U.S. Department ofTransportation Federal Aviation Administration 

## MAR 1 9 

## 20151 FEDERAL EXPRESS MAIL Hearing Docket Clerk FAA, AGC-430, Suite 2Wl000 Wilbur WrightBuilding 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 232015 

## HEARING DOCKET

Re: In the Matter ofWebgistix CorporationFAA Case No. 2013S0700031 Enclosedherewithplease find a copy ofarequest for hearing and the original and one copyof the Complaint inthe above-referencedproceeding. TheFAArequests that the hearinginthis matterbeheld inthe Las Vegas, Nevada area, and expects that the hearing will last two days. Please address all communications for the FAAto the undersigned, at: Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, ASO-7 SouthernRegion 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337 Telephone: (404) 305-5200, facsimile (404) 305-5223.



# ~:;:'~r:?~

**~HAWN~~ORGE** Senior Attorney Office ofthe Regional Counsel Enclosures

# Snell &

# Wilmet LLP. LAW OFFICES Hughes Center 3883 HowardHughes 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 FEDERALEXPRESS AND U.S. MAIL
Federa1 AviationAdministration 600 Independence Avenue SW WilburWrightBuilding Suite 2W1000 Washington DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 Re: Webgistix Corporation Dear Sir/Madam: 

### ' 1- ; .'.../ ... ;, \
'·. 

### 1 2 DENVER LAS VEGAS LOS ANGELES

LOSCABOS ORANGECOUNTY PHOEN[X

RENO SALT U.KECITY 11JCSON

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

**~,,)t_j 'llH<.i·~**  Rt:(;IUN

This finn represents Webgistix Corporation. I am writingto confirmthat Webgistixhas timely requesteda formal hearing onthe above matter. OnFebruary 5, 2015, my clientfiled a requestfor formal hearing. I have attached a copy ofthat request at Tab 1, along withthe envelope showing the date the request was mailed. Despiterequesting thehearing, Webgistixrecently received a letter from Rashawn Rich George,

a Senior Attorney assigned to this matter, entitled "Order Assessing Civil Penalty." I have attached a copy ofthis letter for yourreference. This letter fails to reference ourrequest for hearing anddemands immediate payment ofthe penalty. As confirmed in my attached letter, Webgistix did not consent to the proposed civil penalty and requested a formal hearing. Accordingly, we againrequestthat you schedule the hearing and proceed accordingly. In addition, we requestthatyou forward all future communications regarding this matter to my attention as counsel for Webgistix to avoid any delays incommunication.

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 ofthe 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 VIAU.S. MAIJFederal AviationAdministration 800 IndependenceAvenue SW WilburWright Building Suite 2Wl000 WashingtonDC20591 Pebruary 5, 2015

Attention: HearingDocketClerk 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 RashawnRich George, dated ofJanuary 22, 2015 (attached), Webgistixhereby requests a formal hearing on thismatter. Please direct any correspondenceregardingthe scheduling ofthe hearing

or any related mattersto myattention. Thank youfor your cooperation.

cc: RashawnRichGeorge SeniorAttorney Office oftheRegional Counsel

20%2167 Verytruly 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) ,;;,':'".'CS Pt'::,·,:;.-,
**c-~** '·,;-

**~· <~~~**  **~:;:fr~r;~~E~·:·.:·~=**

)" :q s 00.90°

c·:::;;;;:,::y::::· **~:cs-:;:; :-:~::** 

Mt.,tL£0 **p~,::.--r., /'~···.**  ·:.·D, :-<-' r:;U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

# R-···· FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION •.• 

# t:

# cE

**~**

# vED

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, Complainant,
vs. WEBGISTIX CORPORATION Respondent

