{"operation":"document","citation":"01-0136","title":"Law Offices of Fennemore Craig — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2001-08-20","effective_on":null,"summary":"01-0136 response to Law Offices of Fennemore Craig concerning 173.22.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-01-0136.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-01-0136.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-01-0136","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2001/010136.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nSpecial Programs\nResearch and\nAdministration\nAUG 2 0 2001\nAnne N. Christenson, Esq.\n3003 North Central Avenue\nLaw Offices of Fennemore Craig\nRef. No. 01-0136\nSuite 2600\nPhoenix, AZ 85012-2913\nDear Ms.\nChristenson:\nThis is in response to your letter dated May 28, 2001, requesting\nclarification of the term \"offeror\" under the Hazardous Materials\npresent the following two scenarios and ask whether these\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you\nactivities are subject to the HMR.\nIn the first scenario, Company A performs all offeror functions,\nsuch as\nselecting and preparing packages for shipment and\ngenerating shipping papers for their product.\nwould be considered the offerer for purposes of HMR\nAs such, Company A\napplicability.\nIn the second scenario, Company B physically prepares packagings\ncontaining Company A's product and generates shipping papers with\nCompany A's oversight. Company A selects the packaging for their\nproduct. Because Company A and Company B split the performance\nof offeror functions, both companies are subject to the HMR as\nofferors.\nThe requirements of the HMR apply to persons who offer for\nmaterials. Any one of several entities in a\ntransportation, accept for transportation or transport hazardous\ntransportation\nmovement could perform, singly or in combination, regulated\nfancaging, etg.) Preparation of shipping papers,\nselection of\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nFor purposes of administration and enforcement of the HMR, any\nperson who performs, attempts to perform, or is obligated (by\ncontract or otherwise) to perform\nany of the functions assigned\nby the HMR to an offeror in § 173.22 is subject to the HMR as an\nofferor.\nI hope this satisfies your request.\nSincerely,\nJOhA-A.\nGale\nTransportation Regulations Specialist\nOffice of\nHazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n: \"\n*001*\nBAH\nHIA T\n1\n...\n8173.22\nLAW OFFICES\nShipper's Responsibity\nFENNEMORE CRAIG\nA PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION\n01-0136\nANNE N, CHRISTENSON\nDirect Phone: (602) 916-547:\nschristo@fclaw.com\nDirect Fax: (602) 916-5673\nPHOENIX, TUCSON AND NOGALES\nOFFICES IN:\n3003 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE\nPHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-2913\nSUITE 2600\nPHONE: (602) 916-5000\n•\nFAX: (602) 816-5998\nMay 28, 2001\nMr. Ed Mazzullo, Director\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n400 Seventh Street, SW\nResearch and Special Programs Administration\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nRe:\nRequest for Written Interpretation\nDear Ed:\nI am writing this letter on behalf of a client who ships hazardous materials. Under the\nfollowing scenarios, for purposes of applicability of 49 C.F.R. parts 170 - 179, are one or both of\nthese companies offerors of the hazardous material (\"product\")?\nScenario 1:\nCompany A owns the product. Company A manufacturers the product.\nCompany A prepares the product for shipment by marking, labeling, and packaging the product.\nCompany A prepares the shipping papers and signs the shipper's certification.\nScenario 2: Company A owns the product, it provides the raw materials to manufacture\nthe product, and it always has title to the product. Company B manufacturers the product.\nCompany B prepares the product for shipment by marking, labeling, and packaging the product.\nCompany A tells Company B how to prepare shipping papers. Company B prepares the shipping\nthe packaging (a cargo tank) and arranges for transportation of the product.\npapers, on Company A's bill of lading, and signs the shipper's certification. Company A selects\nquestions.\nThank you for your assistance with this matter. Please contact me if you have any\nSincerely,\nAnne n.Christenson\nAnne N. Christenson\nPHX/ACHRISTE/1186142.1/53078.179\n{0 0 20206008 1 5 96 209\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nof Transportation\nU.S. Department\nWashington. DC\n400 Seventh Street, S4\n20590\nSpecial Programs\nResearch and\nAdministration\nDEC 5 1994\nMs. Alice Walker, Ph.D.