{"operation":"document","citation":"98-0600","title":"Regulatory Compliance Services — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1998-03-24","effective_on":null,"summary":"98-0600 response to Regulatory Compliance Services concerning 173.304.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0600.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0600.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0600","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980600.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S.Department\nof Transportation\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashingion, D.C.\nResearch and\nSpecial Programs\nAdministration\nMAR 2 4 1998\nMr. R. J. Reynolds\nRegulatory Compliance Services\n5437 Adventure Drive\nDublin, Ohio 43017\nDear Mr. Reynolds:\nI have been requested by Acting Research and Special Programs Administrator Kelley Coyner to\nreply to your letter concerning industrial aerosols packaged in cylinders and using isobutane or\npropane as propellants. You request information as to how such products would be classified\nand shipped under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180).\nIn your letter and in telephone conversations with my staff, you described two products that\nwould be packaged in DOT Specification 39 cylinders (up to 1,500 cubic inch capacity) and used\nas industrial aerosols. Product A consists of 85 percent water, 10 percent non-hazardous\nsurfactants, and 5 percent isobutane or propane used as propellant. Product B consists of 48\n:\npercent methylene chloride, 25 percent non-hazardous resins and polymers, and 27 percent\nisobutane or propane used as propellant. Your specific questions about these two products are\naddressed below.\nQ1.\nIs testing under § 173.306(i)(2) applicable for this type of application?\nAl.\nNo. The flammability tests specified in § 173.306(i) are required for aerosols shipped\nunder the limited quantity provisions of § 173.306. Since your client's products do not\nmeet the criteria for shipment as limited quantities, their flammability may not be\ndetermined using the test specified in § 173.306(i)(2).\nQ2.\nAre the products as a whole considered Division 2.1 materials since the propellants are\n2.1 materials?\nA2.\nNo, Products A and B would not be classified as Division 2.1 materials solely because the\npropellants are Division 2.1 materials. Your client must determine the correct hazard\nlass of each product in the form it will be offered for transportation. If Products A and I\nmeet the definition specified in § 173.115(a) for Division 2.1, Flammable Gas, then they\nmust be classified as Division 2.1 materials.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nQ3.\nIf Spec 39 cylinders are used for these products, are they limited to 75 cubic inches?\nA3.\nSection 173.304(d)(3)(i) limits the internal volume for a DOT Specification 39 cylinder\nused to transport liquefied petroleum gas to 75 cubic inches. This limitation applies to\npure liquefied petroleum gas or to mixtures that have the characteristics of liquefied\npetroleum gas. If your client's products have the characteristics of liquefied petroleum\ngas, as determined by testing, then the internal volume limitation of § 173.304(d)(3)(i)\nwill apply.\nQ4.\nAre there any exemptions in use that may be applicable to these types of shipments?\nA4. No, a search of our exemptions data base found no current exemptions applicable to\naerosols shipped in DOT Specification 39 cylinders and using propane or isobutane as\npropellants.\n• relati dimini\nI hope this information is helpful. If you need anything further, please do not hesitate to contact\nme.\n1\nSincerely,\nAlan I. Roberts\nAssociate Administrator for\nHazardous Materials Safety\n..... headam imming.\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nRegulatory\n•\nCompliarice\nServices\nRobert J. Reynolds\nConsultant\nFebruary 24, 1998\nAdministrator, RSPA\nU.S. Department of Transportation\n400 7* Street SW\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nI am a consultant working with a small formulator of industrial cleaning compounds.\nI would like your assistance in determining whether a certain industry practice is in\ncompliance with DOT regulations.\nMy client has two products, similar to competitor products, that he would like to\npackage in DOT 39 cylinders (up to 1500 cu. in. capacity). The cylinders would be\nused as industrial size aerosols. Other specification cylinders are too costly for use\nas a disposable container. The composition of the two products are:\n• PRODUCT A\n•:\n. =\nwater - 85%\nsurfactants - 10% (non-hazardous)\nisobutane or propane - 5%.\nPRODUCT B\nmethylene chloride - 48% (Division 6.1, PG I||)\nresins and polymers - 25% (non-hazardous)\nisobutane or propane - 27%\nThe isobutane and propane, in both products, are used only as propellants. They are\nnot dissolved in the solution. Carbon dioxide and other non-flammable gases cause\nquality problems with the product.\nPropane and isobutane are both classified as Division 2.1 flammable gases as defined\nin 173.115. They are not dissolved in the remainder of the product.\nAlthough the containers are used as aerosols and charged to only 50-75 psig, they\n:\ndo not meet the limited quantity criteria of 173.306. The cylinder is fitted with a dip\ntube inhibiting the propellant form being expelled unless the container is operated\nwhile inverted or it is almost empty.\n5437 Advanture Drive • Dublin, OH 43017-3021 • Phone: (614) 766-1060 • Fax: (614) 760-1459\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n•\nMy advice originally was that if flammable gases, such as propane or isobutane were\nto be used, the container size would be limited to 75 cubic inches [173.302(a)(4)].\nUnfortunately, it is a common industry practice to use isobutane or propane as the\npropellent. Some competitors use a flammable gas label; others ship as non-regulated\nbecause the products are not flammable according to tests conducted under\n173.306(i)(2).\nCan you please provide responses to the following questions:\n1)\nIs testing under 173.306(i)(2) applicable for this type of application?\n2)\nAre the products, as a whole, considered Division 2. 1 materials since the\npropellants are 2.1 materials?\n3)\nIf Spec 39 cylinders are used for these products, are they limited to 75\ncubic inches?\n4)\nof shipments?\nAre there any exemptions in use that may be applicable to these types\nMy client, in his desire to be in compliance with all applicable regulations, is at a\nsevere competitive disadvantage until this issue is resolved.\nThank you for your help in this matter.\nSincere\nR/S. Reynolds","truncated":false,"body_characters":5913}