# Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 13-0047
- **title:** Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2013-05-09
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** 13-0047 response to Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc. concerning 173.28.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0047.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0047.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0047
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2013/130047.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

U.S. Department of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
1200 New Jersey Ave, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20590
MAY 092013
Mr. David Wilson
Packaging and Transportation Project Manager
Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc.
669 Emory Valley Road
Oak Ridge, TN 3 7830
Reference No.: 13-0047
Dear Mr. Wilson:
This is in response to your February 8, 2013 letter and requesting clarification of the
Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). You reference a previous
letter of interpretation, 11-03 02 issued to you by this office in November of 2011, and ask
several questions concerning the reuse of Type B and fissile material packagings. Your
questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:
Q 1. If packaging components are inspected and determined to require replacement in
accordance with established acceptance criteria in the safety analysis report (SAR)
submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), would these inspection and
replacement determinations be constructed as showing evidence of a reduction in integrity
which would require the packaging to be reconditioned in accordance with § 173 .28( c )(2)?
Al. The answer to your question is no. Routine inspections and replacements of packaging
components would not normally be considered to be evidence of a reduction in integrity
which would require the packaging to be reconditioned in accordance with§ 173.28(c)(2).
As stated in§ 173.28(a), the reconditioning requirements apply only to packages which have
suffered damage which have reduced their structural integrity. Should an inspection reveal
sufficient structural damage that reduces packaging integrity, then the reconditioning
requirements would apply.
Q2. If containment is independent of the outer packaging (i.e. removable contaimnent
vessel with separate closure device including any required gaskets), would the determination
of a reduction in integrity of a containment system component also require the
reconditioning of the protective outer packaging? Or is it permitted to recondition the
containment system and outer packaging independently?
A2. If it is determined that the reduction in packaging integrity is limited to the internal
contaimnent vessel and did not impact the outer packaging, reconditioning of the outer
packaging would not be necessary.

<<<PAGE 2>>>

Q3. The requirements of§ 173.28( c)(2)(i) stipulate the removal of all former contents.
What are the acceptable contamination limits that would satisfy this requirement? Would
the packaging be decontaminated to; less than or equal to the contamination levels specified
in § 173.403, ensuring that the activity concentration and the total activity are less than or
equal to the limits specified in § 173.403, less than or equal to the non-fixed external
contamination limits specified in§ 173.443, or less than or equal to the internal
contamination limits specified in§ 173.428(d)?
A3. The requirement in§ 173.28(c)(2)(i) simply states, removal of all former contents.
Decontamination is not required by this paragraph. However, if the packaging is to be
shipped to another location to be repaired, it would need to meet the requirements of
§ 173.443, or if shipped as "Empty", the requirements of§ 173.428.
Q4. The requirements of§ 173.28(c)(2)(i) stipulate cleaning to original materials of
construction. What extent of packaging disassembly would be required for packaging with
intermediate cavities to satisfy this cleaning requirement? Or does this requirement only
apply to accessible surfaces?
A4. This requirement only applies to those surfaces which would come in contact with the
contents and which would need cleaning to fully remove the contents.
QS. For non-bulk Type Band Fissile Material packagings, what constitutes cushioning and
cushioning material? Does the§ 173.28(c)(2)(iii) requirement for replacement of all
cushioning and cushioning material impose the replacement of all impact-limiting materials
of construction? Are elastomeric pads or spacers, which are used to avoid metal-to-metal
contact or to limit vibration, considered cushioning or cushioning material?
AS. Cushioning material is not a defined term in the HMR. Without specific package
details this office cannot determine what internal components may or may not be considered
cushioning material. Generally speaking, cushioning material in non-bulk packages refers to
material that is not an integral component of the package that is added to absorb shocks
normally incident to transportation. Generally, elastomeric pads or spacers used as spacers
between integral metal components would not considered to be cushioning or cushioning
material It is important to note that the requirement to replace cushioning and cushioning
material only applies to packages deemed to have damage which reduces its structural
integrity in accordance with§ 173.28.
Q6. What markings applied by the reconditioner are required for non-bulk Type Band
Fissile Material packagings?
A6. The requirement to mark reconditioned packaging in§ 173.28(c)(3) is limited to a
person who reconditions a packaging manufactured and marked under the provisions of
subpart L of part 178 of the HMR. As Type B and Fissile Materials are not packages
manufactured and marked under these provisions, no reconditioning mark is required.
Q7. Based on the PHMSA response in interpretation 11-0302, a domestic reconditioning
activity would be imposed for non-bulk packagings that are internationally excluded from
the reuse and reconditioning requirements specified in chapter 6.1 of the United Nations