\nRegulatory Consultant\n47 Country Club Drive\nSenatobia, MS\n38668\nDear Dr. Walker:\nThis is in response to your letter dated September 28, 1994, regarding the\nyou ask if we concur with your opinion that mixtures containing 77% and 57.6%.\nclassification of certain mixtures containing copper hydroxide. Specifically,\n61.4% copper hydroxide are not subject to the Hazardous Materials Regulations.\nThe Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) govern the\ntransportation of hazardous materials in commerce. Under 49 CFR 173.22, it is\nthe shipper's responsibility to properly classify a hazardous material.\nHowever, based on the information provided in your letter, we agree that the\nmixtures of copper hydroxide described in your letter are not subject to the\nI hope this satisfies your inquiry.\nSincerely,\nDelmer F\nBillings\nchiet, Regulations Development\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nDB\nFle: 173,22\nREGUILATORY CONBULTING • T UNTRY CLUB DRIVE • SENATORIA, MS 38668SL: 174,399\nAlice Walker, Ph.D.\nSeptember 28, 1994\nMr. Delmer F. Billings\nChief, Regulations Development\ndo a read Mangar Standarde\nOCT - 6 1994\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n4.C.\nRequest for Interpretation of the Appropriate Shipping Classification\nfor Copper (or Cupric) Hydroxide Products\nDear Mr. Billings:\nI am writing this letter to you on behalf of Cuproquim Corporation, Agtrol\nChemical Products, and Griffin Corporation who manufacture and ship in the\nUnited States copper (cupric) hydroxide products. There is much concern and\nor two of their formulations. These are (1) a 77% copper hydroxide dry material,\nliscussion within these companies about the appropriate shipping descriptior\nvariously shipped as Blue Shield DF, Blue Shield WP, Champion WP, and\nKocide 101, and (2) a 57.6 - 61.4% copper hydroxide dry product shipped as Blue\nShield 40DF, Agtrol Champ Formula II DF, and Kocide DF.\nOn DOT's Hazardous Materials Table in 49 CFR § 172.101, copper (cupric)\nhydroxide is not listed. However, a category called \"copper based fungicides\" is.\nThese manufacturers are currently shipping their products under this category.\nTheir shipping description reads: \"Copper based pesticides, solid, toxic, n.o.s.,\n(copper hydroxide), 6.1, UN 2775, III.\nI have been asked to prepare a consolidated acute toxicology profile in an effort to\nfound below:\ncontirm or correct this shipping description. I have duplicated the information I\nCopper Hydroxide (77%)*:\nAcute Tox. Profile\nDOT Limits\nAcute Oral LD50 - Rats:\nmale - 2400 mg/kg\nfemale - 2200 mg/kg\n200 mg/kg (solid)\nAcute Dermal LD50 - Rabbits:\n>2000 mg/kg\n1000 mg/kg\nAcute Inhalation LC50 - Rats:\n28.8 mg/L (nominal concen-\ntration on a 1 hr basis)\n10 mg/L\n*(Includes Cuproquim Blue Shield DF, Cuproquim Blue Shield WP, Agtrol\nChampion WP and Griffin Kocide 101).\nPhone 601 562-5995 • Fax 601 562-7404\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\nLetter to Mr. Billings\nSeptember 28, 1994\nPage Two\nCopper Hydroxide DF (57.6-61.4%)*:\nAcute Oral LD50 - Rats:\n>646 mg/kg\n200 mg/kg (solid)\nAcute Dermal LD50 - Rabbits:\n>2000 mg/kg\n1000 mg/kg\nAcute Inhalation LC50 - Rats:\n>55.51 mg/L (nominal con-\ncentration on a 1 hr basis\n10 mg/L\n* Includes Cuproquim Blue Shield 40DF, Agtrol Champ Formula II DF, and\nGriffin Kocide DF).\nIt is my interpretation that none of these copper hydroxide products falls under\nthe criteria for oral, dermal, or inhalation toxicity as prescribed in 49 CFR\n173.132(a)(1)(i)(ii)(iii) and, therefore, none of them meets the definition for 6.1\npoisonous materials.\nthat copper (cupric) hydroxide is not on Table 1 of the Hazardous Substances List.\nFurther in my quest for hazardous material shipping information, I determined\nIt is not included on the Marine Pollutant List. I have concluded that these\nmaterials are not regulated by DOT.\nMr. Billings, the inclusion of the generic, \"copper based pesticides,\" on the\ncurrent shipping descriptions. However, confirmatory correspondence from you\nmaterials meeting the toxicity criteria for poisonous materials in Division 6.1, PG\nofficials. May we hear from you soon? I understand that labeling changes to\nIIl will be required January 1, 1995. Your reply before then would be extremely\nhelpful.\nSincerely,\nAlice Weeker\nAlice Walker, Ph.D\nRegulatory Consultant\nCC:\nP. Haaf, J. Kirk, L. Horne, Cuproquim\nH. O'Neal, Agtrol\nJ. Yowell, Griffin\nJ. Rathvon, Piper & Marbury","truncated":false,"body_characters":8257}