15184 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices 

FTA’s first quarterly review of 

applications to the Pilot Program, 

applications must be received by FTA 

on or before March 31, 2007. 

Applications received by FTA between 

March 31, 2007, and July 1, 2007, will 

be reviewed in FTA’s second quarterly 

review of applications to the Pilot 

Program. 

Issued in Washington, DC, this 26th day of 

March 2007. 

James S. Simpson, 

Administrator, Federal Transit 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E7–5880 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2006–26275] 

Receipt of Petition for Rulemaking 

Classification of Polyurethane Foam 

and Certain Finished Products 

Containing Polyurethane Foam as 

Hazardous Materials 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This Notice solicits comments 

on the merits of a petition for 

rulemaking filed by the National 

Association of State Fire Marshals 

(NASFM). The NASFM petitioned 

PHMSA to classify Polyurethane Foam 

and certain finished products 

containing Polyurethane Foam (PU) as 

hazardous materials in transportation in 

commerce, as a matter of safety for 

emergency responders and the public. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

June 28, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may 

submit comments on this Notice 

identified by the docket number 

(PHMSA–2006–26275) by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments on the DOT electronic docket 

site. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management System, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

PL–402, Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: PL–402 on the Plaza 

level of the Nassif Building, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number for this notice. Internet users 

may access comments received by DOT 

at http://dms.dot.gov. Note that 

comments received may be posted 

without change to http://dms.dot.gov 

including any personal information 

provided. If you believe your comments 

contain trade secrets or confidential 

commercial information, those 

comments or relevant portions of those 

comments should be appropriately 

marked. PHMSA procedures in 49 CFR 

part 105 establish a mechanism by 

which commenters may request 

confidentiality. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Helen Engrum or Susan Gorsky, Office 

of Hazardous Materials Standards (202) 

366–8553, Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In a letter dated October 31, 2006, the 

National Association of State Fire 

Marshals (NASFM) submitted a petition 

for rulemaking to the U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT) through the 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration (PHMSA) under the 

provisions of 49 CFR 106.31. The 

NASFM requested that the Hazardous 

Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR 

parts 171–180) be amended to classify 

Polyurethane (PU) Foam and certain 

finished products containing PU as a 

hazardous material for purposes of 

transportation in commerce. The 

NASFM is made up of senior-level 

public safety officials from the 50 States 

and the District of Columbia. The 

NASFM petition was received and 

acknowledged by PHMSA and assigned 

petition number P–1491; Docket No. 

PHMSA–2006–26275. 

Issuance of this Notice does not 

constitute a decision by PHMSA to 

undertake a rulemaking action on the 

substance of the petition. This Notice is 

issued solely to obtain comments on the 

merits of the petition to assist PHMSA 

in making a decision of whether to 

proceed with a rulemaking. Of 

particular interest are substantive 

comments that address the following 

items: (1) Estimated incremental costs or 

savings; (2) Anticipated safety benefits; 

(3) Estimated burden hours associated 

with the proposals related to 

information collection; (4) Impact on 

small businesses; and (5) Impact on the 

national environment. 

II. Petition P–1491 Is Quoted as Follows 

As a matter of safety for emergency 

responders and the public, the National 

Association of Fire Marshals petitions the 

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 

through the Pipeline & Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration (PHMSA), to classify 

polyurethane (PU) foam and certain finished 

products containing it as a hazardous 

material for purposes of transportation. 

NASFM consists of senior-level public safety 

officials from the 50 states and District of 

Columbia. 

The petitioners regard this proposal as 

critical to the safety of emergency responders 

and the public they are sworn to protect. The 

safety of emergency responders begins with 

information—at minimum, responders have 

the absolute right to know when they are 

dealing with hazardous materials, so they 

may take special precautions at incidents. 

The petitioners’ interest extends to ensuring 

that hazardous materials are used, stored and 

transported in safe ways. Regulations exist 

across agencies that regulate the use and 

storage of PU foam, but a gap exists in 

ensuring the safe transportation of this 

hazardous material. Because it is not 

officially classified as a hazardous material 

for purposes of transportation, the safety of 

emergency responders and the public is 

compromised. 

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s 

system of hazardous materials transportation 

placarding is critical to the safety of 

emergency responders and the public. 

Placards typically are the one source of 

information immediately available to 

responders as they determine the safest and 

most efficient means of suppressing fires and 

of rescuing persons trapped in vehicles. 

Placards provide information essential to 

knowing how fast a fire might spread, how 

difficult it might be to suppress, and how 

large and dangerous it may become. 

When hazardous materials are not properly 

placarded, the consequences to emergency 

responders could be injury or death. 

Obviously some shippers and transporters 

choose to violate the law by failing to 

properly placard when placarding is 

required. However, the DOT does not require 

placarding with some well-recognized 

hazardous materials. Such is the case with 

most grades of rigid and flexible PU foam and 

many of the finished products containing this 

highly flammable solid. 

