{"operation":"document","citation":"05-0313","title":"Chevron U.S.A. Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2006-02-27","effective_on":null,"summary":"05-0313 response to Chevron U.S.A. Inc. concerning 173.156.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0313.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0313.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0313","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2005/050313.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nFEB 27 2006\nMs. Patricia E. Lin\nRef. No. 05-0313\nCounsel, Environmental Practice Group\nChevron U.S.A. Inc.\n1500 Louisiana Street\nHouston, TX 77002\nDear Ms. Lin:\nThis is in response to your November 23; 2005 letter requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask if\ntemporary storage of a railroad car containing hazardous material on a leased railroad\nspur is considered to be \"in transportation.\" In addition, you ask if the shipper or carrier\nis financially responsible for any release during transportation. Your question pertains to\nthe following scenario:\nA shipper consigns a shipment of a Class 3 (Flammable liquid) material from a vendor's\nfacility in Alabama to its processing plant in Mississippi. Initially, the shipment is\ncarried in trucks via public highway to a private rail yard. The shipment is then\ntransloaded from the trucks to a railcar. The railcar is stored on a leased railroad spur for\na period of 1-3 days before it is picked up by the rail carrier and transported to its final\ndestination.\nIn the scenario you describe in your November 23 letter, the storage of the hazardous\nmaterial in a railcar located on a leased railroad spur is considered to be \"in\ntransportation\" for purposes of the HMR. See § 171.1(c). Specifically, in the scenario\nyou describe, the storage of the material at the rail yard is \"storage incidental to\nmovement\" and subject to all applicable HMR requirements. The HMR define \"storage\nincidental to movement\" to include \"storage of a transport vehicle, freight container, or\npackage containing a hazardous material by any person between the time that a carrier\ntakes physical possession of the hazardous material for the purpose of transporting it in\ncommerce until the package containing the hazardous material is physically delivered to\nthe destination indicated on a shipping document, package marking, or other medium.\"\nSee § 171.8. Storage incidental to movement also includes storage at a transloading\nfacility. See §171.1(c)(4).\nFinancial responsibility for a release of hazardous material during transportation is not\nregulated by the HMR. However, federal law does provide for civil and criminal\n174.67\n050313\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nNovember 23, 2005\nMr. Edward T. Mazzullo\nDirector, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\n400 7th Street S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nDear Mr. Mazzullo:\nOn November 10, I called the Hazardous Materials Information Center for assistance in applying\nthe Hazardous Materials Regulations (HM) to a shipping process that my client, Chevron Technology\nVentures, LLC (CTV), is seeking to implement. CTV needs to move class 3 bulk feedstock oils from a\nvendor's facility in Alabama to its processing plant in Mississippi. Currently, the contemplated shipping\nmethod is for the vendor to transport truckloads of the oil from its facility, via public highway, to a\nprivate railyard where Chevron will lease an unused railroad spur and keep a DOT-compliant rail car.\nThe vendor will transload the oils from its trucks to the rail car and then notifies a rail carrier for\npickup. The rail carrier has indicated that it should be able to pick up the loaded rail car within 24 hours\nof notification, but given the rural location of the railyard, it could take up to 3 days for pick-up. The\nvendor expects to make 12 to 14 such shipments to CTV each year, and each shipment will be manifested\nwith the Mississippi processing plant as the final destination. The feedstock vendor will be\nresponsible for reporting and responding to any spill or release that might occur while the loaded rail cars\nare still at the railyard, but CTV will be contractually required to reimburse the vendor for the cost of any\nsuch reporting or response.\nMr. Kurt Eichenlaub answered my call to the Hazardous Materials Information Center and agreed\nthat all phases of this shipping method -- trucking, transloading, storage at the railyard while awaiting\npickup by the rail carrier, and rail carriage -- qualify as \"transportation\" under the HMR and the guidance\nprovided in HM-223. Additionally, he indicated that CTV's financial liability for any releases that occur\nafter transloading while the railcars are awaiting piukup by the rail varrier, Chevion's lease of the railroad\nspur where the transloading will occur, and Chevron's ownership of the rail cars have no bearing on the\nfact that the oil shipments are \"in transit\" while they are at the railyard.\nCTV and Chevron wish to comply with all regulations that will govern this shipping method. We\nappreciate Mr. Eichenlaub's verbal interpretation of the DOT's HMR. However, in order to move forward\nwith the project, we feel it would be helpful to obtain written confirmation of his interpretation of the\nregulations, especially regarding the effect, if amy, of the contractual allocation of financial responsibility\nfor any losses that may occur in transit.\nThank you for your assistance. If you have any questions, please contact me at (832) 854-6427.\nSincerely,\nPatricia E. Lin signed by permission\nPatricia E. Lin\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n<FRA>\nSubject: RE: Interpretation Letter Concurrence\nKurt,\nBill Schoonover forwarded your message below to me. In response, attached please find FRA's comments to PHMSA's letter\nof interpretation 05-0313 addressed to Chevron, U.S.A. Inc. (I've attached a redlined document which is marked to show our\nsuggested revisions, as well as a clean copy). Thanks for the opportunity to comment.\n-Lucinda Henriksen\nFRA, Office of Chief Counsel\n(202) 493-1345\nFrom: Eichenlaub, Kurt <PHMSA>\nSent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 2:06 PM\nTo: Schoonover, William\nSubject: Interpretation Letter Concurrence\nMr. Schoonover,\nPlease review the attached letter of interpretation and respond with FRA concurrence/comment. Thanks\nfor your help.\nKURT C. EICHENLAUB\nTransportation Regulations Specialist\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\nTel: 202-366-8553\nFAX: 202-366-3012\nE-Mail: kurt.eichenlaub@dot.gov\nWeb Site: http://hazmat.dot.gov\n02/14/2006","truncated":false,"body_characters":6132}