U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

MAR 1 9 20151 

FEDERAL EXPRESS MAIL 

Hearing Docket Clerk 

FAA, AGC-430, Suite 2Wl000 

Wilbur Wright Building 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Southern Region 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, Georgia 30320 

(404) 305-5200 

(404) 305-5223 FAX 

MAR 2 3 2015 

HEARING DOCKET 

Re: In the Matter ofWebgistix Corporation FAA Case No. 2013S0700031 

Enclosed herewith please find a copy of a request for hearing and the original and one copy of 

the Complaint in the above-referenced proceeding. 

The FAA requests that the hearing in this matter be held in the Las Vegas, Nevada area, and 

expects that the hearing will last two days. 

Please address all communications for the FAA to the undersigned, at: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, ASO-7 

Southern Region 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

Telephone: (404) 305-5200, facsimile (404) 305-5223. 

~:;:'~r:?~ ~HAWN~~ORGE Senior Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

Enclosures 
Snell & Wilmet 

LLP. 

LAW OFFICES 

Hughes Center 

3883 Howard Hughes Parkway 

Suite 1100 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5958 

702.784.5200 

702.784.5252 (Fax) 

www.swlaw.com 

Patrick G. Byrne 

(702) 784-5201 

pbyrne@swlaw.com March 5, 2015 

VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS AND U.S. MAIL 

F edera1 Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Suite 2W1 000 

Washington DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 

Re: Webgistix Corporation 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

' 

1- ; . '.../ ... ;, \ 

'·. 1 2 

DENVER 

LAS VEGAS 

LOS ANGELES 

LOSCABOS 

ORANGE COUNTY 

PHOEN[X 

RENO 

SALT U.KE CITY 

11JCSON 

;'" .' /.. i.. ' r. _; ,_' <-=::t 

~,,)t_j 'llH<.i·~ Rt:(;IUN 

This finn represents Webgistix Corporation. I am writing to confirm that Webgistix has 

timely requested a formal hearing on the above matter. 

On February 5, 2015, my client filed a request for formal hearing. I have attached a copy 

of that request at Tab 1, along with the envelope showing the date the request was mailed. 

Despite requesting the hearing, Webgistix recently received a letter from Rashawn Rich George, 

a Senior Attorney assigned to this matter, entitled "Order Assessing Civil Penalty." I have 

attached a copy of this letter for your reference. This letter fails to reference our request for 

hearing and demands immediate payment of the penalty. As confirmed in my attached letter, 

Webgistix did not consent to the proposed civil penalty and requested a formal hearing. 

Accordingly, we again request that you schedule the hearing and proceed accordingly. In 

addition, we request that you forward all future communications regarding this matter to my 

attention as counsel for Webgistix to avoid any delays in communication. 

21124395 
Snell & Wihner 

LLP. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

March 5, 2015 

Page2 

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. 

Enclosures 

cc: Rashawn Rich George 

Senior Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

21124395 

Very truly yours, 
Snell & Wilmer LLP----

LAW OfflCES 

Hughes Cen[er 

3883 Howard Hughes Parkway 

Suite 1 IOO 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5958 

702.784-5200 

702.184.5252 (Fax) 

www.swluw.com 

Patrick G, Hyrne 

(702) 784-520\ 

pbyrne@swlaw.com 

VIA U.S. MAIJFederal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Suite 2Wl 000 

Washington DC 20591 

Pebruary 5, 2015 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 

Re: Webgistix Corporation 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

l>f'.NVF.R 

l-AS VI'.OAS 

\.OSANGtLES 

lOSCABOS 

OR .... NO~ (..\)\.i~Tl' 

HlOf'NIX 

RENO 

S.'\LTL"o)."E L:rry 

1UL-<;l'JN 

This fim1 represents Webgistix Corporation. Pursuant to the letter from Senior Attorney 

Rashawn Rich George, dated of January 22, 2015 (attached), Webgistix hereby requests a formal 

hearing on this matter. Please direct any correspondence regarding the scheduling of the hearing 

or any related matters to my attention. 

Thank you for your cooperation. 

cc: Rashawn Rich George 

Senior Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

20%2167 

Very truly yours, 
To: 

Snell & Wilmer 

--w .P. IAWOF?ICES 

3883 HOV.'3Cd Hughes-Parkway, Suite 1100 

Las Vegas. Nevada 89169 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Att: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1 000 

Washington, DC 20591 

(PGB/Webgistix) 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS R -···· 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION •.• t: c E ~ v ED 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

Complainant, 

vs. 

