Drone On

I Have A Drone Problem Too

One of many speculations links recent drone activity on the East Coast to the Department of Transportation, 49 CFR Hazardous Material Regulations. Apparently, there is word going around that a shipment of radioactive medical equipment was received at a disposal facility in New Jersey, the container breached, and contents missing.

The DOT Hazardous Material Regulations clearly state in Section 171.15, after a hazardous material incident, an unintentional release of a radioactive hazardous material in addition to when someone is killed or hospitalized, must be reported by phone to the National Response Center within 12 hours of discovery. This would be followed by a written report (Form F 5800.1) to the Department of Transportation within 30 days, under Section 171.16.

When you think about it, it’s not too far-fetched. Not because the displaced material presents an “immediate danger to life and health”, I’m not sure it does. But it would give the authorities the opportunity to test out covert surveillance apparatus. If there was suspicion or the threat of an unintentional radioactive release or terrorist event, in the panic, it would be difficult for authorities to carry out a door-to-door search. The solution, drones.

Since more illegal and intrusive government surveillance has been done on our computers and cell phones in the past, it certainly is a possibility.

 It would also be a good way to gauge the public's reaction to this obvious affront. At the same time, test any new types of surveillance information technologies for explosives, infectious substances and poison gas detection during both intentional and unintentional releases, who knows even tiny airborne particles of DNA for tracking perceived criminals, terrorists or bloodlines, capabilities that are not yet available to our distant, orbiting military and intelligence satellites.

Probably the biggest benefit to the government might be the fear it instills in the general public, inciting the need for even more intelligence and surveillance funding. What if the detection apparatus, in conjunction with the drones themselves, pose more of a personal and physical threat than the elusive object or individual? The only thing that I know for sure is that you won’t be making that decision.

I had a drone problem in one of my recent seminars. We always try to finish the seminar at the promised time so that people can make their plans for the evening. However, we received a text late in the day from one of our attendees, concerned the seminar would run over per the fact I seemed to just drone on and on. For this, I apologize. This intelligence was highly valuable, and in the future, we will do better in our surveillance of the time. 

Thank you. 

2024/2025 Hazardous Materials, Substances and Wastes Compliance Guide
2024/2025 Hazardous Materials, Substances and Wastes Compliance Guide
from $115.00

Robert J Keegan
Publisher and President
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company
Transportation Skills Programs Inc
keegan743@gmail.com
610-587-3978 text

Did you hear the one about the gas that thought it was an aerosol?

It had its head in the clouds.

When it comes to aerosol cans of spray paint for tagging and small containers of non-poisonous gas, like butane for refillable lighters, most shippers don’t realize the Department of Transportation’s (DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the airlines have different regulatory requirements.

 In most cases, DOT reluctantly will eventually adopt United Nation (UN) Dangerous Good Regulations (DGR) or as I like to say “recommendations”  into their 49 CFR Hazardous Material Regulations (HMR). But with aerosols they seem to have dug in their heels. For years if you called the DOT Hotline at 800-467-4922 and you were willing to press them they would admit that 49 CFR 173.306 could be confusing and misleading.

The (PHMSA) has always acknowledged their regulations are not truly harmonized with The United Nations Dangerous Goods Recommendations, (DGR) or the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

The PHMSA (DOT) defines an aerosol in § 171.8 “as an article consisting of any non-refillable receptacle containing a gas compressed, liquefied, or dissolved under pressure, the sole purpose of which is to expel a nonpoisonous (other than a Division 6.1 Packing Group III material) liquid, paste, or powder, and fitted with a self-closing release device allowing the contents to be ejected by the gas.”

The United Nations (UN) Model Regulations define an aerosol “as an article consisting of a non-refillable receptacle containing a gas, compressed, liquefied or dissolved under pressure, with or without a liquid, paste or powder, and fitted with a release device allowing the contents to be ejected as solid or liquid particles in suspension in a gas, as a foam, paste or powder, or in a liquid or gaseous state.” 

 In the air carrier’s International Air Transport Association (IATA) Recondations a small can of compressed butane gas for a refillable cigarette lighter, is an aerosol. However, DOT does not consider small cans of compressed gas like butane, to be aerosol cans even though they are shipped as Class 2, Division 2.1 and 2.2, Compress Gases under the same exceptions as the aerosol, in DOT Hazardous Material Regulations, (HMR) 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 173.306. Which is authorized when shipping names reference this number in column 8 of the 172.101 hazardous materials table.

