UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

PREMIER NAIL SOURCE, INC., 

Respondent 

Thursday, 

February 16, 2017 

FDMS No. 

FAA-2016-4266 

1 

The teleconference convened, pursuant 

to notice, at 1:30 p.m. 

BEFORE: 

(202) 234-4433 

THE HONORABLE J. E. SULLIVAN, 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

RECEIVED 

MAR 0 3 2017 

HEARING DOCKET 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
APPEARANCES: 

On Behalf of the Complainant: 

CHRISTOPHER R. STEVENSON, ESQ. 

of: Federal Aviation Administration 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

(404) 305-5208 

ALSO PRESENT: 

CODY L. SMITH 

NEAL R. GROSS 

2 

(202) 234-4433 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
3 

1 P-R-0-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 

2 1:36 p.m. 

3 JUDGE SULLIVAN: We're on the record 

4 in the matter of Premier Nail Source, Inc. This 

5 is Docket Number FAA-2016-4266. Today is 

6 Thursday, February 16, 2017, and the parties have 

7 convened for a litigation scheduling conference. 

8 The Federal Aviation Administration, which I'll 

9 herein after refer to by its initials, the FAA, 

10 is represented by its attorney of record, Mr. 

11 Christopher R. Stevenson. 

12 The Respondent, Premier Nail Source, 

13 Inc., is represented by its attorney of record--

14 oh, I'm sorry, its representative of record, Mr. 

15 Daniel Kerzner. Mr. Kerzner, by the Court ' s 

16 record, appears to be a lay representative, 

17 appearing behalf of the company, Premier Nail 

18 Source. 

19 Mr. Kerzner is not present today, and, at 

20 this moment, there is no explanation for his 

21 absence. Also present at the Office of Hearings 

22 is Mr. Cody L. Smith, an attorney advisor with 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 WINW.nealrgross.com 
4 

1 this office, who is sitting in as an observer 

2 only. 

3 Good afternoon to you all. Simply 

4 note that we had a order issued on November 15, 

5 2016, that specifically was an order granting 

6 joint motion to amend the litigation schedule. 

7 And this telephone motion conference was set up 

8 by the parties' joint motion, and the Court's 

9 calendar availability to occur today, at this 

10 time. 

11 And it was for the purpose of hearing 

12 arguments on summary judgment motion. So, my 

13 initial assertion that this was a litigation 

14 scheduling conference was in error, and I 

15 apologize for that. This is, in fact, a motion 

16 conference. 

17 Since the November 15, 2016, order was 

18 issued, there has been a motion for summary 

19 judgment filed. Actually, prior to that time, 

20 excuse me, on November 10, 2016, the FAA filed a 

21 motion for summary judgment. The order granting 

22 the joint motion to amend the litigation schedule 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
5 

1 issued five days later, on November 15, 2016. 

2 And a deadline for the Respondent to 

3 file an answer to the FAA's summary judgment 

4 motion was set for December 15, 2016, with a 

5 reply due date by the FAA set for January 6, 

6 2017. And I will note that the Court's record 

7 shows that no answer has been filed by the 

8 Respondent. 

9 So, Mr. Stevenson, before we jump into 

10 any particular argument, let's talk first about 

11 whether you actually received an answer from 

12 Premier Nail, to your motion for summary 

13 judgment. 

14 MR. STEVENSON: I did not receive an 

15 answer from Premier Nail Source, to the motion 

16 for summary judgment, Your Honor. 

17 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Have you had any 

18 contact with Mr. Kerzner, or someone else from 

19 Premier Nail, that would explain why Mr. Kerzner, 

20 or another representative of the company, has 

21 failed to appear for today's conference? 

22 

(202) 234-4433 

MR. STEVENSON: No, Your Honor. 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHOOE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
6 

1 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. Well then, why 

2 don't we go forward with the particular oral 

3 argument on the motion? And I'm going to ask you 

4 I'll tell you that I've read all of your 

5 materials, and I do have a couple questions for 

6 you. 

7 So, I can give you an opportunity to 

8 make formal arguments, if you would like that, or 

9 we can just jump right into the Court's inquiry. 

10 What's your preference? 

11 MR. STEVENSON: Given that the Court 

12 has already read my submission and there is no 

13 response for me to address, I think we can go 

14 straight to your questions, Your Honor. 

15 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. Then, what 

16 I'll first do is, I'll deem admissible 

17 Government's Exhibits A, as in apple, and 

18 Government's Exhibit B, as in boy, so that it's 

19 clear that the attached exhibits to the FAA's 

20 November 10, 2016 motion have been deemed 

21 admissible. 

22 I'll note, however, that it appears 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 WW-N.nea!rgross.com 
7 

1 that there is an important part of the motion 

2 that may be missing, and I will specifically 

3 state that, although the argument that the FAA 

4 has made regarding the sanction that is sought, 

5 is certainly well-argued, and it was very easy 

6 for the Court to review, read, understand, and 

7 cross-check, I cannot base a decision on summary 

8 judgment on argument. 

9 It has to be made on evidence that's 

10 submitted, and deemed admissible by the Court. 

11 And so, it would appear to me that there is a 

12 testimonial statement missing, and I want to give 

13 the FAA an opportunity to file that as a 

14 supplement. 

15 And I would specifically note that, 

16 one of the cases that was cited by the FAA in 

17 support of this motion, the matter of National 

18 Power Corporation, which is FAA -- in looking at 

19 that docket number, it looks like FAA-2016-3. 

20 It specifically talks about how the 

21 burden of proof can be made by, not only 

22 reference to the agency's sanction guidance, but 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., NW. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
8 

1 with the testimony of an FAA inspector, or other 

2 FAA employee. 

3 So, as we talk about some of the 

4 questions the Court has about this particular 

5 case, I'm going to be asking some questions that 

6 might be helpful to address in your supplemental 

7 material. 

8 Any questions about that so far, Mr. 

9 Stevenson? 

10 MR. STEVENSON: Well, my one question 

11 would be, what the Court is looking for, in that 

12 testimonial statement, but it sounds like that 

13 will be apparent after you ask your questions. 

14 JUDGE SULLIVAN: I think so. 

15 Especially, first and foremost, there needs to be 

16 someone who can testify that the argument that 

17 has been provided in the motion for summary 

18 judgment is, in fact, the testimonial statement 

19 and position of the FAA. 

20 And then, within that testimonial 

21 statement, I think there will be a couple things 

22 I would encourage you to address, if you can. 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
9 

1 And that's where I want to focus our discussion, 

2 at this point. 

3 So, in looking at the case as a whole, 

4 some of the things that may seem very simple to 

5 you, were not evident to the Court. And one of 

6 them is, your amended complaint, that was filed 

7 on September 20, 2016, indicates that on November 

8 28, 2014, there was a one-piece shipment, 

9 submitted by the Respondent, for transportation 

10 to Nassau, in the Bahamas. 

11 But, I could not find anything in the 

12 amended complaint to say where it was processed, 

13 originally. Where it was submitted to? What 

14 part of the country? It would be helpful if 

15 there was some testimonial statement about where 

16 the package was originally submitted for 

17 transportation. 

18 Secondly, in the amended complaint, as 

19 well as in the original complaint, there's really 

20 no statement about how many violations the 

21 

22 

FAA is charging. And again, the Court is very 

reluctant to make an assumption about that. It 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com 
10 

1 would be helpful, even if you could tell me now. 

2 I've looked at the material, and I 

3 know that there is an argument to be made for 

4 five different violations by the categories of 

5 shipping, and labeling, and markings, and so 

6 forth. 

7 But, I don't know whether you're 

8 charging one violation with five counts as part 

9 of that violation, or five separate violations, 

10 stemming from the one-piece shipment that was 

11 made on November 28, 2014. 

12 Can you clarify that now, or would you 

13 prefer to wait? 

14 MR. STEVENSON: I can clarify that 

15 now. There's -- the number of violations is not 

16 is greater than five. The number of 

17 violations, I will have to retrieve a copy of the 

18 complaint from my file, here, to give the count, 

19 but -- I apologize, just a moment. 

