PAML — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration ljE' 1 1 1200 New Jersey Ave., S E Washington, DC 20590 Ms. Marguerite Busch PAML Chief Compliance Officer 1 10 W. Cliff Avenue Spokane, WA 99204 Ref. No. 08-0276 Dear Ms. Busch: This responds to your October 30, 2008 request for clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 17 1 - 180). Specifically, you ask if a petri dish covered with and sealed to a lid with watertight tape or parafilm that is placed in a leakproof plastic bag meets the criteria for a primary packaging under $ 173.199 of the HMR. The answer is yes. A primary or secondary Category B infectious substance (Division 6.2) packaging may consist of more than one packaging material or container provided the completed packaging and its components conform to the requirements prescribed in $ 173.199 that apply to the materials they contain. In accordance with $173.199, the completed packaging must be a triple packaging consisting of a primary receptacle, a secondary packaging, and a rigid outer package. For liquid Category B infectious substances, both the primary and secondary packaging must be leakproof. For solid Category B infectious substances, both the primary and secondary packagings must be siftproof. In addition, a 5 173.199 package must be capable of successfully passing the drop tests prescribed in paragraphs (d) and (h) of $ 178.609 at a drop height of at least 1.2 meters (3.9 feet). Capability may be demonstrated using a number'of methods, including actual previous handling and transportation experience, design specification, or, even though not required, performance testing. Also, please note that under certain transportation conditions the petri dish may meet the HMR's definition of a sharp (see $ 173.134(a)(6)). Care should be taken to ensure the dishes will not cut or otherwise damage the secondary or outer packaging. I hope this answers your inquiry. ~ h a r l e s E. Betts Chief, Standards Development ffice of Hazardous Materials Standards#

Page 2Request for interpretation sent 1011 512008 Page 1 of 1 Drakeford, Carolyn <PHMSA> From: INFOCNTR <PHMSA> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 4:04 PM To: Drakeford, Carolyn <PHMSA> Subject: FW: Request for interpretation sent 1011 5/2008 Attachments: Request for Interpretation 10.2008.pdf From: Busch, Marguerite [mailto:mbusch@PAIY L.com] Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 1:15 PM To: INFOCNTR <PHMSA> Subject: Request for interpretation sent 10/15/2008 08-0276 Is there a way to know the status of this request for interpretation (see attached response from the DOT website)? <<Request for lnterpretation 10.2008.pdf>> Thank you. Marguerite Busch Chief Compliance Officer 1 10 W. Cliff Avenue Spokane, WA 99204 DISCLAIMER: Information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, be notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If this communication is received in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting from your computer. Thank you.#

Page 3Page 1 of 1 , Your Response Has Successfully Been Sent The following was submitted to infocntr@dot.gov on Wednesday, October 15,2008 at 14:53:40. W h e 3 173 * 175 ZdecboU. J L b s h Category: Shippers-General Requirements for Shipments and Packagings (Sections 173.1 - 173.476) CommentslQuestion: Under 49 CFR 173.199, we understand that a verbal interpretation was provided to Washington State Department of Health personnel by Ms. Edmondson of the DOT Standards Office regarding the shipment of petri dishes for microbiology testing. Can a petri dish - with a complete seal around the lid with a watertight tape or parafilm - then placed in a leakproof plastic bag, be acceptable. Ms; Edmondson was reported to have said that the regulation was never intended to mean that primary containers must be manufactured to be leakproof or siftproof but that it can be rendered leakproof by means of the tape or parafilm. I am requesting a written interpretation before we change our standing protocols. The article in question can be seen at h t t p : l l w w w . d o h . w a . g o v k s q a l f s l l D o c u m e n t s ~ s t O 8 . p d f . Thank you. Email: mbusch@paml.com Phone: 509-755-8799 - . . . . ..., .-.-._I ............. ,^ . P - - - - - m m m m .1._....______1_-1-,,~e-.- pm,Tmw H.AZuTHome__S.a&ee I See=& ITableof C~nLe.e.ts. .x.~.>.:.. $~.~.-.~m-~.x,.c.~.~.~.~.x.,*~'.m~.-.~.~.-,.~*.,.-.- .#