{"operation":"document","citation":"05-0208","title":"American Pyrotechnics Association — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2006-04-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"05-0208 response to American Pyrotechnics Association concerning 172.202.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0208.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0208.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0208","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2005/050208.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nHazardous Materials Safety\nPipeline and\nAdministration\nAPR 19 2006\nMs. Julie L. Heckman\nReference No.: 05-0208\nExecutive Director\nAmerican Pyrotechnics Associatior\nP.O. Box 30438\nBethesda, MD 20824\nDear Ms. Heckman:\nThis is in response to your letter dated September 7, 2005, regarding the description of\nhazardous materials on shipping papers required under the Hazardous Materials Regulations\n(HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask whether an interpretation could be\nprovided allowing the quantity shown on a shipping paper for an explosive article, such as\nfireworks, to be expressed in terms of a percentage of the gross weight of the product being\nshipped.\nIn your letter you described the following:\nThe fireworks industry generally does not use the measure of net explosive\nmass. Because compatible assortments of fireworks are packaged in a single\npackaging for a typical display, companies generally use the gross weight of the\nproduct being shipped. It is extremely difficult for the fireworks industry to\ndetermine net explosive mass. Similarly, it is very difficult for companies to\ndetermine the net explosive mass in a product. For this reason, the American\nPyrotechnics Association (APA) petitioned the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco &\nFirearms (ATF) who issued a memorandum for determining the weight of\nexplosive materials in display shells and cakes. The memorandum states that, for\nDivision 1.3G aerial display shells, the weight of explosive materials should be\ncalculated as 50 percent of the total weight of the completed firework and for\nfireworks items such as cakes the weight of explosive materials should be\ncalculated as 25 percent of the total weight of the completed firework.\nThe answer is no. As provided in § 172.202(a)(5)(i), for an explosive article the quantity shown\non a shipping paper may be expressed in terms of the net mass of the article or the net mass of\nthe explosive substances in the article. Changing this requirement in the way requested would\nrequire a regulatory change or Special Permit rather than an interpretation. Further, we believe\nthe option allowing an individual to express the quantity on a shipping paper for an explosive\narticle in terms of the net mass of the article or the net mass of the explosive substances in the\narticle provides flexibility to the regulated community and has worked well for transportation.\nIt allows a conservative estimate of explosive mass unless the more precise quantity of net mass\nof explosive substances, which is available from the explosives approval process, is provided.\n172.202 4510)\n050208\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nBased on our review of the ATF memorandum, it is the opinion of this office that expressing\nthe quantity shown on a shipping paper for an explosive article in terms of a percentage of the\ngross weight of the product shipped could pose certain risks during transportation that do not\nexist during storage. For example, this methodology has the potential of underestimating the\nactual hazard of the article because estimates rather than known quantities are used for net mass\nof explosive substances. Such errors may be more critical in transportation where exposure to\nhazards is greater, with resultant increased risk to the public, transportation workers, or\nemergency response personnel. Any petition for rulemaking or request for Special Permit\nshould address these issues and provide sufficient rationale for the change to or deviation from\ncurrent regulatory requirements.\nI trust this information is helpful.\nSincerely,\nEcuand 7. Mazzullo\nEdward T. Mazzullo\nDirector, Office of Hazardous\nMaterials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nBetts\n3172.202()6)\nSeptember 7, 2005\nMs. Susan Gorsky\nShipping Papers\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\n05-0208\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nRe: Interpretation regarding Part 172.202(a)(5), Description of Hazardous Materials on\nShipping Papers\nDear Ms. Gorsky:\nAs a follow up to our recent meeting, I am writing to you seeking a formal interpretation\ninvolving the implementation of 49 CFR Part 172.202(a)(5), Description of Hazardous Materials\non Shipping Papers, as revised by Federal Register Notice issued December 20, 2004. 69 Fed.\nReg. 76153 (2004)\nAs you know, under the revised language in Part 172.202(a)(5), shippers of class 1 materials\n(explosives) may now either provide the net explosive mass of the product, or in the case of\nsmall articles, they may provide the net explosive material in the product. In our discussions, you\nagreed that all class 1.4G items would be small articles. I suspect that most class 1.3G items,\nparticularly after the larger shells are moved to class 1.1G, would be considered small articles as\nwell. In any case, the fireworks industry generally does not use the measure of net explosive\nmass. Because compatible assortments of fireworks are packaged in a single box for a typical\ndisplay, companies generally use the gross weight of the product being shipped. It is extremely\ndifficult for the fireworks industry to determine net explosive mass. At best, our members would\nbe guessing the net explosive mass.\nSimilarly, it is very difficult for companies to determine the net explosive material in a product.\nFor this reason, many years ago, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms (ATF) issued an\ninterpretation that for class 1.3G aerial display shells, companies should use 50% of the gross\nweight of the product as a measure of the net explosive material (pyrotechnic material) in the\nproduct. For class 1.4G consumer fireworks items, companies have used 25% of the gross\nweight of the product, which is definitely a high measure for most 1.4G consumer items. The\n25% figure would also apply to 1.4G and 1.4S Articles Pyrotechnic, (for professional use only\nitems). And finally, class 1.3G multi-shot cake, candle and box items would also use the 25% net\nexplosive material figure.\nThe APA respectfully requests that PHMSA accede to this ATF interpretation, which is\nrationally based and provides the agency and first responders with a very accurate measure of the\nnet explosive material in a truck or trailer. The ATF interpretation has been in place for over\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nMs. Gorsky\nSeptember 7, 2005\nPage 2\n13 years and is universally recognized by the fireworks industry. It also would not be difficult\nfor PHMSA to communicate this policy to its inspectors by email. It is a very simple\ninterpretation.\nOtherwise, the fireworks industry will be forced to declared two different measures of explosive\ncontent - one for ATF and one for PHMSA. That does not make any sense.\nThank you for consideration of our request.\nYours truly,\nAmerican Pyrotechnics Association\nJulie L. Heckman\nExecutive Director\nCc: David H. Baker, Esq.","truncated":false,"body_characters":6894}