{"operation":"document","citation":"04-0204","title":"ESS Group, Inc — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2004-11-24","effective_on":null,"summary":"04-0204 response to ESS Group, Inc concerning 173.24.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0204.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0204.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-04-0204","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2004/040204.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nof Transportat on\nU.S. Department\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nSpecial Programs\nResearch anci\nAdministraticn\nNOV 2. 4 2004\nMs. Kelly V. Camp\nRef No.: 04-0204\nSenior Project Manager\nESS Group, Inc.\n401 Wampanoag Trail\nSuite 400\nEast Providence, RI 02915\nDear Ms. Camp:\nThis is in response to your letter dated August 27, 2004 requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you are\nrequesting further clarification of our August 12, 2004 letter addressed to you from\nMr. John A. Gale. You ask about the classification, hazard precedence, and packing\ngroup of methanol for international transportation when it is mixed with other hazardous\nand non-hazardous materials. In addition, you ask if a pressure relief device is\nconsidered to be a vent for purposes of § 173.24(g).\nWhen shipping methanol internationally the authorized Hazardous Materials Table entry\nis identified by a plus sign in Column 1. The plus sign indicates that a material is known\nto pose a risk to humans and the proper shipping name, hazard class and packing group\nfor that entry are fixed without regard to the hazards of the material. If vou prepare an\ninternatical shipment of methanol as a mixture with other hazardous and non-hazardous\nmaterials the final product may or may not exhibit the hazards of the original constitutes.\nthrough testing in accordance with the hazard class definitions found in Part 173 of the\nTo make that determination you must first determine the hazards of the material, either\nHMR or 'ased on your knowledge of the material. If you find that the hazards to humans\nare significantly different from that of the pure methanol or that no hazard to humans is\nposed, the material may be described using an alternative shipping name that represents\nthe hazards posed by the material. In addition, an appropriate alternative proper shipping\nname anć hazard class may be authorized by the Associate Administrator. Based on the\ninformation you provided, it is our opinion that the methanol in the mixtures you describe\nis sufficiently diluted that it poses no toxicity hazard to humans.\nWhen selecting a shipping description for your product you must assign a proper\nshipping name based on the hazards of the material and the most stringent packing group\nassigned :o those hazards. If the hazards are Division 5.1, PG II and Class 3, PG II then\nthe hazard class and packing group assigned to the material would be Division 5.1, PG II.\nIf the hazards are Division 5.1, PG III and Class 3, PG II then the hazard class and\npacking group assigned to the material would be Division 5.1, PG II.\n040204\n193.24\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nFor purposes of the HMR, the terms \"vent\" and \"pressure relief device\" are not\nconsidered to be synonymous. Therefore, § 173.24(g) does not apply to pressure relief\ndevices.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you require additional assistance.\nSincerely,\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n•\nSupko\nLESS\n$173.24\nGroup, Inc.\nAugust 27, 2004\nPackagings\nMr. John A. Gale\n04-0204\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\nChief, Standards Development\nUSDOT/ RSPA\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nRe:\nAugust 12, 2004 Letter\nReference No. 04-0134\nDear Mr. Gale:\nresponse, I have several follow-up questions. I have attached copies of my initial letter and\nThank you for your prompt response to my letter dated May 18, 2004. Based on your\nyour response for reference.\n1. ESS Question 1.d. The material being shipped has three hazards: Class 3 PG III, Division\n5.1 PG II, and Class 8 PGII. One of the constituents is methanol, which, for international\nshipments, has a subsidiary hazard of Division 6.1. Does this affect the precedence of\nmethanol), 5.1 (8), UN3098, PGII) for international shipments?\nhazard or the shipping description (Oxidizing liquid, corrosive, n.o.s., (hydrogen peroxide,\n2. ESS Question 2.c. The material being shipped has two hazards: Class 3 and Division 5.1.\nhazard of Division 6.1. You indicated in A2. that \"Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., UN3139\" is an\nOne of the constituents is methanol, which, for international shipments, has a subsidiary\nappropriate shipping name for domestic and international shipping.\nshipping, will Division 6.1 have to be identified in the shipping description?\nFor international\n3. RSPA response A2. RSPA determined that \"Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., UN3139\" is an\nwould be assigned to the material?\nappropriate shipping name for domestic and international shipping. What packing group\n4. 49 CFR 173.24(g) only allows venting under certain circumstances and does not allow\nvented?\nventing when shipping on aircraft. Is a container with a pressure relief valve considered\nThank you again for your help. Please call me if you have any questions.\nSincerely,\nESS GROUP, INC.\nenior Project Manage\ns: \\corresp and guidance\\dot\\/0826.doc\nwww.essgroup.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":4942}