PU foam, whether in bulk shipments or in 

finished products, is explicitly listed and 

controlled as a hazardous material in all 

phases of manufacturing, construction and 

more recently, consumer applications. As 

such, records pertaining to the hazardous 

nature of PU foam already are kept and 

reports are routinely issued by the producers 

of these materials. Ironically, when the risks 

are least manageable—in transportation—PU 

foam is not officially considered hazardous. 

This petition aims to correct this inadvertent 

oversight. 

Whether experienced in the real world or 

observed under scientific conditions, PU 

foam is a hazardous material. A significant 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices 15185 

1Langevin, Kennedy, and Conyers. United States. 

Cong. House. Foam Fire Safety Act. 109th Cong., 1st 

sess. HR 943. 17 Feb. 2005. 8 Sept. 2006 http:// 

thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.943.IH: 

2 ‘‘Material Safety Data Sheet.’’ Foamex. 17 July 

2002. Foamex International, Inc. 8 Sept. 2006. 

http://www.foamex.com/ftpWs/MSDS%

20Flexible%20Polyurethane %20Foam%20-

%20English.pdf#search=%22OSHA%

20polyurethane%20flexible%20foam%20fire%22. 

3Chowdbury, Risiana, Michael Greene, David 

Miller, and Linda Smith. 1999 Revised—2002 

Residential Fire Loss Estimates. U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission. Washington, DC, 2005. 

4Bell, Henry H. Navigation and Vessel Inspection 

Circular No. 8–80. United States Coast Guard. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Coast Guard, 1980. 8 Sept 

2006. 

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/gm/nvic/8_80/n8–80.

pdf#search=%22Navigation%20and%20Vessel%

20Inspection%20 Circular%20No.%208–80%22 

and unambiguous body of scientific literature 

underscores the poor fire performance of 

these materials and products, and a 

preliminary review of the fire incident data 

found numerous transportation incidents 

where PU foam and such products as 

upholstered furniture and mattresses 

provided the fuel load for significant fires. 

These are not new observations. Smoldering 

and small open flame ignitions of finished 

products containing PU foam have long been 

the number-one cause of death by fire in the 

home. 

Proposed Rulemaking Procedure 

NASFM proposes the following procedure 

based on its understanding of the PHMSA 

rulemaking process: Issue an Interim Final 

Rule designating bulk shipments of 

Polyurethane (PU) Foam as a Class 9 

hazardous material. As part of this Interim 

Final Rule 

Phase I 

• Assign a North American Identification 

number to PU foam. 

• Except shippers/carriers from requiring 

shipping papers, employee training, specific 

packaging requirements, and placarding. 

• Require carriers to display Orange Panels 

with the identification number to identify the 

presence of PU foam for initial responders. 

• Require transportation incidents 

involving PU foam fires to be reported to 

PHMSA. 

• Publish a Safety Alert identifying 

measures initial responders can take to 

protect themselves and the general public 

during this initial response phase of the 

incident involving PU foam. 

• Incorporate the measures published in 

the Safety Alert into the 2008 Emergency 

Response Guidebook (ERG). 

Cotton can be used as an example of how 

PU can be initially regulated. The following 

is recommended for inclusion in the 

Hazardous Materials Table (49 CFR 172101): 

Column 1—Symbols ................................................................................. D (Domestic). 

Column 2—HM description and proper shipping name ........................... Polyurethane Foam. 

Column 3—Hazard Class or Division ....................................................... 9. 

Column 4—Identification Number ............................................................ NA XXXX (to be assigned by PHMSA). 

Column 5—Packing Group ....................................................................... Leave blank. 

Column 6—Label Codes .......................................................................... None. 

Column 7—Special Provisions ................................................................. To be determined by PHMSA. 

Column 8—Packaging (8A, 8B, and 8C) ................................................. None. 

Column 9—Packaging Limitations ........................................................... To be determined by PHMSA and the Federal Aviation Administration. 

Column 10—Vessel Stowage ................................................................... To be determined by PHMSA and the U.S. Coast Guard. 

This should not be considered a significant 

rulemaking, because there are a limited 

number of carriers transporting bulk PU 

foam. 

Phase IIA 

Initiate domestic rulemaking to finalize 

Interim Final Rule and explore the need for 

additional regulatory oversight of products 

manufactured using PU foam through the 

issuance of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

Phase IIB 

Introduce PU foam as a proposed work 

item at the 30th session of the Transport of 

Dangerous Goods Sub-Committee, December 

4–12 2006 in Geneva, Switzerland. 

Phase IIA and IIB can be conducted 

simultaneously. 

DOT has the authority to classify PU foam 

as a hazardous material. 