20 (Pause.) 

21 MR. STEVENSON: Complaint alleged 27 

22 different violations 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
11 

1 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Can I -- I'm going to 

2 stop you. I'm going to I have the amended 

3 complaint, I'm looking at the amended complaint. 

4 Where, where do you have that number, because I 

5 must have missed it? 

6 MR. STEVENSON: In the amended 

7 complaint -- in the amended complaint, the number 

8 is 19, I believe. And those are the lettered 

9 paragraph in Section 3. Section 3, paragraph 1 

10 says, "By reason of the foregoing, the Respondent 

11 violated," and then, subparagraphs A through s, 

12 lists all of the various regulations that were 

13 violated by the Respondent's shipment of the 

14 package. 

15 And I guess, to clarify, those are all 

16 the regulations that are alleged. It is entirely 

17 likely, although I do not recall specifically, 

18 that there are other regulations that were not 

19 alleged. It is typically the case, in undeclared 

20 hazardous materials shipments, that many, many, 

21 very similar sections of regulations are 

22 violated. 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
12 

1 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. So, there's an 

2 allegation of 19 regulations violated. And then, 

3 in your summary judgment motion materials, you 

4 indicate that there are five categories that 

5 you're looking at, for the calculation of the 

6 sanctions. 

7 And those categories are -- I have it 

8 written down here. Let me just double-check. 

9 So, the categories are, shipping papers, Number 

10 1. Number 2, label, Number 3, markings, Number 

11 4, packaging, and Number 5, emergency response. 

12 MR. STEVENSON: That is correct, Your 

13 Honor. 

14 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. So, do you 

15 have an identification of which regulations you 

16 want to be attached to each of these? These 

17 categories? You're saying, for example that, in 

18 paragraphs A through s, of the amended complaint, 

19 there are a total of 19 alleged regulatory 

20 violations. 

21 But, I don't have any information in 

22 your summary judgment complaint -- I mean, your 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
13 

1 summary judgment motion, as to which category 

2 each of those regulatory violations should land. 

3 And I shouldn't be guessing for you. 

4 MR. STEVENSON: I can tell you where 

5 each of them falls, so they're not every 

6 regulation covers every category. So I'm 

7 sorry -- not every regulation is limited to one 

8 category, in particular, the sort of central 

9 allegation. 

10 The central regulatory violation is 

11 what is in Section 3, paragraph 1, subparagraph 

12 A, which is 49CFR Section 171.2(e), which is a 

13 global regulation that says, essentially, that 

14 when a company is offering a hazardous material 

15 for transportation, they have to follow all of 

16 the other regulations that are laid out in the 

17 hazardous materials regulations. 

18 Because, to some extent, for most of 

19 the regulations, the FAA could potentially charge 

20 simply 171.2. (e), without mentioning the other 

21 regulations, because they are all, potentially 

22 incorporated through 171.2(e). 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
14 

1 I, usually, personally don't do that, 

2 because it provides more information for the 

3 Respondent, about what the particular issues 

4 were. So, subparagraph A goes to all of the 

5 categories. 

6 It is a shipping paper violation, as 

7 are subparagraphs c, D, E, F, and G. Those are 

8 all violations of 172.200(a), and different 

9 subparagraphs of 172.202(a). The various 

10 subparagraphs describe what the shipping papers 

11 have to include. Again, if this was a declared 

12 shipment, you might only see one of those in 

13 isolation but, usually, as here, when there's an 

14 undeclared shipment, there's no shipping paper, 

15 so none of the criteria are met. 

16 JUDGE SULLIVAN: And would that be 

17 true for subparagraph H, as in Henry, on page 6, 

18 as well? 

19 MR. STEVENSON: Yes, I believe that H 

20 is a shipping paper violation, as well, along 

21 with I and J. And I, J, K, L -- yes, I believe 

22 that through L, are shipping paper violations. M 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
15 

1 is a marking violation. 

2 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. 

3 MR. STEVENSON: N is a N is, I 

4 believe, a labeling violation. It's about having 

5 liquid hazards material without orientation 

6 arrows on the outside. 

7 o is a label violation. P is an 

8 emergency response violation, as is Q. R is a 

9 packaging violation, as is S. 

10 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. If you could, 

11 in your additional testimonial statement, also 

12 present that? That would be helpful. I have a 

13 question then, a couple other questions for you. 

14 After you filed your amended complaint 

15 on September 20, 2016, there was no answer, that 

16 I know of, that was filed to the amended 

17 complaint. Did you receive any kind of answer, 

18 after September 20, 2016? 

19 MR. STEVENSON: I did not, Your Honor. 

20 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. But, it's part 

21 of your argument that, the admissions that were 

22 presented to you from the Respondent are 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
16 

1 applicable to the amended complaint, as they 

2 would have been, to the original complaint? 

3 MR. STEVENSON: Yes, Your Honor. If 

4 the FAA was aggressively arguing, I would argue 

5 that, because the Respondent had failed to file 

6 an answer to the amended complaint, everything in 

7 the amended complaint was admitted, including the 

8 allegations about the appropriateness of the 

9 sanction. 

10 However, I thought it was more 

11 appropriate to take the admissions and denials 

12 from the original answer as standing, because the 

13 amended answer did not allege anything new. 

14 JUDGE SULLIVAN: I think that's 

15 probably a wise decision. I do have some 

16 questions for you about the way that the 

17 calculation is done, and I'm sure that you'll be 

18 able to education me accordingly. 

19 When I read FAA Order 2150.3B, and I 

20 read some of the other cases that you've cited, 

21 including National Power Corporation, it appears 

22 to me that there's some discretion in what the 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 WW-N.nea!rgross.com 
17 

1 FAA can do, in looking at a proposed sanction. 

2 For example, it appears that there 

3 could be a variety of different ways to deal with 

4 a situation like this, where you have one 

5 shipment, one box, and then, a variety of 

6 different counts. 

7 And as I read your material, in 

8 2150.3B, it looked to me like there was a 

9 possibility that there was also an option for the 

10 FAA to consider this to be one shipment, and then 

11 to apply aggravating factors to one violation, 

12 for all these different shipping papers, labels, 

13 markings, packaging, and emergency response 

14 allegations. 

15 Or, that the FAA could say, there 1 s 

16 two shipments in one box, because there 1 s two 

17 different types of hazardous material, the 

18 bottled nail remover, and the bottled nail paint. 

19 So, it was -- I was interested to see 

20 how you particularly looked at it, and I wanted 

21 to ask you, if I read Section -- going to go to 

22 page C6, in Appendix c, of FAA Order 2150.3B. 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
18 

1 And again, the guidance note, that's 

2 at the bottom of that page. It talks about how, 

3 and I'm going to quote, in case you don't have 

4 this in front of you, ''A package means a 

5 packaging plus its contents. There may be 

6 multiple packages in one shipment, for over-pack. 

7 Multiple packages often represent multiple 

8 violations. Under the sanction guidance, this 

9 fact is considered an aggravating circumstance, 

10 rather than a direct multiplier of the sanction 

11 for each violation. Each case, however, must be 

12 evaluated on its particular facts." 

13 So, is that a possibility in this 

14 case, too? That, you're using your discretion in 

15 how you look at this particular shipment. It's 

16 either one shipment with, you know, these 

17 different counts under it, or it gets one 

18 shipment, but multiple violations. Because I'm, 

19 as you know, still learning about all of this. 

20 MR. STEVENSON: Okay. I'll in this 

21 case, this was treated as simply one thing, I 

22 would note. 

(202) 234-4433 

I would agree with the general 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com 
19 

1 notions that, discriminating sanctions in a 

2 HAZMAT case can be fact-specific, and that there 

3 is the exercise of discretion and judgment 

4 involved on the part of the FAA, in identifying 

5 exactly which factors apply, and exactly which 

6 weight goes to those factors, how much 

7 aggravation or mitigation there is. 

