{"operation":"document","citation":"15-0069","title":"Mr. Joseph Tsiyoni — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2015-06-15","effective_on":null,"summary":"15-0069 concerning 175.10.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0069.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0069.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0069","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2015/150069.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\n1200 New Jersey Avenue SE\nWashington. DC\n20590\nPipeline and Hazardous\nAdministration\nMaterials Safety\nJUN 1 5 2015\nJoseph Tsiyoni\n1415 N. Rose Street\nTempe, AZ 85281\nRef. No.: 15-0069\nDear Mr. Tsiyoni:\nThis is in response to your letter dated April 7, 2015, requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) relating to a lithium ion\nbattery powered wheelchair or other mobility aid carried by aircraft passengers or\ncrewmembers. In your letter you note that most mobility aids contain a lithium ion battery\nthat is removable but not without significant efforts. You raise a concern that because the\nlithium ion batteries are technically removable by the consumer, the watt-hour limit in\n§ 175.10(a)(17)(v) applies. You request confirmation of your understanding of a previous\nletter (14-0066) that specified that mobility aids containing lithium batteries that are not\nspecifically designed to be removed by the user are not subject to battery size limits.\nYour understanding of the requirements of § 175.10(a)(17) and 14-0066 are correct. In\ngeneral, § 175.10(a)(17) does not limit the size of the lithium ion battery installed in a\nwheelchair or other mobility aid when the lithium battery powered mobility aid meets\ncertain conditions outlined in § 175.10(a)(17) and the mobility aid is carried as checked\nbaggage.\nPHMSA created a separate authorization that permits the transport of a mobility aid as\ncarry-on baggage (see final rule 76 FR 3308; January 19, 2011). A lithium battery powered\nmobility aid authorized in carry-on baggage must be specifically designed to allow its\nbattery to be removed and carried separately. This configuration is different than traditional\nmobility aids in which the battery is not intended to be frequently removed and reinstalled.\nI trust this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to\ncontact this office.\nSincerely,\nDuaned:\nDuane Pfund\nInternational Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nteary\n175.70\nGoodall, Shante CTR (PHMSA)\nGenift, Battery\nFrom:\nSent:\nBetts, Charles (PHMSA)\n15-0069\nTo:\nTuesday, April 07, 2015 6:41 PM\nHazmat Interps\nSubject:\nFw: Lithium Ion battery on handicap scooter in aircraft: - IMPORTANT LETTER\nAttachments:\n0407 letter to dot exec.pdf\nSent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizon Wireless 4G LTE network.\nFrom: joseph tsiyoni <tsiyoni@cox.net>\nSent: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 6:01 PM\nTo: Betts, Charles (PHMSA)\nSubject: Lithium Ion battery on handicap scooter in aircraft: - IMPORTANT LETTER\nMr. Charles E. Betts\nCharles. Betts@DOT.GOV\nDirector, Standards and Rulemaking Division\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\nC. Kelley G\nActing International Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n202-366-8553\nDear Mr. Betts:\nAs the only email I have, I would like to ask you to please have one of your assistant review this issue\nand I hope there will be some contribution to the misinterpretation of the law by many who don't even\nknow how to find the law, not they know what the law states.\nRespectfully,\nJoseph Tsiyoni\nTempe, AZ\n480-949-0894\n(The letter is also below for your convenience.)\n================JOSEPH TSIYONI ===================\n1415 N. Rose Street\nPhone: (480) 949-0894\nTempe, Arizona 85281\nTsiyoni@Cox.Net\n1. Mr. Charles E. Betts\nCharles. Betts@DOT.GOV\nDirector, Standards and Rulemaking Division\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\nC. Kelley G\nActing International Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n: 202-366-8553\n2. C. Kelley G\nActing International Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\nVia Mr. Betts\nRe: Lithium lon battery on handicap scooter in aircraft:\n175.10(a) 17(v)(D) AKA AKA 175.10 Vs. §175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), (iii)\nGreetings:\nI respectfully ask you to please review this letter and provided me the \"simple rule\" about\nbatteries installed in \"wheelchair or other mobility aid\". This issue is very important, and I believe that\nthe message has not been delivered clearly and is confusing.\nEXPLANATION:\n1. In my efforts to communicate with DOT personnel, I run into a confusing situation, especially in\nlight of the Letter of Interpretation, Ref. No.: 14-0066, May 13, 2013 by Mr. Shane C. Kelley, Acting\nInternational, Standards Coordinator, Standards and Rulemaking Division.\n2. The letter was sent to L'Gena Shaffer, Technical Consultant, Council on the Safe Transportation of\nHazardous Articles, Inc., 7803 Hill House Court, Fairfax Station, VA 22039\n3. It appears that the actual and clearer interpretation should have been as follows:\nA. Batteries which comply with §175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), (iii) - should be considered as\nNon-collapsible, therefore not subject to limitation of 175.10(a) 17(v)(D) (in 2015\nchange: 300 WH).\nB. Naturally, batteries installed in all or most \"wheelchair or other mobility aid\" are\nremovable. However, batteries which are secured to the scooter by securing\nmeans, and cannot be removed without un-securing them, thus complying with\n§175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), (iii), should be considered as non-collapsible, therefore the\nlimitation of the new 300 WH does not apply on them.