{"operation":"document","citation":"05-0174","title":"National Electrical Manufacturers Association, (NEMA) — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2005-08-17","effective_on":null,"summary":"05-0174 response to National Electrical Manufacturers Association, (NEMA) concerning 173.423.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0174.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0174.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0174","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2005/050174.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nPipeline and\nAdministration\nHazardous Materials Safety\nAUG 1 7 2005\nMr. Mark Kohorst\nReference No. 05-0174\nSenior Manager\nEnvironment, Health and Safety\n1300 North 17' Street, Suite 1847\nNational Electrical Manufacturers Association, (NEMA)\nRosslyn, VA 22209\nDear Mr. Kohorst:\nThis is in response to your July 19, 2005 letter regarding the applicability of the Hazardous\nYou ask for clarification concerning a June 14, 2005 letter (Ref: 05-0086) issued from this\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) to radioactive articles and mercury.\noffice to your company on lamps that contain both mercury and a limited quantity radioactive\nmaterial. Your scenarios and questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:\nQ1. Is the following statement of understanding correct?\n\"If the lighting product contains mercury and qualifies for the exception from\nin such shipment as, \"Mercury contained in manufactured articles, UN2809\";\nthe HMR in § 173.164(b) or (e), we may at our discretion, label each package\nas long as the shipping requirements for multiple hazard, limited quantity,\nClass 7 provisions in § 173.423 are met.\"\nA1. Yes, your understanding is correct.\nQ2. Is the following statement of understanding correct?\n\"If the lighting product contains mercury and does not qualify for the\ninseph shipments Mercury contained in a ve eur bet a pag,\n173.423\n050174\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nClass 7 provisions in § 173.423 are met.\"\nas long as the shipping requirements for multiple hazard, limited quantity,\nA2. Yes, your understanding is correct.\nI hope this information is helpful.\nSincerely,\nSusan corsky\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\nActing Director\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nSatterthwarte\nNETA\n$173.423\nSetting Standards for Excellence\nRAM\n05-0174\nJuly 19, 2005\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\nMs. Susan Gorsky, Acting Director\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nDear Ms. Gorsky:\nThank you for your letter dated 14 June 2005 (Reference No. 05-0086), in response to our\nrequest regarding the applicability of HMR 49 CFR Parts 170 - 180 to radioactive articles and\nmercury. I have replaced Ron Runkles as the liaison for this issue within NEMA and would like\nto verify our interpretation of your answers to the questions Ron posed in his letter to PHMSA\ndated 7 April 2005. Would you please review the following example involving products\ncontaining both radioactive materials and mercury and indicate whether our understanding is\ncorrect?\nEach article contains 60 mg of mercury, packaged at 12 articles per package for a total of 0.72\ngrams of mercury per package. Each article also contains radioactive thorium at 24 Becquerels\nper article, for a total of 288 Becquerels per package. A typical consignment of 48 such\npackages exceeds the activity limit for exempt Class 7, UN2911 consignments.\nAs provided by Answer A2 of your recent response, the shipper may choose to forgo use of the\nnon-mandatory exception of § 173.164(e) for mercury contained in manufactured articles (at less\nthan 1 pound of mercury per package), and may properly mark each package of the consignment\nwith UN2809. The consignment may be properly transported in compliance with § 173.423 for\nmultiple hazard, limited quantity, Class 7 materials.\nSimilarly, if the above consignment were to be shipped by domestic air, the shipper may also\nchoose to forgo use of the non-mandatory exception of § 173.164(b) for mercury contained in\nmercury per package), and mark each package with UN2809. The consignment may be\nmanufactured articles (at less than 100 mg of mercury per article and less than 1 grarn of\nproperly transported in compliance with § 173.423, as long as the phrase \"limited quantity\nradioactive material\" appears on the shipping papers per § 172.204(c).\nNational Electrical\nManufacturers Association\n1300 North 17th Street, Suite 1847\n(703) 841-3200\nRosslyn, VA 22209\nFAX (703) 841-5900\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n• Susan Gorsky\nJuly 19, 2005\nPage 2\nTo summarize,\n1) If the lighting product contains any mercury and qualifies for the exception frorn the HMR\nin 49 CFR 173.164(b) or (e), we may, at our discretion, label each package in such\nshipments as, \"Mercury contained in manufactured articles, UN2809\"; as long as the\nshipping requirements for multiple hazard, limited quantity, Class 7 provisions are met.\n2) If the lighting product contains any mercury and does not qualify for the exception from the\nHMR in 49 CFR 173.164(b) or (e), we must label each package in such shipments as,\n\"Mercury contained in manufactured articles, UN2809\"; again as long as the shipping\nrequirements for multiple hazard, limited quantity, Class 7 provisions are met.\nI would be grateful if you would respond to this letter as soon as it is convenient. I am hoping to\narrange a face-to-face meeting later this summer involving you and me and representatives of the\nNEMA companies most affected by DOT's labeling provisions. One of our planned topics of\ndiscussion will be any remaining uncertainty related to the UN 2809 labeling issue, so it would\nbe helpful to have your answer beforehand. We have more general concerns in this area as well\nand look forward to discussing them with you.\nThank you again for your consideration in this matter.\nSincerely,\nMark Kohorst\nSenior Manager\nEnvironment, Health & Safety","truncated":false,"body_characters":5474}