### IN THE MATTER OF:

### U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATibN OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

## -l i\

COASTAL AIR TRANSPORT, INC. FAA Docket No. FAA-2011-1005 Judge J.E. Sullivan Respondent. FAA CASE NO. 2010S0700037

AGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL FILING IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR HEARING ON SANCTION ONLY 

### Complainant, by and through the undersigned counsel, pursuant to §13.218(a) of the Rules of Practice (14 C.P.R. 13.218(a)), hereby files its Supplemental Filing In Support of its Motion for Hearing on Sanction Only filed February 21, 2012. In support thereof, Complainant incorporates by reference the arguments articulated in its Brief in Support of its Alternative Motion for Hearing on Sanction only filed July 20, 2012 and further states the following: 1. 

### After establishing violations of the HMR, as a general matter, the FAA will seek to impose a sanction that is sufficiently deterrent but not excessive, in order to comply with the underlying purposes of the Federal hazardous material transportation law and the HMR. In determining the sanction to be assessed, penalty criteria set forth in 49 U.S.C. §5123 must be considered. 49 U.S.C. §5123(c). These criteria are the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation; with respect to the violator, the degree of culpability, any history ofpriorviolations, the ability to pay, and any effect on the ability to continue to do business; and other

matters thatjustice requires. 2. Transporting Hazardous Materials

As previously articulated in the Agency's brief dated July 20, 2012, Congress determined that the unregulated transportation of hazardous materials constitutes a threat to public safety in all forms of transportation. As a result, Congress addressed that threat in 1974 by enacting the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA). Congress, in passing the HMT A, as amended, P.L. 93-633, 88 Stat. 2156, 49 U.S.C. app. §1801 

### et. seq., now codified as 49 U.S.C. §5101 

### et. seq., recognized the risks to life and property which are inherent in the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce. As a result, the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) set forth regulations for the transportation ofhazardous materials, also known as dangerous goods.

The HMR establishes requirements for both the offerer/shipper of hazardous materials and for the carrier that transports the hazardous materials. 49 C.F.R. Section 171. 1(b) establishes that requirements in the HMR apply to each person who offers a hazardous material for transportation in commerce, or transports a hazardous material in commeJ;ce and who performs or is responsible for performing a pre-transportation function. Pre-transportation functions include, but are not limited to: (1) determining the hazard class of a hazardous material; (2) selecting a hazardous materials packaging; (3) Filling a hazardous materials packaging, including a bulk packaging; (4) (5) Marking a package to indicate that it contains a hazardous material; (6) Labeling a package to indicate that it contains a hazardous material; (7) Preparing a shipping paper; (8) Providing and maintaining emergency response information; (9) Reviewing a shipping paper to verify



### 2

### compliance with the HMR or international equivalents; (11) Certifying that a hazardous material is in proper condition for transportation in conformance with the requirements ofthe HMR; (12) Loading, blocking, and bracing a hazardous materials package in a freight container or transport vehicle; and (13) Segregating a hazardous materials package in a freight container or transport vehicle from incompatible cargo. See 49 C.F 

### .R. § 171.1 (b). Likewise, 49 C.F

### .R. Section 171.1 (c) establishes the HMR requirements for transporting hazardous materials. The regulation

states that the transportation of a hazardous material in commerce begins when a carrier takes physical possession of the hazardous material for the purpose of transporting it and continues until the package containing the hazardous material is delivered to the destination indicated on a shipping document, package marking, or other medium. See 49 C.P.R. 

### §171.1(c), The general requirements of 49 C.F 

### .R. § 171.2, establish that no person may offer or accept a hazardous material for transportation in commerce unless the hazardous material is properly classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled, and in a condition for shipment as required or authorized by applicable requirements of the subchapter or an exemption or special permit, approval, or registration issued under this subchapter or subchapter A of 49 C.F 

### .R. Chapter 171. See 49 C.P.R. 

### §171.2 (e).

In the instant case, the Respondent accepted for air transportation a package on a flight on or about October 21, 2009, which it described on a bill of lading as containing Diesel Fuel, Hazard Class 3, UN# 1202, PG III. See Exhibit 5 from Agency Briefdated July 20, 2012. However, the package was not accompanied by shipping papers which included the proper shipping name, the hazard class, the assigned identification number, the packing group, or the total quantity for the hazardous material contained within it. 49 C.F 

