21-0009 - BCA Packaging Services — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation | Regulus

Page 1U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 April 30, 2021 Nelson Kays Packaging Engineering Specialist BCA Packaging Services Reference No. 21-0009 Dear Mr. Kays: This letter is in response to your January 29, 2021, letter and previous phone conversations requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to UN Series 6(d) testing. Specifically, you describe a scenario in which your company repackages and reoffers an explosive that is currently approved under EX2003030247; however, the approval is issued to a different company. Furthermore, you state that when repackaged, the explosive continues to be identified and associated with the manufacturer and product designation/part number specified in the EX approval. We have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows: Q1. You ask whether your company can reproduce the packaging authorized in EX2003030247 without conducting UN Series 6(d) testing. You indicate that the reproduced packaging retains the specified segregation dimensions, spacing, and materials of construction of the original inner and intermediate packaging, but is designed to hold less than 20 intermediate packagings (i.e., less than the maximum specified in the EX approval). A1. The answer is yes. The EX approval authorizes the transportation of the explosive in the packaging configuration outlined in the Competent Authority Approval (i.e., the EX approval) letter, and indicates that the explosive meets the UN Series 6(d) test criteria when in the prescribed configuration. Therefore, when the reproduced packaging meets all of the conditions prescribed in the packaging notes, the approval remains valid without needing new UN Series 6(d) testing. Please note that the explosive still must be offered under the EX approval, and must be associated with the manufacturer and product designation/part number specified in the EX approval.#

Page 2Q2. You ask whether an UN Specification 4G (fiberboard) box must be used as the outer packaging when reproducing the packaging, as described in Q1. A2. The answer is yes. See answer A1 as well as the EX approval for outer packaging requirements. Q3. You ask whether the materials of construction (i.e., the specific fiberboard material, fluting, number of corrugate layers or edge crush/burst strength of board, etc.) must be identical to the UN Specification 4G (fiberboard) box in the EX approval, when reproducing the packaging as described in Q1. A3. The answer is no, unless a difference in the outer packaging would impact the classification of the explosive. As specified in the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria, Section 16.7.1.3.1, explosives shall be submitted for UN Series testing “in the same condition and form in which they are offered for transport.” While the EX approval does not specify criteria regarding the UN Specification 4G (fiberboard) box, the classification of an explosive article or substance is based on the packaging configuration used during testing. Therefore, a change to the packaging configuration, such as a change to the UN Specification 4G (fiberboard) box, that would impact the classification of the explosive article or substance (e.g., a change that would affect test results), would constitute a “new explosive” in accordance with § 173.56(a)(2). I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Dirk Der Kinderen Chief, Standards Development Branch Standards and Rulemaking Division#

Page 3Geller 21-0009 Hello Mr. Foster, I am writing to request a formal letter of interpretation. Can you please provide guidance in regards to 49CFR§172.102 (c)(1)347? The Special Provision States: Effective July 1, 2011, for transportation by aircraft, this entry may only be used if the results of Test series 6(d) of Part I of the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria (IBR, see §171.7 of this subchapter) have demonstrated that any hazardous effects from accidental functioning are confined to within the package. Effective January 1, 2012, for transportation by vessel, this entry may only be used if the results of Test Series 6(d) of Part I of the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria (IBR, see §171.7 of this subchapter) have demonstrated that any hazardous effects from accidental functioning are confined to within the package. Effective January 1, 2014, for transportation domestically by highway or rail, this entry may only be used if the results of Test Series 6(d) of Part I of the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria (IBR, see §171.7 of this subchapter) have demonstrated that any hazardous effects from accidental functioning are confined to within the package. Testing must be performed or witnessed by a person who is approved by the Associate Administrator (see §173.56(b) of this subchapter). All successfully conducted tests or reassignment to another compatibility group require the issuance of a new or revised approval by the Associate Administrator prior to transportation on or after the dates specified for each authorized mode of transport in this special provision. My question has 2 parts Part 1: Can Boeing produce 6(d) tested packaging as specified by a CA letter without further 6(d) testing? Pacific scientific offers a 4x5 array of 20count 1.4s P/N 52000735-1 in one package as approved under EX2003030247 with a completed 6(d) test. Boeing would like to reproduce the inner packagings and intermediate packaging. All specified dimensions, spacing and materials will be retained with a reduced quantity of inner packagings. Pacific Scientific P/N 52000735-1 will be offered for shipment using EX2003030247 without further 6(d) testing. Part 2: Is the specification of outer packaging (4G Box) included in requirements of the 6(d) test? CA Letter specifies 4G fiberboard but does not specify flute, number of corrugate layers or edge crush/burst strength of board. Is Boeing able to specify grade of 4G corrugated fiberboard based on POP’s testing alone or does it need to match the specific board material used in the 6(d) test by Pacific Scientific? Attachments: • EX2003030247.pdf • M2252-D37511-3.pdf • D37511-3_PRODUCT STANDARD.pdf#

