{"operation":"document","citation":"05-0145","title":"MHF Logistical Solutions — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2005-07-01","effective_on":null,"summary":"05-0145 response to MHF Logistical Solutions concerning 173.401.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0145.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0145.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0145","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2005/050145.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nPipeline and\nAdministration\nHazardous Materials Safety\nJUL\n1 2005\nMr. Kurt Colborn\nRef. No. 05-0145\nDirector, Technical Services\n300 Cranberry Woods Drive\nMHF Logistical Solutions\nSuite 450\nCranberry Township, PA 16066\nDear Mr. Colborn,\nThis responds to your June 7, 2005, letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to radioactive materials.\nSpecifically, you ask if waste material transported from a defunct tungsten processing\nfacility satisfies the exception for natural material and ores in § 173.401. You state that\nthe material contains natural uranium and thorium, which represent the residual natural\nactivity remaining after the tungsten extraction process. Based on your calculations, the\nmaximum activity level of the material is less than or equal to 9 times the exemption\nlimits in § 173.436. The material is being transported for disposal and will not be\nprocessed for use of the radionuclides.\nSection 173.401(b)(4) provides an exception from Part 173, Subpart I for natural material\nand ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides if: (1) the material is not intended\nto be processed for use of these radionuclides; and (2) the activity concentration of the\nmaterial does not exceed 10 times the exemption limits specified in § 173.436.\nIn order to determine whether the material to be shipped satisfies the conditions in\n§ 173.401(b)(4) to be exempt from Class 7 transport requirements, one must compare the\nactual activity concentration of the material (defined as the sum of the activity\nconcentrations of the parents, i.e., of U238,\n8, Th232\n, and K*° in your case) with 10 times the\ncalculated activity concentration limit for the mixture. The calculated activity\nratios by dividing the fractions of the actual U238\nconcentration limit for the mixture, as described for Um. Thy 6), requires that one form\n(for Thnat), and K40\nconcentrations by the individual exemption activity concentrations for Unat, Thna, and K*D\nlisted in § 173.436. The sum of these ratios is to be used in the expression in\n§ 173.433(d)(6) to determine the calculated activity concentration limit for the mixture.\nIf the activity concentration of the material is less than 10 times the calculated activity\nconcentration limit for the mixture, then the material meets the exception in\n§ 173.401(b)(4).\n173.401 (b)4)\n050145\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nNote that, the exception in § 173.401(b)(4) provides relief from the requirements of Part\nClass 9 (Miscellaneous hazardous material) if it meets the definition of a hazardous\n173, Subpart I for radioactive materials. However, your material may be regulated as a\nsubstance, hazardous waste or marine pollutant in § 171.8.\nI hope this information is helpful.\nSincerely,\nDise Dry\nfr Chief, Standards Development\n'John A. Gale\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nElchenlaub\n3113.40164)\nRAM\nPIOGISTICAI SOLUTIONS\n05. 0145\n800 Cranberry Woods Drive, Suite 450, Cranberry Township, PA16066724.772.9800F724.772.9850 www.mhils.com\nMr. Edward Mazzullo\nDirector of Hazmat Standards\nUSDOT/RSPA DHM-10 Suite 8422\n400 7\" Street, SW\nWashington, DC 20590-3012\nJune 10, 2005\nSUBJECT: Interpretation for the Natural Material Exemption of 49 CFR 173.401(b)(4)\nDear Mr. Mazzullo,\nThe purpose of this letter is to request confirmation of the applicability of the natural\nmaterials exemption of 49 CFR 173.401(b)(4). Please confirm or clarify our\nunderstanding of the exemption. We believe the information in this letter provides a\nbasis for US DOT compliant shipping of materials from a defunct tungsten processing\nfacility. Natural uranium and thorium are present in the materials, which represent the\nresidual natural activity remaining after the tungsten extraction process. Hence, the most\nattractive, and most directly applicable shipping option is to ship under the new\nexemption in 49 CFR 173.401(b)(4) which exempts from regulation some natural\nmaterial and ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides.\nBasis for Applicability of Exemption: The historical analytical data from the site\nindicate that maximum activity levels are generally 1.0 to 4.0 times, and in no case more\nconcentration limits for That, Unat, and K*° in 173.436). The That and U'nat are present as\nthan 9 times the exemption limit for the materials (when evaluated against the\nnatural components of the processed tungsten ore. The K*® is present at levels averaging\n<10 pCi/g; and is believed to be of natural origin [natural levels of K* range from 0 to 30\npCi/g; so concentrations in the material for shipment are at the low end of the naturally\nexpected range]. We believe the materials meet the requirements of 49 CFR\n173.401(b)(4) which exempts\nnatural material and ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides which are\nnot intended to be processed for use of these radionuclides, provided the activity\nconcentration does not exceed 10 times the values specified in 173.436.\nThe history of the site suggests the contamination is from naturally-occurring\nradionuclides that remain from activities related to tungsten extraction; not as a result of\nactivity designed to extract radionuclides. Further, the materials are being shipped as\nwaste for disposal; hence, no future extraction of radionuclides is planned.\n- 1-\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nThe preamble to the new regulation states it is \"intended to exempt ores and materials\nthat contain naturally occurring radionuclides, but whose benefits lie in their non-\nradiological qualities (such as... non-radioactive metals...)\". These materials were\nprocessed to extract non-radioactive metals, and have never been subjected to any known\nprocessing related to their radionuclide content. Hence the 10x exemption appears to\napply, and the materials appear exempt from DOT classification as radioactive material.\nThe exemption does not specifically mention waste products, but it seers reasonable to\nexpect that the waste materials from beneficial extraction of non-radioactive metals\nwould qualify for the exemption, since the intent of the regulation is to permit their\n\"continued use in commerce without making their use economically unfeasible\".\nAdditional support of the applicability of the 10x concentration exemption can be found\nin the IAEA Advisory Guide paragraph 107.4. This guidance explains that the IAEA\nregulations now reflected in 49 CFR do not apply to other [non-fuel cycle] ores which\nmay contain naturally occurring radionuclides or processed materials... where the\nprocessing was not for the purpose of extracting radionuclides. Finally, the 2007\nproposed language for TS-R-1 offers clarification that the exemption applies to post-\nprocessed material, stating the exemption applies to materials that \"have only been\nprocessed for purposes other than extraction of the radionuclides, and which are not\nintended to be processed for the use of these radionuclides\".\nDetermining Concentration for Comparison to Exemption Values from Data: Isotopic\ndata froz he is and Us petroscopy data reported as The\nas 233/234\n°, and Th??; as well\n; U 235/236\n. Based on the Table in 49 CFR 173.436 and its associated\nfootnotes, concentrations can be assessed as follows:\n• Unat activity is the lab reported U238 activity\n• That activity is the lab reported Th232 activity\n• K* activity is as reported for K40\n49 CFR 173.436 lists decay chains in footnote (b). We understand from the table that\nactivity is already considered in the Unat exemption values, along with Th?230.\naddition, Th?\" activity is considered in the That exemption values. Hence, the reported\nactivity of these isotopes (U234\n, and Th?28) need not be added to the activity of the\nisotopes we consider in our determination of Unat and That activity in the bullets above.\nThe U235 contribution to Unar activity is considered negligible.\nThe Unat, Thnat, and K4° concentrations will each be compared to the individual exemption\nvalues for these materials as listed in 173.436. The sum of the fractions of these\ncomparisons will then be used to determine if the material meets the 10x concentration\nrequirement for exemption in 49 CFR 173.401(b)(4).\n- 2-\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nSummary: This letter requests confirmation of our regulatory interpretation that the\nmaterials described herein and destined for disposal, are exempt from regulation in\naccordance with 49 CFR 173.401(b)(4).\nPlease feel free to contact me at (724) 772-9800, ext. 5560 if you have any questions\nabout this request. Thank you for your assistance.\nRespectfully submitted,\nLou\nKurt Colborn\nDirector, Technical Services\nMHF Logistical Solutions\n- 3-","truncated":false,"body_characters":8715}