# Polytek Development Corp. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 14-0138R
- **title:** Polytek Development Corp. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2015-06-02
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 14-0138R response to Polytek Development Corp. concerning 172.202, 172.203, 172.602.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0138r.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0138r.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0138r
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2015/140138R.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

of Transportation
U.S. Department
Washington, DC 20590
1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.
Pipeline and Hazardous
Administration
Materials Safety
Ms. Cynthia Salisbury
JUN 0 2 2015
Regulatory Affairs
Polytek Development Corp.
55 Hilton Street
Easton, PA 18042
Ref. No. 14-0138R
Dear Ms. Salisbury:
This responds to your July 16, 2014 request for clarification on emergency response
information requirements under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts
171-180). Specifically, you state that you ship hazardous materials under generic shipping
description IN; and invide the tally gazardes pons ace good mRS I as part of
the description; and you verify that the carrier has the ERG in the cab of the truck. You ask
if this complies with the § 172.602(b) emergency response information requirements. You
also inquire whether the most current edition of the ERG must be carried.
The combination of providing an ERG guide number with a hazardous material description
and verifying carriage of an ERG in the carrier's vehicle(s) satisfies the HMR requirements
(see § 172.602(b)(3)(iii)). Additionally, the most up-to-date emergency response
information should be used to satisfy the Part 172, Subpart G requirements. Thus, the edition
of the ERG used to satisfy the emergency response information requirements for your
shipment should contain guidance that is most relevant to current emergency response
practices.
Section 172.602(a)(1) states that the emergency response information must contain the basic
description and technical name of the hazardous material as required by §§ 172.202 and
172.203(k). Section 172.602(b)(3) requires that the emergency response information is
presented (i) on a shipping paper; (ii) in a document, other than a shipping paper, that
includes both the basic description and technical name of the hazardous material; or (iii)
related to the information on a shipping paper, in a separate document (e.g., an emergency
response guidance document), in a manner that cross-references the description of the
hazardous material on the shipping paper with the emergency response information
contained in the document. Thus, your method satisfies the third option for presenting
emergency response information.

<<<PAGE 2>>>

I hope this answers your inquiry. If you need additional assistance, please contact this
Office at (202) 366-8553.
Sincerely,
Acting Chief, Standards Development Branch
Standards and Rulemaking Division

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Boothe
172.602 Cb)
Dodd, Alice (PHMSA)
mergency response
4 - 0/38 (
From:
Ciccarone, Michael CTR (PHMSA).
Sent:
To:
Wednesday, July 16, 2014 12:32 PM
Hazmat Interps
Subject:
FW: Request for Letter of Interpretation Regarding Emergency Response Information
Shante and Alice,
Please submit this for a formal letter of interpretation. Ms. Salisbury discussed this issue with Adam Lucas in the HMIC.
Thanks,
Mike
From: Cynthia Salisbury [mailto:csalisbury@polytek.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 12:17 PM
To: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)
Subject: Request for Letter of Interpretation Regarding Emergency Response Information
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to clarify Emergency Response Information (172.602(b)) requirements for hazardous materials covered by a
shipping name with a G in column 1 of the 172.101 (e.g., n.o.s. or other generic shipping names). As you know, for these
materials, a technical name be included with the basic shipping description (49 CFR 172.203(k)). For these hazardous
materials, do we fulfill the requirement for Emergency Response Information by including the proper Emergency
Response Guidebook (ERG) Guide Number on the shipping paper AND verifying that the carrier has the ERG
readily available in the cab of the truck?
For example, if shipping paper includes the following information: UN3082, Environmentally hazardous substance,
liquid, n.o.s. (butyl benzyl phthalate), 9, III, ERG #171; AND we verify that the carrier has the ERG in the cab, does that
fulfill 172.602 (b)?
Does it matter it the ERG in the cab is not the most current edition (e.g., 2008)?
Thank you in advance for clarification.
Best Regards,
Cynthia Salisbury
Regulatory Affairs | Polytek Development Corp. | www.polytek.com
[e] csalisbury@polytek.com | [p] 610.559.8620 x112 | [p] 800.858.5990
Polytek
Development Corp.

