{"operation":"document","citation":"CHI-98-001","title":"National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1988-05-16","effective_on":null,"summary":"CHI-98-001 response to National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. concerning 171.2, 171.3, 172.3, 173.22.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-chi-98-001.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-chi-98-001.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-chi-98-001","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Hazmat/ChiefCounsel/CHI-88-001.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n•\n•\nUS Department\nOffice of the\nof Transpontation\nChiel Counsel\n400 Seventh St.. S.W\nWashington, D.C. 2052\nResearch and\nSpecial Programs\nAdministration\nInt. No.\n88-i-RSPA\nINTERPRETATION\nSOURCE:\nClifford J. Harvison\nPresident\nNational Tank Truck Carriers, Inc.\n2200 Mill Road\nAlexandria, Virginía 22314\nFACTS:\nNational Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. (NTTC) takes 1ssu€\nWith a major oil company shipper of\nhazardous materials which\nrecently commented in a DOT rulemaking docket as follows:\nWhile we (the major ofl company) may supply HM, we\nproduct was sold 'at the rack'\nare not necessarily the shipper because the\nThis means we\nsold it as it was transferred from a pipe or hose\ninto the\ntruck's cargo tank.\nOur customer, the\n'shipper'\n• arranged transportation.\nNTTC disagrees with the apparent conclusion that transfer of\nownership of a hazardous material concurrent with or prior to .\nphysical loading of the hazardous material into a truck's (or\nvessel's) cargo tank transfers HMTA shipper responsibilities\n(under 49 CFR 173.22 and other regulations under the HMTA) from\nthe seller (which\nmay own the storage tank, pipe or hose from\nwhich the material is being loaded) to the\nbuyer of the material.\nIn addition, NTTC states\ntank into which the hazardous material is transferred, the\nthat, regardless of who owns the cargo\ntransfer of ownership has no bearing on the \"shipper\"\nresponsibilities under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR)\nthe \"shipper\".\nand thus the original owner, the oil company, remains liable as\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n2\nINTERPRETATION: The word \"shipper\" is not specifically defined\nin the HMR (49 CFR Parts 170-179), due primarily to the fact that\nit is not possible for the Department to account for the numerous\nAlthough the word \"shipper\" does appear, it is used in an\ncommercial arrangements that may exist under that concept.\nordinary layman's manner rather than as\nterm of art.\na specific, technical.\n\"offerors\" for performance of the functions associated with\nConsequently, responsibflities generally are placed\ngeneral duty and appearity provisions r t5 17401, 171.2.\n2172.3, and 173.1).\nThe key issue in determining the regulatory responsibilities\nwhich parties\nunder the requirements in Parts 171, 172, and 173 is determining\ncase determination based upon all relevant facts. Any person who\nperform which functions.\nThis invo: ves a case-by-\nperforms, attempts to perform, or, under the circumstances\ninvolved.\nany of the functions assigned\nis contractually or otherwise responsible to perform,\nlegally responsible under the\nby the HMR to the offeror. is\nthose functions.\nAny person's performance or attempted\nHMR for the proper performance of\nperformance of\nany \"offeror\" functions may\nperson's responsibility for performance of other \"offeror\"\nbe evidence of that\nfunctions.\nIn\nmany cases, more than one person may be\nresponsible for performing, or attempting to perform, \"offeror\"\nducountable for ach su home of the •bfferor pesponsibdstyesally\nexpressed in terms other than\n(Note that responsibilities for compliance may be\n\"offeror\"\nBE perring required get me italia, and\nother persons performing required functions\nNTTC could result in the oil company or the purchaser for the\nApplication of these principles to the situation described by the\ncarrier if different than the purchaser) being held legally\nresponsible for compliance with requirements associated with\ndetermination would require consideration of all relevant facts,\noffering hazardous materials for transportation.\nThat\nincluding ownership of the materials,\nfunctions performed or\nhowever, Conclusiveng deteraine Taget responsibirty 07ctor,\ncontractual arrangements\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n3\nperformance of \"offeror\" functions under the HMR. For example,\ntransfer of ownership of the hazardous materials from the oil\ncompany to the purchaser does not, in itself, absolve the oil\ncompany of responsibility under the HMR for performance of\n\"offeror\" functions or impose them upon the purchaser. On the\nother hand, the oil company's original ownership does not\nnecessarily result in the oil company being responsible under the\nHMR for performance of all \"offeror\". functions.\nThe ownership of\n¿transportation of hazardous materials is only one of many\nthe hazardous materials before, during or after the\nrelevant factors which must be considered in determining\nregulatory liability under the HMR.\nSurade\nGeorge\".\nChief •\nounsel\nResearch and Special Programs\nAdministration\nMAY 1 6 1988\nISSUED:\nCERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nInterpretation 88-1-RSPA: ABSTRACT\nAll relevant facts are considered in determining which persons\nare responsible, as offerors (the legally correct term, of which\n\"shipper\" is one frequently used synonym) of hazardous\nmaterials\nfor transportation in commerce, for complíance with 49 CFR Parts\n171, 172, and 173 as well as other HMR provisions imposing\nresponsibilities upon offerors\nof. hazardous\nmaterials.\nperson who performs, attempts to perform, or, under the\ncircumstances involved, is contractually or otherwise responsible\nto perform, any of the functions assigned to the offeror or\nashipper by\nthe HMR is legally responsible under the HMR for their\nproper performance.\nPerformance or attempted performance of any\nofferor or shipper functions may be evidence of responsibility\nunder the\nHMR for performance of other offeror or shipper\nfunctions.\nownership, is necessarily determinative of that responsibility.\nNo single commercial act, such as sale or transfer of\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nInterpretation 88-1-RSPA: KEY WORDS\nHazardous Materials, Offer of for transportation\nOfferor\nOffering\nShipper\n•\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\n.:...\nInterpretation 88-1-RSPA: SECTIONS AFFECTED\n49 CFR 171.1\n49 CFR 171.2\n49 CFR 172.3\n..\n49 CFR 173.1\n> 49 CFR 173.22","truncated":false,"body_characters":5781}