Snell & Wilmer ----L.L.~---­

LAWOFFICES 

Hughes Center 

3883 Howard Hughes Parkway 

Suite 1100 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89169-5958 

702.784.5200 

702.784.5252 (Fax) 

www.swlaw.com 

RECE\VED 

MAR 1 0 20\5 

HEARING DOCKET 

Patrick G. Byrne 

(702) 784-5201 

pbyrne@swlaw.com March 5, 2015 

VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS AND U.S. MAIL 

Federal Aviation Administration 

600 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur Wright Building 

Suite 2W1000 

Washington DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 

Re: Webgistix Corporation 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

Oi 

DENVER 

LAS VEGAS 

LOS ANGELES 

LOSCABOS 

ORANGE COUNTY 

PHOENIX 

RENO 

SALT LAKE CITY 

TUCSON 

This firm 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 & Wilmer is a member of LLX J\!L''-HJJ, The Leading Association of Independent Law F1n11s 
Snell & Wilmer 

L.L.P. 

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 

L.L.r.----

LAWOFFICES 

~lughcs Center 

3883 Howard Hughes Parkway 

Suite 1100 

Las Vegas,_ Nevada 89169-.5958 

702.784.5200 

702.784.5252 (Fax) 

www.swbw.c.om 

Patrick G .. BYJ."lle 

(702) 784-5201 

pbyrne@swlaw.com 

VIA U.S. MAIL 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur WrighfBuilding 

Suite .2Wl 000 

Washington DC 20591 

RECEiVED 

MAR 1 0 2015 

HEARING DOCKET 

February 5, 2015 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 

Re: Webgistix Corporation 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

!)fiNYER 

l..,;S VEOAS 

LOS ANOEU;s 

LOS CAllOS 

OMNUcr.:ou.;. .. rrr 

PHOENIX 

RtrNO 

SALT l .. i\XE C!'!'Y 

1tJCSDN 

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

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

hearing on thls 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 

20962767 
To: 

Snell & Wilmer 

----LL 

I.A W OFFICES 

" •. --

3883 Howard HUghes-P-&kway, Suite llQO 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 

Federal Aviation Adlllinistration 

Att: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Wilbur WrightBuilding- Suite 2\Vl 000 

Washington, DC 20591 

(PGB!Webgistix) 
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

~JAN i~; 2 201~ 

Southern Region 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

CERTif:lED ·RETURN RI\\oJ~!P"JJ3J~Q.UiiliTED 

.&JlliQULAlUtlf\!1" 

Wcbgistix Cotporation 

Attn: President 

127 Bast Warm Springs Rd. 

Las Vegas, NV 89119 

and 

Webgistix Cotporation 

Attn: President 

880 Wigwam Parkway 

Ste. 120 

Henderson, NV 89014 

RE 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, Georgia 30320 

(404) 305-5200 

( 404) 305-5223 FAX 

2013S07003! 

EIVED 

MAR 1 D 2015 

HEARING DOCKET 

FINAl, NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY 

On July 8, 2013, you were advised through a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the FAA 

proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $63,000. 

After considering all the evi~ence in this matter, including information submitted at the infomml 

conference on July 23, 2014, it appears that: 

1. 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 tra11sportation by air. 

2. The above described shipment was offer~'<! by Webgistix on behalf of Futul"e 

Health Today Ltd. 

3. The shipment, assigned UPS tracking number lZ 8ES A36 12 9133, was offered 

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

Creek Boulevard, lOA, Dallas, TX 75219. 

4. At all times mentioned herein, the shipment was not accompanied by a Shipper's 

Certification or Declaration of Dangerous Goods. 

1 
5. On or about 0ytober 16,20\2, ground-handling personnel at the UPS sort facility 

in Louisville, KY discovered the shipment leaking. 

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

bottles ofMMS Original Water Purification Drops. 

7. Further investigation showed that approximately 2-ounccs of the Water 

Purification Drops had leaked into and through the fiberboard container. 

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

Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) (49 

C.F.R. § 172.101). 

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

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

identification number of UNl908. The proper label is CORROSIVE. 

