{"operation":"document","citation":"12-0056R","title":"Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, MD Packaging Solutions LLC & Lawrence W. Bierlein, Esq. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2014-02-26","effective_on":null,"summary":"12-0056R response to Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, MD Packaging Solutions LLC & Lawrence W. Bierlein, Esq. concerning 180.350, 180.352.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-12-0056r.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-12-0056r.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-12-0056r","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2012/120056R.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\nOffice of\nChief Counsel\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.L\nPHC-1 0, Room E26-331\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nPhone: (202)366-4400\nFax: (202) 366-7041\nHazardous Materials Safety\ntaw Division\nLETTER OF INTERPRETATION\nFebruary 26, 2014\nMr. Paul W. Rankin, President\nReusable Industrial Packaging Association\n51 Monroe Street, Suite 812\nRockville, MD 20850\nReference No.: 12-0056R and CHI-13-00IR\nDear Mr. Rankin:\nOn May 16, 2012 and August 16,2013, PHMSA issued Interpretations No. 12-0056 and CHI-\n13-001, respectively. At the request of the Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, a review\nofthose letters and the relevant requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49\nCFR Parts 171-180), PHMSA hereby rescinds both letters and issues the following Interpretation\nwith respect to the matters discussed in those letters.\nIn accordance with§ 180.350(b), the replacement of the rigid inner receptacle of a composite\nIBC with one from the original manufacturer is considered a repair. As stated in §\n180.352(d)(l), repaired IBCs may be returned to service provided: (i) The repaired IBC\nconforms to the original design type, is capable of withstanding the applicable design\nqualification tests, and is retested and inspected in accordance with the applicable requirements\nof this section; (ii) an IBC intended to contain liquids or solids that are loaded or discharged\nunder pressure is subjected to a leakproofness test as specified in§ 178.813 of this subchapter\nand is marked with the date of the test; (iii) the IBC is subjected to the internal and external\ninspection requirements as specified in § 180.352(b ); (iv) the person performing the tests and\ninspections after the repair [emphasis added] must durably mark the IBC near the\nmanufacturer's UN design type marking to show the country in which the tests and inspections\nwere performed, the name or authorized symbol of the person performing the tests and\ninspections, and the date (month, year) of the tests and inspections; and (v) retests and\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n2\ninspections performed in accordance with paragraphs (d)( 1 )(i) and (ii) of this section may be\nused to satisfy the requirements for the 2.5 and five year periodic tests and inspections required\nby paragraph§ 180.352(b).\nAdditionally, in accordance with 180.352(g)(l), the owner or lessee of the IBC must keep\nrecords of periodic retests, initial and periodic inspections, and tests performed on the IBC if it\nhas been repaired and manufactured. As stated in 180.352(g)(2), those records must include\ndesign types and packaging specifications, test and inspection dates, name and address of test\nand inspection facilities, names or name of any person conducting the test or inspections, and\ntest, inspection specifics and results. In accordance with 180.352(g)(3), those records must be\nkept for each packaging at each location where periodic tests are conducted, until such tests are\nsuccessfully performed again or for at least 2.5 years from the date of the last test. These records\nmust be available for inspection by a representative of the Department of Transportation upon\nrequest.\nIn summary, as noted above, a person replacing the rigid inner receptacle of a composite IBC\nwith one from the original manufacturer must then fulfill all of the HMR requirements associated\nwith the repair of the IBC, including tests, inspections, record-keeping, and marking.