You are here

Interpretation Response #15-0026

Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 03-17-2015
Company Name: Arkema Inc.    Individual Name: Ms. Christina Kurtz
Location state: PA    Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

March 17, 2015

Ms. Christina M. Kurtz
Manager, Regulations and Packaging
Arkema Inc.
900 First Avenue
King of Prussia, PA  19406

Reference No. 15-0026

Dear Ms. Kurtz:

This is in response to your January 20, 2015 letter proposing a revision to § 172.303(b) of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180).  You believe that the current language of the exception in § 172.303(b) relating to prohibited marking, where each of the sub-paragraphs (1), (2) and (3) are independent conditions is not correct.  You suggest the language should be changed to require that all conditions must be met for the exception to apply, consistent with the requirements of § 172.401(d) relating to prohibited labeling.

It is the position of this Office that the current language of§ 172.303(b) is correct.  Unlike
§ 172.401(d) where all three conditions must be met for the exception to apply, the intent of § 172.303(b) is for the exception to apply if any of the three conditions is met.

I trust this information is helpful and thank you for bringing this concern to my attention. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.


Duane A. Pfund
International Standards Coordinator
Standards and Rulemaking Division

172.303(b), 172.401(d)

Regulation Sections

Section Subject
§ 172.401 Prohibited labeling