Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1of Transportation U.S. Department 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, D.C. 20590 Materials Safety Pipeline and Hazardous JAN 0 5 2015 Administration Mr. Mark Ludwikowski, Esq. Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A. 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004-3062 Ref. No.: 14-0047 Dear Mr. Ludwikowski: This is in response to your email dated March 11, 2014, requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) relating to the classification of airbag inflators. Your client produces the same model or same family of inflators using the same designs across multiple manufacturing sites. Q1. You ask whether a single testing lab report for a particular inflator model or inflator family can be used across your client's multiple manufacturing sites and if this is dependent upon whether the inflator is classed as Class 9 (UN3268) or if the company submits an application to PHMSA for and EX approval. Al. An EX approval for an explosive article remains valid for the same article produced by the same manufacturer at multiple facilities within the United States. However, approvals issued for explosive articles manufactured at a facility outside the United States are only valid for articles produced at that facility unless an authorized laboratory has examined the article and issued a test report conforming to the provisions of §173.166(b)(1) for the article as produced at each additional facility outside of the United States. This applies regardless of whether the article is ultimately classed as a Class 9 (UN3268) or classed and approved as Division 1.4G and assigned an EX number by the PHMSA Associate Administrator. Q2. You also ask whether the energetics used in the inflators must be exactly the same across manufacturing sites and if the energetics must be of the same origin. A2. The energetic formulations used in inflators must be exactly the same in order to be included in a single design type under the provisions of § 173.166(b)(1). Variations in energetic formulations may be authorized under the provisions of the EX approval process in § 173.56 if the explosive examination laboratory documents the variations in a report by analogy to an inflator previously tested, and PHMSA concurs by issuing an EX approval for the inflator. I trust this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Shane C. Kelley Acting International Standards Coordinator Standards and Rulemaking Division#

Page 2Babich 5173.166 3173.56 (b) 1) Air Bags Inflators SANDLER, TRAVIS & ROSENBERG, P.A. 14-0047 ATTORNEYS AT LAW MARK LUDWIKOWSKI, EsQ. Member, D.C. Bar E-MAIL ADDRESS: (202) 730-4967 Direct mludwikowski@strtrade.com (202) 842-2247 Facsimile (202) 216-9307 Telephone March 11, 2014 VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL AND EMAIL: infocntr@dot.gov Office of Hazardous Materials Standards Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE East Building Washington, DC 20590-0001 Attn: PHH-10 RE: Interpretation Request - Use of Test Reports for Multiple Manufacturing Sites Daicel Corporation Dear Sir or Madam: Further to our email communications with Mr. William Fink at PHMSA on February 6, 2014, on behalf of our client Daicel Corporation ("Daicel") 823 Umaba, Ibogawa-Cho, Tatsuno-shi, Hyogo, Japan 671-1681, we hereby request an interpretation concerning the following issue. Daicel and its affiliates in the United States, Thailand, Poland, China and Korea manufacture airbag inflators at these various locations. Often, the same exact model inflators (or inflator families) using the same designs are manufactured across these multiple Daicel manufacturing sites. The - company would like to know whether a single testing lab report for a model inflator or inflator family - - can be used for its multiple manufacturing sites if the inflator designs are the same. Assuming that the - - test report can be used for multiple sites, is the origin of the energetics used in the inflator critical? In other words, must the energetics also be exactly the same across manufacturing sites and must the energetics be of the same origin? The new regulations at 49 C.F.R. 173.166(b) only reference design type, specifically: (b) Classification. (1) An air bag inflator, air bag module, or seat-belt pretensioner, excluding those which contain flammable or toxic gases or mixtures thereof, may be classed as Class 9 (UN3268) if the air bag inflator, air bag module, or seat-belt pretensioner, or if more than a single air bag inflator, air bag module, or seat-belt pretensioner is involved then the representative of the maximum parameters of each - design type, is examined and successfully tested by a person or agency who is 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20004-3062 USA CHICAGO • HONG KONG • MIAMI • NEW YORK • SAN FRANCISCO • SCOTTSDALE • WASHINGTON, D.C.#

Page 3SANDLER, TRAVIS & ROSENBERG, P.A. D March 11, 2014 Page 2 of 2 authorized by the Associate Administrator to perform examination and testing of explosives under § 173.56(b)(I)... (emphasis added). This question applies regardless of whether or not the company submits an approval application to PHMSA for an EX approval under the new inflator regulations. In the revised regulations, PHMSA explained that: As was proposed in the NPRM, persons who test and examine air bag inflators, air bag modules, or seat-belt pretensioners would be required to provide a detailed report on each tested design to the manufacturer. Key components of the report include a description of the design; explanation of the tests performed and results; and a recommended classification for tested designs... In summary, the proposed NPRM amendments provided manufacturers of air bag inflators, air bag modules, or seat-belt pretensioners with the option to utilize new designs that are proven to meet the criteria of a Class 9 through established test criteria, without receiving an EX approval from PHMSA. Hazardous Materials: Approval and Communication Requirements for the Safe Transportation of Air Bag Inflators, Air Bag Modules, and Seat-Belt Pretensioners (RRR), 78 Fed. Reg. 45880, 45882 (July 30, 2013). (emphasis added). or if we can be of assistance. Thank you for your consideration of this inquiry. Please let me know if you have any questions Sincerely yours, SANDLER, TRAVIS & ROSENBERG, P.A. By:.. Mark Ludwikowski Cc: William Fink#

Page 4Drakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA) From: Sent: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) To: Drakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA) Wednesday, March 12, 2014 1:13 PM Subject: Attachments: Interpretation Request - Use of Test Reports for Multiple Sites.pdf; Mark Ludwikowski.vcf: Mark FW: Interpretation Request - Use of Test Reports for Multiple Manufacturing Sites Ludwikowski.vcf Importance: High Hi Carolyn, This caller requested we submit this e-mail as a formal letter of interpretation. Thanks, Victoria d From: Mark Ludwikowski [mailto:mludwikowski@strtrade.com] To: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 6:20 PM Cc: Fink, William (PHMSA) Subject: Interpretation Request - Use of Test Reports for Multiple Manufacturing Sites Importance: High Dear Sir or Madam, Attached, please find the interpretation request submitted on behalf of our client Daicel Corporation. Please let us know if hard copy of this request is being sent by first class mail. you have any questions. A Thank you. Mark Ludwikowski Member Mark Ludwikowski Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A. 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20004 mludwikowski@strtrade.com | www.strtrade.com T:(202) 730-4967 C:(703) 888-8380 F:(202) 842-2247 The information contained in this email message and any attachments is legally privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please destroy it and remove it immediately above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any from your PC and server, and notify us by return email that it was received in error. Thank you 1#