U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

U.S. CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN-RECEIPT REQUESTED 

.MAR 1 8 20161 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1000 

RE: In the matter of Peter Hantz Company 

FAA Docket No. CP- ; Case No. 201280700041 

Enforcement Division 

Southern Team 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

,1,'-

Enclosed are the original and one copy ofthe complaint in the above-referenced case. The 

Complainant requests that the hearing be held in Phoenix AZ and expects that the hearing in this 

case will last one day. All correspondence to the Complainant in this matter should be directed 

to Ryan Landers, Attorney at: 

Enforcement Division, Southern Team 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

email: ryan.landers@faa.gov 

Telephone: (404) 305-5200 (main) 

(404) 305-5223 (fax) 

Respectful! y, 

Ryan Landers 

Attorney 

Enforcement Division, Southern Team 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

email: ryan.landers@faa.gov 

Telephone: (404) 305-5200 (main) 

(404) 305-5223 (fax) 

Enclosure 
03/15/2016 13:11 602-631-4404 

HINSHAW 

& C U 1. A E R T S 0 N I_ L I' 

TlrnQthy I. McCulloeh 

tmceulloeh@ninshawlaw.com 

March 15, 2016 

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

600 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

HINSHAW & CULBERTSON 

Re: Peter Hantz Company, Case No. 2012S0700041 

Dear Gentleperson: 

PAGE 02/02 

ATTDJINIYS AT l-AW 

2375 E. Comelbacl< RO. 

Suite 750 

Phoeni,)\z 85016 

602-631-4400 

602-631-4404 (fax) 

www.hlnshawlaw.com 

This law firm represents Peter Hantz Company. We ask that all correspondence be 

sent to this office. This letter shall serve as the request for hearing in the matter of 

2012S0700041 as required by 14 C.P.R. §13.6(h). The final noti.ce of proposed civil 

penalty was received on March 9, 2016. 

Very truly yours, 

Timothy I. McCulloch 

TlM:tr 

cc: Ryan Landers (via email/facsimile) 

BUilding an the Bsrgor Tr.nlltlon 

Arllona California Florl'da IIDnois Indian;;~ Massaet'lua:atts Mlnn~:sota MIB!K!Url N~ York Rhode Island Wl&CQil.sJn • London 

23447884vl2904 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

Complainant, 

vs. 

PETER HANTZ COMPANY 

Respondent. 

JUDGE NOT YET ASSIGNED 

FAA Docket No. 

Judge 

COMPLAINT 

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

Rule 208 ofthe Rules of Practice (14 C.P.R. 13.208), and states as follows: 

I. 

2 

On February 29, 2016, Respondent, United Parcel Service Company was advised tlnough a Final 

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

of$77,000. On March 15, 2016, the Agency Attorney received a written request for a hearing 

from the Respondent. 

II. 

l. On or about November 2, 2011, Peter Hantz Company (Peter Hantz) knowingly 

offered to United Parcel Service (UPS) a one-piece shipment consisting of a fiberboard box 

containing hazardous materials for transportation by air. 

2. The above-mentioned shipment was assigned UPS tracking number 1Z 847 624 

4684 0410. The shipment was offered by Peter Hantz co/Asazi Inc./Kyla 2000, 1840 E. 

University, Tempe, Arizona 85281, for transportation to the consignee, Aladdin Beauty College 

# 7, 1101 Melbourne Road Suite B-5A, Hurst, TX 76053. 
3. At all times mentioned herein, the above-mentioned shipment was not 

accompanied by a Shipper's Certification or Declaration of Dangerous Goods. 

4. On or about November 2, 2011 the above-mentioned shipment was flown on a 

regularly scheduled UPS cargo flight in air transportation to the UPS sort facility in Louisville, 

Kentucky. 

5. On or about November 3, 2011, ground-handling personnel at the UPS sort 

facility discovered the above-mentioned shipment leaking. 

6. The above-mentioned fiberboard box contained four 16-ounce plastic containers 

3 

of Ravi Nail Liquid, forty-one !-ounce plastic containers of Ravi Acrylic Nail Liquid, and fortyone 7.5 ml glass containers of Star Nail X-Strength Primer. 