\nJoseph Solomey,\nSenior Assistant Chief Counsel for\nHazardous Materials Safety\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\nOffice of\nChief Counsel\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.L\nPHC-1 0, Room E26-331\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nPhone: (202)366-4400\nFax: {202) 366-7041\nHazardous Materials Safety\ntaw Division\nLETTER OF INTERPRETATION\nFebruary 26, 2014\nMr. Dan Dengler\nMD Packaging Solutions LLC\n11 Olde Mill Run\nMedford, NJ 08055\nReference No.: 12-0056R and CHI-13-00IR\nDear Mr. Dengler:\nOn May 16,2012 and August 16,2013, PHMSA issued Interpretations No. 12-0056 and CHI-\n13-00 1, respectively. At the request of the Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, a review\nof those letters and the relevant requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49\nCFR Parts 171-180), PHMSA hereby rescinds both letters and issues the following Interpretation\nwith respect to the matters discussed in those letters.\nIn accordance with§ 180.350(b), the replacement of the rigid inner receptacle of a composite\nIBC with one from the original manufacturer is considered a repair. As stated in§\n180.352(d)(l), repaired IBCs may be returned to service provided: (i) The repaired IBC\nconforms to the original design type, is capable of withstanding the applicable design\nqualification tests, and is retested and inspected in accordance with the applicable requirements\nof this section; (ii) an IBC intended to contain liquids or solids that are loaded or discharged\nunder pressure is subjected to a leakproofness test as specified in§ 178.813 of this subchapter\nand is marked with the date of the test; (iii) the IBC is subjected to the internal and external\ninspection requirements as specified in§ 180.352(b); (iv) the person performing the tests and\ninspections after the repair [emphasis added] must durably mark the IBC near the\nmanufacturer's UN design type marking to show the country in which the tests and inspections\nwere performed, the name or authorized symbol of the person performing the tests and\ninspections, and the date (month, year) ofthe tests and inspections; and (v) retests and\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n2\ninspections performed in accordance with paragraphs (d)(l)(i) and (ii) of this section may be\nused to satisfy the requirements for the 2.5 and five year periodic tests and inspections required\nby paragraph§ 180.352(b ).\nAdditiorta1Iy,~iri accordance witnT80.352(g)(l), the owner or lessee of the IBC must keep\nrecords of periodic retests, initial and periodic inspections, and tests performed on the IBC if it\nhas been repaired and manufactured. As stated in 180.352(g)(2), those records must include\ndesign types and packaging specifications, test and inspection dates, name and address of test\nand inspection facilities, names or name of any person conducting the test or inspections, and\ntest, inspection specifics and results. In accordance with 180.352(g)(3), those records must be\nkept for each packaging at each location where periodic tests are conducted, until such tests are\nsuccessfully performed again or for at least 2.5 years from the date of the last test. These records\nmust be available for inspection by a representative of the Department of Transportation upon\nrequest.\nIn summary, as noted above, a person replacing the rigid inner receptacle of a composite IBC\nwith one from the original manufacturer must then fulfill all of the HMR requirements associated\nwith the repair of the IBC, including tests, inspections, record-keeping, and marking.\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\nOffice of\nChief Counsel\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.L\nPHC-10, Room E26-331\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nPhone: (202)366-4400\nFax: (202} 366-7041\nHazardous Materials Safety\nlaw Division\nLETTER OF INTERPRETATION\nFebruary 26,2014\nLawrence W. Bierlein, Esq.\n1101 30th Street NW\nSuite 500\nWashington DC 20007\nReference No.: 12-0056R and CHI-13-00lR\nDear Mr. Bierlein:\nOn May 16, 2012 and August 16,2013, PHMSA issued Interpretations No. 12-0056 and CHI-\n13-001, respectively. At the request of the Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, a review\nof those letters and the relevant requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49\nCFR Parts 171-180), PHMSA hereby rescinds both letters and issues the following Interpretation\nwith respect to the matters discussed in those letters.