### .R. Section 172.200 requires that each person who offers a hazardous material for transportation shall describe the hazardous material on the

3shipping paper that accompanies the shipment. Specifically, Sections 172.201, 172.202, and 172.203, including the subparagraphs contain individual requirements for the preparation of shipper's declarations for hazardous materials shipments. See Exhibit 1, Example of Shipper's Declaration for Dangerous Goods. Air carriers who accept hazardous materials. without the required Shipper's Declaration or shipping papers are in violation of49 C.F.R. §175.30(a)(2) and §175.35(a). Additionally, the Respondent accepted for air transportation a package on a flight on or about October 21, 2009, which was not labeled or marked. Sections 172.300, 172.301, 172, 302, 172.303, and 172.304 contain the marking requirements for hazardous materials shipments. Specifically, Section 172.301 requires each person who offers a hazardous material for transportation to mark the package with the proper shipping name and identification number of for the material as shown in the 49 C.F .R. §172.101 Table; technical name of the material if applicable; special permit packaging marking if applicable; and the consignee's 1 name and address. The hazardous material marking must be affixed to the surface of a package containing the hazardous material or on a label, tag, or sign. See 49 C.F.R. §172.304. A review ofExhibit 8 ofthe Agency's Brief dated July 20, 2012, photographs ofthe package at issue reveals that the fiberboard box which contained the hazardous materials shipment did not contain the abovedescribed hazardous materials markings. See Exhibit 8 ofthe July 20, 2012 Brief at p.IOP5, lOPS-A, IOP5-E, IOP5-G, and IOP5-H.
Furthermore, the HMR requires packages of liquid hazardous materials to include orientation markings. Section 172.312 specifically requires each non-bulk package having inner

4

### packagings containing liquid hazardous materials to be packed with closures upward and to be legibly marked with package orientation markings. See Exhibit 2, 49 C.P.R. §172.312, with illustration of package orientation markings. In the instant case, the hazardous material transported by Respondent on October 21, 2009, contained Diesel fuel, a Hazard Class 3 flammable liquid. As a result, the offeror of the package was required to include orientation markings as described in Section 172.312 on the two vertical sides of the package with arrows pointing in the correct upright direction. See Exhibit 2 at 

### §172.312(a)(2). A review of the photographs of the package transported by Respondent on October 21, 2009 reveals that the package did not have the required orientation markings on the two vertical sides ofthe package. See Exhibit 8 of the Agency's July 20, 2012 Brief at p.IOP5, IOP5-A, IOP5-E, IOP5-G, and IOP5-H.
Moreover, the HMR requires at Section 172.400 that each person who offers packages of hazardous materials for transportation shall label the package or containment device with the labels specified for the material in the §

### 171.1 01 table and the suppart. For Hazard Class 3 materials the HMR requires a label described at §172.419 for "FLAMMABLE LIQUID." See Exhibit 3 49 C.P.R. §172.419 Flammable Liquid label. The package transported by Respondent

on October 21, 2009, did not contain a FLAMMABLE LIQUID label as required by Section 172.400. See Exhibit 8 of the Agency's July 20, 2012 Brief at p.IOP5, IOP5-A, IOP5-E, IOP5- G, and IOP5-H. Byreason of the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 175.30(a)(3) of the HMR when it accepted a hazardous material for air transportation that was not labeled or marked in accordance

1 49 C.F.R. § 171.8 defmes consignee as the person or place shown on a shipping document, package marking, or


### 5

### with the HMR. Respondent also violated Section 175.3 when Respondent accepted for transportation or transported aboard an aircraft a shipment of hazardous materials not prepared for shipment in accordance with the subchapter.
The Agency alleges that by reason of Respondent's transportation ofhazardous materials on October 21, 2009, Respondent improperly accepted hazardous materials. Coastal Air accepted for transportation or transported aboard an aircraft a shipment of hazardous materials not prepared for shipment in accordance with subchapter 175, accepted for transportation or transported aboard an aircraft a shipment of hazardous materials not prepared for shipment in accordance with subchapter. (49 C.F.R §175.3). The Agency also alleges that Coastal Air accepted hazardous material for transportation aboard an aircraft when the hazardous material

was not properly described and certified on a shipping paper prepared in duplicate in accordance with Subpart C of part 172 or as authorized by 