8 But, in this particular circumstance, 

9 this is essentially something that, for a case 

10 like this, could only be used to increase those 

11 sanctions, because it was, as it stands, it was 

12 treated as one shipment, one package. 

13 Normally, multiple packages in one 

14 shipment would not be a box with smaller boxes in 

15 it. It would be going to, let's say, Federal 

16 Express, with 12 boxes, with one master weigh 

17 bill. And so you have, at that point, 12 

18 packages in one shipment, under one master weigh 

19 bill, with 12 different individual package 

20 tracking numbers. 

21 And so, that and so, I the 

22 primary function of this, is that, normally, 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
20 

1 under those circumstances, where you have one 

2 shipment with lots of different boxes, don't 

3 treat that as 12 -- that's not the same thing as 

4 12 individually-shipped packages. And so, the 

5 aggravating does not blossom in quite the same 

6 way. Let me know if that actually answered your 

7 question. 

8 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Well, that's helpful. 

9 Thank you. So, in a situation like this, where 

10 there's one box, and inside the box are several 

11 different little bottles, that's considered one 

12 violation, one primary shipping violation, but 

13 you still look at each of the regulations, the 

14 categories of regulations, as its own violation 

15 for looking at maximum weight, and monies? 

16 MR. STEVENSON: Well, typically, for 

17 a given shipment, there is, especially when it's 

18 undeclared, there is really only one analysis 

19 where you determine the weight, and then what you 

20 determine the weight, if it's maximum, moderate, 

21 minimum, if it should go up or down. 

22 

(202} 234-4433 

And then you determine that for the 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
21 

1 shipments, and then you determine how many 

2 categories are implicated in that particular 

3 shipment. 

4 JUDGE SULLIVAN: How many regulatory 

5 categories? 

6 MR. STEVENSON: Yes, yes. How many 

7 categories as identified in Figure C1, on page 

8 C12, and as discussed in the accompanying text. 

9 It is not necessarily there was not 

10 necessarily a distinct regulation associated with 

11 a category. 

12 You could, for example, have, I think 

13 it was 171.2, which we could, for the most part, 

14 just fight that, but still cover everything. 

15 But, in particular, I'm thinking something that's 

16 not relevant in this case, but more broadly is, 

17 is one of the categories is a release into the 

18 environment of the hazardous material. 

19 And that does not really have a 

20 specific regulation. There is a regulation that 

21 -- I mean, there is a regulation that requires 

22 that it be packaged so that there not be a 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com 
22 

1 release, but that might be taken as more of a 

2 packaging regulation. 

3 There is not an analysis on a one-to4 one basis, I guess I'm saying, of this regulation 

5 goes to this category, this regulation goes to 

6 that category, in the usual course of things, for 

7 an undeclared shipment. 

8 I don't it is essentially not -- I 

9 don't know if it is even possible to have an 

10 undeclared shipment, its shipping papers, labels, 

11 markings, packagings, and emergency response. I 

12 guess you could have it, it could be properly 

13 packaged. But, if it's got hazardous materials 

14 labels on it, it's not an undeclared shipment, at 

15 that point. 

16 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Right. 

17 MR. STEVENSON: So, the nuances often 

18 only come up in declared shipment cases, which 

19 are -- the Court is less likely to get, in part, 

20 because they are much lower they're less 

21 likely to be legal action, and much lower dollar 

22 amounts. 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
23 

1 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. Let me ask you 

2 a couple other questions. There were, in my 

3 reading, it appears undisputed that the quantity 

4 of the HAZMAT that was included in this one 

5 shipment was almost two cups of flammable 

6 material, but not quite two cups. 

7 And it clearly was beyond the de 

8 minimis amount that is identified in the HAZMAT 

9 regulation. But, is that particular quantity 

10 something that is large enough to actually result 

11 in the kind of safety violation that is alleged? 

12 Because I'm -- I was looking at that, 

13 and thinking, that doesn't seem like a very big 

14 amount of liquid. And can it, in fact, be so 

15 dangerous? 

16 MR. STEVENSON: Well, yes. Myself, 

17 personally, I'm an attorney. I'm not a materials 

18 expert. I can't tell you about the chemical 

19 composition of things. But, the hazardous 

20 materials regulations have been promulgated, and 

21 these materials in these quantities have been 

22 identified as a hazardous material that would 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
24 

1 pose a threat to aviation safety. 

2 Under exactly what circumstances do 

3 these catch fire, and the damage would bring down 

4 an aircraft, I personally can't tell you that. 

5 But, I would also suggest that, the fact that 

6 they have been identified under the regulations, 

7 based on the reasoned determinations of 

8 hazardous materials safety agency. 

9 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. I ask because, 

10 you had indicated on page 4, of your motion, that 

11 there were no aggravation factors that you looked 

12 at, and no mitigating factors. 

13 And I was wondering whether the amount 

14 ever factored into a mitigating factor, if it was 

15 so small. And it sounds to me like, in this 

16 particular case, it does not. 

17 MR. STEVENSON: In this particular 

18 case, it does not. 

19 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. You indicated 

20 on page 5, that a penalty in the upper third of 

21 

22 

the maximum range was appropriate. 

appeared 

(202) 234-4433 

to me that that's 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 

But, it 

actually 

WWoN.nealrgross.com 
25 

1 discretionary, because category A materials are 

2 automatically assigned maximum weight. 

3 And there's a range for maximum 

4 weight, as you properly noted, between 5,000 and 

5 13,000 per violation. And if there's no 

6 mitigating circumstances, and no aggravating 

7 circumstances, and we're already within a maximum 

8 weight range, of 5,000 to 13,000, why wouldn't 

9 the FAA be recommending landing in the median of 

10 that range, which is about 9, 0 0 0, and staying 

11 there, absent mitigating or aggravating 

12 circumstances? 

13 MR. STEVENSON: We are -- the FAA is 

14 recommending landing somewhere that's actually 

15 slightly less than the midpoint of the maximum 

16 range. However, the maximum range is not 5,000 

17 to 13,000. The --

18 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Well, explain that to 

19 me, because I was looking at your materials, and 

20 you have on page 6, at the top of the page, set 

21 for each category of violation, the Respondent 

22 would be subject to a penalty between 5,000 and 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
26 

1 13,000. 

2 MR. STEVENSON: Yes. That is before 

3 considering the weight. So, if this in 

4 looking at the figure Cl, on page 

5 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. And I'm on Cl. 

6 MR. STEVENSON: All right. So, we 

7 have, there in column D. 

8 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Correct. 

9 MR. STEVENSON: And then, we're in 

10 category 2' an undeclared shipment within 

11 quantity limitations. So, any violation by --

12 assuming the absence of some sort of extreme 

13 aggravation or mitigation that would take us 

14 outside of the range any violation by this 

15 kind of business entity, and an undeclared 

16 shipment within HAZMAT limitations is going to be 

17 somewhere in the 5,000 to 13,000 range. 

18 Where -- the weight tells us is where 

19 in that $8,000 range, we would be looking. And 

20 as 

21 

22 

(202) 234-4433 

JUDGE SULLIVAN: I understand. 

MR. STEVENSON: I'm sorry? 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
27 

1 MR. STEVENSON: I understand. 

2 MR. STEVENSON: Okay. And so, as 

3 identified in Nation Power Corp., that means 

4 that, we essentially take that $8,000 range, and 

5 split it into thirds. If it's a minimum range 

6 HAZMAT, it goes in the bottom third, if it's a 

7 moderate range HAZMAT, it goes in the middle 

8 third, and if it's a maximum weight HAZMAT, it 

9 goes in the top third. 

10 Here, because this was a maximum 

11 weight violation, the top third would be $10,334 

12 to $13,000. And the breakdown of how those 

13 thirds would be, is the first full paragraph on 

14 page 6, for your reference. 

15 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Yes. And I've worked 

16 through all of those numbers, and you're 

17 absolutely correct. 

