# e U.S . Departinen t o f Tronsf>orlntio n Federa l Avialio n Administratio n Ne w Englan d Regio n Offic e o f Ih e Regiona l Counse l 

# m

m 1 2 Ne w Englan d Executiv e Par k

Burlington . M A 01603-529 9 Telephone : (7ei)238-70't 5 FAX : (7S1)238-705 G Ma y 11,201 0 FEDEl^ X LXP1<1£S S AN D FACSIMIL E (202 ) 366-753 6 Th e Honorabl e Isaa

c D , 13enki

n Adminisirativ e La

w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U-S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , Kooi n E12-32 0 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Washingion , D.C . 2059 0 ' ( f >' • •,,. , 

# cim^m i Re : Federa

l Aviatio n Administialio n v . Cily o f Bridgeport . Connecticu t Docke t No . CP09NE000 1 Dea r Judg e Be n kin : Enclosed , pleas e findComplainanr. s Motio n fo r Decisio n in th e abovc-capiione dCivi l Penalt y Action . Sincerely ,

' ' /JOH N R . DONNELL Y ' Senio r

Attorne y Enclosure s cc : Richji ^ Kascak , Jr. , Esquire -JdiJarin g Docke t

ELO/LOOi a sw a * VV d StLSSGtSO S XV d9t:e o 0LO2/6L/S O> UNITE D STATE S OF AMERIC A ; DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORTATIO N OFFIC E O F HEARING S WASHINGTON , D. C J . RANDOLP H BAI3131T , Administrator , Federal Aviatio n Administration , Complainant , CIT Y O F BKJDGEPORT , CONNECTICUT . Respondent , e s Docke t No . CP09NE000 1 Adininistraiiv e Law Judg e Isaa c D . Benki n Dale : Ma y 11.201 0

COMPLAINANT' S MOTIO N FORDECISIO N Th e Federal Aviatio n Administratio n ("FAA") , throug h counsel , moves , pursuan t t o §13. 2 IS(0(5 ) o f

th e Rule s o f

Practic e i n FA A Civi l Penalt

y Action s (1 4 C.F.R . 13.218(f)(5) ) fo r adecisio n in tha

t ther e ar c n o genuin e issue s o f material fiic

t an dih e movin g parl y i s entitle dt o a decisio n a s amatte r

o f law , 1 . Respondent' s Failur e t o Specif y i n Di.scovcr

v It s Evidentiar y an dFactua l Basi s fo r Ful l o r Partia l Denia l o f

Administrator' s Complain t Result s i n Admissio n 1 . O n Marc h 30 , 201U . th e Complainant , FAA . tile daMotio n t o Compe l Discovery . 2 . Th e Responden t

faile dto objec t

o r respon dt o the Motio n t o Compel . 3 . Thu.s , o

n Apri l 15 , 2010 , th e Adniinislraliv e Judg e issue da n Orde r Settin g Deadlin e fo

r Reply to Motio n t o Compe l whic h states , in pcrtinen l part , th e following :

"I f b y Apri l 20 , 2010 , th e Responden t ha s no t supplie di

n goo dfait

h th e material sough t

b y Complainant' s di.scover y request s o r

demonstrate dtha

t some o r al l o f thes e request s ar e no i well-taken , 1 wil l hav e n o choic e excep t l o gran t Complainant' s motio n an dimpos e sanction. ^ upo n th e City. "

GLO/SOOi a SW O * VV d StLSSGtSO S XV J 9t:6 0 0LO2/GL/S O4 . Responden t faile dt o compl y witii thi s Order . 5 . A s such , o

n Apri l 29 , 2010 , th e Administrativ e Judg e issue da n Orde r Imposin g Sanction.' ? fo

r Failur e to Provid e Response s t o Discover

y Request s whic h stales , in pertinen t par t that ; I

n consideratio n o f

th e foregoing , an

dpursuan t

t o § 13.22 0 o f

th e Rule s o f Practic e andProcedure , the Responden t wil l no t b e permitte dto introduc e any evidenc e o r

sponso r any witnesse s a

t the hearin g o n th e subjec i o f it s liabilit y fo r acivi l penalty b y reaso n o f di e violation s o f

th e Federal Aviatio n Regulation s wit h whic h i t i s charged . It s participatio n i n th e hearin g wil l b e limite dt o cross examinatio n o f

