## US IJEPA.RTMENT OF TRANSPORTA.

## TION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASIDNGTON DC

IN THE MATTER OF: 

### EXTRE:MR RNRRDY StJLUTfDNS IN-C. 

# RECEIVED Herein known as the Respondent; 

## DEC 152015 FDMS NO.: FAA-2015-1322 (Civil Penalty Action) 

## HEARING DOCKET Case No. 2015NM730008



## RESPONDENT'S A.NSWER TO FAA'S JUNE IJ, 

## 2IT15 COMPLAINT.

Notice is hereby given that Samuel K. Burlum, Sui Juris, 

### Petitioner Defendant, in proper person, on behalf of EXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS, INC., above named, hereby makes the following MOTION before THE HONORABLE JUDGE J.E. SULLIVAN, U.S. Administrative Law Judge, Office ofHearings, M-20, U.S. Department ofTransportation, in the order entered in this matter in 2015. This order has been entered in the docket as evidenced by the official court record.



### tlUS RESPUNSE ISliY THE RESPUNDENT 

## in "tlte MATTER" ofEXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS, FDMS NO.: FAA-2015-1322 (Civil Penalty Action), Case No. 2015NM730008, known herein as 

### "the MATTER" or "this MATTER", here 

### by PROVIDE TillS INFORMATION AND RESPONSE;



### WHEREAS: FAA'S ciail'n ofthe 

### kb:sf>ONDENI tailed to respond 

### AND the 

### FAA MOrtoNS should be DENIED and/or VACATED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS stated herein; AND the Respondent as the Court for this Consideration in this matter, under the Good Cause Standard;WHEREAS: The RRSPONDEN'I' did in-fact respond to the FAA's Jline 9· 2015 corl1plaillt in a prior submitted response, in the document served to Cheryl M. Jones, Senior Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel, FAA, in the matter referenced herein, in the document labeled, 

### "RESPONSE TO THE ALLEGEATIONS MADE IN NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY, REQUEST FOR TELEPHONIC INFORMAL COONFERENCE AND REQUEST FOR HEARING," served to ilie Complainant on March, 17,2015 and received by the FAA on March 19, 2015; (Sec Attachment 1);



### WHEREAS: The RESPONDENT not having a clear understanding ofthe process ofthe Court, since the RESPONDENT is not a trained legal counsel, and is acting in a limited capacity, with liinlted legal knowledge, was iiiiware that 

### H had to Respond to Hie June 9, 

### 2\lls Complaint, sii1ce the Respondent bad already stated its objections and response in the document previously served in March 17, 2015 and received by the FAA on March 19, 2015; (See Attachment I); therefore RESPONDENT with limited knowledge ofthe actual process in Responding, failed to do so; '\Vlt:EREAS: 1'he RESPONDENT not havii1g the opportunity to cm1siilt with a legal representative on their behalf in this matter, and is acting in a limited capacity for reasons previously mentioned, did not have the proper guidance or information on how to properly deal with the FAA's June 9, 2015 Complaint, therefore RESPONDENT with limited knowledge of the actual process in Responding, failed to do so;

SO IN THIS DOCUMENT 

## tm: RESPONDENT i'OVlDES TO THiS COURT THEIR OFFICIAL REPONSE EVEN THOUGH THE FAA ALREADY HAD THIS 

### INFORMATION PRVIOUSLY SERVED TO THEM PRIOR TO THEIR JUNE 9, 2015 COMPLAINT;

RESPONDENT'S HEREBY OFFERS THIS ANSWER TO THE FAA'S JUNE 9, 2015 COMPLAINT AND ITS AFFRIMED DEFENSE(S);

1. EXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS ("EES" or "the Company", also known as the "Respondent,") does not deny this allegation; it should be noted for the record thatthe Company did in fact engage with an authorized agent for the Shipper, aka Employee at Staples ofFranklin,New Jersey, who was the dedicatedstaffer assigned to process oi·ders 

# for United Parcel Sei-vice (UPS). This authorized agent for UPS did in fact engage in a discussion with the Company's staffer which the Company had asked for the authorized agent to check their rules, policies, and other regulations, ifthe item described in #2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty, whether this item could even be shipped. The authorized agent checked with their rules, and replied "as long as you have a MSDS" it can be shipped." 

### 1. The t:oinpany does not deny this allegation; however ihe iicins, 

### (12) 14 oiiiice Gold's iire:ik Parts Cleaner canisters, were actually packaged by the authorized agent ofUPS. 3. The Company denies this allegation and/or finding for it does not have the expertise or admit or deny this allegation and was not aware ofsuch regulation. 4. The Company does not deny this allegation; however it did provide the required MSDS as it was instructed by the authorized agent ofUPS, and the Company provided an invoice oforigin; also requested by UPS to accornjxiny the package. Respondent \V111 i-evea1 Its evidei1ces during the proper time ofdue diligence and discovery; 5. The Company does not deny this allegation, however the Company, as per the instructions of UPS, provided an MSDS and invoice ofproduct origin, which contain the contact information of the entity who offers/manufacturers the product, who would be responsible for handling any type ofemergency situation regarding said product that was designated for shipping. Respondent will reveal ils evidences diifing the proper iiffie 

### cifdiie diligeilce and discovery;

6. The Company denies this allegation for 

### it does not have proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information on said mentioned form in item 6 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. Company will need time to perform due diHgence arid discovery. 7. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information on said mentioned shipping paper, mentioned in item 7 of Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. 8. !heCompany denies this allegation for ii does nothave the pi·oofs whether 

### ii did or did not provide said mentioned information on said mentioned shipping paper, mentioned in item 8 of Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. 9. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said menHoi1ed il1forri1aiiori on said mel1tiol1ed shipping paper, incl1tiol1ed i!1 iieill 9 of Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom waswoo'king on beha:tfofthe shipper, UPS. Company provided

# to Hie shippei·, UPS all information, documents, and things requested by the shipper at that time upon purchasing the shipping services, including MSDS and invoice oforigin. Respondent will reveal its evidences during the proper time ofdue diligence and discovery; I0. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 10 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need tiine io perfmm due diligei1ce and discoveiy Company was uiider the advisemci1t and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. 11. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 11 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will needtime to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was woi-king oil behalfofthe shipper, 

### UPS. 12. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 12 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, 

### UPS. 13. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 13 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. Companyprovided to the shipper, UPS all information, documents, and things requested by the shipper at that tilne upon ptii'chasiiig the shipping services, iiicTiidiiigMSDS iiiid iiwoice oforigin. Respondent will reveal its evidences during the proper time ofdue diligence and discovery; As to items and sections (a) through (m) ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Peualty; 14. The Company hereby;

a. denies this allegation for it does noi have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 13 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. Company provided to the shipper, UPS all information, documents, and things requested by the shipper at that time upon purchasing the shipping services, including MSDS and invoice of origin. Respondent will reveal its evidences during the proper time ofdue diligence and discovery; b. The Company is the not the shipper, but a patron ofthe Shipper, UPS;c. Whereas UPS Is the actual slilpper, providing the actual iranspoiiation, wno was hired by the Company to advise the Company on how to handle such a type of shipment, via their authorized agent whom worked behalfofthe shipper, UPS; d. Whereas the Company is not an expert in the areas offreight, shipping, logistics, transfer, packaging, and/or other sub categories offreight handling, package delivery, and relied solely on the expertise ofthe authorized staffwhom worked on behalfofUPS for this knowledge CajJihil; io advise the Company on the bestpractices on shipping mentioned product 

### iii Hein 2 of the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty;

e. Whereas the Company does not regularly attempt to ship the type ofproduct described in item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; for this was the first time the Company attempted to ship such type ofproduct; 

### t Whereas ilie C6mpal1y is 

### i10t a mal1l!fadu1'er or distributor ofthe said mel1tiol1ed product described in item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; whereas the Company made the purchase ofthis product at the request ofa third party; in which the product was proposed to be shipped to; g. Whereas the Company relied on the shipper's expertise, and the expertise ofthe authorized agent whom worked on behalfofthe shipper (UPS), and had asked the party(ies) to verify, review, arid che& info the policies,jirocecfures, practices, arid regulations \Vheiher t)i· 

### i16t theproduct mentioned in item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty could even be shipped, and ifthere were any additional instructions in which the Company would have to comply with to make sure thatthe shipment made it to its final destination; And therefore; 