18 MR. STEVENSON: Yes. So, I say that 

19 we have identified something in the median here, 

20 if we round down, and say that the range is 

21 approximately $10,000 to $13,000. The midpoint 

22 of that is $11,500, which is the penalty that was 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
28 

1 used here for category. That's, like I said, 

2 that's technically slightly less than the 

3 midpoint, because that's between $10,000 and 

4 $13,000, rather than $10,333 to $13,000. 

5 So, that's why it is in the median of 

6 the applicable range. 

7 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. That's very 

8 helpful. Let me see if there's anything else I 

9 need to chat with you about. Oh, I did have a 

10 question, and this probably doesn't go directly 

11 to this particular case. In your motion, page 6, 

12 footnote 2, bottom of the page. 

13 You indicate that, if there had been 

14 an intentional or deliberate shipping of HAZMAT 

15 that was unmarked, that the proposed penalty 

16 would be much higher. And you referenced the 

17 Court to figure C1, page C12(v), D, as in David. 

18 And I'm wondering if Cl2, the figure 

19 C1 has been updated since 2007, because my figure 

20 Cl doesn't contain the same information that your 

21 figure Cl apparently has. I have some 

22 information about fines that can go up to 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
29 

1 $100,000, but you've indicated that the fine 

2 should be potentially up to $250,000. 

3 MR. STEVENSON: I'm sorry. The 

4 $250,000 figure is that, on figure Cl, in 

5 category 5, which is intentional or deliberate 

6 violation 

7 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Right. 

8 MR. STEVENSON: It says, consult legal 

9 up to $50,000 per offense category may be 

10 assessed. 

11 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Oh, I see. 

12 MR. STEVENSON: Times five category. 

13 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Times five. Okay. 

14 Obviously, I'm getting close to the end of the 

15 week, Mr. Stevenson. So, one or two other 

16 questions. It appears that this particular 

17 business might have been a small business. Was 

18 that something that was considered? Or, do you 

19 have no facts to support that kind of 

20 consideration? 

21 

22 

MR. STEVENSON: I believe that they 

are a small business. The size of the business 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
30 

1 in hazardous materials cases is primarily 

2 accounted for in ability to pay determinations, 

3 unlike, in aviation safety cases, is an absolute 

4 affirmative defense in hazardous materials cases. 

5 You can prove, but you can't pay a 

6 penalty of more than a third amount. And that 

7 becomes the maximum penalty. There's no 

8 possibility of saying, well, this is just so bad 

9 that we're going to impose an amount and, if it 

10 puts you out of business, so be it. 

11 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Well, and I notice, 

12 in Government Exhibit A, in the Respondent's 

13 answers to your first discovery, Respondent was 

14 not asserting an inability to pay. 

15 MR. STEVENSON: Correct. Yes. Your 

16 Honor had, if I recall correctly, during, I 

17 believe, our original scheduling conference, or 

18 perhaps the motion conference when I filed for a 

19 motion for judgment on the pleadings, had raised 

20 the possibility of an ability to pay defense. 

21 And so, that is something I had 

22 discussed with Mr. Kerzner before this litigation 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
31 

1 began, when it was still at the notice stage. 

2 But, I had asked him that again, in discovery, 

3 just to make sure that we had something in 

4 writing, about the possibility of an ability to 

5 pay. 

6 And you indicated there, he responded 

7 that they were not asserting an inability to pay. 

8 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. Those were the 

9 questions that I had for you, and I do need to 

10 ask you to submit a supplemental to your motion 

11 for summary judgment, that provides some 

12 testimonial evidence in support of the arguments 

13 that you've made in the motion document itself. 

14 And as I understand the rule, this may 

15 be something that you can testify to yourself, 

16 but you might want to double check on your own, 

17 for that. But, if it's not something that you 

18 can provide testimony about, as the charging 

19 official, then please have someone else at the 

20 FAA provide some testimonial statement about 

21 that. 

22 When do you think you would be able to 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
32 

1 supplement your motion so that the Court could 

2 make a final ruling? 

3 MR. STEVENSON: I guess, because I 

4 want to assure you with a good answer to that, I 

5 think I'm going to have to ask for clarification 

6 on what the Court is looking for. 

7 I know I identified two specific 

8 things, one of which was, where did the package 

9 originate, and then, possibly, a written 

10 identification of what I was talking about 

11 before, which is, which regulation supported each 

12 category that we were imposing a sanction for. 

13 JUDGE SULLIVAN: I would like to have 

14 testimony, number one, where did the package 

15 originate? How many violations you're actually 

16 alleging. You've said to me, orally, today, that 

17 there are 19 alleged violations. Which alleged 

18 violations are you assigning, or would you like 

19 the Court to assign to which category of 

20 sanctions assessment? 

21 And you talked about that a little 

22 bit, today, in terms of violation A, as in apple, 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
33 

1 being a shipping paper violation, and so forth. 

2 I would also ask you to have some testimonial 

3 statement, either from yourself, or someone else, 

4 who has read your motion and the argument that 

5 you made. 

6 And to state that this is testimonial 

7 evidence that you could present in an admissible 

8 form at a hearing. I must be able to render a 

9 decision in summary judgment based on the 

10 evidence. I cannot look at a motion argument and 

11 consider it to be evidence. 

12 So, you have, for example, you made a 

13 very detailed argument from pages 3 to 6 of your 

14 motion, about how you, as a charging officer with 

15 discretion, would propose what the sanctions 

16 should be, and why. 

17 But presenting an argument is not 

18 sufficient for summary judgment purposes. so, 

19 anything that you argue has to relate to the 

20 evidence that's adduced and admitted and 

21 considered by the Court. 

22 And typically, when you are making an 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
34 

1 argument, it's based upon both your exhibits and 

2 your testimonial statements. And because the 

3 review of, and the application of the FAA 

4 sanction guidance has various points of 

5 discretion involved, there has to be some 

6 testimony about what you did, why you did it, and 

7 where you want the Court to land with you, in 

8 terms of your motion. 

9 Because you're the only person here, 

10 and there appears to be no particular objection 

11 from the other side. I'm simply saying to you 

12 that, it would be very helpful if you could 

13 present some testimonial evidence in support of 

14 the arguments that you've made. 

15 MR. STEVENSON: I will -- I'm not sure 

16 what, if any action will be taken on this point, 

17 but I would respectfully disagree with the 

18 Courts, that that is something that has to be put 

19 into evidence. The facts that are considered by 

20 the FAA, in reaching its sanction determination, 

21 are absolutely things that have to be put into 

22 evidence. 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
35 

1 But the explanation for why the FAA 

2 chose the sanction that it did, based on those 

3 facts, and based on policies that are identified 

4 for the Courts, is something that is properly 

5 explained through argumentation by the agency 

6 attorney. 

7 I know, off the top of my head, we 

8 have explicit case law in that point in the NTSB 

9 context, which I know is not binding on this 

10 Court. I'm not sure, off the top of my head, if 

11 they have explicit case law on that point, in the 

12 DOT context. 

13 But I guess I respectfully disagree 

14 that that is something that that that 

15 explanation is something that needs to be, or 

16 should be, adduced through testimony. 

17 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Well, I appreciate 

18 you difference of opinion, and so, what we will 

19 do at this point is, I will ask you for a general 

20 idea of when you can either produce for the Court 

21 a supplemental testimonial statement or, a 

22 memoranda of argument, citing to the authority 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 WVWJ.nealrgross.com 
36 

1 that says you don't have to. 

2 Because my understanding of summary 

3 judgment motion, and the authorities that I've 

4 looked at, over and over and over again, indicate 

5 to me that the Court cannot substitute argument 

6 for evidence. 

7 And cannot accept argument in lieu of 

8 evidence on a summary judgment motion, that is 

9 case positive. So, the choice is yours, but we 

10 can agree upon a deadline of some sort, and you 

11 can choose to do what you think is best for your 

12 client. When would you like to submit something? 