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Model Regulations. Are the PHMSA responses to Q 1-Q6 different for packages authorized
in accordance with§§ 173.415(d), 173.416(b), 173.417(a)(l)(iii), and 173.417(b)(2)?
A7. Packages offered in accordance with§§ 173.416(b), 173.417(a)(l)(iii), and
173 .417(b )(2) are only authorized for export or import shipments and are contingent on the
package fulfilling the requirements of both the foreign competent authority certificate and
the U.S. Competent Authority revalidation, and all requirements of the certificates and
revalidations must be met in accordance with § 171.23(b )(11 )(ii). Packages offered in
accordance with § 173 .415( d) must conform with requirements of the country of origin and
the International Atomic Energy Agency regulations applicable to Type A packagings. Our
response to your previous interpretation request (11-0302), as well as this response, do not
impose any requirements beyond repairing a damaged package as needed to meet the
requirements applicable to it.
I trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
£~i~~
Senior Regulatory Advisor
Standards and Rulemaking Division

<<<PAGE 4>>>

NAVARRO
Research and Engineering, Inc.
NAVARRO
NRE-PE-13-0136
February 8, 2013
Page 1 of 6
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Attn: PHH-10
U.S. Department of Transportation
East Building
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590-0001
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION OF PACKAGING REUSE AND RECONDITIONING REQUIREMENTS
Given the the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration (PHMSA) response (Reference No.: 11-0302, dated April 2, 2012) to our
previous request for clarification (NRE-PE-11-0133, dated Nov. 2, 2011), we request additional
clarification of the 49 CFR 173.28 provisions applicable to Type Band fissile material packagings,
which: (1) are intended for reuse; (2) are considered non-bulk packagings as defined in
49 CFR 171.8; and (3) meet the applicable requirements of 49 CFR 173, Subpart I, and have
been evaluated, approved, and certified for use in accordance with 10 CFR Part 71. As described,
the subject packagings of this inquiry are authorized in accordance with the requirements of
49 CFR 173.416(a), 49 CFR 173.417(a)(1)(ii), and 49 CFR 173.417(b)(1) as well as Type Band fissile
material packagings evaluated, approved, and certified by the U.S. Department of Energy in
accordance with 49 CFR 173.7(d).
Background
As stated in 49 CFR 172.101(i), "When packaging requirements are specified, they
are in addition to the standard requirements for all packagings prescribed in § 173.24 of this
subchapter and any other applicable requirements in subparts A and B of part 173 of this
subchapter." The general design requirements in 49 CFR 173.410 establish that "In addition
to the requirements of subparts A and B of this part, each package used for the shipment of
Class 7 (radioactive) materials must be designed so that-... " Furthermore, it is recognized
that as specified in 49 CFR 173.401(a) the requirements in 49 CFR 173, Subpart I, are in
addition to, not in place of, other requirements set forth in 49 CFR, Subchapter C, for Class 7
(radioactive) materials and those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) delineated
in 10 CFR 71.
669 Emory Valley Rood, Oak Ridge, 1N 37830
865-220-9650 • www.navarro-inc.com + 865-220-9651 Fax

