Hazmat Safety Consulting, LLC — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 11200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration January 20, 2026 Robert Richard Vice President Hazmat Safety Consulting, LLC 10036 Lake Occoquan Drive Manassas, VA 20111 Reference No. 25-0117 Dear Mr. Richard This letter is in response to your August 25, 2025 letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) regarding vessel transportation of “UN1838, Titanium tetrachloride, 6.1 (8), PG I.” You state that the transportation of “UN1838,” an inhalation Hazard Zone B material, will be performed using non-bulk packagings in accordance with § 173.227(b) of the HMR, a method which differs slightly from the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code. It is your understanding that although the IMDG Code requires a competent authority approval (CAA) for packagings not definitively authorized in a packing instruction, the HMR may serve as the CAA in such cases. Referencing a prior letter of interpretation (Ref. No. 24-0017), you seek confirmation that a separate CAA letter is not required when this material is packaged and transported in accordance with § 173.227(b) and all other applicable HMR requirements. Your understanding is correct. A CAA letter is not required in this scenario described in your incoming letter. Under § 178.605 of the HMR, PG I packagings intended to contain hazardous materials must be tested to a minimum test pressure of 250 kPa. The IMDG Code assigns packing instruction P602 to “UN1838.” This packing instruction specifies that drums or composite packagings must comply with the 300 kPa hydrostatic test pressure requirement. Furthermore, the Hazardous Materials Table in § 172.101 refers to § 173.227 for the non-bulk packaging authorization for “UN1838.” Specifically, § 173.227(b) requires compliance with packaging performance test requirements of subpart M of part 178 at the Packing Group (PG) I performance level.#

Page 2Please note that a CAA, as defined in § 105.5, is an approval by the competent authority that is required under an international standard, and that a specific regulation in the HMR may be considered a CAA if it satisfies the requirement of an international standard—in this case see section 4.1.3.7 of the IMDG Code. Therefore, the authorization in the HMR for packagings in conformance with § 173.227(b) for the transportation of “UN1838” serves as a U.S. CAA. I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Dirk DerKinderen Chief, Standards Development Branch Standards and Rulemaking Division#

Page 325-0117 Baker, Y. From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Nickels, Matthew (PHMSA) Baker, Yul (PHMSA) FW: Question on Interp letter Tuesday, August 26, 2025 10:12:10 AM Yul, please use this version of email with attachments instead of my email from yesterday, 8/25/25 2:49PM. Bob updated the documents he wanted to submit. PDF Incoming PDF Interp Example he thinks helps his pov WORD doc draft response he developed Thank you! Mr. Matthew B. Nickels Acting Director, Standards & Rulemaking Division Office of Hazardous Materials Safety Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration U.S. Department of Transportation From: Nickels, Matthew (PHMSA) <Matthew.Nickels@dot.gov> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2025 2:49 PM To: Hazmat Interps Cc: Baker, Yul (PHMSA) Subject: FW: Question on Interp letter Hey Yul, please process. Thank you! Mr. Matthew B. Nickels Acting Director, Standards & Rulemaking Division Office of Hazardous Materials Safety Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration U.S. Department of Transportation From: Bob Richard <brichard@hazmatsafety.com> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2025 1:02 PM To: Nickels, Matthew (PHMSA) <Matthew.Nickels@dot.gov> Cc: Kelley, Shane (PHMSA) <shane.kelley@dot.gov>; Ryan Paquet <rpaquet@hazmatsafety.com> Subject: RE: Question on Interp letter CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.#

Page 4Matt, Please accept the attached request for interpretation. This request is very straightforward and consistent with prior interp responses. In fact, it is like the attached 1405-0294 interp. Is there anyway since this is so clear and consistent with PHMSA’s previous responses that it could be expedited? I have drafted a response if that is helpful. Our client is getting pushback from a consignee who does not understand that the HMR can serve as a CAA in certain circumstances and has requested a written letter from PHMSA. Best Regards, Bob Richard Hazmat Safety Consulting, LLC.#

Page 5August 25, 2025 Mathew Nickels Chief Standards Development Branch Standards and Rulemaking Division PHMSA Washington, DC 20590 Dear Mr. Nickels, This letter is requesting clarification that the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) may serve as a competent authority approval for shipments offered in accordance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code. We recognize that a Competent Authority Approval (CAA), as defined in §105.5, is an approval by the competent authority that is required under an international standard, and that a specific regulation in the HMR may be considered a CAA if it satisfies the requirement of an international standard—see, for example, section 4.1.3.7 of the IMDG Code. We recognize that PHMSA has confirmed this in several interpretation letters and statements made in public forums (e.g., Reference No. 24- 0017). Nevertheless, due to a current shipment frustration, we are requesting written confirmation relevant to a shipment my client is offering by vessel transportation in accordance with the IMDG Code. The hazardous material that will be offered for transportation is UN1838, Titanium Tetrachloride, 6.1 (8), PGI. It is an Inhalation Hazard-Zone B material packaged in conformance with 49 CFR §173.227(b). 49 CFR §173.227(b) is assigned to UN1838 in the § 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table. §173.227(b) authorizes various non-bulk packagings for transportation, including for vessel transportation. The IMDG Code packaging instruction is P602 which specifies a hydrostatic test pressure of 300 kpa for one of its potential packaging options utilizing a drum or composite packaging. At §178.605(d) the HMR specifies a hydrostatic test pressure of 250 kpa for PGI hazmats. 4.3.1.7 of the IMDG Code:#