13 MR. STEVENSON: Well, I am currently 

14 scheduled to be in hearing on the week of 

15 February 26th, so I would ask for more time than 

16 I usually would. Would March 

17 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Sure, and it's your 

18 choice because, obviously there's no objection at 

19 this point. And I'm simply trying to make sure 

20 that I'm able to do what you're asking me to do. 

21 March, the week of March 6th, March 13th, what 

22 would be convenient for you? 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
37 

1 MR. STEVENSON: March lOth, Your 

2 Honor, I would suggest. 

3 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. Let's say, 

4 March lOth, which is a Friday, 2017, for the 

5 filing of either a testimonial statement or a 

6 memoranda of authority in support of your 

7 assertion that none is needed. 

8 And then, Mr. Stevenson, I do have 

9 just a real quick question. You had told me, a 

10 while back, that you were moving from Atlanta to 

11 DC. Did that ever occur? 

12 MR. STEVENSON: That has not yet 

13 occurred, Your Honor. I am moving at the end of 

14 the school year. 

15 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Oh, okay. 

16 MR. STEVENSON: Which, this year, 

17 happens right at the end of May. 

18 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. All right. 

19 So, I was looking, and seeing that your address 

20 is still in Georgia, and I thought that maybe 

21 something had changed. But it just has not 

22 occurred yet. 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
38 

1 MR. STEVENSON: Yes. I didn't want to 

2 do the move in the middle of the school year. 

3 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. All right. 

4 Well then, with that, is there anything else that 

5 you would like to address on behalf of your 

6 client today? 

7 MR. STEVENSON: No, Your Honor. 

8 JUDGE SULLIVAN: Okay. I'm going to 

9 thank you very much for your assistance with the 

10 Court, and for the assistance that you provided 

11 in talking about some of the material that's 

12 before the Court. 

13 I'll look forward to hearing from you 

14 on or before March 10, 2017. And then, 

15 subsequently, I' 11 issue an appropriate order. 

16 With that, it appears our business is complete, 

17 and we can go off the record. I wish you all a 

18 good day. Thanks. 

19 (Whereupon, the above-mentioned matter 

20 was concluded at 2:26p.m.) 

21 

22 

(202) 234-4433 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 
39 

A alleged 10:2111:16 15:21 33:4,10,13 believe11:814:19 

ability 30:2,20 31:4 11:1912:19 23:11 33:17 34:1 35:22 14:21 15:4 29:21 

able 16:18 31:22 32:17,17 36:5,7 30:17 

33:8 36:20 alleging 32:16 argumentation best36:11 

above-mentioned amend 4:6,22 35:5 beyond23:7 

38:19 amended 9:6,12,18 arguments 4:12 6:8 big 23:13 

absence 3:21 26:12 11:2,3,6,712:18 31:12 34:14 bill19:17,19 

absent 25:11 15:14,1616:1,6,7 arrows 15:6 binding 35:9 

absolute 30:3 16:13 asked 31:2 bit 32:22 

absolutely 27:17 AMERICA 1:1 asking 8:5 36:20 blossom 20:5 

34:21 amount 23:8,14 asserting 30:14 bottled 17:18,18 

accept36:7 24:13 30:6,9 31:7 bottles 20:11 

accompanying amounts 22:22 assertion 4:13 37:7 bottom 18:2 27:6 

21:8 analysis 20:18 22:3 assessed 29:1 0 28:12 

accounted 30:2 answer 5:3,7,11,15 assessment 32:20 box17:5,1619:14 

action 22:21 34:16 15:15,1716:6,12 assign 32:19 20:10,10 

additional15: 11 16:13 32:4 assigned 25:2 boxes 19:14,16 

address 6:13 8:6 answered 20:6 assigning 32:18 20:2 

8:22 37:19 38:5 answers 30:13 assistance 38:9,10 boy6:18 

adduced 33:20 apologize 4:15 associated 21:10 breakdown 27:12 

35:16 10:19 assuming 26:12 bring 24:3 

Administration 2:4 apparent 8:13 assumption 9:22 broadly21:16 

3:8 apparently 28:21 assure32:4 burden 7:21 

Administrative appear5:21 7:11 Atlanta 37:10 business 26:15 

1:15 APPEARANCES attached 6:19 29:17,17,22,22 

admissible 6:16,21 2:1 12:16 30:10 38:16 

7:10 33:7 appeared 24:22 attorney 3:10,13,22 

admissions 15:21 appearing 3:17 23:17 35:6 c 

16:11 appears 3:16 6:22 authorities 36:3 c 14:7 17:22 

admitted 16:7 16:21 17:2 23:3 authority 35:22 C1 21:7 26:4,5 

33:20 29:16 34:10 38:16 37:6 28:17,19,20,21 

advisor 3:22 Appendix 17:22 automatically 25:2 29:4 

affirmative 30:4 apple 6:17 32:22 availability 4:9 C1221:8 28:18 

afternoon 4:3 applicable 16:1 Avenue2:4 C12(v) 28:17 

agency 24:8 35:5 28:6 aviation 2:4 3:8 C617:22 

agency's 7:22 application 34:3 24:1 30:3 calculation 12:5 

aggravating 17:11 apply17:1119:5 16:17 

18:9 20:5 25:6,11 appreciate 35:17 8 calendar4:9 

aggravation 19:7 appropriate 16:11 86:18 case8:5 9:311:19 

24:11 26:13 24:21 38:15 back 37:10 18:3,11,14,21 

aggressively 16:4 appropriateness bad 30:8 19:2,9 21:16 

agree 18:22 36:10 16:8 Bahamas 9:10 24:16,18 28:11 

aircraft 24:4 approximately base 7:7 35:8,11 36:9 

allegation 12:2 27:21 based 24:7 33:9 cases 7:16 16:20 

13:9 argue 16:4 33:19 34:1 35:2,3 22:18 30:1,3,4 

allegations 16:8 arguing 16:4 basis 22:4 catch 24:3 

17:14 argument5:10 6:3 began 31:1 categories 10:4 

allege 16:13 7:3,8 8:16 10:3 behalf2:2 3:17 38:5 12:4,7,9,1714:5 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

