{"operation":"document","citation":"10-0252","title":"The Dow Chemical Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2011-05-12","effective_on":null,"summary":"10-0252 response to The Dow Chemical Company concerning 173.154.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-10-0252.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-10-0252.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-10-0252","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2010/100252.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\nMAY 122011\nCherry Burke\nGlobal Transportation Safety and Risk Management Leader\nThe Dow Chemical Company\n2020 Dow Center\nMidland, MI 48674 USA\nReference No.: 10-0252\nDear Ms. Burke:\nThis responds to your January 11, 2011 letter regarding the exception applicable to materials\ncorrosive to aluminum or steel only found in 49 CPR 173.154 (d) of the Hazardous Materials\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CPR Parts 171-180). Your questions are summarized and addressed\nbelow:\nQl: If a bulk packaging is lined or coated with a material that prevents contact of the\ncorrosive material with the steel, can the exception in § 173.154(d) be used?\nAI: The answer is no. The intent of § 173.154(d)(2) is to provide an exception to bulk\npackaging constructed of materials that will not react dangerously with, or be degraded\nby the corrosive material. This office does not believe that placing liner's inside a steel\nbulk container would be in line with the intent of this exception.\nQ2: The exception for materials corrosive to steel in § 173.154( d)(2) applies just to bulk\npackagings, while the exception for materials corrosive to aluminum in § 173.154(d)(1)\ndoes not specify packaging size. Is this discrepancy intentional, and if so, why would\nonly bulk packagings be excepted from the regulations for materials corrosive to steel,\nwhile both bulk and non-bulk packagings would be excepted from the regulations for\nmaterials corrosive to aluminum?\nA2: As you stated, section 173.154(d)(2) applies only to bulk packagings, while\n§ 173.154(d)(I) applies to both bulk and non-bulk packagings. Typically, non-bulk\npackagings would be shipped on trailers with other containers that may be made of steel\n(possibly more so than aluminum). This office believes that in the event of a breach of\nthe corrosive material, other containers in the trailer could be damaged.\nQ3: Does \"bulk packagings\" in § 173.154(d)(2) mean that the exception applies to any\npackages meeting the DOT definition of bulk (i.e. rail tank cars, cargo tanks, IBCs, and\nportable tanks)?\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA3: The answer is yes. The exception in § 173.154(d)(2) would apply to any containers\nmeeting the definition of a bulk packaging as defined in § 171.8.\nI hope this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nThe Dow Chemical Company\nMidland, MI 48674\nU,S,A,\nJanuary 11, 2011\nVia E-Mail\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nAttention: Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Technology\nU,S, Department of Transportation\nEast Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE,\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nSubject: Interpretation Request 49 CFR 173.154 (d)\nDear Ms. Freeman and Mr. Andrews:\nThe Dow Chemical Company respectfully requests an interpretation of the language in 49 CFR\n173.154 (d). I am coming to you both directly as I understand you have been in discussions with\nMr, Kevin Blackwell from FRA on this topic,\n49 CFR 173.154 (d) reads:\n(d) Materials corrosive to aluminum or steel only. Except for a hazardous substance, a hazardous\nwaste, or a marine pollutant, a material classed as a Class 8, Packing Group III, material solely\nbecause of its corrosive effect(1)\nOn aluminum is not subject to any other requirements of this subchapter when transported by\nmotor vehicle or rail car in a packaging constructed of materials that will not react dangerously\nwith or be degraded by the corrosive material; or\n(2) On steel is not subject to any other requirements of this subchapter when transported by\nmotor vehicle or rail car in a bulk packaging constructed of materials that will not react\ndangerously with or be degraded by the corrosive material, (emphasis added)\nOur questions are specifically around (d) (2), as highlighted above.\n• If the bulk packaging is lined or coated with a material that prevents contact of the corrosive\nmaterial with the steel, can this exception be used?\no Our understanding, consistent with many in industry, is that if the steel is\nprotected against the corrosive effects of the material by a lining or a coating that\nprevents contact between the corrosive material and the steel, and does not\nreact with the corrosive material, this meets the definition of \"a bulk packaging\nconstructed of materials that will not react dangerously with or be degraded by\nthe corrosive materiaL\"\n• The exception for materials corrosive to steel applies just to bulk packagillgs, while the\nexception for materials corrosive to aluminum does not specify packaging size, Is this\ndiscrepancy intentional, and if so, why would only bulk packagings be excepted from the\nregulations for materials corrosive to steel, while both bulk and non-bulk packagings would be\nexcepted from the regulations for materials corrosive to aluminum?\nPage 1 of2\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nThe Dow Chemical Company\nMidland. MI 48674\nU.S.A.\nDoes \"bulk packagings\" in (d) (2) mean that the exception applies to any packages meeting\nthe DOT definition of bulk (i.e. rail tank cars, cargo tanks, IBes, and portable tanks)?\nYour help in clarifying this section of the regulations would be most appreciated. If I can provide\nany other information or clarification of my questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.\nSincerely,\nCherry Burke\nCherry Burke\nGlobal Transportation Safety and Risk Management Leader\nThe Dow Chemical Company\n2020 Dow Center\nMidland. MI 48674 USA\nPhone: (989) 638-5578 Fax: (989) 638-8227 Mobile: (302) 530-6891\nE-mail: caburke@dow.com\nPage 2 of2","truncated":false,"body_characters":5744}