{"operation":"document","citation":"98-0514","title":"North American Transportation Consultants, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1998-05-04","effective_on":null,"summary":"98-0514 response to North American Transportation Consultants, Inc. concerning 173.28.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0514.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0514.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0514","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980514.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n•\nUS Deportmens\nof Transportation\n* Sevent Steer $'\nastongion, 0.C 205:\nResearch and\nAdministration\nSpecial Programs\nMAY 4 1998\nMr. J. P. Gibbons, President\nNorth American Transportation Consultants, Inc.\nP.O. Box 1404\nHightstown, NJ 08520\nDear Mr. Gibbons:\nThis is in response to your letter and subsequent telephone calls regarding a regulatory exception\naddressing the reuse of UN certified drums without leakproofness testing under the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180). Specifically you ask for a clarification of\n§ 173.28 (b)(7)(iii).\nThe reuse provisions in § 173.28 require that all packagings and receptacles used more than once\nbe in such condition that they conform in all respects to the HMR. The exception under\n§ 173.28(b)(7) authorizes reuse of a packaging without leakproofness testing provided the\npackaging is:\n(1) refilled with a material which is compatible with the previous lading;\n(2)\nretilled and offered for transportation by the original filler;\n(3)\ntransported in a transport vehicle or freight container under the exclusive use of the\nrefiller of the packaging; and\n(4)\nconstructed of stainless steel, monel or nickel with a thickness not less than 1 ½ times the\nminimum thickness prescribed by § 173.28(b)(4); plastic provided the packaging is not\nrefilled for reuse on a date more than five years from the date of manufacture marked on\nthe packaging; or other packagings as approved by the Associate Administrator for\nHazardous Materials Safety.\nThe exception is intended to apply only to a drum which is in dedicated service and the drum\nmay only be transported in a transport vehicle that does not contain any material offered by\nanyone other than the filler of the drums. \"Exclusive use of the refiller\" as referenced in\n§ 178.28(b)(7)(ii), or dedicated service means only the original filler may refill a drum before\noffering it for transportation to an end user who then returns the drum for refilling. The intent is\nto limit the loading, unloading and handling of the drums. In addition, the transport vehicle may\nnot contain any material offered by anyone other than the filler of the drums.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n..\"\nThe following scenario would qualify for the leakproofness test exception:\nDrums are filled by the original filler and offered for transportation directly to an end user. The\n• end user returns the drums to the original filler. This scenario illustrates a distribution chain\nwithout any other shipper or filler.\nI hope this satisfies your request. Please contact this office if you need additional information.\nsHatte 2. Mithell\nHattie L. Mitchell\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n\".\nmalatyre\nTele: 17328(6)(1)\nNATC\n50394,398\nvi\nJUly 17, 1997\nMr. Edward I. Mazzullo\nRESEARCH\nDirectox, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nU. S. Department of Transportation\nand SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMIN. - DHM-10\nwashington, DC\n400 seventh street, Sw\n20590\nRE: REQUEST FOR INTErPRETATION ON 173.28 (B) (7)\nDear Director Mazzullo:\nRecently a number of shippers have been visited by investigators\nfxom RSPA\nfor plastic drums.\nconcerning the pressure leakproof testing requirements\nparagraph.\nThis, confusion centers on what constitutes compliance\nSome confusion exist concerning the referenced\non center\nwith the phrase in paragraph (111):\n\"under the exclusive use of the refiller of the package\".\nIn the chemical distribution industry,\nfire and safety laws,\ncentralized facilities are used to fill non-\ndue to some state and local\nfor different customers.\nnon-xegulated, is then placed into the\ncontainers and properly\nmarked and identified under the individual customer's name.\npackaged according to applicable\nregulations.\nThe packaging is\nprepared the material is either picked-up by them in theix own\nOnce\nvehicles or by an authorized carrier.\nAccoral degister on page 67399 SPA belloves beat plastic drums\nused in distribution chains controlled by the ofteror can be used\nfederal Register on page 67399,\nappears that the phrase \"under the exclusive use of the refiller\"\nsately without leak testing prior to each reuse\".\nTherefore\nit\nmeans \" in a distribution chain controlled by the offeror\".\nPlease answer the following questions concerning what constitutes a\ndistribution chain controlled by the offeror.\n1. If the filler of the container offers the material as\nagent fox the party which owns the containers then would\nthe party who owns the containers be the offerox ?\n2.\nend user ?\nDoes the distribution chain mean ixom the ¿iller to the\nchain for the purpose of this regulation ?\nIt not then what constitutes a distribution\nNORTH AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.\nYour Total Transportation and Safety Consultants\nPO. Box 1404 • Hightstown, NJ 08520 • 609-426-0555\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nPage 2 of 2\n3.\nSince\nplastic drums by private carrier,\n, the preamble\nidentifies\nthe transportation of\ncommon carxier as authorized, what\nsateguards axe reguired\ncontract\ncarrier,\nto ship under this paragraph of the HMR ?\n4.\nhazardous materials\ntransportation\nwhich was not\nplastic drun\ncontaining\nfilling, be authorized from the fiiler to a warehouse\nleak tested priox to\ndistribution center where\nshort period of time, reloaded onto a transport vehicle\nIt is unloaded,\nstoxed\nand delivered\n173.28 (b) (7) it no other materials were transported which\ncustomer comply with.\ncould damage the plastic drums ?\n5.\nIt the answer to question 4\nand relinate to the same or ake to as seoul\nthen it you reverse\nreferenced section of the HMR ?\nleak testing the drum would you be in compliance with the\ndra gene at Boreand in during the First lo 8\nyears after manufacture ?\nAs mentioned above,\nconcerning the use\nseveral investigations have been conducted\nfilling.\nis associated with this paragraph of the HMR. As it is in the best\nthe investigators and the industry in resolving the confusion which\ninterest of the general public to clarify safety issues without\ndelay I 100k forward to youx reply.\nIf your staff requires additional information or clarification of\nthe information contained within this letter have them contact me\ndirectly at (609) 426-0555.\nfor their assistance in this matter.\nAs always I thank you and your staff\nPresident\nGibbons\ncc: Anthony Lima - RSPA\nNACD Members","truncated":false,"body_characters":6308}