{"operation":"document","citation":"98-0374","title":"Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1999-06-02","effective_on":null,"summary":"98-0374 response to Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America concerning 173.166.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0374.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0374.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0374","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980374.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\n...\n173-166\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C.\n400 Seventh Street, S.W\n20590\nSpecial Programs\nResearch and\nAdministration\nJUN 2\n1999\nMr. Edwin C. Amsler\nRef. No. 98-0374\nMitsubishi Motor Manufacturing\nof America\n100 N. Mitsubishi Motorway\nNormal, IL 61761\nDear Mr. Amsler:\nThis is in response to your letter dated October 29, 1998,\nconcerning air bag devices that are packed in non-specification,\nreusable high strength plastic containërs for transportation from\na manufacturing facility to the assembly facility under\n§ 173.166 (e) (4)\nParts\n171-180).\nof the Hazardous Materials Regulations 149 CFR\nYou state that the airbag devices are packed in open-top reusable\nhave lids and are constructed to interlock when stacked on top of\ncontainers that are stacked on a skid. The containers do not\nstacked containers are then banded twice in both directions to\neach other, with a top cap placed on the topmost container.\nThe\nloading configurations for the air bags as prepared for\nthe skid. You enclosed four photographs showing two different\ntransportation. Your questions are paraphrased and answered\nas\nfollows:\nQ1. Do the containers depicted in attachments 1 and 1-A meet the\nrequirements\nprescribed in § 173.166 (e) (4) (ii) ?\nA1.\nsection 173.166 (e) (4) (ii) requires a container or dedicated\nhandling device that is not completely enclosed by design to\nbe covered with plastic, fiberboard, or metal and secured to\nthe container by banding or other comparable methods.\nthe opinion of this Office that your stacked, high strength\nplastic containers when fitted with a top cap and securely\nbanded to the skid satisfy the requirements of a dedicated\nhandling device.\n02. Do the closures on the containers depicted in attachments 2\nand 2A meet the requirements prescribed in § 173.24 (f) ?\n980374\n\n<<>>\n\n..i.0\nA2. The general requirements in § 173.24 apply to all\npackagings.\nAs required by § 173.24 (f), the closure on a\ncontainer must be designed, closed and secured to the\ncontainer so that under conditions (including the effects of\ntemperature and vibration) normally encountered in\ntransportation there is no release of the hazardous material\nfrom the container.\nTherefore, your packaging\nconfigurations would satisfy the applicable requirements\nprovided the following conditions are met: (1) the air bag\ndevices are properly secured against movement within the\ncontainers ($ 173.166 (e) (4) (iii)); and (2) the skid of\nstacked containers fitted with a top cap is tightly secured\nto prevent both the release of the airbag devices from the\ncontainers and the release of the containers from the skid\nduring normal transportation conditions.\nPlease contact this office if we can be of further assistance.\ncopy of this response has been sent to the Illinois Department of\nTransportation, Division of Traffic Safety.\nSincerely,\nHottie z. Mitchell\nHattie I. Mitchell, Chief\nRegulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<>>\n\nMITSUBISHI\nMOTOR MANUFACTURING OF AMERICA, InC\nMr. E. T. Mazzullo\nDirector, Office of Hazardous Materials\nU. S. Department of Transportation, RSPA\n400 - 7* Street, South West\nWashington D.C., 20590-0001\nDate: October, 29, 1998\nSubject: Clarification of 49CFR, 178.166(e)(4)(ii)\n49CFR, 173.24(f)\nDear Mr. Mazzullo,\nI would like to get a clarification and interpretation of the above packaging\nstandards. I have attached pictures (with descriptions of the packaging) of\ntwo different styles of packaging.\n.i. S:\nPlease advise if these meet the guidelines of the 49CFR. If in your opinion\nand interpretation, they do not meet the guidelines, what must be changed\nto meet your interpretations of the standards.\nThank you for your assistance in this matter,\nSincerely,\nEdiP. lemeles\nEdwin C. Amsler\nOperations Specialist/Safety Coordinator\nAttach: Pictures with explanations of packaging\n(Attach: 1 and 1A)\n(Attach: 2 and 2A)\n100 N. MITSUBISHI MOTORWAY\nNORMAL, IL 61761\n(309) 888-8000\n\n<<>>\n\nDoes this meet the requirements of 49CFR 178.166(e)(4)(ii)?\nPlease note that each container does not have a lid. We place the\ncontainers on top of each other and then put a top cap on the skid.\nIt is then banded twice in both directions.\n21. 1:\nAttachment #1\n\n<<>>\n\nNOTE:\nContainers do not\nhave individual\nlids. Containers\nare stacked on top\nNE\nof each other to\nform a covering.\nTop cap is placed\non top and banded\ntwice in both\ndirections\n\n<<>>\n\nNOTE:\nTies are not inserted\ninto lids.\nDoes this package meet the guidelines of the 49 CFR 173.24(f)?\nAttAchment# 2\n\n<<>>\n\nNOTE:\nLids are not tied down\nwith tie downs\nAttachment # 2-A","truncated":false,"body_characters":4647}