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 of prior 
violations, the ability to pay, and any effect on the ability to continue to do business; and other 

matters that justice 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 197 4 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 of hazardous 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 of the 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 Brief dated 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 

3 
shipping 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 of 49 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's1 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 of the Agency's Brief dated July 20, 2012, photographs of the 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 of the 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 of hazardous 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) of this 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 of Hazardous 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 of harm 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 of hazardous materials and properly displays notices 

7 
of the requirements of hazardous materials and notifies the FAA when there is a failure to adhere 

to the HMR requirements by offerors of hazardous 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 

of the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 175.20 of the BMR. 

Moreover, air carriers are required to provide written notification to the pilot-in-command 

of the presence of hazardous materials on board an aircraft. HMR Section 17 5.3 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 of the aircraft. In the instant case, the shipment of hazardous 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 

8 
same 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 

17 5.25 and 17 5.26 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 designed to promote better consistency so 

that similar penalties are imposed in similar cases. The specified Matrix ranges (e.g. $250-$550, 

9 
or $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 of the 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. 

10 
The 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 of legislative intent to authorize multiple punishments. 

The plain language of Section 5123 of the Federal hazardous material statute 

contemplates a civil penalty for each violation of the 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 of the 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 if the 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 of its regulations." Id at 144. The plain language of the 

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 of Transportation 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 of Carr, 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 of the HMR should 

12 
relative weight of minimum, moderate, or maximum. Based on the totality of the facts and 

circumstances of this case, a final aggregate weight of MAXIMUM was assigned. 

As set forth in the Complainant's Brief filed 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 of the 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 of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

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 of Transportation 

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 of this 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 Pack eel 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~terials. 

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. 

1 n 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:-;: 
LHR 

Station of loading 

BA-226 

Flight 

cluding the COMPLETE Class or 

division, for 

Class1also Compatibility 

group 

UM 

UN or Subsidiary 

ID risk 

Number 

Contents/Description 

g packages 

Loaded as shown 

AJC Regn 

Number of Net quantity 

packages per 

package 

(incl. unit of 

measure Lor 

Special load • Dangerous Goods Worksheet 

Packing Code Loaded 

group IMP ULOID 

EX Number or SP 

Quantity Code Loaded: ULD 

ID 

BULK 

---

Agent's signature GISELLE WHITE 

' 

I 

c 

to 
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 ID 
tCRAFT LOADING 

LY 

RESTRICTION CODE 

AIRCRAFT 

POSITION (Complete When 

:AO 

I rill 

ode 

Applicable) 

Air Waybill I Tracking Number 

-

Form Revised: 1017/2010 

Printed: 12/21/2011 

IVIA.NUAL ULU Uu T 

ULD BUILD UP INFORMATION 

ULD Build Up BreakDown Date ULD 

I cer

dang

doc

cont

Notes: Signa

1 - Refer to appropriate national regulations for international placarding requirements 

2 -Any Quantity of 111-Y8ilow requires placarding. No placarding for 1-\Nhite and II-Yellow per 49CFR. 

• Class placard mandatory when loading 1 000 kgs or more of indicated class 

.. Not required while in U.S. Territory. Refer to 49 CFR 172 Subpart F for details. {454 kgs = 1000 lbs; 1000 kgs = 22051bs) 

NOTE: Per 172.504{b), use of the Danger Placard is not authorized tor Table 1 materials in any amount. 

LEGEND: CAO Column {Type Aircraft) "P" = Passenger and Cargo Aircraft. "C" = Cargo Aircraft Only 

ULD DG Loading Restrictions "A" = Accessibility required I "M" = Magnetized I "R" = Radioactive II or Ill Yellow I "U" = No Aircraft Loading Restricti

ERIP = Emergency Response Information Provider 

Class or No. NetQty or Radio- 

Seq. UN or Proper Shipping Name with Technical Name in DivJCiass Sub Risk PG RQ of Transp. UOM active CAO 

10# Parenthesis 1 Compat Pack- Ind. per 

Group ages package Category 

Total Packages: 

S:VI-IIR\T 4 A ,l_