JUDGE NOT YET ASSIGNED FAADocketNo. Judge

COMPLAINT 

## MAR 2320!5 

## HF=A.RING DOCKET

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), by counsel, hereby files its Complaint, pursuant to Rule 208 ofthe Rules ofPractice (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) containinghazardous materials for transportation by air. 3. The above described shipment was offered by Webgistix on behalf of Future HealthToday 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 accompaniedby a Shipper's Certification orDeclaration ofDangerous Goods.
6. On or about October 16, 2012, ground-handlingpersonnel at the UPS sort facility in Louisville, KY discoveredthe shipmentleaking.
7. The fiberboard box described in paragraph 1 contained two (2) 4-ounce plastic bottles ofMMS Original WaterPurificationDrops. 8. Further investigation showed that approximately 2-ounces of the Water Purification Drops hadleaked into and throughthe 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 identificationnumber ofUN1908. Theproperlabel is CORROSIVE.
11. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous material for transportation by air without shippingpapers that included: (a) the assigned identificationnumberprescribed for eachmaterial; (b) the proper shippingname prescribedfor eachmaterial; (c) thehazard class prescribedfor eachmaterial; (d) thepackinggroup prescribedfor eachmaterial; (e) the total netmass perpackage; and (f) the number and type ofpackages. (g) a statement indicating that the shipment is within the limitations prescribedfor eitherpassenger 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 withthe HMR (49 C.F.R. §§ 171, et seq.) by printing the certification set forth in § 172.204(a) or § 172.204( c)(l) ofthe HMR; prepare the required certifications induplicate; and (b) add the following statementto the certification:"I declare that all ofthe applicable air transport requirements have been met." 13. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to: (a) mark the outer container withtheproper shipping name ofeachhazardous material containedtherein; (b) mark the outer container with the assigned identification number ofeach hazardous material containedtherein; (c) markthe outer container with standard orientation markings; and (d) affix a CORROSIVE label to the outer container. 14. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to provide emergencyresponse infonnation.
15. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to provide an emergency responsetelephonenumber.
16. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous 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 shipmentwas properly trained. 18. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous 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 applicableregulations.
19. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to package it so there would be no identifiable release ofhazardous material to the environment. 20. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to ensurethe closure was secure andleakproof. 21. Webgistix offered the shipment materials of hazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to pack, secure, and cushion the package to preventbreakage orleakage. 22. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to use a leakproofliner, plasticbag or other equally efficient means of containment.23. Webgistix offered the shipment ofhazardous materials for transportation by air and failed to use an authorized packaging for its transportation. III. 24. Byreason ofthe above Webgistix Corporationviolatedthe following Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (Title 49 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations): (a) Section l71.2(e) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for transportation in commerce when the hazardous material was notproperly 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 ofthe§ 172.101 Table, in the mannerrequiredbythis 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 mannerrequired bythis 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 ofthe § 172.101 Table, inthe mannerrequiredby 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 ofthe§ 172.101 Table, if any, ofthe material covered bythe description, in the manner required bythis 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, perpackage, inthe manner requiredbythis 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 hazardousmaterial on the shipping papers, including the number and type of packages (indicated bydescription ofthe 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 onlywas not entered on the shippingpaper. (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 setforth inthis part. (j) Section 172.204( c)(2) inthat Webgistix offered a hazardous material to an aircraft operator for transportation by air and failed to provide two copies ofthe certificationrequired inthis 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 inthis sectionthe following statement:

"I declare that all ofthe 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 ofliquidhazardous materialwithclosures 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 orientationmarkings, on two opposite vertical sides ofthepackagewiththe arrows pointinginthe correctupright 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 packagewithprimary and subsidiruyhazard labels as specified in Column 6 ofthe §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 containingthe 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 ofan emergency involvingthe 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 ofits officers, agents, and employees having responsibility for preparing hazardous materials for shipment as to applicable regulations ofthis subchapter. (t) Section 172.702(a) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that each ofits 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 thehazard communication standards ofthis 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 ofthis subchapter which were specifically applicable to the functions the employeeperformed. (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 hazardsassociated 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 ofits hazmat employees received training that provides an awareness ofsecurity 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 ofits 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 ofa 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 wouldbe no identifiable release ofhazardous 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 oftemperature 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 ofcontaining the liquid in the form of a leakproof liner, plastic bag or other equally efficient means ofcontainment in the event ofleakage. (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 ofpart 178 ofthis subchapter at the Packing Group I or II performance level (unless otherwise excepted), and to the requirements of the special provisions ofColumn 7 ofthe §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 greaterthan $75,000 ($175,000 ifdeath, serious illness, severe injury, or substantial property damage results), for each violation ofthe Department ofTransportation Hazardous Materials Regulations. 26. Under the facts and circumstances ofthis case, a civil penalty of$63,000 is appropriate. WHEREFORE, the Agency, by counsel respectfullyrequests that the Administrative Law Judge enter an order that Respondentbe assessed a civil penalty in the amount of$63,000. 

### ally



# ~bmitt.""**thi~** 

# 1'1%_ doy ofM"reh, 

### 2015.

**~** Senior Attorney Office oftheRegional 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 ifappropriate, not later than 30 days after the date shown on the Certificate ofService which follows.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Ihereby certifythat a copy ofthe foregoing Complainthasbeenmailed this datebyFederal ExpressMail to the following: HearingDocket Clerk FAA, AGC-430, Suite 2Wl000 WilburWright Building 600 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Webgistix Corporation Attn: President 127 EastWarm Springs Rd. Las Vegas, NV 89119 Webgistix Corporation Attn: President 880Wigwam 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)