# Fomo Products Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation - **operation:** document - **citation:** 04-0117 - **title:** Fomo Products Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation - **source type:** guidance - **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration - **status:** guidance - **official:** true - **published on:** 2004-09-07 - **effective on:** Not available - **summary:** 04-0117 response to Fomo Products Inc. concerning 177.840. - **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0117.json - **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0117.md - **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0117 - **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2004/040117.pdf **body:** <<>> 400 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 Special Programs Research and SEP Administration / 2004 Mr. Timothy J. Eberling Safety and Regulatory Manager Reference No.: 04-0117 Fomo Products Inc 2775 Barber Road Norton, Ohio 44203 Dear Mr. Eberling: This is in response to your letter dated May 4, 2004 regarding the loading requirements for Class 2 (gases) under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171- 180). Specifically, you ask whether the requirements in § 177.840(a) prohibit DOT 39 specification cylinders that are packaged in 4G packaging and palletized from being doubled stacked. materials may be stacked or "double stacked" in a transport vehicle provided, as stated in The answer is no. Non-bulk packagings including cylinders containing hazardous § 177.840(a) the floor or platform is essentially flat. Although, the HMR do not prohibit stacking, a person loading hazardous materials in non-bulk packagings (e.g., 4G boxes) into a transport vehicle must determine whether stacking could reduce the integrity of the packages. I trust this satisfies your request. Sincerely, Hattie L- Mitchel + (Office of Hazardous Materials Standards W' Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention 040117 <<>> May 4 2004 9:24 P.01 Fomo Products, Inc. A Member of the FLM Group of Companies May 4, 2004 Betts 2004 Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Webb Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 400 Seventh Street S.W. Attention: Mr. Ed Mazzullo $177.840 Washington D.C. 20590 Cylinders Dear Mr. Mazzullo: 04-0117 part basically states that "Cylinders containing Class 2 (gases) materials shall not be loaded onto any part of the floor or This letter is to provide an official request for written interpretation of a part of the 49 CFR. Part 177.840 to be specific. This platform of any motor vehicle which is essentially not flat;...." This in turn is being interpreted as that we cannot double stack poly-urethane insulating sealant foam that is dispensed out of DOT 39 specification cylinders that are individually or doubly even the carrier protects/prevents against movement by securing his lading which they have to do anyway. Our product is a each layer, 2 layers to each pallet. The top of the pallet is as flat as the floor of the transportation unit and creates the same area packed into UN tested and approved 4G corrugated packaging with a 44 ECT test rating and then stacked onto pallets, 13 to on the top of the loaded pallet as the pallet area itself 48 inches by 48 inches. These 4G's are stack tested to 270 pounds each. These products are shipped as Compressed Gases n.o.s. (fluorocarbon) UN1956 2.2. The 2.2 gas is not the only material in the carriers refuse to double stack this product because of their interpretation of this part of the regulations since we do ship Class 2 container as a matter of fact the gas makes up only about 20% of the filled material in each container. We have had some I have solicited and received a verbal interpretation from the DOT hazardous materials hot line that basically had agreed with shrink wrapped to form a solid base with which to stack safely upon. Furthermore they stated that the requirements of 177.834 my interpretation that 177.840 does not apply to our Class 2 product since the cylinders are packaged in 4G's and they are specifically paragraphs (a) and (b) are more applicable to our product then the 177.840. I even asked the gentleman assisting this section and they both agreed as I have stated here. me to double check with another person in the department to make sure what they interpreted was their true understanding of product as described because it is currently causing a financial hardship for our company. I am also forwarding a copy of this Can you please request that you expedite your reply as to the intent of the 177:840 and whether or not it is applicable to our request by fax to help speed the reply if possible. We appreciate your quick response and thank you for your involvement in this our first ever request for written interpretation. Regards, histle helis Tantand eeritory Manager Fomo Products Inc. 2775 Barber Road (330) 753-4585 ext. 192 Norton, Ohio 44203 Fax (330) 753-5199 E-mail teberling@fomo.com Cc. T. Fishback P. Hurray M. Karr 2775 Barber Road • P.O. Box 1078 • Norton, Ohio 44203 USA E-mail: info@fomo.com • Web: www.fomo.com Tel: 330-753-4585 • Fax 330-753-5199 - **truncated:** false - **body characters:** 4456