\nIn accordance with § 180.3 50(b ), the replacement of the rigid inner receptacle of a composite\nIBC with one from the original manufacturer is considered a repair. As stated in §\n180.352(d)(l), repaired IBCs may be returned to service provided: (i) The repaired IBC\nconforms to the original design type, is capable of withstanding the applicable design\nqualification tests, and is retested and inspected in accordance with the applicable requirements\nof this section; (ii) an IBC intended to contain liquids or solids that are loaded or discharged\nunder pressure is subjected to a leakproofness test as specified in§ 178.813 of this subchapter\nand is marked with the date of the test; (iii) the IBC is subjected to the internal and external\ninspection requirements as specified in§ 180.352(b); (iv) the person perfonning the tests and\ninspections after the repair [emphasis added] must durably mark the IBC near the\nmanufacturer's UN design type marking to show the country in which the tests and inspections\nwere performed, the name or authorized symbol of the person performing the tests and\ninspections, and the date (month, year) of the tests and inspections; and (v) retests and\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\n2\ninspections performed in accordance with paragraphs (d)(l)(i) and (ii) of this section may be\nused to satisfy the requirements for the 2.5 and five year periodic tests and inspections required\nby paragraph§ 180.352(b).\nAdditionally, in accordance with 180.352(g)(l), the owner or lessee of the IBC must keep\nrecords of periodic retests, initial and periodic inspections, and tests performed on the IBC if it\nhas been repaired and manufactured. As stated in 180.352(g)(2), those records must include\ndesign types and packaging specifications, test and inspection dates, name and address of test\nand inspection facilities, names or name of any person conducting the test or inspections, and\ntest, inspection specifics and results. In accordance with 180.352(g)(3), those records must be\nkept for each packaging at each location where periodic tests are conducted, until such tests are\nsuccessfully performed again or for at least 2.5 years from the date of the last test. These records\nmust be available for inspection by a representative of the Department of Transportation upon\nrequest.\nIn summary, as noted above, a person replacing the rigid inner receptacle of a composite IBC\nwith one from the original manufacturer must then fulfill all of the HMR requirements associated\nwith the repair of the IBC, including tests, inspections, record-keeping, and marking.\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 7>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration Office of\nChief Counsel\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.,\nPHC-10, Room E26-331\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nPhone: (202)366-4400\nFax: (202) 366-7041\nEmail: joe.solomey@dot.gov\nHazardous Materials Safety Law\nDivision\nLETTER OF INTERPRETATION\nAugust 16, 2013\nLawrence W. Bierlein, Esq.\n1101 30th Street NW\nSuite 500\nWashington DC 20007\nReference No.: CHI-13-001\nDear Mr. Bierlein:\nOn May 16,2012, PHMSA issued PHMSA Interpretation No. 12-0056 (Interpretation) ofthe\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) related to the repair of\nintermediate bulk containers (IBCs). Due to correspondences between yourself and this office, I\nthought it necessary to clarify PHMSA' s interpretation of the HMR as it relates to the repair of\nIBCs. More specifically, this letter will cover the requirement to test, inspect, and durably mark\ndamaged IBCs that have been repaired.\nAs stated in§ 180.352(d)(l), damaged IBCs may be repaired and the inner receptacles of\ncomposite packagings may be replaced and returned to service provided: (i) The repaired IBC\nconforms to the original design type, is capable of withstanding the applicable design\nqualification tests, and is retested and inspected in accordance with the applicable requirements\nof this section; (ii) an IBC intended to contain liquids or solids that are loaded or discharged\nunder pressure is subjected to a leakproofness test as specified in§ 178.813 of this subchapter\nand is marked with the date of the test; and (iii) the IBC is subjected to the internal and external\ninspection requirements as specified in§ 180.352(b).\nIn the interpretation 12-0056, PHMSA clarified that the HMR allow a company that repairs IBCs\nto rely on the leakproofness test and internal visual inspection of a replacement inner receptacle\nconducted by a third party. PHMSA also affirmed that the company relying on the third party\n\n<<<PAGE 8>>>\n\n2\ntesting and inspection would need evidence to establish that the leakproofuess test and internal\nvisual inspection was performed in accordance with§ 178.813 and the internal visual inspection\nwas performed before the IBC is filled and offered for transportation(§ 180.352(g)).