{"operation":"document","citation":"14-0014","title":"Transportation Compliance Associates, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2014-03-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"14-0014 response to Transportation Compliance Associates, Inc. concerning 176.907.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0014.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0014.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-14-0014","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2014/140014.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\nMAR 1 9 2014\nMr. Mike Alston\nOwner/General Manager\nTransportation Compliance Associates, Inc.\n1340 RT 30\nClinton, PA 15026\nRef. No.: 14-0014\nDear Mr. Alston:\nThis is in response to your email dated January 16,2014, requesting clarification ofthe\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CPR Parts 171-180) and the International\nMaritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code applicable to shipments of polymeric beads,\nexpandable and plastics molding compound in ventilated freight containers, and security\nconcerns for shipments being transported in freight containers utilizing one door off\noperation. In your email you include an informal email correspondence from a member of\nmy staff and ask for a more formal-letter of interpretation from this office. Your questions\nare paraphrased and answered as follows:\nQ 1. Are the standard passive ventilation systems (two to four small vents along only the\ntop side rails of a freight container) in freight containers considered ventilated containers as\nreferenced in§ 176.907(a) and special provision 965 ofthe IMDG Code.\nAI. The answer to your question is no. When transported in cargo transport units\npolymeric beads, expandable and plastics molding compounds are required by§ 176.907(a)\nand special provision 965 of the IMDG Code to be transported in cargo transport units that\nprovide an adequate exchange of air in the unit to prevent the build-up of an explosive\natmosphere. One of the listed examples to achieve this adequate exchange of air is the use\nof a ventilated container. Unfortunately the term ventilated container is not a term defined\nin either 49 CPR or the IMDG Code. However, the ventilation that you are describing (2 or\n4 passive vents at the top of the container) would not be considered an adequate exchange of\nair to prevent the build-up of an explosive atmosphere as required by both 49 CPR\n§ 176.907(a) and SP 965 ofthe IMDG Code. The small passive vents you describe have\nlittle to no ventilation effect, and mainly equalize pressure differentials on opening and\nclosing of containers. The pentane vapors potentially given off during transport are heavier\nthan air. In our opinion, passive vents only along the top side rails are not sufficient to\nprovide an adequate exchange of air in cargo transport units.\nQ2. Section 176.907(a) lists a container in one door off operation as one of the methods\nof achieving an adequate exchange of air in the cargo transport unit. How is a freight\ncontainer in one door off operation viewed and handled from a security standpoint?\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA2. This office is unaware of any HMR security requirements that a cargo transport unit\nin one door off operation would be in conflict with. The United States Coast Guard\nHazardous Materials Division notes that a freight container transported by vessel in one\ndoor off operation is viewed and handled, from a security standpoint, in compliance with the\nvessel's security plan requirements.\nI trust this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to\ncontact this office.\nSincerely,\n>:v~\"~\nDuane A. Pfund\nInternational Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject:\nAttachments:\nLehman, Victoria CTR (PHMSA)\nFriday, January 17,2014 1:17PM\nDrakeford, Carolyn (PHMSA)\nFW: 49 CFR 176.907 lnterpretaion request\n070155.pdf\nV.€sse~ ~ I M bG Code·\nl4-0DIY.\nHi Carolyn,\nThis caller requested we submit this e-mail as a formal letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nVictoria\nFrom: Mike Alston [mailto:Mike.Aiston@hazmat-l.com]\nSent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:06PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: 49 CFR 176.907 Interpretaion request\nDear PHMSA:\nCan you help interpret the regulations in 49 CFR 176.907 and the new IMDG SP965. I recently contacted the DOT hotline\non behalf of my customer and asked if passive vents on a shipping container were considered adequate ventilation. I was\ndirected to the attached interpretation letter #07-0155 dated October 16, 2007 which indicates that that \"natural vents\"\nor vents that are not power generated are adequate and may be used to vent a shipping container of dangerous gases.\nI contacted my customer to provide them the information I received which appeared to clear up any doubts we may have\nhad regarding ventilation. My customer then presented me with a unofficial but very credible note that they had received\nthrough one of their customers which states the following:\nFrom: Webb, Steven (PHMSA)\nSent: Friday, January 03, 2014 10:30 AM\nSubject: RE: Special Permits Feedback: Other Questions?\nThank you for the question. You correctly note that PHMSA harmonized the transport requirements for shipments of\nplastics molding compound and polymeric beads (UN 3314 and UN 2214) with the IMDG Code in a recent rulemaking (HM\n215-L). This change was made to prevent the buildup of dangerous pentane gases in freight containers. PHMSA created\n§ 176.907 to be consistent with IMDG Code special provision 965. The transport of plastics molding compounds and\npolymeric beads in cargo transport units require an adequate exchange of air in the unit. Multiple options for achieving\nthis adequate exchange of air are given; ventilated container, open-top container, or a container in one door off\noperation. There are is also the option to offer these materials in refrigerated cargo transport units. Further, an\nexception from the adequate exchange of air within the cargo transport unit requirement is provided if the substances\nare; packed in hermetically sealed packages or IBC's conforming to the PG II performance level for liquid dangerous goods,\nand the marked hydraulic test pressure exceeds 1.5 times the total gauge pressure in the packagings or ISS's at 55 degrees\nc.