Interpretation Response #13-0160 ([The Boeing Company] [Mr. Paul Burroughs])
Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.
Interpretation Response Details
Response Publish Date:
Company Name: The Boeing Company
Individual Name: Mr. Paul Burroughs
Location State: OK Country: US
View the Interpretation Document
Response text:
December 19, 2013
Mr. Paul Burroughs
The Boeing Company
6001 S. Air Depot Blvd
Oklahoma City, OK 73135
Ref. No.: 13-0160
Dear Mr. Burroughs:
This is in response to your August 05, 2013 email requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) regarding the applicability of the HMR to persons and functions. You state that your facility is a business engaged in commerce that receives and ships non-bulk shipments of hazardous materials, and that you are a conditionally exempt small quantity household waste generator. You state that you have recently signed a lease on additional building space and would like an interpretation as to if hazardous materials shipments made between an existing site and the new site would be regulated under the HMR. You have provided a map of the existing facilities, the new facilities, and the proposed transport route between the old and new facilities.
Based on the information provided in your letter it is the opinion of this office that your shipments between your existing facilities and the new facility would be regulated by the HMR. Section 171.1(d) lists functions not subject to the requirements of the HMR. Section § 171.1(d)(4) states that the HMR do not apply to rail or motor vehicle movements of a hazardous material exclusively within a contiguous facility boundary where public access is restricted unless the movement is on or crosses a public road or is on track that is part of the general railroad system of transportation. However, if access to the public road is restricted by signals, gates, lights, or similar controls, the movement is not subject to the HMR. The map that you provided notes that part of the proposed transport route occurs in parking lots not part of your contiguous property. As long as the motor vehicle movement includes any transportation outside of the contiguous property boundary, § 171.1(d)(4) cannot apply.
I trust this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
Duane A. Pfund
International Standards Coordinator
Standards and Rulemaking Division
171.1