Interpretation Response #06-0005 ([Byfield Marine Supply] [Mr. Keith L. Mauer])
Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.
Interpretation Response Details
Response Publish Date:
Company Name: Byfield Marine Supply
Individual Name: Mr. Keith L. Mauer
Location State: PA Country: US
View the Interpretation Document
Response text:
Feb 10, 2006
Mr. Keith L. Mauer Reference No. 06-0005
Byfield Marine Supply
175 East Olive Rd.
Pensacola, FL 325 14-4586
Dear Mr. Mauer:
This is in response to your December 27, 2005 letters regarding marking and packaging requirements for hazardous materials transported under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Your questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:
Q1. Is "Muriatic acid solution, corrosive material, UN1789" an authorized proper shipping name?
Al. No. The entry "Muriatic acid, see Hydrochloric acid" appears in the Hazardous Materials Table; (HMT § 172.101); however, because "Muriatic acid" appears in italics, it is not an authorized shipping name (see § 172.101(c)(2)). The description is "Hydrochloric acid, 8, UN1789, PGIII."
Q2. Is muriatic acid authorized for transportation in non-specification packaging?
A2. For materials shipped under the entry "Hydrochloric acid," Column 8A references § 173.154, which allows materials packaged in accordance with the limited quantity requirements described in § 173.154(b) to be transported in non-specification packagings.
Q3. Must orientation arrows placed on a box, as required under § 172.312, appear as depicted in § 172.312(d) or are the orientation arrows pictured in your letter authorized?
A3. Orientation arrows, when required, must appear as depicted in § 172.312(d). The orientation arrows in the enclosed photograph do not satisfy the requirements in § 172.312.
Q4. May a material properly classified as "Corrosive liquid, n.o.s.." be shipped under the limited quantity exception in § 173.154?
A4. Yes. Provided all the provisions in § 173.154(b) are met, a hazardous material shipped under the proper shipping name "Corrosive liquid, n.o.s." may be shipped as a limited quantity.
Q5. Is it a violation of the HMR to omit a comma in a shipping description?
A5. No. In accordance with § 172.10l(c)(2), punctuation marks and words in italics are not part of the proper shipping name, but maybe used in addition to the proper shipping name.
Q6. If the hazard class and packing group are printed on the packaging, must the packing group be in Roman numerals?
A6. No. Information provided that is not required under the HMR is not a violation of the HMR even if it is in the incorrect format. However, information in the improper format may cause confusion and lead to a delay of the shipment.
Q7. Under § 172.202(a)(4), the packing group on a shipping paper must appear in roman numerals. Is it acceptable to represent the Roman numeral "I" with the Arabic numeral "1" (i.e., PG111)?
A7. Yes. The packing group must be represented using Roman numerals; however, use of any font or numeral that is easily identified as an "I" is acceptable. It should be noted that the use of Arabic numbers is not authorized (e.g., PG3).
Q8. Are all packages containing a limited quantity of hazardous materials required to be marked in accordance with § 172.315?
A8. No. The limited quantity marking described in § 172.315 (the identification number, preceded by the letters "UN" or "NA" placed within a square-on-point border) is part of an exception provided in the HMR. Provided the package is marked with the proper shipping name of the limit quantity of hazardous material, the marking described in § 172.315 is not required.
Q9. The inner receptacle of a combination packaging is marked; "DOT Shipping name, Corrosive materials nos, (phosphoric acid), 8, UN1760, PG111." Is this a violation of the HMR?
A9. You are correct in your understanding that "Corrosive materials n.o.s." is not a proper shipping name listed in the 172.101 table. However, provided the inner receptacle is never shipped as a single packaging and provided the inner receptacle, when shipped in an outer packaging, is not visible during transportation, there is no violation of the HMR. It will be a violation of the HMR if the shipper or any subsequent shipper marks the outer packaging or enters on the shipping papers "Corrosive materials n.o.s." as the proper shipping name.
Q10. Does a material offered for transportation through marine retail stores meet the definition of a consumer commodity?
Al0. Even though a material may not be intended for consumption by individuals for purpose of personal care or household use, as indicated by the retailer or the manufacturer, the material may have household uses. For example, some materials that are normally used in industrial applications are frequently found in home workshops of persons who restore personal watercraft, furniture and the like. Thus, on the basis of information concerning its customers needs and uses, a shipper of such hazardous material that is packaged in a form suitable for retail sales may determine whether a product may be appropriately renamed and reclassed as a consumer commodity.
Q1l. May a packaging be marked with both "Consumer commodity, ORM-D" and "Paint, UN1263?"
Al 1. Yes. The prohibited marking requirements in § 172.303 do not require the removal or obliteration of the marking representing the shipping name that is not applicable to the current shipment. Provided both markings are representative of the contents of the package, dual-marking is authorized.
Q12. Does the packaging in the enclosed photograph meet the requirements for strong outer packagings?
A12. It is impossible to determine if the packaging in the photograph meets the definition of a strong outer packaging. It appears to have been damaged in transportation and would not be acceptable for reuse. A strong outer packaging is the outermost enclosure which provides protection against the unintentional release of its contents. It is a packaging that is sturdy, durable, and constructed so that it will retain its contents under normal conditions of transportation, including rough handling. In addition, a strong outer packaging must meet the general packaging requirements of subpart B of part 173 but need not comply with the specification packaging requirements in Part 178.
In one of your letters you describe an epoxy resin shipped in a combination packaging. The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) and the package markings indicate two different classifications. The MSDS states that the material is not regulated; however, the shipper has chosen to ship the material as "Environmentally hazardous substance, solid, n.o.s." The package is also labeled with a Class 9 label that does not meet the size requirements for labels in § 172.407. In regard to the above scenario, you have the following questions:
Q13. How is the epoxy resin properly classified?
A13. Under § 173.22, it is the shipper"s responsibility to properly classify a hazardous material. Such determinations are not required to be verified by this Office.
Q14. Is the 50 mm (2 inch) Class 8 label shown in the photograph authorized?
A14. No. You are correct in your understanding that the label must be at least 100 mm (3.9 inches) on each side.
I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
Hattie L. Mitchell
Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
171.8, 173.150, 172.101
172.407(c), 172.312