WEBGISTIX CORPORATION 

Respondent 

JUDGE NOT YET ASSIGNED 

FAA Docket No. 

Judge 

COMPLAINT 

MAR 2 3 20!5 

HF=A.RING DOCKET 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by counsel, hereby files its Complaint, 

pursuant to Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice (14 C.F.R. 13.208), and states as follows: 

I. 

1. On January 22, 2015, Respondent, Webgistix Corporation was advised through a 

Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the 

amount of $63,000. On March 12, 2015, the Agency Attorney received a written request for a 

hearing from the Respondent It appears the Office of Hearing received the appeal from the 

Respondent, Webgistix on or about February 5, 2015. 

II. 

2. On or about October 15, 2012, Webgistix Corporation (hereinafter Webgistix) 

knowingly offered to United Parcel Service (UPS) a non-specification fiberboard box (shipment) 

containing hazardous materials for transportation by air. 

3. The above described shipment was offered by Webgistix on behalf of Future 

Health Today Ltd. 

4. The shipment, assigned UPS tracking number lZ 8E5 A36 12 9133, was offered 

by Webgistix for 3 Day Select air transportation to Elaine Head, 3525 Turtle 

Creek Boulevard, lOA, Dallas, TX 75219. 
5. At all times mentioned herein, the shipment was not accompanied by a Shipper's 

Certification or Declaration of Dangerous Goods. 

6. On or about October 16, 2012, ground-handling personnel at the UPS sort facility 

in Louisville, KY discovered the shipment leaking. 

7. The fiberboard box described in paragraph 1 contained two (2) 4-ounce plastic 

bottles ofMMS Original Water Purification Drops. 

8. Further investigation showed that approximately 2-ounces of the Water 

Purification Drops had leaked into and through the fiberboard container. 

9. Water Purification Drops are classified as a hazardous material under the 

Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) ( 49 

C.F.R. § 172.101). 

10. The proper shipping name of Water Purification Drops is Sodium Chlorite 

Solution. It is in Hazard Class 8, Packing Group II, and has an assigned 

identification number of UN1908. The proper label is CORROSIVE. 

11. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous material for transportation by air 

without shipping papers that included: 

(a) the assigned identification number prescribed for each material; 

(b) the proper shipping name prescribed for each material; 

(c) the hazard class prescribed for each material; 

(d) the packing group prescribed for each material; 

(e) the total net mass per package; and 

(f) the number and type of packages. 

(g) a statement indicating that the shipment is within the limitations 

prescribed for either passenger and cargo aircraft or cargo aircraft only. 

12. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous material for transportation by air 

and failed to: 

(a) certify that the materials were in accordance with the HMR (49 C.F.R. §§ 

171, et seq.) by printing the certification set forth in § 172.204(a) or § 

172.204( c)(l) of the HMR; prepare the required certifications in duplicate; 

and 

(b) add the following statement to the certification: 
"I declare that all of the applicable air transport requirements have been 

met." 

13. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to: 

(a) mark the outer container with the proper shipping name of each hazardous 

material contained therein; 

(b) mark the outer container with the assigned identification number of each 

hazardous material contained therein; 

(c) mark the outer container with standard orientation markings; and 

(d) affix a CORROSIVE label to the outer container. 

14. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to provide emergency response infonnation. 

15. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to provide an emergency response telephone number. 

16. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to make the emergency response information available away from the 

package. 

17. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to ensure that the hazmat employee responsible for preparing the 

shipment was properly trained. 

18. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to instruct each of its officers, agents, and employees having 

responsibility for preparing the shipment as to the applicable regulations. 

19. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to package it so there would be no identifiable release of hazardous 

material to the environment. 

20. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to ensure the closure was secure and leakproof. 

21. Webgistix offered the shipment materials of hazardous materials for 

transportation by air and failed to pack, secure, and cushion the package to 

prevent breakage or leakage. 

22. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to use a leakproof liner, plastic bag or other equally efficient means of 

containment. 
23. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to use an authorized packaging for its transportation. 

III. 

24. By reason of the above Webgistix Corporation violated the following Department 

of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (Title 49 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations): 

(a) Section l71.2(e) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation in commerce when the hazardous material was not properly 

classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled, and in condition for 

shipment. 