### §171.11 of this subchapter. (49 C.F .R. § 

### 175.30(a)(2). Finally the Agency alleges that Coastal Air accepted hazardous material for transportation aboard an aircraft when the hazardous material was not labeled or marked in accordance with Subparts D and E of part 172 or as authorized by §

### 171.11 of this subchapter, and placarded (when required) in accordance with subpart F of part 172 of this subchapter. §175.30(a)(3).
Air carriers have a responsibility in the HMR to inspect shipments of hazardous materials. Section 175 .30(b)(1) of the HMR states except as provided in paragraph (d) ofthis section, .that

no person may carry a hazardous material in a package, outside container, or overpack aboard an aircraft unless the package, outside container, or overpack is inspected by the operator of the aircraft immediately before placing it aboard an aircraft. The regulation further establishes only

other media as the location to which the carrier is directed to transport a hazardous material. 

### 6

### after the air operator's inspection ensures that the package containing the hazardous material contained the proper shipping, names, identification numbers, labels and special handling instructions on the outside of an overpack may it be transported; See 49 C.P.R. 

### §175.30(b), (c), and (e). For the package at issue in this matter, the Respondent failed to ensure that the package

was properly prepared in accordance with the provisions of the HMR. As a result, the Respondent is in violation of Sections 175.30(b), 175.30(e)(2) and 175.30(e)(3) of the HMR. See 49 C.F.R. §§175.30(b), 175.30(e)(2), and 175.30(e)(3).


### 3. Air Carrier Responsibilities with the transportation ofHazardous Materials
Air Carriers have the highest duty of care and are held to the highest level of culpability when transporting hazardous materials. See In the Matter of Federal Express, FAA Docket No. CP09NM0010, (March 29, 2011). The ALJ in Federal Express explained "they are obligated to perform their services with 'the highest possible standard of care.' This degree of care devolves from carriers' responsibility to assure, to the maximum extent possible, the safety and well-being of their passengers, crew, and others involved in transportation by air." Citing Folsom's Air Service, Inc., FAA Order No. 2008-11 (November 6, 2008), p. 16. "The risk ofharm posed by improperly marked, labeled, or packaged hazardous materials is substantial; the HMRs, furthermore, underscore the strong public policy favoring properly transported hazardous materials." See In the Matter of Federal Express Corporation, FAA Docket No. CP98GL0021 (October 12, 2000). To that end, the HMR requires air carriers to ensure that its employees are properly trained to handle the transportation ofhazardous materials and properly displays notices



### 7

### ofthe requirements ofhazardous materials and notifies the FAA when there is a failure to adhere

to the HMR requirements by offerors ofhazardous materials. Section 175.20 of the HMR sets forth the training requirements for air carrier employees who transport hazardous materials. The regulations specifically state that an air carrier may not transport a hazardous material by aircraft unless each of its hazmat employees involved in the transportation is trained as required by subpart H of Part 172 ofthe subchapter. The regulation further requires air carriers to comply with all the applicable hazardous materials training requirements in 14 C.F.R. Part 121 and 135. As explained in the Agency's Brief dated July 20, 2012, Respondent is a Part 135 air carrier and designated itself as a "Will Not" accept dangerous goods for air transport carrier. As a result, Respondent did not train its employees in accordance with the training requirements articulated in 49 C.F.R. Part 172 or 14 C.F.R. Part 135. By reason ofthe foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 175.20 ofthe BMR. Moreover, air carriers are required to provide written notification to the pilot-in-command ofthe presence of hazardous materials on board an aircraft. HMR Section 175.3 3(a) specifically requires that a copy of the shipping paper required by § 175.30(a)(2) must accompany the shipment it covers during the transportation aboard an aircraft, and the information regarding the hazardous material must be provided to the pilot-in-command as early as practicable before departure ofthe aircraft. In the instant case, the shipment ofhazardous material at issue was not accompanied by the required shipping paper required by §175.30(a), and therefore was not provided to the pilot

