{"operation":"document","citation":"13-0195","title":"Public Utilities Commission of OhioTransportation Department — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2013-12-23","effective_on":null,"summary":"13-0195 response to Public Utilities Commission of OhioTransportation Department concerning 177.834.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0195.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0195.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0195","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2013/130195.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nDEC 2 3 LUlj\nMr. Tom Forbes\nPublic Utilities Commission of Ohio\nTransportation Department\n180 E Broad Street, 4th Floor\nColumbus, OH 43215\nRef. No. 13-0195\nDear Mr. Forbes:\nThis responds to your October 15, 2013 email regarding enforcement ofthe Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). In your email, you describe a scenario\nwhere a shipper loads a van trailer with hazardous materials (hazmat) packages and then seals\nthe trailer noting that the carrier is not present during loading. The shipper then instructs the\ncarrier not to break the seal and provides a shipping paper. During the course of\ntransportation, the carrier is stopped by a State enforcement agent and the trailer is inspected\nwhereupon the agent discovers the hazmat packages are not secured. With respect to this\nsituation, you request clarification ofthe person in violation of the package securement\nrequirements of§ 177.834(a) of the HMR.\nIt is the opinion of this Office that, and barring additional information pertinent to the\nscenario you describe, the person performing the loading of the hazmat packages in the motor\nvehicle is in violation of the package securement requirements of§ 177.834(a); in this case\nthe shipper. Regarding carrier responsibility, as specified in§ 171.2(£), no person may\ntransport hazmat unless it is transported in accordance with the HMR. The carrier may rely\non information provided by the offeror (the shipper) of the hazmat unless the carrier knows\nor, a reasonable person, acting in the circumstances and exercising reasonable care, would\nhave knowledge that the information provided by the offeror is incorrect. See § 171.8 for the\nHMR definition of person who offers or offeror. Note that in general, whenever hazmat has\nnot been shipped in compliance with the HMR, DOT will attempt to identify and bring an\nenforcement proceeding against the person who first caused the transportation of the\nnoncomplying shipment. See the formal interpretation of carrier responsibility when\naccepting hazmat for transportation in commerce (June 4, 1998; 63 FR 30411).\nIn the absence of participating in the loading operation or having access to the loaded trailer,\nit is assumed that the carrier would be relying on the shipping paper and the accompanying\ncertification that the packages are in proper condition for transportation; i.e., properly secured.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nUnless the carrier has actual or constructive knowledge that the packages are not properly\nsecured, we see no reason not to accept the shipment. However, the carrier may not ignore\nreadily apparent information that would indicate the packages are not properly secured.\nI hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact this office.\nSincerely,\nRobert Benedict\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSent:\nTo:\nThursday, October 17, 2013 11:10 AM\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nSubject: FW: Interpretation Request\nHi Carolyn,\nThis caller requested we submit this e-mail as a formal letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nVictoria\nFrom: Forbes, Tom [mailto:Tom.Forbes@puc.state.oh.us]\nSent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 7:47 AM\nTo: PHMSA HM InfoCenter\nSubject: Interpretation Request\nOctober 15, 2013\nPHMSA Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nAttn: PHH-10\nEast Building\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nDear Sir:\nWe are requesting written interpretation providing clarification of the regulatory responsibility for securement of\npackages of hazardous materials under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) in the following\nloading scenario.\nA shipper pre-loads and seals a van trailer containing hazardous materials. The shipper instructs the carrier not to break\nthe seal. No carrier personal was present during the loading. The shipper provides a properly completed shipping paper\nto the carrier.\nWhile transporting the shipment between Point A and Point B the carrier get stopped and inspected by a MCSAP certified\ninspector. The inspector discovers the hazardous material is not secured at all.\nShould a securement/loading violation be listed against the carrier only, the shipper only or both the carrier and shipper\nin this scenario?\nThank you for your assistance in this matter.\nTom Forbes, Enforcement Supervisor\nPublic Utilities Commission of Ohio\nTransportation Department\n180 E Broad Street, 4th Floor\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n_ Columbus/ OH 43215\nPhone 614-644-0296\nFax 614-728-2133\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":4695}