FAA Proposes Fines Against Multiple Companies Including British Airways, FedEx | 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-12.08.25

AirborneNextGen-
12.09.25

Airborne-Unlimited-12.10.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-12.11.25

AirborneUnlimited-12.12.25

AFE 2025 LIVE MOSAIC Town Hall (Archived): www.airborne-live.net

Tue, Sep 16, 2014

FAA Proposes Fines Against Multiple Companies Including British Airways, FedEx

Penalties Range From $54,000 To $195,000 For Hazardous Materials Violations

The FAA has proposed civil penalties ranging from $195,000 to $54,000 to against four companies for allegedly violating Hazardous Materials Regulations.

The largest penalty was levied against British Airways. The FAA alleges that on Aug. 14, 2012, British Airways offered a cardboard box containing a chemical oxygen generator to American Airlines for shipment aboard a passenger aircraft from London Heathrow Airport to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Oxygen generators are extremely flammable and are forbidden as cargo aboard passenger aircraft. The generator, which is a component in the passenger oxygen system, was being shipped to Texas for repair.

The FAA alleges British Airways did not declare the hazardous materials, and the shipment was not properly classed, described, packaged, marked or labeled. The FAA further alleges British Airways failed to label the package as an oxidizer that is suitable for transport by cargo aircraft only, provided no emergency response information with the package, and did not ensure its employees had received the required training for shipping hazardous materials.

In each of the remaining three cases, the FAA alleges the shipped 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. In the Allied Technology and Linvin, LLC cases, the FAA also alleges the companies did not provide emergency response information with the packages and did not ensure their employees received required hazardous materials training.

The other cases include:

FedEx Corp. of Memphis, TN, $65,000. The FAA alleges that on Jan. 10, 2014, a FedEx employee in Austin, Texas improperly accepted a cardboard box containing two one-gallon cans of Tuffy Fast Dry F.F. Blue Paint for shipment by air aboard a FedEx aircraft. The shipment was destined for Fort Smith, Ark. One of the cans leaked during transit.

According to Department of Transportation regulations, paint is considered to be a hazardous material. The FAA alleges the FedEx employee who accepted the shipment failed to inspect the package as required by regulations.

Linvin, LLC, of Austin, TX, $57,000. The FAA alleges that on April 5, 2014, a Linvin employee offered an undeclared shipment containing a one-quart container of denatured alcohol and a 15.5-ounce aerosol can of dust-removing spray in checked baggage to American Airlines for transport from Chicago O’Hare International Airport to Austin Bergstrom International Airport in Texas.

Under Department of Transportation regulations, denatured alcohol is considered to be a flammable liquid and dust-removing spray is considered to be a flammable aerosol. The Transportation Security Administration discovered the hazardous material.

Allied Technology Group of Rockville, MD, $54,000. The FAA alleges that on Jan. 21, 2014, Allied Technology offered a fiberboard box containing a 14.5-ounce can of electrical coating to Southwest Airlines for shipment from Amarillo, Texas, to Las Vegas, Nev.

According to Department of Transportation regulations, electrical coating is considered to be a flammable liquid. The shipment was discovered during baggage sorting operations at Rick Husband Amarillo International Airport.

Each company has requested meetings with the FAA to discuss their cases.

FMI: www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (12.13.25): Light Gun

Light Gun A handheld directional light signaling device which emits a brilliant narrow beam of white, green, or red light as selected by the tower controller. The color and type of>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (12.13.25)

“We have performed extensive ground testing by comparing warm up times, full power tethered pulls, and overall temperatures in 100 degree environments against other aircraft >[...]

NTSB Final Report: Gippsland GA-8

While Taxiing To Parking The Right Landing Gear Leg Collapsed, Resulting In Substantial Damage Analysis: The pilot made a normal approach with full flaps and landed on the runway. >[...]

Classic Aero-TV: Historically Unique -- Marlin Horst's Exquisite Fairchild 71

From 2014 (YouTube Edition): Exotic Rebuild Reveals Aerial Work Of Art During EAA AirVenture 2014, ANN's Michael Maya Charles took the time to get a history lesson about a great ai>[...]

Airborne 12.12.25: Global 8000, Korea Pilot Honors, AV-30 Update

Also: Project Talon, McFarlane Acquisition, Sky-Tec Service, JPL Earth Helo Tests Bombardier has earned a round of applause from the business aviation community, celebrating the fo>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

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