### 15. The Company disagi·ees with the Notice ofProposed Civil Venally; aiid the proposed civil penalty in the Amount of$19,400.00 (nineteen thousand four hundred dollars) by the FAA for mentioned herein and;

a. The alleged shipment is the first ofits kind by the Company, and therefore the Company finds the amount ofthe proposed fine grossly inflated related to the actual alleged offenses; b. the Company has not aiiel11pted to ship any other related product ovei·seas or otherwise since it has received the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty;

c. The Company believes that this is an isolated incident, and has never had any other type ofissue, regulatory infraction, or faced any other type ofinvestigation having products and/or items shipped by UPS for the Company; d. the Company was under the advisement ofthe adl!a! shipping company, who provided the shipping services, UPS, before the item in question, mentioned in item 2 oftheNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, was prepared, packaged, in front of, and tii1der the adviseinent by UPS, later shipped by UPS;

e. There is no actual mathematical metric provided as to how the FAA came to the final conclusion ofthe proposed $19,400 civil penalty and find that it was decided on arbitrarily, in a capricious manner; 

### f. the Cmnpai1y, having relied on the expertise ofthe shipper, UPS, 

## and lis authorized agent, would have complied with any additional policy, procedure, rule, and/or regulation ifit was advised to do so by both the authorized agent working on behalfofUPS and the actual shipper UPS; g. The Company is willing provided additional information ofits Evidences for consideration in the matter; h. The Company cannot affoi·d such a fine, for itwouldsubjectthe Company illto a matter ofundue burden, financial hardship, and could possibly cause the Company to shut down part or in whole its operations. Company is a start-up organization, with little or no cash flow at this time. Company is willing to provide its "financial proofs" within the due diligence and discoveryperiod at a later date unspecified at this time; AFFIRMED DEFENSES



### First Affirmed llefeiise The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the Company is not the shipper; the Company hired UPS and subscribed to UPS's services to perform the actual shipping duties, whereas it relied on the expertise and advisement ofUPS and its authorized agents to comply within the scope ofthe law regarding shipping product in question in this matter; and therefore it is the responsibility ofUPS to make sure shipments are withiri the scope ()freguhition and compliance; expertise and sei-vkes ii1 which the Corripany paid for, and later provided by the actual shipper UPS; Second Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the Company provided any and all requested information to the authorized agent working on behalfofUPS; See Evidences; at tne time ofpackiging the items in question mentioned iii item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; and the Company had verbally requested information ifthere was any other documents, materials, and things required in order to have the item shipped by UPS; Third Affirmed DefenseThe proposed civilpenalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in pali cftie to the 

### tad that the Company is not in the logistics, freight, shipping, handling, import/export business and shipping overseas is not a part ofits core business; Fourth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact the Company is iioi a resellei', distributor, arid/or iiiarii.ifaciui·er oHhe product 

### iii question il1 iieiii 2 of the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; Fifth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact the allegations are "stacked" and are found grossly embellished and repetitive to make the sensitivity ofthis matter seem more heightened or advanced than what it really it is; 

### SiiUiAff1rmed 

### Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the FAA did not apprise the Company ofthe "nature and cause" ofthe allegation; as it states Under the sixth amendment ofthe US Constitution, "the accused shall enjoy the right

...to be informed ofthe nature and cause ofthe allegation," in which was not afforded to Company in the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty;

The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the FAA investigation and findings are arbitrary and capricious in nature; Eighth Affirmed Defense 

# The pi·ojxised civil penalty should be disinissedMicaied 

### iii whole or

# in part due 

### ii1 the fact the imposed timeline to respond did not allow the Company to seek fonnal opinion ofCounsel in this matter; to retain counsel, orto hire counsel to represent them in this matter; therefore violating the US Constitutional rights ofthe Company afforded to it under the Sixth Amendment ofthe US Constitution; Ninth Affirmed Defense Tne proposed civil permhy should be disinissed/vacaied

# in whole or in part due to the explanation on how the FAA arrived at the monetary penalty of$19,400 proposed in its Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; nor does it provide a detail evaluation ofthe actual matter ofthe mathematical metrics ofthe penalty; except in discussing the "maximum" in each penalty circumstance; Tenth Affirmed Defensethe pi·oposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in 

### jmi due to the fact that there was no violations resulting in the death, serious illness, or severe injury to any person, or substantial destruction ofproperty, in any ofthe alleged accounts ofviolations; Eleventh Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that there were no physicalvkiinJs, whmn experienced a loss ofbodily 