(202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 
40 

20:14 21 :2,5,7, 17 composition 23:19 currently36:13 34:5 

category 13:1,6,8 concluded 38:20 discretionary 25:1 

21:11 22:5,6 25:1 conference 3:7 4:7 D discriminating 19:1 

25:21 26:10 28:1 4:14,16 5:21 D 14:7 26:7 28:17 discussed 21:8 

29:5,9,12 32:12 30:17,18 damage24:3 30:22 

32:19 consider 17:10 dangerous 23:15 discussion 9:1 

central13:8, 10 33:11 Daniel3:15 distinct21:10 

certainly 7:5 consideration date 5:5 docket 3:5 7:19 

changed 37:21 29:20 David 28:17 document 31:13 

charge 13:19 considered 18:9 day38:18 dollar 22:21 

charging 9:21 10:8 20:11 29:18 33:21 days 5:1 DOT35:12 

31:18 33:14 34:19 DC 37:11 double31:16 

chat28:9 considering 26:3 de23:7 double-check 12:8 

check31 :16 consult 29:8 deadline5:2 36:10 due5:5 

chemical23: 18 contact 5:18 deal17:3 --- ----~----

choice 36:9,18 contain 28:20 December 5:4 E 

choose 36:11 contents 18:5 decision7:716:15 e 1:14 13:20 14:7 

chose35:2 context 35:9,12 33:9 easy7:5 

Christopher 2:3 convened 1:11 3:7 declared 14:11 education 16:18 

3:11 convenient 36:22 22:18 either18:16 33:3 

circumstance 18:9 copy 10:17 deem 6:16 35:20 37:5 

19:8 Corp27:3 deemed 6:20 7:10 emergency 12:11 

circumstances Corporation 7:18 defense 30:4,20 15:8 17:13 22:11 

20:1 24:2 25:6,7 16:21 deliberate 28:14 employee 8:2 

25:12 correct 12:12 26:8 29:5 encourage 8:22 

cited 7:16 16:20 27:17 30:15 denials 16:11 entirely 11:16 

citing 35:22 correctly 30:16 DEPARTMENT 1:1 entity 26:15 

clarification 32:5 count 10:18 describe 14:1 0 environment 21:18 

clarify 10:12,14 country 9:14 detailed 33:13 error4:14 

11:15 counts 10:8 17:6 determination especially 8:15 

clear6:19 18:17 34:20 20:17 

clearly 23:7 couple 6:5 8:21 determinations ESQ2:3 

client36:12 38:6 15:13 23:2 24:7 30:2 essentially 13:13 

close 29:14 course22:6 determine 20:19,20 19:9 22:8 27:4 

Cody 2:9 3:22 Court6:11 7:6,10 20:22 21:1 evaluated 18:12 

College 2:5 8:4,11 9:5,21 difference35:18 evidence7:9 31:12 

Columbia 2:4 22:19 28:17 32:1 different 10:4,22 33:7,10,11,20 

column26:7 32:6,19 33:21 14:8 17:3,6, 12,17 34:13,19,22 36:6 

come22:18 34:7 35:10,20 18:17 19:19 20:2 36:8 

company3:17 5:20 36:5 38:10,12 20:11 evident9:5 

13:14 Court's 3:15 4:8 5:6 direct18:10 exactly 19:5,5 24:2 

Complainant 2:2 6:9 directly 28:10 example 12:17 17:2 

complaint 9:6,12 Courts 34:18 35:4 disagree 34:17 21:12 33:12 

9:18,1910:18,21 cover21 :14 35:13 excuse4:20 

11:3,3,7,712:18 covers 13:6 discovery 30:13 exercise 19:3 

12:2215:14,17 criteria 14:15 31:2 Exhibit6:18 30:12 

16:1 ,2,6,7 cross-check 7:7 discretion 16:22 exhibits 6:17,19 

complete 38:16 cups23:5,6 18:14 19:3 33:15 34:1 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

(202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 
expert 23: 18 

explain 5:19 25:18 

explained 35:5 

explanation 3:20 

35:1,15 

explicit 35:8,11 

Express 19: 16 

extent 13:18 

extreme 26:12 

filing 37:5 

final32:2 

find 9:11 

fine 29:1 

fines 28:22 

fire 24:3 

first5:10 6:16 8:15 

27:13 30:13 

five5:110:4,8,9,16 

12:4 29:12,13 

6:18 

granting 4:5,21 

greater 10:16 

guess11:1522:4 

22:12 32:3 35:13 

guessing 13:3 

guidance 7:22 18:1 

18:8 34:4 

H 

···~ flammable 23:5 H 14:17,19 

happens 37:17 

hazardous 11 :20 

F 14:7 

FAA3:9 4:20 5:5 

7:3,13,16,18 8:1,2 

8:19 9:21 13:19 

16:4,1917:1,10 

17:15,22 19:4 

25:9,13 31:20 

34:3,20 35:1 

FAA's5:3 6:19 

FAA-2016-3 7:19 

FAA-2016-42661 :5 

3:5 

fact4:15 8:1818:9 

23:14 24:5 

fact-specific 19:2 

factor 24:14 

factored 24:14 

factors 17:1119:5 

19:6 24:11,12 

facts 18:12 29:19 

34:19 35:3 

failed 5:2116:5 

falls 13:5 

far8:8 

FDMS 1:5 

February 1:9 3:6 

36:15 

Federal2:4 3:8 

19:15 

fight21 :14 

figure 21:7 26:4 

28:17,18,19,21 

29:4,4 

file5:3 7:1310:18 

16:5 

filed 4:19,20 5:7 9:6 

15:14,16 30:18 

(202) 234-4433 

focus 9:1 

follow 13:15 

footnote 28:12 

foregoing 11:10 

foremost 8:15 

form 33:8 

formal6:8 

forth 10:6 33:1 

forward 6:2 38:13 

13:14,1717:17 

21:18 22:13 23:19 

23:22 24:8 30:1 ,4 

hazards 15:5 

HAZMA T 19:2 23:4 

23:8 26:16 27:6,7 

27:8 28:14 

Friday 37:4 head 35:7,10 

front 18:4 

full27:13 

function 19:22 

--·· (3 

G 14:7 

GA2:5 

general18:22 

hearing 4:11 33:8 

36:14 38:13 

Hearings 1:2 3:21 

·~· helpful8:6 9:14 

10:1 15:12 20:8 

28:8 34:12 

Henry 14:17 

35:19 

Georgia 37:20 

getting 29:14 

give6:7 7:1210:18 

given 6:11 20:17 

global13: 13 

go 6:2,13 17:21 

20:21 28:10,22 

38:17 

goes 14:4 19:6 22:5 

22:5 27:6,7,9 

going 6:3 8:5 11:1 

11:217:2118:3 

19:15 26:16 30:9 

32:5 38:8 

good 4:3 32:4 

38:18 

Government 30:12 

Government's 6:17 

higher 28:16 

Honor5:16,22 6:14 

12:1315:1916:3 

30:16 37:2,13 

38:7 

HONORABLE 1:14 

idea 35:20 

identification 12:15 

32:10 

identified 21:7 23:8 

23:22 24:6 27:3 

27:19 32:7 35:3 

identifying 19:4 

implicated 21:2 

important7:1 

impose30:9 

imposing 32:12 

inability 30:14 31:7 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

Washington DC 

41 

include 14:11 

included 23:4 

including 16:7,21 

incorporated 13:22 

increase 19:10 

indicate 12:4 28:13 

36:4 

indicated 24:10,19 

29:1 31:6 

indicates 9:7 

individual19: 19 

individually-ship ... 

