Document J8JB2p9pEN3Bzej0wr861QMO

TO: Distribution Interoffice Communication FROM: DATE: SUBJ: T. G. Grumbles March 11, 1991 HM-181 SUMMARY ANALYSIS TGn- XF; rrnT- M[H; AJ0. RF VISTA Attached is CMA's summary o the HM-181 rulemaking. This is one of the best, most succinct summaries I've seen to date. T. G. Grumbles dlj Attached Distribution: TRANSPORTATION CONTACTS T. S. Randolph-LCCP, D. G. Stephens-LCLABt K. C. Cash-LCVCM, M. F. Ticar-Balt, F. G. Jeanson-Aber, G. C. Lipps-Prem, H. D. GarrisonOkc, R. G. Witt-Blane, R. T. Jackson-Austin, K. R. Perez-Hmd, J. G. Farrier, J. M. Kerlegon, H. L. Duckworth, M. L. Williams, R. B. Quy cc: PLANT MANAGERS R. W. Seymour-Aber, L. R. Bauer-Balt, G. D. Williams-Blane, J. Pavao-Hmd, J. Friend-LCCP, J. W. Ware-LCLAB, R. A. Conrad-LCVCM, H. D. Garrison-Okc, P. L. Foote-Prem, V. W. Weiss-Austin T. H. Huffman CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION February 14, 1991 TO: CMA Distribution Contacts CMA International Affairs Contacts FR: International Distribution Task Group RE: Sumary Analysis of HM-181 Final Rule Please find enclosed for your information, a summary analysis of the Department of Transportation (DOT) Final Rule in HM-181, Perform ance Oriented Packaging Standards (December 21, 1990; 55 FR 52403). The analysis, prepared by E. A. Altemos (of Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge), describes changes required to classification, hazard communication, packaging and handling requirements based on United Nations standards and DOT initiative. As HM-181 completely revises the DOT Hazardous Materials Regulat ions, CMA is currently considering whether a need exists to develop a petition for reconsideration. The filing deadline for the petition is March 21, 1991. CMA and the author of this paper recognize that discrepancies may exist in the final rule, and that the information contained herein should be viewed accordingly. If your company would like to participate in this potential CMA request for corrective action, please contact either Hike Ileiaowitz (202) 887-1360 or Frank Principi (202) 887-1262. Thank you for your attention to this matter. VVV 000006133 2501 M Street, NW, Washington. DC 20037 202-887-1100 Panafax 202-887-1237 Telex 89617 {CMA WSH) Shaw, Pittman, Potts S. Trowbridge A PAPTNCHSniP INCLUOING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS SUMMARY OF DOCKET NO. HM-181: PERFORMANCE ORIENTED PACKAGING STANDARDS; CHANGES TO CLASSIFICATION, HAZARD COMMUNICATION, PACKAGING AND HANDLING REQUIREMENTS BASED ON UN STANDARDS AND AGENCY INITIATIVE Final Rule (December 21, 1990; 55 FR 52403) Prepared for: The Chemical Manufacturers Association By: E. A. Altemos Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Washington, D.C. VVV 00000613^ Shaw, Pjttman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS INTRODUCTION. The Department of Transportation (DOT) published a final rule in the Federal Register on December 21, 1990 (55 FR 52403) which, for all practical purposes, constituted a complete revi sion to the Department's Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR parts 100 to 179). This final rule is commonly referred to as the "HM-181" final rule, but it in fact represents a consolida tion of proposals published under a number of different docket numbers (Docket Nos. HM-181, HM-181A, HM-181B, HM-181C, HM-181D and HM-204.) When first published as an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in 1982, the intent behind HM-181 was to replace the existing DOT packaging specifications by the Untied Nations (UN) "performance oriented" packagings in order to provide greater flexibility in packaging design and use, to eliminate the need for exemptions authorizing the use of novel packagings and to align the domestic packaging requirements with those being intro duced elsewhere in the world based on the UN standards. By the time the basic HM-181 notice of proposed rulemaking appeared (May 5, 1987 (52 FR 16482) and November 6, 1987 (52 FR 42772)) the scope of the anticipated action had greatly expanded. It had been recognized that introduction of the UN packaging system com pelled introduction of the UN classification and grouping system. This, in connection with the need for a general alignment of the domestic regulations with the existing major world-wide air and sea transport requirements, dictated an alignment of the descrip tion and hazard communication (i.e., marking, labeling, placarding) requirements. Thus, HM-181 had evolved into a major, indeed, a total revision to the DOT Hazardous Materials Regula tions which had remained fundamentally unchanged since the first half of this century. The HM-181 final rule cancels all the current specifications for non-bulk hazardous materials packagings, other than those for cylinders and radioactive materials, and replaces them with "per formance oriented" standards based on the Recommendations of the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (the UN Recommendations). Major revisions to the system of classifi cation of hazardous materials are made in the final rule in order to align the system with that contained in the UN Recommenda tions. Greater emphasis is placed on the classification and packaging of "Poison - Inhalation Hazard" (PIH) materials which results in significant changes in the transportation requirements for such materials. The hazardous materials description and com munication requirements are aligned with those in the UN Recom mendations, resulting in numerous changes in description, label ing and placarding requirements for materials. Finally, while -1- VVV 000006135 Shaw, Pittman, Potts 6. Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP* INCLUOING PROrESS'ONAL CORPORATIONS the final rule makes no amendments to the specifications for bulk packagings, the description and classification changes, and the general complete restructuring of the regulations, have resulted in significant changes in the requirements governing the use of bulk packagings to transport individual hazardous materials. The above represents only the the briefest possible synopsis of the most important changes introduced by HM-181, but will serve to demonstrate the major implications of this final rule. The final rule represents the most comprehensive revision ever made to the DOT regulations, and will have major impacts on all shippers of hazardous materials. The purpose of this document is to summarize the new HM-181 requirements. Because of the broad scope of the amendments introduced in this final rule, it is impossible to address these changes in detail in a brief summary such as this. Therefore, this discussion will concentrate on the major differences intro duced in HM-181 in comparison to the existing requirements. In addition, since one of the principal stated intents of HM-181 was to align the DOT regulations with various international transport standards based on the UN Recommendations, fundamental departures from the UN Recommendations that were taken by DOT in the HM-181 final rule will also be noted. Certain major aspects of the HM-181 final rule not consid ered to be of general interest to the CMA membership are not addressed in this discussion. These include the requirements for the classification, packaging and transport of explosives, infec tious substances, organic peroxides and self-reactive substances classed as flammable solids. The requirements for each of these classes of materials were fully aligned with the corresponding UN provisions. CMA members having particular interest in these classes of materials are invited to contact the writer directly for further information. Also not addressed are the requirements for gases, except for classification of gases, and radioactive materials, as these remain essentially unaffected by the final rule. Finally, this discussion will not attempt to address the major changes made under HM-181 to the modal transport require ments in Parts 174, 175, 176 and 177 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations. Before proceeding to a more detailed consideration of the provisions of the final rule, a word of caution to the reader is in order. This document contains only the most general summary of the fundamental provisions of the HM-181 final rule. It is impossible to draw attention to detailed requirements that may have very serious impacts on the manufacturers and shippers of particular hazardous materials. This is especially true with respect to the packaging requirements and "special provisions" 2- - VVV 000006136 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCUJOiNG PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS listed for individual hazardous materials in the Hazardous Mate rials Table (S172.101). These requirements, which may be easily overlooked in a cursory review of the final rule, can, for exam ple, have the effect of eliminating the possibility to use cer tain types of packaging, both bulk and non-bulk, for major prod ucts of interest to a particular manufacturer. Therefore, it is imperative that CMA members review HM-181 by "following through" the new requirements as they apply to important products in order to identify potential problem areas in time to initiate appropri ate corrective action. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TRANSITION PERIOD. The effective date of the Docket No. HM-181 final rule is October 1, 1991. However, compliance with only relatively few of the new requirements will actually be mandated on that date because of transitional measures that have been incorporated into the rule. The transitional provisions phase in the new require ments over a period of five years from the effective date and are spelled out in $ 171.14 of the final rule. The elements of the final rule that become mandatory on the effective date (i.e., October 1, 1991) relate only to the classi fication and hazard communication requirements applying to new explosives, infectious substances and materials poisonous by inhalation.!./ The hazard communication requirements are those marking, labeling, placarding and shipping paper description requirements generally found in Part 172. The classification requirements are the revised class definitions and classification criteria that appear in Subparts C and D of Part 173. For example, beginning October 1, 1991, the revised classi fication criteria in Part 173 for materials poisonous by inhala tion would apply, as would the Part 172 hazard communication requirements applicable to such materials. The packagings used for such materials, on the other hand, would not have to conform to the new regulations until a later date as provided in the transitional measures. 1/ For the purpose of discussion of these transition measures, materials considered poisonous by inhalation are those clas sified as either poison gases (Division 2.3) or poisonous liquids classified in Division 6.1, Packing Group I by vir tue of their toxicity on inhalation. Additional information on the applicable classification criteria is provided else where in this document. -3- VVV 000006137 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge * PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROPESSiONAL CORPORATIONS The continued manufacture and marking, in accordance with the current Parts 173 and 178f of those DOT specification packagings that are eliminated under the final rule is authorized until October 1, 1994. On and after that date, "specification" packagings may only be manufactured and marked according to the revised Parts 173 and 178. Packagings manufactured, marked and maintained in accordance with the existing Parts 173 and 178 may be used for the transportation of hazardous materials, other than "Poison-Inhalation Hazard" materials, in accordance with the pro visions of the existing Part 173 until October 1, 1996. However, since no new manufacture of such packagings is permitted after October 1, 1994, it is likely that supplies of many types of these packagings, such as fiberboard boxes, will be exhausted well before the October 1, 1996 date. All other provisions of the final rule become effective on October 1, 1993. This includes the new hazard communication requirements (i.e., new shipping descriptions, labeling require ments, marking requirements, placarding requirements, etc.) and the revised class definitions for all hazardous materials other than those that were mandated on October 1, 1991 for explosives, infectious substances and materials poisonous by inhalation. Also effective on this date are the new and revised packaging requirements for materials classified as poisonous by inhalation. Again, notwithstanding the hazard communication and classifica tion changes effective at this time, all other types of hazardous materials may continue to be packaged in accordance with the pro visions of the existing Part 173, subject to the prohibition, on and after October 1, 1994, against new manufacture of packagings to specifications eliminated by the final rule. The use of non-specification packagings as permitted under the existing Part 173 may continue until October 1, 1996. Since the methods of packaging and the types of packagings allowed for most classes of hazardous materials under the regula tions in effect on September 30, 1991, will continue to be autho rized until October 1, 1996, it will be important to maintain a copy of these regulations for reference until the end of the transition period. The versions of 49 CFR Parts 100 to 177 and Parts 178 to 199, updated as of October 1, 1990, will contain the packaging requirements applying throughout this transition period. Therefore, these editions of the regulations should not be discarded after the HM-181 final rule becomes effective on October 1, 1991. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE. The Hazardous Materials Table in S172.101 is the "heart" of the DOT Hazardous Materials Regulations. The proper shipping -4- Wy 00006138 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS name under which each hazardous material is listed in this table serves as the required shipping description for the material dur ing transport. In addition, for each proper shipping name the Table provides the applicable classification as well as the iden tification number, labeling, bulk and non-bulk packaging and var ious other requirements. In some cases this information is pro vided by the Table through references to applicable sections of the regulations. The HM-181 final rule completely revised the Hazardous Mate rials Table, both with respect to the general format of the Table as well as with respect to its content. The following features of the revised Hazardous Materials Table are of particular note: 1) Hazardous materials description and proper shipping names. The proper shipping names have been aligned with those in the UN Recommendations. As a result, many of the names in the existing regulations no longer appear or have been revised. Certain well-established proper shipping names, including those of many EPA-designated hazardous substances required by statute to be regulated by DOT in transporta tion, not existing in the UN system have been retained for domestic use only and are identified by the letter "D" appearing in a column preceding the shipping name. 2) Hazard class or Division. The hazard class names appearing in the existing Hazardous Materials Table have been replaced by the UN class or division numbers. 3) Identification number. The UN number assigned to the proper shipping name is shown for each entry in the list. Because most of the proper shipping names appearing in the revised Table correspond directly to the UN proper shipping name, the need for most of the "NA" numbers appearing in the existing table has been obviated. Therefore, the vast majority of the identification numbers shown are now "UN" numbers. 4) Packing group. The revised Table assigns a "packing group" to each listed hazardous material, other than gases, radio active materials and infectious substances. No similar information is provided in the existing Table as the con cept of packing group does not exist under the current reg ulations. The packing group is indicated by a roman numeral I, II or III and is an indication of the relative level of hazard of a material within the assigned hazard class. Packing Group I indicates high hazard, II indicates -5- VVV 000006139 Shaw. Pittman. Potts 6. Trowbridge a Partnership incluoing professional corporations medium hazard and III indicates low hazard.2/ The packing group concept is taken directly from the (JN Recommendations and is used principally to establish the level of perfor mance required of non-bulk packagings used to transport the material. However, because it provides an indication of relative hazard level it has come to be used for various other purposes, such as establishing certain quantity limi tations and hazard communication requirements, and for determining the primary class of materials meeting the def inition of two or more hazard classes. 5) Special provisions. One or more notes, or "special provi sions," may be indicated for an entry in the Table. The text of each special provision is provided in S172.102. The special provisions may provide qualifying information concerning the entry in question, additional bulk or non-bulk packaging requirements (for example, prohibited materials of construction of packagings, requirements for insulation of bulk packagings, etc.) or special modal transportation requirements. 6) Packaging authorizations. An indication of the authorized packagings for each of the materials listed in the Table is provided through a cross reference to the applicable para graph in Part 173. Three separate cross references are provided, one to the bulk packaging requirements, one to the non-bulk packaging requirements and one to an "excep tions" section in which the quantities of the material in question for which "specification" packaging is not required, or other exceptions, are provided. 7) Aircraft quantity limitations. The maximum net quantity per package allowed aboard passenger or cargo only aircraft is provided for each of the materials listed in the Table. Since the revised table has aligned the proper shipping names with those in the UN Recommendations (and, therefore, 2/ Generic or "not otherwise specified" ("n.o.s.") entries in the Table may have two or three packing groups indicated. In such cases it is the responsibility of the shipper to deter mine which packing group applies based on the level of haz ard of the material in question. Specific test procedures and criteria for assigning packing groups within each hazard class are provided in Part 173. 