# URS Corporation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 04-0082
- **title:** URS Corporation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2004-11-16
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 04-0082 response to URS Corporation concerning 177.834.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0082.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0082.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0082
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2004/040082.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

of Transportation
U.S. Department
Special Programs
Research and
NOV 16 2004
400 Seventh St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Administration
Mr. Andrew N. Romach
Ref. No. 04-0082
Corporate Regulatory Manager
URS Corporation
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Morrisvile, NC 27560-8421
Dear Mr. Romach:
This is in
response to your March 29, 2004 letter requesting
clarification of responsibility for loading and unloading
packages under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR
Parts 171-180). In your scenario the shipper physically
transfers the drums containing hazardous materials onto a
transport vehicle and the carrier secures the drums against
carrier is in violation of the HMR if the drums are not
movement. Specifically, you ask whether the shipper or the
adequately secured on the transport vehicle.
Depending on the actual functions performed, one or both parties
may be held responsible for violations related to the carrier's
load securing devices or methods.
A shipper or carrier who
performs loading or unloading functions must perform those
functions in accordance with applicable HMR requirements.
Securing drums or other packages in a transport vehicle is a
loading function subject to regulation under the HMR. In your
scenario, the shipper's personnel place the drums on the
responsibility for securing the load rests with the carrier's
transport vehicle, but, by agreement with the carrier,
personnel.
Shipper personnel verify that the load is properly
secured prior to the carrier's departure from the facility. In
accordance with § 173.30, because both the shipper and the
carrier are involved in the loading operation, both are
responsible for assuring compliance with applicable HMR
requirements. In addition, in accordance with § 177.834 (a), a
carrier has a further responsibility to ensure that any package
of hazardous materials not permanently attached to their motor
vehicle is properly secured at all times while in
transportation.
147.834
040082

<<<PAGE 2>>>

I hope this
information is helpful. If you have further
questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
Hallu z. Mtateli
Hattie L. Mitchell
Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Stevens
URS
$117.834
March 29, 2004
Loading Unloading
Mr. Ed Mazzullo, Director
04-0082
Office of Hazardous Material Standards
Research and Special Programs Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
400 7th Street, SW (DHM-10)
Washington, DC 20590-0001
FAX: (202) 366-3012
Dear Mr. Mazzullo:
I am writing to you to request a written regulatory interpretation to clarify the shipper's
responsibil ty in a situation where the blocking and bracing configuration that secures several 55-
gallon drums of hazardous material in place onboard a truck becomes dislodged during transit.
The specific questions are:
?? Is the shipper responsible for any failures of the carrier's load-securing devices or
failures due to the carrier's securement methods that become apparent after the
truck leaves the shipper's facility?
?? Is the shipper responsible because the shipper physically placed the containers
ontoard the truck, even though the truck driver signed the bill of lading verifying
that the load was secured properly?
?? Is responsibility tied to the specific loading/blocking/bracing activity performed?
hazardous materials by ground transportation to customers in various locations around the United
The situation about which we are concerned is as follows. A Company ships 55-gallon drums of
States. These HAZMAT shipments are transported onboard trucks by commercial carriers.
The Company prepares the drums for shipment (which includes packaging, marking, labeling).
Employees of the Company place the drums into the carrier's truck trailer. The carrier is
to secure the load (such as load lock levers, straps, etc.) The Company has internal procedures,
responsible for securing the load, including responsibility for providing the necessary equipment
are not allowed to secure the containers.
which require the carrier to secure all containers prior to departure. Employees of the company
Prior to allowing the Carrier to transport the load offsite, employees of the Company inspect the
ruck trailer to verify visually that the carrier has installed appropriate load securing devices
'ollowing this inspection, the truck driver signs a statement on the bill of lading verifying tha
the load is secured properly.
49 CFR §173.30 states that a person must load hazardous materials in accordance with
applicable loading and unloading requirements. This provision might be interpreted as placing
responsibility for insuring proper loading upon the shipper in the situation above. However, this
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
URS Corporation
Tel: 919.461.1220
Morrisville, NC 27560
Fax: 919.461.1371
andy_romach@urscorp.com

<<<PAGE 4>>>

URS
interpretation seems to be at odds with the regulations governing the carriage of HazMat by
public highway. 49 CFR §177.834(a) sets forth the general requirement to secure loads against
shifting. It is our understanding that responsibility for insuring compliance with this provision,
falls upon the carrier. Placing responsibility for insuring proper loading upon the shipper would
seem to remove responsibility for this activity from the one entity that is most qualified to insure
compliance, i.e., the carrier. Also, 49 CFR §392.9 places load securement responsibilities on the
carrier anc! further requires the carrier to reexamine the load securement at intervals during the
course of transportation and to make any necessary adjustments.
We appreciate your assistance in resolving this question. Thank you for your consideration of
this request.
Sincerely,
Andrew N. Romach
Corporate Regulatory Manager
URS Corporation
URS Corporation
Morrisville, NC 27560
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Fax: 919.461.1371
Tel: 919.461.1:220
andy_romach@urscorp.com
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 5952