20:4 

information 12:21 

14:2 28:20,22 

initial4: 13 

initials 3:9 

inquiry6:9 

inside 20:10 

inspector8:1 

intentional28:14 

29:5 

interested 17:19 

involved 19:4 34:5 

isolation 14:13 

issue 38:15 

issued 4:4,18 5:1 

issues 14:3 

J 

J 1:1414:21,21 

January5:5 

joint4:6,8,22 

Judge 1:15 3:3 5:17 

6:1,15 8:1411:1 

12:1,1414:16 

15:2,10,20 16:14 

20:8 21:4 22:16 

23:1 24:9,19 

25:18 26:5,8,21 

27:15 28:7 29:7 

29:11 '13 30:11 

31:8 32:13 35:17 

36:17 37:3,15,18 

38:3,8 

judgment4:12,19 

4:21 5:3,13,16 7:8 

8:18 12:3,22 13:1 

www.nealrgross.com 
19:3 30:19 31:11 

33:9,18 36:3,8 

jump5:9 6:9 

K 

K 14:21 

Kerzner 3:15,15,19 

5:18,19 30:22 

kind 15:17 23:11 

26:15 29:19 

know10:3,715:16 

18:16,19 20:6 

22:9 32:7 35:7,9 

L -'-""-""~·---· 

L 2:9 3:22 14:21,22 

label12: 10 15:7 

labeling 10:5 15:4 

labels 17:12 22:10 

22:14 

laid 13:16 

land 13:2 34:7 

landing 25:9,14 

large 23:10 

law1:15 35:8,11 

lay 3:16 

learning 18:19 

legal22:21 29:8 

let's5:10 19:15 

37:3 

lettered 11:8 

lieu 36:7 

limitations 26:11 

26:16 

limited 13:7 

liquid 15:5 23:14 

lists 11:12 

litigation 3:7 4:6,13 

4:22 30:22 

little 20:11 32:21 

look 18:15 20:13 

33:10 38:13 

looked 10:2 17:8,20 

24:11 36:4 

looking 7:18 8:11 

9:3 11:3 12:5 17:1 

20:15 23:12 25:19 

26:4,19 32:6 

(202) 234-4433 

37:19 

looks 7:19 

lots 20:2 

lower 22:20,21 

M 

M 14:22 

making 33:22 

March 36:16,21,21 

36:21 37:1,4 

38:14 

marking 15:1 

markings 10:5 

12:1017:13 22:11 

master 19: 16, 18 

material8:7 10:2 

13:14 15:5 17:7 

17:17 21:18 23:6 

23:22 38:11 

materials 6:5 11:20 

12:3 13:17 22:13 

23:17,20,21 24:8 

25:1,19 30:1,4 

matter 1:4 3:4 7:17 

38:19 

maximum 20:15,20 

24:21 25:2,3,7,15 

25:16 27:8,10 

30:7 

mean 12:22 21:21 

means 18:4 27:3 

median 25:9 27:19 

28:5 

memoranda 35:22 

37:6 

mentioning 13:20 

met 14:15 

middle 27:7 38:2 

midpoint25:15 

27:21 28:3 

minimis 23:8 

minimum 20:21 

27:5 

missed 11:5 

missing 7:2,12 

mitigating 24:12,14 

25:6,11 

mitigation 19:7 

26:13 

moder ate 20:20 

27:7 

mome nt 3:20 10:19 

monie s 20:15 

motion 4:6,7,8, 12 

18,21,22 5:4 

15 6:3,20 7:1 

8:17 12:3 

24:10 28:11 

,19 31:10,13 

33:4,10,14 

36:3,8 

4:15, 

5:12, 

7:17 

13:1 

30:18 

32:1 

34:8 

move 38:2 

movin g 37:10,13 

e 18:6,7,7 

19:13 

multipl 

18:18 

multi pi ier 18:10 

--

N 

N 15:3, 3 

nail1: 5 3:4,12,17 

5:12, 15,1917:18 

17:18 

Nassa u 9:10 

Nation 27:3 

Nation al7:17 16:21 

sarily 21:9,10 

8:9 31:9 

d37:7 

neces 

need2 

neede 

needs 8:15 35:15 

new16 :13 

norma lly 19:13,22 

4 5:6 6:22 

18:1,22 

25:4 

note4: 

7:15 

noted 

notice 1:12 30:11 

31:1 

notion s 19:1 

mber4:4,17 

5:1 6:20 9:7 

Nove 

4:20 

10:11 

NTSB 35:8 

nuanc es 22:17 

er3:5 7:19 

5,1611:4,7 

10, 10, 10,11 

numb 

10:1 

12:9, 

32:1 4 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

Washington DC 

numbers 19:20 

27:16 

0 

015:7 

objection 34:10 

36:18 

observer 4:1 

obviously 29:14 

36:18 

42 

occur4:9 37:11 

occurred 37:13,22 

offense 29:9 

offering 13:14 

office 1:2 3:21 4:1 

officer 33:14 

official31:19 

oh 3:14 28:9 29:11 

37:15 

okay6:1,1512:1,14 

15:2,10,20 18:20 

23:1 24:9,19 26:5 

27:2 28:7 29:13 

31:8 37:3,15,18 

38:3,8 

one-piece 9:8 

10:10 

one-to- 22:3 

opinion 35:18 

opportunity 6:7 

7:13 

option 17:9 

oral6:2 

orally 32:16 

order4:4,5, 17,21 

16:19 17:22 38:15 

orientation 15:5 

original9:19 16:2 

16:12 30:17 

originally 9:13,16 

originate 32:9,15 

outside 15:6 26:14 

over-pack 18:6 

___ ,p 

p 15:7 

P-R-0-C-E-E-D-1-... 

3:1 

www.nealrgross.com 
43 

p.m 1:12 3:2 38:20 pleadings 30:19 31:11 27:14 

package 9:16 11 :14 please 31:19 purpose 4:11 referenced 28:16 

18:419:12,19 plus 18:5 purposes 33:18 regarding 7:4 

32:8,14 point 9:2 19:17 pursuant 1:11 regulation 13:6,7 

packaged 21:22 22:15 34:16 35:8 put 34:18,21 13:13 21:10,20,20 

22:13 35:11,19 36:19 puts 30:10 21:21 22:2,4,5 

packages 18:6,7 points34:4 23:9 32:11 

19:13,18 20:4 policies 35:3 Q regulations 11:12 

packaging 12:11 pose 24:1 quantities 23:21 11:16,18,2112:2 

15:9 17:13 18:5 position 8:19 quantity 23:3,9 12:1513:16,17,19 

22:2 positive 36:9 26:11 13:21 20:13,14 

packagings 22:11 possibility 17:9 question 8:10 23:20 24:6 

page 14:17 17:22 18:13 30:8,20 15:13 20:7 28:10 regulatory 12:19 

18:2 21:7 24:10 31:4 37:9 13:2,10 21:4 

24:20 25:20,20 possible 22:9 questions 6:5,14 relate 33:19 

26:4 27:14 28:11 possibly 32:9 8:4,5,8,1315:13 release 21:17 22:1 

28:12,17 potentially 13:19 16:16 23:2 29:16 relevant21 :16 

pages33:13 13:21 29:2 31:9 reluctant 9:22 

paint 17:18 Power7:18 16:21 quick37:9 remover 17:18 

paper 14:6,14,20 27:3 quite 20:5 23:6 render33:8 

14:22 33:1 prefer 10:13 quote 18:3 reply5:5 

papers 12:9 14:10 preference 6:10 """~- --- ,. --- ---- ---- _____ " ___ ------ represent 18:7 

17:12 22:10 Premier 1:5 3:4,12 R representative 3:14 

paragraph 11:9,9 3:17 5:12,15,19 R2:3 3:1115:8 3:16 5:20 

13:11 27:13 present2:7 3:19,21 raised 30:19 represented 3:10 

paragraphs 12:18 15:12 33:7 34:13 range 24:21 25:3,8 3:13 

Park2:5 presented 15:22 25:10,16,16 26:14 requires 21:21 

part7:1 9:1410:8 presenting 33:17 26:17,19 27:4,5,7 respectfully 34:17 

15:2019:4 21:13 primarily 30:1 27:20 28:6 35:13 

22:19 primary 19:22 reaching 34:20 responded 31:6 

particular5:10 6:2 20:12 read 6:4,12 7:6 Respondent 1:6 

8:4 13:8 14:3 prior4:19 16:19,2017:7,21 3:12 5:2,8 9:9 

18:12,1519:8 probably 16:15 33:4 11:1014:315:22 

21:2,15 23:9 28:10 reading 23:3 16:5 25:21 30:13 

24:16,17 28:11 processed 9:12 real37:9 Respondent's 

29:16 34:10 produce 35:20 really 9:19 20:18 11:13 30:12 

particularly 17:20 promulgated 23:20 21:19 response 6:13 

parties 3:6 proof7:21 reason 11:10 12:1115:817:13 

parties' 4:8 properly 22:12 25:4 reasoned 24:7 22:11 

Pause 10:20 35:4 recall 11:17 30:16 result 23:10 

pay 30:2,5,14,20 propose 33:15 receive5:1415:17 retrieve 10:17 

31:5,7 proposed 17: 1 received 5:11 review7:6 34:3 

penalty 24:20 25:22 28:15 recommending right 6:9 22:16 26:6 

27:22 28:15 30:6 prove30:5 25:9,14 29:7 37:17,18 

30:7 provide 31:18,20 record 3:3,10, 13,14 38:3 

person 34:9 provided 8:17 3:16 5:6 38:17 round 27:20 

personally 14:1 38:10 refer3:9 rule31:14 

23:17 24:4 provides 14:2 reference 7:22 ruling 32:2 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