6- - VVV 000006140 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUQING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS with those in the ICAO Technical Instructions!/), the quan tity limitations provided in the table now generally corre spond to those appearing in the ICAO Technical Instructions. 8) Vessel stowage requirements. The table provides vessel stowage requirements based on those appearing in the IMO IMDG Code.!/ The importance of these changes to the listing of hazardous materials in the Hazardous Materials Table cannot be over-emphasized. As a result of the introduction of the revised shipping descriptions and the new classification and packing grouping criteria, extensive changes will have to be made to package markings and in documentation procedures. More impor tantly, the revised shipping description applicable to a particu lar material may now refer to completely different types of required packagings than does the applicable description in the existing regulations. The "special provisions" relating to the authorized packagings may disallow packagings of particular mate rials of construction or may, for example, require use of only insulated bulk packagings or packagings with no bottom outlets. It is imperative that each entry of interest to a manufacturer in this table be fully investigated to determine the full regulatory implications of what may, at least on first reading, appear to be only a change in the required shipping description. HAZARD COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS The hazard communication requirements in Part 172 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations were amended in a number of ways by the HM-181 final rule. Changes involve all aspects of hazard communication, that is, shipping paper preparation, marking, labelling and placarding. Some of the more significant changes are highlighted below. 3/ The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air. The ICAO Technical Instructions are reproduced, with certain additions and modifications, in the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). 4/ The International Maritime Organization (IMO) International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code. -7- VVV 000006141 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUOING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS Shipping paper requirements. The major change to the way in which hazardous materials will be required to be described on shipping papers involves the previously outlined extensive changes to the proper shipping names. However, there are a number of additional requirements. Some of these may compel extensive alterations to computer gener ated shipping paper programs since, in addition to changes in the information already required to be provided on the shipping paper, additional fields will be needed to handle information not previously required to be included in the shipping papers. Changes or additions to the shipping paper requirements include: 1) The hazard class or division must now be indicated by the class or division number assigned to the material in the Hazardous Materials Table. Hazard class or division names mav be shown in parentheses following the numerical hazard class. 2) The oasic hazardous materials description must now include the packing group for the material, as indicated in the Hazardous Materials Table, following the UN Number. The roman numeral indicating the packing group must be preceded by the letters "PG", for example "PG III." 3) Shipping papers for gases in Division 2.3, and for poison ous liquids classed in Division 6.1, Packing Group I by virtue of their toxicity on inhalation, must bear the nota tion "Poison-Inhalation Hazard" and, in addition, must indicate the "hazard zone" for the material in accordance with the criteria in Part 173 (e.g., "Hazard Zone 8.") It is emphasized that the above mentioned requirements are in addition to the existing shipping paper entry requirements in Part 172. Marking requirements. No fundamental changes were introduced through the HM-181 final rule to the types of information required to be marked on packages containing hazardous materials. However, the rule did replace the requirement to mark "THIS SIDE UP" or "THIS END UP" on packagings with inner packagings containing liquids by a requirement to mark orientation arrows conforming to ISO Standard R780-1968 on two opposing sides of the package, in addition, packages containing gases of Division 2.3 and poisonous liquids classified in Division 6.1, Packing Group I by virtue or toxicity on inhalation are required to be marked "Poison-Inhalation Haz ard" in association with the required labels or placards. Bulk packagings must be so marked on two opposing sides. 8- - 0006U, Shaw, Pittman, Potts 6. Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROECSSIONAL CORPORATIONS Although the existing marking provisions in Part 172 already require the marking of the proper shipping name on packages, it is again emphasized that, owing to the revised shipping descrip tions in the Hazardous Materials Table, the names that must be marked on the packages will change in many cases. Labelling requirements. The HM-181 final rule introduces a number of new hazardous materials labels. In addition to five new labels for explosives and a new label for infectious substances, use of a "Keep Away From Foodstuffs" label is mandated for poisonous liquids and sol ids in Packing Group III and a label is required for certain "Miscellaneous Hazardous Materials" (Class 9). in addition to establishing these new labels, the rule makes certain changes to the specifications for existing labels. For most labels (i.e., labels for Classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8) text is no longer required on the label if the class or division number, as appropriate, appears in the lower corner of the label. In the case of subsidiary risk labels, the class or division num ber may not appear in the lower corner of the label. Any label conforming to UN label specifications is allowed as an alterna tive to a label conforming to the detailed specifications in Part 172. The requirements for applying subsidiary risk labels have been revised. Packages containing materials meeting the defini tion of certain subsidiary hazard classes or divisions are required to bear subsidiary risk labels, notwithstanding whether such subsidiary risk labels are indicated for the material con cerned in the Hazardous Materials Table. The requirement to apply subsidiary risk labels is dependent not only on meeting the definition of a subsidiary hazard class of division, but also on the packing group (hazard level) of the subsidiary risk and on the intended modes of transport. These subsidiary risk labeling requirements are taken directly from the UN Recommendations. With respect to placement of labels, the HM-181 final rule requires labels to be placed "on the same surface" of the package as the proper shipping name marking. Previously, labels had only been required to be affixed in a location "near" the marked proper shipping name. Finally, attention is again drawn to the fact that the alignment of the shipping descriptions and classifications of the materials listed in the Hazardous Materials Table with the corre sponding UN provisions has resulted in numerous changes in both the primary and subsidiary risk labels required to be applied to packages containing these materials. The implications of these -9- vvv 0000061*3 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL. CORPORATIONS changes must be evaluated for the hazardous materials concerned on a case by case basis. Placarding requirements. A number of new placards were created by the HM-181 final rule. Essentially, there is now a placard corresponding to each label. As a result, there are now new placards for explosives (a total of six), Spontaneously Combustible Materials (Division 4.2), Dangerous When Wet Materials (Division 4.3), "Harmful" Materials (Division 6.1, Packing Group III poisons) as well as a placard for Class 9 materials (Miscellaneous Hazardous Materi als.) As is now the case with labels and except for the radioac tive materials placard, placards are no longer required to con tain text indicating the hazard. The appropriate class or divi sion number is required to appear in the lower corner of each primary risk placard. Numbers may not appear in the lower corner of subsidiary risk placards. In addition, any placard corre sponding to a specification in the UN Recommendations or in the Canadian Transport of Dangerous Goods (TDG) Regulations is autho rized in place of a placard complying with the detailed specifi cations in Part 172. The requirements for display of placards have not changed significantly. However, transport vehicles, portable tanks, freight containers and unit load devices containing materials with a subsidiary "dangerous when wet" risk, are required to bear DANGEROUS WHEN WET placards on each side and each end in addition to the placard corresponding to the primary hazard. GENERAL SHIPPER