# Cadbury Schweppes — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation **Citation:** 00-0269 **Type / status:** guidance / guidance **Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration **Effective:** Not stated **Published:** 2001-07-02 00-0269 response to Cadbury Schweppes concerning 178.601. ## Document text <<>> 7- • of Transportation U.S. Department 400 Seventh St., S.W. Research and Washington, D.C. 20590 Special Programs Administration JUL 2 2001 Mr. William Eaton Packaging Development Engineer Reference No. 00-0269 Cadbury Schweppes 30 Trefoil Drive Trumbull, CT 06611 Dear Mr. Eaton: This is in response to your letter and conversations with a member of my staff asking if 13 different non-bulk combination packages your company is using may be marked with their own specification to indicate the heaviest weight and most severe packing group. You stated the packages consist of using the same outer fiberboard box and various inner bottles made of polyethylene therephthalate or high density polyethylene up to 1-gallon in size filled with a Class 3 (flammable), PG II, or Class 8 (corrosive), PG III, material. You also stated that, although the packaging configurations meet the conditions prescribed in Variation 1 of § 178.601(g)(1), your company tested each packaging configuration and that each passed the UN performance tests. Based on the information contained in your letter, the answer is yes. Each tested package may be marked once to denote the most stringent tested packing group performance level and maximum gross mass. For future reference, all tested configurations may be included on a single test report. I hope this satisfies your request. Sincerely, Hette Z. Mittell Hattie L. Mitchell Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Office of Hazardous Materials Standards <<>> Edmonson Cadbury Schweppes 178.601 GLOBAL BEVERAGES September 14, 2000 Yarnas TECHNOLOGY CENTER lesnna packaging: Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 00 - 0269 400 7* Street S.W. U.S. DOT/RSPA (DHM-10) Washington, D.C. 20590-001 Dear Mr. Mazzullo: I am writing to request confidential interpretation and confirmation of proper marking for a specific set of circumstances related to class 3, packing group Il, combination packaging. We have a series of UN Standard combination packaging (Kits) using the same outer corrugated tested in their actual shipping configuration and passed the required tests. Below are pack package and various inner packaging containing Class 3 PG I hazardous products. All have been In some cases, not all of the inner packages contain hazardous materials, however we treat each as contigurations that cover the various inner packs at the highest usage level. (P# indicates part number) such tor test purposes to determine the performance of the actual finished shipping unit. PET- Polyethylene Therephthalate HDPE- High Density Polyethylene 1. P1-2x1 gal PET+P2-2x0.5gal PET+P3-2x4oz HDPE 2. P1-2x1gal PET + P-2 2x32oz PET P1-2x1 gal PET+P2-2x0.5gal PET+P3-2x32oz PET (Covers #1 & #2, but tested others for assurance 4. P1-2x1 gal PET + P2-1x5L HDPE purposes) 5. P1-1x1gal HDPE + P2-3x2.0L HDPE 6. P1-4X3.0L HDPE + P2-4x8oz HDPE 7. P1-4x1gal HDPE + P2-4x4oz HDPE +4x60gm bag non haz powder 8. 4x1 gal HDPE + 4x 0.81 # bags non haz powder 9. 2x1 gal PET + 1x8.5#+1x4.49#+2×10.36# bags non haz powder 10. P1-2x1gal PET + P2- 2x16oz PET + 2x2.82#+2×2.0#+2x1.7# bags non haz powder 11. P1-1x.5gal PET+P2-1x1 galPET+5.36##+ 2.83#+ 13.08# bags non haz powder 12. 4x1 gal PET 13. P1-1x320z PET + P2-1x320z PET+ P3-3×1 gal PET ° In some cases, we include non-hazardous bagged dry ingredients, which are non-reactive and help fill variation 1 provisions, however we have choose to test each for assurance of performance. any voids to keep the unit tight and stable. Also several of the inner packages could fall under the 30 Trefoil Drive Trumbull, Connecticut 06611 203.459.3000 tel 203.459.3109 fax A MEMBER OF THE CADBURY SCHWEPPES ple GROUP <<>> • Page 2 September 14, 2000 I am interpreting the DOT regulations for marking as follows. Within the UN marking is the maximum same with the exception of the weight tested. We are proposing to use a single marking that indicates weight tested tor that outer package. For all of the above noted tests, the UN Marking would be the no purpose to my knowledge and should not be required if the level of testing covers the most severe the heaviest tested package weight. Having an individual UN marking for each pack tested would serve easy and quick access to necessary details of tested components. packing group. We also include on the bottom flap reference to each UN test report number to allow single outer package and using individual UN markings for each would take up an entire side of the The reason for approaching this issue in this manner is that we have 13 different test packs for the -boX,-hiS-space is necessary for product, hazard and-instructional-labeling for-proper handling-and -- storage. I have spoken to Diane Levalle at the Hazmat Service Center as well as other contacts. Most received responses from local enforcement agents indicating a UN marking for each test pack needs to are in agreement with my interpretation, however our supplier is not in agreement as they have information in each line with the exception of the weight of the tested