...in-command before departure of the aircraft. As a result, Respondent violated Section 175.33(a). Additionally, Section 175.30(b) requires that a copy of the written notification to the pilot-in-command be readily available to the pilot-in-command during flight. Emergency response information required by subpart G of part 172 must be maintained in the



### 8same manner as the written notification to the**pilot..;in~command** during transport of the hazardous material aboard the aircraft. See Exhibit 4, Examples of written notification to pilotin-command. In this case, the shipment transported by Respondent was not accompanied by shipping documents which would contain emergency response information. The emergency response information is found within the shipping papers. The shipment in this matter· did not have shipping papers which included the emergency response information. Respondent violated Section 175.33(b) ofthe HMR. As a result,

Finally, the HMR requires air carriers who transport passengers and cargo at Sections 175.25 and 175.26 to display notices of the requirements applicable to the carriage of hazardous materials aboard aircraft. The notice requirements must communicate information to the
passengers and shippers regarding federal law prohibitions of carriage of hazardous materials in luggage, on your person, and requirements to lawfully offer hazardous materials for cargo transportation. Air carriers are required under Section 175.31 to file reports of discrepancies with the FAA whenever ·a shipment of hazardous materials does not meet the HMR requirements. The reporting requirement includes when discrepancies involve hazardous materials which are improperly described, certified, labeled, marked, or packaged in a manner that is not in accordance with the HMR. In the instant case, the Respondent failed to display hazardous materials restrictions and requirements in violation of Sections 175.25 and 175.26 and therefore failed to notify FAA properly of incident/discrepancies in hazmat shipments when it improperly accepted hazardous materials on October 21,2009. 4. The Hazardous Materials Sanction Guidance is designedto promote better consistency so that similar penalties are imposed in similar cases. The specified Matrix ranges (e.g. $250-$550,



### 9or $15,000-$32,500) are intended to reflect the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the

case as compared with other types of cases. See Exhibit 10 of Brief dated July 20, 2012. Each

case, however, is evaluated on its own facts. The Sanction Guidelines must be respected as an expression of agency sanction policy. They represent an effort to produce consistent results in similar cases. The Administrator has asserted the power to impose the agency's sanction policy

on appeal if an ALJ assesses a civil penalty that is not consistent with the Guidelines. See Warbelow's Air Ventures, Inc., FAA Order No. 2000-3 (February 3, 2000), p. 20; Northwest Airlines, FAA Order No. 1990-37 (November 7, 1990), pp. 8-10. Violations of Part 175 of the HMR, which establish particular requirements for air carriers and other aircraft operators, are contained in 

### a separate matrix. See Exhibit 11 of the Complainant's Brief dated July 20, 2012. A sanction may differ from the specified Matrix
ranges when the facts and circumstances of a case support either a greater or lesser penalty. The complaint in this case charged Respondent with sixteen regulatory (16) violations of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) (Title 49 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations). In accordance with Section 5123(a) of Title 49 of the United States Code (Transportation) (49 U.S.C. § 5123(a)), Respondent is liable for a civil penalty not lower than $250, nor greater than $50,000 for each regulatory violation of the HMR. However, utilizing the FAA Sanction Guidance matrix, Respondent's violation of the sixteen regulations

are grouped into five (5) categories of offense: (1) Improper acceptance of hazmat for air transportation; (2) Failure to inspect hazmat shipment properly; (3) Failure to provide hazmat training, maintain records of training, or meet minimum requirements for hazmat training; (4) Failure to notify FAA properly of incident/discrepancies in hazmat shipment; and (5) Failure to provide notice to the**pilot~**in-command.

10The sixteen regulations are divided into each category of offense as follows: (1) Improper acceptance ofhazrnat for air transportation= Sections 175.3, 175.30(a)(2), 175.30(a)(3), and 175.35(a); (2) Failure to inspect hazrnat shipment properly=175.30(b), 175.30(e)(2), 175.30(e)(3); (3) Failure to provide hazrnat training, maintain records of training, or meet minimum requirements for hazrnat training=175.20; ( 4) Failure to notify FAA properly of incident/discrepancies in hazrnat shipment=175.25, 175.26; and (5) Failure to provide notice to the pilot-in-command=175.33(a) and 175.33(b).

