# Harrison Jet Guns II LP — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation **Citation:** 17-0130 **Type / status:** guidance / guidance **Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration **Effective:** Not stated **Published:** 2018-06-29 17-0130 response to Harrison Jet Guns II LP concerning 173.64, 173.65. ## Document text <<>> U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Pipeline and Hazardous Administration Materials Safety JUN 2 9 2018 James Shelton Product Reliability / Network Administrator Harrison Jet Guns II LP 6915. Hudson Village Creek Road Kennedale, TX 76060 Reference No. 17-0130 Dear Mr. Shelton: This letter is in response to your November 29, 2017, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to explosive approval numbers (EX-Numbers). Specifically, you ask whether an explosive may continue to be shipped under a current EX-Number when a change is made in the formulation, design, or process so as to not alter any of the properties of the explosive, (e.g. a change that reduces the explosive content contained in a charge) if both: (1) a "not a new explosive letter" is issued by an explosives lab; and (2) an associated tracking number has been obtained from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The answer is yes. Except as provided in §§ 173.64 and 173.65, no person may offer a new explosive for transportation unless that person has specified to the examining agency the ranges of composition of ingredients and compounds, showing the intended manufacturing tolerances in the composition of substances or design of articles which will be allowed in that material or device, and unless it has been examined, classed, and approved. For the purposes of the HMR, a "new explosive" means an explosive produced by a person who has previously produced an explosive but has made a change in the formulation, design, or process so as to alter any of the properties of the explosive. However, an explosive will not be considered a "new explosive" if an agency listed in § 173.56(b) has determined, and confirmed in writing to the Associate Administrator, that there are no significant differences in hazard characteristics from the explosive previously approved. Therefore, submission of the "not a new explosive letter" to PHMSA and receiving the associated tracking number provided by the DOT satisfies the written confirmation requirement prescribed in § 173.56(a)(2). I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, T. Glenn Foster Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch Standards and Rulemaking Division <<>> stevers Explosives January, Ikeya CTR (PHMSA) 17 - 0130 Sent: From: DerKinderen, Dirk (PHMSA) To: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 12:15 PM Cc: Nickels, Matthew (PHMSA); Hazmat Interps Kelley, Shane (PHMSA) Subject: Re: Letter of Interpretation Please assign asap and include a note for the assigned specialist to work with Bill Fink and/or Jackie Herrera. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizon Wireless 4G LTE network. Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 11:30 AM From: Nickels, Matthew (PHMSA) To: Hazmat Interps Cc: Kelley, Shane (PHMSA); DerKinderen, Dirk (PHMSA) Subject: FW: Letter of Interpretation Hey Alice and Ikeya, please log and process as a new Interp request (James Shelton issue at the bottom of email chain). Thanks, Matt Matthew B. Nickels Senior Regulations Officer (E24-420) office: 202.366.0464 | work cell: 202.597.4187 From: Fink, William (PHMSA) Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 11:15 AM To: Kelley, Shane (PHMSA) ; Nickels, Matthew (PHMSA) Cc: Herrera, Jacqueline (PHMSA) Subject: FW: Letter of Interpretation Shane, Matt, Letter of interp please for Mr. Shelton. TY Bill Fink From: Bartrum, Zeudi CTR (PHMSA) On Behalf Of EXPLO (PHMSA) Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 11:09 AM To: Fink, William (PHMSA) Subject: FW: Letter of Interpretation Bill, Please see Mr. Shelton's email below. I mentioned the interpretation letter as you stated, but I guess there was confusion on his end. Zeudi 1 <<>> From: James Shelton [mailto:James.Shelton@higmfg.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 10:47 AM To: EXPLO (PHMSA) Subject: Letter of Interpretation Dear Sir / Madam I've submitted two applications (tracking numbers 2017100201 and 2017114294) these are considered "Not a new explosive". The applications involve two separate testing labs and both have said once a tracking number is obtained I can legal ship charges with the explosive. Due to recent events, the availability of explosive has been severely curtailed. We been given opportunity to obtain supplies used in other processes that changes from the standard 1% to 1 - 6% which will reduce the explosive content in all charges when used. I just wanted to get confirmation on being able to ship using the higher binder content explosive before the current EX-Number is revised. I'm requesting a letter of interpretation that we are allowed to ship under current assigned EX-Numbers until as such time as our applications have be processed and approved. Thanks I HARRISON James Shelton Product Reliablity / Network Administrator 6915 Hudson Village Creek Road TEL: 817.478.9216 ex 2232 Kennedale, Texas 76060 FAX : 817.478.6910 CELL: 817.891.8449 2 ## Provenance - Official: Yes - Source: - Source ID: `phmsa` - SHA-256: `ea94a400d0120460f39ea0eae1b67f36553b560466acbf340297a2a50d79c654` - Retrieved: 2026-08-20T00:59:31.977Z - Exported: 2026-08-24T05:14:45.554Z - Document slug: `phmsa-interpretation-17-0130` ### Source metadata ```json { "materialSubtype": "interpretation", "interpretationArea": "hazardous_materials", "representation": "full_text_from_official_pdf", "companies": [ "Harrison Jet Guns II LP" ], "individuals": [ "James Shelton" ], "refIds": [ "17-0130" ], "catalogDates": [ "2018-06-29" ], "catalogParts": [ 173 ], "catalogRowCount": 2, "sourceRecordUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/70786" ], "linkedAttachmentUrls": [], "unavailableResponseUrls": [], "duplicateRepresentationUrls": [], "citedSections": [ "173.64", "173.65", "173.56(b)" ], "catalogPageUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/17364", "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/17365" ], "pdfUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/65876/170130.pdf" ], "representations": [ { "viewUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/65876/170130.pdf", "detailUrl": null, "detailHtmlPath": null, "pdfUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/65876/170130.pdf", "pdfArtifactPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/17-0130-07be392bb1.pdf", "pdfArtifactSha256": "593093b9b05b3eb7267cfd80a729d4dd624d9df2767930c79106015f36f28418", "extractedTextPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/17-0130-07be392bb1.v2.txt", "extractedTextSha256": "4c973be7c729815b015e7fec62a949a8e7c754fca9787f2045eadb93d7be6706", "pageCount": 3, "extractionVersion": 2 } ], "caveat": "Interpretations apply regulations to the facts presented and do not create independently enforceable requirements.", "jurisdiction": "US" } ```