{"operation":"document","citation":"13-0187","title":"Westpak, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2013-11-29","effective_on":null,"summary":"13-0187 response to Westpak, Inc. concerning 178.601.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0187.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0187.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0187","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2013/130187.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nNOV 2 6 2013\nMr. Pal Khangaldy\nDirector of Engineering\nWestpak, Inc.\n83 Great Oaks Blvd.\nSan Jose, CA 95119\nRef. No.: 13-0187\nDear Mr. Khangaldy:\nThis is in response to your September 6, 2013 letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to combination packages. In\nyour scenario, you state that two similar combination packages are tested and certified as\nperformance oriented packages with different inner packagings. You ask whether it is\nacceptable to mix the two types of inner packagings in the combination packages provided\nthey not exceed the weight rating of the package system and all materials in the package are\ncompatible.\nThe answer to your question is yes. In accordance with§ 178.601(c)(4), a \"different\npackaging\" is defined as one that differs from a previously produced packaging in structural\ndesign, size, material, of construction, wall thickness or manner of construction. However,\n§ 178.601 (c)( 4)(ii) states that this definition does not include a combination packaging which\ndiffers only in that the outer packaging has been successfully tested with different inner\npackagings. This definition permits a variety of inner packagings to be assembled in the outer\npackaging without further testing.\nI hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to\ncontact this office.\nSincerely,\n~7 ~:/},:;7;/[?t::;;--\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n·-----~---\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject:\nINFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nFriday, September 06, 2013 3:53 PM\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFW: Request for Interpretation\n.\nlesttn!j\nt ~-()J 81\nHi Carolyn,\nThis caller requested we submit this e-mail as a formal letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nVictoria\nFrom: Pal Khangaldy [mailto:Pal@westpak.com]\nSent: Friday, September 06, 2013 3:11 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nS~bject: Request for Interpretation\nTo Whom it May Concern,\nIf two similar combination packages are tested and certified (POP tested) each containing two different sets of 4\ninner bottles, is it acceptable to mix the two types of bottles under the variation 1 (the bottles are of similar\nweight) in Paragraph 178.601 of the 49-CFR.\nFor example:\nPackage A has 4 inner 1 00-ml HOPE bottles and has been tested and certified\nPackage B has 4 inner 1 00-ml glass bottles and has been tested and certified\nPackage A and Package B are identical with the exception of inner bottles.\nIs it possible to ship a package containing 2 1 00-ml HOPE bottles and 2 1 00-ml glass bottles in the\ncombination package not exceeding the weight rating of the package system, granted all materials are\ncompatible?\nBest Regards,\nPal Khangaldy I Director of Engineering I Westpak, Inc.\n83 Great Oaks Blvd I San Jose, CA 95119\nDirect ( 408) 600-3414 I Main ( 408) 224-1300 I Fax ( 408) 224-5113\npal@westpak.com I www.westpak.com\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":3117}