{"operation":"document","citation":"12-0136","title":"Transportation Enforcement Division Public Utilities Commission of Ohio — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2012-08-01","effective_on":null,"summary":"12-0136 response to Transportation Enforcement Division Public Utilities Commission of Ohio concerning 177.834.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-12-0136.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-12-0136.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-12-0136","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2012/120136.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n, , ,~ Cr-\"'oartmPnt\n·.~/rrn;;sportati~n\n':oeiine tmd ~azarrdo~Js\n·lc:.derials Satety\n. :.a ministration\nr.\\IJ !' Jr-~'/¥ ljt;t\"~~_..,,/ .~ .. \\J~nue ~:-Jt:\n. ::ll!PC!tOtl, UC ~;~_::<?~J\n-IJG. o 1 41112\nCarlisle Smith\nSupervisor, Hazardous Materials Section\nTransportation Enforcement Division\nPublic Utilities Commission of Ohio\n180 East Broad Street\nColumbus, Ohio 43215\nReference No.: 12-0136\nDear Mr. Smith:\nThis is in response to your June 21, 2012 email requesting guidance relating to the\nhighway transportation load securement requirements of the Hazardous Materials\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). You present a particular loading scenario for\nintermediate bulk containers (IBCs) within a van type trailer and provide supporting\nphotographs. You ask whether the IBCs, loaded as described and depicted are in\ncompliance with the load securement requirements of the HMR.\nThe answer is no.\nAs depicted, the longitudinal (front to back) securement of the load may be appropriate,\nhowever, the lateral (side-to side) securement is insuftl.cient. Section 177.834(a) of the\nHMR provides, \"Any package containing any hazardous material, not permanently\nattached to a motor vehicle, must be secured against shifting, including relative motion\nbetween packages, within the vehicle on which it is being transported, under conditions\nnormally incident to transportation.\" As loaded, voids between the lBCs and between the\nIBCs and the sides of the trailer could allow the IBCs to shift. and there is no securement\nmechanism in place to prevent the IBCs from shifting. Specific methods for securing\npackages in a motor vehicle are not provided in the HMR. However, varied methods, such\nas tiedowns, using dunnage or other cargo, shoring bars, jack bars, or toe-boards would be\nacceptable to secure the IBCs from side to side movement within the trailer.\nI trust this satistl.es your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nDelmer Billings\nSenior Regulatory Advisor\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nDrakeford, Carol n (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject: Attachments: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nFriday, June 22, 2012 9:27 AM\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFW: Request Formal Letter of Interpretation\nOH3202305369 007.jpg; OH3202305369 008.jpg; OH3202305369 004.jpg\nWe received the following request for a formal letter of interpretation.\nVictoria\nFrom: Smith, Carlisle [mailto:Carlisle.Smith@puc.state.oh.us]\nSent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 2:52 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: Request Formal Letter of Interpretation\nTo Whom it may concern;\nI am requesting a formal letter of interpretation of 49 CFR 177.834(a) regarding the proper securement of hazardous\nmaterials packages in a closed transport vehicle. Attached please find photo evidence taken by an Ohio PUC HM\nSpecialist 9!16, 330 gallon IBC's containing Class 8 (6.1) material. 49 CFR 177.834(a) specifies that \"any package\ncontaining a hazardous material, not permanently attached to a motor vehicle must be secured against shifting,\nincluding relative motion between packages, within the vehicle on which it is being transported, under conditions\nnormally incident to transportation.\" Our question is, are the packages as loaded in violation of 177.834(a)?\nAs you will see by the photo evidence provided, the IBC's were loaded in an staggered formation in the front ofthe\ntrailer, with the remaining IBC's loaded in an \"I\" formation. The rearmost IBC's were secured by a load strap. The IBC's\nwere not mounted to or secured to the floor of the trailer. There was no evidence of motion or movement of the\nIBC's. As you will note, there were no means taken to prevent the IBC's from shifting into the void spaces on the left and\nright sides of the packages.\nA,r.eview of PHMSA (RSPA) Interpretations produced RSPA 97-0205 and RSPA 98-0021. Although neither Interpretation\nresponds to an exact duplicate of the Ohio scenario provided, they are the closest thing to be found.\nThank you for your assistance,\nSincerely,\nCarlisle Smith\nCarlisle Smith, Supervisor\nHazardous Materials Section\nTransportation Enforcement Division\nPublic Utilities Commission of Ohio\nOffice: 614-728-9126\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":4188}