 

11 40 423 MIA 

GTR 5.27 

DAY COUNT SDQ 

DEP M 

0640 

0638 

1215 

1216 

1615 

1 >'S2 

P/C 

4 

(JNDUTY 12.45 (JDL 17, 

ONDUTY 14.54 ODL 15. 

12 40 882 SDQ 

12 40 882 SDQ 

12 40 959 MIA 

12 40 959 M[A 

GTR 5,20 

• DAY COUNT PTY 

1440 

1439 

1755 

1822 

P/C 

1 

ONDUTY 8.35 ODL 11. 

ONDUTY 8.44 ODL 11. 

13 40 960 PTY 

13 XX 960 PTY 

13 40 2110 MIA 

13 40 2110 MIA 

13 40 1952 SJU 

13 40 1952 SJU 

GTR 5.11 

•• DAY COUNT MIA 

ONDUTY 13.35 

ONDUTY 15.56 

0.00 

GTR 15.58 

0905 

0900 

1520 

1814 

2000 

2220 

P/C 

2 

P/C 

EMP NDR 

EMP NDR 

EMP NBR 

STA ARR 

SJU 1000 

SJU 1014 

MIA 1400 

MIA 1345 

SDQ 1925 

SOU 2134 

2.00E TL 

45 

36 

MIA 1610 

MIA 1550 

PTY 2045 

PTY 2054 

0.00 TL 

20 

11 

MIA 1155 

MIA 1224 

SJU 18S0 

SJU 2140 

FLL 2140 

FLL 0001 

2.47E TL 

4.47 TL 

196077 

565707 -

321274 

•^C FLY 

1.lOAA 

0.00AA 

2. 45 

2.29 

2. 10 

2.42 

7.27 

2.30 

2.11 

2.50 

2.32 

5.20 

1.25AA 

O.OOAA 

2.30 

2.26 

2.40 

2.41 

7.58 

EXP 

DU 

BP 

tt TR 

2.45 

2.42 

2.30 

2.50 

2.30 

2.41 

66 

GRD 

2. 15 

2.02 

2'. 15 

4 . •;) 7 

1.45 

2.32 

3.25 

5.50 

1.10 

0,40 

.21 

DHD PA 

20.45 TAFB 66 ,21 

LP AY 

ACT 

0.23