th e witnes s o r

witnesse s sponsore db

y th e Complainan t

an dth e presentatio n o f

evidenc e bearin g solel y upo n th e i.ssu e o f th e amoun t

o f th e civi l penalt y t o b e assesse dagains t

it . 6 . Notably , durin g discovery . Responden t failedt o provid e it s evidentiary an dfactua l basi s fo r it s ful l o r partial denial s t

o allegation s containe di

n th e Complaint . 7 . A s such . Respondent' s blanke t unsupporte ddenial s shoul db e stricke n an ddeeme d admitted . 8 . For example , th e Complainant' s Firs t Set o f InteiTOgatorie s andReques t fo r Productio n o f Document s requests , i

n pertinen t

part , tha t Responden t

specif y th e evidentiar y an dfactua l basi s fo r Respondent' s full o r

partia l denia l ( o Ih e followin g paragraph s i n th e Administrator' s Complaint : 5 , 6 , 7 , 8,10,11 , 13 , 16 , 18 , 20 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , an d28 , (Pleas e se e Exhibi t

A attached , paragrap h (9) . Responden t admitte dt o th e remainde r paragraphs) . 9 . Responden t

completel y faile dt

o respon dto thes e requests . A s aresult , Responden t ha s failedt o suppl y adefinit e statemen t o f it s unfounde ddenials . Sai dfailure result s i n deeme d admissio n o f

unanswere dallegation s i n th e Complaint . (Se e e.g. . 1 4 C.F.R . §13.218{3)(ii)) . 10 . I n that by Orde r th e Responden t

i s preclude dfro

mprovidin g testimon y o r evidenc e a

t hearin g (includin g th e evidentiai y an dfactua l basi s fo r it s blanke t

denials) . Responden t

shoul d no w h e deeme dt o hav e admitte dl o eac h o f th e allegation s containe dmth e Administrator' s Complaint . 11 . Consequently , give n Respondent' s complet e admi.ssion t o th e Complaint , ther e are n o genuin e issue s o f

material fact . 12 . Accordingly , th e Complainan t i s entitle dt

o adecisio n i

n it s favor a s amatte r

o f law .

etO/SOOi asw a^ VV J 3tLSSGt20 2 XV J 9t:G 0 OLOS/GL/S OII . Respondent' s Failur e t o Stat e An y Affirmativ e Defense s Result s i n aWaive r

t o Contes t

th e Civi l Penalt y 13 . Th e burde n o f

providin g th e affirmativ e defens e o f tlnancia l hardshi p falL

s o n th e Responden t

who claim s inability to pa y acivi l penalty . 1 4 C'.E.R . § 13.224(c) ; (Sec , also . I n th e Matte r o f Salvato r Giuffrida . Civi l Penalt

y Decisio n 1992-72 . CP91EA028 9 (Decembe r 21 , 1992)) . 14 . I n thi s case . Responden t

faile dt o stat e an

y alTimiativ e defense s i

n it s Answe r

filedon February 1 , 2010 , a s require db y §13.209(d ) whic h states : §13.20 9 Answe r (d ) Contents . A

n answe r shal l specificall y stat e an y affirmativ e defens e tha t

th e responden t

intend s l o asser t

a t th e hearing . A perso n filin g a n answe r

may includ e abrie f

statemen t

o f an y relie f requeste din th e answe r

(emphasi s added) , 15 . Despite thi s inandatoi y requirement , Responden t ha s completel y faile dt

o provid e an

y affirmativ e defense s o r

relie f requeste di

n it s Answer . 16 . Likewise , Responden t faile dt o provid e abrie f

summai y o f

al l propose daffirmativ e defense s an dth e factua

l an dlega l basi s fo r eac h a s requeste db

y Complainan t

i n discovei-y . (Exhibi t A , paiagiap h (6)) . 17 . Furthermore , Complain t paragraph s 2 7 and2 8 correctl y .stat e that th e maximu mpenalt

y pe r violatio n a s adjuste dunder 1 4 C.K.R , 13.30 5 i s !E25,00 0 an dtha t unde r th e fact s an d circumstance s tha

t a$77,00 0 civi l penalt

y i s appropriate . 18 . Th e Complain t

allege s sixtee n (16 ) separat e violation s o f variou s section s o f

Par t 13 9 (1 4 C.F.R . 139) . Complaint , Paragrap h 26 . 19 . Accordingly , th e Cit

y o f Bridgeport' s potentia l liabilit y i n thi s cas e i s $400,000 . (1 6 violation s multiplie db

y $25,00 0 equal s $400,000) .

