Oct-08-2015 02:00 PM
Oct-17-2015 08:02 PM
Oct-12-2015 02:41 PM
Oct-09-2015 10:59 AM
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be
Douglas AdamsOct-09-2015 10:47 AM
Crowe wrote:I am wondering too. He still hasn't clarified his plans. There are so many different routes. I personally like 287 around the city.
I just shot an email to MassDOT to clarify this.
I'd be very interested to see their response as I do know people have been cited. Once you get an answer I would post it in either Roads and Routes or General RVing as it's a question that comes up frequently.
Wonder where the OP is?
Oct-09-2015 05:12 AM
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be
Douglas AdamsOct-08-2015 06:26 PM
Crowe wrote:it isn't consistent between states.
Can you point me to where an RV is considered "hazardous cargo"
Propane falls under the definition of a Class 2 hazardous cargo per the USDOT. The HC signs mean Hazardous Cargo. Members of this forum have been stopped and fined plus I have witnessed it myself.
PANYNJ wrote:
Division 2.1 or 2.2
DOES A CAMPER/RV MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR M.O.T
• Not over 100 kg (220 pounds) in a cylinder, or
• Not more than 70 gallon water capacity for a non-liquefied Division 2.2 material
with no subsidiary hazard in a permanently mounted tank manufactured to the
ASME Code.
PA Turnpike wrote:
The following materials are prohibited, restricted or permitted in Commission tunnels as per the following chart. Restricted is defined as non-tanker loads, limited to transport in non-bulk packaging of 119 gallons per container or less, as per 49 CFR 171.8.
MASS DOT FAQs wrote:
Why not use the I-93 tunnel?
In the routing regulations, 49 CFR 397.67, in addition to following the
hazmat routes specified by the State, political subdivision or Indian
Tribe, the motor carrier must operate the vehicle over routes which do
not go through or near heavily populated areas, places where crowds
are assembled, tunnels, narrow streets or alleys, except when the
carrier determine that no other feasible alternative exists or that a
deviation is necessary because of an emergency. Thus, the
hazardous material carrier is generally prohibited under federal
regulations from using the tunnel. Under existing state regulations,
Massachusetts has already designated the I-93 and related CA/T
harbor tunnels in Boston as restricted routes prohibiting their use for
the transportation of hazardous cargoes.
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/portals/8/docs/hazmat/FAQ_hazmat_090611.pdf
MdTA wrote:
Why can't I take my RV or camper through either the Baltimore Harbor or the Fort McHenry Tunnels?
Regulations govern the transportation of certain hazardous materials across our toll facilities. Under these regulations, vehicles carrying bottled propane gas in excess of 10 pounds per container (maximum of 10 containers), bulk gasoline, explosives, significant amounts of radioactive materials, and other hazardous materials are prohibited from using the Fort McHenry Tunnel (I-95) or the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel (I-895). The Francis Scott Key Bridge (I-695) is a convenient alternative route for crossing Baltimore's harbor.
Oct-08-2015 06:09 PM
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be
Douglas AdamsOct-08-2015 04:22 PM
Oct-08-2015 04:11 PM
jplante4 wrote:
DO NOT DRIVE THROUGH BOSTON. In addition to being some of the worse traffic in the northeast, the tunnel under the city is a no hazardous cargo tunnel (no propane).
Oct-08-2015 03:14 PM
Oct-08-2015 02:42 PM
Oct-08-2015 02:19 PM
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be
Douglas Adams