Butane Stove Canisters Now "Hazardous Material"

[Rocketman]

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif Butane Stove Canisters Now "Hazardous Material" - not cheaply shipped
[ Before too much discussion gets going, it would be a good idea if some other folks could double check the essential facts of this posting. No point in getting overheated if the facts aren't correct. ]

https://www.outdoorindustry.org/pdf/...elWN081209.pdf (https://www.outdoorindustry.org/pdf/HazMatExemptionsFuelWN081209.pdf)

The HazMat exemption for the 4 ounce butane cans/canisters, especially those by MSR, has been suspended as of last year. DOT previously allowed a "consumer commodity" exemption for these containers.

The details result from a hiker who illegally shipped some canisters by air to Alaska. They were caught and a DOT inspector called in.

The following is taken from the above link.



Shipping some isobutane/propane fuel canisters direct to consumers has gotten much more expensive after DOT concluded the industry is not complying with the agency’s 2002 interpretation of hazmat regulations. In an October, 2002 interpretation letter to a manager at Cascade Design’s Mountain Safety Research (MSR), DOT said that “a mixture of liquefied compressed gases in a container of not more than four (4) fluid ounces capacity” could be exempted from hazardous material packaging and labeling requirements except when shipped by air, in part because the small canisters qualified as a “consumer commodity.” This allowed fuel shipped in such containers to be reclassified as “other regulated material –domestic,” or OSM-D, which in turn allowed FedEx, UPS and other carriers to waive hazmat fees.

When a consumer tried to ship a canister containing 4 fluid ounces of gas to Alaska by air earlier this year, however, a DOT inspector measured the canister and found it could accommodate 6 fluid ounces. Manufacturers say they’ve been shipping 4 fluid ounces of gas in containers of at least 6 fluid ounces to allow room for the gas to expand, but DOT has determined the larger canisters are not OSM-D compliant.

DOT has since inspected several manufacturers and retailers and ordered them to start labeling the canisters as a hazardous material. That will add $22.50 in hazmat fees to every case of 4-fluid-ounce MSR IsoPro canisters shipped through FedEx or UPS, according to Cascade Designs. That’s the same fee the small package delivery services charge the company for a case of 8-fluid-ounce IsoPro canisters, which never had ORM-D status.

Now, shipping of 4 ounce, 12 ounce and 8 ounce canisters of propane/butane are all HazMat shipments with extra costs and limitations.
UPS told me that if I wanted to ship them to myself along the trail, the HazMat fees would apply and I would need to be a certified HazMat shipper by UPS training - which costs $500.

For some long distance hikers, it may be time to evaluate the selection of stove fuel to something else, or to more carefully plan fuel consumption/carrying to get from retail outlet to retail outlet along any long trail you may be hiking.

[Rocketman]

UPS Hazardous Materials Support Center
takes from the www.ups.com website



If you have any questions about shipping hazardous materials with UPS, please call the UPS Hazardous Materials Support Center at 1-800-554-9964.
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif Butane Stove Canisters Now "Hazardous Material" - not cheaply shipped

UPS told me that if I wanted to ship them to myself along the trail, the HazMat fees would apply and I would need to be a certified HazMat shipper by UPS training - which costs $500.

For some long distance hikers, it may be time to evaluate the selection of stove fuel to something else, or to more carefully plan fuel consumption/carrying to get from retail outlet to retail outlet along any long trail you may be hiking.

[white_russian]

So what are the implications concerning USPS Parcel Post. I could care less about UPS and FedEx

[Rocketman]

I suggest that you try to buy some stove canisters online and have them shipped to you by USPS.

It isn't gonna happen.

Several retailers have notices that all shipments of stove canisters are now Hazardous Material shipments and have a hefty surcharge should you elect to buy and have them shipped to you, rather than pick them up in person.

The USPS generally uses DOT rulings, specifically safety rulings. The butane is no longer “other regulated material –domestic,” or OSM-D, and the packages containing the stove canisters shipped by USPS had to bear the label OSM-D, and they cannot be so labeled any longer.

Perhaps you can call your post office to see if they will let you ship them now. You are likely to be prohibited from sending stove canisters (hazardous material) to yourself care of "general delivery".