\nFurthermore, the letter stated that this evidence should be from the third party that performed the\ntests and inspections and identify the company as able to rely on that testing for the purposes of\nthe repair.\nIt is the responsibility of the person that repairs the IBC to make sure these requirements are met\nbefore the IBC is filled and placed into transportation in commerce. If an inspector shows up at\na company's facility and sees that it conducts repairs of composite IBCs by replacing the rigid\ninner receptacle, the company must provide evidence ofleakproofness tests and internal visual\ninspections. If the testing and inspections are done on-site, this is generally done at the\ndiscretion of the inspector through a demonstration of the company's testing or inspection\nprocedures. If the company relies on a third party to conduct the required testing and\ninspections, then the company must provide evidence of its reasonable and mutually\nacknowledged reliance.\nIn your correspondence dated August 24, 2012, you cited an email between William Schoonover,\nPHMSA's Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations, and Paul Rankin, the President\nof Reusable Industrial Packaging Association, as evidence that the Interpretation had been, in\npart, \"retracted by the head of Field Operations as unnecessary\". Specifically, you say that based\non this email exchange a company does not need an individual letter addressed to it from a\nmanufacturer. Furthermore, you proposed that this contradicts and therefore invalidates (at least\nin part) the Interpretation issued just three months earlier.\nWe would like to clarify that Mr. Schoonover correctly expressed the Agency position that a\nletter individually addressed to a company is not needed. However, this does not contradict the\nInterpretation. A company wishing to rely on a third party's leakproofness test and internal\nvisual inspection in the circumstances described in the Interpretation is obligated to provide\nevidence of a mutually recognized arrangement between the two companies in the form of an\nacknowledgment of that arrangement. It need not be in a letter at all. Therefore, nothing from\nMr. Schoonover in the exchange you cited contradicts the Agency guidance set forth in PHMSA\nInterpretation No. 12-0056.\nOnce a company replaces the rigid inner receptacle of a composite IBC, according to the HMR,\nit has conducted a repair. This triggers the requirement for a leakproofuess test and an internal\nvisual inspection as specified in §180.352(d)(l)on the rigid inner receptacle of a composite\nIBC. Additionally, in accordance with § 180.3 52( d)(l )(iv), the person performing the tests must\ndurably mark the month and year of the testing and inspections after the repair. If the inner\nbottle has been tested, inspected, and marked by a third party, the date durably marked must also\nreflect the date of repair. If the inner bottle is marked with the month and year prior to the date\nof repair, it would need to be re-tested in accordance with §180.352(d)(1).\nTherefore, in response to your correspondence dated August 24, 2012, I am issuing this letter as\na clarification and affirmation ofPHMSA Interpretation No. 12-0056.\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 9>>>\n\n3\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact this office if you have any additional\nquestions.\nSincerely, 11\n/) l f ;·~\n\\ . I y· /\n\\ ... ·\n1 .rr?J,/l -;·-\"-4-(J-/;,(1~.-).\n·;~·;j'-/I' !, <.J ' 0\n/ Joseph Solorney, '\nSenior Assistant Chief Counsel for\nHazardous Materials Safety\n3\n\n<<<PAGE 10>>>\n\n.•. ~....,_.._!'\"~\n'\nLear~\n.;>Jgo.S52-\n\"I.'&C..\nlZ-606~\nMD Packaging Solutions, LLC\n11 Olde Mill Run Medford, NJ 08055 Phone (609) 499-1311, Fax (866) 439-1713\nU.S. DOT\nPHMSA Office of Hazardou~ Materials Standards\nAttn: Plffi-1 0\nEast Building\n1200 New Jersey A venue, SE.\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nTo whom it may concern:\nI am seeking clarification/interpretation of section 180.352 \"Requirements for retest and\ninspection offfiCs\".\nBy definition section 180.350 defmes a \"REPAIRED IBC\" as among other things, the\nreplacement of the rigid inner receptacle of a composite IBC with one from the original\nmanufacturer.