{"operation":"document","citation":"24-0053","title":"Entegris, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2024-10-09","effective_on":null,"summary":"24-0053 response to Entegris, Inc. concerning 173.29.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-24-0053.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-24-0053.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-24-0053","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2026-04/24-0053.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nOctober 9, 2024\nStefanie Yarbrough\nSr Manager, Strategic Initiatives\nEntegris, Inc.\n700 Jeffrey Way, Suite 400\nRound Rock, TX 78664\nReference No. 24-0053\nDear Mrs. Yarbrough:\nThis letter is in response to your June 6, 2024, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to empty packagings. In your\nemail, you provide a scenario where your company is shipping a hazardous material in 55-gallon\ndrums. The hazardous material contents of the drums are removed to the maximum extent\npracticable, but the drums are not cleaned, refilled, or purged of any vapors. Specifically, you ask\nfor clarification of the provisions to allow packagings with residue to be shipped as empty\npackagings, as specified in § 173.29(b).\nWe have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ1. You ask whether all the conditions listed in § 173.29(b)(2) have to be met in order to ship\nthe drums as empty packagings.\nA1. The answer is no. The conditions of § 173.29(b)(2) are independent of one another, as\nidentified by the conjunction “or” connecting § 173.29(b)(2)(iii) and (iv). Please note that\nwhichever condition in § 173.29(b)(2) applies, it is in combination with the provisions of\n§ 173.29(b)(1) and (3).\nQ2. You ask for clarification of the term “unused,” as specified in § 173.29(b)(2)(i), and\nwhen a packaging would be considered “unused.”\nA2. The HMR does not define the term “unused” with respect to its use in § 173.29. The\nword “unused” is defined in a standard dictionary as “has never been used before.” In this\ncontext, the term “unused,” as utilized in § 173.29(b)(2)(i), means the package must have\nnever been filled, offered for transportation, or undergone equivalent actions that would\nrender the packaging as “used.”\n\n<<>>\n\nQ3. You ask whether the drums with residue as described in your email qualify as empty\npackagings, in accordance with § 173.29.\nA3. The answer is no.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nDirk Der Kinderen\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<>>\n\nCardez\n24-0053\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nTo: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nCc: Hazmat Interps\nSubject: FW: Request for Interpretation - Empty Packagings, 49CFR § 173.29\nDate: Tuesday, June 18, 2024 2:02:25 PM\nAttachments: Entegris Request for Interpretation Empty Packagings 2024-06-06.pdf\nHello Alice,\nSee the attached interpretation request. Let us know if you need anything else.\nBest,\nAminah\nFrom: Stefanie Yarbrough \nSent: Thursday, June 6, 2024 4:57 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) \nSubject: Request for Interpretation - Empty Packagings, 49CFR § 173.29\nCAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do\nnot click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content\nis safe.\nDear Sir or Madam,\nPlease see our request for interpretation regarding § 173.29, Empty Packagings.\nMany thanks in advance for your response.\nBest regards\nStefanie Yarbrough\nSr Manager, Strategic Initiatives\nGlobal Supply Chain\nT +1 512 244 5284 M +1 512 688 7430\nEntegris entegris.com\n700 Jeffrey Way, Suite 400\nRound Rock, TX 78664 USA\n\n<<>>\n\nENTEGRIS PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL – INTERNAL\n\n<<>>\n\nGLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN\nJune 6, 2024\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Attn: PHH-10\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nEast Building\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\ninfocntr@dot.gov\nRequest for Interpretation\nDear Sir or Madam,\nPursuant to 49 CFR §105.20, this letter is being submitted by e-mail to PHMSA to request an interpretation\nof the Hazard Materials Regulations regarding the use of § 173.29 Empty packagings in the HMR.\nEntegris is using material sourced from a US supplier in 55-gallon drums. The material is classified as a class\n8, subsidiary division 5.1 material in packing group II. It is not a marine pollutant or a hazardous substance.\nAfter removal of the material from the drums to be used in manufacturing, the drums are returned to the\nsupplier to be cleaned and reused. The contents of the drums are removed to the maximum extent\npracticable. The drums are not cleaned, refilled, or purged of any vapors.\nPer § 173.29 (a), an empty packaging containing only the residue of a hazardous material shall be offered\nfor transportation and transported in the same manner as when it previously contained a greater quantity\nof that hazardous material.\n§ 173.29 (b) contains the provisions that need be conformed with to allow packagings with residue to be\nshipped as empty packagings.\nQuestion 1: Am I correct in that only one of the conditions listed in § 173.29 (b)(2) would have to be met,\nand not all of them, to be allowed to ship as an empty packaging?\n§ 171.8 states “Residue means the hazardous material remaining in a packaging, including a tank car, after\nits contents have been unloaded to the maximum extent practicable and before the packaging is either\nrefilled or cleaned of hazardous material and purged to remove any hazardous vapors.”\nQuestion 2: Could PHMSA please explain the condition in § 173.29 (b)(2)(i), which states that the packaging\nshall be “unused”? The definition of residue in the HMR implies that contents have been unloaded from\nthe packaging, would that constitute “use” of the packaging? Consequently, in which cases would a\npackaging be considered “unused”?\nThe definition of “residue” is met in the case of the 55-gallon drums Entegris is using as described above.\nMaterial was removed from the drums, they have not been cleaned or purged of vapors, they have not\nbeen refilled with a non-hazardous material to nullify the hazard, and the material is neither a limited\nquantity material, nor a 2.2 non-flammable gas. Any labeling and marking could be removed.\nRequest for Interpretation\nEntegris, Inc.― 129 Concord Road ― Billerica, MA 01821 USA\nPage 1 of 2\n\n<<>>\n\nQuestion 3: Does the 55-gallon drum with residue as described above qualify as empty packaging in the\nsense of § 173.29?\nEntegris greatly appreciates PHMSA’s attention to this matter and looks forward to a response that further\nclarifies our understanding of the hazardous materials regulations.\nShould PHMSA require additional details to process this interpretation, please contact me using the\ninformation listed below.\nSincerely,\nStefanie Yarbrough\nSr Manager, Strategic Initiatives\nEntegris, Inc.\n700 Jeffrey Way, Suite 400\nRound Rock, TX 78664 USA\nDirect Line: (512) 244-5284\nMobile: (512) 688-7430\nE-mail: stefanie.yarbrough@entegris.com\nRequest for Interpretation\nEntegris, Inc.― 129 Concord Road ― Billerica, MA 01821 USA\nPage 2 of 2","truncated":false,"body_characters":6955}