{"operation":"document","citation":"09-0235","title":"NEMA — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2010-01-08","effective_on":null,"summary":"09-0235 response to NEMA concerning 173.421, 173.424, 173.448.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-09-0235.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-09-0235.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-09-0235","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2009/090235.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Deportment of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue. SE\nwashington, DC 20590\nMr. Craig Updyke\nManager, Trade and Commercial Affairs\nNEMA\n1300 North 17th Street, Suite 1752\nRosslyn, VA 22209\nRef. No.: 09-0235\nDear Mr. Updyke:\nThis responds to your September 30, 2009 letter regarding the applicability ofthe\nHazardous Materials regulations (HMR; 49 CPR parts 171-180) to certain lamps\n(e.g., lighting equipment, including light bulbs), containing small amounts of hazardous\nmaterials, including mercury and/or radioactive isotopes. Specifically, you are seeking\nreaffirmation or an update of:\n• Previous interpretations on this issue provided to your company on June\n14,2005 (Ref. No.05-0086) and August 17,2005 (Ref. No. 05-0174); and\n• An interpretation ofthe labeling requirements for pallet loads of lighting\nproduct marked \"UN 2911\".\nQ1. Is the following statement of understanding correct?\nOn the first point, based on the 2005 letters, NEMA lamp companies understood\nthat exceptions to the HMR are not mandatory. The importance ofthis for\nmanufacturers oflamps containing radioactive materials is that measurements\nneed not be taken to verify whether a package is subject to the exception ifthe\nshipper chooses not to take advantage ofthe exception to the requirement to mark\npackages ofradioactive lamps with \"UN 2911\" without taking measurements of\ntotal radioactivity. In 2005, the companies wanted to make sure that overcomplying\nwould not constitute a compliance problem and were assured by\nPHMSA that it would not. Is that still the case?\nAI. The answers to the questions in the two previous interpretations (Ref No.050086;\n6/14/05 and Ref. No. 05-0174; 8/17/05) provided to your company on this\nissue are still correct.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nAs you are aware, when properly identified as containing limited quantity\namounts ofboth mercury and radioactive isotopes in accordance with §173.423,\nNEMA lamp companies' lighting products must be classed for the additional\nhazard, packaged to confonn with the requirements specified in § 173.421(a)(I)\nthrough (a)(5) or § 173.424(a) through (g), as appropriate, and offered for\ntransportation in accordance with the requirements applicable to the hazard for\nwhich it is classed. Therefore, except for those exceptions pertaining to labeling,\nspecification packaging, and marking, a material offered for transportation as\n\"'Radioactive material, excepted package-instruments or articles, UN 2911\" is\nfully subject to the HMR.\nQ2. Is the following statement of,understanding correct?\nOn the second point, NEMA lamp companies are seeking a clear interpretation of\nthe requirements for marking ofpallet-loads of\"UN 2911\" lamps. One view\nis that, ifa pallet of\"UN 2911\" cartons is secured with transparent shrink-wrap,\neach carton must be marked with \"UN 2911\". A second approach would have\nthe entire pallet of cartons enclosed by a large overpack box that is marked\nwith \"UN 2911\". A third possibility would have the pallet of cartons shrinkwrapped\nwith UN 2911\" labels included between layers ofthe wrapping so they\nare clearly visible.\nA2. Generally, in accordance with § 173.448(g), ifan overpack is used to consolidate\nindividual packages or to enclose a single package ofClass 7 (radioactive)\nmaterial, the package(s) must comply with the packaging, marking, and labeling\nrequirements ofthe HMR. In addition, the overpack must be labeled as\nprescribed in § 172.403(h), and marked as prescribed in subpart D of Part 172 and\n§ 173.25(a). The transport index ofthe overpack may not exceed 3.0 for\npassenger-carrying aircraft or 10.0 for cargo-aircraft shipments. Thus, the\noverpack must be marked, and labeled as required for each hazardous material it\ncontains, unless markings and labels representative ofeach hazardous material in\nthe overpack are visible. Your company's view that each carton must be marked\nwith \"UN 2911\" if a pallet ofcartons is secured with transparent shrink-wrap is\nthe correct one.\nI hope this infonnation is helpful. Ifwe can be of further assistance, please contact us.\nSincerely, rt /~ fit:- .\n;1\n'171111 [? V~lJ.b~\nf\n\\ Charles E. Betts\n\\Chief, Standards Development\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Development\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nThe Association ofElectrical and Medical\nImaging Equipment Manufacturers\nwww.nema.org\nSetting Standards for Excellence\nSeptember 30, 2009\nEngrlAWl\n~ 1-'3. LfZZ\nMr. Edward Manzullo\nDirector, Office ofHazardous Materials Standards l3113. '-Iz ~\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nU.S. Department ofTransportation ~I\\N\n1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Oct-Ol6SWashington,\nDC 20590\nDear Mr. Manzullo,\nIn part, NEMA represents U.S. manufacturers oflighting equipment, including light \"bulbs\",\nwhich are known in the industry as \"lamps\". Certain lamps, contain small amounts of hazardous\nmaterials, including mercury and/or certain radioactive isotopes, which are needed to optimize\nthe energy efficient conversion of electricity into visible light. Over the past several years in\nparticular, the Office of Hazardous Materials Standards has been helpful in providing clear\ninterpretation and explanation ofthe U.S. Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) as they apply\nto these lamp products.\nConsistent with their efforts to maintain compliance with the HMR, members ofthe NEMA\nLamp Section are seeking\n• reaffirmation of or an update ofthe interpretations provided in letters from\nPHMSA to NEMA of June 14 and August 17,2005, and\n• an interpretation of the labeling requirements for pallet loads of product marked\n\"UN2911\"\nOn the first point, based on the attached 2005 letters, NEMA lamp companies understood that\nexceptions to the HMR are not mandatory. The importance ofthis for manufacturers of lamps\ncontaining radioactive materials is that measurements need not be taken to verify whether a\npackage is subject to the exception ifthe shipper chooses not to take advantage of the exception\nto the requirement to mark packaging with the UN number. In their specific case, NEMA\ncompanies have chosen to mark packages of radioactive lamps with UN2911 without taking\nmeasurements oftotal radioactivity. In 2005, the companies wanted to make sure that overcomplying\nwould not constitute a compliapce problem and were assured by PHMSA that it\nwould not. Is that still the case? '.\nOn the second point, NEMA lamp companies are seeking a clear interpretation of the\nrequirements for marking of pallet-loads of UN2911 lamps. One view holds that, if a pallet of\nUN2911 carton is secured with transparent shrink-wrap, each carton must be marked with\nUN291 1. A second approach would have the entire pallet ofcartons enclosed by a large overpack\nbox that is marked with UN2911. A third possibility would have the pallet ofcartons\nshrink-wrapped with UN29111abeis included between layers ofthe wrapping so they are clearly","truncated":false,"body_characters":6895}