When I tried to ship canisters by USPS ground in 2008, my local postmaster wouldn't allow shipping of the 8 ounce containers unless I could produce a DOT 2p certification for them. That was in writing. The issue of 4 ounce containers didn't come up at that time. The 8 ounce containers couldn't qualify for DOT 2p status as they were physically too large in diameter.

[RGB]

I would find some hungry local cats and make a Super Cat.

[10-K]

Wonder what this will do to retail prices?

[Cookerhiker]

Hmm, this puts me in a bind for my upcoming Allegheny Trail hike (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19996&page=5). The Trail is pretty isolated and the few stores encountered aren't likely to carry canisters. I was planning to mail all supplies including canisters. I think I'll visit my local PO Monday morning with a canister and see what they say.

I suppose I can always carry 286 miles-worth of canisters.:rolleyes:

[rusty075]

The mailing of canisters, via USPS, shouldn't be affected by the DOT ruling. All the usual limitation per Publication 52 (http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/pubs/pub52.pdf) should still apply: 33.6oz or less, surface mail only. The DOT ruling Rocketman references is pretty limited in scope; the DOT has for years said that containers smaller than 4oz were exempt for being declared Hazardous Materials and thus could be shipped by air without jumping through all the hoops, but now some busy-body bureaucrat has decided that shipping 4oz of gas in a container that could technically hold 6oz of liquid is in violation of that rule.

Either way, on the AT I didn't find it to be an issue. There's enough sources for canisters along the trail that there isn't really a need to ship them to yourself.

[rusty075]

Hmm, this puts me in a bind for my upcoming Allegheny Trail hike (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19996&page=5). The Trail is pretty isolated and the few stores encountered aren't likely to carry canisters. I was planning to mail all supplies including canisters. I think I'll visit my local PO Monday morning with a canister and see what they say.

I suppose I can always carry 286 miles-worth of canisters.:rolleyes:

Just to show what an exciting Saturday night I'm having, I did some math:

286 miles, at 12 miles per day = 24 hiking days
2 cooked meals per day, times 24 days, = 48 "boils"
In experiments with my stove, it takes about 1/4oz to boil 2 cups, but that's under ideal conditions. In the wind and cold maybe it takes up to double that much, so worst case it's:
1/2oz per boil, times 48 boils = 24oz of fuel.

That's only 3 canisters. Totally doable. I kept track of it for a little while on my hike last year, and I seemed to average right around 20 boils per 8oz canister, using it mostly just to boil water with very little simmering. At that rate it'd be just over 2 canisters to do 286 miles. (so you'd end up carrying a third one anyway)

[Cookerhiker]

Just to show what an exciting Saturday night I'm having, I did some math:

286 miles, at 12 miles per day = 24 hiking days
2 cooked meals per day, times 24 days, = 48 "boils"
In experiments with my stove, it takes about 1/4oz to boil 2 cups, but that's under ideal conditions. In the wind and cold maybe it takes up to double that much, so worst case it's:
1/2oz per boil, times 48 boils = 24oz of fuel.

That's only 3 canisters. Totally doable. I kept track of it for a little while on my hike last year, and I seemed to average right around 20 boils per 8oz canister, using it mostly just to boil water with very little simmering. At that rate it'd be just over 2 canisters to do 286 miles. (so you'd end up carrying a third one anyway)

Thanks for your detailed analysis. I was projecting about 4-5 but didn't think it through. I admit to not being very efficient in my fuel usage but I'm getting better!

[Roland]

I just did a very quick search of the following websites and could not find isobutane fuel canisters available for online purchase: REI, Campmor, EMS

These outfitters still sell stoves online, but canister fuel appears to be restricted to in-store purchase only.

[Rocketman]

Hmm, this puts me in a bind for my upcoming Allegheny Trail hike (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19996&page=5). The Trail is pretty isolated and the few stores encountered aren't likely to carry canisters. I was planning to mail all supplies including canisters. I think I'll visit my local PO Monday morning with a canister and see what they say.

I suppose I can always carry 286 miles-worth of canisters.:rolleyes:

I would carry in both the 4 ounce canister and the 8 ounce canister on the off chance that the 4 ounce canisters are still treated differently than the 8 ounce ones by USPS.

Uncle Johnny told me that it was the 8 ounce cansiter that the USPS objected to (in 2008) and that the 4 ounce canisters were routinely surface mailed, then.