### ill jury or property, llOt were there any real damages as a result ofthe alleged actions by the Company, or by any other party; Twelfth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the lack ofthe investigative findings explained in the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; whereas the FAA failed 

# to disclose whether or not they ii1vestigated oi· proposed a fine to the acfual shippe1', UPS, and/oi· the shipper's authorized agent whom worked on behalfofthe shipper at the time in which the package was prepared for shipment; Thirteenth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the size oflhe penally seems to be unjust for a first o!fense; Fourteenth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the Company cannot financially comply with the unjust penalty and would have to abandon in whole or in part ofits operation for such a penalty would create undue burden upon the Company, thus the Company woiild face financial consequence ofn1agriitt1de; iii which it caiiiKit afford; Fifteenth Affirmed Defense The civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the application of doctrines oflaches, waiver, estoppel, and unclean hands; Sixteenth Affirmed Dcfciisc The civil penalty should be dismissed and vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the FAA cannot prove any "real" damages; Seventeenth Affirmed Defense The civil pei1alty should be disinissedlvacated ii1 whole or in part diie to the fact ofTack offacts presented by accompanied by any "proofs" that support the FAA investigation; findings; or claims;

### Eigllteeiitli Affiriiiei:I 

# nereiisii The FAA has acted in bad faith and in much hast to take advantage ofthe fact that the Respondent lacks legal knowledge in dealing with this matter; therefore violating the US Constitutional rights ofthe Respondent afforded to it under the Fifth and Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution;

The FAA main intent in the matter is "Financial Gain" under forced acceptance ofa contract, against the will ofthe Respondent; therefore violating the US Constitutional rights ofthe Respondent afforded to them under ofthe US Constitution; in which the Fourteenth Amendment ofthe US Constitution states, "

...nor shall any State deprive anyperson of life, liberty, or property withoutprocess of law, nor deny to anyperson within its jurisdiction the equal proieciions of the la-W," 

### iii which the Respoiidei1t is afforded these rignts; 

### the basis 

### ofthis idea is explained under Section I ofthe U.S. Code; Twentieth Affirmed Defense The FAA knowingly violated the Respondent's Seventh Amendment Right afforded to them under the US Constitution by forcing Judgement without the Respondent being afforded its 

### fights to a trial by 

### Jury, aud slialll:ic preserved; 

## in \VI1icli llie 

### Seventh Amciidriieiii ofihe US Constitution states, "

... where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of a trial by jury shall be reserved; Twenty-first Affirmed Defense The Respondent has not been afforded its right to discovery ofinformation ofgreat importance, 

### by tlie court

# or by 

### tlie FAA, wliei'eas tiie Respondent Tiiis tile riglit to request stich 

### iiifoiiiiiitloii as to the Federal Open Records Act; Twenty-second Affirmed Defense The Company and/or Respondents to the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty reserves their rights under the US Constitution, also reserve the right to assert additional affirmative defenses as 

## rniiher investigation 

## ana disCovery niay

## reveal; THEREFORE, the Respondent Respectfully Submits this 

### RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO FAA'S JUNE 9, 2015 COMPLAINT to this court within the deadline imposed by the Order of the COURT; dated November 

### 2015; reference "ORDER SETTING DEADLINE 

### FOR THE RESPONDENT TO REPSOND AND SHOW CAUSF:, AN{) RULING ON OTHER RELIEF;

## And

THEREFORE, the Respondent Respectfully Request that its RIGHTS afforded to them under the CONSTITUTION ofthe United States ofAmerica, be fully observed and respected by all parties mentioned herein before this Court, and any other Court in which the Respondent's maHer shall be heard;

And it is said on this date, Monday, December 14, 2015, that it has been given this RESPONSE to the Office ofHearings, M-20, U.S. Department ofTransportation; JUDGE J.E. SULLIVAN, also known as the HORNORABLE JUDGE SULLIVAN, also known as JUDGE SULLIVAN, also known as 

### 1.£. SULLIVAN; as to theii· OfFICIAL CAPlCITY, as weH as 

### their INDIVIDUAL PERSONAL PRIVATE CAPICITY, as well as any oftheir agents, appointees, employees, assistants, peers, known as the "NOTIFIED PARTIES", collectively or as individuals whom represent the COURT acknowledge this RESPONSE

