{"operation":"document","citation":"23-0093","title":"Transportation Development Group — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2024-04-24","effective_on":null,"summary":"23-0093 response to Transportation Development Group concerning 172.102, 173.22.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-23-0093.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-23-0093.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-23-0093","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2024-05/230093.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nApril 24, 2024\nJim Powell\nTransportation Development Group\n190 West Continental Road, Suite 216-401\nGreen Valley, AZ 85622\nReference No. 23-0093\nDear Mr. Powell:\nThis letter is in response to your October 25, 2023, letter requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) concerning the application of\nthe term “vehicle” in § 172.102, special provision 134, currently assigned to the proper shipping\nname “UN3171, Battery-powered vehicle or Battery-powered equipment.\n” You state it is your\nunderstanding that the language in special provision 134 would apply to four-wheeled robots as a\n“vehicle,” and ask whether a “humanoid-looking” robot that carries totes or boxes in a\nwarehouse would be applicable to the term “vehicle” as it relates to special provision 134.\nIn accordance with § 173.22 of the HMR, it is the shipper’s responsibility to properly class and\ndescribe a hazardous material. This Office does not generally perform that function. However, it\nis the opinion of this Office that the intent of the term “vehicle” in § 172.102, special provision\n134 is to include self-propelled apparatus designed to carry one or more persons or goods.\nTherefore, humanoid-looking robots powered by lithium ion batteries and designed to carry one\nor more persons or goods would be consistent with the description of a “vehicle” in § 172.102,\nspecial provision 134 and thus be transported as “UN3171, Battery-powered vehicle.”\nI hope this information helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nSteven Andrews\nActing Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<>>\n\nAndrews\n23-0093\nJones, Jessie Jane CTR (PHMSA)\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSent: Thursday, October 26, 2023 3:27 PM\nTo: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nCc: Hazmat Interps\nSubject: FW: Interpretation request special provision 134 Robots as Vehicles\nAttachments: PHMSA_Interpretation_Request_ROBOTS.pdf\nFollow Up Flag: Follow up\nFlag Status: Flagged\nHello Alice,\nPlease see the below interpreta on request. Let us know if you need anything.\nSincerely,\nJanaye\nFrom: Jim Powell \nSent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 2:37 PM\nTo: PHMSA HM InfoCenter \nCc: Support \nSubject: Interpretation request special provision 134 Robots as Vehicles\nCAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links\nor open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.\nA ached is an interpreta on request for the term “vehicles” as defined in 49\nCFR 172.102 SP 134, as it relates to “robots” designed to transport/convey\ncargo.\nIt seems easy to envision that four-wheeled robots scoo ng around a\nwarehouse floor with a tote on top, that it’s clearly a vehicle. But what about\na humanoid-looking robot carrying totes or boxes in it’s arms and placing on a\nconveyer?\nSeems like that would also meet the defini on of a vehicle. I would just like a\nwri en interpreta on on this. It will come up again, sooner rather than later\nas the new UN number 3556 will be in use in 2025.\n1\n\n<<>>\n\nJim Powell\nTransporta on Development Group LLC\n1-808-280-6047\nwww.dgtraining.com\njim@dgtraining.com\n2\n\n<<>>\n\nTransportation Development Group LLC\n190 W. Continental Rd Ste 216-401\nGreen Valley, AZ 85622\n1-808-280-6047 Direct | 1-800-949-4834\nOctober 25, 2025\nPipeline Standards and Rulemaking\nU.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nEmail pdf to infocntr@dot.gov Phone: 202-366-8553\nInterpretation request – Are lithium battery-powered bipedal robots considered “vehicles?”\nIn 49 CFR 172.102(c)(1) Special Provision 134 it defines a “vehicle” as the following:\nhttps://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/part-172/section-172.102#p-172.102(c)(1)\na. For the purpose of this special provision, vehicles are self-propelled apparatus designed to carry one or more persons\nor goods…\nUpon conducting a quick search of the internet for “human shaped bipedal robots in the warehouse” you’ll find\nnumerous examples of robots carrying totes around a warehouse, putting them on a conveyer, etc. Since this\nbattery-powered apparatus is transporting cargo, would it be correct to classify it as a Battery Powered\nVehicle? This would be UN3171 or Internationally under the new UN 3556, Vehicle, lithium-ion battery powered\nas codified in the UN Orange book and ICAO TI for 2025.\nSincerely,\nJim Powell, DGSA, CDGP\nPresident\nTransportation Development Group LLC\njim@dgtraining.com 1-808-280-6047\nDOT Interpretation Request from Jim Powell dgtraining.com regarding “Robots” as “Vehicles”","truncated":false,"body_characters":4899}