FAA Proposes Civil Penalties Against Two Companies | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-11.24.25

AirborneNextGen-
11.18.25

Airborne-Unlimited-11.19.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-11.20.25

AirborneUnlimited-11.21.25

LIVE MOSAIC Town Hall (Archived): www.airborne-live.net

Tue, Feb 10, 2015

FAA Proposes Civil Penalties Against Two Companies

Both Allegedly Violated Hazardous Materials Regulations

The FAA has proposed civil penalties of $54,000 and $96,800 against two companies for allegedly violating Hazardous Materials Regulations.

The FAA alleges that on June 26, 2014, an employee of Rheem Manufacturing Co. of Atlanta, GA offered to FedEx three undeclared shipments containing a total of 19 metal cans of flammable paint for air transportation from Laredo, Texas, to Heber, CA. Two of the three packages leaked in transit

The FAA alleges that the packages were not declared to contain hazardous materials and the materials offered were not properly classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled and in proper condition for shipment under the hazardous materials regulations. Further, the FAA alleges that Rheem did not provide emergency response information with the package and did not ensure its employees had received required hazardous materials training.

The proposed fine against Rheem is $96,800

In a separate incident, the FAA is proposing a $54,000 fine against Amazon.com of Seattle, Wash. The FAA alleges that on Feb. 5, 2013, Amazon offered to UPS a package containing a handgun cleaning kit for air transportation from Las Vegas to Pueblo, CO. The kit included a 2-ounce plastic container of flammable, corrosive liquid, which workers at the UPS sort facility in Louisville, KY discovered was leaking.

Investigators determined the shipment was not accompanied by shipping papers to indicate the nature or quantity of the hazardous material. The FAA also alleges the shipment was not marked, labeled or packaged in accordance with the Hazardous Materials Regulations, and that Amazon did not provide required emergency response information.

Both companies have 30 days from receipt of the FAA’s enforcement letters to respond to the agency.

FMI: www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (11.27.25)

“Achieving PMA for the S-1200 Series magnetos is another step in expanding our commitment to providing the aviation community with the most trusted and durable ‘firewal>[...]

Airborne 11.26.25: Bonanza-Baron Fini, Archer v LA NIMBYs, Gogo Loses$$$

Also: Bell 505 on SAF, NYPA Gets Flak For BizAv 'Abuse', FAA Venezuela Caution, Horizon Update Textron Aviation has confirmed it will be ending production of the Beechcraft Bonanza>[...]

FAA Seeks Info For New Brand-New ATC Platform

State-Of-The-Art Common Automation Platform To Replace Legacy Systems The FAA has issued a Request for Information (RFI) regarding the initiative of the Trump Administration and U.>[...]

USAF Reaper Drone Crashes Off the South Korean Coast

Kunsan Air Base Reported the Accident During Routine Operations The US Air Force has confirmed that it lost an MQ-9 Reaper drone to the South Korean waters on November 24. The airc>[...]

Hartzell Engine Tech Magneto Gains FAA-PMA

PowerUp S-1200 Series Approved, Available for 4- And 6-Cylinder Engines Hartzell Engine Tech announced it received FAA Parts Manufacturer Approval for its PowerUp S-1200 Series air>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC