# Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

**Citation:** 98-0550  
**Type / status:** guidance / guidance  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 1998-01-30

98-0550 response to Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc. concerning 173.240.

## Document text

<<<PAGE 1>>>

of Transportation
U.S.Department
Washingion, D.C. 2059
400 Seventh Street, S.W
Research and
Administration
Special Programs
JAN 30 1998
Mr. Jerry D. Davis
Manger, Corporate Transportation Programs
Laidiaw Environmental Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 11393
Columbia, SC 29211
Dear Mr. Davis:
;
This is in response to your letter of January 5, 1998, regarding packaging requirements for
Class 9 hazardous materials under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR
parts 171-180). Specifically you ask whether a shipper may place ten cubic yards of
:
Hazardous waste, solid, n.o.s., 9, NA 3077, III with several non-bulk packages containing
Asbestos, 9, NA2212, III in a non-specification sift-proof closed bulk bin.
The answer is yes. As provided in § 173.240, a non-specification closed bulk bin is an
authorized bulk packaging for both of the described Class 9 materials. The fact that the
asbestos is already packaged in bags is not relevant to this scenario.
I hope this information is helpful.
Sincerely,
•
Delmer F. Billings
Chief, Regulations Development
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
........

<<<PAGE 2>>>

...........
MAR-17-1999
13:46
HMIC
P.02/02
US.Deportment
of Transportation
Ho segion. D.C. 3000
Research and
special Prograins
Administration
JAN 3D 1998
Mr. Jerry D. Davis
Manger, Corporate Transportation Programs
Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 11393
Columbia, SC 29211
Dear Mr. Davis:
This is in response to your letter of January 5, 1998, regarding packaging requirements for
Class 9 hazardous materials under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR
parts 171-180). Specifically you ask whether a shipper thiay place tess cubic yards of
Hazardous waste, solid, n.o.s., 9, NA 3077, III with several non-bulk packages containing
Asbestos, 9, NA2212, III in a non-specification sift-proof closed bulk bin.
The answer is yes. As provided in § 173.240, a non specification closed bulk bin is an
authorized bulk packaging for both of the described Class 9 materials. The fact that the
asbestos is already packaged in bags is not relevant to this scenario.
I hope this information is helpful.
Sincerely,
Delmer F. Billings
Chief, Regulations Development
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
TATA P.DD

<<<PAGE 3>>>

r.
-:
U.S. Department
•
of Transportation
400 Seventh Streel, S.W.
Special Programs
Research and
Washington, D.C.
20590
Administration
•..
NOV T 1997
Mr. Jétry D. Davis
Manger, Corporate Transportation Programs
• ..
Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 11393
Columbia, SC 29211
Dear Mr. Davis:
...
This is in response to your letter of October 24, 1997 regarding classification and transportation
of rags containing flammable liquid under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR
parts 171-180). Your questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:
Q.
Can "Solids containing flammable liquid, n.o.s., 4.1, UN 3175, PG II" be used to describe
!
these rags as long as there are no free liquids visible at the time of transportation?
A.
:
Yes. See special provision 47.
Q.
Is it permissible to put rags containing flammable liquid in plastic bags and fiberboard
boxes and to transport the plastic bags and fiberboard boxes in a "sift-proof" closed
vehicle (i.e., van trailers) under § 173.240?
A.
Yes, provided the packagings are compatible with the lading as required by § 173.24(e).
Q. May this same material be transported in "sift-proof" roll-off containers and dump
11
trailers?
:
A.
Yes, as provided by § 173.240 sift-proof non-DOT specification closed bulk bins and sift-
proof closed vehicles are authorized for transportation..
Q.
What is the definition of sift-proof?
A.
A sift-proof packaging is one that is constructed so that its contents cannot pass through.
Has there been any interfacing between the Occupational Safety and Health
:
Administration (OSHA) and DOT on the transportation of rags containing flammable
liquid? Does RSPA's regulations take precedence during transportation?
173.240
-

