{"operation":"document","citation":"18-0137","title":"Idaho Power Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2019-03-11","effective_on":null,"summary":"18-0137 response to Idaho Power Company concerning 172.802.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-18-0137.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-18-0137.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-18-0137","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/70866/180137.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n.0\nU.S. Department\n· of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterlala Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nMAR 1 1 2019\nMr. William Norris\nIdaho Power Company\n1221 West Idaho Street\nBoise, ID 83702\nReference No. 18-0137\nDear Mr. Norris:\nThis letter is in response to your October 30, 2018, email requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to security\nrequirements in Part 172. You cite.a final rule entitled \"Risk-Based Adjustment of.\nTransportation Security Requirements\" published on March 9, 2010 [75 FR 10973] under\nDocket No. PHMSA-06-35885 (HM-232F) that states risk management systems are intended to\nreduce potentially catastrophic consequences. You note that this language presents challenges\nwhen determining the appropriate measures to implement based on the assessed risk.\nSpecifically, you ask whether it is the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\n_ Safety Administration's\nintent to \"prevent\" or \"protect against\" theft of high security sensitive materials while in\ntransportation as both terms are used in the final rule.\nThe HMR require that a security plan include an assessment of possible transportation security\nrisks for shipments of the covered hazardous materials and appropriate measures to address the\nassessed risks. At a minimum, the security plan must address personnel security, unauthorized\naccess, and en route security issues (see § 172.802). However, the HMR do not distinguish\nbetween \"preventing\" incidents and \"protecting against\" incidents involving hazardous materials\ntransportation. Therefore, a security plan is expected to address both preventative and protective\nmeasures.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review, and Reinvention\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nJanuary, lkeya CTR (PHMSA)\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject: Thursday, November 01, 2018 10:22 AM\nHazmat Interps\nFW: Form submission from: Contact Form\nHello Alice and lkeya,\nBelow is a Request for Letter of Interpretation.\nThanks,\nJonathon, HMIC\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: DOT.gov CMS Notifications\nSent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 10:36 AM\nTo: PHMSA Webmaster <PHMSAWebmaster@dot.gov>\nSubject: Form submission from: Contact Form\nSubmitted on Tuesday, October 30, 2018 - 10:35 Submitted by anonymous user: 63.233.61.196 Submitted values are:\n==Contact Information==\nName: William Norris\nProfessional Organization: Idaho Power Company\nBusiness Email Address: bnorris@idahopower.com\nBusiness Telephone Number: 2083882622\nBusiness Fax Number:\n==Message==\nType: Hazmat Safety\nPlease Enter Your Question/Comment:\nI have a question regarding the intent of the regulations found\nin 49 CFR 172.800 and 802: Specifically, a question related to\nwhether the \"intent\" of the HMR is to \"prevent or protect\nagainst\" theft of high security sensitive materials while in\ntransportation.\nI specifically draw attention to the March 9, 2010 Federal\nRegister (Vol. 75, No. 45, Page 10988) whereby the text of the\ndiscussion speaks to the- HMR system being \"a risk management\nsystem\" (column 1 first sentence) and goes on to say in column\n21st sentence \" ... the HMR are intended to reduce the\npotentially catastrophic consequences ... \" This language could\npresent challenges when trying to determine what measures may be\nappropriate to implement based on the assessed risk. In the\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nsecurity industry the term \"protect against\" is categorically\nused to define the measures used to prohibit unauthorized access.\nEven the best and most advances security measures cannot\n\"prevent\" someone from accessing the materials.\nBelow are excerpts from the page in reference:\n\"The security plan requirements in Subpart I of Part 172 of the\nHMR [Hazardous Materials Regulation] are intended to reduce the\npotentially catastrophic consequences, including adverse\nenvironmental consequences of a criminal or terrorist incident\ninvolving hazardous materials in transportation.\"\nThe FR goes on to say, \" ... include an assessment of possible\ntransportation security risks and appropriate measures to address\nthe assessed risks.\"\nThe word \"prevention\" is used in the following context within\nthe FR, \"The hazardous material regulatory system is a risk\nmanagement system that is [prevention-oriented] and focused on\nidentifying a safety hazard and reducing the probability and\nquantity of a hazardous material release.\"\nTwo words/phrases from the previous paragraph do not correlate\n\"prevention-oriented\" and \"reducing.\"\nMy specific question is, are these requirements designed to\n\"prevent\" or \"protect against?\"\nMailing Address:\n1221·West Idaho St.\nBoise, Idaho 83702\nThe results-of this submission may be viewed at:\nhttps://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/16716/subm ission/7391\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":4892}