Two 4 ounce capacity canisters weigh somewhat more than does a single 8 ounce one.

To optimize your chances of a favorable reply, maybe just carrying the 4 ounce one is the smart thing to do. Maybe not.

Please post your results.

[Cookerhiker]

I would carry in both the 4 ounce canister and the 8 ounce canister on the off chance that the 4 ounce canisters are still treated differently than the 8 ounce ones by USPS.

Uncle Johnny told me that it was the 8 ounce cansiter that the USPS objected to (in 2008) and that the 4 ounce canisters were routinely surface mailed, then.

Two 4 ounce capacity canisters weigh somewhat more than does a single 8 ounce one.

To optimize your chances of a favorable reply, maybe just carrying the 4 ounce one is the smart thing to do. Maybe not.

Please post your results.

Will do. Not sure I have a 4 oz can - I only use them for bicycle camping.

[Kerosene]

If you insist on using a butane stove and carry 3+ canisters for your hike, then it might behoove you to take a close look at a JetBoil, trading off the additional weight of the stove for carrying one less canister.

[Cookerhiker]

If you insist on using a butane stove and carry 3+ canisters for your hike, then it might behoove you to take a close look at a JetBoil, trading off the additional weight of the stove for carrying one less canister.

I also have the option of delaying the hike by about 1/2 a day and hand-delivering my drop boxes to some places along the way. This probably makes the most sense.

[Rocketman]

I also have the option of delaying the hike by about 1/2 a day and hand-delivering my drop boxes to some places along the way. This probably makes the most sense.

Sounds like you have a pretty good backup plan.

I would still like to see another post office questioned about the containers. The same postmaster who denied shipping in 2008 is still at my local post office.

I phoned (in 2008) several post offices along the AT and the most common response was "Butane can't be shipped" which is/was in direct contradiction to the USPS regulations in USPS Publication 52.
http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/pubs/pub52.pdf

[lucky luke]

ahhmmmm, don´t get me wrong...

are they asking at the postoffice whats in the box? do you tell them? tell them the truth? or do you say food, or clothes,etc. ??

i mean in europe i can-legally- send lighter gas in a box of 72 250 ml bottles, or even 2 of those boxes in one package. and nobody asks whats inside. never....

and if they would ask me what is inside and the truth was a problem i would just say something else. if i had to i would fake the senders adress and name.

so i don´t really see the problem with this rule...

greets
lucky luke

[Cookerhiker]

ahhmmmm, don´t get me wrong...

are they asking at the postoffice whats in the box? do you tell them? tell them the truth? or do you say food, or clothes,etc. ??

i mean in europe i can-legally- send lighter gas in a box of 72 250 ml bottles, or even 2 of those boxes in one package. and nobody asks whats inside. never....

and if they would ask me what is inside and the truth was a problem i would just say something else. if i had to i would fake the senders adress and name.

so i don´t really see the problem with this rule...

greets
lucky luke

They usually don't ask what's in the box. Rather, they typically ask if there's anything "...fragile, liquid, perishable, or hazardous.." (emphasis mine).

I've been to my local PO with my canisters twice this week but the line was way too long so I still haven't found out how they regard canisters.

[white_russian]

ahhmmmm, don´t get me wrong...

are they asking at the postoffice whats in the box? do you tell them? tell them the truth? or do you say food, or clothes,etc. ??

i mean in europe i can-legally- send lighter gas in a box of 72 250 ml bottles, or even 2 of those boxes in one package. and nobody asks whats inside. never....

and if they would ask me what is inside and the truth was a problem i would just say something else. if i had to i would fake the senders adress and name.

so i don´t really see the problem with this rule...

greets
lucky luke
I'm right there with you. They do ask, but I have seen some postal clerks give subtle hints that folks should just lie after the sender goes and tells them the truth.

[boarstone]

You guys better look at the posters in your US post offices next time your in there! NO CANISTERS UNDER PRESSURE OF ANY KIND allowed to be shipped...

[Rocket Jones]

Yep, no need to tell the truth. Except that if by some freak chance they do find out (box is damaged, canister springs a leak, etc) then you're looking at a Federal crime.

[Panzer1]

this may change things. you may begin to see less canister stoves on the trail.

Panzer

[Panzer1]

my gut feeling is that canisters seem to be more sturdy that liquid fuel containers such as coleman fluid.