The precise classification of PU foam is a 

legalistic matter for consideration by 

regulators, and may require special treatment 

given the unusual properties of these 

materials. For example, PU foam becomes 

highly flammable as it moves rapidly from 

solid to liquid to vapor states. In that way, 

it is similar to gasoline, which becomes 

hazardous as it moves from a liquid to a 

vapor. Gasoline is a flammable liquid when, 

in scientific terms, it is a flammable vapor. 

Another unique characteristic is that, unlike 

most hazardous materials, PU foam becomes 

dangerous as it becomes lighter in weight, for 

a simple reason: low density PU foam 

contains more air to feed a fire and more 

surfaces to ignite. 

Manufacturers of PU foam describe these 

materials as ‘‘combustible solids’’ on the 

material safety data sheets provided to 

customers and regulators. However, PU foam 

does not fit neatly into the combustible solids 

category. The prescribed test methods used 

with combustible solids are irrelevant to the 

real-world fire hazards posed by PU foam, 

because PU foams possess fire performance 

and chemical properties more comparable to 

well-established hazardous materials such as 

gasoline that react in liquid and vapor 

phases.1 A fire hazard of this significance 

may not legally be ignored simply because of 

the inflexibility of the rating system. 

Rather than assigning PU foam to Class 4 

as a flammable solid, NASFM recommends 

that it be placed within Class 9, which exists 

for unusual but clearly hazardous materials 

and products ranging from molten asphalt to 

life preservers containing pressurized 

containers. The exact classification may not 

matter as much as the fact that the 

classification will subject this material to 

tighter controls in transport, thus helping to 

ensure the safety of emergency responders 

and the public. 

Classification of PU foam as a hazardous 

material for transportation is necessary as a 

matter of consistency of policies across 

various agencies that define the safe use of 

hazardous materials. 

Those responsible for safety in residential, 

manufacturing and storage occupancies 

already regard PU foam as a hazardous 

material because of its poor fire performance. 

• Manufacturers’ Materials Safety Data 

Sheets and warning labels on the bulk 

shipments note the flammability 

characteristics of PU foam. Manufacturers 

recognize that PU foam poses unique fire and 

explosion hazards. A typical label on PU 

foam sold in bulk says: 

If ignited, foam can produce rapid flame 

spread, intense heat, dense black smoke and 

toxic gases. Material can melt into a burning 

liquid that can drip and flow. Accumulated 

polyurethane dust can be readily ignited and 

presents a fire risk. High concentrations of 

dust in the air can explode if exposed to a 

flame, spark, or other ignition sources.2

• The National Fire Protection Association 

standard NFPA 13’s hazard classification 

system lists PU foam as a Group A Plastic. 

This now requires increased use of automatic 

fire sprinklers, imposes limits on storage 

requirements and is strictly enforced by state 

and local fire code enforcement officials. 

• Starting in July 2007, the U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission (CPSC) will 

begin enforcement of mattress fire safety 

requirements that effectively isolate PU foam 

in residential fires. This action has the 

benefit of significantly reducing the risk of 

fires when mattresses are being transported, 

in addition to preventing the approximately 

400 mattress fires that occur every year. 3

Even if the CPSC proposes fire safety 

requirements for upholstered furniture, there 

is some question whether these standards 

will be adequate to address the issues 

discussed here. 

The use of PU foam is regarded as 

hazardous in some transportation modes. 

• The Coast Guard has issued warnings on 

the fire hazard of polyurethane insulation 

and other organic foams on vessels.4


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
15186 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices 

5Baier, Edward J. ‘‘The Fire Hazard of 

Polyurethane and Other Organic Foam Insulation 

Aboard Ships and in Construction.’’ OSHA Hazard 

Information Bulletins. 10 May 1989. U.S. 

Department of Labor. 8 Sept. 2006. http:// 

www.osha.gov/dts/hib/hibdata/hib19890510.html 6United States. Federal Aviation Administration. 

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (E-CFR) 

Title 14: Aeronautics and Space Part 23. 25 Sept. 

2006 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&

sid=06a589895da22315eabb8c077bed3ded&

rgn=div8&view=text&node=14:1.0.1.3.10.4.86.72&

idno=14 7Hall, Jim. ‘‘Safety Recommendation in Reply to 

M–95–24 and –25.’’ 17 July 1995. Washington, DC: 

National Transportation Safety Board, 1995. http:// 

www.ntsb.gov/recs/letters/1995/M95_24_25.pdf#

search=%22NTSB%20safety%

20recommendation%20M–95–24%22. 8Lonnemark, Anders. On the Characteristics of 

Fires in Tunnels. Lund, Sweden: Tryckeriet I E–

Huset, Lund University, 2005. 9 Ibid., 524. 

10 ‘‘2003 GMC Savana Recalls & Problems.’’

Internet Auto Guide. 25 Sept. 2006. http:// 

www.internetautoguide.com/auto-recalls/67-int/

2003/gmc/savana/2500/index.html. 