\n4. The core issue is the term \"collapsible\". All scooters used by people with mobility difficulties\nhave removable batteries. However, unlike laptop battery, which can be removed by a simple pushing\na small switch or spring button, there are scooter with battery which are secured and CANNOT BE\nremoved without significant efforts of un-securing.\nHaving such proper secured elements, those batteries comply with §175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), iii).\nOtherwise, you would eliminate most, if not, all \"wheelchair or other mobility aid\" from the exception of\nWH capacity.\n1 am sure this is an important issue, and would appreciate response.\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nAnother issue related is this:\nThe limitation of 300 WH is incomplete.\nThe international industry produces batteries by Ah, which normally uses ODD numbers such as 10,\n12, 14, 16.\nFor 24V or 36V battery, no Ah will be 300, and all are lower or higher. That makes the use of\ncollapsible batteries more difficult and inappropriate.\nFor example, 24V 12Ah = 288 WH; 24V-14Ah= 336. If used 24V 13Ah= 312.\nBy eliminating to lower AH, while the industry has moved to 36V or more, it will be difficult for people\nwith disability to use\nproper and applicable battery, because,\n36V10Ah= 360WH. Thus, the maximum AH for 36V according to the limitation of 300WH is: 8.3Ah. It\nbased on 36V battery,\nmeans using 8Ah in 36V battery results in a very week battery, which most likely is not available\nanymore.\nThank you very much.\nRespectfully,\nJoseph Tsiyoni\nc.c. Director, Council on the Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles, Inc., 7803 Hill House Court,\nFairfax Station, VA 22039\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\n\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\n==JOSEPH TSIYON ===========\n===\n1415 N. Rose Street\nPhone: (480) 949-0894\nTempe, Arizona 85281\nTsiyoni@Cox.Net\n1. Mr. Charles E. Betts\nCharles. Betts@DOT.GOV\nDirector, Standards and Rulemaking Division\n• U.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\nC. Kelley G\nActing International Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n202-366-8553\n2. C. Kelley G\nActing International Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\nVia Mr. betts\nRe: Lithium lon battery on handicap scooter in aircraft:\n175.10(a) 17(v)(D) AKA AKA 175.10 Vs. §175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), (iii)\nGreetings:\nI respectfully ask you to please review this letter and provided me the \"simple rule\" about\nbatteries installed in \"wheelchair or other mobility aid\". This issue is very important, and I\nbelieve that the message has not been delivered clearly and is confusing.\nEXPLANATION:\n1. In my efforts to communicate with DOT personnel, I run into a confusing situation,\nespecially in light of the Letter of Interpretation, Ref. No.: 14-0066, May 13, 2013 by Mr.\nShane C. Kelley, Acting International, Standards Coordinator, Standards and Rulemaking\nDivision.\n2. The letter was sent to L'Gena Shaffer, Technical Consultant, Council on the Safe\nTransportation of Hazardous Articles, Inc., 7803 Hill House Court, Fairfax Station, VA 22039\n3. It appears that the actual and clearer interpretation should have been as follows:\nA. Batteries which comply with §175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), (iii) - should be considered as\nNon-collapsible, therefore not subject to limitation of 175.10(a) 17(v)(D) (in 2015\nchange: 300 WH).\nB. Naturally, batteries installed in all or most \"wheelchair or other mobility aid\" are\nremovable. However, batteries which are secured to the scooter by securing\nmeans, and cannot be removed without un-securing them, thus complying with\n§175.10(a)(17) (i), (i), (iii), should be considered as non-collapsible, therefore the\nlimitation of the new 300 WH does not apply on them.\n4. The core issue is the term \"collapsible\". All scooters used by people with mobility\ndifficulties have removable batteries. However, unlike laptop battery, which can be removed\n\n<<<PAGE 7>>>\n\nby a simple pushing a small switch or spring button, there are scooter with battery which are\nsecured and CANNOT BE removed without significant efforts of un-securing.\nHaving such proper secured elements, those batteries comply with §175.10(a) 17) (i), (ii),\nOtherwise, you would eliminate most, if not, all \"wheelchair or other mobility aid\" from the\nexception of WH capacity.\nI am sure this is an important issue, and would appreciate response.\nAnother issue related is this:\nThe limitation of 300 WH is incomplete.\nThe international industry produces batteries by Ah, which normally uses ODD numbers\nsuch as 10, 12, 14, 16.\nFor 24V or 36V battery, no Ah will be 300, and all are lower or higher. That makes the use\nof collapsible batteries more difficult and inappropriate.\nFor example, 24V 12Ah = 288 WH; 24V-14Ah= 336. If used 24V 13Ah= 312.\nBY eliminating to lower AH, while the industry has moved to 36V or more, it will be difficult\nfor people with disability to use proper and applicable battery, because, based on 36V\nbattery, 36V10Ah= 360WH. Thus, the maximum AH for 36V according to the limitation of\n300WH is: 8.3Ah. It means using 8Ah in 36V battery results in a very week battery, which\nmost likely is not available anymore.\nThank you very much.\nRespectfully,\nJoseph Tsiyoni\nc.c. Director, Council on the Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles, Inc., 7803 Hill\nHouse Court, Fairfax Station, VA 22039","truncated":false,"body_characters":10429}