Panzer

[rusty075]

You guys better look at the posters in your US post offices next time your in there! NO CANISTERS UNDER PRESSURE OF ANY KIND allowed to be shipped...

Only for shipping via air. The USPS rules have not changed. They are still permitted for ground shipping, same as they always have been. You may still get grief from PO employees who don't know their own rules, but that's the same as it's always been too.



this may change things. you may begin to see less canister stoves on the trail.

The DOT ruling that prompted this thread only applies to air shipping of 4oz canisters. For that matter, the rules for 8oz canisters haven't changed either - they'll still be just as available as they were before. About the only change you're going to see is that it will be harder or more expensive to buy 4oz canisters off the internet.

[Panzer1]

EMS.com says:

The MSR IsoPro™ Fuel Canister, 4 Ounces is available for in-store pickup only.
they have the same message for the 8 ounce container.

REI.COM no longer carries the containers on their web site.
I don't see the canisters on CAMPMOR.COM either

Panzer

[rusty075]

Yeah, I noticed that too. I'm trying to remember if REI ever had the 8oz canisters available for shipping from their website. Looks like Canisters are going to be an in-person type of purchase now.

[Rocketman]

Only for shipping via air. The USPS rules have not changed. They are still permitted for ground shipping, same as they always have been. You may still get grief from PO employees who don't know their own rules, but that's the same as it's always been too.

The UPSP regulations required the ground only shipping with an ORM-D label on the outside of the package .... evidently only for the 4 ounce size because the DOT had declared them to be ORM-D via an exemption based on the 4 ounce capacity or volume of the container.



The DOT ruling that prompted this thread only applies to air shipping of 4oz canisters. For that matter, the rules for 8oz canisters haven't changed either - they'll still be just as available as they were before. About the only change you're going to see is that it will be harder or more expensive to buy 4oz canisters off the internet.

https://www.outdoorindustry.org/pdf/HazMatExemptionsFuelWN081209.pdf

Shipping some isobutane/propane fuel canisters direct to consumers has gotten much more expensive after DOT concluded the industry is not complying with the agency’s 2002 interpretation of hazmat regulations. In an October, 2002 interpretation letter to a manager at Cascade Design’s Mountain Safety Research (MSR), DOT said that “a mixture of liquefied compressed gases in a container of not more than four (4) fluid ounces capacity” could be exempted from hazardous material packaging and labeling requirements except when shipped by air, in part because the small canisters qualified as a “consumer commodity.” This allowed fuel shipped in such containers to be reclassified as “other regulated material –domestic,” or OSM-D, which in turn allowed FedEx, UPS and other carriers to waive hazmat fees.


When a consumer tried to ship a canister containing 4 fluid ounces of gas to Alaska by air earlier this year, however, a DOT inspector measured the canister and found it could accommodate 6 fluid ounces. Manufacturers say they’ve been shipping 4 fluid ounces of gas in containers of at least 6 fluid ounces to allow room for the gas to expand, but DOT has determined the larger canisters are not OSM-D compliant.


DOT has since inspected several manufacturers and retailers and ordered them to start labeling the canisters as a hazardous material. That will add $22.50 in hazmat fees to every case of 4-fluid-ounce MSR IsoPro canisters shipped through FedEx or UPS, according to Cascade Designs. That’s the same fee the small package delivery services charge the company for a case of 8-fluid-ounce IsoPro canisters, which never had ORM-D status.
Manufacturers are now working with Outdoor


The DOT ruling removed the HazMat exception {Allowing them to be shipped ORM-D}for the 4 ounce containers and made them hazardous materials, just as the 8 ounce containers have always been.

The concern is that these containers are now "hazardous materials " and the ORM-D exclusion that allowed fairly free ground shipping has been taken away.

I suggest that those who wish to send these materials by USPS or UPS or FedEx contact the shippers for the status of shipping. I have been denied ground shipping by UPS for 8 ounce containers because they are hazardous materials, and I did not have a DOT classification number for a 4 ounce container to get a ruling on that.

I'm not trying to be a spoilsport, mainly trying to get accurate information rather than slightly educated guesses.

[Mad Hatter 08]

this is from the usps

read section 10 dealing with hazardous materials
http://pe.usps.gov/text/dmm300/601.htm#wp1064962

as far as I can tell it absolutely has to be ORM-D class to be able to be shipped in any way ground or air.

