{"operation":"document","citation":"20-0025","title":"Entergy — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2020-05-12","effective_on":null,"summary":"20-0025 response to Entergy concerning 171.2, 171.8, 172.101, 172.504, 172.516, 173.24, 173.410.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-20-0025.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-20-0025.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-20-0025","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/73911/200025.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nMay 12, 2020\nDonnie James\nShipping Technician\nEntergy\nWaterford 3 Steam Electric Station\n17265 River Road\nKilona, LA 70057\nReference No. 20-0025\nDear Mr. James:\nThis letter is in response to your March 11, 2020, email and subsequent email conversation\nrequesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180)\napplicable to placarding visibility. Specifically, you provide the following scenario:\n• Waste Class 7 (radioactive) materials are transported in cargo containers with\napproximately 1150 cubic ft. capacity each.\n• The radioactive materials are placed directly in the cargo containers with no intermediary\npackaging.\n• The cargo containers meet the general design requirements of §§ 173.24, 173.24b,\nand 173.410.\n• You included two pictures of the potential containers and their configuration.\nWe have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ1. You ask whether the cargo container meets the § 171.8 definition of a freight container.\nA1. The answer is yes. Although the definition of a freight container indicates that its use is\n“intended primarily for containment of packages (in unit form),” the definition of a bulk\npackaging means “a packaging, other than a vessel or a barge, including a transport\nvehicle or freight container, in which hazardous materials are loaded with no intermediate\nform of containment.” Therefore, based on the description and picture of the container, it\nmeets the definition of a freight container. Please note, that the non-specification sift\nproof bulk packaging will still need to be authorized in accordance with the bulk\npackaging section assigned in the § 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table.\nQ2. You ask whether the cargo container complies with placarding visibility requirements if\nthe container is placarded on all four sides, the placards are clearly visible, and the\nplacards are not obstructed.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA2. The answer is yes. In accordance with § 172.504(a), unless otherwise excepted, each\nbulk packaging, freight container, unit load device, transport vehicle or rail car must be\nplacarded on each side and each end. Additionally, § 172.516(a) requires that each\nplacard on a motor vehicle must be clearly visible from the direction it faces, except from\nthe direction of another transport vehicle to which the motor vehicle is coupled. This\nmay be met by placards displayed on the freight container loaded on the motor vehicle.\nTherefore, as described in your email, displaying a placard on all four sides of the freight\ncontainer meets the general placarding and visibility requirements.\nQ3. You describe a scenario where two cargo containers placarded on all four sides with the\nsame placard are placed next to each other lengthwise on a vehicle such that they act as\none unit for visibility purposes. In this scenario, the ends of the cargo containers facing\neach other are not visible. You ask whether cargo containers transported in this\nconfiguration would meet the placard visibility requirements without attaching additional\nplacards to the trailer.\nA3. The answer is yes, because both freight containers display the same placards. If the\nfreight containers displayed different placards it would not comply with placard visibility\nrequirements (see A2).\nQ4. You ask whether § 172.516(a) is limited to freight containers and portable tanks. In your\nemail, you give examples of shrink-wrapped pallets with placards on all four sides or\nIBCs with placards on all four sides.\nA4. The answer is no. Section 172.516(a) lists freight containers or portable tanks as\npackaging types that may display a placard, instead of the motor vehicle; however, the\nrequirement is that each placard must be readily visible from the direction it faces except\nwhen the vehicle is attached to another motor vehicle. Therefore, a placard securely\nattached or affixed to the IBC or pallet may be used for this visibility requirement, if the\nplacard is visible from the direction it faces. However, the package must be located clear\nof appurtenances and devices (e.g., ladders, pipes, doors, tarpaulins). Additionally, the\nplacard must represent the hazardous material in the package (see § 171.2(k)).