{"operation":"document","citation":"19-0132","title":"Robatel Technologies — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2020-02-12","effective_on":null,"summary":"19-0132 response to Robatel Technologies concerning 173.412, 173.461, 173.465.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-19-0132.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-19-0132.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-19-0132","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/73401/190132.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\nFEB 1 2 2020\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nMr. Jared Bower\nRobatel Technologies\n5115 Bernard Drive, Suite 304\nRoanoke, VA 24018\nReference No. 19-0132\nDear Mr. Bower:\nThis letter is in response to your November 18, 2019, letter requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to testing\nrequirements for packages of Class 7 (radioactive) materials. You explain that it is not possible\nor practicable to assess the free drop test specified in § 1 73 .465( c) in certain orientations of your\nType A package due to its size and securement to the trailer during transportation. You note that\nthe only possibility of impact to the top surface or lid of the package is if the entire package falls\noff the trailer, which you believe would be considered an accident condition. Specifically, you\nask whether it is necessary to assess the free drop test specified for Type A packages in\n§ 173.465(c) in certain packaging orientations that are not likely to occur under normal\nconditions of transport.\nThe answer is yes. Testing, or other demonstration of compliance in accordance with\n§ 173.461(a), must be done to prove the package meets the requirements of§§ 173.412 and\n173.465 regardless of whether you believe the package orientations are impossible or not likely\nto occur under normal conditions of transport.\nIf you are unable to demonstrate compliance with the testing requirements, you may apply for a\nspecial permit by submitting an application to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous\nMaterials Safety in conformance with the requirements prescribed in 49 CFR Part 107, Subpart\nB. You may obtain information on the special permit application process from our website at\nhttps:/ /www.phmsa.dot.gov/approvals-and-permits/hazmat/hazardous-materials-approvals-and-\npermits-overview, or by calling PHMSA's Approvals and Permits Division at (202) 366-4511.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\n~~~~\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Pivision\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nICJ-0!3'L\nj I 73, ✓ f,5/(c /\nROBATEI. technologi · s\n18 November 2019\nMr. Shane Kelley\nDirector, Standards and Rulemaking Division\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH -10)\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE East Building, 2nd Floor\nWashington, DC 20590\nSubject: Regulat ory Clarification for 49 CFR 173.465(c), Free Drop Test\nDear Mr. Kelley,\nRobatel currently holds U.S. NRC Certificate of Compliance No. 9365 for the model no. RT-100\npackage. This is a Type B cylindrical transportation package which sits upright on a dedicated\ntransportation trailer as shown in Figure 1 in the enclosure.\nIn 2019, Robatel reviewed the DOT regulatory requirements and determined that the RT-100\nmeets all of requirements for Type A shipments. This applies when the package is shipped in the\nsame configuration as a Type B shipment.\nRecently, our customer requested that we consider the possibility of shipping Type A waste\nw ithout installation of the upper impact limiter. For reference, this configuration is shown as an\nexample in Figure 2 in the enclosure. In this configuration, additional justification would be\nrequired to ensure compliance with the free drop test specified in 49 CFR 173.465(c), wh ich\nstates that \"the specimen must drop onto the target so as to suffer maximum damage to the\nsafety features being tested\", and \"the height of the drop measured from the lowest point of the\nspecimen to the upper surface of the target may not be less than 0.3m for a package with mass\n>15,000 kg\"\n.\n5115 Bernard Drive, Suite 304\nRoanoke, VA, USA 24018\n1-540-989-2878\nwww.robateltech.com\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nRDBATEL\ntechnologies\nHowever, a drop of 0.3m in certain orientations of the RT-100 during transportation is not\npossible or practical under normal conditions of transport due to the size of the package and\nsince the package is secured to the trailer during transportation. The only possibility of impact to\nthe top surface or lid of the package is if the package falls off the trailer. We believe that this\nscenario would be considered an accident condition and is not applicable for assessing packages\nfor Type A shipments.\nIs it acceptable to ignore certain orientations of the package when assessing the free drop test,\nif these orientations are not possible under normal conditions of transport?\nFor reference, the IAEA considered this scenario in SSG-26 Section 722.6:\n\"During the revision process leading to the 1996 Edition of the Transport Regulations, it was\nagreed that all possible drop test orientations need not be considered when conducting the drop\ntest for normal conditions of transport. Provided that it is not possible under 'normal' conditions\nfor the package to be dropped in certain orientations, these orientations could be ignored in\nassessing the worst damage. It was envisaged that this relaxation would only be allowed for\nlarge dimension and large aspect ratio packages. In addition, this relief would require\ndocumented justification by the package designer. Package designs requiring approval by the\ncompetent authority should be tested in the most damaging drop test attitudes, irrespective of\npackage size or aspect ratio.\"\nWe understand that IAEA advisory material is not incorporated by reference into the 49 CFR.\nThank you in advance for your consideration of this request. Please let us know if any additional\ninformation is needed.\n5115 Bernard Drive, Suite 304\nRoanoke, VA, USA 24018\n1-540-989-2878\nwww.robateltech.com\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nROBATEL.\ntechnologies\nSincerely,\nJared Bower\nEngineering Manager\nRobatel Technologies\nEnclosure [1]\n5115 Bernard Drive, Suite 304\nRoanoke, VA, USA 24018\n1-540-989-2878\nwww.robateltech.com\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nRDBATEL.\ntechnologies\n30.36 m (99.60 ft)\n18.02 m (59 .10 ft)\nJeep\nFlip Deck\n13.97 m (45.84 ft)\nTrai ler\n4.05 m\n(13 .28 ft)\nStinger\nFigure 1. RT-100 Package Configuration for Type B Shipment\nFigure 2. RT-100 Package Configuration without the Upper Impact Limiter Installed (for example)\n5115 Bernard Drive, Suite 304\nRoanoke, VA, USA 24018\n1-540-989-2878\nwww.robateltech.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":6270}