# Entegris, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 06-0270
- **title:** Entegris, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2007-04-11
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 06-0270 response to Entegris, Inc. concerning 178.601, 178.801.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-06-0270.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-06-0270.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-06-0270
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2006/060270.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

f Transportatior
.S. Departmen
Washington, D.C. 20590
400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration
APR 11 2007
Mr. Kevin Bevis
Containers Engineer
Ref. No. 06-0270
3500 Lyman Boulevard
Entegris, Inc.
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
Dear Mr. Bevis:
This responds to your letter requesting clarification of
the non-bulk and IBC packaging design and testing criteria
under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR
answered as follows:
Parts 171-180).
Your questions are paraphrased and
Q1.
We successfully tested three different non-bulk single
specified in § 178.601 (c) (1).
packaging designs under the design qualification criteria
Under selective testing
Variation 5, in § 178.601(g) (5), if a replacement closure
5 testing on one of the three designs presenting the most
device or gasket successfully passes the required Variation
severe test conditions on the original design, is it
second and third design?
permissible to use a replacement closure or gasket on the
Al. The answer is yes.
Would the answer be the same if the second and third
authorized in § 178.601(g) (3) (Variation 3)?
designs were qualified under the selective testing
A2. The answer is yes.
Under the design qualification testing for IBCs in
§ 178.801 (d), is it permissible to consider IBCs with
identical bodies
the same design type?
and with similar service equipment to be
178.601 (g) 3)
178.801
060270

<<<PAGE 2>>>

A3.
to other parts of the IBC (e.g., pallet base, cage
The answer is yes, provided there are no changes made
support) .
I trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if
we can
be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Hole 20h11
Hattie L. Mitchell
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Stevens
$178.601(9X6)
Entegris
§178:801
HEADQUARTERS
CORPORATE
Testing
Entegris, inc.
06-0270
Chaska. Minnesota 56318 USA
3500 Lyman Boulevardi
Fax 952-555-1890
Tel. 952-558-3131
November 17, 2006
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo
400 7th Street SW
U.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)
Washington, D.C. 20590-0001
Dear Mr. Mazzullo,
I am writing to request clarification of two paragraphs in CFR 49 Part 178. After reading the Letters of
Interpretation relating to my questions, available on your website, I spoke at length via telephone with Rob at your
interpretations, and encouraged this written request for clarification.
Hazardous Materials Information center. His interpretations of the paragraphs in question appeared to agree with my
its use in certified non-bulk and bulk specification packagings produced by Entegris. Fluids are dispensed through
My questions concern service equipment, specifically a drum insert with related closures, and the testing required for
this drum insert by the end-user. We have qualified this service equipment as part of two non-bulk specification
packagings. (Please find enclosed reference drawing.)
packagings, and I am seeking clarification of the qualification testing required for use in various other specification
to close and seal the drum insert for shipment or storage, two different plastic resins (polypropylene and PFA), and
This drum insert product includes several possible configurations: three caps (vented, non-vented, and manual relief)
many different O ring combinations. Every configuration to be offered for sale was qualified under Variation 5 on
requalify, as a new design type, each IBC with every combination of drum insert/closure/O ring.
the two specification packages mentioned above. My intent with Ql below, is to determine if Entegris needs to
178.700(c)(2) defines "service equipment" as including "filling and discharge... devices.."
178.801(c)(7)(iv) defines a "different IBC design type" as not including "a packaging which differs in service
178.801(c)(1) identifies "representative service equipment" as a feature of any "IBC design type".
equipment".
service equipment to be the same "design type" ?
Q1. For the purposes of 178.801(d) Design qualification testing, may I consider identical IBC bodies with similar
second sentence following paragraph 178.601(g)(5)(ii) "Replacement closures and gasketings qualified under the
My purpose with question 2, below, is to better understand the intent of 178.601(g)(5) "Variation 5". I find the
above test requirements also are authorized without additional testing for different tested design types packagings of
the same type as the originally tested packaging, provided the original design type tests are... " to be unclear.
When considering three different packagings (all tested, qualified, different design types, single packagings under
Q2. Does the following example conform to the intent of 178.601(g)(5)?
presenting the most severe test conditions of these three, the other two packagings may use closure device "A" or
CFR 49), if closure device "A" or gasket "B" successfully passes the required variation 5 testing in the packaging
gasket "B" without further testing, provided an equivalent level of performance is maintained.
fritegris

<<<PAGE 4>>>

Please contact me if you would find more detailed information to be helpful, or I may be of any assistance.
Thank you for help in this matter, and for your service, working to advance the safety and welfare of our country.
Sincerely,
Kevin Bevis
Cell 612-819-6562
Containers Engineer
Office 952-556-8663
kevin_bevis@entegris.com
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 5436
