# NRS Logistics — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation **Citation:** 03-0176 **Type / status:** guidance / guidance **Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration **Effective:** Not stated **Published:** 2003-08-11 03-0176 response to NRS Logistics concerning 172.802. ## Document text <<>> of Transportation U.S. Department Research and AUG 1 1 2003 400 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 speciai Programs Administration Mr, David Hiromura Ref No.: 03-0176 NRS Logistics 10 Bank Street, Ste 1110 White Plains, NY 10606 Dear Mr. Hiromura: This responds to your July 18, 2003 letter and subsequent conversation with Ms. Susan Gorsky concerning hazardous materials transportation security requirements adopted in the final rule published March 25, 2003, under docket HM-232. Specifically, you ask how the security plan requirements established in the final rule apply to a person (overseas subcontractors) domiciled outside the United Foreign-based entities must comply with all applicable HMR requirements when operating within the United States. Foreign entities that ship or transport hazardous materials in the United States in quantities listed in the HM-232 final rule must develop and implement security plans for those hazardous materials. Foreign entities, such as overseas subcontractors, that do not operate in the United States are not subject to the security plan requirements. Carriers are not required to verify whether a shipper has a security plan that conforms to the HM-232 requirements nor are shippers required to verify that a carrier has a security plan that conforms to the HM-232 requirements. At a minium, however, a shipper should satisfy itself that its carrier has a security plan in place that covers the hazardous material to be transported. As you note, in December 2002, the United Nations Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods amended the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods to add a new Chapter 1.4 on security provisions. The UN Recommendations include requirements for security awareness training and development and implementation of security plans. The HM-232 final rule provides that security plans that conform to regulations or guidelines issued by international organizations may be used to satisfy the security plan requirements in Subpart I of Part 172 (see § 172.804). I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you require additional assistance Sincerely, Thon Baoly Susan Gorsky Senior Transportation Regulations Specialist Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 407 030176 <<>> Gorsky, Susan From: To: Sent: david_hiromura@nrsgroup.co.jp Belerford Friday, July 18, 2003 10:08 AM Cc: Gorsky, Susan Subject: mmorrissette@hmac.org $172.802 HM-232 SecurityPlans 03-0176 interpretation from RSPA. and to hopefully get some idea on when we can expect Thanks and have a nice weekend. David Hiromura 07/18/2003 10:06 AM Forwarded by david hiromura/USER/NYC/NRSGROUP on 07/09/2003 03:16 PM david hiromura CC: To: mmorrissette@hmac.org susan.gorsky@rspa.dot.gov Subject: HM-232 plan under the above rule making. We are an NVOCC and come under the requirements for establishing a security HM-232, it seems to require that any subcontracted warehouse, trucker, etc, In order to meet the requirements of equivalent needs to have have their own security plan in place which provides which we would like RSPA's guidance. security to that required by HM-232. This raises an issue for not, we will US companies 1) Domestic sub-contractors: I don't think we will have a problem here as be able to find alternative service should be aware of new security requirements and if they are 2) Overseas sub-contractors: This is an area of major concern. providers. companies are not subject to US laws and I do not anticipate many will have Overseas security plans in place by 9/25/03. Unlike the US domestic market, When I spoke with you security regulations are being of RSPA's policy on this issue. adopted in 2005, but that does not address We are aware that new international the time period between 9/25/03 and when the international rules are adopted. in Supplementary Information III F states that persons subject to the Similarly, we have issues with cargoes offered by shippers. the any of the materials designated in the rulemaking are required to registration requirements of subpart G of part 107 who offer or transport develop and implement a security plan. domiciled outside the US (i.e. foreign shippers) from the registration 107 subpart G excepts persons requirement; however, I cannot find any reference to subpart G in the If this is correct, then. offerors who come under the new requirements? Will carriers be required to verify the existence of security plans by required to verify that offerors of haz mats had registered with DOT, so if In the past, we were not of security plans RSPA is consistent, they should be no requirement to verify the existence by offerors. Besides foreign offerors, we anticipate <<>> HM-232 and so do not have security plans In blavare of the requirements of there may be some domestic offerors who Thank you for your response to these questions. Regards, NRS Logistics David Hiromura 10 Bank Street, White Plains, NY 10606 Ste 1110 F 914-422-3414 914-422-3400 ## Provenance - Official: Yes - Source: - Source ID: `phmsa` - SHA-256: `a3da59cafb6132d34a6e431f1cb01284fb15dddcd9855f0508fb74959068ac4f` - Retrieved: 2026-08-20T00:59:31.977Z - Exported: 2026-08-22T14:24:49.507Z - Document slug: `phmsa-interpretation-03-0176` ### Source metadata ```json { "materialSubtype": "interpretation", "interpretationArea": "hazardous_materials", "representation": "full_text_from_official_pdf", "companies": [ "NRS Logistics" ], "individuals": [ "Mr. David Hiromura" ], "refIds": [ "03-0176" ], "catalogDates": [ "2003-08-11" ], "catalogParts": [ 172 ], "catalogRowCount": 1, "sourceRecordUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/63356" ], "linkedAttachmentUrls": [], "unavailableResponseUrls": [], "duplicateRepresentationUrls": [], "citedSections": [ "172.802", "172.804" ], "catalogPageUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/172802" ], "pdfUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2003/030176.pdf" ], "representations": [ { "viewUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2003/030176.pdf", "detailUrl": null, "detailHtmlPath": null, "pdfUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2003/030176.pdf", "pdfArtifactPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/03-0176-59d651f65e.pdf", "pdfArtifactSha256": "a619c51e160a3c3f752f5854333f18be3d9399ac391e2aacf9aefbf99bc408d8", "extractedTextPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/03-0176-59d651f65e.v2.txt", "extractedTextSha256": "d35b83f5db5bd31f84c93742fc8e941c12009b3eae23e8b352efb53f8ab81d48", "pageCount": 3, "extractionVersion": 2 } ], "caveat": "Interpretations apply regulations to the facts presented and do not create independently enforceable requirements.", "jurisdiction": "US" } ```