5. The legislative history of the Section 5123, the Federal Hazardous Materials statute indicates a legislative intent to impose a penalty for each discrete violation of the hazardous materials regulations. Therefore, multiple violations may be charged even if the violations arise

out of a single transaction. FAA v. Landy, 705 F.2d 624 (2nd Cir.), 

### cert. denied, 464 U.S. 895 (1983). The statute itself, its legislative history and its underlying purpose indicates that Congress specifically intended to subject a person to a civil penalty for each violation of an applicable regulation. So long as each violation requires proof of a fact that other do not, passes constitutional muster. Whalen v. U.S., 445 U.S. 684 (1980). Both Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684 (1980) and Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359 (1983) qualified Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) to provide that cumulative punishment is authorized when there is a clear indication oflegislative intent to authorize multiple punishments. The plain language of Section 5123 of the Federal hazardous material statute contemplates a civil penalty for each violation ofthe HMR. Congress vested in the Secretary of Transportation the power to assess a civil penalty for each violation of any regulation

11

### promulgated in support of the Federal hazardous material statute.2 

### The plain language of the Federal hazardous material statute specifically addresses an act, which is a "violation of a regulation," prescribed under it. The statute itself, its legislative history and its underlying
purpose indicate that Congress specifically intended to subject a person to a civil penalty for each violation ofthe HMR caused by a single act. See FAA v. Landy, 705 F.2d 624 (2nd Cir.) (as long

as legislative intent contemplates the desire to impose a penalty for each discrete violation, multiple violations may be charged even ifthe violations arise out of a single transaction). This legislative intent was recognized by the D.C. Circuit in NL Industries v. Department of Transportation, 901 F.2d 141 (D.C. Cir. 1990). In NL Industries the court held that "[t]he law in which the agency must find its justification in this case authorizes the agency to assess a penalty up to $10,000 for each violation ofits regulations." Id at 144. The plain language ofthe penalty portion of Section 5123 of the Federal hazardous materials statute leaves no doubt that Congress intended for each violation of a regulation contained in the HMR to constitute an independent basis for a penalty_3



### As described in the Sanction Guidance, a weighting analysis was performed to determine the appropriate amount of civil penalty to assess. A series of questions reviewing factors involving the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the violation, the violator's degree of culpability, and the violator's history of violations was answered. Each response was assigned a

2 The Secretary ofTransportation delegated this authority to the Administrator ofthe FAA for hazardous materials transported by air. 49 C.F.R §1.47(k). 3 The FAA did not attribute a sanction to the general violation cited in § 171.2(a). The general regulation was included in the Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty and the Complaint to provide Respondent with a general overview of the specific subparts of the HMR that were violated and was not treated as a separate violation for penalty purposes. See In the Matter ofCarr, FAA Order No. 98-2 (March 12, 1998), modified on other grounds, FAA Order No. 98-8 (May 4, 1998). The Administrator held that violation of general, introductory sections ofthe HMR should



### 12

### relative weight of minimum, moderate, or maximum. Based on the totality of the facts and circumstances ofthis case, a final aggregate weight ofMAXIMUM was assigned. As set forth in the Complainant's Brieffiled July 20, 2012, under the Sanction Guidance Matrix, Respondent was determined to be a Group IV, 14 C.F.R. Part 135 Air Carrier. The MAXIMUM civil penalty for Group IV air carriers in the Matrix for Improper Acceptance, Failure to Inspect, and Failure to train is $16,200 for each category. The MAXIMUM civil penalty for Group IV air carriers is $5,500 per category for Failure to notify FAA and Failure to notify pilot-in-command. See Exhibit 11 of the Complainant's Brief dated July 20, 2012, FAA Order 2150.3B at Appendix C, page C-13. Based on the weighting analysis performed, an appropriate penalty was assigned for each of the applicable violations groups. The penalty

amount for each violation group was then added together. In evaluating the extent and gravity of the regulations that are alleged to have been violated, a totality of the circumstances approach is used to judge the potential consequences that might have resulted from failure to comply with the requirements of the HMR. Consequently, Complainant is seeking an appropriate civil penalty in accordance with the FAA Hazardous Materials Penalty Guidelines of$59,600.

not necessarily count as separate violations for sanction purposes when violations of more specific regulatory requirements are proven.


### 13

### 7. WHEREFORE, for the reasons articulated above and in its Brief dated July 20, 2012, Complainant respectfully requests that its Motion for Hearing on Sanction Only be granted and Respondent assessed a civil penalty in the amount of$59,600.
Respectfully submitted this 6th day ofNovember 2012.

# ~~ AWN RIC GEORGE Attorney Office ofthe Regional Counsel



### 14·

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy ofthe foregoing Agency Supplemental Filing In Support of its Motion for Hearing on Sanction Only was mailed by Federal Express and facsimile to:
The Honorable J.E. Sullivan DOT, Administrative Law Judge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. East Building Ground Floor Room E12-320 Washington, D.C. 20590 (FAX) (202) 366-7536 and via Express Mail to: Michael Foster, President Coastal Air Transport, Inc. P.O. Box 3985 Christiansted, St. Croix, VI 00822 and the original and one copy via Federal Express to: Hearing Docket U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations, M-30 West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590

# ~~~~i>tzWt~ Legal Assistant 

## NOV 6 2012 Dated

15

# I FIGURE 8. 1.B 

### Shipper's Declaration Specimen Designed for Manual Completion

SHIPPER'S DECLARATION FOR DANGEROUS GOODS Shipper

Consignee Air Waybill No. Page of Pages Shipper's Reference Number (optional) For optional use for Company logo name and address

Two completed and signed copies ofthis Declaration must be handed to the operator. 

# I WARNING

TRANSPORT DETAILS This shipment is within the Airport of Departure: limitations prescribed for: Failure to comply in all respects with the applicable Dangerous Goods Regulations may be in breach of the applicable law, subject to legal penalties. This Declaration must not, in any circumstances, be completed and/or signed by a consolidator, a forwarder or an lATA cargo agent. (delete non-applicable) 

# I

PASSENGER 

# I CARGO 

# I AND CARGO AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT ONLY Shipment type: (delete non-applicable) I NQN-RADIOAQTIVE I RADIOACTIVE I Airport of Destination: NATURE AND QUANTITY OF DANGEROUS GOODS**--------------------------------------------------------~------------------- ----r------r---------~----**  ' ' ' ' ' ' Dangerous Goods Identification

-------------------------------,-----,---------,----- i -----: : : ; Class; UN : Pack-; Subsi-; Quantity and : Packing: Authorization ' or • or • ing ' diary ' type of packing ) lnst. ; : Divi- : ID :Group: Risk : ' ' : sion ; No. : : : ' 1 Proper Shipping Name

I I I I I I I**-------------------------------~----~--------~----~-----~-~----------------------~------l---------------** 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 l I 1 1 1 I I I l I J I I I 1 I 1 I I I I l I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I ' ' '

' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,.. ' ''**---~---------_.:...-~**

# ___ _:_

# _ __:

# __ .:.._

# _________ _:

# __**~------** Additional Handling Information

I hereby declare that the contents of this consignment are fully and accurately described above by the proper shipping name, and are classified, packaged, marked and labelled/placarded, and are in

.all respects ·in proper condition for transport according to applicable international and national governmental regulations. Name/Title of,Signatory

Place and Date Signature (see warning above} 

# su-usrr ... .-::-e-. . ----§ 

### 172.312 tha.t confonns to the requirements of Appendix B of this pa,1·t. (el Ea,ch Type B(Ul. 'Type BIMl or fissile ma,terial paclmg·e destined for export shipment must also be ma,rked "USA" in conjunction with the specification marking. or othe1· package certificate identification. (See §§ 173.471. 173.472. anc117:3.473 of this subchapter.) [Docket No.**RSPA-99-628~3** (HM-230l. 69 FR 36()8. ,Jan. 2fi. 2004] 

# *

172.312 Liquid hazardous materials in non-hulk packagings. (a) Except as provided in this sect.ion, each non-bull< combination package having· inner packaging·s containing liquid hazardous materials. single pa.ckaging 

### n tted witll vents. or open Cl'yogenic receptacle intended for the transport of refrigerated liquefied g·ases must be: <1 l Packeel with closures upward. ancl (2) Legibly marked with package orientation markings that are similar to the illustration shown in this paragraph. on two opposite vertical sides of the package with the arrows pointing in the correct upright direction. The arrows must be either black or reel on white or other suitable contrasting background and commensurate with the size of the packag·e. Depicting a**n~ctangular** border around the arrows i;,; optional.

