{"operation":"document","citation":"05-0210","title":"Sandia National Laboratories — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2006-02-06","effective_on":null,"summary":"05-0210 response to Sandia National Laboratories concerning 173.1, 173.476.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0210.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0210.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0210","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2005/050210.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nFEB 6 2006\nMr. Leighton Ford\nRef. No. 05-0210\nSandia National Laboratories\n7011 East Avenue MS9221\nLivermore, CA 94550\nDear Mr. Ford:\nThis is in response to your electronic mail requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) pertaining to the classification of\nhazardous materials. You state that you cannot recall the classification of the materials\nwhen received by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and that SNL plans to transport\nthe materials for disposal. Specifically, you ask whether the materials meet the definition\nfor a Class 1 (explosive) or Class 3 (flammable) material and you request assistance in\nassigning proper shipping names. You also ask whether the materials are allowed any\nexceptions under the HMR based on the small amount of explosive material in each\ncomposition, and whether there is a percentage threshold of diluent that would allow SNL\nto reclassify the materials without submitting an approval request to the U.S. Department\nof Transportation (DOT).\nAll new compositions containing any amount of explosive material must be classed by\nDOT, including compositions of diluted (desensitized) explosives. Prior to transport, a\nwritten approval and an assigned EX number must be obtained from DOT. If you do not\nhave access to the EX number or documentation of the DOT classification for the\nmaterial that you received, or if a change in the formulation, design, or process alters the\nproperties of the material, the material is considered to be a new explosive and must be\ntested. If you determine that the material may not meet the definition for Class 1\n(explosive) under Subpart C of Part 173, you may include the data with your written\nrequest for classification, as specified in §173.56(i), to the Associate Administrator, U.S.\n173.1\n173:476\n050210\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nDOT, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Special Permits\nand Approvals, PHH-32, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, DC 20590.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact this office if you have additional\nquestions.\nSincerely,\nHattie L. Mitchell\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nThe InfoCenter received that following Interp request via\ne-mail.\nThank you!\n05.0210\nJessica\n-----Original Message-- - - -\nFrom: 1ford@sandia.gov\n[mailto:lford@sandia.gov]\nSent: Friday, August 26, 2005 2:22 PM\nSubject: Information Center Comments/Questions\nTo: INFOCNTR < PHMSA>\nBelow\nis the result of your feedback form.\nLeighton Ford (1ford@sandia.gov) on Friday, August 26, 2005 at\nIt was submitted by\n14:21:46.\nEmail: lford@sandia.gov\nName:\nLeighton Ford\nCategory:\nShippers-General Requirements for Shipments and Packagings (Sections 173.1 -\n173.476)\nOrganization:\nSandia National Laboratories\nStreet: 7011 East Avenue MS9221\nCity:\nLivermore\nState: California\nZip Code:\nPhone:\n925-294-4506\nFax:\n925-294-3418\nComments: Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo\nDirector, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\n400 7th Street S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590-0001\n'Dear Mr. Mazzullo,\nthat we would like :o dispose of.\nThe intent of this letter is to request a proper shipping name for the following material\nI am getting all kinds of advice fru? across the\nthe following material\ncountry as to whether or not the material these standards to be used as a baseline\nthere is no explosive characteristic but rather just a flammable solution per se.\nreference for analysis meets the definition of an explosive or because of the percentages,\nsercentages,\nlight of all of the advice that I find invaluable; i.e., 10% rule,\n...what happens if the\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nRDX, Trinitrobenzene solution (.018) in Acetonitrile (99.9%).\nampoule in one box.\n5) 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (.01%) in Acetonitrile (99.9%).\n1- 1 ml ampoule with no box.\n6) Tetryl (.01%) in Acetontitrile (99.9%).\n2- 1ml ampoules with no box.\nHow we classify these materials for disposal will dictate how we are able to handle them\nat our facility and how we\nare to transport them in accordance with all applicable DOT\nregulations. I Considering the quantities involved are we provided relief from any of the\nHMR requirements? Is there a percentage threshold of diluent in the standard that would\nallow us to reclassify the material under a different shipping name without the need to\nseek an EX letter should the material be classified as an explosive? 3 When SNL/CA received\nthe material I cannot recall that the material was shipped to us as an explosive material.\nRather,\nWith\nthis in mind, is there\nI am under the impression that the standard came to us as a flammable liquid.\nshipping standards such\nas these.\nThank you ahead of time for your time and consideration.\nSincerely,\njeighton Ford\nvaste Management\n3NL/ CA\nlivermore.","truncated":false,"body_characters":4822}