(b) Sections l72.200(a) and l72.202(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the identification number 

prescribed for the material as shown in Colunm 4 of the§ 172.101 Table, 

in the manner required by this subpart. 

(c) Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(2) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the proper shipping name 

prescribed for the material in Column 2 of the § 172.101 Table, in the 

manner required by this subpart. 

(d) Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(3) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the hazard class or division 

prescribed for the material as shown in Column 3 of the § 172.101 Table, 

in the manner required by this subpart. 

(e) Sections l72.200(a) and 172.202(a)(4) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the packing group, in Roman 

numerals, prescribed for the material in Column 5 of the§ 172.101 Table, 

if any, of the material covered by the description, in the manner required 

by this subpart. 

(f) Sections 172.200(a) and l72.202(a)(6) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the total net mass, per package, 

in the manner required by this subpart. 

(g) Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(7) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 
material on the shipping papers, including the number and type of 

packages (indicated by description of the package). 

(h) Section 172.203(f) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation when a statement indicating that the shipment is within the 

limitations prescribed for either passenger and cargo aircraft or cargo 

aircraft only was not entered on the shipping paper. 

(i) Section 172.204(a) or (c)(l) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to certify that the material was 

offered for transportation in accordance with this subchapter by printing 

on the shipping paper containing the required shipping description one of 

the certifications set forth in this part. 

(j) Section 172.204( c )(2) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material to an 

aircraft operator for transportation by air and failed to provide two copies 

of the certification required in this section. 

(k) Section 172.204(c)(3) in that Webgistix offered for transportation by air a 

hazardous material authorized for air transportation and failed to add to 

the certification required in this section the following statement: 

"I declare that all of the applicable air transport requirements have been 

met." (Effective October 1, 2006.) 

(1) Section 172.30l(a) in that Webgistix offered for transportation a 

hazardous material in a non-bulk packaging and failed to mark the 

package with the proper shipping name and identification number 

(preceded by "UN" or "NA", as appropriate) for the material as shown in 

the § 172.101 table. 

(m) Sections 172.300(a) and 172.312(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a nonbulk combination package having inner packagings containing liquid 

hazardous materials for transportation and failed to properly pack the 

package of liquid hazardous material with closures upward. 

(n) Sections 172.300(a) and 172.312(a)(2) in that Webgistix offered a nonbulk combination package having inner packagings containing liquid 

hazardous materials for transportation and failed to legibly mark the 

package with standard orientation markings, on two opposite vertical sides 

of the package with the arrows pointing in the correct upright direction. 

(o) Sections 172.400 and 172.402(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered for 

transportation a package containing a hazardous material and failed to 

label the package with primary and subsidiruy hazard labels as specified in 

Column 6 of the §172.101 Table. 
(p) Section 172.600(c) in that Webgistix offered for transportation a 

hazardous material and failed to make the emergency response 

information immediately available for use at all times the hazardous 

material was present, and failed to make such information, including an 

emergency response telephone number, immediately available to any 

government agency responding to an incident involving hazardous 

materials or conducting an investigation which involves a hazardous 

material. 

( q) Sections 172.600 and 172.602(b )(2) in that Webgistix offered for 

transportation a hazardous material for transportation and failed to make 

the emergency response information available for use away from the 

package containing the hazardous material. 

(r) Section 172.604(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation and failed to provide a 24-hour emergency response 

telephone number (including the area code or international access code) 

which was monitored at all times the hazardous material was in 

transportation, including storage incidental to transportation, for use in the 

event of an emergency involving the hazardous material. 

(s) Section 173.1(b) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation and failed to follow its duty to instruct each of its officers, 

agents, and employees having responsibility for preparing hazardous 

materials for shipment as to applicable regulations of this subchapter. 

(t) Section 172.702(a) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation and failed to ensure that each of its hazmat employees was 

trained in accordance with the requirements prescribed in this subpart. 

(u) Sections 172.702(a) and 172.704(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that its hazmat 

employee training included general awareness/familiarity training 

designed to provide familiarity with the requirements of this subchapter 

and to enable the employee to recognize and identify hazardous materials 

consistent with the hazard communication standards of this subchapter. 

(v) Sections 172.702(a) and 172.704(a)(2) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that its hazmat 

employee training included function specific training concerning 

requirements of this subchapter which were specifically applicable to the 

functions the employee performed. 

