Polytek Development Corp. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1of 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 2I 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 3Boothe 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 4U.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 5Boothe, 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 6This 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#