Fortco Plastics, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1..i" 2 200 Mr. Stephen Jetter Ref. No. 06-0029 Fortco Plastics, Inc. 500 Industrial Park Road Portland, IN 47371 Dear Mr. Jetter: This is in response to your letter requesting clarification of the stacking requirements under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49CFR, Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask whether either stack test method in § 178.606 may be used to comply with Variation 5 in § 178.601(g)(5). The answer is no. The option for using either the stack test method in § 178.606(c)(1) or (c)(2)(ii) applies to periodic retesting only. For design qualification testing, you must use the stacking test prescribed in § 178.601(c)(1). If you wish to use an alternative test method for compliance with Variation 5, you may apply for an approval in accordance with Subpart H of Part 107. I hope this information helpful. Please contact this office should you have additional questions. Sincerely, * Male t Hattie L. Mitchell Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 1786016916) 060029#

Page 2January 18, 2006 06-0029 Delmer Billings U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Office of Hazardous Materials Safety 400 7th St., S.W. Washington, DC 20590 Dear Mr. Billings: Fortco Plastics is requesting a clarification on section 178:601 (g) (5) (Selective testing variation V for plastic single packages). Subpart ii of the section calls out the requirement for the stacking test as specified in 178.606. Section 178.606 contains two stacking test methods; the 28 days stack test and the dynamic compression stack test. Can either method be used to comply with the variation V requirement? Thank you for taking the time to clarify this question. Sincere site that Stephen Jetter VP - Engineering MANUFACTURERS OF BLOW MOLDED CONTAINERS#