{"operation":"document","citation":"08-0166","title":"Remington Arms Company, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2008-07-09","effective_on":null,"summary":"08-0166 response to Remington Arms Company, Inc. concerning 176.172.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0166.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0166.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0166","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2008/080166.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\nJUL ~19 2008\n1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.\nWashington. DC 20590\nMr. Gregory D. Kehrli\nWorldwide Transportation Manager\nRemington Arms Company, Inc.\n870 Remington Drive\nMadison, NC 27025\nRef. No. 08-01 66\nDear Mr. Kehrli:\nThis responds to your June 9,2008 letter requesting clarification of the requirements for\nstructural serviceability of containers and vehicles carrying Class 1 (explosive) materials on\nships under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 17 1-1 80).\nSpecifically, you ask for clarification of the applicability of the requirements to Division 1.4s\nexplosives under 9 176.172 of the HIVIR.\nIt is your understanding that Division 1.4 explosives are not subject to the structural\nserviceability requirements under 9 176.172(a)(2) based on the exception from the\nrequirement to have a certification statement of structural serviceability accompany the\nshipment as provided in 8 176.1 72(c). You indicate that your understanding is supported by\nlanguage in the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code). 7.4.6.4.2 of\nthe IMDG Code states that \"freight containers and vehicles shall not be offered for the\ntransport of goods of class 1 other than division 1.4 unless the container or the vehicle is\nstructurally serviceable.\"\nYour understanding is correct. It is the opinion of this Office that Division 1.4 explosives\n(including Division 1.4s explosives) are excepted from the structural serviceability\nrequirements in accordance with 5 176.172(c) of the HMR. According to 5 176.172(c), \"all\nshipments of Class 1 (explosive) materials except those in Division 1.4 (explosive) must be\naccompanied by a statement, which may appear on the shipping paper, certifying that the\nfreight container or the vehicle is structurally serviceable as defined in paragraph (a)(2) of\nthis section.\"\nThe intent of 5 176.172(c) is to except Division 1.4 explosives from the structural\nserviceability requirements in the same manner as the IMDG Code. The language as written\nis unclear and could be interpreted to only except Division 1.4 explosives from the\nrequirement for a certification statement to accompany the shipment. However, the\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\ncertification statement is not required because the containers or vehicles containing Division\n1.4 explosives are not required to meet the structural serviceability requirements of\n4 176.172(a)(2). We will clarify this language in an upcoming rulemaking.\nI hope this information is helpful.\nSincerely,\nSusan Gorsky\nActing Chief, Standards Development\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nJune 9,2008\nMr. Shane Kelley\nUS Department of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue SE\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nSubject: Application of Container Serviceability Rule to Shipments of 1.4s\nDear Mr. Kelley:\nWe are writing to request an interpretation of the rules regarding the application of the Container\nStructural Serviceability rule for international shipments of Class 1.4s materials.\nPer the 2006 IMDG Code, Part 7 (7.4.6.4.2) , Division 1.4 materials are exempted from\nstructural serviceability rules. However, we have had numerous instances where cargo inspection\nbureaus, working on behalf of ocean carriers, have insisted that these rules do apply as specified '\nin 49CFR part 176. In reviewing 176.172, 176.172 (c) specifically exempts Division 1.4\nmaterials from the requirement that a statement must appear on the shipping paper certifying that\nthe freight container is structurally serviceable. It would appear from our view that this statement\nleads us to believe that serviceability rules should not be applicable, coupled with the fact that\nthis exception for Division 1.4 materials is clearly stated in the IMDG code.\nIn instances where containers have been rejected by the cargo inspection bureaus referencing the\nrequirements of this rule, some of our shipments have missed their initial vessel sailing dates,\nand had to remain in the port area for an extended period to be trans-loaded into another\ncontainer causing unnecessary delay to our customers.\nPlease review and advise the proper interpretation that should be applied to ocean shipments of\nDivision 1.4 materials.\nSincerely,\n~ o i d w i d e Transportation Manager\nRemington Arms Company, Inc. 870 Rernington Drive e P.O. Box 700 6 Madison, NC 27025\nPhone 800-243-9700 www.remington.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":4505}