{"operation":"document","citation":"24-0074","title":"Kansas Highway Patrol — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2024-12-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"24-0074 response to Kansas Highway Patrol concerning 172.101, 173.225, 173.56, 177.848.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-24-0074.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-24-0074.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-24-0074","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2025-01/240074.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nDecember 19, 2024\nMr. Nicholas Wright\nTechnical Trooper\nKansas Highway Patrol\n1220 S. Enterprise\nOlathe, KS 66061\nReference No. 24-0074\nDear Trooper Wright,\nThis letter is in response to your August 26, 2024, email requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the use of the\nsegregation table for hazardous materials in § 177.848(d). You present a scenario of an organic\nperoxide with an explosive subsidiary hazard—i.e., “UN3112, Organic peroxide type B, solid,\ntemperature controlled (contains Acetyl cyclohexanesulfonyl peroxide), 5.2, (1)”—and ask\nwhether the hazardous material may be offered for transportation in the same transport vehicle as\na Class 3, a Division 6.1 (packing group I with a Class 3 subsidiary (not poisonous by\ninhalation)), or a Division 6.2 material. Specifically, you ask how to apply the instructions to the\nsegregation table when the § 172.101 hazardous materials table entry for UN3112 does not\nprovide a Division number for the explosive subsidiary hazard.\nAs described in your scenario, a Division 5.2 hazardous material assigned a subsidiary Class 1\nthat is listed on the organic peroxides table in § 173.225 does not require an approval;\nadditionally, the material is not subject to the explosive approval requirements described in\n§ 173.56 as long as it conforms to all applicable provisions of the table. As such, for the purposes\nof segregation, it is the opinion of this Office that it is prudent to default to the most restrictive\nsegregation requirements and treat the Class 1 subsidiary as a Division 1.1 material. PHMSA\nmay consider clarifying the instructions in a future rulemaking.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nDirk Der Kinderen\nChief, Standards Development\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nRoundtree\n24-0074\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nTo: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nCc: Hazmat Interps\nSubject: FW: Letter of Interpretation request (177.848)\nDate: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 4:37:31 PM\nHello Alice,\nPlease see the below interpretation request. Let us know if you need anything.\nSincerely,\nJanaye\nFrom: Nicholas Wright [KHP] <Nicholas.Wright@KS.GOV>\nSent: Monday, August 26, 2024 3:03 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) <INFOCNTR.INFOCNTR@dot.gov>\nSubject: Letter of Interpretation request (177.848)\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.\nGreetings,\nI am seeking an official interpretation request regarding the segregation table found in 49 CFR\n§177.848. I located interpretation request #11-0161, in which PHMSA responded to the\nrequestor’s similar question as mine needing additional information to make a determination.\nI am unable to find a follow-up response from PHMSA on this issue.\nMy question about segregation is specific to an organic peroxide (Division 5.2) with an\nexplosive subsidiary hazard (Class 1). Specifically, the following entry is in question:\nUN3112, Organic peroxide type B, solid, temperature controlled, 5.2 (1)\nFor the purpose of this issue request, we will hypothesize the technical name for the material\nis “Acetyl cyclohexanesulfonyl peroxide.”\nThe question for which I am seeking guidance is whether the organic peroxide may be\ntransported in the same transport vehicle as the following hazard classes:\nClass 3\nDivision 6.1, PG I, with a Class 3 subsidiary (NOT a material poisonous by inhalation)\nDivision 6.2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nAs the original requestor asked in 2011 in the aforementioned issue request, I am inquiring as\nto how the Class 1 subsidiary is applied to the segregation table. Since the explosive\nsubsidiary does not have a division, how is the Class 1 used in the table when verifying\nsegregation? The instructions for the segregation table in 177.848(e)(6) direct the user to verify\nboth the primary and subsidiary hazard for materials on the same transport vehicle, but\nwithout a division to the Class 1, it seems impossible to apply proper segregation for a\nmaterial such as UN3112.\nThank you in advance for your interpretation and guidance.\nTechnical Trooper Nick Wright, K-100\nKansas Highway Patrol\nTroop I, Commercial Vehicle Enforcement\nMCSAP Training & Public Information\n1220 S. Enterprise\nOlathe, KS 66061\nOffice: (913) 782-8100\nNicholas.Wright@ks.gov","truncated":false,"body_characters":4580}