{"operation":"document","citation":"CHI-92-001","title":"Nuclear Regulatory Commission — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1992-10-13","effective_on":null,"summary":"CHI-92-001 response to Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning 171.1.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-chi-92-001.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-chi-92-001.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-chi-92-001","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Hazmat/ChiefCounsel/CHI-92-001.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nof Transportation\nUS Department\nResearch and\nSpecial Programs\nAdministration\nDeputy General Counsel for\nMartin G. Malsch, Esq.\nLicensing and Regulation\nOCT / 3!992\nNuclear Regulatory Commission\nWashington, D.C.\n20555\nDear Mr. Malsch:\nI am responding to your August 26, 1992 letter concerning\nwhether the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA),\n49 App. U.S.C. S 1801 et seg., requires Department of Energy\n(DOE)\ncontractors to comply with Nuclear Regulatory Comnission\n(NRC) packaging and transportation regulations.\nThe HMTA was amended significantly In 1990 by the Hazardous\nNo. 101-615, 104 Stat. 3244 (1990). A new provision, codified\nMaterials Transportation Uniforn Safety Act (HMTUSA), Pub. I.\nat 49 App. U.S.C. S 1818, states:\nAny person who, under contract with any department\n•.. of the Federal government, transports, or\ncauses to be transported or shipped, a hazardous\nmaterial . . . shall be subject to and comply with\nall provisions of this chapter, all orders and\nregulations issued under this chapter, and all\nother substantive and procedural raquirements of\nFederal, State, and local governments and Indian\nbeen preempted by this chapter or any other\ntribes (except any such requirenents that have\nfederal law), in the samé manner and to the same\nthat are in or affect commerce is subject to such\nextent as any person engaged in such activities\nprovisions, orders, regulations, and requirements.\nThis provision simply denles sovereign inmunity to government:\nnot represent a change in the law. As cited in your letter:\ncontractors, and its legislative history indicates that it does\nSection [20] adds a new section [120] to the [HMTA].\nNew section [120] clarifies that contractors with the\nFederal Goverrment are subject to the same regulations\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\ngoverning the transportation of hazardous material as\nany other shipper or carrier.\nThe Committee firmly\nstates that this\namendment is to remove any lingering\ndoubt on this point.\nIt is the Committee's firm\nposition that this simply restates existing law.\n(H.\nRept. No. 101-444 (Part 2), 101 Cong., 2d Sess. 43\n(1990))\nTherefore, agencies' pre-HMTUSA regulatory prerogatives remain\nunchanged.\nThis provision requires government contractors to\ncomply with legal requirements applicable to them; however, it\ndoes not require them to comply with requirements from which\nthey are excluded or exempted, nor does it require regulatory\nagencies to apply all their requirements to any or all\ngovernment contractors.\nFor example, there are several regulatory exceptions in the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) (49 C.F.R. Parts 171-\n180) which frequently are used by DOE contractors.\nThus, under\n49 C.F.R. SS 173.7 (b) and 177.806 (b), national security\nshipments of Class 7 (radioactive) materials made by or under \"\nDOE or Department of Defense direction or supervision, and\nescorted by personnel specifically designated by or under the\nauthority of either agency, are not subject to the HMR.\nSimilarly, DOE, its contractors, and' others are excepted from\nuse packagings made by or under DOE's direction for the\ncompliance with certain HMR packaging requirements when they\ntransportation of Class 7 materials. 49 C.F.R. S 173.7(d). To\nqualify for this exception, the packagings must be evaluated,\nDOE against packaging standards\nequivalent to those specified in 10 C.F.R. Part 71.\nThese\npackages also must be marked and prepared for shipment in a\nmanner equivalent to the HMR's requirements for Nuclear\nRegulatory Commission (NRC) -approved packagings.\nJust as the Research and Special Programs Administration is not\nrequired by the new statutory provision to apply any or all\nrequired to apply any or all of its regulations to government\nportions of the HMR to government contractors, the NRC is not\ncontractors.\nFor example, NRC need not expand the applicabi-\nthe certificate holders and licensees now covered by its\nlity of its packaging and transportation regulations beyond\nregulations. 10 C.F.R. § 71.0(c). To the extent government\ncontractors fall within those categories, they are subject to,,\nthe NRC regulations; however, government\ncontractors which are\nnot certificate holders or licensees need not comply.\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nIn summary, 49 App. U.S.C. 1818 does not require that DOE\ncontractors comply with NRC transportation regulations which\nare not applicable to them.\ncontractors comply with those NRC regulations which are\nIt only requires that DOE\napplicable to them.\nThis provision also does not require NRC\nto change its regulations to apply them to all government\ncontractors.\ncontact me at 202-366-4400.\nIf you have any questions concerning this matter, please\nSincerely,","truncated":false,"body_characters":4686}