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

without shipping papers that included: 

(a) the assigned identificationmtmber prescribed for each material; 

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

(c) the hazard class prescri])ed for each material; 

(d) the packing gmup 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. 

l L Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardotts 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 JL~.) by printing the certification set forth it1 § l72.204(a) or § 

172.204(c)(1) of the HMR; prepare the required certifications in duplicate; 

and 

(b) add the following statement to the certification: 

''[ declare that all of the applicable air transp01t requirements have becrt 

m_et. 1

' 

2 
12. Webgistix offered the shipment of haz.ardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to: 

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

material contained 1J1ere.in; 

(b) mark the outer container with the assigned identitication 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. 

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

and failed to provide emergency response information. 

!4. Webgistix 'offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to provide an emergency response telephone number. 

I 5. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials fot· trm1sportation by air 

1md failed to make the emergency response information available away tl·om the 

package. 

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

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

shipment was properly trained. 

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

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

responsibility for prepHring the shipment as to the applicable regulations. 

18. Webgistix ofl'ered the shipment of hazardous. materials for transportation by air 

m1d failed to package it so there would be no identifiable release of hazm·dous 

material to the environment. 

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

and failed to ensure the closure was secure and leakproof. 

20. Webgislix offcicd the shipment materials of hazardous materials for 

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

prevent breakage or leakage. 

21. 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 

containtnent. 

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

m1el failed to use an authorized packaging for its transportation. 

3 
23. By reason of the above, Webgistix violated the following Department of 

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

Regubtions): 

(a) Secdon 17!.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) <md 172.202(a)(1) 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 Column 4 of the § 172.10 l Table, 

in the mmmer 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 transpoJtation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the hazard class OJ' division 

prescribed for the material as shown h1 Column 3 of the § 172.101 Table, 

in the mmmcr required by this subpart. 

(e) Sections 172.200(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 tlm material covered by the description, in the mmmer required 

by this subpart. 

(f) Sections l72.200(a) and 172.202(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 o!Iered a 

hazardous material for trm1sportation 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(£) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation when a statement indicating that the shipment is within the 

4 
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 requited in this section. 

(k) Section l72.204(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 decla:re that all of the applicable air transport requirements have been 

mei." (Effective October 1. 21106.) 

(I) 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 1 72.312(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a nonbulk combination package having i!1ller 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 mal'kings, on two opposite vet~ical sides 

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

(o) Sections 172.400 and 172.402(a)(1) in that Webgistix offered for 

transportation a package containing a hazardous material and failed to 

label the package withprimary and subsidiary hazard labels as specified in 

Column 6 of the § 172.101 Table. 

5 
(p) Section 172.600(c) in that Webgistix offered for transportation a 

hazardous material and failed to make the emergency response 

infomration inunediately available for use at all times the hazardous 

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

emergency response telephmre number, immediately available to any 

goverJllllent agency responding to an incident involving hazardom 

materials or conducting an investigation which involves a hazardous 

material. 

(q) Sections 172.600 and l72.602(b)(2) in that Wcbgistix 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)(1) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation and failed to provide a 24-hour emergency response 

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

which was monitored at all times the hazardous material was in 

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

event of an e1ncrgency involving the hazardous material. 

(s) Section 173.1(b) in that Webgistix o±Iered 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 shipm~nt as to applicable regulations {)f 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 l'equirements prescribed in this subpart. 

(LL) Sections 172.702(a) ru1d 172.704(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that its haz!llat 

employee training included general awareness/fmniliarity training 

designed to provide familiarity with the requirements of this subchapter 

m1d to enable the employee to recognize and identify hazm·dous materials 

consistent with the hazard communication standards oftbis subchapter. 

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

hazardous material for transportation and ft1iled to ensure that its hazmat 

employee training included function specific training concerning 

requirements of this subchapter which were specitically applicable to the 

functions the employee pelformed. 

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

hazardous material for trrursportation and failed to ensure !hal its hazmat 

employee training included safety training concerning -- (i) emergency 

response information; (ii) measures to protect the employee from hazards 

6 
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 ofl'cred 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 tnmspoliation 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)(S) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transpottation and failed to ensW'e 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 organi7.ationa1 security structure. 