\nFrom looking at your question below it appears you would not like to utilize the packaging methods outlined above (which\nwould provide an exception from the requirement to transport in a ventilated or refrigerated transport unit), and request\nclarification as to if a freight container with two (or 4) small passive vents would qualify as a ventilated container under\nthe provisions of 49 CFR § 176.907 and or SP 965 of the IMDG Code. Unfortunately the term ventilated container is not a\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nterm defined in either 49 CFR or the IMDG Code. However, the ventilation that you are describing (2 or 4 passive vents at\nthe top of the container) would not be considered an adequate exchange of air to prevent the build-up of an explosive\natmosphere as required by both 49 CFR § 176.907 and SP 965 of the IMDG Code. My personal experience with these\nsmall vents is that they have little to no ventilation effect, and mainly equalize pressure differentials on opening and\nclosing of the containers. I do not have access to the ISO standard that you reference below to find the code number for\nthis particular container, but an acceptable ventilated container would be something along the lines of a container\ncommonly referred to as a \"coffee container\". These containers have ventilation openings over the entire length of their\nside walls in the floor and roof areas. This ventilation is passive, but allows for air flow into and out of the\ncontainer. There are pictures of such a container under the heading of \"passively ventilated containers\" at the link below.\nhttp://www.containerhandbuch.de/chbe/stra/index.html?/chb_e/stra/stra 03 01 01 01.html\nHopefully the above is helpful. Please feel free to reach out to me with additional questions or concerns. It is worth\nnoting that this office provides formal interpretations of regulations, and answers questions via a mailed letter\nresponse. If you would like to submit a formal request for interpretation you may do so by submitting a specific question\n(with as much detail as possible) and your contact information (name, company name, business title, mailing address) via\nemail to infocntr@dot.gov. If this is desired it is recommended you submit your question in the form of a letter (as the\nincoming letters and responses are posted on our website) which you can then scan or attach to an email.\nVery Respectfully\nSteve Webb\nTransportation Specialist- International Standards Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) -U.S.\nDOT Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\n1200 New Jersey Avenue S.E., E24-422, Washington D.C. 20590\nE24-422\n***********************\nsteven.webb@dot.gov\n***********\nMr. Webb provides a very good explanation as to why passive ventilation systems are not adequate but is this the\nofficial interpretation of the regulation. Some steam ship lines will accept the natural ventilation while others will not\nand I feel everyone is confused by the regulation.\nMy second part of this question is in reference to the 49 CFR176.907 (a) When transported in cargo transport units, the\naccomplished by utilizing a ventilated container, an open-top container, or a container in one door off operation.\ncargo transport units must provide an adequate exchange of air in the unit. This adequate exchange of air may be\nIn a one door off operation how is this viewed and handled from a security standpoint?\nRegards\nMike Alston, CHMM\nOwner/General Manager\nTransportation Compliance Associates, Inc.\n1340 RT 30\nClinton, PA 15026\nOffice: 724-899-4100 | Fax: 724-899-5049\nwww.Hazmat-1.com\nCell: 412-651-8776\nransportation Compliance Associates Inc\neven Presses in Compasse Sately))\nWe are your Hazmat Compliance Partner for Rail, Truck, Air, Vessel, and Database Management\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nWebb, Steven (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nCc:\nSubject:\nFollow Up Flag:\nFlag Status:\nTiffany.A.Duffy@uscg.mil on behalf of Duffy, Tiffany A L T <Tiffany.A.Duffy@uscg.mil>\nMonday, February 24, 2014 10:28 AM\nWebb, Steven (PHMSA)\nParker, Amy\nRE: Ventilated Contianer lnterp\nFollow up\nFlagged\nQ2/A2: I would like to add that the security constraints/requirements may be detailed in each vessel's security plan (ISPS\nand MTSA), so we would like to add to your answer that they must consult with the vessel owners about such\nrequirements.\nMight I suggest the following text:\nA door off operation is viewed and handled, from a security standpoint, in compliance with the vessel's security plan\nrequirements.\nThanks for letting us take the opportunity to review this.\nSincerely,\nLT Tiffany Duffy\nUnited States Coast Guard Headquarters\nStop 7509\n2703 Martin Luther King JR. AVE SE\nWashington D.C. 20593-7509\nHazardous Materials Division (CG-ENG-5)\nPhone: (202} 372-1403\nFax: (202} 372-8380\ntiffany.a.duffy@uscg.mil\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: prvs=12274779d=steven.webb@dot.gov [mailto:prvs=12274779d=steven.webb@dot.gov] On Behalf Of\nsteven.webb@dot.gov\nSent: Friday, February 21, 2014 4:46 PM\nTo: Parker, Amy; Duffy, Tiffany A LT\nSubject: Ventilated Contianer lnterp\nHello,\nPlease see the attached incoming interp and draft response for your comments/concurrence. have any questions.\nPlease let me know if you\nSteve Webb\nTransportation Specialist- International Standards Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) -U.S.\nDOT Office of Hazardous Materials Safety\n1200 New Jersey Avenue S.E., E24-422, Washington D.C. 20590\nE24-422\nsteven.webb@dot.gov\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":11353}