[rusty075]

I'm not trying to be a spoilsport, mainly trying to get accurate information rather than slightly educated guesses.

No worries of spoilsporting, we're all trying to get to the same answer.

Ok, after more reading of government regs than I ever want to do while at home, here's my new-and-improved understanding of the situation:

Per USPS Pub 52 Hazardous Material Mailability Guide Table, canisters are mailable via ground only shipping if they are ORM-D labeled, and comply with Appendix C section 2A's packaging requirements. 2A's packing requirements for a metal canister are: up to 1 liter in volume, and a DOT-2P labeled container. So, for example, I have here on my desk a 8oz canister, with a DOT-E label that according to the DOT is an approved "exemption to authorize a larger design container conforming to DOT Specification 2P, except for size, testing requirements and marking, for the transportation of a Division 2.1 material".

So it sounds like we'd be good to go, right? I've got a DOT approved canister, in a USPS approved size. Even WB's Canister Fuel FAQ (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?p=97824&postcount=1) says I'm good to go.

But we're not.

It's not ORM-D. DOT-2P, as required by Pub 52, is not the same as ORM-D. Per HMR; 49 CFR Part 173.306(a)(1), canisters can only be granted an ORM-D designation when in containers of not more than 4 fluid ounces capacity. And that's not new; it's always been that way. Bigger than 4 ounces, equals never ORM-D. Never ORM-D equals never shippable via USPS rules.

So I was completely wrong with regards to 8oz containers. The WB Canister Fuel FAQ (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?p=97824&postcount=1) is wrong too, and always has been. It's very confusing. I don't know why the USPS references shipping sizes of up to a liter when nothing over 4oz will ever get a ORM-D exemption.

In Summary: You could never legally ship an 8oz fuel canister, not even by ground, regardless of labeling. Up until recently you could ship 4oz canisters by ground, but now you can't. Ever.

Those of us who did ship 8oz canisters were unknowingly using USPS's confusing rules to trick our post masters into letting us ship them.

Someone who has the authority to do so should probably revise the FAQ to reflect that. Unless I'm wrong again, which I very well may be.

My brain hurts.

[Rocketman]

Ok, after more reading of government regs than I ever want to do while at home, here's my new-and-improved understanding of the situation:

<big snip>

In Summary: You could never legally ship an 8oz fuel canister, not even by ground, regardless of labeling. Up until recently you could ship 4oz canisters by ground, but now you can't. Ever.

Those of us who did ship 8oz canisters were unknowingly using USPS's confusing rules to trick our post masters into letting us ship them.

Someone who has the authority to do so should probably revise the FAQ to reflect that. Unless I'm wrong again, which I very well may be.

My brain hurts.

You did a fine job. Thanks.

[Roland]

~
It's very confusing. I don't know why the USPS references shipping sizes of up to a liter when nothing over 4oz will ever get a ORM-D exemption.
~

The key is whether or not it is pressurized gas.

If pressurized, the water-holding capacity of the container cannot exceed 4 ounces to qualify for the ORM-D exemption.

However, if not pressurized, fuels may still qualify for ORM-D exemption when packaged in an approved container with a volume of no more than 1 liter.

[bulldog49]

In Summary: You could never legally ship an 8oz fuel canister, not even by ground, regardless of labeling. Up until recently you could ship 4oz canisters by ground, but now you can't. Ever.





How do you arrive at the conclusion 4 oz canisters aren't permitted via surface mail?


10.12.3 Container

An other-than-metal primary receptacle containing a mailable gas may be acceptable if the water capacity of the primary receptacle is 4 fluid ounces (7.22 cubic inches) or less per mailpiece and the primary receptacle meets 49 CFR requirements. Mailable nonflammable and flammable compressed gases are acceptable in metal primary receptacles that have a water capacity up to 33.8 fluid ounces (1 liter or 61.0 cubic inches), depending on their internal pressure. A DOT 2P container must be used as the primary receptacle if the internal pressure is from 140 to 160 psi at 130°F (55°C). A DOT 2Q container must be used as the primary receptacle if the pressure is from 161 to 180 psi at 130°F (55°C). A container with an internal pressure over 180 psi at 130°F (55°C) is prohibited from mailing. Mailable flammable compressed gases are restricted to 33.8 fluid ounces (1 liter) per mailpiece. Mailable nonflammable compressed gases are permitted in individual 33.8 fluid ounce (1 liter) containers that must be securely packed within an outer shipping container. Each mailpiece must not exceed a total weight of 25 pounds.