(z) Section 173.24(b)(1) in that Wcbgistix 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(±)(1) in that Webgistix failed to use a package which had 

closlll'es so designed and closed that under conditions (inclLJcling. the 

effects of temperature and vibration) normally incident to transpmtation, 

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 Lo 

usc 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 construqted to prevent leakage that may be caused by 

changes in altitude and temperah1re during transportation aboard aircraft. 

(dd) Section l73.27(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 closme from loosening due to. vibration 

or substantial chm1ge in temperature. 

7 
(ee) Section 17327(e)(3) in that Webgistix ofl'ered a package contmmng 

hazardous liquids ill 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 contaim11ent in the event of leakage. 

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

containing liquid hazardous material in Pacldng 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 conforming 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 

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

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

In accordance with Section 5123(a) of Chapter 51, Title 49 of the United Stales Code of 

Transportation, 49 U.S. C.§ 5123, Webgistix is liable for a civil penalty of not less than $250 

($450 for training violations), nor greater thm1 $75,000 ($175,000 if death, serious illness, severe 

injury, or substantial property damage results), for each violation of the regulations. 

After reviewing our investigative file, we propose to assess a civil penalty in the amount of 

$63,000 for these violations. 

Unless you mail or personally deliver, in writing, your requesr :for a heari11g in this matter, on or 

before fifteen (15) days after you receive this Final Notice, we will issue an Order Assessing 

Civil Penalty and you will have no further right to a hearing. If you do not submit a written 

request for a hearing, you must pay the proposed civil penalty. 

Your request for a heming must be sent to the Federal Aviation Administration, 600 

Independence Avenue SW, Wilbur Wright Building, Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591, 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 (if delivery is in person or via expedited courier 

service) or Federal Aviatio.il Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Wilbur Wright 

Building, Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

(if delivm')' is via U.S. Mail), and a copy must be sent to the undersigned FAA attorney. Your 

request must be dated and signed, in accordance with section 13.16 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations, sent to you with the Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty (14 C.F.R. § 13.16). 

8 
You may pay tl1e proposed penalty by submitting a certified check or money order payable to the 

"Federal Aviation Administration" to the nndersigned. 

RANDY ELLEN HYMAN 

REGIONAL COUNSEL 

(/J (//--~ t I /, 

BY: 1~ [\j.J1\ (\llA-~-14,_( ) • 

RAS!lA~N lZJCH GEORtiE 

Senior Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

9 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty has been mailed by 

Certified Mail & Regular Mail to: 

Wcbgistix Corporation 

Attn: President 

127 East Warm Springs Rd. 

Las Vegas, NV 89119 

and 

Webgistix Corporation 

Attn: President 

880 Wigwam Parkway 

Ste. 120 

··--····---~-------···-- Dated 

LO 

U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

!fEB ,2 c : · 

Southern Region 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

CERTIFIED -RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

& REGULAR MAIL 

Webgistix Corporation 

Attn: President 

127 East Warm Springs Rd. 

Las Vegas, NV 89119 

and 

Webgisiix Corporation 

Attn: President 

880 Wigwam Pa1·kway 

Ste. 120 

Henderson, NV 89014 

RE 

P.O. Box 20636 

Atlanta, Georgia 30320 

(404) 305-5200 

( 404) 305·5223 FAX 

20 l3S07003l 

D 

MAR 1 0 2015 

HEARING DOCKET 

ORDER ASSESSING CIVIL I'ENALTY 

On January 22. 2015, you were advised through a Final Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty that the 

FAA proposed to assess a civil penalty in the amount of$63,000. 

After consideration of all of the available information in this matter, including the information 

submitted at the informal conference on July 23, 2014, it has been determined that: 

I. 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 transp01iation by air. 

2. The above described shipment was oifered by Webgistix on behalf of Future 

Health Today Ltd. 

3. 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. 

4. At all times mentioned herein, the shipment was not accompanied by a Shipper's 

Certification or Declaration of Dangerous Goods. 

l 
5. On or about October 16, 2012, ground-handling personnel at the lJPS soti facility 

in Louisville, KY discovered the shipment leaking. 

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

bottles ofMMS Original Water Purif1cation Drops. 

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

Purification Drops had leaked into and through the fiberboard container. 

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

Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) (49 

C.F.R. § 172.101). 

