Tri-State Motor Transit Company-Reconsideration
Case: B-253293.2
Agency:
Protester: Tri
Date: 1995-11-16
Other
Tri-State Motor Transit Company-Reconsideration
BNUMBER: B-253293.2; B-254374.2; B-254375.2; B-254381.2
DATE: November 16, 1995
TITLE: Tri-State Motor Transit Company-Reconsideration
**********************************************************************
Matter of:Tri-State Motor Transit Company-Reconsideration
File: B-253293.2; B-254374.2; B-254375.2; B-254381.2
Date: November 16, 1995
DIGEST
A shipment of mortar cartridges containing smoke producing white
phosphorus, a commodity that met the definition of "chemical
ammunition" under the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Hazardous
Materials Regulations in Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations
(C.F.R.), at 49 C.F.R. (1990) Section 173.53(r), also met the
definition of "chemical ammunition" for purposes of rates and charges
under the Military Traffic Management Command's Freight Traffic Rules
Publication 1A. Similarly, "special fireworks," which met the
definition of "chemical ammunition" under the Hazardous Materials
Regulations, also met that definition for purposes of rates and
charges.
DECISION
Tri-State Motor Transit Company (Tri-State) requests reconsideration
of our decision Tri-State Motor Transit Company, B-253293 et al., Dec.
10, 1993.[1] There, we held that shipments of certain hazardous
materials transported by Tri-State were not "chemical ammunition" for
the purpose of applying higher minimum weights to the shipments, in
accordance with Note 3 of item 325 and Note 3 of item 327 of the
Military Traffic Management Command's (MTMC) Freight Traffic Rules
Publication No. 1A (MFTRP 1A).
We have fully reviewed the issues again, including the information
submitted on reconsideration, and we now believe that the term
"chemical ammunition," as used in Note 3 of items 325 and 327,
includes the items involved here. Therefore, we reverse our prior
decision.
BACKGROUND
Each Note 3 of items 325 and 327, provides that higher minimum weights
(resulting in higher charges) are applicable "when shipper provides
additional descriptive information in conjunction with the hazardous
material description entry on the GBL [government bill of lading],
which identifies chemical ammunition with incendiary charges or white
phosphorus . . . ."
Examples of the hazardous material involved in the shipments in this
controversy are (1) smoke-producing mortar cartridges that were
described on the GBL as: "CARTRIDGE 81MM, SMOKE, WHITE PHOSPHORUS,
M375A3;" and (2) incendiary grenades used primarily to provide a
source of intense heat to destroy equipment described on the GBL as:
"FIREWORKS, SPECIAL-CLASS B EXPLOSIVE - CAT3 - (Grenade, Hand,
Incendiary, AN-M14)." The mortar cartridges were classified as
"ammunition for cannon with smoke projectile." The grenades were
classified as "special fireworks." The controversy is whether, for
purposes of each Note 3, these GBLs contained "additional descriptive
information" indicating that the shipments consisted of chemical
ammunition with incendiary charges or white phosphorus.
Tri-State's argument has been that the Department of Transportation's
(DOT) Hazardous Materials Regulations (especially Parts 172, 173 and
177 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), as they
existed prior to 1991), are the basis for determining whether the 1990
shipments in issue should have been classified as "chemical
ammunition." At the time of the shipments in question, 49 C.F.R.
173.53(r), under the heading "Class A Explosives; Definitions,"
defined "chemical ammunition" as including "all kinds of explosive
chemical projectiles . . . loaded with toxic, tear, or other gas,
smoke or incendiary agent . . . ." Thus, Tri-State argued, the term
"chemical ammunition," by definition, included any explosive or
ammunition containing as a filler white phosphorus (a recognized smoke
agent), incendiary or other agent named in 49 C.F.R. 173.53(r).
In our prior decision, we agreed with Tri-State that the DOT
regulations "are relevant in interpreting the term 'chemical
ammunition' in Note 3 of items 325 and 327," since item 5 of MFTRP 1A
specifically incorporates the American Trucking Association's (ATA)
Hazardous Materials Tariff, and the tariff is based on the DOT
Hazardous Materials Regulations.
Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...