{"operation":"document","citation":"07-0029R","title":"DG Advisor, LLC — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2018-05-16","effective_on":null,"summary":"07-0029R response to DG Advisor, LLC concerning 178.601.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-07-0029r.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-07-0029r.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-07-0029r","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/58851/070029.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\n1200 New Jersey Ave. SE\nof Transportation\nWashington. DC 20590\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\nAUG 20 2007\nMr. Robert J. Ten Eyck\nDirector, Technical Services\nRef. No. 07-0029\nTEN-E Packaging Services, Inc.\n1666 County Road 74\nNewport, MN 55055\nDear Mr. Ten Eyck:\nThis responds to your letter dated January 30, 2007, requesting an interpretation of what\nconstitutes a non-bulk packaging design change under the Hazardous Materials\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask for reconsideration of a\nprevious interpretation issued by this office (06-0129) that states \"Changing the size (e.g.,\nwidth) of the tape from that specified in the packaging test report and closure notification\nconstitutes a change in design.\" It is your opinion that a change to a wider tape of the\nsame specification as that originally certified would not detract from the packaging's\nperformance either under the UN performance tests or conditions normally incident to\nWe agree it is possible that a wider tape applied to a package may create a more \"robust\"\nvhen tested or transported. Additionally, a strict interpretation of the HMR does no\npackage; however, it does not conclusively demonstrate how the package will perform\nannotate the test report and customer notification to read \"identical specification tape,\nprovide for regulatory relief under such a scenario. One solution you may consider is to\nminimum width 2 inches\" if you can conclusively ascertain that using wider tape will not\nimpair the performance of the package as the design was originally tested. This\nrecordkeeping solution would not constitute a different package design type provided a\nminimum width or a range of widths of identical specification tape was applied by the\npackage designs.\npackage assembler. This analogy could also be applied retroactively to previously tested\nBecause our previous response (06-129) offered a similar solution to this issue, we\nconsider our previously issued response to be valid and with merit.\nassistance.\nI trust this adequately responds to your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further\nSincerely,\nSusan Gorsky\nRegulations Officer\ne of Hazardous Materials Standards\n178.601\n070029\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nStevens\nTENOE\n3178.601\nSETTING THE STAMORRO\nTesting\n07-0029\nJanuary 30, 2007\nJohn A. Gale\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards PHH-10\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, DC 20590\nRef. No.: 06-0129\nDear John:\nTEN-E Packaging Services is writing to request a reconsideration concerning the interpreted design\nchange when a shipper substitutes a wider tape of the same material specification to that which was\n\"wider\" variation of tape due to different box sealing equipment being employed at its various\noriginally certified under UN combination package testing. A shipper may have reason to substitute a\nproduction operations. A change to a wider tape of the same specification as that originally UN\ncertified would not, in TEN-E's opinion, detract from the packaging's performance either under the\nthis tape substitution places an unnecessary burden on industry and it is for this reason that we ask\nUN performance tests or conditions normally incident to transportation. Requiring a re-certification of\nthe agency to consider amending the above clarification.\nSincerely,\nRuber. Panti\nTEN-E. Packaging Services, Inc.\nDirector, Technical Services\n1666 County Road 74\nTEN-E Packaging Services, Inc.\nNewport, MN 55055\nFax: 651-459-1430\nPhone: 651-459-0671\nWeb: www.ten-e.com\nEmail: info@ten-e.com\nUNITED STATES - MN","truncated":false,"body_characters":3676}