7. Further investigation showed that approximately four ounces of the 16-ounce 

Ravi Nail Liquid had leaked into and through the fiberboard container. 

8. (a) "Acrylic Nail Liquid" and "Nail Strength Primer" are classified as 

hazardous material under the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations 

(HMR) (49 C.F.R. § 172.101). 

(b) The proper shipping name of one of the materials is Ethyl Methacrylate, 

Stablized. It is in Hazard Class 3 Flanunable Liquid, Packing Group II, and has an assigned 

identification number of UN 2277. The proper label is FLAMMABLE LIQUID. The proper 

shipping name of the other material is Methacrylic Acid, Stabilized. It is in Hazard Class 3 

Flammable Liquid, Packing Group II, and has an assigned identification number of UN 2531. 

The proper label is FLAMMABLE LIQUID. 

9. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air without shipping papers that included: 

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

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

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

(d) the total net mass per package of each hazardous material; and, 

(e) the number and type of packages containing hazardous material. 

I 0. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air and failed to: 
(a) certify that the materials were in accordance with the HMR ( 49 C.P.R. §§ 

171, et seq.) by printing on the shipping papers the certification set forth in§ 172.204(a)(l), 

172.204(a)(2), or § 172.204(c) ofthe HMR; 

(b) prepare the required certifications in duplicate; and, 

(c) add to the certification required in this section the following statement: 

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

been met." 

11. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous materials for 

transportation by air when: 

4 

(a) the outer container was not marked with the proper shipping name of each 

hazardous material contained therein; 

(b) the outer container was not marked with the assigned identification 

number of each hazardous material contained therein; 

(c) the outer container was not marked with standard orientation markings (as 

prescribed in 49 C.P.R. § 172.312(a)) on two opposite vertical sides of the package with the 

arrows pointing in the correct upright direction; and 

(d) a "FLAMMABLE LIQUID" label was not affixed to the outer container. 

12. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air and failed to make emergency response information available for use at all 

times the hazardous material was present. 

13. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air and failed to make an emergency response telephone number immediately 

available to the appropriate official person designated to respond to an incident involving a 

hazardous material, or who was conducting an investigation involving a hazardous material. 

14. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air and failed to ensure that each of its hazmat employees was trained in 

accordance with the prescribed requirements as set forth in Section 172.704. 

15. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air and failed to keep a proper record of training for each of its hazmat 

employees in accordance with the prescribed requirements as set forth in Section 172. 704( d). 
16. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air and failed to properly instruct each of its agents having any responsibility 

for preparing hazardous materials for shipment. 

17. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment for transportation in a 

packaging or container and failed to properly class and describe the hazardous material. 

18. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of hazardous material for 

transportation by air when the packaging was not designed, constructed, maintained, filled, its 

contents so limited, and closed, so that nnder conditions normally incident to transportation, 

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

19. Peter Hantz offered the above-described shipment of liquid hazardous materials 

for transportation by air and failed to use an authorized combination packaging for its 

transportation. 

III. 

20. As a result, UPS violated the following sections of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations: 

21. Section 171.2( e) in that Peter Hnatz offered or transported a hazardous material 

5 

for transportation in commerce when the hazardous material was not properly classed, described, 

packaged, marked, labeled, and in condition for shipment as required or authorized by applicable 

requirements of this subchapter, or an exemption, approval, or registration issued under this 

subchapter or under subchapter A of this chapter. 

22. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(l) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous material on shipping papers 

including the identification number prescribed for the material as shown in Column 4 of the § 

172.101 Table, in the manner required by this subpart. 

23. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(2) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous material on shipping papers 

including the proper shipping name prescribed for the material as shown in Column 2 of the§ 

172.101 Table. 

24. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(3) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous material on shipping papers 

including the hazard class or division number prescribed for the material as shown in Column 

3 of the§ 172.101 Table. 

25. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(4) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous material on shipping papers 
including the packing group in Roman numerals, as designated for the hazardous material in 

Column 5 of the § 172.101 Table. 

26. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(6) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

6 

material for transportation by aircraft and failed to describe the hazardous material Qn shipping 

papers showing the total mass per package, unless a gross mass is indicated in Columns (9A) or 

(9B) of the § 172.101 Table in which case the total gross mass per package must be shown; or , 

for Class 7 materials, the quantity of radioactive must be shown by activity. 

27. Sections 172.200(a) and 172.202(a)(7) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to describe the hazardous material on shipping papers 

indicating the number and type of packages (for example, "12 drums"). 

28. Sections 172.204(a) or (c)(!) in that Peter Hantz 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. 

29. Section 172.204(c)(2) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous material to an 

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

required in this section. 

30. Section 172.204(c)(3) in that Peter Hantz offered for transportation by air a 

hazardous material authorized for air transportation and failed to add to the certification required 

in this section the following statement: 

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

31. Section 172.301(a) in that Peter Hantz 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. 

32. Sections 172.300(a) and 172.312(a) in that Peter Hantz offered hazardous material 

for transportation and failed to properly pack the package of liquid hazardous material with 

closures upward and legibly mark the package with standard orientation markings, on two 

opposite vertical sides of the package with the arrows pointing in the correct upright direction. 

33. Section 172.400(a) in that Peter Hantz offered for transportation a hazardous 

material in one of the packages or containment devices listed in this subpart and failed to label 

the package or containment device with the labels specified for the material in the § 172.101 

Table and in this subpart. 

34. Section 172.600( c) in that Peter Hantz offered for transportation a hazardous 

material and failed to make the emergency response information immediately available for use at 

all times the hazardous material was present, and failed to make such information, including an 
emergency response telephone number, immediately available to any government agency 

responding to an incident involving hazardous materials or conducting an investigation which 

involves a hazardous material. 

35. Section 172.604(a)(3) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous material for 

transportation and failed to provide a 24-hour emergency response telephone number which was 

entered on a shipping paper in the manner required by this paragraph for use in the event of an 

emergency involving the hazardous material. 

36. Section 172.604(b) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous material for 

7 

transportation and failed to provide the emergency telephone number required by paragraph (a) 

of this section which was either that of the person offering the hazardous material, or an agency 

or organization capable of, and accepting responsibility for, providing the current detailed 

information conceruing the hazardous material. 

37. Sections 172.702(a) and 172.704(a)(l) in that Peter Hantz offered a hazardous 

material for transportation and failed to ensure that each hazmat employee was provided general 

awareness/familiarity training designed to provide familiarity with the requirements of this 

subchapter and to enable the employee to recognize and identify hazardous materials consistent 

with the hazard communication standards of this subchapter. 

38. Section 173.24(b)(l) in that Peter Hantz 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 (without the use of 

instruments) release of hazardous material to the environment. 

39. Section 173.202 in that Peter Hantz offered for transportation a package 

containing liquid hazardous material in Packing Group II when §172.101 of this subchapter 

specified that it be packaged under this section and failed to use non-bulk packagings prescribed 

in this section 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 

(unless otherwise excepted), and to the requirements ofthe special provisions of Colunm 7 ofthe 

§ 172.101 Table. 

40. In accordance with Section 5123(a) of Chapter 51, Title 49 of the United States 

Code of Transportation, [49 U.S.C.§ 5123(a)], Peter Hantz is liable for a civil penalty of not less 

than $250 ($450 for training violations), nor greater than $50,000 (or $100,000 for violations 

resulting in death, serious illness, or severe injury to any person, or substantial destruction of 

property), for each violation of the regulations. After reviewing our investigative file, we propose 

to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $77,000 for these violations. 

41. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, a civil penalty of $77,000 is 

appropriate. 

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

enter an order that Respondent be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $77,000. 
Respectfully submitted this 

~anders 

Attorney 

I~ day of March, 2016. 

Enforcement Division, Southern Team 

PLEASE NOTE: 

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

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

shown on the Certificate of Service which follows. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

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

Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to the following: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000 

Timothy I. McCulloch 

HINSHAW & Culbertson LLP 

2375 E. Camelback Road 

Suite 750 

Phoenix, AZ 85016 

M1ttL.~~ Program Analyst 

Dated 

original and 1 copy 

8