[rusty075]

How do you arrive at the conclusion 4 oz canisters aren't permitted via surface mail?

The new 4oz ruling goes back to the very beginning of this thread, where the new DOT rule says that the 4oz canisters that manufacturers have been using are not ORM-D because they're actually 4oz of fuel in a 6oz can. So yes, they do comply with the USPS 10.12.3 regulation that you quoted, but not the other part of the requirements - that they be ORM-D.

[bulldog49]

The new 4oz ruling goes back to the very beginning of this thread, where the new DOT rule says that the 4oz canisters that manufacturers have been using are not ORM-D because they're actually 4oz of fuel in a 6oz can. So yes, they do comply with the USPS 10.12.3 regulation that you quoted, but not the other part of the requirements - that they be ORM-D.

Ah...oK, but technically 4 oz cans are still permitted, just not the mislabeled 6 oz cans.

[Rocketman]

How do you arrive at the conclusion 4 oz canisters aren't permitted via surface mail?


10.12.3 Container

An other-than-metal primary receptacle containing a mailable gas may be acceptable if the water capacity of the primary receptacle is 4 fluid ounces (7.22 cubic inches) or less per mailpiece and the primary receptacle meets 49 CFR requirements. Mailable nonflammable and flammable compressed gases are acceptable in metal primary receptacles that have a water capacity up to 33.8 fluid ounces (1 liter or 61.0 cubic inches), depending on their internal pressure. A DOT 2P container must be used as the primary receptacle if the internal pressure is from 140 to 160 psi at 130°F (55°C). A DOT 2Q container must be used as the primary receptacle if the pressure is from 161 to 180 psi at 130°F (55°C). A container with an internal pressure over 180 psi at 130°F (55°C) is prohibited from mailing. Mailable flammable compressed gases are restricted to 33.8 fluid ounces (1 liter) per mailpiece. Mailable nonflammable compressed gases are permitted in individual 33.8 fluid ounce (1 liter) containers that must be securely packed within an outer shipping container. Each mailpiece must not exceed a total weight of 25 pounds.





A DOT 2P container must be used as the primary receptacle if the internal pressure is from 140 to 160 psi at 130°F (55°C).
I am holding in my hand a DOT 2Q pressurized can for "Norzalla Duster", one of those pressurized cans for blowing air to clean things. It has the maximum diameter allowed under DOT 2Q or 2P, of 2.5 inches.

None of the butane canisters for stove gas are DOT 2P containers. You can look on the cansiters to find the DOT number (XXXX), and then look up the DOT XXXX specification to find that the cansiters indeed are designed to hold the same pressures as in the DOT 2P specification, however these canisters are not granted the classification that the DOT 2P canisters are.

These 8 ounce canisters are larger in diameter than 2.5 inches, and I cannot find my one 4 ounce stove canister at the moment to measure it. If I remember correctly, the diameter is 3 inches for the 4 ounce containers, but I could easily be mistaken. I looked up all of this stuff in 2008 while trying to get my postmaster to allow shipping per the statements in the White Blaze Stove Canister FAQ. I was stopped when I was given written instructions to produce the DOT 2P certification of the containers before shipping.

It is the DOT removal of the ORM-D classification for the 4 ounce stove canisters that causes the problem, as without that classification the canisters are defined as hazardous materials.

Here are the USPS Publication 52 Descritive remarks on packaging for compressed flammable gases. See Appendix C of Pub 52.