<<<PAGE 5>>>

NRE-PE-13-0136
February 8, 2013
Page 2 of 6
Title 10 CFR 71.0(b} states that the requirements of 10 CFR 71 are in addition to, and
not in substitution for, other requirements. Also, 10 CFR 71.5 requires that the transportation
of licensed material shall comply with the applicable requirements of the U.S. Department of
Transportation regulations in 49 CFR parts 107, 171-180, and 390-397, appropriate to the
mode of transport. Accordingly, the design, fabrication, assembly, testing, maintenance, repair,
modification, and use of the subject packagings is governed by the applicable NRC; DOT; and
other Federal, State, and local regulations not preempted by the DOT.
With respect to the subject packagings, an application for package approval is prepared
in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 71, Subpart D. NRC Regulatory Guide 7.9,
Standard Format and Content of Part 71 Applications for Approval of Packages for Radioactive
Material provides guidance on preparing the application for approval of Type 8 and fissile
material transportation packages. The application [hereafter referred to as a safety analysis
report (SAR}] is the principal document in which an applicant provides the information
and bases for the NRC staff to use in determining whether a given package meets the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 71. Safety analysis reports that are prepared in accordance with
the standard format presented in NRC Regulatory Guide 7.9 will have sections, which establish
the fundamental requirements for the package operations as well as the acceptance tests and
maintenance program. Additionally, as specified in 10 CFR 71.37, the applicant shall describe
the quality assurance (QA} program for the design, fabrication, assembly, testing, maintenance,
repair, modification, and use of the proposed package.
Package operations, consistent with the package evaluation in the SAR, are routinely
performed in accordance with detailed, written site-specific procedures based on the Certificate
of Compliance (CoC}, the package operations section of the SAR, and facility-specific operational
requirements. Acceptance tests and maintenance program activities are performed in
accordance with the SAR provisions to ensure that the design requirements and the conditions
of approval in the CoC are satisfied in addition to ensuring the integrity of the packaging
components with respect to the structural, thermal, containment, shielding, and criticality
evaluations in the SAR. Furthermore, the subject packagings are fabricated, procured, and
maintained according to an approved QA program in accordance with 10 CFR 71, Subpart H.
As stated in 10 CFR 71.101(a}, this established QA program describes the quality assurance
requirements that apply to the design, purchase, fabrication, handling, shipping, storing,
cleaning, assembly, inspection, testing, operation, maintenance, repair, and modification of
packaging components that are important to safety.
Guidance on the Determination of a Reduction in Integrity
For the subject packagings, routine inspections are performed to ensure that the
packaging is in unimpaired physical condition, except for superficial defects, in accordance
with 49 CFR 173.47S(b} and 10 CFR 71.87(b} as well as required inspections to ensure that each
closure device of the packaging, including any required gasket, is properly installed, secured,
and free of defects in accordance with 49 CFR 173.475(c} and 10 CFR 71.87(c). As required in

<<<PAGE 6>>>

NRE-PE-13-0136
February 8, 2013
Page 3 of 6
10 CFR 71.91, records for the subject packagings are maintained, which verify: (1} that there
are no significant defects in the packaging, as shipped; (2} the results of the quality control
provisions in 49 CFR 173.475 and routine determinations in 10 CFR 71.87; and (3} the conditions
of the package approval. Reporting requirements for the subject packagings are specified in
10 CFR 71.95, which include: (1) instances in which there is a significant reduction in the
effectiveness of the subject packagings during use; or (2} details of any defects with safety
significance in any of the subject packagings, after first use.
The package operations chapter of the SAR often permits incidental maintenance
activities including provisions for the routine replacement of damaged packaging components
with certified replacements during package loading, package unloading, and preparation of
the empty package for transport. In addition, the maintenance program often specifies
routine inspections with replacement requirements for deteriorated or damaged packaging
components in accordance with the SAR and as supplemented by the conditions of approval in
the CoC. Title 49 CFR 173.28(b}(1} states:
(b) Reuse of non-bulk packaging. A non-bulk packaging used more than
once must conform to the following provisions and limitations:
(1) A non-bulk packaging which, upon inspection, shows
evidence of a reduction in integrity may not be reused
unless it is reconditioned in accordance with paragraph (c)
of this section.
Ql: If packaging components are inspected and determined to require replacement
in accordance with established acceptance criteria in the SAR, would these inspection
and replacement determinations be construed as showing "evidence of a reduction in
integrity," which would require the packaging to be reconditioned in accordance with
49 CFR 173.28(c}(2)?
The subject non-bulk packagings often incorporate design features for lifting,
tie-down, impact limiting, thermal insulation, heat dissipation, radiation shielding, nuclear
criticality safety, and containment. The containment system may be integral to the packaging
or it may be a separate container that is enclosed within a protective outer packaging, which
may be fabricated with intermediate cavities filled with impact-limiting, thermal-insulating,
neutron-absorbing, or shielding materials and other engineering features. For packagings
with an integral containment boundary, which upon inspection shows evidence of a
reduction in integrity, it seems apparent that based on the DOT PHMSA response
(Reference No.: 11-0302) the packaging as a whole would be subject to the reconditioning
requirements in 49 CFR 173.28(c}(2}.
Q2: If containment is independent of the outer packaging [i.e., removable containment
vessel with separate closure device including any required gasket(s)], would the determination
of a reduction in integrity of a containment system component also require the reconditioning
of the protective outer packaging? Or, is it permitted to recondition the containment system
and outer packaging independently?

