U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

August 15,2014 

Northwest Mountain Region 

Office of Regional Counsel 

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, 

Wyoming 

RECEIVED 

AUG 1 9 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057 

Tel: (425) 227-1847 

Fax: (425) 227-1007 

kyle.lomazow@faa.gov 

VIA FACSIMILE AND CERTIFIED MAIL- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

(Wilbur Wright Bldg-- Room 2Wl000) 

800 Independence Avenue S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Re: In the Matter Global Arms and Ammunition, Docket No. FAA-2014-0320 

FAA Case No. 2012NM710034 

Enclosed is an original and one copy of the Complaint in the above-referenced proceeding 

along with Respondents Notice of Appeal. 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requests that the hearing in this matter be held in 

Seattle, Washington, and expects that the hearing will last one (1) day. 

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

Sincerely, 

~ 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM -7 

1601 Lind Avenue S.W. 

Renton, Washington 98057 

Telephone: (425) 227-1847 

FAX: (425) 227-1007 

e~ // 

L//~~>/ 

Enclosures: Notice of Appeal 

Complaint 
KYLE LOMAZOW 

FAA OFFICE OF REGIONAL COUNSEL 

1601 LIND AVE., SW 

RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057 

TELEPHONE: (425) 227-1847 

FACSIMILE: (425)227-1007 

RECEIVED 

AUG 1 9 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

GLOBAL ARMS AND AMMUNITION DOCKET No.: FAA 2014-0320 

FAA Case No. 20 12NM71 0034 

Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

COMPLAINT 

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

pursuant to Rule 208 of the Rules of Practice (14 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) 

Section 13 .208), and states as follows: 

1. 

On Apri14, 2014, Global Arms and Ammunition (Global) was advised through an 

Order Assessing Civil Penalty that the FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount 

of$50,000. On May 29,2014, Global submitted a written Notice of Appeal. 

II. 

1. Global is a business entity that regularly otTers, accepts, or transports hazardous 

material (HAZMAT). 

2. On June 15,2012, at or near Spokane, Washington, Global offered a shipment 

consisting of four ( 4) fiberboard boxes for transport in air commerce. The shipment 

was destined for Whitefish, Montana. 

COMPLAINT 

FAA v Global Arms and Ammunition. 

FAA Case No. 2012NM710034 

Page 2 of7 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 
3. The shipment was transported by use of Federal Express (FedEx) Air Waybill 

Number 8768-2610-5551. 

4. During sorting operations a FedEx employee observed that one ofthe fiberboard 

boxes traveling under the above-mentioned FedEx Air Waybill Number had broken 

open and that weapons ammunition was falling out. 

5. This substance is classified as HAZMAT under the Department of Transportation 

Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) [49 C.F.R. Parts 171 et. seq.]. 

6. The proper shipping name and description for this substance is "Cartridges, Small 

Arms, Class 1.4, UN0012, PG II." 

7. The shipment was not marked or labeled with the proper shipping information based 

upon the contents, did not have the appropriate labels affixed, including the proper 

orientation labels for transportation or storage, or in a condition for shipment, as 

required by HMR. 

8. At all times mentioned herein, Global offered the above-described shipment for 

transportation by air when the external package was not marked or labeled in a 

manner that would indicate the hazardous nature ofthe contents of its package. 

9. The shipment was not accompanied with emergency response information, including 

the emergency response telephone number necessary in the event of an incident or 

investigation involving HAZMAT. 

10. Global did not ensure that each of its employees who handle HAZMAT was trained 

per Title 49 C.F.R., Subchapter C, Subpart H. 

COMPLAINT 

FAA v Global Arms and Ammunition. 

FAA Case No. 2012NM710034 

Page 3 of7 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, F AAATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 
III. 

1. By reason of the foregoing facts and circumstances, Global violated the following 

sections of the Federal Aviation Regulations ( 14 C.F .R.): 

a. Section 171.2(e), in that it offered HAZMAT to be shipped in air commerce 

which were not properly classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled, or in a 

condition for shipment required by the Hazardous Material Regulations ( 49 

C.F.R. Parts 171, et. seq.). 

b. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202, in that it offered HAZMAT for transportation 

without properly describing the material on shipping papers. 

c. Section 172.204, in that it offered HAZMAT for transportation without the 

required shipper's certification. 

d. Sections 172.300 and 172.301(a), in that it offered HAZMAT for transportation 

when the package was not marked with the proper shipping names for its contents. 

e. Section 172.304(a)(1), in that it offered HAZMAT for transportation when the 

required markings were not durable, in English, and printed on or affixed to the 

surface of the package or on a label, tag, or sign. 

f. Section 172.400(a), in that it offered a package containing HAZMAT for 

transportation when the package was not properly labeled as specified in Section 

172.101 (49 C.F.R. Section 172.101). 

g. Section 172.600( c) and Section 172.604, in that it offered HAZMAT to be 

shipped in air commerce without providing emergency response information 

required by 14 C.F.R. Part 172, Subchapter C, Subpart G. 

COMPLAINT 

FAA v Global Anns and Ammunition. 

