{"operation":"document","citation":"16-0030","title":"Pioneer Tank Lines, Inc — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2016-07-06","effective_on":null,"summary":"16-0030 response to Pioneer Tank Lines, Inc concerning 171.2, 172.204, 173.35.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0030.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0030.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0030","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2016/160030.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nof Transportation\nU.S. Department\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nMaterials Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nAdministration\nMr. Larry Nielsen\nSafety and Compliance Manager\nJUL 0 6 2016\nPioneer Tank Lines, Inc.\n12501 Hudson Road South\n. Afton, MN 55001\nReference No. 16-0030\nDear Mr. Nielsen:\nThis letter is in response to your February 12, 2016, email requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the transport of\na package in service beyond its requalification date. Specifically, you ask if a motor carrier is\nculpable for violations of the HMR if it transports an Intermediate Bulk Container (IBC) that\nwas refilled and offered for transportation beyond its requalification date and if the motor\ncarrier can rely on the shipper's certification on the shipping paper to determine whether an\nIBC was filled prior to its requalification date.\nAn IBC that is filled before its requalification becomes due may remain in service until it is\nemptied and may be transported in commerce by highway, rail, aircraft, or vessel provided all\napplicable HMR requirements are met (see § 173.35(a)). Section 172.204 requires the shipper\nto certify on the shipping paper that the materials are properly classified, described, packaged,\nmarked and labeled, and in proper condition for transportation. However, § 171.2(f) provides\nthat a carrier who transports a hazardous material in commerce may rely on information\nprovided by the offeror of the hazardous material or a prior carrier, 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 or prior carrier is incorrect. As\nsuch, the motor carrier cannot rely on the shipper's certification on the shipping paper and\nthe information provided is incorrect.\nmay be culpable for violation if the motor carrier knows or should have reason to believe that\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nroster\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nStevens\n180.352\noodall, Shante CTR (PHMSA)\nSent:\nFrom:\nGeller, Shelby CTR (PHMSA)\n16-0030\nTo:\nMonday, February 22, 2016 9:29 AM\nSubject:\nHazmat Interps\nRE: request for interpretation\nDear Shante and Alice,\nI wanted to follow up on Mr. Nielsen's request as I didn't see it logged in the database.\nThanks,\nShelby\nFrom: Rivera, Jordan CTR (PHMSA)\nSent: Friday, February 12, 2016 4:26 PM\nSubject: FW: request for interpretation\nTo: Hazmat Interps\nHi Shante/Alice,\nPlease submit the inquiry below as a letter of interpretation. Mr. Nielsen spoke to me today, February 12.\nThank you,\nJordan\nFrom: Larry Nielsen [mailto:larryn@pioneertanklines.com]\nSent: Friday, February 12, 2016 11:53 AM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: request for interpretation\nFebruary 12, 2016\nPHMSA info Center\nPlease issue a formal interpretation on the following issue:\nQuestion:\nMay a carrier be deemed to be in violation of any part of 180.352 (more specifically 180.352(b)) when transporting an\nIBC containing hazardous materials where the expiration date on the IBC has expired, provided the shipper has signed\nthe shipper's certification stating that the \"materials are properly classified, described, packaged, marked and labeled,\nand are in proper condition for transportation\"?\nI contend that the carrier should be able to rely on the certification of the shipper to determine whether the IBC was\nfilled prior to the expiration date. I cite the following rules and interpretation:\n49CFR173.35(a) states in part: \"This requirement does not apply to any IBC filled prior to the retest or inspection due\ndate\".\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":3804}