49 C.F.R. §177.834 - General requirements
| Cite as | 49 C.F.R. §177.834 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
National Propane Gas Ass'n v. U.S. Dept. of Trans., Civ.A. 3:97-CV-2576-D.
...Service," codified at 49 C.F.R. § 171.5(a)(1)(iii) (1997) (the "Final Rule"), and defendants' interpretation of another regulation, 49 C.F.R. § 177.834(i) (1997) (the "Attendance Regulation"). Plaintiffs allege various violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 551 et. seq. ......
-
White v. Caterpillar, Inc., No. 91CA1696
...violation caused plaintiff's injuries. See Lego v. Schmidt, 805 P.2d 1119 (Colo.App.1990). At trial, defendants claimed White violated 49 C.F.R. § 177.834(i) (1984) which requires that an operator of a hazardous materials carrier be in attendance during unloading operations. The regulation ......
-
OPC Polymers v. Pub. Utilities Comm'n of Ohio, 12AP-735
...PUCO staff initiated enforcement for this violation by citing OPC Polymers under the same subsection invoked to cite USF Glen Moore. 49 C.F.R. 177.834(a) states:Packages secured in a motor vehicle. Any package containing any hazardous material, not permanently attached to a motor vehicle, m......
-
Hartford Cas. Ins. Co v. Winston Co. Inc
...during its June 5, 2008 transport of Oxy-Kem from Oklahoma to Illinois. (Hartford's brief at 6-7). Hartford is probably referring to 49 C.F.R. § 177.834(h), which states: (h) Precautions concerning containers in transit; fueling road units. Reasonable care should be taken to prevent undue r......