Railroad Regulatory Safety Services — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington. DC 20590 DEC 0 3 2012 Mr. Raymond Kasey Railroad Regulatory Safety Services 7500 Masonville Drive Falls Church, VA 22042-3520 Ref. No.: 12-0207 Dear Mr. Kasey: This responds to your September 14, 2012letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to additional description requirements for shipping papers. Your questions are paraphrased and answered below. Ql: You ask where on the shipping paper must the word "non-odorized" or "not- odorized" be located when shipping liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)? You also ask whether the word "non-odorized" or "not-odorized" must follow the basic description, or be immediately before or after the proper shipping name? Al: In accordance with§ 172.203(p), the word "non-odorized" or "not-odorized" must be included in association with the proper shipping description on a shipping paper when non-odorized LPG is offered for transportation. Furthermore, in order to maintain harmonization with international standards (e.g., International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, International Civil Aviation Organization Technical Instructions, etc.), the word "non-odorized'" or ''not- odorized" is required to be provided in association with the proper shipping description and not immediately preceding the proper shipping name, since international regulations do not permit additional information to be interspersed among the four required elements of the basic description. Q2: You ask whether LPG shipments that originate in the U.S. and terminate in Canada must have the non-odorized notation? You also ask if Transport Canada will accept the U.S. shipping paper reference? A2: The answer is yes, the word "non-odorized" or "not-odorized" must be included in association with the proper shipping description on a shipping paper when non- odorized LPG is offered for transportation. Further, there are no provisions in the HMR that prevent Transport Canada from accepting the additional description requirements for shipping papers when non-odorized LPG is offered for transportation.#

Page 2In your letter, you also suggest that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) revise the HMR to: (1) revise the generic use of the proper shipping name Liquefied Petroleum Gas to include the other products in the LPG family such as butane, isobutane, and propane, et. al.; and (2) develop one standard of where the extra descriptive information goes on a shipping paper in order to standardize shipping paper information across all modes of transport. We appreciate your bringing these issues to our attention. PHMSA cannot make regulatory changes through a request for interpretation of the HMR. However, if you believe a rulemaking change is warranted, we invite you to file a petition for rulemaking in accordance with§ 106.95 including all information (see§ 106.100) needed to support your petition. I trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, ~r#~~- T. Glenn Foster Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch Standards and Rulemaking Division ---------- - -----~------#

Page 3N 1e-ke/f:> l\atlroab l\egulatorp ~afetp ~erbtte~ tg J 7 t., · 2 o 3 www.railroadregulatory~afetyser;ices.com ~ipp /n Cf ~a.iJe n; 7500 ;ffll.a~onbtlle ~rtbe u a jfall~ Ql:burcb, ~trginia 22042-3520 I~ - 0 ;LO 7 m:etepbone 202-230-9563 or 703-560-0229 September 14, 2012 Standards and Rulemaking Division, PHH-1 0 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration United States Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590-0001 Re: Interpretation request of 49 CFR 172.203(p) (Docket HM-218F) To Whom It May Concern: On July 20,2011 the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration issued the final rule of Docket HM-218F regarding 49 CFR 172.203(p) required the words non-odorized preceding the proper shipping name on a shipping paper when non-odorized liquefied petroleum gas is offered for transportation. Following this, a correction document was published on December 28,2011, which required the words non-[ or not]-odorized to be placed "in association with" the "proper shipping description". My question is where does "in association with" mean? Can the words follow the entire basic description or must it be immediately before or after the proper shipping name? With electronic data interchange (EDI) shipping paper transmission, changes to the system require immense efforts to comply with the regulations. The carriers that utilized EDI for decades have sought to comply with the most sensible solution possible. Numerous examples in the regulations that require words to be used "in association with" are usually interpreted to mean after the basic shipping description. For example, 49 CFR 172.203: $ (a) is normally interpreted to mean the DOT-SP can follow the basic shipping description, $ ( d)(1 0) requires "HRCQ to be "in association with" which would normally follow the basic shipping description, $ (i)(3) also would place the segregation group after the basic shipping description,#

Page 4$ (k)(2)(i) also requires the EPA hazardous waste number to follow the basic description, $ Marine pollutants, paragraph (1)(1)(2)(3) further require the constituent making the material a marine pollutant must appear "in association with" the basic description, $ Paragraph (m) has been interpreted to require the hazard zone to be entered "immediately following the basic shipping description", $ 171.23(b )2 the EX number or product codes must be included in association with the basic shipping description. $ 171.23(b)10 must be entered on the shipping paper immediately following the basic shipping description. In addition, does this mean that LPG shipments that originate in US and terminate in Canada must have the non-odorized notation placed in association with the proper shipping name? Will Transport Canada accept the US shipping paper (reference Section 171.12)? For clarification, an interpretation requiring the correct placement of the words "non-[ or not]- odorized" is requested before the EDI systems are permanently changed for compliance at considerable expense. On a related topic, because I am seeing confusion in the shipper community interpreting 172.203(p ), I would suggest that the generic use of the proper shipping name Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) should also include the other products in the LPG family, namely; butane isobutane, and propane, et al. This could be included in parentheses in 172.203(p) or in the definition section 49 CFR 171.8. In addition, for the sake of clarity and especially uniformity for the emergency responders, PHMSA should develop one standard of where the extra descriptive information goes ---- except for maybe adding "waste" before the PSN and "Residue: last contained" before the basic description, all other information should go after the basic description--- RQ, HOT, PIH, ete. This would also assist PHMSA in standardizing shipping paper information utilizing EDI for all other modes of transportation. Your prompt attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, Raymond Kasey#