{"operation":"document","citation":"15-0195","title":"Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2016-02-17","effective_on":null,"summary":"15-0195 response to Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant concerning 173.403, 173.410, 173.427, 173.441.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0195.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0195.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0195","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2016/150195.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\nFEB 1 7 2016\nClay G. Sweet\nRadioactive Material Shipping Coordinator\nPrairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant\n1717 Wakonade Drive East\nWelch, MN 55089\nRef. No. 15-0195\nDear Mr. Sweet:\nThis responds to your letter of September 28, 2015 requesting clarification of\"exclusive use\"\nshipments under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; Subchapter C; 49 CFR Parts\n171-180). Specifically, you inquire about the authorized packaging of Low Specific Activity\n(LSA) material and Surface Contaminated Objects (SCO) in light of a change to the definition\nof \"exclusive use\" (as defined in§ 173.403) in the final rule, \"Hazardous Materials:\nHarmonization with International Standards (RRR)\" (HM-215M; 80 FR 1076). Moreover, in\nyour request, you have referenced a Letter oflnterpretation (Ref. No. 15-0036) issued by this\nOffice. Your questions are paraphrased and answered as follows.\nQ 1. May a general design packaging meeting the requirements of § 1 73 .410 be used to\nship LSA material and SCO under \"exclusive use\" in accordance with\n§ 173.427(b)(4), even ifthe limits prescribed in§ 173.441(a) are not exceeded?\nAl. Yes. Section l 73.427(b)(4) authorizes LSA material and SCO to be packaged in a\npackaging meeting the requirements of§ 173 .410 (general design requirements)\nprovided that the shipment is consigned as \"exclusive use,\" the transportation is\ndomestic, and the shipment is less than an A2 quantity. In other words, in order to use\nthe general design packaging authorized in§ 173.427(b)(4) to transport LSA material\nand SCO, the HMR (i.e., \"this subchapter\"), specifically§ 173.427(b)(4), require that\nthe shipment be consigned as \"exclusive use.\"\nPlease note that there are multiple circumstances whereby the HMR require that a\nshipment be consigned as \"exclusive use,'' not solely the circumstance of a package\nexceeding the limits prescribed in§ 173.441(a) or (d). Letter oflnterpretation, Ref.\nNo. 15-0036, cited§ 173.441(a) and (d) as an example of when the HMR require\n\"exclusive use\" consignment.\nQ2. May the package of LSA material or SCO still qualify for the marking and labeling\nexception found in§ 173.427(a)(6)(vi), even ifthe limits prescribed in§ 173.441(a)\nare not exceeded?\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA2. Yes. Provided the shipment is offered under \"exclusive use,\" the marking and\nlabeling exception found in§ 173.427(a)(6)(vi) may be used. While it is the\nshipper's option to exercise this provision, when it is selected, the HMR, specifically\n§ l 73.427(a)(6), require that the shipment be consigned as \"exclusive use.\"\nQ3. If the limits prescribed in§ l 73.441(a) are not exceeded, must LSA material and.\nSCO be packaged in accordance with§§ 173.427(b)(l), (2), (3), or (5) (instead of\nusing a general design packaging meeting the requirements of§ 173 .410 in\naccordance with§ l 73.427(b)(4))?\nA3. No. See Al.\nI hope this answers your inquiry. If you need additional assistance, please contact this\nOffice again.\nSincerely, ---7\n/\"? /~ /\nf!!f;L;f~-vL\nDirk D(:~inderen\nActing Chief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n1717 Wakonade Drive\nWelch, MN 55089\n~\n~ /'73. 4 Z(\nG.eft-1Vl.J2- ergy®\n1-800-895-4999\nxcelenergy.com\nRE P NSIBLE BY NATUR\n15-0195\nSeptember 28, 2015\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration\nU.S. Department ofTransp01tation\n1200 New Jersey A venue, SE\nEast Building, 211d Floor\nWashington, DC 20590\nSubject: Clarification on Effect ofHM-215M on the Packaging Provision of 49 CFR l 73.427(b) (4).\nDear PHMSA Representative(s),\nIn January, 2015, DOT issued HM-215M with a required compliance date of January 1, 2016. Among the changes\nin the final rule was a change in the definition of Exclusive Use to include the wording \"where required by this\nsubchapter.\" PHMSA interpretation 15-0036 states \"The definition was revised to clarify that \"exclusive use\"\nonly applies when compliance is required by the regulations, such as when the limits of l 73.441(a) or (d) are exceeded.\"\n49 CFR 173.427(b) (4) states:\n\"For domestic transportation of an exclusive use shipment that is less than an A2 quantity, in a packaging which meets the\nrequirements of 173 .41 O\".\nSince the definition of \"exclusive use\" in 173 .403 is now taken to mean that exclusive use only applies when compliance is\nrequired by the regulations, such as when the limits of 173.44l(a) or (d) are exceeded, does that mean that a packaging\nwhich only meets the requirements of 173 .410, General design requirements, cannot be used for an exclusive use shipment\nunless required by regulation? In other words, can a general design packaging be used to ship under exclusive use provisions\nif the limits of 173.44 l(a) are not exceeded? ( 1)\nIf the package is not required to be shipped as exclusive use, would the package need to be fully marked and labeled if the\nprovisions of 173.427 (6) (vi) are not allowed (i.e. stenciling or marking \"RADIOACTIVE-LSA\" OR \"RADIOACTIVE-SCO\"\nin lieu of other marking and labeling requirements of the subchapter)?\nWould the packaging need to meet the requirements of l 73.427(b) (1),(2), or (3) if a \"general design\" package cannot then\nbe used per 173.427(b)(4)?\nThank you for your time and consideration of these questions. I look forward to your response.\n~lay G. Sweet\nRadioactive Material Shipping Coordinator\nPrairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant\n1717 Wakonade Drive East\nWelch, MN 55089\n( 651 )267-6276\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nFrom: Geller, Shelby CTR (PHMSA)\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject:\nAttachments:\nTuesday, September 29, 2015 4:00 PM\nHazmat Interps\nFW: Request for Written Letter of Interpretation\nDOT Interpretation Request.pdf\nDear Shante and Alice,\nPlease see the attached letter of interpretation. Mr. Sweet spoke with Edom Seifu in the HMIC.\nThanks,\nShelby\nFrom: Sweet, Clay G. [mailto:Clay.Sweet@xenuclear.com]\nSent: Monday, September 28, 2015 12:33 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: Request for Written Letter of Interpretation\nPlease see attached letter in regard to a request for a letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nClay Sweet\nXcel Energy I Responsible By Nature\nRadioactive Material Shipping Coordinator\nPrairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant\n1717 Wakonade Drive East, Welch MN, 55089\nP: 651.388 .1121 x6276 Fax: 612.330.6702\nE: Clay.Sweet@xenuclear.com\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":6455}