Page 6clearly applies and authorizes packaging authorized by the competent authority. We are requesting written confirmation that if the material is packaged and transported in accordance with §173.227(b) and all applicable HMR requirements that a competent authority approval (CAA) is not required because the authorization in the HMR for use of packaging in conformance with 49 CFR 173.227(b) for transportation of a UN1838 serves as a U.S. CAA. If you require any additional information or have questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact me. I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your timely response. Sincerely, Robert Richard Robert Richard Vice President Hazmat Safety Consulting LLC#

Page 7This letter is in response to your August ?, 2024 email requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) regarding vessel transportation of UN1838, Titanium Tetrachloride, 6.1 (8), PGI an Inhalation Hazard-Zone B material packaged in conformance with 49 CFR 173.227(b). You ask whether the packaging in the HMR using this hazardous materials description satisfies the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code requirement for a competent authority approval (CAA), or if a CAA letter is still required to transport it internationally via vessel. More specifically, you ask whether a CAA (letter) is required to transport UN1838 when packaged in conformance with 49 CFR173.227(b) for vessel transportation. The answer is no. Your understanding is correct that 49 CFR 173.227(b)—which is assigned to the UN1838 entry in the § 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table—authorizes various non-bulk packagings for transportation, including for vessel transportation. Note also that a CAA, as defined in § 105.5, is an approval by the competent authority that is required under an international standard, and that a specific regulation in the HMR may be considered a CAA if it satisfies the requirement of an international standard—see, for example, section 4.1.3.7 of the IMDG Code. Therefore, the authorization in the HMR for use of packaging in conformance with 49 CFR 173.227(b) for transportation of a UN1838 serves as a U.S. CAA.#

Page 81200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration April 24, 2024 Melanie Barker Regulatory Specialist Champion X 11177 S. Stadium Drive Sugar Land, TX 77478 Reference No. 24-0017 Dear Ms. Barker: This letter is in response to your March 7, 2024, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) regarding vessel transportation of “UN3286, Flammable liquid, toxic, corrosive, n.o.s., 3 (6.1, 8), PG II” in composite intermediate bulk containers (IBCs). You ask whether the IBCs authorized in the HMR for a commodity transported using this hazardous materials description satisfies the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code requirement for a competent authority approval (CAA), or if a CAA letter is still required to transport it internationally via vessel. More specifically, you ask whether a CAA (letter) is required to transport a 31HA1 composite IBC for vessel transportation of this material. The answer is no. Your understanding is correct that special provision IB2—which is assigned to the UN3286 Packing Group (PG) II entry in the § 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table— authorizes composite (31HZ1) IBCs for transportation, including for vessel transportation. Further, the HMR authorizes the use of composite IBCs for UN3286 materials, provided the packaging meets the conditions and limitations in § 173.243(d). Note also that a CAA, as defined in § 105.5, is an approval by the competent authority that is required under an international standard, and that a specific regulation in the HMR may be considered a CAA if it satisfies the requirement of an international standard—see, for example, section 4.1.3.7 of the IMDG Code. Therefore, the authorization in the HMR for use of composite IBCs for transportation of a UN3286 PG II material serves as a U.S. CAA. I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Dirk Der Kinderen Chief, Standards Development Branch Standards and Rulemaking Division#

Page 9From: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) To: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA) Cc: Hazmat Interps Subject: FW: Question regarding transportation of materials classified as UN3286 Date: Thursday, March 14, 2024 11:58:17 AM Hi Alice, Please see the below interpretation request. Let me know if you need anything. Regards, -Breanna From: Barker, Melanie <Melanie.Barker@championx.com> Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 11:51 AM To: PHMSA HM InfoCenter <PHMSAHMInfoCenter@dot.gov> Subject: Question regarding transportation of materials classified as UN3286 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, I have been receiving questions regarding transport of materials classified as UN3286 Flammable liquid, toxic, corrosive, n.o.s., 3(6.1,8), PG II in IBCs by sea and one specific vessel that is refusing to accept the cargo without a letter from DOT. We have 31HA1 composite totes which appears to be an authorized composite IBC under Special Provision IB2 according to 49 CFR 172.102(c)(4) and table found in 49 CFR 178.702(a)(2). IB2 – Authorized IBCs: Metal (31A, 31B and 31N); Rigid plastics (31H1 and 31H2); Composite (31HZ1). If 31HA1 composite IBCs are authorized containers to transport materials classified as UN3286 Flammable liquid, toxic, corrosive, n.o.s., 3(6.1,8), PG II by DOT, then does that extend to being authorized under IMDG? The IMDG regulations list packing instruction IBC 99 which states: Only IBCs which are approved for these goods by the competent authority may be used (see 4.1.3.7). A copy of the Competent Authority approval shall accompany each consignment or the transport document shall include an indication that the packaging was approved by the Competent Authority. Can you provide a Letter of Interpretation for IB2 or advise if an application for a Competent Authority approval is required? Additionally, if a Competent Authority certification will be required, what documentation will need to be provided in order to receive an approval. We have attempted to apply for a Competent Authority certification in the past and were rejected on grounds of documentation. Best Regards, Melanie Barker Regulatory Specialist 11177 S. Stadium Dr, Sugar Land, Texas 77478 T +1 281 632 8105 E melanie.barker@championX.com Connect with Us LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain proprietary and privileged information for the use of the designated recipients named above. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.#