Page 4Geller From: Foster, Glenn (PHMSA) To: Subject: Date: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA); Hillman, Kenetha CTR (PHMSA) [EXTERNAL] Repackaging Explosives, UN6(d) criteria, UN0323 Cartridge Power Device 1.4S Monday, February 1, 2021 10:46:39 AM 21-0009 Alice / Kenetha Please see the attached request for an Interp for processing and assignment to a Specialist. Thanks, Glenn From: Kays (US), Nelson S [mailto:nelson.s.kays@boeing.com] Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 5:15 PM To: Foster, Glenn (PHMSA) <Glenn.Foster@dot.gov> Cc: Fink, William (PHMSA) <William.Fink@dot.gov>; Boik (US), Randy P <randy.p.boik@boeing.com>; Burger, Donald (PHMSA) <donald.burger@dot.gov>; Singh, Harpreet (PHMSA) <harpreet.singh@dot.gov>; Raszewski, Kimberly (PHMSA) <kimberly.raszewski@dot.gov>; Nicklous, Joseph (PHMSA) <joseph.nicklous@dot.gov>; Payne (US), Scott B <scott.b.payne@boeing.com>; Vos, Brian (PHMSA) <brian.vos@dot.gov>; Pollack, Arthur (PHMSA) <arthur.pollack@dot.gov>; Roth (US), Randolph R <randolph.r.roth@boeing.com> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Repackaging Explosives, UN6(d) criteria, UN0323 Cartridge Power Device 1.4S CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello all, Thank you for taking the time to meet with us and discuss 6(d) testing requirements, Please see attached for Boeings formal request for interpretation and supporting documents. Thank you, Nelson Kays Packaging Engineering Specialist Enterprise Transportation, Warehousing & Logistics Work: 425-306-2826 Cell: 714-615-9170 nelson.s.kays@boeing.com BCA Packaging Services ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ -----Original Appointment----- From: Fink, William (PHMSA) [mailto:William.Fink@dot.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 1:04 PM To: Fink, William (PHMSA); Burger, Donald (PHMSA); Singh, Harpreet (PHMSA); Raszewski, Kimberly (PHMSA); Foster, Glenn (PHMSA); Nicklous, Joseph (PHMSA); Payne (US), Scott B Cc: Vos, Brian (PHMSA); Pollack, Arthur (PHMSA) Subject: [EXTERNAL] Repackaging Explosives, UN6(d) criteria, UN0323 Cartridge Power Device 1.4S When: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 3:00 PM-4:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: Microsoft Teams Meeting EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments.   NOTE:   WE WILL NOT BE USING MSTEAMS AS SOME DO NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITY.     Your conference has been setup for January 19, 2021.   Your dial in number will be 202-366-6338   Your schedule time: 3:00pm – 4:00pm   Number of lines: 15   Your passcode is: 217764       Agenda:   1. Introductions 2. Statement of the request 3. Review of EX2003030247 (attached) 4. Packaging as received by Boeing 5. Re-packaged 6. PHMSA comments on what was presented. 7. Additional information requested/required. 8. Interp letter necessary? 9. Comments/Concerns 10. Action items 11. Ajournment   William Fink IF YOU FORWARDED THE INVITE PLEASE DO SO AGAIN.#

Page 5Transportation Specialist William.Fink@dot.gov   US Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Ave SE, Washington DC, 20590 Office: 202-366-1108 ◊   PHMSA Home | LinkedIn | Twitter | HAZMAT | OPS << File: image001.jpg >>        << File: image002.png >>   << File: image003.png >>   Meeting  Suggested- “…suggest that it may be best to set up a call with Mr. Payne and include our technical experts as well.  To ensure we fully understand the nuance and provide a coordinated response.  That way our experts can ask questions and make sure we understand the scenario fully before we provide any definitive advice.”                Background:     From: Payne (US), Scott B Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 5:09 PM To: 'William.schoonover@dot.gov' <William.schoonover@dot.gov> Subject: Boeing 1.4S shipping   Mr. William Schoonover U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 13 November 2020   The Boeing Company – Global Services Spares Distribution Center SeaTac, WA  98138       Mr. Schoonover,   I am contacting you at the direction of my colleague, Dean Ramert. Dean mentioned that he had the opportunity to sit with you at a roundtable session during a COSTHA conference last year and you provided valuable feedback to the attendees.   The issue I am needing guidance with is the packaging of 1.4S Explosives and whether or not a UN 6(D) test is required.   Boeing is a reseller of spare parts for commercial aircraft, and as such, has a large catalog of parts available to our customers. Some of these are Classified as 1.4S Explosives.    After speaking to several authorities over the years, we have been operating under the impression that we could “piggyback” off of a manufacturers’ Approval without additional UN 6(D) testing as long as we replicated the intermediate packaging called out in the test report (  I am attaching EX 2003030247 for reference).   Dean has recently decided to retire and a new group has assumed his statement of work. The new team is questioning our previous interpretations.   I am hoping you can provide guidance on how we can get this question answered so that we may go forward with the design and testing of our packaging.   I look forward to hearing your thoughts.     Respectfully,     Scott Payne Manager – SDC Packaging Operations Friday-Sunday,  6am-6pm. << File: image004.jpg >> 206-544-0070 | Cell: 206-769-3979       ________________________________________________________________________________ The United States Department of Transportation Learn More | Help | Meeting options ________________________________________________________________________________   << File: image005.jpg >> << File: image006.png >> << File: image007.png >> << File: image008.jpg >> << File:#