Test Procedures and Classification Criteria for Release of Toxic Gases from Water-Reactive Materials (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

4C H A P T E R 2 The research approach for HMCRP Project HM-14 included two phases: Phase I: Test Survey and Planning and Phase II: Method Development. The tasks assigned to each phase are provided below. Phase I included the following: • Task 1 (Test Survey) – A review of the literature on water-reactive materials that give off toxic gases and of procedures used by test laboratories worldwide. – Outreach to experts at laboratories engaged in this type of chemical evaluation; chemical manufacturers known to produce water-reactive substances; and to industry associations such as the International Council of Chem- ical Associations, the American Chemistry Council, and the Dangerous Goods Advisory Council. This outreach specifically included the German Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM) as well as the French National Institute for Industrial Environment and Risks (INERIS). – Consideration of testing variables such as water intro- duction rate, particle size, sample size, techniques used to measure gas evolution, and test duration to identify important variables. – Development of draft classification criteria for water- reactive materials evolving toxic gases. – Preparation of a preliminary list of materials that should be considered for regulation as water-reactive substances evolving toxic gas, identifying the toxic gases that are given off, and providing an estimate of the toxic gas release rate. – Briefing of the UN Subcommittee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (SCETDG) personnel on status and plans for this project. • Task 2 (Test Plan Development) – Using the recommendations from Task 1, development of plans to explore ways to modify, improve, and stan- dardize existing test methods. • Task 3 (Interim Reporting) – Reporting on (1) the critical review of the worldwide literature on water-reactive material testing; (2) the preliminary list of water-reactive materials and the toxic gases given off when these materials are exposed to water, and (3) a revised work plan incorporating the outcome of Task 2 for review with the HMCRP Proj- ect HM-14 Panel. Phase II included the following: • Task 4 (Test Development) – Execution of the work plan developed in Task 2, including extensive experimentation to develop a workable approach and validate it. The bulk of the work within HMCRP Project HM-14 took place as part of this task. • Task 5 (Classification System) – Creation of a classification system for water-reactive materials based on the test procedures developed in Task 4 and a knowledge of the rate and toxicity of evolved gases. This classification system was used as part of the formal implementation plan in Task 6. • Task 6 (Implementation Plan) – Creation of a plan to potentially implement and stan- dardize new test procedures for water-reactive materials, including a list of substances that should be consid- ered for classification as substances that evolve toxic gases. • Task 7 (Final Reporting) – Final report preparation, documenting results, summa- rizing findings and conclusions, and including proposed test procedures (in draft ASTM format) and proposed classification criteria. The single largest task within HMCRP Project HM-14 was Task 4, which encompassed both experimental work Research Approach

5 to develop the test and then experimental work to validate the test. Outcomes from Tasks 1 through 3 have largely been reported to HMCRP personnel and other stakeholders as interim status and information reports from the project prin- cipal investigator. The outcome from the work to develop an approach (as part of Task 4) is embodied in the test procedure and the example experimental apparatus reported on here. The balance of the work under Task 4 includes the experi- mental validation work, which is reported within Appen- dix A. This report embodies Task 7.