AND:

MR. GLENN H. BROWN, 

### COMPLAINTANT'S COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL COUNSEL, as well as any oftheir agents, appointees, employees, assistants, peers, known as the "NOTIFIED PARTIES", collectively or as individuals whom represent the COMPLAINT ANt, acknowledge 

### Hils RESPONSE;

And it is said; The COURT has THIRTY (30) business days to respond to this RESPONSE; and failure to respond will automatically VACATE and DISMISS this MATTERbefore the COURT; and the case will be disposed ofwithout any fine and orjudgment against the RESPONDENT, and will be disposed ofwithout PREJUDICE. Response is to be fOrwarded by the Court to the RESPONDENT to the said address provided in the previously filed MOTION OF NOTICE OF ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE with the Court;

And it is said; The COURT has been OFFICIALLY SERVED this RESPONSE via United States Postal Service, regular alld/or priority mail; arid fax;

## submitted byt**~·"'** "'**~-** - / -·· 

### /**~** '/

. . 

## '- 

# c£{dt c /**~~~~~~>·** Sanruel K. Burlum Defendant; Signed and served 

### on ihis 

### date: Monday, December 14, 2015;

# -J-l' f

# I C(Attention Cheryl M. Jones, Senior Attorney Office ofRegional Counsel FAA Inthe Matter of; US Department ofTransportation-Federal Aviation Administration; Alaskan Region Office ofthe Regional Counsel 222 W. 7th Avenue #14 Anchorage, Alaska 99513 And; Extreme Energy Solutions, Inc. 150 Main Street Ogdensburg, NJ 07439 RE: Case Number: 2015NM730008 RESPONSE TO THEALLEGATIONS MADE IN NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL

PENALTY, REQUEST FOR TELEPHONIC INFORMAL CONFERENCE. AND REQUEST FORHEARING; 1. EXTREME ENERGY SOLUTIONS ("EES" or "the Companf') does not deny this allegation; it shouldbe noted for therecord that the Company did in fact engage with an authorized agent for the Shipper, aka Employee at Staples ofFranklin, New Jersey, who was the dedicated staffer assigned to process orders for United Parcel Service (UPS). This authorized agent for UPS did in fact engage in a discussion withthe Company's staffer which the Companyhad asked for the authorized agent to checktheir rules, policies, and otherregulations, ifthe item described in#2 oftheNotice ofProposedCivil Penalty, could evenbe shipped. The authorized agent checkedwiththeirrules, andreplied "as long as you have a MSDS" it canbe shipped." 2. The Companydoes not deny this allegation; however the items, (12) 14 ounce Gold's Break Parts Cleaner canisters, were actuallypackagedbythe authorized agent ofUPS. 3. The Company denies this allegation and/or fmding for it does not have the expertise or admit or deny this allegation and was not aware ofsuch regulation. 4. The Companydoes not deny this allegation; however it didprovide the required MSDS as it was instructedbythe authorized agent ofUPS, and the Companyprovided aninvoice oforigin; also requested byUPS to accompany thepackage. (See Evidences) 5. The Companydoes not deny this allegation, however the Company, as per theinstructions ofUPS, provided an MSDS and invoice ofproduct origin, which contain the contact information ofthe entity who offers/manufacturers the product, who would be responsible for handling any type ofemergency situation regarding said product that was designated for shipping. (See Evidences) 6. The Companydeniesthis allegationfor it does nothave proofs whetherit did ordidnot provide saidmentioned information on said mentioned form in item 6 ofthe Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty. Companywas under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working onbehalfofthe shipper, UPS. Company will need time to perform due diligence and discovery.

7. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information on said mentioned shipping paper, mentioned in item 7 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will needtime to perform due diligence and discovery. Companywas under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working onbehalfofthe shipper, UPS. 8. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did notprovide said mentioned information on said mentioned shipping paper, mentioned in item 8 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working onbehalfofthe shipper, UPS. 9. The Company denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whether it did or did not provide said mentioned information on said mentioned shipping paper, mentioned in item 9 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will needtime to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working onbehalfofthe shipper, UPS. Companyprovided to the shipper, UPS all information, documents, and things requestedby the shipper at that time upon purchasing the shipping services, including MSDS and invoice oforigin. (See Evidences) 10. TheCompanydenies this allegation for itdoes nothave the proofs whetherit did ordid notprovide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 10 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will needtime to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement andinstruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. 11. TheCompanydenies this allegation for it does not have theproofs whether itdid ordid notprovide said mentioned information, mentioned in item 11 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. 12. TheCompanydenies this allegation for itdoes not have the proofs whetheritdid ordidnotprovide said mentioned information, mentioned initem 12 ofNotice ofProposedCivil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. 13. The Companydenies this allegation for itdoes nothave theproofs whetheritdid ordid notprovide saidmentioned information, mentioned in item 13 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. Companyprovided to the shipper, UPS all information, documents, and things requested bythe shipper at that time upon purchasing the shipping services, including MSDS and invoice oforigin. (See Evidences) As to items and sections (a) through (m) ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; 14. TheCompany hereby;

a. denies this allegation for it does not have the proofs whetherit did or did not provide said mentioned information, mentioned initem 13 ofNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty, and will need time to perform due diligence and discovery. Company was under the advisement and instruction ofthe authorized shipping agent whom was working on behalfofthe shipper, UPS. Company provided to the shipper, UPS all information, documents, and things requested by the shipper at that timeuponpurchasing the shipping services, including MSDS andinvoice oforigin. (See Evidences); b. The Company is the not the shipper, but a patron ofthe Shipper, UPS;

c. Whereas UPS is the actual shipper, providing the actual transportation, who was hired by the Company to advise the Company onhow to handle such a type ofshipment, via their authorized agent whom worked behalfofthe shipper, UPS; d. Whereas the Companyis not an expert in the areas offreight, shipping, logistics, transfer, packaging, and/or other sub categories offreight handling, package delivery, and relied solely onthe expertise ofthe authorized staffwhom worked on behalfofUPS for this knowledge capital; to advise the Companyonthe bestpractices on shipping mentioned productin item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty;

e. Whereas the Company does not regularly attempt to ship the type ofproduct described in item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; for this was the first time the Company attempted to ship such type ofproduct; f. Whereas the Company is not a manufacturer or distributor ofthe saidmentioned product described initem 2 ofthe Notice ofProposedCivil Penalty; whereas the Company made the purchase ofthis product at the request ofa third party; in which the product was proposed to be shipped to;g. Whereas the Companyrelied on the shipper's expertise, and the expertise ofthe authorized agent whom worked on behalfofthe shipper (UPS), and had asked the party(ies) to verify, review, and check into the policies, procedures, practices, and regulations whether ornotthe productmentionedinitem 2 oftheNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty could even be shipped, and ifthere were any additional instructions inwhich the Company would have to comply with to make sure that the shipment made it to its fmal destination; And therefore; 15. The Company disagrees with the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; and the proposed civil penalty in the Amount of$19,400.00 (nineteen thousand four hundred dollars) bythe FAAfor mentioned herein and;

a. The alleged shipment is the first ofits kindbythe Company, andtherefore the Company finds the amount ofthe proposed fine grosslyinflated related to the actual alleged offenses; b. The Companyhas not attempted to ship any other related product overseas or otherwise since it has received the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty;

c. The Companybelieves that this is anisolated incident, and has never had any other type ofissue, regulatory infraction, orfaced any other type ofinvestigation having products and/or items shipped byUPS for the Company; d. The Company was under the advisement ofthe actual shipping company, who provided the shipping services, UPS, before the item in question, mentioned in item 2 of the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty, was prepared, packaged, in front of, andunder the advisement byUPS, later shipped byUPS;

e. There is no actual mathematical metric provided as to how the FAA came to the final conclusion ofthe proposed $19,400 civil penalty and find that it was decided on arbitrarily; f. The Company, having relied on the expertise ofthe shipper, UPS, and its authorized agent, would have compliedwith any additional policy, procedure, rule, and/or regulation ifitwas advisedto do so byboththe authorizedagentworking onbehalfofUPS and the actual shipper UPS; g. The Companyhas provided additional information ofits Evidences for consideration in the matter; h. The Company cannot afford such a fine, for it would subject the Companyinto a matter ofundueburden, fmancial hardship, and could possibly cause the Companyto shut down part orin whole its operations. Companyis a start-up organization, with little orno cash flow atthis time. Companyis willing to provide its "financial proofs" within the duediligence and discovery period at a later date UDBpecified at this time; 