\nQuestion seeking interpretation: In the process of Repairing an IBC or replacing the rigid inner\nreceptacle of a composite IBC with one from the original manufacturer, does the manufacturer's\n(of the new inner receptacle) original leak proof test satisfy the required leak proof test per\n178.813 for the repaired IBC? Does it matter if the previous outer cage was not damaged and\nthe reason for the REP AIR is simply because the previous inner receptacle could not cleaned?\nAny assistance that you could provide in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Please do not\nhesitate to contact me with any questions.\nDan Dengler\nMD Packaging Solutions LLC\n11 Olde Mill Run\nMedford, NJ 08055\nPh (609)-499•1311\nddengler@mdpkg.com\n\n<<<PAGE 11>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nMAY 1 6 2012\nMr. Dan Dengler\nMD Packaging Solutions LLC\n11 Olde Mill Run\nMedford, NJ 08055\nRef. No. 12-0056\nDear Mr. Dengler:\nThis responds to your February 6, 2012 letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the requirement for retest and\ninspection of intermediate bulk containers (IBCs). Specifically, you ~kif you may rely on the\nleakproofness test and internal visual inspection conducted by the original manufacturer to\nsatisfy the requirement in § 180.352 when repairing an IBC or replacing the inner receptacle of a\ncomposite IBC.\nYes. As speciiled in§ 180.352(d)(l), each repaired IBC must be subjected to a leakproofness\ntest as specified in § 178.813, an internal visual inspection and must be marked with the date of\nthe test. The inner receptacle of a composite IBC may be leakproofness tested without the outer\npackaging provided the test results are not affected(§ 178.813(b)). If you choose to rely on the\nleakproofnesstest conducted by the manufacturer ofthe inner receptacle to satisfy this\nrequirement, you must have evidence to establish that the leakproofness test was performed in\naccordance with § 178.813 and the internal visual inspection was performed before the IBC is\nfilled and offered for transportation(§ 180.352(g)). The evidence of these tests/inspections\nshould be from the manufacturer of the inner receptacle and identify your company as able to use\nthis certification.\nI hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please contact this office.\nBen Supko\nActing Chiet: Standards Development\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 12>>>\n\nMAUSER USA, LLC\nMAUSER USA, LLC 35C Cottars lane East Brun&Widc, New Jersey 08816 USA\nMr. Mike Porreca\nPresident\nNational Container Group\nMRUSER\nChristopher Lind, Director\nTechnology and Regulatory Affairs\nPhone: 732.353.7014\nFax: 732.353.7074\nChris.Lind@Mausergroup.com\nEast Brunswick 3/5/2012\nSubject: IBC Inner Receptacles\nThe inner receptacles for IBCs or replacement bottles are visually inspected for defects prior\nto valve installations. After valve installation the bottles are leakproofness tested in\naccordance with Sec. 178.813 to insure the bottom seam and valve are intact and leak free,\ncapped and security sealed.\nThe bottles are molded with the marks required by 49 CFR 178.703 (b) (6) (i):\n(6) For each composite IBC, the inner receptacle must be marked with at least the following infonnation:\n(i) The code number designating the ISC design type, the name and address or symbol of the manufacturer,\nthe date of manufacture and the country authorizing the a_llocation of the mark as specified in paragraph (a)\nof this section;\nThat is 31HA1/M number /Date/USA. The current M numbers for Mauser USA LLC factories\nproducing the bottles are M4118 (MtVernon), M4119 (Anniston), M4601 (Houston), and M4602\n(Rancho Cucamonga).\nPlease feel free to contact me if we can provide any additional infonnation or assistance.\n-~· .fi f) ifJQ\nChristo~ar\nMAUSER USA llC\n35 C Cotten; Lana\nEast Bn.mswic:k, NJ 08816 USA\nManaging Dlrectcr\nHans-Peter Schaeffer\nWinftfed Klar\nRag!slen!KI Sellt50321 Bn:!ehl\nLocal CQurt: Cologne\nRegla!rafion HBB 58469\ninfo.ua@mausergroup.Cilm\nwww.mausergroup.et~m\n\n<<<PAGE 13>>>\n\nSCHUTZ\nSchuetz Container Systems Inc.\n200 Aspen Hill Road\nNorth Branch, NJ 08876\nMarch 14, 2012\nTo: ICS\nRe: Testing of inner bottles for IBCs\nTo Whom It May Concern:\nThe inter receptacles for IBCs or replacement bottles you purchase from us are visually inspected\nfor defects prior to valve installations. After valve installation the bottles are leakproofness tested\nin accordance with Sec. 178.813 to insure the bottom sea,m and valve are intact and leak free,\ncapped and security sealed. In addition, the bottles are molded with the marks required by 49\nCFR 178.703 (b) (6) (i).\nSincerely,\nTatiana Smoleeva\nTechnical Service\nPhone: 908-526-6161 x 1126","truncated":false,"body_characters":21714}