(a) This part includes:
(1) Definitions of hazardous materials for transportation purposes;
(2) Requirements to be observed in preparing hazardous materials for shipment by air, highway, rail, or water, or any combination thereof; and
(3) Inspection, testing, and retesting responsibilities for persons who retest, recondition, maintain, repair and rebuild containers used or intended for use in the transportation of hazardous materials.
(b) A shipment of hazardous materials that is not prepared in accordance with this subchapter may not be offered for transportation by air, highway, rail, or water. It is the responsibility of each hazmat employer subject to the requirements of this subchapter to ensure that each hazmat employee is trained in accordance with the requirements prescribed in this subchapter. It is the duty of each person who offers hazardous materials for transportation to instruct each of his officers, agents, and employees having any responsibility for preparing hazardous materials for shipment as to applicable regulations in this subchapter.
(c) In general, the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) contained in this subchapter are based on the UN Recommendations and are consistent with international regulations issued by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO Technical Instructions) and the International Maritime Organization (IMDG Code). However, the HMR are not consistent in all respects with the UN Recommendations, the ICAO Technical Instructions or the IMDG Code, and compliance with the HMR will not guarantee acceptance by regulatory bodies outside of the United States.
[Amdt. 173-94, 41 FR 16062, Apr. 15, 1976, as amended by Amdt. 173-100, 41 FR 40476, Sept. 20, 1976; Amdt. 173-161, 48 FR 2655, Jan. 20, 1983; Amdt. 173-224, 55 FR 52606, Dec. 21, 1990; Amdt. 173-231, 57 FR 20953, May 15, 1992; 64 FR 10776, Mar. 5, 1999; 68 FR 61941, Oct. 30, 2003]
Notes of Decisions
In Re New Orleans Train Car Leakage Fire Litig., 795 So. 2d 364 (La. Ct. App. 2001).
“" 49 C.F.R. § 173.1 (b): Purpose and scope: A shipment of hazardous materials that is not prepared in accordance with this subchapter may not be offered for transportation by air, highway, rail, or water.”
Barcelo v. Brown, 478 F. Supp. 646 (D.P.R. 1979).
“49 C.F.R. 173.1 et seq. We note that transportation of hazardous material apply only to carriers in commerce, see: 49 U.”
In re In re, 339 F. Supp. 3d 185 (S.D. Ill. 2018).
“According to the resulting regulations, "[a] shipment of hazardous *200 materials that is not prepared in accordance with [the regulations] may not be offered for transportation by air, highway, rail, or water.”
United States v. Allied Chem. Corp., 431 F. Supp. 361 (W.D.N.Y. 1977).
· cites it 3× “-268(c); all in violation of 49 CFR 173.1(b), *363 49 CFR 173.22(a) and Title 18, United States Code, Section 834 (f).”
Poliskie Line Oceaniczne v. Hooker Chem. Corp., 499 F. Supp. 94 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).
“Defendant thus violated 49 C.F.R. § 173.1 (b), which requires that “[i]t is the duty of each person who offers hazardous materials for transportation to instruct each of his officers, agents, and employees having any responsibility for preparing hazardous materi- , als for…”
Hurt v. Coyne Cylinder Co., 956 F.2d 1319 (6th Cir. 1992).
“” 49 C.F.R. § 173.1 (a)(3). In fact, the statutory language and legislative history of the statute authorizing the DOT regulations limit their applicability to matters of transport and not consumer use.”
MCR Oil Tools v. TRAN, 110 F.4th 677 (5th Cir. 2024).
“” 49 C.F.R. § 173.1 (a). “In general,” its provisions are “based on UN Recom- mendations” and “consistent with international regulations issued by the International Civil Aviation Organization [(“ICAO”)].”
United States v. United States, 417 F. Supp. 851 (D.D.C. 1976).
“On the other hand, plaintiff, in addition to introducing cost studies, contended before the ICC that military personnel, and not the carriers, routinely load and secure vehicles for transport onto freight vans; that the consignor or consignee under Government regulation ( 49…”
Noffsinger v. Valspar Corp., 60 F. Supp. 3d 907 (N.D. Ill. 2014).
“” 49 C.F.R. § 173.1 (a)(3). Therefore, the Part cannot be read to relate solely to shippers’ responsibilities because it explicitly references the responsibilities of manufacturers and reconditioners as well.”
United States v. United States, 417 F. Supp. 851 (D.D.C. 1976).
“On the other hand, plaintiff, in addition to introducing cost studies, contended before the ICC that military personnel, and not the carriers, routinely load and secure vehicles for transport onto freight vans; that the consignor or consignee under Government regulation ( 49…”
— 49 C.F.R. § 173.1(b) — 1 case
United States v. Allied Chem. Corp., 431 F. Supp. 361 (W.D.N.Y. 1977).
“-268(c); all in violation of 49 CFR 173.1(b), *363 49 CFR 173.22(a) and Title 18, United States Code, Section 834 (f).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.