### AFFIRMED DEFENSES

First Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or inpart due to the fact that the Companyis not the shipper; the Company hiredUPS and subscribed to UPS's services to perform the actual shipping duties, whereas itrelied onthe expertise and advisement ofUPS and its authorized agents to comply within the scope ofthe law regarding shipping product in question in this matter; andtherefore it is the responsibility ofUPS to make sure shipments are within the scope ofregulation and compliance; expertise and services in which the Companypaid for, and laterprovidedby the actual shipper UPS; SecondMfirmed Defense The proposed civilpenalty should be dismissed/vacated inwhole or inpart due to the fact that the Companyprovided any and all requested information to the authorized agent working onbehalfofUPS; See Evidences; at the time ofpackaging the items in question mentioned in item 2 oftheNotice ofProposed Civil Penalty; and the Companyhad verbally requested information ifthere was any other documents, materials, and things required in orderto have the item shipped byUPS; Third AffirmedDefense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole orin part due to the fact thatthe Companyis notinthe logistics, freight, shipping, handling, import/exportbusiness and shipping overseas is not a part ofits core business; Fourth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated inwhole or in part due to the fact the Companyis not a reseller, distributor, and/ormanufactureroftheproduct inquestionin item 2 ofthe Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; Fifth Mfirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated inwhole or in part due to the fact the allegations are "stacked" and are found grossly embellished and repetitive to make the sensitivity ofthis matter seem more heightened or advanced than whatit really it is; Sixth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated inwhole or in part due to the fact that the FAAdid not apprise the Company ofthe "nature and cause" ofthe allegation; as itstates Under the sixth amendment ofthe US Constitution, "the accused shall enjoy the right

...to be informed ofthe nature and cause ofthe allegation," inwhichwas not afforded to Companyin the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; Seventh AffirmedDefense The proposed civil penalty shouldbe dismissed/vacated in whole orinpart due to the fact that the FAA investigation and fmdings are arbitrary and capricious innature; Eighth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or inpart due to the fact the imposed timeline to respond didnot allow the Company to seek formal opinion of Counsel in this matter; to retaincounsel, or to hire counsel to represent them inthis matter; therefore violating the US Constitutional rights ofthe Company afforded to itunder the Sixth Amendment ofthe US Constitution; Ninth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty shouldbe dismissed/vacated in whole or inpart due to the explanation on how the FAA arrived at the monetary penalty of$19,400 proposedinits Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty; nor does itprovide a detail evaluation ofthe actual matter ofthe mathematical metrics ofthe penalty; except in discussing the "maximum" in each penalty circumstance; Tenth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or inpart due to the fact that there was no violations resulting in the death, serious illness, or severe injuryto any person, or substantial destruction ofproperty, in any ofthe alleged accounts ofviolations; Eleventh Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or inpart due to the fact that there were no physical victims, whom experienced a loss ofbodily injury orproperty, nor were there anyreal damages as a result ofthe alleged actions bythe Company, orby any otherparty; Twelfth Affirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole orinpart due to the lack ofthe investigative findings explainedintheNotice ofProposedCivil Penalty; whereas the FAAfailed to disclose whether ornot they investigated orproposed a fine to the actual shipper, UPS, and/orthe shipper's authorized agent whom worked onbehalfofthe shipper at the time in which the package was prepared for shipment;Thirteenth Affrrmed Defense The proposed civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole orin part due to the fact that the size ofthe penalty seems to beunjust for a first offense; Fourteenth Mfirmed Defense The proposed civil penalty shouldbe dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the Company cannot fmancially comply with the unjustpenalty and would have to abandon inwhole orinpart ofits operation for such a penaltywould create undue burden upon the Company, thus the Company would face fmancial consequence ofmagnitude; in which it cannot afford; FifteenthAffirmed Defense The civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the application of doctrines oflaches, waiver, estoppel, andunclean hands; Sixteenth Affrrmed Defense The civil penalty shouldbe dismissed/vacated in whole or in part due to the fact that the FAA cannot prove any "real" damages; Seventeenth Affirmed Defense The civil penalty should be dismissed/vacated in whole orin part due to the fact oflack of facts presented by accompanied by any "proofs" that support the FAA investigation; findings; or claims; Eighteenth Affrrmed Defense The Company and/or Respondents to the Notice ofProposed Civil Penaltyreserves their rights under the US Constitution, also reserve the right to assert additional affirmative defenses as finiher investigation and discoverymay reveal; REQUEST FOR INFORMAL CONFERENCE WITH FAA ATTONEY The Companyreserves its right and formally request a telephonic informal conference with the FF A Attorneyhandling this matter, to discuss the issue for possible earlyresolve; to be scheduled in about 30 days from the time ofreceiving service ofthis response; PRO-OFFER OF ALTERNATIVE REDUCED PENALTY The Companyhas offered an alternative reduced penalty to bring this matter to a quick resolve on the form ofREPLY TO NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY (HAZARDOUS MATERIALS); inthe event the FAA does not accept this offer, theCompany suggest the FAA Attorney and the Companyhave a second telephonic inf01mal conference to bring this matter to a resolve; 