REQUIREMENTS. A number of changes were made to the general requirements for shippers that appear in the beginning of Part 173. For the most part these changes were necessary to take account of the introduction of UN performance oriented non-bulk packagings as well as the general alignment of the hazardous materials classi fication system with the UN system. Some of the more significant changes are outlined below. Hazard class designations. The hazard class names previously used in the regulations have, with one exception, been replaced with a numerical designa tion system. The system of numbering hazard classes is identical to that used in the UN Recommendations. The exception to this general rule is the Other Regulated Material (ORM-D) hazard class (i.e., consumer commodities) which has no corresponding numerical designation. Classes are indicated by a number from 1 to 9. For -10- WV 000006144 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS example. Class 3 is the flammable liquids class. Many classes are further subdivided into Divisions. For example, Class 6 (poisonous materials and infectious substances) is divided into two divisions. Division 6.1 (Poisonous materials) and Division 6.2 (Infectious substances or etiologic agents.) A table in $173.2 lists the hazard classes and divisions in numerical order, accompanied by the class or division name. A thorough familiarity with this new numerical system of hazard class/division designation is an essential ingredient to under standing the revised regulations published in the HM-101 final rule. Salvage drums. The revised requirements governing the use of "salvage drums" are contained in $173.3. The requirements now authorize the use of plastic drums as well as the "metal" drums that were previously authorized. Salvage drums must be open head drums marked and tested according the the UN standards (as reflected in Part 178 of the final rule) for liquids with a specific gravity of 1.2 in Packing Group III. The minimum marked hydraulic test pressure must be 35 kPa (5 psig). The requirement concerning the amount of absorbent materials that must be used has been quali fied in the final rule to indicate that sufficient absorbent material must be employed to eliminate all free liquid "at the time the drum is closed." Exceptions for shipping wastes. The exceptions in $173.12 for shipping wastes have for the most part remained unchanged. Open head drums are still allowed for wastes containing solids or semi-solids, notwithstanding whether such drums are authorized for the same materials when not a waste. However, the regulations provide that the open head drum must be in all other respects equivalent to the drum nor mally required for the material concerned. This means that the open head drum must meet the same levels of performance in terms of, for example, the drop test and hydraulic test. This could prove difficult for many open head drums. For example, for Pack ing Group I liquid wastes, the drum would be required to pass a minimum 250 kPa (38 psig) hydraulic pressure test. The requirements for lab packs have not been changed signif icantly. However, waste poison liquids in Packing Group I by toxicity on inhalation are not allowed to be transported in lab packs -11- VVV 0000061*5 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbrioge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS Forbidden materials. This section (S173.21) has been revised to indicate that materials with a Self-Accelerating Decomposition Temperature (SADT) of 50 C (122 F) or less are forbidden for transport unless shipped under approved temperature control conditions. The method presented in the UN Recommendations for calculating the control and emergency temperatures for the purposes of this approval has been incorporated into the section. In addition, a prohibition has been included which forbids the transport of any electrical device likely to create sparks or generate a dangerous quantity of heat, unless the device is packaged to preclude such an occurrence. Reuse, reconditioning and remanufacture of oackaoinqs. The requirements for the reuse, reconditioning and remanufacture of packagings are presented in S173.28. Although these requirements are of most interest to packaging reconditioners, several important changes have been made in this section that have a direct effect on shippers. First of all, a general provision, which applies to bulk as well as non-bulk packagings, has been included that requires that before reuse, each packaging must be inspected and may not be reused unless "free from incompatible residue, rupture, or other damage which reduces its structural integrity." If a non-bulk packaging shows evidence of a reduction in integrity, it may not be reused unless reconditioned. Regardless of whether a non-bulk packaging is reconditioned, if the packaging was required to undergo a leakproofness test when new, it must be retested as required in Part 178 before it can be reused, and must be marked as required in that Part to indicate that it successfully passed the test. The person apply ing the marking must be identified in the marking. As a result, shippers reusing certain non-bulk packagings will be required to perform a leakproofness test, not previously required, prior to each reuse. The new regulations provide that metal and plastic drums and jerricans may not be reused unless they are of a specified mini mum thickness and unless this thickness is marked on the packag ing. No similar requirements exist under the UN system. Since drums and jerricans not meeting these requirements are not autho rized for reuse, the disposal of such packagings containing resi dues of hazardous materials could prove difficult. -12- VVV 000006146 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUOING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS CLASSIFICATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. The HM-181 final rule has, with several exceptions, revised the system of classification of hazardous materials to align the system with that presented in the UN Recommendations. This has two major impacts. First, many more materials will now meet the definition of a hazardous material than was the case under the previous classification system. Second, the classification, and consequently description, marking, labelling, etc. requirements for many hazardous materials will change. In addition, the introduction of the "packing group" concept not only requires the shipper to determine whether a material meets the definition of a hazardous material, but also to determine the relative level of hazard within the applicable hazard class. This makes more dif ficult the approach of using screening tests to determine, on a "go or no-go" basis, whether a material is hazardous since, if it does meet the definition, additional data must be generated to establish the appropriate packing group of the material. The following will attempt to highlight the essential elements of the revised classification system. Precedence of hazards for multiple hazard materials. Section 173.3 indicates how to determine the primary hazard (i.e., the hazard class) of a material that meets the definition of more than one class or division. The list of precedence of hazard classes in the "old" regulations has been replaced with a table extracted from the UN Recommendations. The table draws a finer distinction regarding the prominence of one hazard over another by utilizing the packing group as an indicator of the relative level of hazard within each hazard class. For example, where under the old system the flammability of a liquid always took precedence over its toxicity, under the revised regulations this would not be the case if, for example, the flammability were only of a Packing Group III hazard level while the toxicity is of a Packing Group I hazard level. This results in a system that is more accurate in assigning the primary hazard but, unfortunately, more complicated. Class 2 - Gases. The HM-181 final rule establishes the following three divi sions within Class 2: Division 2.1 - Flammable gases Division 2.2 - Non-flammable, non-poisonous gases Division 2.3 - Poisonous gases. _ vvv 0000061*7 -13- Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge: A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS This system is based on that which has appeared in the IMO IMDG Code for many years and which has now been adopted by the UN for inclusion in the next edition of the UN Recommendations. The classification criteria for Divisions 2.1 and 2.2 relate closely to the corresponding criteria in the existing Part 173. However, significant changes are incorporated in the classifica tion criteria for Division 2.3. Under these criteria, a gas is considered poisonous if it is known to be toxic to humans or if it exhibits an LC50 on not more than 5000 ppm. This definition is new to the DOT regulations, but is consistent with the recent UN decisions. However, DOT has further subdivided Division 2.3 into four "hazard zones" based on LC50. As discussed previously, these hazard zones are used to determine specific packaging and hazard communication require ments. There is no precedent in the UN system for subdividing toxic gases into hazard zones. Under