package. appear on the box. This would equate to having up to13 UN markings with essentially the same above situation, please provide details on properly marking our shippers for the above circumstances. Thank you in advance for your response. Sincerely, William Eaton Packaging Development Engineer wre... - - Eric Crouch Co: Jack Neill Denise Leflebvre Gene Metti Karen O'Toole Kathy Stohldrier <<>> TELEPHONIC CONVERSATION RECORD Specialist Placing Call: Eileen Edmonson ROUTING Date of Call: June 1, 2001 8:56 am voice mail SYMBOL INT message & 11:15 am conversation Person (s) Contacted: William (Bill) Eaton, Packaging Development Engineer, Cadbury Schweppes, 30 Trefoil Drive, Trumbull, CT 06611, 203-459-3136, & 203-459-3109 Regarding: The configuration of his tested packages Variation 1. and if all the variations met 178.601(g) (1), Date of Incoming Letter: 9/14/00 Specific Subject (including section #'s and key words) : His company has put together a variety of combination packagings and tested them all. He wants to know if he can mark the package for its highest design weight and the severest hazard it was tested for. He seems to be under the ith the UN specification markina for eac mpression that he must mark the outside packag packaging configuration he tested. Summary: Mr. Eaton said all of the configurations of his company's UN specitication packaging where a smaller inner. 178.601 (g) (1). packaging is used meet the conditions listed in Variation 1 of $ MI. Eaton said in some cases inner packagings containing non-hazmat will be laid across the top of packages containing hazmat, but that all of these packaging configurations were tested and meet UN specification. He acknowledged that since his company tested all of their packaging configurations, they really didn't need the selective testing rules. customer is insisting the HMR requires Cadbury Schweppes to mark each fiberboard box with the UN specification for all the configurations for which it was successfully tested. He wanted something from us in writing to requirement. say this was not an HMR Comments for Further Action: Finish draft & forward to supervisor. Specialist Signature: Date: 6/1/01 <<>> TELEPHONIC CONVERSATION RECORD Specialist Placing Call: Eileen Edmonson ROUTING Date of Call: 12/05/00 SYMBOL INT Person (s) Contacted: William Eaton, Packaging Drive, DeveLopment Engineer, Cadbury Schweppes, 30 Trefoil 3109. Trumbull, CI 06611, 203-459-3136, & 203-459- Regarding: Information needed to answer his letter Date of Incoming Letter: 9/14/00, 2:15 pm Specific Subject (including section #'s and key words): His company has put together a variety of combination packagings and tested them all. He wants to know if he can mark the package for its highest design weight and the severest hazard it was tested for. He seems to be under the impression that he must mark the outside package with the UN specification marking for each packaging configuration he tested. Summary: MI. Eaton said he inner packagings are made of one of polyethylene), a variety of sizes, and similar in design. He said two types of plastic (polyethylene therephthalate and high density both plastics perform the same, that is they have equal resistance to the hazardous material. He also said his company tested all the packaging types passed the HMR's performances tests. and configurations they will be using, and all Mr. Eaton ships Class 3, PGII, and Class 8, PG III materials, sometime in the same package. He configurations are tested to the PII standard. He said most packagings consist of 4-1 gallon inner packagings, but the company of non-hazardous also ships with 3, 2 or 1 gallon inner containers along with bags material or other types of cushioning to fill the void spaces. Comments for Further Action: Prepare response and send through normal clearances. Specialist Signature: Tolen Edmonton Date: 3/21/01 <<>> • U.S. Department of Transportation Seventre Sw Research and Nashingion. D C 20590 Administration Special Programs MAR - 71:2 Mr. Patrick •R. Muncie Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems MZ 6888 P.O. Box 748 Fort Worth, Texas 76101 Dear Mr. Muncie: This is in concerning performance oriented packaging requirements. Your response to your letter of December 21, 1995, questions are answered as follows: Q1. Is a shipper permitted to use a vendor-provided UN packaging that was tested with four 1-gallon cans if the packaging contains only three 1-gallon cans and the void space is filled with vermiculite? Al. Yes. Variations tested combination package, without further testing of are permitted in inner packagings of a the package, provided an equivalent level of performance is maintained. A lesser number of the tested inner packagings may be used provided sufficient cushioning is added to fill void space (s) and to prevent significant movement of the inner packagings. 