{"operation":"document","citation":"08-0012","title":"Utah Division of Radiation Control — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2008-05-07","effective_on":null,"summary":"08-0012 response to Utah Division of Radiation Control concerning 173.22, 173.433.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0012.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0012.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0012","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2008/080012.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nMr. Boyd Imai\nUtah Division of Radiation Control\n168 North 1950 West\nSalt Lake City, UT 841 16\nRef. No.: 08-0012\nDear Mr. Imai:\nThis is in response to your January 3,2008 letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-1 80) applicable to Class 7 (radioactive)\nmaterials. Specifically, you ask several questions concerning the requirements for a closed\ntransport vehicle used solely for the transport of radioactive materials in accordance with\n§ 173.443(d). Your questions are paraphrased and answered below:\nQ1. Is an empty transport vehicle used in accordance with 5 173.443(d) subject to the HMR?\nAl. To determine the applicability of the HMR to an empty transport vehicle with a\nradioactive substance distributed on its surface, it must first be determined whether the total\nactivity present exceeds the activity limit for an exempt consignment, as listed in $ 173.436\nor calculated in accordance with $ 173.433. If the total activity is greater than the activity\nlimit for an exempt consignment, the empty transport vehicle would be subject to the HMR\nas a Class 7 hazard; otherwise it would not.\nQ2. Would DOT assume an empty transport vehicle used in accordance with is subject to the HMR?\n173.443(d),\nA2. See Al.\n43. How can a shipper demonstrate an empty transport vehicle used in accordance with\n$ 173.443(d), does not meet the definition of a Class 7 (radioactive) material?\nA3. Measurements performed with an appropriate instrument in conjunction with\ncalculations or reasoned evaluation, using reliable and conservative procedures and\nparameters may be used to determine the level of radioactive substances distributed on the\ntransport vehicle.\n\n<<>>\n\n44. If the transport vehicle is subject to the HMR, what proper shipping name should be\nused?\nA4. Under 8 173.22, it is the shipper's responsibility to properly class and describe a\nhazardous material.\nQ5. If no measurement of residual radioactive material remaining in an empty transport\nvehicle subject to 8 173.443(d) is taken and the transport vehicle is subject to the shipping\npaper requirements, what activities can be assigned in order to comply with 8 172.203(d)?\nA5. The shipper must determine how much activity, and of which radionuclides are present,\nbased on calculations or reasoned evaluation, using reliable and conservative procedures and\nparameters before completing a shipping paper. Situations may exist when these methods are\nnot sufficient and physical measurements must be performed.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you require additional assistance.\nSincerely,\nRegulations Specialist\nStandards\n\n<<>>\n\nPage 1 of 2\nDrakeford, Carolyn -* -- --.-,- .\"--- - ---- * .---*-- -\nFrom: INFOCNTR Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1 1 :04 AM To: Drakeford, Carolyn \nSubject: FW: 49 CFR 173.443(d) Interpretation\nCarolyn, please make this an Interp letter request, thanks!\n31730q03\n0 \\13.~(43& .\nM f i ; f 7 6 f l\nmF-L)olz\nFrom: Mark Ledoux [mailto:mledoux@energysolutions.com]\nSent: Thursday, January 03,2008 1:04 PM\nTo: Boyd Imai; INFOCNTR \nCc: John Hultquist; Tye Rogers; Allan Erichsen; Jeff Gardner\nSubject: RE: 49 CFR 173.443(d) Interpretation\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Boyd Imai [n~ailto:bimai@utah.~o~v]\nSent: Thursday, January 03,2008 10:35 AM\nTo: infocntr@dot.gov\nCc: Mark Ledoux; John Hultquist\nSubject: 49 CFR 173.443(d) Interpretation\nIn accordance with 49 CFR 105.20(a)(2) the State of Utah, Division of\nRadiation Control (DRC) requests that several issues regarding the\napplication of 49 CFR 173.443(d) provisions be interpreted.\n49 CFR 173.443(d) states:\nParagraphs (b) and (c) of this section do not apply to any closed\ntransport vehicle used solely for the transportation by highway or rail\nof Class 7 (radioactive) material packages with contamination levels\nthat do not exceed 10 times the levels prescribed in paragraph (a) of\nthis section if-\n(1) A survey of the interior surfaces of the empty vehicle shows\nthat the radiation dose rate at any point does not exceed 0.12 mSv per\nhour (10 mrem per hour) at the surface or 0.02 mSv per hour (2 mrem per\nhour) at 1 m (3.3 feet) from the surface;\n(2) Each vehicle is stenciled with the words \"For Radioactive\nMaterials Use Only\" in letters at least 76 millimeters (3 inches) high\nin a conspicuous place on both sides of the exterior of the vehicle; and\n(3) Each vehicle is kept closed except for loading or unloading.\nWith respect to this provision please address the following questions:\n1) When shipping the empty closed transport vehicle is the shipment\nexcepted from 49 CFR Part 172 requirements (all or in part)?\n2) Is there any DOT assumption that the empty closed transport vehicle\nandlor the residues contained within are not Radioactive Material as\ndefined in 49 CFR 173.403?\n\n<<>>\n\nPage 2 of 2\n3) How can a shipper demonstrate that the empty transport vehicle and/or\nresidues do not meet the defmition of a Class 7, radioactive material?\n4) If 49 CFR 172 Subpart C shipping papers are required, what proper\nshipping name should be used?\nCan/should the shipper designate the proper shipping name that was used\nto describe the initial shipment of Class 7 material (the material\ntransported by the conveyance before it was emptied)? Can/should\nprovisions in 172.203(e) be applied? Or is there a more preferred\nproper shipping name for this shipment, e.g. Radioactive Material,\nSurface Contaminated Object?\n5) Assuming no assay of any residual material is performed and no\nmeasurement is taken of the amount of material left in the conveyance\nafter being emptied, and if the shipment of an empty \"For Radioactive\nMaterials Use Only\" conveyance is not excepted from shipping paper\nrequirements, e.g. a limited quantity of radioactive material, what\nactivities can be assigned in order to comply with 49 CFR 172.203(d)(3)?\nThe DRC has immediate concerns in this regard and respectfully requests\na response as soon as possible.\nFor your convenience, a copy of this request is attached as a MS Word\ndocument. If you have any questions about this request please contact\nme. Thank you very much.\nBoyd Imai\nUtah Division of Radiation Control\n168 North 1950 West\nSalt Lake City, UT 841 16\nDivision Phone No.: (801) 536-4250\nDirect Phone Line: (801) 536-0038\nFax: (801) 533-4097","truncated":false,"body_characters":6502}