<<<PAGE 7>>>

NRE-PE-13-0136
February 8, 2013
Page 4 of 6
Reconditioning of Non-Bulk Type B and Fissile Material Packagings
As required in 49 CFR 173.28(b), a non-bulk packaging, which upon inspection shows
evidence of a reduction in integrity may not be reused unless it is reconditioned in accordance
with 49 CFR 173.28(c). For the subject packagings, the applicable reconditioning requirements
are specified in 49 CFR173.28(c)(2), which states:
(2) For the purpose of this subchapter, reconditioning of a non-bulk
packaging other than a metal drum includes:
(i) Removal of all former contents, external coatings and labels,
and cleaning to the original materials of construction;
(ii) Inspection after cleaning with rejection of packagings with
visible damage such as tears, creases or cracks, or damaged
threads or closures, or other significant defects;
(iii) Replacement of all non-integral gaskets and closure devices
with new or refurbished parts, and cushioning and cushioning
materials; and components including gaskets, closure devices
and cushioning and cushioning material. (For a UN lHl plastic
drum, replacing a removable gasket or closure device with
another of the same design and material that provides
equivalent performance does not constitute reconditioning); and
(iv) Ensuring that the packagings are restored to a condition that
conforms in all respects with the prescribed requirements of
this subchapter.
Q3: The requirements of 49 CFR 173.28(c)(2)(i) stipulate the "removal of all former
contents." What are the acceptable contamination limits that would satisfy this requirement?
Would the packaging be decontaminated to:
(1) less than or equal to the contamination levels (fixed plus removable)
specified in 49 CFR 173.403 (Contamination);
(2) ensure that the activity concentration and the total activity are less
than or equal to the limits specified in 49 CFR 173.403 (Radioactive
material);
(3) less than or equal to the non-fixed external contamination limits
specified in 49 CFR 173.443; or
(4) less than or equal to the internal contamination limits specified in
49 CFR 173.428(d)?

<<<PAGE 8>>>

NRE-PE-13-0136
February 8, 2013
Page 5 of 6
As stated earlier, the containment system for non-bulk Type Band Fissile Material
packagings may be integral to the packaging or it may be a separate container that
is enclosed within a protective outer packaging with intermediate cavities filled with
impact-limiting, thermal-insulating, neutron-absorbing, or shielding materials. While the
requirements of 49 CFR173.28(c)(2) are directly applicable to single-walled non-bulk packagings
(other than a metal drum), without further clarification or guidance these requirements are not
readily extrapolated to the engineered features common to the subject non-bulk packagings.
Q4: The requirements of 49 CFR 173.28(c)(2)(i) stipulate "cleaning to the original
materials of construction." What extent of packaging disassembly would be required for
packagings with intermediate cavities to satisfy this cleaning requirement? Or, does this
requirement only apply to accessible surfaces?
QS: For non-bulk Type Band Fissile Material packagings, what constitutes cushioning
and cushioning material? Does the 49 CFR173.28(c)(2)(iii) requirement for replacement of all
cushioning and cushioning material impose the replacement of all impact-limiting materials of
construction? Are elastomeric pads or spacers, which are used to avoid metal-to-metal contact
or to limit vibration, considered cushioning or cushioning material?
Markings Applied by the Reconditioner
Since the subject packagings are not manufactured and marked under the provisions
of 49 CFR 178, Subpart L-Non-bulk Performance-Oriented Packaging Standards, the first
sentence of 49 CFR 173.28{c)(3) is not applicable. However, for the subject packagings that are
reconditioned in accordance with 49 CFR 173.28(c)(2), marking requirements are imposed by
49 CFR 173.28{c)(4) and the second sentence of 49 CFR 173.28{c)(3). Title 49 CFR 173.28(c)(3)
and {4) state that:
(3) A person who reconditions a packaging manufactured and
marked under the provisions of subpart L of part 178 of this
subchapter, shall mark that packaging as required by§ l78.503(c)
and (d) of this subchapter. The marking is the certification of the
reconditioner that the packaging conforms to the standard for
which it is marked and that all functions performed by the
reconditioner which are prescribed by this subchapter have
been performed in compliance with this subchapter.
(4) The markings applied by the reconditioner may be different
from those applied by the manufacturer at the time of original
manufacture, but may not identify a greater performance
capability than that for which the original design type had been
tested (for example, the reconditioner may mark a drum which
was originally marked as 1AI/Yl.8 as 1Al!Yl.2 or 1Al/Z2.0).
QG: What "markings applied by the reconditioner" are required for non-bulk Type B and
Fissile Material packagings?

