{"operation":"document","citation":"00-0323","title":"Iowa Department of Transportation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2001-02-15","effective_on":null,"summary":"00-0323 response to Iowa Department of Transportation concerning 172.504.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-00-0323.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-00-0323.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-00-0323","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2000/000323.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nResearch and\nSpecial Programs\nAdministration\nFEB | 5 2001\nMr. Tom Sever\nIowa Department of Transportation\nRef. No.: 00-0323\nMotor Vehicle Enforcement\nP.O. Box 10473\nDes Moines, Iowa 50306-0473\nDear Mr. Sever:\nThis responds to your November 17, 2000 letter concerning the applicability of the placarding\nrequirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) to domestic\nshipments of Class 9 materials. Specifically, you disagree with our determination that a Class 9\nplacard is not required for shipments traveling through the United States that may be intended for\ndestinations outside the United States.\nThe CLASS 9 placard was included in the HMR to assure consistency with international\nhazardous materials transportation regulations. We provided an exception from placarding for\nshipments of Class 9 materials in domestic transportation because the risks associated with their\ntransportation are relatively low as compared with other classes of hazardous materials, and the\ncommunication of the hazard using a placard is not cost-effective. As stated in a\nFebruary 25, 1997 letter of clarification on this subject, an international shipment of hazardous\nmaterial traveling through the United States may benefit from the domestic transportation\nplacarding exception in § 172.504(f)(9) while the material is in the United States. For safety and\nhazard communication purposes, there is no difference between a shipment of a Class 9 material\nbeing transported entirely within the United States and a shipment of a Class 9 material being\ntransported through the United States to a foreign destination. Thus, we do not agree that the\nFebruary 25, 1997 letter of clarification should be rescinded. Further, because of the need to\nmaintain consistency between the HMR and international standards, we do not agree that the\nCLASS 9 placard should be eliminated.\nYou also suggest that we use the same criteria for determining whether a shipment is being\ntransported in interstate or international commerce for purposes of the HMR as the Federal\nMotor Carrier Safety Administration does in applying the Federal Motor Carrier Safety\nRegulations (FMCSR). Determinations as to the applicability of the HMR and FMCSR differ\nbecause of differences in the authorizing statutes that form the bases for the hazardous materials\nand motor carrier safety programs.\n000323\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nPage 2\nI hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact\nthis office.\nSincerely,\nEland I. Mezullo\nEdward T. Mazzullo\nDirector, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nIowa Department of Transportation\nPark Fair Mall, 100 Euclid Avenue\n515-237-3278\nP.O. Box 10473, Des Moines, IA 50306-0473\nFAX: 515-237-3387\nEngrum\n§172.504\nPlacarding\nNovember 17, 2000\n00-0323\nEdward Mazzullo, Director\nOrice of Had soul al ras drie in 10\nU.S. Department of Transportation\n400 Seventh Street, SW\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nDear Mr. Mazzullo:\nI request the Research and Special Programs Administration rescind their\ninterpretation dated February 25, 1997 (copy enclosed) pertaining to\ndomestic transportation of Class 9 material, or change the definition of\ndomestic transportation listed in 171.8, or eliminate the Class 9 placard\nrequirements in 172.504(f)(9) and 172.560.\nFirst, we must look at the intent of a shipment. A shipment originates in Des\nMoines, lowa and is destined for a foreign country. The intent of the\nshipment is international and not domestic. To be a domestic shipment, it\nmust originate in the United States and destined to be delivered in the United\nStates. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has guidance on\nintra/interstate commerce, which could be extended to domestic and\ninternational transportation.\nInterstate commerce is determined by the essential character of the\nnovement manifested by he shippers fixed and persistent intent at the tim\nf shioment: and is ascertained from all of the facts and circumstances\nsurrounding transportation. When the intent of transportation being\neven when the route is within the\nsubject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nEdward Mazzullo, Director\nPage 2\nNovember 17, 2000\nWith the concept of \"one DOT,\" it would be great if RSPA and modal\nadministrations could write regulations that have uniform intent.\nThank you in advance for considering this matter.\nSincerely,\nTomtever\nTom Sever\nHazardous Materials Coordinator\nMotor Vehicle Enforcement\nTS: jdl\nEnclosure\ncc: Art Fleener\nFederal Motor Carrier Safety Administration\nMLW:jdl","truncated":false,"body_characters":4676}