{"operation":"document","citation":"06-0129","title":"C.L. Smith Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2006-09-14","effective_on":null,"summary":"06-0129 response to C.L. Smith Company concerning 178.601, 178.819.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-06-0129.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-06-0129.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-06-0129","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2006/060129.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\npair us Materials Safet\ndministratio\nSEP i 4 2006\nMr. Lonny Jaycox\nRef. No.: 06-0129\nL. Smith Compan\n311 South 39th Stree\nSt. Louis, Missouri 63110\nDear Mr. Jaycox:\nThis is in response to your May 30, 2006 email regarding the application of selective testing\nVariation 4 in § 178.601(g) of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts\n171-180). Specifically, your state that your company has a performance oriented packaging\ndesign type that is tested and certified with a closure method specified in the notification as\nfollows: \"Tape XXXX, 48mm wide, poly PST, single strips top and bottom, centered both\nlongitudinally along and spanning the flap seams, extending a minimum of 2.5\" onto the\nsides of the carton, with tape adhered firmly in place.\" However, your company would like\nto use lape xxXx, 72mm wide, which is different from the original notification. Your\nquestions are paraphrased and answered below:\nQ1: If a shipper complies with the closure method specified in the notification, then adds\nsome additional strips of the same tape, either in a similar manner slightly offset from the\nflap seams, or in a different manner, would that package be considered a \"different\npackaging design type\" under the HMR and require retesting?\nAl: The answer is no. A different packaging as defined in § 178.601(c)(4), is one that\nsize, material of construction, wall thickness, or manner of construction. The packaging\ndiffers (i.e., is not identical from a previously produced packaging in structural design,\nheir policio afa dional pape to our be conside wedad nor ent desidered a irferent\nackaging design type\nconsistent with the closure method specified in the notification, would that package be\nQ2: If a shipper uses the 72mm wide version of the tested 48mm wide tape and applies it\nconsidered a \"different packaging design type\" under the HMiR and require retesting?\n178.1\n178.819\n060129\n178.601\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA2: The answer is yes. Changing the size of the tape from that specified in the packaging\ntest report and closure notification constitutes a change in design. To eliminate this\nnotification amended to specify the actual widths or a range of widths.\nproblem, two packagings should be tested with the different tapes and the packaging\nmethod specified in the notification, would that package be considered a \"different\nQ3: If a shipper applied both 48mm and 72mm wide tape consistent with the closure\npackaging design type\" under the HMR and require retesting?\nA3. See preceding answers.\nI hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to\ncontact this office.\nSincerely,\n- John A.Gale\"\n/ Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\n/ Chief, Standards Development\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nSteven\nJarman, Erin <PHMSA›\nReterford\nSent:\nFrom:\nljaycox@clsmith.com\nSubject:\nTo:\nINFOCNTR <PHMSA>\nTuesday, May 30, 2006 11:27 AM\n$178.1\nInformation Center Comments/Questions\n$178.819\nBelow is the result\n(1jaycox@clsmith.com)\nof your feedback form.\non Tuesday, May 30, 2006\nwas submitted by Lonnie\n11:27:08.\nJaycox\npackagings\n06 - 0129\nEmail:\nljaycox@clsmith.com\nName: Lonnie Jaycox\nCategory: Specifications for Packagings (Sections 178.1 - 178.819) |\nOrganization: C L Smith Co.\nStreet: 1311 South 39th Street\nCity: St. Louis\nState: Missouri\nZip Code: 63110\nPhone: 314-771-1202.\nFax:\n314-773-2354\nA performance oriented packaging design type is tested and certified, and with a carton\nComments: Scenario:\nclosure method specified in the notification as follows:\nlongitudinally along and spanning the flap seams, extending a minimum of 2.5\" onto the\n\"Tape XXXX, 48mm wide, poly PST, single strips top and bottom, centered both\nsides of the carton, with tape adhered firmly in place.\"\nTape XXXX, is a specific stock number manufactured by a particular vendor to a consistent,\nacceptable specification.\nidentical tape just slit to the wider specification. (Tape is manufacturered in wide\nThis same tape is also available in 72mm widtł..\n\"logs\" then slit to width.)\nlift points; would that package be \"different\" under the regulations and require re-\nan \"H' pattern) to enhance flap retention or to keep handlers from using the flap edges as\napplied it consistent with the notification, to satisfy application equipment needs, or\nQ2: If the shipper needed to use the 72mm wide version of the tested 48mm tape and\nfrom the desire\npackage be \"different\" under the regulations and require re-testing?\na more robust\npackage (perhaps for parcel shipment); would that\nQ3: Assuming the answer to Q1 is yes: If the shipper needed to use the 72mm wide version\npackage be \"different\" under the regulations and require re-testing?\nthe tested\ntape applied consistent with the application variations in fi; would that","truncated":false,"body_characters":4806}