<<<PAGE 9>>>

NRE-PE-13-0136
February 8, 2013
Page 6 of 6
Reconditioning of Other Non-Bulk Type B and Fissile Material Packagings
While this request for clarification is limited to the applicability of 49 CFR 173.28 with
respect to the specified subset of Class 7 (radioactive) material packages, we recognize that
full consideration to the broader universe of packagings, which are subject to the requirements
of 49 CFR 173, Subpart I, may be warranted. For example, non-bulk packages authorized
in accordance with 49 CFR 173.415(d), 49 CFR 173.416(b), 49 CFR 173.417(a)(1)(iii), and
49 CFR 173.417(b)(2), which meet the applicable requirements of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, 1996 Edition
(Revised), No. TS-R-1 (ST-1, Revised), are excluded from international reconditioning activities
as acknowledged in Chapter 6.1, "Requirements for the Construction and Testing of Packages"
of the United Nations (UN) Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, Model
Regulations, sixteenth revised edition, Volumes I and II (2009). Although Chapter 6.1 of the
UN Model Regulations includes requirements for reconditioning packagings, as stated in
6.1.1.1, these requirements do not apply to packages containing radioactive material that
comply with the regulations of the IAEA.
Q7: Based on the DOT PHMSA response (Reference No.: 11-0302), a domestic
reconditioning activity would be imposed for non-bulk packagings that are internationally
excluded from the reuse and reconditioning requirements specified in Chapter 6.1 of the
UN Model Regulations. Are the DOT responses to Q1-Q6 different for packages authorized
in accordance with 49 CFR 173.415(d), 49 CFR 173.416(b), 49 CFR 173.417(a)(1)(iii), and
49 CFR 173.417(b)(2)?
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me.
Respectively submitted,
Did tith
David A. Wilson
Packaging and Transportation Project Manager
Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc.
669 Emory Valley Road
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
c: M. D. Waters, NRC/NMSS/SFST
Navarro Project File

<<<PAGE 10>>>

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety
Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington. DC 20590
APR 0 2 2012
David Wilson
Packaging and Transportation Project Manager
Navarro Research and Engineering~ Inc.
669 Emory Valley Road
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Reference No.: 11-0302
Dear Mr. Wilson:
This is in response to your November 17, 2011letter requesting clarification of the
Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) as they pertain to the
reuse and reconditioning provisions of§ 173.28. Specifically you ask if the reuse and
reconditioning provisions of§ 173.28 are applicable to Type B(U), Type B(M), and fissile
material packagings.
The answer to your question is yes. Subpart I of part 173 describes the shippers general
requirements for Class 7 (radioactive) materials. General design requirements are
discussed in § 173.410. The introductory text to § 173.410 states that each package used
for the shipment of Class 7 materials must be designed to the requirements of this section,
as well as meet the requirements of subparts A and B of this part. The section you
reference, § 173.28 is found in subpart B of part 173, and thus the reuse and reconditioning
provisions found in § 173.28 apply to shipments of Type B(U), Type B(M), or fissile
packagings.
I hope this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
P!:tHo·
Senior Regulatory Advisor
Standards and Rulemaking Division

<<<PAGE 11>>>

),Ajdjb
£3 t?3#Z-B
Re.u~CJ
II-Oc302
NAVARRO
Research and Engineering, Inc.
NRE-PE-11-0133
November 17, 2011
Page 1 of 1
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Attn: PHH-10
U.S. Department of Transportation
East Building
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 2059Q-0001
CLARIFICATION OF PACKAGING REUSE AND RECONDITIONING REQUIREMENTS
In support of transportation related activities associated with Class 7 (radioactive) materials
under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR Parts 171-180), we request clarification of
the reuse and reconditioning provisions of 49 CFR 173.28 applicable to Type B(U), Type B(M),
and fissile material packagings, which meet the applicable requirements of 49 CFR, Subpart I
and have been evaluated, approved, and certified for use in accordance with 10 CFR Part 71.
More specifically, to what extent, if any, are the requirements of 49 CFR 173.28 applicable
to Type B(U), Type B{M), and fissile material packagings?
If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact me.
Thank you for your assistance.
Respectively submitted,
David A. Wilson
Packaging and Transportation Project Manager
Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc.
669 Emory Valley Road
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
(865) 220-9650
c: Navarro Project File
669 Emory Valley Road, Oak Ridge, 1N 37830
865-220-9650 • www .navarro-inc.com • 865-220-9651 Fax
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 25831