this new system, many more gases will be classified as "poison gases" than was the case under the previous classification scheme. Class 3 - Flammable liquids. The final rule amends the definition of flammable liquid to align with the UN definition and also introduces the criteria for assigning packing group provided in the UN Recommendations. Under the revised definition, flammable liquids are defined as liquids with a flashpoint of not more than 60 C (140 F) . The definition of combustible liquid has been revised accordingly to provide for a lower flashpoint limit of greater than 60 C (140 P). An exception provision permits a flammable liquid with a flashpoint at or above 38 C (100 F) and below 60 aC (140 F) to be reclassified as a combustible liquid, but only for transporta tion by rail or highway. As a result such liquids are eligible for an exception applying to combustible liquids in non-bulk packagings. Under this exception these liquids are not subject to any of the requirements of the hazardous materials regula tions. Criteria for determining packing groups for flammable liq uids are provided. These criteria, identical to those in the UN Recommendations, are based on consideration of the material's flashpoint and boiling point. A number of existing provisions excepting certain materials from classification as flammable liquids have been retained. These provisions apply, for example, to mixtures containing only -14- VVV 000006148 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS small concentrations of low flashpoint liquids and to aqueous solutions of alcohol. Class 4 - Flammable solids. Spontaneously combustible materials and Dangerous when wet materials. Three divisions have been established within Class 4 as follows: Division 4.1 - Flammable solids Division 4.2 - Spontaneously combustible materials Division 4.3 - Dangerous when wet materials These divisions coincide generally with those established within Class 4 in the UN Recommendations. However, the UN includes only materials which emit flammable gases in Division 4.3 whereas DOT has defined Division 4.3 to include materials that evolve flammable or toxic gases when wet. The definition and classification criteria for these materi als again reflect the corresponding UN provisions. While these types of materials had always been regulated under the DOT regu lations, they were for the most part considered flammable solids. The exception to this is pyroforic liquids, previously classed as flammable liquids by DOT but now considered, along with self-heating solids, as Division 4.2 materials under the revised classification system. For the first time the DOT regulations contain specific tests and criteria for the classification of these materials. For example, flammable solid classification, with certain excep tions, is based on burning rate and dangerous when wet classifi cation is based on the rate of evolution of flammable or toxic gases. In each case a specified test is used. Packing grouping criteria is provided based on the same parameters used to deter mine the classification (e.g., burning rate, gas evolution rate). Class 5 - Oxidizers and Organic peroxides. The HM-181 final rule establishes the following two divi sions within Class 5: Division 5.1 - Oxidizers Division 5.2 - Organic peroxides vW 000006149 The definitions of these divisions agree with the corresponding definitions in the UN Recommendations. As previously indicated, -15- Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge * PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS no discussion of the classification system for organic peroxides will be attempted in this document. As with Class 4, the DOT regulations had previously con tained only a qualitative definition of oxidizer but the new final rule now establishes, at least for solid oxidizers, a quan titative definition based on classification tests and criteria. The test used measures the oxidizing potential of a material in relation to a defined reference substance. For materials found to meet the classification criteria, similar tests with other reference substances are used to determine the appropriate pack ing group. No classification or grouping tests or criteria are provided for liquid oxidizers. The rule provides that the clas sification and packing group of such materials are to be deter mined by analogy to liquid oxidizers listed by name in the Haz ardous Materials Table. Class 6 - Poisonous materials and Infections substances. The following two Divisions are established by the final rule within Class 6: Division 6.1 - Poisonous materials Division 6.2 - Infectious substances (Etiologic agents) These divisions correspond to those established within Class 6 in the UN Recommendations. As previously indicated, no attempt is made in this document to discuss Division 6.2. As is the case with the classes previously discussed, the UN criteria for classification and assignment of packing groups have been adopted in the final rule. This results in a very signifi cant increase in the number of materials regulated as poisons since, in general, materials meeting the criteria for Packing Group III had not previously been regulated by DOT. This group includes materials with, for example, an oral LD50 (rat) of between 50 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg for solids and 50 mg/kg and 500 mg/kg for liquids. With regard to materials toxic by inhalation, the final rule preserves much of what had already been put in place by DOT for these materials under Docket No. HM-196. The packing grouping criteria for liquids based on inhala tion toxicity is that presented in the UN Recommendations and employs both the LC50 fr t*ie material its saturated vapor con centration. The latter is used as a measure of the volatility of the liquid. However, unlike the UN Recommendations and as already implemented by DOT, the UN Packing Group I zone is fur ther sub-divided into two hazard zones which are, as previously discussed, used for purposes of specifying required packagings 16:- - VVV 000006150 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS and for enhanced hazard communication. There is no precedent in the UN system for these further sub-divisions within Packing Group I. Class 8 - Corrosive materials. There is little change in the basic definition of corrosive materials in the HM-181 final rule as the existing DOT definition already closely paralleled the UN definition, at least as it relates to skin corrosivity. However, the final rule eliminates the ORM-B hazard class and, consistent with the UN definition, includes these materials, which are corrosive only to aluminum, in Class 8. In this regard an exception from the regulations is provided for materials corrosive only to aluminum or steel when transported only by motor vehicle or rail car when the corrosive material is in a packaging constructed of materials that will not react dangerously with or be degraded by the corrosive material. Packing groups for corrosive materials are defined on the basis of the time taken for the material to cause visible necro sis to tissue.!/ In addition, a material can be assigned to packing group III, irrespective of its effect on tissue, if it exhibits a corrosion rate on steel or aluminum of 6.25 mm (0.246 inches) a year. Class 9 - Miscellaneous hazardous materials. Materials assigned to this class exhibit a hazard in trans port not covered by any other class. Many of the materials assigned to this class were previously included under the hazard classes ORM-A, C or E. Like ORM-B, these hazard classes have been eliminated under the final rule - the only "Other Regulated Material" class having been retained being the ORM-D class (con sumer commodities). For the most part, materials in Class 9 are specifically designated by name, for example as hazardous sub stances, and there is no general classification criteria for 5/ There is one potential source of concern relative to the clas sification and grouping criteria for corrosive materials. Both the current and revised definitions of corrosive mate rial are based on the time taken for the material to cause "irreversible alteration" to tissue. However, the criteria to be used for determination of packing group refers to "visible necrosis" to tissue. Assessment of tissue damage on the basis of "visible necrosis" as opposed to "irrevers ible alteration" will result in many more corrosive materi als meeting the criteria for Packing Groups I or II, which will, consequently, compel the use of packagings tested to higher performance levels. VVV OOOOO&l^1 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge a PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS Class 9. The exception to this is materials which could cause extreme annoyance or discomfort to a flight crew which, though not specifically identified by name in the regulations, are to be classified in Class 9 and transported under the description "Other regulated substances." Hazardous substances and hazardous wastes not meeting the definition of any other hazard class are classified in Class 9 under the revised classification, system. GENERAL PACKING REQUIREMENTS The HM-181 final rule extensively revised the general requirements for packagings and packages