<<<PAGE 4>>>

.....:.
A.
Differences in OSHA and DOT requirements are due to the fact that the two agencies
have separate mandates to regulate hazardous materials. RSPA is required to regulate
materials in transportation that may pose an unreasonable risk to health and safety or
property. OSHA is required to regulate hazardous chemicals that pose a physical or
health hazard, but not a property hazard. OSHA requirements apply to storage of a
hazardous material in a workplace. DOT requirements apply during transportation of a
hazardous material including loading and unloading. DOT requirements definitely take
precedence during transportation.
Q.
**Does RSPA have any safety measures that can be.used to prevent a spontaneous
combustion from occurring when rags containing flammable liquid are transported in
plastic bags, fiberboard boxes, roll-off containers, and dump trailers?
:1
•A.
No, the HMR provide safety measures for the safe transportation of a hazardous material,
but not how to prevent that material from posing a hazard.
I hope this information is helpful.
Sincerely,
Delmer F. Billings
:
Chief, Regulations Development
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Davis 2

<<<PAGE 5>>>

JAN-05-1998 14:33
FROM LAIDLAW COMPLIANCE
TO
912023668700
P.02
DADDLAW
LaValle
SERNCES ING.
EVERUNMENTAL
File Part 173
SC: 300,380
173.240
VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
January 5, 1998
Delmer F. Billings
Chief, Regulations Development
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Research and Special Programs Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
400 Seventh Street, Southwest
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Mr. Billings:
Laidiaw Environmental Services, Inc. is seeking guidance on the transportațion of two
Class 9 materials. Our situation and question are as follows:
Suppose a shipper puts ten cubic yards of a material in a twenty cubic yard roll-off
container (sift-proof closed bulk bin). The basic shipping description of this material is
"Hazardous waste solid, n.o.s., 9, NA 3077, PG III." The shipper also wants to put
several non-bulk packages that contain a material described as " Asbestos, 9, NA 2212,
PG Ill" in the roll-off container. Both materials are chemically compatible with each
other. Is it permissible under the Hazardous Materials Regulations to transport both
materials in the roll-off container?
Your immediate response is greatly appreciated.
Give me a call at (803) 933-4379 if you have any questions or need additional
information.
:
Sincerely,
Davis
Jeny D.
Jerry D. Davis
Manager, Corporate Transportation Programs
:
1301 Gervais Street, Suite 300 (29201) Post Otice Box 11393 (29211) Columbia, South Carolina
Phone 803.933.4200
@irpaniona

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980550.pdf>
- Source ID: `phmsa`
- SHA-256: `c0caa0fd9939ed2f8334e7c1ed736cf67b9343db73764f1980ac75427ebbb0f7`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T00:59:31.977Z
- Exported: 2026-08-22T14:23:58.518Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-interpretation-98-0550`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "materialSubtype": "interpretation",
  "interpretationArea": "hazardous_materials",
  "representation": "full_text_from_official_pdf",
  "companies": [
    "Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc."
  ],
  "individuals": [
    "Mr. Jerry D. Davis"
  ],
  "refIds": [
    "98-0550"
  ],
  "catalogDates": [
    "1998-01-30"
  ],
  "catalogParts": [
    173
  ],
  "catalogRowCount": 1,
  "sourceRecordUrls": [
    "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/69251"
  ],
  "linkedAttachmentUrls": [],
  "unavailableResponseUrls": [],
  "duplicateRepresentationUrls": [],
  "citedSections": [
    "173.240",
    "173.24(e)"
  ],
  "catalogPageUrls": [
    "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/173240"
  ],
  "pdfUrls": [
    "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980550.pdf"
  ],
  "representations": [
    {
      "viewUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980550.pdf",
      "detailUrl": null,
      "detailHtmlPath": null,
      "pdfUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980550.pdf",
      "pdfArtifactPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/98-0550-8bc9c7b2a1.pdf",
      "pdfArtifactSha256": "bf6964b0df51ed9be93a54f16b81cb86c3923d715a64746a38ad83125ef85893",
      "extractedTextPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/98-0550-8bc9c7b2a1.v2.txt",
      "extractedTextSha256": "b0baa6e1e3a5b230c100f774a8759c0e4e991a93528bdf75b719ff073c2421e8",
      "pageCount": 5,
      "extractionVersion": 2
    }
  ],
  "caveat": "Interpretations apply regulations to the facts presented and do not create independently enforceable requirements.",
  "jurisdiction": "US"
}
```
