{"operation":"document","citation":"11-0206","title":"CH2MHill — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2011-09-21","effective_on":null,"summary":"11-0206 response to CH2MHill concerning 173.412.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-11-0206.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-11-0206.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-11-0206","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2011/110206.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Ave. S,E\nWashington, DC 20590\nSEP 2 1 2011\nMr. Chris Backus\nPackaging Engineer\nCH2MHill\nPO Box 1600 MSIN T3-11\nRichland, W A 99354\nReference No.: 11-0206\nDear Mr. Backus:\nThis responds to your August 26, 2011 email requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to tie-down attachment requirements for\nType A packages in accordance with § 173.412(i). Your questions are paraphrased and\nanswered as follows:\n01. Are accident conditions for Type B packages contained in 10 CPR § 71.45 applicable to\nType A packages?\nAI. The answer to your question is no. The static force requirements in 10 CFR § 71.45 are\nprescribed for packages designed for the transport of radioactive materials indicated in 10 CFR\n§ 71.0.\n02. Are there load cases indicative of\"accident conditions\" for Type A packages?\nA2. There are no specific static force requirements that structural component tie-down\nattachments of Type A packages must be capable of withstanding referenced in the HMR. A\npackaging tie-down system should be designed so that it fails first in the event of an accident\nand the failure should not result in a tear or hole in the package containment or a reduction in\nshielding. Section 173.412(i) requires that in the event of an accident a failure of the tie-down\nsystem must not impair the ability of the package to meet the other requirements of Subpart I in\nthe same manner as a failure during normal transportation conditions.\nI trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nDelmeI B\\ml\\g,~\nSenior Regulations Advisor\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSent: Friday, August 26, 2011 4:42 PM\nTo: Drakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nSubject: FW: 173.412(i} interpretation requested\nImportance: High\nHi Carolyn,\nWe received the following request for a letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nVictoria\nVictoria Lehman\nHazmat Information Center (HMIC)\nhttp://phmsa.dot.gov(hazmat(info-center\n(2e2) 366-1e35\nFrom: Backus, Christopher L [mailto:Christopher L Backus@RL.gov]\nSent: Friday, August 26, 2011 1 :48 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: 173.412(i) interpretation requested\nImportance: High\nPHMSA Office of Hazardous Materials Safety:\nWe would like clarity on interpreting the language in 49CFR 173.412 (i) with respect to \"accident conditions\". It states\nthe additional design requirements of Type A packages: \"failure of any tie-down attachment\" for both \"normal and\naccident conditions\". However, nowhere is there a discussion of what load requirements on the tiedown points are\nindicative of \"accident conditions\". Does this paragraph imply that the accident conditions as provided for Type B\npackages on tie-down devices be applied? In which case, 10CFR 71.45 tiedown loads should be applied per 173.415(b)\nor 173.415(c)? This indicates that 109 longitudinal, 5g lateral and 2g vertical be applied to the tiedown devices. It would\nfollow from paragraph 173.412 (i) that failure of the tie-down attachments under these load cases does not impair the\nability of the package to meet other Type A requirements. Or is there some other load case indicative of \"accident\nconditions\" for Type A packages?\nBest Regards,\nChris Backus\nPackaging Engineer\nTransportation Safety\nPO Box 1600 MSIN T3-11, Richland, WA 99354\nPhone:509-373-2678\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nFax:S09-373-40S 1\ne-mail: Christopher L Backus@rl.gov\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":3565}