# N & M Transfer Co., Inc — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 04-0217
- **title:** N & M Transfer Co., Inc — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2005-11-24
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 04-0217 response to N & M Transfer Co., Inc concerning 177.854.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0217.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0217.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0217
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2004/040217.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

of Transportation
U.S. Department
400 Seventh St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Research ancl
Special Programs
Administration
NOV 24 2015
Mr. Greg Born
Ref. No.: 04-0217
Safety Assistant
N & M Transfer Co., Inc.
630 Muttart Road
Neenah, WI 54956
Dear Mr. Born:
This is in response to your letter dated July 19, 2004 requesting clarification of the packaging
requirements found in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180).
Specifically, you ask if a consignee may refuse to accept a shipment of hazardous material
that shows evidence of leakage during transportation.
The answer is yes. A consignee may refuse to accept a shipment of hazardous material that
shows evidence of leakage during transportation. In that case, it is the carrier's responsibility
to safely repair, overpack, store or dispose of a leaking or damaged hazardous material
package in accordance with §§ 177.854(b) and 173.3(c).
Also note that the person in physical possession of a leaking hazardous material package at
the time it is discovered in transportation must submit a Hazardous Materials Incident Report
within 30 days of the discovery of the incident (§ 173.16).
I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you require additional assistance.
Sincerely.
Dest
Chief, Standards Development
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
177:854(e)
040217

<<<PAGE 2>>>

DHM-10
On time. We quarantee it.
TRANSFER CO., INC.
Eicheblamb
July 19th
, 2004
$177.854 (e)
04
Apphcability
RECEIV
Office of the Chief Counsel
Research and Special Programs Administration
04 - 0217
400 Seventh Street, SW
Room 8407
Washington, DC 20590
(202) 366-4400
Dear RSPA:
Can 177.854(e) be enforced on a consignee when it is discovered that the hazardous material
packaging being delivered to them indicates evidence of leakage? In other words, by referring to
this regulatin, can a motor carrier force a consignee to accept hazardous material packaging
even though there is evidence of leakage (e.g. residue around vent caps)? Doesn't a consignee
who refuses packaging under these conditions force a motor carrier to increase the health risks to
the general public when the packaging is forced to continue in transport?
We recently had an incident in, which this occurred. We were willing to pick up the hazardous
packaging the next day when we could return with metal overpack containers to reduce or
minimize any further chances of spills during transport. This customer still would not accept our
request. This consignee has a policy that the entire shipment will be refused whenever there are
any sings (no matter how minor) of leakage on hazardous material packaging. My company was
advised that the consignee's attorney told them they have the right to refuse any shipment,
regardless if it is or is not hazardous.
Any input you could provide would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
N &M Frar sfer Co., Inc.
Safety Assistant
Greg Born
630 Muttart Road • Neenah, WI 54956 • 920-722-7760 • 800-236-4463 • 920-722-t285 Fax • www.nmtransfer.com
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 3037
