10-0137
10-0137
Page 1U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration AUG 26 2010 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE Washington. D.C. 20590 Mr. Jianke Wang. PH D, PE Senior Project Engineer National Oilwell Varco 2800 N. Frazier Street Conroe, TX 77303 Ref. No. 10-0137 Dear Mr. Wang: This responds to your July 1,2010 request for clarification ofthe Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask whether an intermediate bulk container (lBC) is authorized for repeated offshore use "IN OPEN SEAS". According to your letter, you have IBCs and UN/DOT Portable tanks that require certification for offshore transportation in open seas (dynamic lifting for offshore oil exploration). You state that the transporting liquid is diesel. You further state that your !BCs are UN tanks, but, they are not UN Portable tanks which are also designed and constructed in accordance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code's "Guidelines for the Approval of Containers Handled in Open Seas" (MSC/Circ.860). The design, testing, and use ofoffshore containers are not addressed in the HMR. IBCs, portable tanks, or other container types designed for multi-modal transportation ofhazardous materials in accordance with the IMDG Code or the HMR are generally not considered suitable as offshore containers unless they are also specially designed to withstand dynamic lifting and impact forces likely to be encountered during open sea operations. If your IBCs meet the additional requirements as contained in MSC/Circ.860, then they may also be suitable for open sea operations. If you have any additional questions regarding offshore containers or offshore operations, please contact the U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Operating and Environmental Standards (CG-522), 2100 2nd Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593-7126, Ph: (202) 372-1401, Fax: (202) 372-1926. I hope this answers your inquiry. If you need further assistance, please contact this office. Sin~ ~ Ben Supko Acting Chief, Standards Development Office ofHazardous Materials Standards#
Page 2Drakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA) From: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) Sent: Thursday, July 01, 20104:26 PM To: Drakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA) Cc: DerKinderen, Dirk (PHMSA) Subject: FW: Request for Formal interpretations to the Questions about UN IBC & Portable Tanks for Offshore Diesel Transportation in Open Seas. Carolyn, Rob Could you assign this for a written interpretation of the regulations. From: Wang! Jianke [mailto:Jianke.Wang@nov.com] Sent: Friday! February 12! 2010 11:41 AM To: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) Subject: Request for Formal interpretations to the Questions about UN !BC & Portable Tanks for Offshore Diesel Transportation in Open Seas. Completed via email by RB on 2/12 @ 1217 pm Dear Sir/Madam, We have some UN/DOT IBC tanks and some UN/DOT Portable tanks that need to be certified for offshore transportation in open seas (dynamic lifting for offshore oil exploration). The transporting liquid is diesel. As I am reading the Dot CFR 49 code, I have some questions about the UN/Dot Tanks going offshore IN OPEN SEAS. IBCs are UN tanks. But they are not UN Portable tanks. The UN Portable tanks, which are also designed and constructed in accordance with the "Guidelines for the Approval of Containers Handled in Open Seas" (MSC/Circ.860) specified in the IMDG Code, are suitable for repeated offshore use. This is specified in Section 178.274. It also says: for open seas operations, "the words 'OFFSHORE PORTABLE TANK' must be marked on the identification plate." However, in Dot CFR 49 code, I could not find any recommendations for the offshore application of IBC in open seas. Is IBe (Intermediate Bulk Container) suitable for repeated of1:.,hore use IN OPEN SEAS? If yes, could you please tell me which section of CFR 49 deals with this specific application? Thanks in advance for your helps. Best regards, .Hanke Wang, Ph.D., P.E. Senior Project Engineer National Oilwell Varco 2800 N Frazier St Conroe, TX 77303 Tel: 936-523-2634 1#
Page 3Fax:936-523-2788#
This material provides agency context. It does not replace binding regulatory text, and its legal effect depends on the underlying authority and facts.