FAA Case No. 2012NM710034 

Page 4 of7 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 
h. Section 172.702(a), in that it failed to ensure that each of its employees who 

handle HAZMA T are properly trained per the requirements prescribed in Subpart 

H (49 C.P.R. Section 172.700 et seq.). 

1. Section 173 .I (b), in that it improperly prepared the packing of, and offered a 

shipment ofHAZMAT for shipment by air. 

J. Section 173.22(a), in that it failed to properly class and describe the HAZMAT 

contained in its shipment. 

2. In accordance with Section 5123(a) of Title 49, United States Code, Global is subject 

to a civil penalty not to exceed $75,000 for each of the violations noted. 

3. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of $50,000 is 

appropriate. 

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

Law Judge enter an Order that Global be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $50,000. 

Respectfully submitted this 15tl' d of August, 2014. 

COMPLAINT KYLE E. !.OMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

FAA v Global Arms and Ammunition. TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 

FAA Case No. 20l2NM7l0034 

Page 5 of7 
ANSWER 

In accordance with Section 13.209 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, Global, must answer 

this Complaint not later than thirty (30) days from the time it is served on it. Failure to file an 

Answer within thirty (30) days without good cause shall be deemed an admission of the truth 

of each allegation contained in the Complaint [14.C.F.R. § 13.209(£)]. 

COMPLAINT 

FAA v Global Anns and Ammunition. 

FAA Case No. 2012NM710034 

Page 6 of7 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certifY that the foregoing Complaint has been served via facsimile and certified mail 

- Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following: 

Federal Aviation Administration (Original and one copy) 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000 

Fax: (202) 493-5142 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Complaint has been served via certified mail - Return 

Receipt Requested this date, to the following: 

David Carl Williams, President 

Global Arms and Ammunition 

28- 37'h Street N.E., Suite A 

Auburn, W A 98002 

TEL: (206) 325-9400 

Dated this 15th day of August, 2014. 

COMPLAINT 

FAA v Global Anns and Ammunition. 

I' AA Case No. 20 l2NM7l 0034 

Page 7 of7 

<JSanastephellson ' 

Office ofRegional Counsel (ANM-7) 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Ave. SW 

Renton, W A 98057 

( 425) 227-2007 

KYLE E. LOrviAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-l847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 
FAA Case No. 20l2NM710034 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

800 Independence Avenue, SW. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Respondent, 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel (ANM-7) 

Northwest Mountain Region Headquarters 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW. 

Renton, WA 98057-3356 

v. 

Appellant, 

Global Arms and Ammunition 

David Carl Williams, President 

28- 37th Street N.E., Snite A 

Auburn, Washington 98002 

BRIEF OF APPELLANT 

David Carl Williams (Pro Se) 

28- 37th Street N.E., Suite A 

Auburn, Washington 98002 
I. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR 

A. The FAA failed to properly serve Global Arms and Ammunition pursuant to 

§13.211. 

B. The FAA erred in denying Global Arms and Ammunition's request for a hearing. 

ill. FACTS AND ARGUMENT 

I. THE FAA FAILED TO PROPERLY SERVE GLOBAL ARMS AND AMMUNITION 

Under the Federal Aviation Regulations, section 13.211, each party must be served. 

Although the Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty was properly addressed to Global Arm and 

Ammunition (herein "Global Arms"), it was given to :Mr. Allion Brewer who is not an employee 

of Global Arms. :Mr. Brewer shares office space with Global Arms but does not work for Global 

Arms and does not have authority to represent Global Arms in any capacity. 

Global Arms was never notified of the Notice and on its own initiative (liscovered it. 

Therefore, because service was not made to Global Arms or its employee, it was improper. 

II. THE FAA ERRED IN DENYING GLOBAL ARMS AND AMMUNITION'S 

REQUEST FOR A HEARING. 

Global Arms attempted to request a hearing promptly after it became aware of the 

pending civil penalty. However, the FAA denied the request, stating that the time allotted for 

requesting a hearing had expired. The Notice specifically gives Global Arms 15 days to request a 

hearing, but because proper service was not made to Global Arms, it was deprived of this right. 

Therefore, because Global could not obtain a hearing, it was deprived of a fair opportunity to 

explain the circumstances that lead to the FAA's investigation and proposed civil penalty. 
IV. RELIEF REQUESTED 

For the above reasons, Global Arms and Ammunition request that the FAA grant its 

request for a hearing to explain the mitigating circumstances that lead to the FAA investigation 

and the Order Proposing Civil Penalty. 

Respectfully submitted this 29th day of May 2014. 

David Carl Williams (Pro Se) 

Global Arms and Ammunition 
No. 20!2N.M710034 

and Am1mm!tion 

David Carl Williams, Pre,sid.el11 

-37th Street N.E., A 

AUC>um, Wru;hin;gton. 98002 

NOTICE JUN 0 3 2l114 

Notice is given Arms Ammunition, appeals Order Assessing 

Penalty of$50,000 in to the above case issued by Federal Aviation 

Administration's Northwest Mmmtt.rin Oftice. Appellant ali<:ges_l,lrmr-irt-fulnl·efi\ult 

order !ru!de without fmmal hearing. 

DATED: May 20!4 

David Carl Williams (ProSe) 

and Ammunition