Regardless of air or ground, there are other concerns when shipping aerosols as they are restricted in size. Once over the container capacities for aerosol, they are shipped as gases under the shipping name Chemical under pressure, n.o.s..Be aware, under IATA there are more shipping names and hazard class options when shipping these limited quantities by air.

One of the lessons that I’ve learned in my life, 

“It’s not what you do, it’s where you are when you do it”. 

Robert J Keegan
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company
Transportation Skills Programs Inc
hazmat.tsp@gmail.com
610-587-3978 call or text

2024/2025 Hazardous Materials, Substances and Wastes Compliance Guide
from $115.00
Price per Quantity:
Quantity:
Add To Cart

DON’T PUT A LABEL ON ME!


IT’S A COMBUSTIBLE SITUATION

We are all getting less. Companies don’t charge more, they just reduce the amount they use to provide. It's called Shrinkflation. Chocolate bars from 100 to 90 grams, breakfast cereal boxes the same size, less contents. Toilet paper rolls have less sheets. Household cleaning solutions and laundry detergents packaging contain less liquid.

So too, as with the 49 Code of Federal Regulations, (CFR) Department of Transportation, (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration, (PHMSA) Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) who is allowing shippers of hazardous materials and waste to reduce the size of the Class 3 Combustible Liquid placard for use on Intermediately Bulk Containers, (IBC’s) and Portable Tanks.  

Combustible liquids are defined by the DOT as liquids that have a flash point at or above 100°F (37.8°C) and below 200°F (93.3°C). The flash point of a liquid is the lowest temperature at which it can vaporize to form an ignitable mixture in air near the surface of the liquid (per ChatGPT). 

 If the new smaller combustible liquid placard were a combustible liquid label there would be no need for the revision as PHMSA already authorizes the use of labels on IBCs in place of placards per 172.514(c).

There is a lot of misunderstanding around combustible liquid regulations as the international community does not regulate combustible liquids, unless they flash above 100°F up to 140°, but as Class 3 Flammable Liquids.  When they flash over 140°F up to 200°F neither the United Nations, (UN), the International Maritime Organization (IMO) or the International Civil Aviation Organization,(ICAO) recognize domestic DOT combustible liquids as dangerous goods, because of their extremely high flashpoints, only DOT. 

 If a liquid flashes between 100°F and 140°F it could be flammable or combustible. But, if it flashes above 140°F up to 200°F in a bulk container, it is only combustible (per DOT).

Add to the confusion, DOT allows the reclassification of both bulk and non-bulk containers of flammable liquids flashing above 100°F, to combustible liquids under 173.120(b)(1) and 173.150(f)(2) based on the prior combustible definition. The PHMSA does not regulate non-bulk containers of combustible liquids. That’s why there’s no combustible label under 173.150(f)(2), only the combustible placard for bulk containers. 

 PHMSA has also revised 172.514(c)(1) and (4) to allow portable tanks containing combustible liquids to be placarded with a combustible placard that meets the label size specifications in 172.407(c).

Your UN/ID Identification number options are on the orange panel, inside the placard, or on a square on square point. Unless you meet the marking requirements in 172.301(a)(1), for non-bulk container markings, which would then include the proper shipping name, in addition to the UN/ID identification number.

Don’t use the new smaller label size combustible liquid placard on your trucks or trailers as they are not authorized. The IBC’s and portable tanks can use the label size combustible liquid placard with the proper shipping name and UN/ID Identification number on two opposite sides, however all four sides of the truck would be required to have the full size combustible liquid placard under 172.504(a) and the UN/ID Identification numbers under 172.302 (b).
 To be sure some people will wrongly believe that there is a new combustible liquid label and that DOT has started to regulate combustible liquids in non-bulk containers. Download the final rule and check the federal register regularly to prepare for any proposed and final rules in the future. If you have a comment or input on my blogs, a question about hazardous materials, hazardous wastes or hazardous substances regulations please feel free to contact us and we won't charge you at all.

Thank you for your support.

