Iowa Department of Transportation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1U.S. Department 400 Seventh St., S.W. of Transportation Washington, D.C. 20590 Research and Special Programs Administration FEB | 5 2001 Mr. Tom Sever Iowa Department of Transportation Ref. No.: 00-0323 Motor Vehicle Enforcement P.O. Box 10473 Des Moines, Iowa 50306-0473 Dear Mr. Sever: This responds to your November 17, 2000 letter concerning the applicability of the placarding requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) to domestic shipments of Class 9 materials. Specifically, you disagree with our determination that a Class 9 placard is not required for shipments traveling through the United States that may be intended for destinations outside the United States. The CLASS 9 placard was included in the HMR to assure consistency with international hazardous materials transportation regulations. We provided an exception from placarding for shipments of Class 9 materials in domestic transportation because the risks associated with their transportation are relatively low as compared with other classes of hazardous materials, and the communication of the hazard using a placard is not cost-effective. As stated in a February 25, 1997 letter of clarification on this subject, an international shipment of hazardous material traveling through the United States may benefit from the domestic transportation placarding exception in § 172.504(f)(9) while the material is in the United States. For safety and hazard communication purposes, there is no difference between a shipment of a Class 9 material being transported entirely within the United States and a shipment of a Class 9 material being transported through the United States to a foreign destination. Thus, we do not agree that the February 25, 1997 letter of clarification should be rescinded. Further, because of the need to maintain consistency between the HMR and international standards, we do not agree that the CLASS 9 placard should be eliminated. You also suggest that we use the same criteria for determining whether a shipment is being transported in interstate or international commerce for purposes of the HMR as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration does in applying the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR). Determinations as to the applicability of the HMR and FMCSR differ because of differences in the authorizing statutes that form the bases for the hazardous materials and motor carrier safety programs. 000323#

Page 2I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Eland I. Mezullo Edward T. Mazzullo Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards#

Page 3Iowa Department of Transportation Park Fair Mall, 100 Euclid Avenue 515-237-3278 P.O. Box 10473, Des Moines, IA 50306-0473 FAX: 515-237-3387 Engrum §172.504 Placarding November 17, 2000 00-0323 Edward Mazzullo, Director Orice of Had soul al ras drie in 10 U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington, D.C. 20590-0001 Dear Mr. Mazzullo: I request the Research and Special Programs Administration rescind their interpretation dated February 25, 1997 (copy enclosed) pertaining to domestic transportation of Class 9 material, or change the definition of domestic transportation listed in 171.8, or eliminate the Class 9 placard requirements in 172.504(f)(9) and 172.560. First, we must look at the intent of a shipment. A shipment originates in Des Moines, lowa and is destined for a foreign country. The intent of the shipment is international and not domestic. To be a domestic shipment, it must originate in the United States and destined to be delivered in the United States. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has guidance on intra/interstate commerce, which could be extended to domestic and international transportation. Interstate commerce is determined by the essential character of the novement manifested by he shippers fixed and persistent intent at the tim f shioment: and is ascertained from all of the facts and circumstances surrounding transportation. When the intent of transportation being even when the route is within the subject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.#

Page 4Edward Mazzullo, Director Page 2 November 17, 2000 With the concept of "one DOT," it would be great if RSPA and modal administrations could write regulations that have uniform intent. Thank you in advance for considering this matter. Sincerely, Tomtever Tom Sever Hazardous Materials Coordinator Motor Vehicle Enforcement TS: jdl Enclosure cc: Art Fleener Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration MLW:jdl#