<<<PAGE 4>>>

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Washington, D.C. 20590
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Pipeline and Hazardous
Administration
Materials Safety
OCT 2 9 2014
Ms. Cynthia Salisbury
Regulatory Affairs
Polytek Development Corp.
55 Hilton Street
Easton, PA 18042
Ref. No. 14-0138
Dear Ms. Salisbury:
This responds to your July 16, 2014 request for clarification on emergency response
information requirements under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts
171-180). Specifically, you state that you ship hazardous materials under generic shipping
description "UN3082, Environmentally hazardous substance, liquid, n.o.s. (butyl benzyl
phthalate), 9, III," and include the Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG) #171 as part of the
description; and you verify that the carrier has the ERG in the cab of the truck. You ask if this
complies with the § 172.602(b) emergency response information requirements. You also
inquire whether the most current edition of the ERG must be carried:
The combination of providing an ERG guide number with a hazardous material description
and verifying carriage of an ERG in the carrier's vehicle(s) satisfies the HMR requirements
(see § 172.602(b)(3)(iii)). Additionally, the most current edition is required as it includes the
most current response information.
Section 172.602(a)(1) states that the emergency response information must contain the basic
description and technical name of the hazardous material as required by §§ 172.202 and
172.203(k). Section 172.602(b)(3) requires that the emergency response information is
presented (i) on a shipping paper; (ii) in a document, other than a shipping paper, that includes
both the basic description and technical name of the hazardous material; or (ill) related to the
information on a shipping paper, in a separate document (e.g., an emergency response
guidance document), in a manner that cross-references the description of the hazardous
material on the shipping paper with the emergency response information contained in the
document. Thus, your method satisfies the third option for presenting emergency response
information.
I hope this answers your inquiry. If you need additional assistance, please contact this Office
at (202) 366-8553.
Sincerely,
Acting Chief, Standards Development Branch
Standards and Rulemaking Division

<<<PAGE 5>>>

Boothe, Deborah (PHMSA)
Sent:
From:
DerKinderen, Dirk (PHMSA)
Subject:
To:
Boothe, Deborah (PHMSA)
Tuesday, December 23, 2014 10:02 AM
Attachments:
FW: Interp #14-0138
140138 ERI requirements.pdf
Debbie,
Even though we got FMCSA sign-off, Paul is worried about the letter especially that carriers may be sited for not carrying
the most current version of the ERG even if the language from an older version satisfies the ERI requirements of the
HMR. He's also worried about the cost of purchasing new editions. We need to discuss this internally and may need to
massage the language and reissue the latter.
Sincerely,
Dirk Der Kinderer
From: Benedict, Robert (PHMSA)
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 9:01 AM
Subject: FW: Interp #14-0138
To: DerKinderen, Dirk (PHMSA)
FYI.
From: Bomgardner, Paul (FMCSA)
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 9:00 AM
To: Benedict, Robert (PHMSA)
Subject: FW: Interp #14-0138
Cc: Ford, David (FMCSA)
Hi Rob:
Please see the interpretation attached. Both Dave and I believe that the statement about the carrier having to have the
latest edition of the ERG is in error. Historically, all that was needed was a version that had the information required for
the load. Take gasoline or acetone, for example. Response to incidents involving those materials really hasn't changed
in ages. So, why would there be a need for the latest version? Also, I see a bit of a problem in that the interpretation is
pretty close to rulemaking by requiring the newest version, which comes at a hefty cost to industry.
Anyway, might I suggest that the sentence be revised to read that the version of the ERG used must contain the
information that adequately covers the HM being transported. That is what the rule requires.
Regards,
Paul
From: Ford, David (FMCSA)
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 8:50 AM
Subject: Interp #14-0138
To: Bomgardner, Paul (FMCSA)
Paul,
1

<<<PAGE 6>>>

This interp states that you must have the most current ERG in the vehicle. I believe that is incorrect. That is not
specifically stated in the regulations, and previous interpretations have said that as long as the response information is
accurate, an older ERG may be used. Can you ask PHMSA to take a second look at this?
Thanks
David W. Ford
Hazardous Materials Program Manager
USDOT/FMCSA/Southern Service Center
404-327-7374
david.ford@dot.gov
2
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 8991