(w) Sections 172.702(a) and 172.704(a)(3) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that its hazmat 

employee training included safety training concerning - (i) emergency 

response information; (ii) measures to protect the employee from hazards 
associated with hazardous materials to which they may be exposed in the 

work place, including specific measures the hazmat employer has 

implemented to protect employees from exposure; and (iii) methods and 

procedures for avoiding accidents, such as the proper procedure for 

handling packages containing hazardous materials. 

(x) Sections 172.702(a) and 172.704(a)(4) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that each of its 

hazmat employees received training that provides an awareness of security 

risks associated with hazardous materials transportation and methods 

designed to enhance transportation safety, including a component covering 

how to recognize and response to possible security threats. 

(y) Sections 172.702(a) and 172.704(a)(5) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that each of its 

hazmat employees received training concerning the required security plan 

and its implementation, including company security objectives, specific 

security procedures, employee responsibilities, actions to take in the event 

of a security breach, and the organizational security structure. 

(z) Section 173.24(b)(l) in that Webgistix failed to use a package which was 

designed, constructed, maintained, filled, its contents so limited, and 

closed, so that under conditions normally incident to transportation, there 

would be no identifiable release of hazardous material to the environment. 

(aa) Section 173.24(f)(l) in that Webgistix failed to use a package which had 

closures so designed and closed that under conditions (including the 

effects of temperature and vibration) normally incident to transportation, 

there would be no identifiable release of hazardous materials to the 

environment from the opening to which the closure was applied and the 

closure was secure and leakproof. 

(bb) Section 173.27(a) in that Webgistix offered for transportation aboard 

aircraft a package containing a Class 8 hazardous material and failed to 

use packagings conforming to the requirements of part 178 of this 

subchapter at the Packing Group II performance level. 

(cc) Section 173.27(c) in that Webgistix failed to ensure that the packaging 

was designed and constructed to prevent leakage that may be caused by 

changes in altitude and temperature during transportation aboard aircraft. 

( dd) Section 173 .27( d) in that Webgistix failed to ensure stoppers, corks or 

other such friction-type closures were held securely, tightly and effectively 

in place by positive means, and that each screw-type closure on any 

packaging was secured to prevent closure from loosening due to vibration 

or substantial change in temperature. 
(ee) Section 173.27( e)(3) in that Webgistix offered a package containing 

hazardous liquids in Class 3, 4, 5, 6, or 8, in glass, earthenware, plastic or 

mental inner packagings and failed to use a means of containing the liquid 

in the form of a leakproof liner, plastic bag or other equally efficient 

means of containment in the event of leakage. 

(ff) Section 173.202 in that Webgistix offered for transportation a package 

containing liquid hazardous material in Packing Group II when §172.101 

of this subchapter specified that it be packaged under this section and 

failed to use non-bulk packagings prescribed in this section confonning to 

the general packaging requirements of subpart B of part 173, to the 

requirements of part 178 of this subchapter at the Packing Group I or II 

performance level (unless otherwise excepted), and to the requirements of 

the special provisions of Column 7 of the § 172.101 Table. 

25. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Section 5123(a), Webgistix Corporation is subject to a civil 

penalty not lower than $250 ($450 for training-related violations), nor greater than $75,000 

($175,000 if death, serious illness, severe injury, or substantial property damage results), for each 

violation of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations. 

26. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of $63,000 is 

appropriate. 

WHEREFORE, the Agency, by counsel respectfully requests that the Administrative Law Judge 

enter an order that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $63,000. 

ally ~bmitt."" thi~ 1'1 %_ doy of M"reh, 2015. 

~ 

Senior Attorney 

Office ofthe Regional Counsel 

PLEASE NOTE: 

Pursuant to Title 14 CPR Section 13.209(a), you are required to file a written answer to this 

Complaint, or a written Motion to Dismiss if appropriate, not later than 30 days after the date 

shown on the Certificate of Service which follows. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Complaint has been mailed this date by Federal 

Express Mail to the following: 

Hearing Docket Clerk 

FAA, AGC-430, Suite 2Wl000 

Wilbur Wright Building 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Webgistix Corporation 

Attn: President 

127 East Warm Springs Rd. 

Las Vegas, NV 89119 

W ebgistix Corporation 

Attn: President 

880 Wigwam Parkway 

Ste. 120 

Henderson, NV 89014 

Patrick G. Byrne 

Snell & Wilmer L.L.P. 

Law Offices 

Hughes Center 

3883 Howard Hughes Parkway 

Suite 1100 

Dated 

(original+ 1 copy)