# Carus Chemical Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 11-0191
- **title:** Carus Chemical Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2011-10-10
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 11-0191 response to Carus Chemical Company concerning 180.352.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-11-0191.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-11-0191.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-11-0191
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2011/110191.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

U.S. Deportment ofTronsportotion Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
OCT 1 2 2011
Chithambarathanu G. Pillai, Ph.D.
Carns Chemical Company
1500 Eighth Street
P.O. Box 1500
LaSalle, IL 61301-3500
Ref. No.: 11-0191
Dear Dr. Pillai:
This responds to your August 8, 2011 letter seeking clarification of IBC marking requirements
ofthe Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask
if § 180.352(b)(2)(i) permits the IBC owner to replace the plates containing the manufacturer's
markings.
The answer to your question is yes. Missing or damaged markings, or markings difficult to
read, must be restored or returned to their original condition. This may include replicating and
replacing the plates containing the manufacturer's markings.
I hope this answers your inquiry. If you need additional assistance, please contact the
Standards and Rulemaking Division at (202) 366-8553.
Ben Supko
Acting Chief, Standards Development
Standards and Rulemaking Division

<<<PAGE 2>>>

c::: A R. (J S® w,mer
~ l'OO.3-"2(b)(z)~)
t3115.703
T&('s
Il-D/q,
August 8, 2011
u.s. Department of Transportation
PHMSA Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Attn: PHH -10 East Building
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590-0001
Re: Request for Interpretation of 49 c.P.R. § 180.352
Dear Sir or Madam:
As the Regulatory Manager and Responsible Care Coordinator for Carus Corporation, I
am writing to request that you confinn our interpretation of49 C.P.R. § lS0.352(b )(2)(i). That
section requires that IBC's be "marked in accordance with requirements in § 178.703 ofthis
Subchapter." "., r-, '
" ,/. "
The specific issue involves the language explaining that "missing or' daI)1aged iU<lfkings,
or markings difficult to read must be restored or returned to original condition.'" "As the owner of
IBCs, Carus conducts the required periodic visual inspections. In some cases, the visual . .
inspection reveals that the plates on which the manufacturer's markings were placed are too
worn to be readable. The question we have is whether under these circumstimces the regulations
pennit Carus as the IBC owner to use a plate with the required markings that it fabricates instead
of a plate from the original IBC manufacturer. The plate with the markings that Cahls can
fabricate will wear better and retain markings longer than the original plate provided by the
manufacturer of the IBC. Whether replacement plates are even available from the original IBC
manufacturer in all cases is unknown. Carus already provides the information required by 49
C.P.R. §IS0.352(e) by using plates that it fabricates.
The regulatory language appears to be sufficiently broad to allow the IBC owner
conducting the required periodic re-tests of the !BCs to replace the plates containing the
manufacturer's markings. When the pI,ate is missing or dama~ed such that the markings are riot
readable, adding a new plate that contains the markings "restores" the markings. In addition,
adding a new plate is the only way to return the markings ''to original condition" in many cases.
Section IS0.352(b)(2)(i) could state explicitly that the required m~rkings must be locat(!d on a .
plate provided by the original IBC manufacturer, but does not. The relevant requirement appears
to be that the markings be readable, not that the plates on which the markings are contained must
Carus Chemical Company
I 500 Eighth Street
ROo Box 1500
laSalle, IL 6130 I -3500
Tel (815) 223 1500
Fax (8 15) 224 68 I 6

<<<PAGE 3>>>

C: ARLJS
come from the original IBC manufacturer. Unfortunately, the Federal Register preambles to the
proposed and final rule for this section of the regulations (57 Fed. Reg. at 36697 (August 14,
1992) and 59 Fed. Reg. at 38050 (July 26, 1994)) do not clarify the issue, and we could locate no
letters of interpretation on the subj ect.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
Cbithambarathanu G. Piliai, Ph.D.
'P:
cc: Eric E. Boyd
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 4048