### REQUEST FOR HEARING BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Inthe event the Company andthe FAAcannot come to a reasonable resolve to this matter, the Companyreserves its rights and request for this Matterto beheard inCourtbya Judge; andthat the matter beheard in the Eastern Region; REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY The Companyreserves all rights to due diligence, discovery and its own abilityto perform its own investigation including butnot limited to within its discovery request; right to depose witnesses, documents, photographs, audio/video recordings, materials and things, communications (including electronic); and other items it deems relevant in providing a defense inthis matter. The Company will make its formal motions to discovery at a later date unspecified herein; TIMELY OF REPSONSE BYFAA The Companygrants the FAA 30 days to respond to the Company's response andrequest; andinthe eventthe Companyisnotprovided a responsebythe FAAAttorneyhandling the matter, we will move to dismiss the matter in its entirety;

WHEREFORE; the Respondents, the Company, Extreme Energy Solutions, Inc., hereby respectfullyrequest that the Notice ofProposed Civil Penalty, penalties, and fines set forththereinbedismissed withoutprejudice and vacatedinits entirety for any other and further for the Court should findjust andproper.

Dated: March 

### 17, 

### 20J:i1



# ~. .· . .

# /(./



# -/~.",~~ By: c· GC•. ,.,



### ~~ **-~~~** Samuel K. Burlum, President/CEO ofand onbehalfof; Extreme Energy Solutions, Inc.

### CERTIFICATION OF TIMELY SERVICE I herebyhave responded witlrin the time frame allotted bythe FAA Attorneywitlrin the NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY, and hereby serve the Company's response via email and certified mail through the United States Parcel Service; 

### ' I Dated: Mar h 11,2015 

### ' ,/ //!

### ~~~ By0 .•

### J~:yt···{ 

# ....**'~** 

# - Samuel 

### K. 

### Birrlum, President/CEO ofand onbehalfof; Extreme Energy Solutions, Inc.

### CERTIFfCATE OJ' 

### SERVICE:

This DOCUMENT hereby certifies and bares witness to the actions ofSAMUEL K. BURLUM, has served proper notice to the declared parties within this DOCUMENT, has addressed these notices to the HONORABLE J.E. SULLIVAN, U.S Administrative Law Judge, 

### Oll behalfofihe Ot'fice ofHeail!lgs, M-20, 

# u.s Department of1ral1sportaiiol1; a!ld to the office ofMr. Glenn H. Brov-01, 

### Complainant's Counsel, whom have been dully notified ofthis DOCUMENT, has been served through the United States Postal Service, either by form of regular mail and/or priority delivery; and/or fax;



### NAME OF boti.JMENt SERVED: 

## RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO FAA'S JUNE 9, 2015 COMPLAINT.

I attest that the statement above is true and complete, and that Tdid in fact serve notice as to the declaration ab9ve, on the Date ofMonday, December 14, 

### 2015. 

# / J**··~_/;** .·' .J' ,/}

### .i·~···i ·' .·•· / ·' / ,' ,. "/ 

## /**j1~1** 

## . L/

..·. ·'/ 

# j>z/.r 1"···················

../ Samuel K. Burlum

# ()4~ Witness and Notai·ized DANIEL 

### R. THOMAS NOTARY PUBLIC OF NEWJERSEY My Commission Expires 6/171<i!18