(202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 
44 

--···""'"'-"'"-~·--··---

s simple9:4 38:7 taken 22:1 34:16 

s 11:1112:1815:9 simply4:3 13:20 stop 11:2 talk 5:10 8:3 

safety 23:11 24:1,8 18:21 34:11 36:19 straight 6:14 talked 32:21 

30:3 sitting 4:1 subject 25:22 talking 32:10 38:11 

sanction 7:4,22 situation 17:4 20:9 submission 6:12 talks 7:20 18:2 

16:917:118:8,10 size29:22 submit31:10 36:12 technically 28:2 

32:12 34:4,20 slightly 25:15 28:2 submitted 7:10 9:9 teleconference 

35:2 small24: 15 29:17 9:13,16 1:11 

sanctions 12:6 29:22 subparagraph telephone 4:7 

19:1 '11 32:20 smaller 19:14 13:1114:4,17 tell6:410:113:4 

33:15 Smith 2:9 3:22 subparagraphs 23:18 24:4 

saying 12:17 22:4 sorry3:14 13:7 11:1114:7,9,10 tells 26:18 

30:8 34:11 26:22 29:3 subsequently terms 32:22 34:8 

says11:10 13:13 sort 13:8 26:12 38:15 testify 8: 16 31 : 15 

29:8 36:1 36:10 substitute 36:5 testimonial7:12 

schedule 4:6,22 sought7:4 sufficient 33:18 8:12,18,20 9:15 

scheduled 36:14 sounds 8:12 24:15 suggest24:5 37:2 15:11 31:12,20 

scheduling 3:7 Source 1:5 3:4,12 SULLIVAN 1:14 3:3 33:2,6 34:2,13 

4:14 30:17 3:18 5:15 5:17 6:1,15 8:14 35:21 37:5 

school37:14 38:2 specific 21:20 32:7 11:112:1,14 testimony 8:1 

Secondly 9:18 specifically 4:5 7:2 14:16 15:2,10,20 31:18 32:14 34:6 

Section 11:9,9 7:15,2011:17 16:14 20:8 21:4 35:16 

13:11,1217:21 split27:5 22:16 23:1 24:9 text 21:8 

sections 11:21 stage 31:1 24:19 25:18 26:5 thank 20:9 38:9 

see 14:12 17:19 standing 16:12 26:8,21 27:15 Thanks38:18 

28:8 29:11 stands 19:11 28:7 29:7,11 '13 thing 18:21 20:3 

seeing 37:19 state 7:3 33:6 30:11 31:8 32:13 things 8:21 9:4 

separate 10:9 statement 7:12 35:17 36:17 37:3 22:6 23:19 32:8 

September9:7 8:12,18,21 9:15 37:15,18 38:3,8 34:21 

15:15,18 9:2015:11 31:20 summary4:12, 18 think6:13 8:14,21 

set4:7 5:4,5 25:20 33:3 35:21 37:5 4:21 5:3,12,16 7:7 16:14 21:12 31:22 

shipment9:810:10 statements 34:2 8:1712:3,2213:1 32:5 36:11 

11:1314:12,14 STATES 1:1 31:11 33:9,18 thinking 21:15 

17:5,1018:6,15 staying 25:10 36:2,8 23:13 

18:16,1819:12,14 stemming 10:10 supplement 7:14 third 24:20 27:6,8,9 

19:18 20:2,17 Stevenson 2:3 3:11 32:1 27:11 30:6 

21:3 22:7,10,14 5:9,14,22 6:11 8:9 supplemental8:6 thirds 27:5,13 

22:18 23:5 26:10 8:10 10:14,21 31:10 35:21 thought 16:10 

26:16 11:612:1213:4 support 7:17 29:19 37:20 

shipments 11 :20 14:1915:3,19 31:12 34:13 37:6 threat 24:1 

17:1621:1 16:3 18:20 20:16 supported 32:11 Thursday 1:9 3:6 

shipping 10:5 12:9 21:6 22:17 23:16 sure16:17 31:3 time4:10,19 36:15 

14:6,10,14,20,22 24:17 25:13 26:2 34:15 35:10 36:17 Times 29:12,13 

17:12 20:12 22:10 26:6,9,22 27:1 ,2 36:19 today 3:5,19 4:9 

28:14 33:1 27:18 29:3,8,12 ------····-·-···· 32:16,22 38:6 

shows5:7 29:15,21 30:15 T today's 5:21 

side 34:11 32:3 34:15 36:13 take16:11 26:13 told 37:9 

similar 11 :21 37:1,8,12,16 38:1 27:4 top 25:20 27:9,11 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

(202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com 
35:7,10 

total12:19 

tracking 19:20 

transportation 1:1 

9:9,1713:15 

treat20:3 

treated 18:2119:12 

true 14:17 

trying 36:19 

two 17:16,16 23:5,6 

29:15 32:7 

types 17:17 

typically 11:19 

20:16 33:22 

- ....... __ 1.1 ___ _ 

U.S1:15 

undeclared 11:19 

14:14 20:18 22:7 

22:10,14 26:10,15 

understand 7:6 

26:21 27:1 31:14 

understanding 

36:2 

undisputed 23:3 

UNITED1:1 

unmarked 28:15 

updated 28:19 

upper24:20 

usual22:6 

usually 14:1,13 

36:16 

v 

variety 17:3,5 

various 11:12 14:9 

34:4 

violated 11 : 11 , 13 

11:22 12:2 

violation 10:8,9 

13:10 14:6,20 

15:1,4,7,8,917:11 

18:11 20:12,12,14 

23:11 25:5,21 

26:11 '14 27:11 

29:6 32:22 33:1 

violations 9:20 

10:4,9,15,17,22 

(202) 234-4433 

12:20 13:2 14:8 

14:22 18:8,18 

32:15,17,18 

-- __ ___.._.___ w __ 

wait 10:13 

want7:12 9:112:16 

31:16 32:4 34:7 

38:1 

wanted 17:20 

way 16:16 20:6 

ways 17:3 

we're 3:3 25:7 26:9 

30:9 

week29:15 36:14 

36:21 

weigh 19:16,18 

11,500 27:22 

1219:16,17,19 20:3 

20:4 

13,000 25:5,8,17 

26:1,17 27:12,21 

28:4,4 

13th 36:21 

154:4,17 5:1,4 

161:9 3:6 

1701 2:4 

171.213:20 21:13 

171.2(e) 13:12,22 

172.200(a) 14:8 

172.202(a) 14:9 

1911:812:2,19 

32:17 

weight19:620:15 2 

20:19,20 25:2,4,8 212:10 26:10 28:12 

26:3,18 27:8,11 2:26 38:20 

well-argued7:5 209:715:15,18 

wise16:15 200728:19 

wish38:17 20149:810:11 

wondering 24:13 20164:5,17,20 5:1 

28:18 5:4 6:20 9:7 15:15 

worked 27:15 15:18 

wouldn't 25:8 20171:9 3:6 5:6 

writing 31 :4 37:4 38:14 

written 12:8 32:9 2150.3816:19 17:8 

==-~:~~~ L _- 17:22 250,000 29:2,4 

y 26th 36:15 ---------- 2710:21 

year37:14,16 38:2 

z 

0 

···-··--- __ 1, ____________ ---

111:912:1013:11 

1:301:12 

1:36 3:2 

104:20 6:20 38:14 

10,000 27:21 28:3 

10,333 28:4 

10,334 27:11 

100,000 29:1 

10th 37:1,4 

289:810:11 

3 

311:9,912:10 

13:11 33:13 

30337 2:5 

305-5208 2:5 

4 

412:1124:10 

4042:5 

49CFR 13:12 

512:11 24:20 29:5 

5,000 25:4,8,16,22 

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. 

Washington DC 

26:17 

50,00029:9 

45 

65:514:17 25:20 

27:14 28:11 33:13 

6th 36:21 

---c--··--

____ j:l _______ _ 

8,000 26:19 27:4 

9,000 25:10 

www.nealrgross.com 
46 

C E R T I F I C A T E 

This is to certify that the foregoing transcript 

In the matter of: Premier Nail Source, Inc. 

Before: U.S. Dept of Transportation Office of Hearings 

Date: 02-16-17 

Place: Teleconference 

was duly recorded and accurately transcribed under 

my direction; further, that said transcript is a 

true and accurate record of the proceedings. 

(202) 234-4433 

Court Reporter 

NEAL R. GROSS 

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .• N.W. 

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com