9. 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 

ideutifictttionmm1ber of UNl908. The proper label is CORROSIVE. 

I 0. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous material for transpotiation by air 

without shipping papers that included: 

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

(b) tlre proper shipping name prescribed lor each material; 

(c) the hazard class prescribed. for each material; 

(d) the packing group prescribed tor each material; 

(e) the total net mass per package; and 

(!) 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. 

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

and failed io: 

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

171, et §_<ell,) by printing the celiification set forth in § 172.204(a) or § 

172.204( c)( 1) of the HMR; prepare the required certifications in duplicate; 

and 

(b) add the following statement to the certification: 

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

111eL '' 

2 
12. Wcbgistix om~red the shipment of hazardous materials for tnmsportation 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. 

13. Webgistix o!Jered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to provide emergency response information. 

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

and 1ltiled to provide an emergency response telephone number. 

15, Webgistix ofTered the shipment of hazardous materials for transportation by air 

and failed to make the emergency response information available away fromthe 

package. 

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

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

sl1ipment was properly trained. 

17. 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. 

18. Webgistix offered the shipment of hazardous materials for transp01tation by air 

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

material to the environment. 

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

and failed to ensure the closure was secure and leakproot: 

20. Webgistix offered the shipment materials of hazm·dous materials for 

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

prevent breakage or leal<age. 

21. 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. 

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

and failed to use an authorized packaging for its transportation. 

3 
23. By reason of the above, Webgistix violated the following Department of 

Transportation Haz.ardons Materials Regulations (Title 49 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations): 

(a) Section 171.2(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 172.200(a) and l72.202(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the ha?.ardous 

material on the shipping papers, including the identification number 

presctibed for the material as shown in Column 4 of the § 172.101 Table, 

in the manner required by this subpart. 

(c) Sections l 72.200(a) and l 72.202(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 § 172.10 l Table, in the 

manner required by this subpart. 

(d) Sections !72.200(a) and l72.202(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 tor tl1e material as shown in Column 3 of tl1e § 172.101 Table, 

in the manner required by this subpart. 

(e) Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)( 4) in that Wcbgistix offered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardons 

material on the shipping papers. induding the packing gronp, in Roman 

numerals, prescribed lor the material in Column 5 crf the § 172.101 Table, 

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

by tl1is subpart. 

(t) Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(6) in tltat Webgistix. offered a 

hazardous material for transpmtation 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 o!1ered a 

hazardous material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous 

material on iJ1e shipping papers, including the number and l)'1Je of 

packages (indicated by deseription of the package). 

4 
(h) Section 1 72.203(!) 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 l72.204(a) or (c)(!) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to ceriify that the material was 

offered for transporiation 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 l72.204(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 certit1cation required in this section. 

(k) Section I 72.204( c)(3) in that Webgistix offered for transportation by air a 

hazardous material authorized for air transportation and failed to add to 

the certi.fication required in this section the following statement: 

(1) 

(m) 

(n) 

(o) 

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

met." (Ejfeclive Otiober I, 2006) 

Section 172.30 I (a) in that Webgistix o1Tered f\Jr 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 "lJN" or "NA'', as appropriate) for the material as shO\vn in 

the § 172.101 table. · 

Sections 172.300(a) and 172.31 2(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. 

Sections 172.300(a) and 172.3!2(a)(2) in that Webgistix offered a nonbulk combination package having inner packagings containing liquid 

hazardous materials for transponation 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 conect upright direction. 

Sections 172.400 and 1 72.402(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered for 

transportation a package containing a hazardous material and failed to 

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

Colurnn6ofthe §172.101 Table. 

5 
(p) Section 172.600( c) in that Webgistix offered for transportation a 

hazardous material and failed to make the emergency response 

information inunetiiately available for use at all times the haz.ardous 

material was present. and failed to make such inf(nmation. including an 

emergency response teJephone number, immediately available to any 

government agency responding to an incident involving hazardous 

materials or conducting an investigation which involves a hazardons 

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 l72.604(a)(J) in that Webgistix offered a hazardous material for 

transportation and failed to provide a 24-hour emergency response 

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

which was monitored at all times the hazardous material was in 

lTanspmtation, inclnding storage incidental to transportation, for use in the 

eve.ot of an emergency involving the hazardous materiaL 

(s) Section 173.l(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 fclr 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 

u·ained in accordance with the requirements prescribed in this subpart 

(u) Sections 172.702(a) and l72.704(a)(l) in that Webgistix offered a 

haz~1rdous 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 communieation standards of this subchapter. 

