Interpretation Response #13-0010 ([Inmark Packaging] [Mr. Jay Johnson ])

Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 05/01/2013

Company Name: Inmark Packaging

Individual Name: Mr. Jay Johnson 

Location State: NJ Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

May 1, 2013

Mr. Jay Johnson 
Inmark Packaging
DGSA, Regulator Compliance
675 Hartman Road, Suite 100
Austell, GA   30168

Ref. No. 13-0010

Dear Mr. Johnson:

This responds to your December 4, 2012 email and follow up email request for clarification of the testing of combination packaging specified in § 178.601of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180).  Specifically, you ask for clarification on the 4GV packaging variation under § 178.601(g)(2) for a packaging tested with 2 x 1L fragile glass bottles.

Your questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:

Q1.  Are the constraints on package modification set by 4GV packaging specified in 178.601(g)(2) based on the total volume tested, the marked maximum gross mass and the minimum thickness of cushioning material?

A1.  The constraints on package modification set by 4GV packaging specified in §178.601(g)(2) are based on all these factors.  In addition, the gross mass of the inner packagings, use of absorbents, and liners are considered in package modification.

Q2. In your email you indicate a 4GV package with 2 x 1L fragile glass bottles as the inner packaging was tested with lead shot.  You ask can a shipper substitute (without the need for further testing) the following inner combinations of inner packagings, if the minimum thickness of cushioning material was maintained and the package weighs less than the marked gross mass?

    4 x .5L plastic bottles, total volume of inner packages 2L;

1. 2 plastic bags each containing 2 x .5L plastic bottles with no minimum cushioning distances maintained within the bag, total volume of inner packages 2L; 
2. 1 x 2L plastic bottle, total volume of inner packages 2L;
3. 2 metal cans each containing 1 x 1L glass bottle, total volume of inner packages 2L;
4. 2 metal cans each containing 2 x .5L glass bottles with no minimum cushioning distances maintained within the can total volume of inner packages 2L; and
5. 2 metal cans each containing 1 x .5L glass bottles total volume of inner packages 1L.

A2.  As you noted the packaging containing 2 x 1L inner packagings was tested with lead shot.  Section 178.601(g)(2)(ii) states, “the total combined gross mass of the inner packagings may not exceed one half the gross mass of the inner packagings used for the drop test.”  You did not provide any indication of the gross mass of the inner packagings used for the drop test; however, you indicate that the gross mass of the inner packagings scenarios you provided would not exceed one half the gross mass of those used for the drop test.  Based on the combinations of inner packagings provided in Q2 and the testing scenario you describe, scenarios “a”, “c”, “d”, and “f” comply with § 178.601(g)(2)(ii).  Scenarios “b” and “e” do not comply because the minimum cushioning is not maintained as specified in § 178.601(g)(2)(iii). 

I hope this answers your inquiry.  If you need further assistance, please contact this office on (202) 366-8553.

Sincerely,

Robert Benedict 
Chief, Standards Development Branch 
Standards and Rulemaking Division

178.601(g)

Regulation Sections