{"operation":"document","citation":"02-0047","title":"RWE Solutions — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2002-05-10","effective_on":null,"summary":"02-0047 response to RWE Solutions concerning 173.435.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0047.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0047.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0047","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2002/020047.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nof Transportation\nU.S. Department\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nResearch and\nMAY 10 2002\nAdministration\nSpec|al Programs\nMr. Stanley H. Hodges\nRWE Solutions\nRef. No.: 02-0047\n3800 Fernandina Road\nSuite 200\nColumbia, SC 29210-3854\nDear Mr. Hodges:\nThis is in response to your letter dated January 25, 2002, requesting clarification of the\nprovisions in § 173.435 regarding the proper methodology and A2 values that should be utilized\nfor transport calculations for uranium radioisotopes under the Hazardous Materials Regulations\n(HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180).\nQ1: When calculating transport parameters for waste materials that contain uranium isotopes,\nwhen should we utilize the individual radionuclide Az Values vs. the Az values delineated\nfor the uranium on an enrichment basis [e.g. natural uranium, enriched uranium ≤ 5%) or\ndepleted uranium]?\nAl:\nIn § 173.403, Natural uranium (U(nat)) is defined as \"uranium with the naturally\noccurring distribution of uranium isotopes.\" Depleted uranium (U(depleted) is \"uranium\ncontaining less uranium-235 (U-235) than the naturally occurring distribution of uranium\nisotopes.\" Similarly, enriched uranium (U(enriched)) contains more U-235 than the\nnaturally occurring distribution of uranium isotopes. Not said, but implied, is that\nU(depleted) or U(enriched) are uranium with the natural occurring distribution of\nuranium isotopes that has then been processed to reduce or increase the amount of U-235.\nhigher enrichments are reached.\nThis process will also gradually change the fractions of other uranium isotopes present, as\nBecause of the above definitions, whenever radioisotopes of other elements are present in\nthe material to be transported, the A value to be used to determine the appropriate\npackaging requirements is the effective A, value for the mixture, using the formula in\n§ 173.433(d)(2) and using as input for that formula the fractional activities and the Az\nvalues of the individual nuclides present.\nIn general, that includes the A2 values of the various uranium isotopes which may be\npresent. An exception may be made if it is clear from process knowledge that none of the\nuranium in the waste material came from uranium enriched to greater than 5% by mass of\nU-235, and that none of the uranium present had previously been irradiated (reprocessed).\nIn that case, when applying the mixture formula, an unlimited Az value may be assumed\nfor all isotopes of uranium present.\n173.435\n020047\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n•\nQ2:\nSince my waste does not contain U-230, U-232 and U-233, would these isotopes also be\ntreated in a similar manner, if they were present?\nA2: No. Since these isotopes are not normally present in measurable quantities in natural\nuranium or uranium enriched to less than 5% by mass of U-235, if they are detected, the\nfractional activity of each, divided by each respective A, value, should be used in the\nmixture formula.\nQ3:\nIf analytical data are not available for the individual uranium radionuclides, can we use\nthe values based on enrichment or do we need to obtain additional analytical data to\ndetermine the uranium isotopic distribution in the package waste?\nA3:\nIf it is known that all uranium in the waste had the same enrichment, standard activity\nratios for each of the uranium isotopes present for that enrichment may be assumed. I\nIetermine fee rahas experimentalyichment is present in the waste, it is preferable to\nI hope this information is helpful.\nSincerely,\nHattie L. Mitchell, Chief\nRegulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n;\nFEB. 7.2002\n4:25PM\nNO. 987\nP.2\nBetts\n5173.435\nRAM\nRVE\n02-0047\nSolutions\nJanuary 25, 2002\nMI. Edward T. Mazzullo\nU.S. DOT/RSPA (DHM-10)\nDirector, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\n400 7th Street S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\nSubject:\nUranium Isotope A, Values for Transport Calculations\n49 CFR 173.435 Clarification Request - Proper Soloction of\nDear Mr. Mazzullo:\n/This letter is being written to you to request written clarification on the proper\nUranium radioisotopes.\nmethodology and Az values that should be utilized for DOT transport calculations for\nThe table following the text of this letter is an excerpt from the Code of Fedoral\nRegulations Title 49 Section 173.435 entitled \"Table of Al and Az Values for\nhe individual uranium radionuclidos in addition to limits based on its enrichment.\nRadionuclides\", The element Uranium has individual A, and Ag limits delineated fo:\nWhen calculating transport parameters for waste matorials that contain uranium\nvalues delineated for the uranium on an enrichment basis [e.g. U (natural), I\nsotopes, when should we utilize the individual radionuclide Az values vs. the A\n(enriched ≤ 5%), U (enriched > 5%) or U (depleted)]?\nvalues for uranium on an\nlimit as delineated in 49 CFR 173.425.\nRWE NUKEM Corporation\nutilized the individual uranium values for U-234 and I-236 and an A, value of\nnrichment of 5%. For uranium enrichment percentages greater than 5%, I hac\nCOUT FE 2920-16 200\n60321100\n49CFR173.435.\nMissin Statement:\nIf analytical data is not available for the individual uranium radionuclides, can the\nvalues based on onrichment be used or do we need to obtain additional analytical\ndata to determine the uranium isoropic distribution in the package waste?\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n;\nFEB. 7.2002\n4:25PM\nNO.987\nP.3\nPage 2 of2\nJanuary 25, 2002\nLetter to Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo\nRWE\nSubject: 49 CRR. 173.495 Clarification Request\nSolutions\nI would like to thank you in advance for your attention to this clarification request.\n5848.\nShould you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 803-214\nSincerely,\nDistoff\nSr. Project Manager\nStanley M. Hodges, J.\n49 CHR 173.435 - \"Thble of A, and A, Values for Radionuclides\" (Values for Vinnium Radionuclides)\nRadionuclide\nSymbol of\nElement and\nU-230\nstomic number\nU-233\nU-232\nUranium(92)\nA, (TBg)\n4Q\nAI (Ci)\nA, (T3g)\n38109\nIx10%\n0.270\nA, (Ci)\n(TBg/e) (Cilp)\nSpecifio Activisy\n1030\n5w\n81L\nUnlimited\n270\n1x10\n8.11x10\"\n2.7x10\nU-294\nU-236\nU-235\nUnlimited\n10\n270\nIx10\n2,70x10~\n8.3x10\n2.2x10\nUnlimited\n270\nJnlimitec\n2.70x10*\n3.6x10%\n2.3x101\n62x10%\n2.7x10\"\nUnlimited\n1x10\n8.0x10\n2.4x109\n6.Sx10%\n2.2x10%\nU-238\n1.2x10°\n3.4x10%\nU (narural)\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\n: Unlimited\n2.6x108\n7.1x107\nU (onrichod - 5%\nor less\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\n(sea §173.434)\nthan 5%)\nI (enriched - more\n10\n270\n1x102\n2,70x10°\n(sec §173.434)\nU (depleted)\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\nUnlimited\n(Gcc $173.434)","truncated":false,"body_characters":6507}