Radioactive packaging

This is in response to your December 22, 2006 letter and subsequent telephone conversation with Ben Supko of my staff requesting clarification of performance oriented packaging requirements contained in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask if a UN1A2 packaging that is embossed with a complete marking for liquids in PG II and partial marking for solids in PG I, missing the UN1A2 portion of solid marking, is a suitable packaging for a material classed as "Radioactive material, Type A package, fissile; UN3327." In addition to the markings embossed on the bottom, you indicate that the packaging is dual marked on the side with the complete markings as required by § 178.503(a).

In a final rule published under Docket HM-230 (69 FR 3632; January 26, 2004) we indicated our intention to remove paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(6), (b)(1) and (b)(2) of § 173.417 and discontinue the use of DOT Specification 6L, 6M, and 1A2 containers as authorized fissile materials packagings. However, in accordance with § 173.417(c), provided the packaging conforms with all requirements in effect on October 1, 2003, continued use of existing inventories is authorized until October 1, 2008.

In accordance with the requirements in effect on October 1, 2003, the 55 gallon drum must be a UN1A2 packaging that has been marked and tested at the PG I performance level in accordance with Part 178, Subparts L and M, respectively. The packaging you describe is not a UN1A2 packaging because it is not marked in accordance with all the requirements in § 178.503. As specified in § 178.503(a)(10), each new UN rated drum over 100 L must be permanently marked on the bottom with the marks required in paragraphs (a)1)-(a)16), and (a)(9)(i) of § 178.503. Therefore, the packaging you describe is not an acceptable packaging for a material classed as "Radioactive material, Type A package, fissile; UN3327."