BEFORE THE 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

:KET 

IN THE MATTER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA Docket No. CP10SW0012 

FAA Case No. 2009SW270202 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0979 

Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

ANSWER OF 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC. 

I 

.X 

0 

•••"^.._.-- n 

—^'-'JL 3 3 

Pursuant to Rule 209 of the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty ActlxJiis 

CO 

C.F.R. Part 13, Subpart G), Continental Airlines, Inc. ("Continental" or 

"Respondent"), by the undersigned, files this Answer to the Complaint of the Federal 

Aviation Administration ("FAA") in the above-captioned case that was served by 

certified mail on October 13, 2010, and states as follows" 

Admissions and Denials 

1. The procedural history recited in Complaint section identified as I is 

ADMITTED. 

2. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 1 are ADMITTED. 

3. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 2 are ADMITTED. 

-in 3 m 

" o Q 
Answer of Continental Airhnes, Inc. 

Page 2 

4. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 3 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of Boeing MM 32-45-02, which speaks for itself and is the best 

evidence of its contents. 

5. Continental is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 4 at this time and intends 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

6. Continental is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 5 at this time and intends 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

7. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 6 are ADMITTED. 

8. The allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 7 constitute the 

FAA's characterization of the Boeing maintenance manual, which speaks for itself and 

is the best evidence of its contents. 

9. Continental is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or 

deny the allegations in Complaint paragraph identified as II 8 at this time and intends 

to conduct discovery in this matter in accordance with the Rules of Practice in FAA 

Civil Penalty Actions and the Procedural Order. 

10. The allegations following Complaint paragraph identified as II 8 and 

designated as a, b and c are DENIED, pending discovery in this matter. 
Answer of Continental Airhnes, Inc. 

Page 3 

11. Continental ADMITS that the maximum penalty per violation under the 

regulation(s) cited in paragraph III 1 of the Complaint is $25,000, but Continental 

DENIES that it violated the regulation(s) cited in the Complaint, pending discovery in 

this matter, or is otherwise subject to a civil penalty in this case. 

12. Continental DENIES any allegation in the Complaint not specifically 

addressed in this Answer. 

Affirmative Defenses 

1. For its first affirmative defense, Continental asserts that the FAA has 

failed to state a claim upon which relief can be based. 

2. For its second affirmative defense. Continental asserts that the proposed 

civU penalty is excessive, not appropriate and unwarranted under the circumstances 

presented. 

Relief Requested 

Continental respectfully requests that the Complaint be dismissed with 

prejudice. 

Place of Hearing 

Continental requests that the hearing in this matter be held in Houston, Texas, 

which is the corporate headquarters for Respondent and the place from which most 

Continental witnesses will hkely be called to testify. 
Answer of Continental Airhnes, Inc. 

Page 4 

Duration of Hearing 

Continental expects at this time that the hearing will last two days, but may 

take substantially longer depending on the witnesses to testify and the evidence to be 

presented. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Thomas Newton Bolhng 

Managing Attorney, Regulatory Affairs 

November 16, 2010 

DGIWDMS: 13751680._1 
Answer of Continental Airhnes, Inc. 

Page 5 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that on this IG*:*! day of November 2010,1 caused a true copy of the 

foregoing Answer to be served: 

by U.S. certified mail (original and one copy), return receipt requested, to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2W1000 

and by U.S. certified mail (one copy), return receipt requested, to: 

Tim Duff, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel, ASW-7 

Southwest Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2601 Meacham Boulevard 

Fort Worth, TX 76193-0007 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building, Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

Jud^h A. Dabney /