that were previously presented in $173.24. These general requirements have now been expanded and subdivided into three separate sections as follows: 1) General requirements applying to both bulk and non-bulk packagings ($173.24); 2) General requirements applying to non-bulk packagings only (S173.24a); and 3) General requirements applying to bulk packagings only. The main features of each of these sections are summarized below. In addition, a new S173.27 contains additional general require ments for packagings intended for transportation by air. Bulk and non-bulk general packaging requirements. Much of what is contained in the revised 173.24 simply reflects good packaging practice. The requirements apply to both new and reused and both specification and non-specification packagings. Packagings authorized for use under the regulations are spe cifically limited to those packagings referenced in the Hazardous Materials Table for the hazardous materials description concerned and must also conform to any "special provisions" noted in the Table. Greater emphasis is placed on compatibility of packagings with their lading under the revised rules. In addition to a gen eral statement requiring the shipper to ensure compatibility between packaging and lading, the regulation goes on to state that even though a particular packaging is specified for use for a particular hazardous material by the regulations, it is the responsibility of the shipper to ensure that this packaging is -18- WV G0G0G6152 Shaw, Pittman, Potts 6. Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS compatible with the intended lading. Detailed methods are pro vided in the rule for determining compatibility of plastic packagings with the intended contents. A new provision has been added which requires solids that may melt "at temperatures likely to be encountered in transport" to be placed in packagings capable of containing the materials in liquid state. Non-bulk general packaging requirements. The majority of the provisions in the new 173.24a have been extracted directly from the UN Recommendations. They address the basic requirements concerning closures for packagings, cushioning and securing of inner packagings of combination packagings, use of absorbent materials, filling limits and similar requirements. Also contained in this section are a number of limitations on the use of packagings based on the markings required by Part 178 to appear on the packagings. These markings indicate the performance levels to which the packaging has been tested. For example, packagings for liquids and solids may not be filled such that the marked maximum gross mass or specific gravity, as appro priate, is exceeded. The vapor pressure of liquids may not exceed that for which the packaging is suitable on the basis of the marked hydraulic test pressure. The only significant departure in this section from the UN Recommendations is the requirement that each packaging be capable of passing a vibration test. No similar requirement exists in the UN Recommendations. Bulk general packaging requirements. This section provides the outage requirements for bulk packagings. In general, a one per cent outage is specified, except for poisonous liquids in Packing Group I by virtue of inhalation toxicity, for which a five per cent outage is required. Also presented in this paragraph are additional minimum thickness requirements for packagings containing certain high-hazard materials, in particular, "Poison-Inhalation Hazard" materials. These provisions apply only when specifically refer enced by one of the special provisions appearing in the Hazardous Materials Table. -19- VVV 000006153 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP 'NCUJOING PROfCSSIONAL CORPORATIONS General requirements for air transport. A new S173.27 is added prescribing general requirements for packagings transported by aircraft. In general, this section is based on the general packaging requirements presented in Part 3; Chapter 1 of the ICAO Technical Instructions. However, one major difference is the inclusion in S173.27 of tables^presenting the maximum net capacity of inner packagings of combination packagings allowable for transport by passenger and cargo air craft. This matter is dealt with in the individual packing instructions in the ICAO Technical Instructions, but due to the more general approach to specifying authorized packagings taken by DOT in the final rule, the use of such tables is necessitated. Because the DOT method, to specifying these packaging conditions is more general in nature, it is likely that certain differences will exist between the DOT authorized inner packaging capacities for a particular material as compared to those authorized in the ICAO Technical Instructions. Other important provisions of this section include minimum pressure capability requirements for packagings containing liq uids (which under the ICAO Technical Instructions have been found to present difficulties for many commonly used types of packagings) and a requirement that hazardous materials in Packing Group III of Classes 4, 5, and 8 be transported in packagings meeting all applicable Packing Group II testing and marking requirements. SPECIFIC PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS As previously mentioned in connection with the discussion of the Hazardous Materials Table, this Table provides a cross refer ence to the specific bulk and non-bulk packaging provisions for each of the hazardous materials listed. This reference is to one of the packaging sections in Part 173 in which the specific packagings authorized for transport of the material are listed by specification number or packaging identification code. The HM-181 final rule made sweeping changes to the packaging requirements in Part 173 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations, both for bulk and non-bulk packagings. In the case of bulk packagings, the changes relate not so much to the specifications for the packagings themselves as to the materials allowed to be transported in a particular specification packaging. For non-bulk packagings the changes are even more fundamental since the specifications for the previously authorized packagings have actually been cancelled and have been replaced by "performance oriented" packaging standards. -20- VVV 000006154 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUOING PROfESSIONAL CORPORATIONS The implementation of the new classification system that introduces the packing group concept for most classes of hazard ous materials has provided a mechanism to quantify, to some extent, the relative hazard of these materials. In the final rule, DOT has used this mechanism to group materials of similar hazard levels and physical characteristics together for the pur poses of specifying the types of packagings authorized for the transport of the materials. This principle has been followed both with respect to bulk and non-bulk packagings and has made possible the elimination of the vast majority of the specific packaging sections in Part 173 for individual materials or groups of materials. Mon-Bulk packaging sections. The final rule provides six basic non-bulk packaging sec tions, one each for liquids in Packing Groups I, II and III and one each for solids in Packing Groups I, II and III. The vast majority of materials listed in the Hazardous Materials Table are referenced to one of these general packaging sections for the purpose of indicating the types of packagings authorized. These general packaging sections authorize the use of virtually every type of packaging that is appropriate to the physical state and hazard level of the materials concerned. As a consequence, this approach offers far greater flexibility in the choice of packagings than do the current packaging requirements. While the authorized packagings for most hazardous materials are now indicated through these general sections there are cer tain exceptions. For example, specific packaging sections have been retained for certain articles, such as "refrigerating machines" and "matches," for which the general packaging sections are obviously inappropriate, and for certain specific materials possessing unique or particularly severe hazards, such as "hydro gen cyanide, anhydrous, stabilized." Also not addressed in the "basic" packaging sections for liquids are the packagings required for poisonous liquids in Packing Group I by virtue of toxicity on inhalation. Two sepa rate packaging sections are provided for these materials, one for liquids in "Hazard Zone A" and one for liquids in "Hazard Zone B." The packagings authorized for these materials closely paral lel those required for Poison-Inhalation Hazard (PIH) materials by the rule published under Docket No. HM-196 and the packaging approvals issued pursuant to the procedures established by that rule. In general, "double" packagings are required (i.e., a drum within another drum). Minimum thicknesses for the drums and additional requirements concerning closures and use of cushioning/absorbent materials are specified. "Single" packagings are authorized for materials in Hazard Zone B under -21- WV 000006155 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCUJO'NG PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS certain "controlled" conditions of transport. The exception in the current regulations for PIH materials in packagings of one litre or less has been removed and replaced by requirement to use a triple-layered combination packaging meeting Part 178 perfor mance standards for Packing Group I. Bulk packaging sections. While HM-181 was not originally intended to implement basic changes in the bulk packagings authorized for hazardous materi als, the reformatting of the method of presentation of authorized packagings in Part 173 through the elimination of the many indi vidual packaging sections has resulted in significant changes in the types of bulk packagings authorized for many hazardous mate rials. The final rule takes a similar approach to authorizing bulk packagings as is taken with non-bulk packagings. A series of general bulk packaging, sections is presented based on the physical state of the materials and their relative level of haz ard. Included within these sections are requirements concerning pressure relief systems, bottom outlets and similar design fea tures, which may be applied only to those materials in a certain hazard class or packing group. The consolidation of the bulk packaging requirements that were contained in the many packaging sections in the "old" regu lations into a relative few "generic" bulk packaging sections has resulted in a number of changes in the packagings authorized for transport for various materials. Furthermore, the types of bulk packagings authorized, and their associated construction features (e.g., bottom outlet arrangements), must be viewed in conjunction with any of the bulk "special provisions" indicated for the haz ardous material concerned in the Hazardous Materials Table. As with non-bulk packagings, specific sections are provided to address bulk packagings for liquids toxic by inhalation in each of the two "hazard zones" included within Packing Group I. Packagings authorized for the transport of pyroforic liquids are likewise specified in these sections. These high hazard liquids are also effected by a number of the bulk "special provisions" indicated for the materials concerned in the Hazardous Materials Table. For example, one special provision applied to these mate rials requires the bulk packagings used to be insulated. Another special provision contains requirements regarding the minimum thickness of the packagings. This provision applies only when the packaging is fabricated of a material other than stainless steel with specified mechanical properties. Transport in portable tanks is dealt with in the same manner as transport in other bulk packagings. It is worthy of note, however, that the revised bulk packaging requirements have -22- VVV 00000615* Shaw, Pittman, Potts 5. Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS eliminated the need for the "IM Tank Table" previously used to specify the required design features for Specification IM 101 and IM 102 tanks used for the transport of hazardous materials. These requirements are now specified through the general bulk packaging sections and through a series of "T" special provisions indicated for the hazardous materials concerned in the Hazardous Materials Table. PERFORMANCE ORIENTED PACKAGINGS General. The HM-181 final rule has extensively revised Part 178 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations which contains the specifica tions for packagings. Except for the specifications for cylin ders and radioactive materials packagings, the existing specifi cations for all non-bulk packagings have been cancelled. The cancelled non-bulk specifications have been replaced by "perfor mance oriented" packaging standards based on the provisions of Chapter 9 of the UN Recommendations. Under this system, the performance tests that a packaging must pass vary according to the level of hazard of the material the package is to contain. Some of the tests, such as the drop test and leakproofness test, vary in severity according to the Packing Group of the material to be transported. Performance test severity may also vary according to the physical character istics of the material to be carried. For example, the required hydraulic test pressure for drums intended to con tain liquids is a function of the vapor pressure of those liquids. Because the new packaging system is performance oriented, an important function of the markings required to appear on the packagings is to indicate not only the type or "specification" of the packaging, as was the case under the "old" system, but also to indicate the level of performance to which the packaging has been tested. This marked indication of the performance level determines the level of hazard and the physical characteristics of the hazardous materials for which the packaging is suitable for use. Examples of the types of information conveyed through the required markings include: 1) The packing group(s) of the hazardous materials for which use of the packaging is authorized; 2) An indication of whether the package is authorized for the transport of liquids or, on the other hand, authorized only for the transport of solids or inner packagings; -23- 000006157 VVV Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 3) The maximum allowable density of liquid contents, or the maximum allowable gross weight if the packaging is intended to contain solids or inner packagings, and 4) The maximum allowable vapor pressure of liquid contents. Under this system, each type of packaging is identified by means of an alpha-numeric "packaging identification code." For example, "1A1" is the code for a tight head steel drum, "1A2" the code for an open head steel drum, "1G" the code for a fibre drum and "4G" the code for a fiberboard box. The meaning of the vari ous elements in these codes are explained in Part 178. A complete review of the UN packaging testing and marking system, as implemented through HM-181, is not possible in a sum mary document such as this. Therefore, this discussion will con centrate only on the types of tests required, any substantive differences between the HM-181 requirements and the corresponding UN Recommendations and the responsibilities of persons marking and using packagings pursuant to the HM-181 provisions. Manufacturers responsibilities. The final rule defines the manufacturer of a packaging as "any person who certifies that packaging complies with a UN or DOT standard, including a person who applies, or directs another to apply a DOT specification marking or a UN mark to a packag ing." Clearly, this definition of "manufacturer" is much broader than simply the person who physically manufacturers a packaging, and experience has shown that under the UN system the shipper of a hazardous material must often take on the role as the packaging manufacturer. This is particularly true with respect to "combi nation" packagings (i.e., packagings consisting of an inner pack aging, such as glass or plastic bottles, in an outer packaging, such as a fiberboard or wooden box.) Under the UN system, packagings must be tested "as prepared for transport." The testing of the assembled combination packag ing is not normally within the capabilities of, for example, a fiberboard box manufacturer, because he has no knowledge of the number and types of inner packagings that will be placed in the box. Therefore, the testing and subsequent certification must be undertaken by the shipper. The shipper must then cause the packagings to be marked with the required UN markings and, as a result, becomes the manufacturer. Under the final rule, the application of the UN markings to a packaging constitutes certification of compliance with the applicable construction and testing requirements. The person certifying compliance (i.e., the "manufacturer" of the packaging) -24- 00000615B VVV Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUOINC PROfXSSlONAC CORPORATIONS must be identified in the prescribed sequence of markings. The manufacturer may be identified either by indicating his name and address or a symbol (which must be registered with DOT) where required in the marking sequence. The manufacturer is required to maintain records of the design qualification tests to support certification of packaging compliance. As a minimum, these records must include: 1) Types, dates, testing locations and a detailed description of the packaging tested; 2) Test specifics such as drop heights, hydrostatic test pres sures , etc.; and '3) Test operators names or the name of the person responsible for testing of each packaging. These records must be maintained at each location where the pack aging is manufactured and at each location where the design qual ification tests are conducted. It should be noted that as an alternative to this "self-certification" approach, the DOT has established a system whereby testing is performed, and compliance certified, by inde pendent, DOT-approved, third-party laboratories. The use of independent testing laboratories is strictly optional. A list of the DOT-approved laboratories may be obtained from the DOT. When a DOT-approved testing laboratory is employed in the testing and certification of a UN standard packaging, it is this agency, rather than the "manufacturer", that must be identified