================================================== ======



USPS Packaging Instructions Appendix C
July 1999 Page 273
USPS Packaging Instruction 2A


Flammable Gases
A Class 2 flammable gas that qualifies as an ORM-D material is mailable
provided all applicable requirements in 342 are met and it is properly
packaged as follows.
Proper Shipping Name
􀀀 Consumer Commodity
ID Number
􀀀 Various (see Appendix A)
Mailability
􀀀 International Mail: Prohibited.
􀀀 Domestic Mail: Permitted only via surface transportation (i.e., Standard
Mail rates).
Required Packaging
Primary Receptacle
􀀀 The capacity of an other-than-metal (i.e., nonmetal) primary receptacle
must be 4 fluid ounces (7.22 cubic inches) or less per mailpiece.
􀀀 The capacity of a metal primary receptacle must be 33.8 fluid ounces
(1 liter or 61.0 cubic inches) or less per mailpiece.
􀀀 The liquid content of the material and the gas must not completely fill
the primary receptacle at 130° F.
􀀀 A DOT 2P container must be used if the internal pressure is from
140 psig to 160 psig at 130° F (55° C). A DOT 2Q container must be
used if the pressure is from 161 psig to 180 psig at 130° F (55° C).
􀀀 A container with an internal pressure more than 180 psig at 130° F
(55° C) is prohibited from mailing.
􀀀 Primary receptacles must have recessed valves, screw-thread caps,
tap closures, or other means to prevent accidental discharge. Valves
and fittings must be protected to ensure the integrity of the receptacle
during transport.
Cushioning Material
􀀀 Sufficient cushioning material must surround the primary receptacle to
absorb shock and prevent damage.
Outer Packaging
􀀀 A strong outer packaging that is capable of firmly and securely holding
the primary receptacle and cushioning material is required.
Appendix C Hazardous, Restricted, and Perishable Mail


Page 274 Publication 52
􀀀 Multiple primary receptacles may be securely packed within a single strong outer packaging, provided the total volume of flammable gas does not exceed 33.8 fluid ounces (1 liter) per mailpiece.
Marking
􀀀 The address side of the outer packaging must be clearly marked with
“Surface Mail Only” and “Consumer Commodity ORM-D.”
􀀀 A complete return address and delivery address must be used.
PS: Looking up the actual DOT Specifications was quite difficult for me in 2008. It doesn't appear to have gotten any easier since.

[rusty075]

None of the butane canisters for stove gas are DOT 2P containers.[/B] You can look on the cansiters to find the DOT number (XXXX), and then look up the DOT XXXX specification to find that the cansiters indeed are designed to hold the same pressures as in the DOT 2P specification, however these canisters are not granted the classification that the DOT 2P canisters are.

There are butane canisters that are DOT 2P compliant, via exemptions to the DOT 2P rules. For example, I have a Primus canister that has the following exemption granted to it: DOT-E 10677 S-171 26 49 CFR 178.33.........Primus AB, Solna, Sweden. To modify the exemption to authorize a larger design container conforming to DOT Specification 2P, except for size, testing requirements and marking, for the transportation of a Division 2.1 material. So the DOT authorized an exemption for Primus' can to the DOT 2P spec's for purpose of shipping.

You could provide that documentation to your post master to get around the DOT 2P requirement, but you're still not "qualified as an ORM-D material" , so while you're one step closer to being mailable, you're still not there.

[makoboy]

I am holding in my hand a DOT 2Q pressurized can for "Norzalla Duster", one of those pressurized cans for blowing air to clean things. It has the maximum diameter allowed under DOT 2Q or 2P, of 2.5 inches.

None of the butane canisters for stove gas are DOT 2P containers. You can look on the cansiters to find the DOT number (XXXX), and then look up the DOT XXXX specification to find that the cansiters indeed are designed to hold the same pressures as in the DOT 2P specification, however these canisters are not granted the classification that the DOT 2P canisters are.

These 8 ounce canisters are larger in diameter than 2.5 inches, and I cannot find my one 4 ounce stove canister at the moment to measure it. If I remember correctly, the diameter is 3 inches for the 4 ounce containers, but I could easily be mistaken. I looked up all of this stuff in 2008 while trying to get my postmaster to allow shipping per the statements in the White Blaze Stove Canister FAQ. I was stopped when I was given written instructions to produce the DOT 2P certification of the containers before shipping.

It is the DOT removal of the ORM-D classification for the 4 ounce stove canisters that causes the problem, as without that classification the canisters are defined as hazardous materials.

Here are the USPS Publication 52 Descritive remarks on packaging for compressed flammable gases. See Appendix C of Pub 52.

================================================== ======

PS: Looking up the actual DOT Specifications was quite difficult for me in 2008. It doesn't appear to have gotten any easier since.

My read of that is that you are subject to the DOT 2 if the pressure exceeds 140 psi at a certain temp. What is the internal pressure of a butane cannister?

