{"operation":"document","citation":"14-0225","title":"Dangerous Goods Advisory Council — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2015-05-15","effective_on":null,"summary":"14-0225 response to Dangerous Goods Advisory Council concerning 173.24, 173.24a, 173.24b, 173.27.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0225.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0225.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0225","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2015/140225.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\n1200 New Jersey Avenue SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nPipeline and Hazardous\nAdministration\nMaterials Safety\nMAY 1 5 2015\nMr. Delmer Billings\nTechnical Director\nDangerous Goods Advisory Council\n7501 Greenway Center Drive, Suite 760\nGreenbelt; MD 20770\nReference No. 14-0225\nDear Mr. Billings:\nThis is in response to your recent e-mail requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to secondary means of closure on\ninner packagings that contain Packing Group (PG) II and III liquid materials. We have\nparaphrased your questions and answered them in the order you provided.\nQ1. What does the language \"when a secondary means of closure cannot be applied or is\nimpracticable to apply\" as referenced in § 173.27(d)(2) mean?\nAl.\nThis language means an inner packaging intended for the transportation of Packing\nGroup (PG) II and/or IIl liquids is designed in a manner that either does not permit\nor is impractical to permit its closure to be held securely in place by a separate\n\"positive\" (i.e., non-friction) means. This language permits an alternative form of\ncontainment to be used if the secondary closure requirement in § 173.27(d),\nintroductory paragraph, for an inner packaging of liquids placed in a combination\npackaging and transported by aircraft cannot be met.\nQ2.\nDo the following methods of closure satisfy the requirement for a secondary means\nof closure under § 173.27(d)(2): adhesive tape, friction sleeves, welding or\nsoldering, locking wires, locking rings, induction heat seals, and child-resistant\nclosures?\nA2.\nAs stated in the introductory paragraph of § 173.27(d)(2), acceptable methods of\nsecondary means of closure include the methods you listed as well as others of\nsimilar positive means, such as shrink wrap, to ensure closures are held in place.\nPlease note downward pressure alone exerted upon a friction-type closure (e.g.,\nstoppers, corks, caps) does not satisfy this requirement.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nQ3. What factors determine if a secondary means of closure cannot be applied or is\nimpracticable to apply?\nA3.\nPackaging conditions that may make a secondary means of closure impracticable or\nimpossible to apply include physical dimensions and/or conditions that may make\ncontainment or adherence in a secondary closure problematic. These conditions can\ninclude irregular shaped or oversized packagings; packaging materials, condensation,\nor temperatures that make attachment with an adhesive difficult; and transportation.\nconditions that promote expansion or contraction of the packagings or their contents.\nQ4. If a method of closure is impracticable or cannot be applied, what support is\nnecessary to make this determination?\nA4. Unless otherwise excepted under the HMR, the package must be able to physically\ndemonstrate that it satisfies the general packaging requirements prescribed in\n§§ 173.24, 173.24a, and 173.24b. If the package also meets a DOT specification or\nUN standard, it must also satisfy the applicable performance requirements for these\npackagings, which is essentially a package engineering assessment. Support for\nmaking a determination that a method of closure is impracticable or cannot be\napplied can occur through handling experience, package testing, incident reporting,\nand in discussions with PHMSA's packaging engineers.\nI hope this satisfies your request.\nSincerely,\nTHen Faste\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nEdmanson\n8173.27 6d@\nGeneral requiement forestat\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\n14-0325\nFrom:\nBetts, Charles (PHMSA)\nSent:\nTuesday, November 18, 2014 10:02 AM\nTo:\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nCc:\nSubject:\nGoodall, Shante CTR (PHMSA); Delmer Billings (DBillings@dgac.org)\nFW: § 173.27(d) (2)\nImportance:\nHigh\nAlice -\nPlease log and assign to a specialist for response.\nThanks,\nCharles\nFrom: Delmer Billings [mailto:DBillings@dgac.org]\nTo: Betts, Charles (PHMSA)\nSent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 9:56 AM\nCc: Delmer Billings\nImportance: High\nSubject: § 173.27(d)(2)\nCharles,\nA member has requested an interpretation of 49 CFR 173.27 (d)(2), regarding the meaning of: when a secondary\nclosure cannot be applied or impracticable to apply to inner packaging containing liquids of Packaging Groups Il or\nIII..?\nDoes this mean if there are methods available such as adhesive tape, friction sleeves, welding or soldering,\nlocking wires, locking rings, induction heat seals, and child-resistant closures that can be used as a\nsecondary means of closure then a leakproof liner can't be used? What factors determine if a secondary\nmeans of closure can't be applied or is impracticable to apply? If a method is impracticable or can't be\napplied what support for this determination is necessary?\nIf possible, an informal email response would be appreciated, pending an official written interpretation.\nThanks for the assistance.\nDel\nDel Billings\nTechnical Director\nDangerous Goods Advisory Council\n7501 Greenway Center Drive, Suite 760\nGreenbelt, MD 20770\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nPhone: 202/289-4550\nFax: 202/289-4074\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":5125}