Package orientation (h l Arrows for purposes other thR.n illdic;ctLimt nroner nae){a,g·e orientR.tion 

### 49 CFR Ch. I (lQ..,..l-09 Edition) may not be displayed on a pauka.g·e containing a liquid hazardous material. (C) The requi.rement,s of paragraph (a) of this section clo not apply to-- ( 1) A non-bulk package with inner packag·ings which are cylinders. (2l Except when offered or intended for transportation by a.irm·aft. packages containing flammable liquids in inner packaging·s of 1 L or less prepared in accordance with § 17:3.150 cb l or (e) of this subchapter. (3) When offered or intended for transportation by aircraft. pa.ckages containing flammable liquids in i.nner paclmging·s of 120 mL (4 Duicl oz.) or less prepared in accordance with §173.150 <lJl or (C) of this subchapter when packed with sufficient absorption material between the inner and outer packagings to completely absorb the liquid contents. (4) Liquids contained in manufactured articles (e.g

.. alcohol or inercury in thermometers) which are leak-tight in all orientations. (5l A non:..bulk pack::tge with hermetically sealed inner paclmg·ings. ' t6l Packages containing· liquid infectious substances in primary receptacles not exceeding 50 mL <1.7 oz.). i7l Class 7 raclioautive materiaJ in 'Type A. IP--2. IP-<3. Type Bl U ). or Type BIMl packages. [Amdt. 172--123. 55 FH. 52891. Dec. 21. W90. as amended at 56 FR 66254. Dec. 20. 1991: f>7 FR 45458, Oct. l. 1H92: G4 FR 51918. Sept.. 27. 1H9H: 6G FR 45379. Aug-. 28. 2001: G8 P'R 45030. ,July 31. 200:3.: 71 FR 54398. Sept. 14. 2006: 71FR 78627. Dec. 29. 2006] 

# *

172.313 Poisonous hazardous**m~te** rials. In addition to any other mm·king·s required by this subpart: · (a) A material poisonous by inhalation 1 see § 171.8 of this subch::tpter l shaD be marked "Inhalation Hazard" in association with the required labels or placards. as appropriate. and shipping· name when required. The markingmust be on two opposing sides of a bulk packaging. _(See §172.3021bl of this subpart for size of marking·s on hulk packages. l When the words "Inhrtlation Hazard" appea1· on the lal)el, as prescribed in §§172.416 and 172.429. or placard. as nresuribed in**~~172.540** ancl 172.555. the /fl«···**~-·**



# -'

# I· 

# I

1 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Admin., DOT § 172.420**~** 172.416 POISON GAS labeL 1:11 Except fol' size and colm·. t!JP POl- ;-;oN GAS label must he as follows:

ill) In acirlit.ion to compl,ving- wit;l1**~** 172.407. tJH· hacl.;gTourHl on the POISON**GA~** lahel ancl the s.vmhol must be white. The IJ:tc:kgTotmd of t.lw upper diamond must f,e black and the lower point of' t lw up]HT diamond**mu~t** lw 14 mm rO.!"J·J inch,.·:-:1 <lhuvt• tlw horizontal ''I·'Jl Li'J' ) ll\P.**~** 172.417 FLAMMABLE GAS label.

1n 1 J;;xc·c•pt l'ol' ;-;ize and color. Uw FLA.:V1M ABLE**GA~** lai;Ed muc;t lw as f'nllows:



### 363 1h1 In adclit;ion r.o cornpl,Vin,L; with §172..407. the lJa.ckgTouncl I'Olol' on tlw FLAMMABLE GAS label must lie !'eel. [Amclt. 172-13:1. fiG FH Gl12f>7. !)e,·. 20. 1901)**~** 172.419 FLAMMABLE LIQUID label.