\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nLastly, please note that IBCs or other packagings may be substantially smaller than\nportable tanks and freight containers, which may affect the visibility of a placard when\nthe IBC or package is placed on a flat-bed vehicle.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nDirk Der Kinderen\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n~\\.,,Oy1__Q_\n2-0-002.s\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nWednesday, March 11, 2020 3:03 PM\nHazmat lnterps\nFW: Request for interpretation, 49 CFR 172.516 (a), Re-submittal with physical Address.\nHello Alice and lkeya,\nPlease see below for letter of interpretation request.\nThank you,\nKathryn (HMIC)\nFrom: James, Donald [mailto :djames7@entergy.com]\nSent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 12:44 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) <INFOCNTR.INFOCNTR@dot.gov>\nSubject: Request for interpretation, 49 CFR 172.516 (a), Re-submittal with physical Address.\nUS Department of Transportation\nD.O.T. Information Center\nMarch 11, 2020\nDear Sir or Ma'am,\nPlease accept this correspondence as a request for interpretation of 49 CFR 172.516, Visibility and Display of Placards,\nand interpretation of the definition of Freight Containers from 49 CFR 171.8.\nI have three questions related to the following:\n§172.516 (a) \"Each placard on a motor vehicle and each placard on a rail car must be clearly visible from the direction it\nfaces, except from the direction of another transport vehicle or rail car to which the motor vehicle or rail car is\ncoupled . This requirement maybe met by the placards displayed on the freight containers or portable tanks loaded on a\nmotor vehicle or rail car.\"\nI understand this to mean that if a Freight Container on a flatbed trailer can be clearly viewed from all four sides of a\ntrailer, then the container placarding is adequate and trailer placarding is not required. I looked up the definition of\nFreight Container.\n\"Freight Container means a re-useable container having a volume of 64 cubic feet or more, designed and constructed to\npermit being lifted with its contents intact and intended primarily for the containment of packages (in unit form) during\ntransportation.\"\nI currently use 20 ft x 8 ft x 8 ft Sea lands (intermodal cargo containers/ ISO Containers, approximately 1150 cu ft\ncapacity) to transport Class 7 Dry Active Waste. The Sea lands were originally designed and constructed to be\nFreight Containers per the definition, but I do not use any intermediate packaging within them. The Sea lands\nthemselves are being used as a bulk shipping container meeting General Design requirements of §173.410, 24, and\n24b.\nI have read many interpretations relating to §172.516 and haven't found exactly what I am looking for.\nThe USDOT / PHMSA interpretation dated May 13, 2010 (Ref. No. 10-0075) appears to condone placarding individual\npackages upon a trailer and not the trailer itself, although it is not a \"Freight Container\" or \"Portable Tank\"\n. The\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nexample given was individual pallets of 5-gallon pails shrink wrapped together and placarded on the shrink wrap. It was\ndetermined that having the placards on the pallet wrapping visible from all sides of the trailer was adequate.\nQuestion One: Would the Sea Land above without any interior packaging meet the definition of a Freight Container and\nthe placards on the Sea Land be adequate for Vehicle Placarding (assuming one placard on each side and clearly visible\nfrom all sides of the trailer and not obstructed)?\nQuestion Two: Would two such Sea Lands placed lengthwise door-to-door (placards between the two Sea Lands not\nvisible, but at least one placard per side clearly visible from each direction) be acceptable without additional placards\nattached to the trailer?\nQuestion Three: Is the allowance in §172.516 (a) authorizing the container placards to meet vehicle placarding\nrequirement limited specifically to \"Freight Containers\" and \"Portable Tanks\", or can the same principle be used for\nother containers (such as shrink-wrapped pallets with placards on four sides, or bulk packages with placards on four\nsides).\nThank you for your time and effort. I look forward to your response.\nDonnie James, Shipping Technician\n504-464-33 79\ndjames7@entergy.com\nWaterford 3 Steam Electric Station\n17265 River Road, Killona LA 70057.\nThis message is intended for the exclusive use of the intended addressee. If you have received this message in error or\nare not the intended addressee or his or her authorized agent, please notify me immediately by e-mail, discard any\npaper copies and delete all electronic files of this message.\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":9030}