{"operation":"document","citation":"08-0201","title":"Triumvirate Environmental, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2008-12-09","effective_on":null,"summary":"08-0201 response to Triumvirate Environmental, Inc. concerning 173.12, 177.848.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0201.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0201.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0201","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2008/080201.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\nDEC 9 2008\n1200 New Jersey Ave., SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nMr. John Menzigian\nQA Manager\nTriumvirate Environmental, Inc.\n61 Inner Belt road\nSomerville, MA 02 143\nRef. No.: 08-0201\nDear Mr. Menzigian:\nThis is in response to your letter dated July 30,2008, regarding methods of achieving\nseparation of hazardous materials, as indicated by the letter \"0\" in the Segregation and\nSeparation Chart of Hazardous Materials (49 CFR 177.848(e)(3)), on the same transport\nvehicle in a manner that under conditions normally incident to transportation, commingling\nwould not occur.\nYour questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:\nQ. In §177.848(e)(3), the \"0\" in the table indicates that the materials must be separated to\nprevent commingling if packages were to leak. In previous letters on this subject, you\nsuggest that physical space is considered an acceptable method of separation. Is there\na minimum distance that is considered acceptable?\nA. The requirement for separation or non-adjacent loading is considered satisfied if the\npackages are separated in such a manner (for example, by using barriers, packages of\nnon-hazardous materials, or intervening space) that their contents would not\ncommingle in the event of leakage under conditions normally incident to\ntransportation. There is no minimum distance specified, but, in our opinion, a distance\nof four (4) feet in all directions would be considered acceptable.\nQ. Vermiculite is a material commonly used in packaging chemicals for cushioning and\nabsorption of any spilled liquids in the event the inner container breaks. If a drum of\nClass 3 (flammable liquid) and a drum of Division 5.1 (oxidizer) were loaded onto a\ntruck with a bag of vermiculite (with sufficient volume to absorb the liquid content of\neither drum) placed between these containers, would this be considered proper\nseparation?\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA. Q. A. Section 177.848(e)(3) requires that separation must be accomplished by some means\nof physical separation, such as, non-permeable barriers, non-reactive freight, or non-\ncombustible, non-reactive adsorbents between packagings of hazardous materials\nrequired to be separated; a bag of vermiculite placed between these containers would\nbe acceptable only if it prevents commingling of materials in the event of leakage.\nYour company, Triumvirate Environmental, creates a lab pack that meets the lab pack\nprovisions prescribed in $173.12(b); your company adds a 6 mil HDPE bag as a liner\non the inside of the drum and vermiculite regardless if the inner containers have solids\nor liquids in them. The purpose of the liner is to provide additional \"leak-proofing\" in\nthe event that one of the inner packages breaks open. In these lab packs, the inner\npackages are surrounded by absorbent material and placed in a leak-proof bag, which\nis then placed in a Packing Group I1 rated container. Would this packing method be\nconsidered adequate separation as prescribed in $177.848(e)(3)?\nNo. As previously stated, separation must be accomplished by some means of\nphysical separation, such as non-permeable barriers, non-reactive freight, or non-\ncombustible, non-reactive adsorbents between packagings of hazardous materials\nrequired to be separated. The mere integrity of a packaging may not be used as a\nphysical barrier. If the packaging should fail, commingling of materials could not\nbe prevented. Therefore, the packaging itself may not be used to satisfy the\nrequirements of $ 1 77.848(e)(3).\nI hope this information is helpful. If we can be of M h e r assistance, please contact us.\nSincerely,\n<-'\nSusan Gorsky\nActing chief, Standards Development\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nTRIUMVIRATE .\nENVIRONMENTAL PROVIDING LONG-TERM,\nINNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS\nJuly 30,2008\nMr. Edward Mazzullo, Director\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\nUSDOT/ PHMSA (PHH-10)\n1200 New Jersey venue, SE East Building, 2nd Floor\nWashington D.C., 20590\nDear Mr. Mazzullo,\nPlease accept this letter as a request for formal interpretation from your office. Triumvirate\nEnvironmental, Inc. wishes to receive clarification regarding what is consider proper segregation\nas described in section 177.848(e) (3).\nQuestion 1: In 177.848(e) (3), the regulations tell us that a n \" 0 in the table indicates that\nmaterials must be separated to prevent commingling if packages were to leak. Through previous\nletters of interpretation, physical space is considered an acceptable method of separation. Is there\na minimum distance that is considered acceptable?\nQuestion 2: Another method of separation mentioned in other letters of ~Iarification is the\nplacement of non-reactive absorbent between packages. Vermiculite is a material commonly\nused in packaging chemicals for cushioning and absorption of any spilled liquids in the event the\ninner container was to break. If I were to load onto a truck a drum of hazard class 3 and another\ndrum of'hazard class 5.1 and placed a bag of vermiculite (with sufficient volume to absorb the\nliquid content of either drum) between these containers, would this be considered proper\n\"separation\" as called for in the regulations?\nQuestion 3: When Triumvirate creates a lab pack (as defined at 173.12(b)), we add a 6 mil HDPE\nbag as a liner on the inside of the drum and vermiculite regardless if the inner containers have\nsolids or liquids in them. The purpose of the liner is to provide additional \"leak-proofing\" in the\nevent that one of the inner packages was to break. Thus in any lab pack, the inner packages are\nsurrounded by absorbent material and placed in a leak-proof bag, which is then placed in a\npacking group I1 rated container. Would this packing method be considered adequate separation\nas caiied for in 177.84S(e) (3)?\nThank you in advance for your time and your input on these questions. Please contact me at\n(617)628-8098 if there are any needed clarifications to properly address these questions.\nRegards,\n&-\nJohn Menzigian\nQA Manager\nTriumvirate Environmental, Inc.\nCELEBRATING TWENW YEARS\n61 Inner Belt Road . Somerville, MA 021 43 800.966.9282 phone. 61 7.628.8099 fax 1500 Carbon Avenue Baltimore, MD 21 226 800-404-8037 phone -41 0-636-0260 fax 42-14 19'\"venue .Astoria, NY 11 105\n800.427.3320 phone. 71 8.726.791 7 fax","truncated":false,"body_characters":6343}