in the marking as the person certifying compliance with the applicable requirements. Marking and oeneral design standards. Subpart L of the revised Part 178 provides the requirements for marking of packagings, as well as general design and con struction standards for each type of packaging (e.g., steel drums, plastic drums and jerricans, composite packagings, fiberboard boxes, etc.) The requirements for marking of packagings closely follow those in the UN Recommendations with two exceptions. The first relates to the requirement discussed earlier concerning the mark ing of minimum thickness on steel and plastic drums and jerricans. While this marking is not actually required on all such packagings, packagings not so marked are not authorized for reuse, even after reconditioning. No similar requirements cur rently exist in the UN Recommendations. A second difference relates to the manner in which the markings are applied. The UN -25- VVV 000006159 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge a PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS Recommendations require any packaging liable to undergo a recon ditioning process to be "permanently" marked (e.g., by emboss ment) whereas the HM-181 final rule requires only "durable" mark ings. The UN has traditionally drawn a very definite distinction between forms of marking considered to be "permanent" vis-a-vis those considered to be "durable." Twenty separate sections are contained in Subpart L which provide general design and construction standards for each type of packaging. The information presented is so general that these sections can hardly be termed "specifications". Nevertheless, failure to take account of these provisions can result in a pack aging being deemed not to comply with the applicable requirements for which the packaging is marked, even though the packaging passes all the appropriate performance tests. Examples of the types of information contained for various types of packagings in these sections include: 1) Qualitative standards for the materials used in packagings. 2) Maximum authorized capacities for each type of packaging. 3) The manner in which seams, chimes and the like must be designed and fabricated. 4) The maximum size of openings in certain types of packagings. 5) Requirements for use of gaskets in closures and the general design considerations for closures. 6) For certain types of drums, the capacities above which rolling hoops are required. 7) For fiberboard packagings, minimum standards for water resistance of the fiberboard. 8) For plastic packagings, conditions under which protection against ultra-violet radiation is required. The above are only examples of the types of packaging design considerations presented in these sections. Although not gener ally dealing with true "specifications" such as the detailed material specifications for packaging components, minimum thick nesses, required dimensions, etc., that were contained in the "old" DOT specifications, they do define in some detail design -26- WV 000006160 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS considerations that must be incorporated into a particular type of packaging. Packaging performance tests. The packaging performance tests are contained in Subpart M of the revised Part 178. Each design of packaging must successfully pass the prescribed tests as design qualification tests. In general, a new design of packaging is one that is not identi cal to a previously tested packaging in terms of its structural design, size, material of construction, wall thickness or manner of construction. Variations in any of these packaging parameters results in a "new" design of packaging which must be tested and certified in accordance with the requirements of Part 178. Cer tain specific variations are allowed without a requirement to retest. The allowable variations, which primarily concern "com bination" packagings, are indicated in S178.601(g). After a particular packaging design is qualified, it is required that production packagings be periodically retested to ensure that they pass all required tests. The period for retesting must be established by the manufacturer so as to ensure that each packaging produced is capable of passing the design qualification tests. In addition, retesting must be performed at least every 12 months for single and composite packagings and at least once every 24 months for combination packagings. It is anticipated that DOT inspectors will confirm compliance with these requirements by ordering random tests on production packagings. Each single and composite packaging (e.g., steel drums, plastic drums, jerricans, etc.) marked as suitable for the trans port of liquids must be subjected to and successfully pass the leakproofness test required for the packaging as a design quali fication test. Part 178 imposes certain responsibilities on the shipper of a UN marked packaging. For example, it is provided that each packaging must be manufactured and assembled (e.g., closed) so as to be capable of passing the prescribed tests at all times while in transportation. In addition, Part 178 provides that it is the responsibility of the manufacturer and the person who offers a hazardous material for transportation, to the extent that assem bly functions including final closure are performed by the person offering, to assure that each package is capable of passing the prescribed tests. There are four basic performance tests in the revised Part 178 that emanate from the UN Recommendations. They are: -27- 000006l*>1 MW Shaw. Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 1) A drop test; 2) A leakproofness test; 3) An internal pressure (hydrostatic) test; and 4) A stacking test. Of these four basic tests, two must be performed on all packagings - the drop test and the stacking test. The other two tests - the leakproofness test and the hydrostatic pressure test - are required only for "single" and composite packagings intended to contain liquids. The latter two tests are not required for liquid-containing inner packagings of combination packagings. In addition to the four tests required under the UN Recom mendations, DOT has included a vibration test in Part 178. The UN Recommendations contain no provisions regarding vibration testing. The DOT vibration test is expressed in terms of a "capability" requirement as opposed to a required test on each and every design type. Part 178 requires that each packaging must be capable of withstanding, without rupture or breakage, the vibration test procedure prescribed in the applicable section. It should be noted that in addition to a design qualification requirement, this vibration test is referenced in S173.24a as a capability requirement for each non-bulk package offered for transportation. A section is included to address the preparation of packagings for testing. As previously mentioned, the basic requirement is that packagings be tested "as prepared for trans port." Hazardous materials may be replaced with non-hazardous materials of the same or greater density as the materials to be carried and with similar physical properties, such as grain size or viscosity. Fiberboard packagings must be conditioned at spec ified temperatures and relative humidities prior to testing. Drop testing of plastic packagings must be carried out at -18 C (0 F) or lower. A specific section is devoted to each of the required tests. In general, these sections address the types of packagings that must undergo the test, the number of sample to be tested, any special preparation of the packagings required for the test, the test method and the criteria for passing the test. When all tests have been successfully passed and the results documented, that packaging is eligible for marking with the applicable UN marking. -20- yyV 000D0&162 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING professional, corporations CONCLUSION The foregoing discussion will hopefully illustrate the mag nitude and major implications of the HM-181 final rule. As has been repeatedly emphasized, it is impossible in a brief summary such as this to draw attention to all potential problem areas with such a major regulatory action. While every attempt has been made to highlight the general provisions of the rule and to discuss major departures from the previous regulatory regime, some of the most important effects of the rule are "material spe cific" and can only be identified through a careful analysis of the rule - as it applies to specific hazardous materials - by the knowledgeable producer and shipper of these materials. If serious problems are discovered in the course of review ing the final rule, corrective action should be sought by filing a petition for reconsideration with the DOT. The deadline indi cated in the final rule for filing petitions is March 21, 1991. However, at its discretion, DOT may entertain petitions received after that date. It is anticipated that a correction document addressing matters raised in petitions for reconsideration will be published before the October 1, 1991 effective date of the HM-181 final rule. In order to be considered for inclusion in this document, petitions should be submitted at the earliest pos sible date. A:0CLeaa4634.91 -29- VVV 000006163