178.601 (g) (1) and 178.601(g) (1) (ii). See 49 CFR Q2. Is a shipper allowed to ship vendor supplied cartons that have been manufactured more than 2 years prior? A2. Yes. The packaging manufacturer must periodically retest to ensure that each packaging produced by the • qualification tests. for manufacturers. packaging, store it indefinitely and then use it without I hope this information is helpful. Sincerely, 7933 Regulations Development Standards <<>> „5. - • U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Research and Washington, D.C. 20590 Administration Special Programs DEC 3 | 1992 Mr. Durwood Anderson Wyle Laboratories Manager, special Projects 1841 Hillside Ave. NOICO, CA 91760 Dear Mr. Anderson: This is in response to your letter of october 1, 1992 regarding third party test certification of packages. Your questions have been paraphrased as follows: 2. If the outer fiberboard material of a 4G packaging that failed the cobb test, but passed required performance tests, is treated to reduce water change to the previously tested packaging - must the packaging be absorption (thus meeting cobb test requirements) -- and that is the only requalified? A. Yes. A packaging that does $ 178.516(b) (1) cannot be certified a UN 4G packaging, The 1G outer packaging must conform to both the subpart I cobb test and the subpart M test requirements (with inner packagings) before the combination packaging can be documented as a succeasfully tested design type, and UN certified. cans in this design type, would the packaging have to be recertified? l. If a nearly identical friction lid is applied to the inner metal gallon a. so, under selectiva testing varsation 1 in $ 178 601(9) (1)(4) and (3)é inner packagings of similar design and material construction to originally tested inner packagings may be used without further designi gross mass of the testing provided an equivalent level of performance is maintained and the tested design type. substitute packaging doas not exceed the originally tested can and the substituted can? 2. Would the same UN configuration number be used for both the originally 1082 Aplof 2 <<>> w... • 2 A. In the performance system adopted under 1M-181, inner packagings of by "UN configuration number" you are referring to the certification marking combination packagings are not marked with certification information. requirements in S 178.503, there would be no change in marking because, under variation 1, no design type change has been made requiring a new combination package certification mark. If we can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, j0 Deputy Director, office of Thomas G. Allan Hazardous Materials standards 1082 ApLofz <<>> • of Transportation US. Department Research and • • Washington, D.C. 400 Seventh Street, S.W 20590 Special Programs Administration NOV 1 3 1995 Ms. Patricia I. Garin manager, Technical Services : 1666 County Road 74 Ten-E Packaging Services, Inc. Newport, Minnesota 55055 Dear Ms. Garin: This is in response to your August 23, 1995 letter concerning if Variation 1 in 49 CFR 178.601 (g) (1) (1) permits use of a The may be used without further testing if: (1) an equivalent level answer is yes. A greater number of smaller inner packagings of cushioning material between inner packagings and the outside of performance is maintained, such as by ensuring the thickness of the packaging is not reduced below the corresponding thickness oI the originally tested packaging; (2) the gross mass ot the other requirements of $ 178.601 (g) (1) (i) are met. package does not exceed that of the original package; and (3) all If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Director, Materials Standards Office of Hazardous 7898 Ap 1of1 <<>> • 11 L.- Cadbury Schweppes GLOBAL BEVERAGES TECHNOLOGY CENTER SEP ISEX! S 30 TREFOIL DRIVE AMEMBER OF THE CADBURY SCHWEPPES pl GROUP TRUMBULL, CONNECTICUT 06611 E000 CT 6703 Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards U.S. DOT/RSPA (DHM-10) 400 7t Street S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590-001 ## Provenance - Official: Yes - Source: - Source ID: `phmsa` - SHA-256: `2a2972fa82cf1a493a89e3b23b1bac34b4adc158a2b29986513f4a8a22970354` - Retrieved: 2026-08-20T00:59:31.977Z - Exported: 2026-08-23T12:35:43.266Z - Document slug: `phmsa-interpretation-00-0269` ### Source metadata ```json { "materialSubtype": "interpretation", "interpretationArea": "hazardous_materials", "representation": "full_text_from_official_pdf", "companies": [ "Cadbury Schweppes" ], "individuals": [ "Mr. William Eaton" ], "refIds": [ "00-0269" ], "catalogDates": [ "2001-07-02" ], "catalogParts": [ 178 ], "catalogRowCount": 1, "sourceRecordUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/60841" ], "linkedAttachmentUrls": [], "unavailableResponseUrls": [], "duplicateRepresentationUrls": [], "citedSections": [ "178.601", "178.601(g)(1)", "178.516(b)", "178.503" ], "catalogPageUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/178601" ], "pdfUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2000/000269.pdf" ], "representations": [ { "viewUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2000/000269.pdf", "detailUrl": null, "detailHtmlPath": null, "pdfUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2000/000269.pdf", "pdfArtifactPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/00-0269-1fa432a76d.pdf", "pdfArtifactSha256": "0602bbb211ef8dfbc0b5d7e71576f1f335431e654db300656ae2ccad23d81797", "extractedTextPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/00-0269-1fa432a76d.v2.txt", "extractedTextSha256": "63fd8b4a28ddc2e28ec8258a05e6fecbfe81cd0c7a77ca88bee58eef6637dccf", "pageCount": 10, "extractionVersion": 2 } ], "caveat": "Interpretations apply regulations to the facts presented and do not create independently enforceable requirements.", "jurisdiction": "US" } ```