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

hazardous material for transportation and failed to ensure that its hazmat 

employee training included fhnction specific training concerning 

requirements of this subchapter which were specifically applicable to the 

functions the employee performed. 

6 
(w) Sections 1 72.702(a) and 1 72.704(a)(3) in that Webgistix offered a 

hazardous material for tTansportation and failed to ensure that its hazmat 

employee training included safety training conceming (i) emergency 

response infonnation; (ii) measmes to protect the employee from hazards 

associated with hazardous materials to which they 111ay be exposed in the 

work place, including specific measures the hazmar 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 matedals. 

(x) Sections J72.702(a) and 172.704(a)(4) in that Webgistix offered a 

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

hazmal employees received training that provides an awareness of security 

risks associated with hazardoLts materials transportation and methods 

designed to enhance transp01iation safety, including a componentcovering 

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 u·aining 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 structtrre. 

(z) Section 173.24(b)(l) in that Wcbgistix 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 Webgisti:< tailed to use a package which had 

closw·es so designed and closed that under conditions (including the 

effects of temperature and vibration) normally incident to transportation, 

there would be no identit1able release of hazardous materials to the 

enviromnent ti:om 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 transpor1ation aboard aircraft. 

7 
(dd) Section 173.27(d) in that Webgistix Hriled 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 J73.27(e)(3) in that Webgistix offered a package contatnmg 

hazardous liquids in Class 3, 4, 5, 6, or 8, in glass, earthcJrware, 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 efftc.ient 

means of containment in the event of leakage. 

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

containing liquid hazardous rnaterial in Packing Group II when § 172.10 l 

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

failed to use non-bulk packagings prescrihed in this section conforming 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 (tmless otherwise excepted), and to the requirements of 

the specialprovisions of Column 7 of the§ 172.1 OJ Table. 

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 5123(a) of Title 49 of the United 

States Code (Transp01tation) (49 U.S.C. § 5123(a)), that Webgistix be and hereby is assessed a 

civil penalty in the amount of$63,000. 

You are hereby ordered to pay, immediately. the assessed amount by mailing or delivering a 

ceJtifted check or money order in the amount of $63,000, payable to the "Federal Aviation 

Administration," to: 

FAA/AMK-322 

P.O. Box 25770 

Oklahoma City, OK 73125 

8 
The amount of civil penalty assessed in this Order constitutes a debt owed to the United States. 

You have now exhausted your right to seek review of the validity or amount of this debt. If this 

debt is not paid in fiJI! within 30 days of your receipt of this letter, the debt is considered 

delinquent. For delinquent debts, federal regulation (49 C.F.R. §89.23) requires us to charge 

interest, from the date of this Order. at a fixed annual rate of l %, along with an administrative 

charge of$ I 2.00 per month. representing our costs of administrative collection. Furthermore, if 

the full amount assessed is not paid in full within 120 days of your receipt of this letter, we are 

required to assess an additional penalty at an annual rate of 6%, accruing from the date of 

delinquency. Delinquent debts may be reported to consumer reporting agencies or commercial 

credit bureaus, which couid adversely affect your credit rating. Nonpayment of this debt may 

ultimately result in a referral to a collection agency, the Intemal Revenue Service, or to the 

United States Department of Justice for enforced collection. 

RANDY ELLEN HYMAN 

REG~AL COUNSEL 

~·· J I //_/-) ~ 

\ .-\/ ~· ' 1/1 

By: Nlv \fiJ)!L.... ~ , Jl~Z- RAsH.Yt 'l'fizicH GEoRGE 

Senior Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

9 
CERTIFICATE O.F SERVICE 

Mail 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Order Assessing Civil Penalty has been mailed by Certified 

& Regular Mail to: 

Webgistix Corporation 

Attn: Presidelll 

127 East Warm. Springs Rd. 

Las Vegas, NV 891 19 

and 

Webgistix Corporation 

Attn: President 

Dated 

10