eLO/tOO l SW O ^ VV J 3l7LSeGt20 2 XV d 9t?:G 0 OLOS/GL/S O20

- Th e propose dpenalt y o f $77,000 ' however , i s quit e modes t whe n compare dwit

h th e potential maximu mliabilit y o f $400,00 0 (indeed , i

t i s les s tha

n 25% ) ye t

reasonabl y reflect s th e natur e andseriousnes s o f

thes e violaiion.<; . 21 . Nevertheless , Responden t ha s completel y faile dto assert any affirmativ e dcfen.se s i n thes e proceedings , includin g financia l hardshi p o r inabilit y t o pa y an dha s therefor e waive d it s righ t t o contes t

th e civi l penalty . 22 . Even if

Responden t

hadclaime dan y affirmativ e defenses , th e FAA ha.'? already taken suc h matter s unde r

consideratio n i

n reducin g amaxima

mpotentia l civi l penalty o f $400,00 0 dow n t o afa

r mor e moderat e penalt y o f S77,000 . 23 . A s provide db

y 1 4 C.F.R . §13.218(0(5) , th e Administrativ e Judg e shal l gran t aparty' s motio n fo r decisio n if

th e pleadings , ... , answer s t o interrogatories , admissions , [or j matter s the Administrativ e La

w Judg e ha s olliciall y noticed,.,.sho w thai there i s n o genuin e issu e o f material fact

andtha t th e parl y makin g th e motio n i s entitle dto adecisio n a s amaile r o f law . WHEREFORE , th e Complainant , |-"AA , hereb y move s for

adecisio n under

1 4 C-F.R . 13 . 218(i)(5 ) becaus e ther e ar e n o genuin e issue s o f material fac

t an dth e movin g part

y i s entitle dt o adecisio n a s amatte r

o f law . Respectfull y Submitted ,

JOH N R . DONNEIXY , Senio r Attor n 'edera l Aviatio n Administratio n Offic e o f Regional Counse l 1 2 Ne w Englan dExecutiv e Par k Burlington . M

A 01803-529 9 Tel : 781-238-704 5 Fax:781-238-705 5 Email : John.DonneJlv('(t'faa.i;o_ v Ma y 11,201 0

' Th e FA A ba.sc dit s piopose dsanctio n on .seve n (7 ) topical ;n-ca

s o f violation s (I . AC

M Conienis ; |1 , Opcralions/PcrisonncI ; III . Pave dAreas ; IV . Safet y Arc;i.s ; V . Fii c Safet

y it i Aviatio n l-uci ; V ( Fuelin g Agen t Truiiiinu; : nodV|| . Wildlif

e HazardManagement ) an diiiiikiplic dthes e seven (7 ) .•^^lbiec ^ area s o f violation s time s afa

r JiiOi e moderat e penalty o f

$11,00 0 resultin g i

n the propose dcivi l penalt y o f .1!77,000 .

ELO/SOO E SW O ^ VV J S1?LSeG1?S0 2 XV J 9t:G 0 OLOS/GL/9 0CERTIFICAT E O F SERVIC E

I hereb y certif

y tha t today . Ma

y 11 , 2010 , I hav e .sen

t vi aFedera

l Expres s andFacsimil e a n original o f

Complainant' s Motio n fo r Decisio n i

n the matte r

o f FAA v . Cit

y o f Bridgepon , ("onnccticut . FA A Docke t No . CP09NE000 1 addresse dt o th e following : Th e Honorabl e Isaac D . Benki n Administrativ e La

w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 1200 Ne w Jerse y Ave. , S.E . Washington . D.C . 2059 0 Fax:(202)366-753 6 I iih o certif

y tha t today . Ma

y 11 . 2010, 1 hav e sent

vi aCertifie dMail-Return Receip t Requeste dandU.S . Firs t

Clas s Mail , acop y o f

sai ddocumen t

addresse dl o di e following : Mr , RichardG . Ka.scak, Jr . Associat e Cit

y Attorne y Offic e o f th e Cit y Attorne y 99 9 BroadStreet , 2" ^ Floo r Bridgeport , Connecticu t

06604-432 8 Fax : (203 ) 576-825 2 Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-43 0 Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Wilbu r Wriglit Building-Suii e 2W100 0 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Washington , D C 2059 1 

## XCfvAr L DONT^ A SORENSEN Progra mAnalys t 

# liM.-^

Dated : Ma

y 11,201 0

£10/900 0 

### sw a VVd SfrlSGGtSO S XV dGtiG O 0LOS/6L/9 O