{"operation":"document","citation":"13-0213","title":"Lockheed Martin MST — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2014-01-28","effective_on":null,"summary":"13-0213 response to Lockheed Martin MST concerning 173.185.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0213.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0213.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-13-0213","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2013/130213.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nMr. Kevin Unger\nLockheed Martin MST\n1801 State Route 17C\nMail Drop 0574\nOwego, NY 13827\nJAN 2 8 2014\nReference No.: 13-0213\nDear Mr. Unger:\nThis is in response to your November 11, 2013 email requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). The specific\nrequirements you address are contained in Section 38.3.2.1 of the United Nations (UN)\nManual of Tests and Criteria and are implemented through the provisions of 49 CFR\n173.185. Specifically you ask if adding wire leads from the anode and cathode of a single\ncell battery would constitute a change to the cell design that would require the battery\ndesign to be retested in accordance with the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria.\nThe criteria by which a lithium battery is considered to be a new type and require retesting\nare found in§ 38.3.2.1 ofthe UN Manual of Tests and Criteria. One ofthe criteria that\nwould require testing is when a cell or battery differs from the type tested by \"a change that\nwould lead to a failure of any of the tests.\" The type of change that might be considered to\ndiffer from a tested type, such that it might lead to failure of any of the test results, may\ninclude, but is not limited to: 1) a change in the material of the anode, cathode, the separator\nor electrolyte; 2) a change ofprotective devices, including hardware and software; 3) a\nchange of safety design in cells or batteries, such as a venting valve; 4) a change in the\nnumber of component cells; or 5) a change in connecting mode of component cells. A\nmanufacturer of lithium batteries should take these types of changes into account when\ndetermining whether or not a cell or battery is a new type and requires retesting.\nI hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to\ncontact this office.\nSincerely,\n~\\v' . ..,v ~; .\\~;,;:.Jv. L ,-\n- -\n-~\n. v/ ··~-'\nDuane Pfund Y\nInternational Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\n~~ i-h /u m From: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 9:27AM\nTo: Drakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nSubject: FW: 49 CFR parts 171 through 180 and UN Certification of Test 38.3 Rev 5\nImportance: High\nBa f...krt'es\n13-o:Z.t3\nHi Carolyn,\nThis caller requested we submit this e-mail as a formal letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nVictoria\nFrom: Unger, Kevin [mailto:kevin.unger@lmco.com]\nSent: Monday, November 11, 2013 11:01 AM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: 49 CFR parts 171 through 180 and UN Certification of Test 38.3 Rev 5\nImportance: High\nLeft vm by MC on 11/12/13 at 1:48\nIf a manufacturer of primary lithium batteries tests and certifies their single cell to UN 38.3 criteria, but also offers the\nsame cell with permanently attached wire leads from the cathode and anode to a variety of different connector\nconfigurations, do they need to test and certify each different configuration? Doesn,t the Manual of Tests for Rev 5 of UN\n38.3 indicate and require that \"any material, modification that could affect the testing results must itself be tested? I\nhave several battery manufacturer's claiming they don't need to test the alternate configurations on a single tested\ncell even though they are adding permanent wires and a connector to the \"system, that adds variability and risk,\nespecially for shorting, to the reliability of the package. Can they use the cell data and only test the wiring configuration\nto meet certification of the different options?\nRegards,\nKevin Unger\nEnvironmental Engineering\nLockheed Martin MST\n1801 State Rte 17C mail drop 0574\nOwego, NY 13827\nPhone: 607-751-5237 Cell: 607-765-6974\ne-mail: kevin. unger@lmco.com\n~ Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":3883}