Robert J. Keegan
Publisher and President
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company
Transportation Skills Programs Inc
610-587-3978
www.hazmat-tsp.com

TRAIN WRECK

emergency escape breathing
apparatus training


The 49 CFR Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) fine for failure to train, test, and certify hazmat employees, was recently increased to $601.00. Little more than the cost of a cup of coffee and attending our DOT, EPA & OSHA Hazardous Materials, Substances and Wastes Compliance Seminar.*  That is the minimum, for training violations, the maximum is not more than $99,756.00. 

A violation resulting in death, serious illness, injury to any person, or substantial destruction of property rises to a $232,762.00 civil penalty. That is per violation. Conversely, knowingly, willfully or recklessly violating the PHMSA regulations could result in an additional 5 years in prison, up to 10 years in cases of bodily injury or death.

Did you know, that the PHMSA and some of their friends at DOT in a recent final rule, increased their fines and penalties in the Federal Register? 

You know the PHMSA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Federal Carrier Motor Safety Regulations (FMCSR), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the Occupational Safety, and Health Administration,(OSHA), all regularly update their hazardous material and waste training and testing requirements. Did you read FRA’s final rule on Friday, the 26th of January for new emergency escape breathing apparatus training? This was in response to the East Palestine, Ohio hazardous material disaster where the wheels fell off, literally. 

At least with the seminar registration in addition to the peace of mind of knowing your employees have been trained, tested, and certified they would also receive the new 2023/2024 Hazardous Materials, Substances & Wastes Compliance Guide (over 2000 pages). Which includes the PHMSA hazardous material shipping, the EPA hazardous waste management, and the OSHA worker protection regulations. 

In addition to our Hazmat Compliance Guide and training and testing certification, seminar attendees receive a free** one-year subscription to our DOT, EPA, and OSHA Hazmat Regulatory Update Service. Sign up now. “Training it is the law”.

 Be prepared and relax. We have you covered.

* Note: Better rates are available for additional attendees, even in multiple seminars and time zones, on our website hazmat.tsp.com under Seminars.

** Note: Subscription of our Federal Register Regulatory Update Service for a limited time, is FREE, sign up on our website to receive your updates, whether you plan to attend a seminar or not.


Robert J. Keegan
Publisher and President
Hazardous Material Publishing Compan
Transportation Skills Programs Inc.
Hazmat.tsp@gmail.com
610-587-3978 text

 ‘Parlez-vous ERG?’

A baguette, bottle of wine, and a beret.

Emergency Response Information (ERI) must be immediately accessible to hazardous material and waste drivers, train, flight and vessel bridge personnel. But not the Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG), as many shippers and generators, the ones required to provide the ERI information, believe. Nor does the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) for drivers. 

The ERG is only one of three ways that shippers can provide 49 CFR Department of Transportation (DOT) Hazardous Materials (HMR), ERI. Shippers also have the option of making up their own ERI form in 172.602(a)(1) or attaching a OSHA Safety Data Sheet (SDS) under 172.602(b)(3)(iii). DOT used to recommend the ERG, or at least mention it in their regulations, years ago. Now, the only federal regulation I can find is that Haz-mat team members must “understand” the ERG under 1910.120(q) Emergency response to hazardous substance releases.

Should the ERG be required to accompany all shipments of hazardous materials?  

Do emergency responders rely on the carrier's ERG or their own information?  

How effective is the ERG in air and marine vessel incidents? 

 The answers to these questions could have been up to you. Sign up for our DOT/EPA /OSHA Regulation Update Service. Now!  You missed the first comment period. Don’t miss the second one in the forthcoming Proposed Rule and its crucial preamble, which explains the regulations in layman's terms. This will precede the final rule, which is then incorporated in the Code of Federal Regulations, (CFR) as law.

 Drivers would be in violation in 177.801 if they accepted a shipment without the shipper or generator’s ERI or their own. But it’s never been the carriers or transporters job to provide it, that’s always been the shippers responsibility.

The United States, Mexico and Argentina, all work on the ERG, but I feel that CANUTEC in Canada does most of the heavy lifting. Whenever I’ve called CANUTEC (canutec@tc.gc.ca. tel.613-992-4624) they've been extremely helpful. They answered my question and patiently waited as I brought forth the requested Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) information off their websites. 

One more thing, all government agencies in Canada are bilingual. So when you have a DGR question, you can also brush up on your French.

Merci beaucoup!

Robert J. Keegan
Publisher and President 
Hazardous Materials Publishing Company
Transportation Skills Programs Inc
Hazmat.tsp@gmail.com
Text : 610-587-3978