Uncategorised
By Anthony Affissio
In last month’s article, we looked at why the United States State Variations in the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations are more complex than they first appear. That discussion introduced the unique structure within the United States Department of Transportation, particularly the relationship between the regulatory branch, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, known as PHMSA, and the enforcement branch, the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, known as AXH, which sits within the Federal Aviation Administration.
That structure is worth examining more closely.
The history and evolution of AXH has placed it in a distinctive position. It has one foot in the dangerous goods environment administered by PHMSA, and the other in the aviation environment administered by the FAA. At the same time, AXH does not always hold official authority to represent either administration in certain matters.
AXH’s Position Within the FAA
AXH currently conducts surveillance, compliance and enforcement activities for hazardous materials offered, accepted and transported by air. It does so as part of a separate FAA line of business, Security and Hazardous Materials Safety, known as ASH.
A mandated transition may soon see some, or all, of those activities and personnel incorporated into FAA Aviation Safety, known as AVS.
Before 2017, AXH activities and data collection were largely independent from the rest of the FAA. The scope of those activities was mostly limited to the requirements of the 49 CFR Hazardous Materials Regulations, known as the HMR, with very little involvement in the 14 CFR Federal Aviation Regulations, known as the FAR.
That changed with the introduction of ICAO Annex 19 and the associated State Safety Program and Safety Management System requirements. AXH now conducts activities and collects data within the FAA Safety Assurance System, known as SAS.
Principal Inspectors and the Principal Hazmat Inspector Role
FAA certificate holders, including air carriers, repair stations and airports, are assigned Principal Inspectors. These inspectors have authority to represent the FAA Administrator in official matters.
AXH created the role of Principal Hazmat Inspector in 2015. However, that role does not carry the same authority to represent the FAA Administrator in the way other Principal Inspector positions do.
This distinction matters because AXH often provides hazardous materials subject matter expertise, but does not always hold the final decision making authority.
AXH serves in an advisory capacity during the certification process and during continuing operations, particularly when changes to accepted materials, such as user manuals, or approved materials, such as training programs, are submitted for review. AXH is also consulted when regulatory and guidance materials are developed, although it usually does not have decision making status.
AXH’s Advisory Role to PHMSA
AXH also serves as a technical adviser to PHMSA on matters involving air specific hazardous materials activities. These include aviation related DOT Special Permit, exemption and Approval applications and renewals.
AXH may also provide opinions and expertise on air related interpretation requests or guidance. There is a formally established process for information sharing, data collection and recording between corresponding personnel in each organisation.
AXH provides fitness evaluations and recommendations. However, the final decision is made by PHMSA, which is the United States Competent Authority for those matters.
United States State Variations and the Role of AXH
AXH has a five member Cargo Safety and International Division that supports PHMSA representatives at United Nations meetings and participates in those meetings.
That group is heavily involved in developing the language that appears in the ICAO Technical Instructions United States State Variations. The group has also recently been looking to update the language and information contained in those variations, which may result in improved clarity.
This is important because the United States State Variations rely heavily on references to foundational sections of the HMR. Without understanding the content of those referenced sections, a reader may only gain a cursory understanding of the requirements. That can create compliance risk.
What This Means for Industry
For shippers, freight forwarders, airlines, ground handlers and other parties involved in dangerous goods transported by air, the practical message is clear. The United States State Variations should not be read as standalone text.
They sit within a broader regulatory system involving PHMSA, AXH, the FAA, 49 CFR, 14 CFR and the internal division of regulatory and enforcement responsibilities within the United States Department of Transportation.
Understanding that structure helps explain why the United States variations can appear more detailed, more layered and more dependent on cross referenced regulatory material than the variations of many other States.
Final Reflection
In future articles, we plan to take a closer look at each United States State Variation, either individually or in related groups. That review will examine the underlying 49 CFR requirements behind the references.
Some of those requirements may be familiar. Others may be more surprising.
For those transporting dangerous goods to, through or from the United States, this deeper understanding matters. The wording of a State Variation is only part of the compliance picture. The regulatory framework behind it is often where the real operational meaning sits.