{"operation":"document","citation":"02-0059","title":"ADD South — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2002-04-01","effective_on":null,"summary":"02-0059 response to ADD South concerning 172.201.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0059.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0059.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0059","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2002/020059.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nAPR 1 - 2002\nMs. Becky Webber\nADD South\nRef. No. 02-0059\n5790 S Semoran Blvd\nOrlando, FL 32822\nDear Ms. Webber:\nThis is in response to your October 22, 2001 letter concerning shipping paper requirements under the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). We apologize for the delay in\nresponding to your letter due to mail delivery problems many Federal agencies have been experiencing\ndue to screening and decontamination precautions.\nSpecifically, you ask if using bold print on the shipping paper meets the requirements of using a\ncontrasting color when entering hazardous material descriptions on a shipping paper along with a\nmaterial not subject to the HMR.\nBold print is not considered a contrasting color. If a facility does not have access to color printing\nspit paper. 20 pi is ides ore opine to died is in te lazed us matin taper re\nincluding a column captioned \"HM\" (for Hazardous Material) and placing an \"X\" in the column for the\nhazardous material entries.\nI hope this satisfies your request.\nSincerely,\nAhma 765 els\nDelmer F. Billings\nChief, Standards Development\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n172.201\n020059\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\ndonnsen\n8172.201 60i\nShipping Papers\n02-0059\nA Division of ADD Systems\nOctober 22, 2001\nMs. Hattie L Mitchell\n400 7th St. SW\nChief of Regulatory Review and Reinvention\nRoom 8422\nWashington, DC 20590\nDear Ms. Mitchell,\nWe are a software provider to the petroleum industry. About ten years ago when our\nimplemented the printing of these messages using bold print as the \"contrasting color\"\ncompany first began printing Hazardous Materials Messages on shipping documents, we\nbecause none of our customers had color printers. Printing in a contrasting color was\nreally not an option in their environment.\nOne of our customers recently told us that according to the DOT Regional Office in\nofficial ruling on this, as I'm told you are the one who makes the rules and the DOT just\nBaltimore, bold print was not an accepted \"contrasting color\". I am writing to you for an\nenforces them. Years ago, the ruling was that bold print was an acceptable contrasting\ncolor.\nSincerely,\nBecky weaker\nBecky Webber\nADD South\n5790 S Semoran Blyd\nA Division of ADD Systems, Inc.\nOrlando, FL 32822","truncated":false,"body_characters":2336}