[bulldog49]

PS: Looking up the actual DOT Specifications was quite difficult for me in 2008. It doesn't appear to have gotten any easier since.

Nothing ever gets easier when it involves the Govt.

[Rocketman]

My read of that is that you are subject to the DOT 2 if the pressure exceeds 140 psi at a certain temp. What is the internal pressure of a butane cannister?

That varies depending upon the contents within the canister. Many canisters are based on gas mixtures including butane, isobutane and propane.

The best data easily available, other than manufacturer's private data, are from Roger Caffin.

http://www.bushwalking.org.au/FAQ/FAQ_Mixtures.htm#Pressure

His data appears limited in upper temperature to 110F or 43C and he reports pressure data as Psi and Atmospheres. This is the same upper temperature limit I found on a google search for butane-propane gas mixtures. The DOT 2P specification identifies 140 Psi (9.5 Atmospheres) at 130F (54.4 C).

If you know the theory of vapor pressure, you will know that use of a straight edge to "extrapolate" the available data to 130F is inaccurate and produces a lower pressure than actually exists.

Typical vapor pressure (VP) relationship is
VP= P0*Exp(-A/(R*T))
Where P0 and A are empirical constants, R is the ideal gas constant, and temperature T is absolute (Kelvin or Rankine) and the gas in a canister is a mixture, not a single substance so the vapor pressure curve is the sum of more than one vapor pressure curve of the type above.

A reasonable rule of thumb from Chemical Kinetics is that vapor pressure doubles for every 9 degrees C increase. But, that is a rule of thumb, not a rule of fact. That would put the commonly used fuel mixtures above the 140 Psi figure at 130F.

A pure butane filled canister would almost certainly have a VP less than 140 psi at 130F, but it would have very poor low temperature burning characteristics. Propane and/or isobutane mixtures are used to attain low temperature performance of the canisters.

[safn1949]

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1002727&postcount=5

Read the rules here.It is legal to mail an 8oz metal canister surface mail.:D

[safn1949]

Or apparently just in my opinion it is.:D

[ARambler]

... The DOT 2P specification identifies 140 Psi (9.5 Atmospheres) at 130F (54.4 C).

...
A pure butane filled canister would almost certainly have a VP less than 140 psi at 130F, but it would have very poor low temperature burning characteristics. Propane and/or isobutane mixtures are used to attain low temperature performance of the canisters.

my google search found more easy to extrapolate table data:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/propane-butane-mix-d_1043.html

I get 123.7 psig at 130 F for a 30% propane/ 70% normal Butane mixture.

Rambler

[Rocketman]

my google search found more easy to extrapolate table data:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/propane-butane-mix-d_1043.html

I get 123.7 psig at 130 F for a 30% propane/ 70% normal Butane mixture.

Rambler

There can be differences between an easy (linear) extrapolation and an accurate extrapolation..... not to mention a real measurement as being even more accurate than all of the above.

[ARambler]

There can be differences between an easy (linear) extrapolation and an accurate extrapolation..... not to mention a real measurement as being even more accurate than all of the above.

I, of course, did the easy extrapolation of 1/temperature vs Ln(pressure), both absolute. What are you complaining about? You recommended this method.
Did you notice that at 30/70 average of pure propane and butane at 110 F gives 94 psig and the table says 93 psig. We are dealing with pretty ideal mixtures here, which means that the propane only helps for a short time as Roger explains.
Rambler

[snaplok]

Anyone ever think that this is just a ploy to tack on Hazmat rates to make more money?

With so many things being shipped through the mail, personally I'd pack it well with other items and be done with it.

Does anyone know specifically of any incidents when one of these blew up on a plane? Because I worked for a cigar catalog company that shipped lighter and butane canisters for decades before the regulations changed and never heard of a problem until AFTER the post office started having finance issues.

[veteran]

You guys better look at the posters in your US post offices next time your in there! NO CANISTERS UNDER PRESSURE OF ANY KIND allowed to be shipped...

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=8577&stc=1&d=1272295759

[snaplok]

http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=8577&stc=1&d=1272295759

So, you can mail a Biohazardous material such as ebola, hanta, typhoid, etc but you can't mail a container of isobutane for backpacking. lmao

[veteran]

Then I found this Document:

http://pe.usps.com/text/pub52/pub52c3_017.htm