1a) Except. for :-;ize and c·olor the FLAMMABLE LIQUID label mu;-;t. 111' a;-; follows:

1l)) In addltio11 Lo**cornpl,vinc~** with**~** 172.<!07. Uw lmcl\:g'l'ounil**'~olol'** on Llw FLAMMABLE LIQUID lalHd must he !'Pd. !Arndt

.. 172 12:3. ;,r; FR Gii2fi7. Il<'<:. 20. Hli)lJ 

# *

172.420 FLAMMABLE SOLID label. l:'tl**I·~xcE>pt.** fo1· silo!-' and •·oiol'. tlw FLAMMABLE**~OLID** lahl;l must IH• cls follow:-;:I--··-·---Good----StationAirWaybillofNr(last4)unloadingLHRStationofloadingBA-226FlightPropershippingname(includingtheCOMPLETEClassortechnicalname)division,forClass1alsoCompatibilitygroupOtherspecialload-includingAVIMUWVALHUMUNorSubsidiaryIDriskNumberStationAirWaybillNrofContents/DescriptionIofNr(last4)packagesunloadingLHRThereisnoevidencethatanydamagedofleakingpackageshavebeenloadedontheaircraftLoadedasshownAJCRegnNumberofNetquantitypackagesperpackage(incl.unitofmeasureLorSpecialload•DangerousGoodsWorksheetPackingCodeLoadedgroupIMPULOIDEXNumberorSPQuantityCodeLoaded:ULDIDBULK---Agent'ssignatureGISELLEWHITE'Icto

### AIRLINES MANUAL DG LOAD NOTIFICATION 

### Page

__ of Fax to UPS Flight Control: 1-502-359-1445

nstructions Manual DG Load Notification consists of this page plus the ULD Summaries for each ULD listed below. Copies of each

must be given to the crew, provided to the destination gateway, faxed to the number above, and filed. 1-800-554-9964 or 1-502-359-2900 to inform the HMSC of the faxed Manual DG Load Notification. 

### Fli ht: From: Tail: 

### To: 

### Date: Telephone number where a copy of this NOTOC information can be obtained in the event of an emergency. Note: Use 1 for Aircraft

have been loaded on the aircraft.

POSITION ULD CONTAINER ID POSITION ULD CONTAINER IDtCRAFTLOADINGLYRESTRICTIONCODEAIRCRAFTPOSITION(CompleteWhen:AOIrillodeApplicable)AirWaybillITrackingNumber-FormRevised:1017/2010Printed:12/21/2011IVIA.NUALULUUuTULDBUILDUPINFORMATION•Page:of:PagesULDBuildUpBreakDownDateULDDGBUILDUPCERTIFICATIONIcertifythatthissummaryaccuratelyanacompletelyrepresentsdangerousgoodspackagesloadedinthecontaineridentifiedondocumentIfurthercertifythatnodamagedorleakingpackage:containingdangerousgoodswereloadedinthiscontainer.Notes:Signature:1-Refertoappropriatenationalregulationsforinternationalplacardingrequirements2-AnyQuantityof111-Y8ilowrequiresplacarding.Noplacardingfor1-\NhiteandII-Yellowper49CFR.•Classplacardmandatorywhenloading1000kgsormoreofindicatedclass..NotrequiredwhileinU.S.Territory.Referto49CFR172SubpartFfordetails.{454kgs=1000lbs;1000kgs=22051bs)TotalDl)'NOTE:Per172.504{b),useoftheDangerPlacardisnotauthorizedtorTable1materialsinanyamount.TotalTl:Ice(kgs)LEGEND:CAOColumn{TypeAircraft)"P"=PassengerandCargoAircraft."C"=CargoAircraftOnlyULDDGLoadingRestrictions"A"=AccessibilityrequiredI"M"=MagnetizedI"R"=RadioactiveIIorIllYellowI"U"=NoAircraftLoadingRestrictionAppliesERIP=EmergencyResponseInformationProvider(lbslClassorNo.NetQtyorRadio-AuthorizationsISeq.UNorProperShippingNamewithTechnicalNameinDivJCiassSubRiskPGRQofTransp.UOMactiveCAOPackageInfoI24HourEmergencyP10#Parenthesis1CompatPack-Ind.perNumberIERIPGroupagespackageCategoryRemarksTotalPackages:S:VI-IIR\T4A,l_