USA Banner

Official US Government Icon

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure Site Icon

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation Icon United States Department of Transportation United States Department of Transportation

Interpretation Response #08-0222 ([URS Corporation] [Ms. Erin N. Jarman])

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

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date:

Company Name: URS Corporation

Individual Name: Ms. Erin N. Jarman

Location State: NC Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

October 3, 2008

Ms. Erin N. Jarman

Environmental Scientist

URS Corporation

1600 Perimeter Park Drive

Morrisville, NC 27560

Ref. No.: 08-0222

Dear Ms. Jarman:

This responds to your August 28, 2008 request for clarification of the applicability of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask for further clarification of a letter of interpretation that was issued to Mr. Henry L. Longest II, Acting Assistant Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on February 13, 2003 (Reference No. 02-0093). In that letter, PHMSA stated:

"Based on test results, it is the opinion of this office that the environmental samples containing the following "upper limit" concentrations: 0.28 weight percent Nitric acid, 0.38 weight percent Sulfuric acid, 0.15 weight percent Hydrochloric acid and 0.20 weight percent Sodium hydroxide, do not meet the definition of corrosive material in § 173.136, and, therefore, are not subject to the HMR."

Specifically, you ask if environmental samples preserved within the "upper limit" boundaries specified in the February 13, 2003 letter could be shipped as non-regulated materials, even when they are being shipped for reasons other than EPA testing.

The answer is yes. Samples preserved within the "upper limit" concentrations specified in the February 13, 2003 letter do not meet the definition of a corrosive material in § 173.136, and therefore, are not subject to the HMR. The interpretation applies to environmental samples being shipped for reasons other than EPA testing.

I hope this answers your inquiry.

Sincerely,

Susan Gorsky

Acting Chief, Standards Development

Office of Hazardous Materials Standards

171.8, 173.136

Regulation Sections

Section Subject
173.136 Class 8-Definitions