{"operation":"document","citation":"09-0275","title":"Akzo Nobel Chemicals Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2010-01-05","effective_on":null,"summary":"09-0275 response to Akzo Nobel Chemicals Inc. concerning 173.322.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-09-0275.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-09-0275.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-09-0275","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2009/090275.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Deportment of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\nJAN - 5 2010\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington. DC 20590\nMr. Mark A. Connolly\nManager - Transportation Regulations and Security\nAkzo Nobel Chemicals Inc.\n525 West Van Buren Street\nChicago, IL 60607-3823\nRef. No.: 09-0275\nDear Mr. Connolly:\nThis responds to your email dated November 11,2009 requesting clarification ofthe\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the display of\nmarine pollutant marks on non-bulk packagings. You enclosed a picture of a brown box with\na preprinted black marine pollutant mark. Your questions are summarized and answered as\nfollows:\nQ1. Does PHMSA agree that the mark depicted in the picture does not satisfy the\nrequirement ofthe HMR or the marking requirements ofthe International Maritime\nDangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code)?\nAI. As specified in § 172.322, the marine pollutant mark must be black on a white\nbackground or the symbol, border, and background must be ofcontrasting color to the surface\nto which the marking is to be affixed. The background ofthe mark shown in the picture does\nnot contrast with the surface ofthe box; thus, it does not satisfy § 172.322(e)(2).\nSubject to the conditions and limitations in § 171.22, 171.23, 171.24, 171.25, and 171.26, as\nappJicable, hazardous materials may be offered for transportation and transported in the\nUnited States in accordance with requirements in the IMDG Code. Therefore, IMDG Code\nmarkings such as the marine pollutant mark may be used when hazardous materials are\ntransported to, from or within the United States, provided aU or part ofthe transportation is by\nvessel. Section 5.2.1.2 ofthe IMDG Code requires the marine pollutant mark to be displayed\non a contrasting background on the external surface ofa package. The black marking\ncontrasts with the brown background in the picture you provided; therefore, it satisfies the\nmarking requirements ofthe IMDG Code and may be displayed in that manner when a\npackage is offered and transported in accordance with the IMDG Code.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nQ2. Would the mark be compliant with the HMR if the background of the mark were white?\nA2. Yes. See § 172.322(e)(2).\nQ3. May the marine pollutant mark be placed on an adjacent side of a box when the size of\nthe box is not conducive to placing both the mark and the label on the same side?\nA3. Yes. The marine pollutant mark must be placed \"in association\" with any hazard\nwarning labels (§ 172.322(a)(2)). In this scenario, the placement of the marking on an\nadjacent side of the box satisfies the \"in association\" requirement.\nI hope this answers your inquiry.\nSincerely,\nI ~\n1 ; ? t7;) f)\"\nI /J. n 1 v/~ .. :-;t\n'<-I) 'it, Ii. /' ,I,\nI . ~--\nI\nCharles E. Betts\nt:hief, Standards Development\nOflke of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n£t~ Page lof2\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\n&3/7Z~360\n?s t I\nFrom:\nMazzullo, Ed (PHMSA)\nSent:\nTuesday, November 17, 2009 4:50 PM\nTo:\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nCc:\nKelley, Shane (PHMSA); PHMSA PHH10\nSubject: FW: Marine Pollutant Mark\nImportance: High\nAttachments: Sample cartons with MP label.jpg\nFrom: Connolly, M (Mark) [mailto:Mark.Connolly@AkzoNobel.com]\nsent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 5:03 PM\nTo: Mazzullo, Ed (PHMSA)\nSubject: Marine Pollutant Mark\nImportance: High\nHi Ed,\nA follow-up to our telephone discussion last week regarding marine pollutant marking of nonbulk packaging.\nI have obtained the attached photo from our folks in Asia of an example of preprinted marine pollutant mark and\n5.2 hazard label on a fiberboard box for transport from Asia via water to the U.S.\nIt is my interpretation that this mark does not meet DOT requirements for transport within the U.S.\nMarine Pollutant mark\nItem 1. The marking section of 172.300 does not have a subparagraph which recognizes the UN and\nIMDG marks ( as does the 172.401 for prohibits labels).\nDo you agree that this mark does not meet the requirements of 172.322 (e)(2)?\nIt is my interpretation that since the background of the mark does not contrast with the surface to\nwhich the mark is affixed it doesn't not meet DOT or IMO either.\nItem 2 Do you agree that to make this acceptable for transport either the background must be white OR\nthey reprint the marine pollutant mark with a white background on the box (it does not come out\npearly white but does contrast with the color of the surface of the box.\nItem 3. If the surface of the side of the box is not large enough to enable the 5.2 hazard label and the\nmarine pollutant mark to both be affixed - the marine pollutant mark may be affixed to an\nadjacent side of the box. [172.304, 172.322]\nYour feedback is appreciated.\nRegards,\nMark\n1111712009","truncated":false,"body_characters":4737}