11 ‘‘EU Tunnel Fire Safety Action.’’ Tunnels & 

Tunneling International (2003). 8 Sept. 2006. 

<http://www.etnfit.net/unprotected_documents/

EU%20Action%20-%20Tunnel%20Fire%

20Safety%20%-%20TT%20paper.pdf#search=

%22Mont%20Blanc%20tunnel%20fire%

20cost%22>. 

• The Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration has issued warnings about 

PU foam in marine applications saying, 

Rigid polyurethane and polyisocyanurate 

foams will, when ignited, burn rapidly and 

produce intense heat, dense smoke and gases 

which are irritating, flammable and/or toxic. 

As with other organic materials the most 

significant gas is usually carbon monoxide. 

Thermal decomposition products from PU 

foam consist mainly of carbon monoxide, 

benzene, toluene, oxides of nitrogen, 

hydrogen cyanide, acetaldehyde, acetone, 

propene, carbon dioxide, alkenes and water 

vapor.5

• The Federal Aviation Administration 

requires that all seat cushions and padding 

be self-extinguishing.6

• The National Transportation Safety 

Board issued a recommendation on the use 

of PU foam in maritime applications in 1995 

saying, 

The Safety Board believes that NFPA [the 

National Fire Protection Association] and the 

Coast Guard should establish, in cooperation, 

a national marine fire safety standard on the 

safe use of RPU [Rigid Polyurethane] foam 

and other organic combustible material 

insulation on vessels.7

The current classifications of PU foam as 

a hazardous material are supported by a large 

and unambiguous body of technical and 

scientific literature. A bibliography is in the 

appendix to this petition. 

The petitioners also ask PHMSA to review 

the results of recent large-scale fire tests 

conducted on behalf of the European Union, 

which demonstrate clearly the danger that 

PU foam presents during transport. The SP 

Swedish National Testing and Research 

Institute conducted four full-scale tests 

involving truck fires in the Runehamar 

tunnel in Norway in September 2003. In one 

test a truck was loaded with furniture and in 

another, a truck was loaded with mattresses 

and wooden pallets. In both tests, the heat 

release rates (HRR), or measure of the fire’s 

intensity, reached levels that are normally 

expected only from hazardous materials.8 In 

fact, temperatures in the tunnel reached 

those comparable to tunnel tests involving 

petroleum products.9

PHMSA is well aware of the difficulties of 

securing data from hazardous materials 

incidents. Because PU foam is not classified 

as a hazardous material for transportation, it 

might follow that finding examples of 

incidents would be that much more difficult. 

But with little effort, NASFM has found 

numerous examples. Here are two: 

• On August 28, 2006, a furniture delivery 

truck caught fire on Interstate 5 near San 

Diego. The semi-truck veered of the road, 

hitting a guardrail before the truck burst into 

thick flames and smoke. According to the 

California Highway Patrol, the semi-truck 

was transporting furniture and mattresses 

that quickly went up in flames. The incident 

began around 4 pm during the evening rush 

hour, and the fire was still burning at 5:30 

pm; the incident closed northbound lanes of 

I–5 well into the evening and backed up 

traffic for miles. 

• A May 7, 2005, fire in Navarro County, 

Texas, resulted in the loss of a reported 

$10,500 truck where an upholstered sofa and 

chair were among the items first ignited. 

As part of a rulemaking, NASFM is 

prepared to work with PHMSA to undertake 

a systematic review of incident records 

where PU foam contributed to motor carrier 

fires. These fires may be ignited accidentally 

because of collisions or friction during 

transport, electrical faults, careless smoking, 

or they may be ignited intentionally. 

Regardless of ignition source, the ensuing 

fires present unacceptable risks to emergency 

responders. 

NASFM is especially interested in 

incidents that may involve the GMC Savana 

cargo van that is recommended for furniture 

deliveries by the American Home 

Furnishings Alliance, yet has been the 

subject of two DOT supervised recalls 

because of potential fire hazards related to 

defective brakes and electrical components.10

This vehicle has been the subject of at least 

10 recalls overall; some of these defects have 

the potential to cause the vehicle to crash, 

further increasing the risk of vehicle fire. 

Exemptions are possible for fire-resistant 

PU foam and finished products containing 

PU foam that meet certain flammability 

standards. 

The petitioners believe it is reasonable to 

exempt certain finished products from this 

rule. For example, mattresses sold after July 

1, 2007, in the United States must comply 

with CPSC requirements that effectively 

shield PU foam from ignition sources. Much 

as properly packaged individual containers 

of fingernail polish remover are exempt 

while bulk shipments are not, this new fire 

safety standard may exempt compliant 

mattresses from classification as a hazardous 

material. Some upholstered furniture used by 

institutions such as health care facilities, 

prisons and hotels meet the State of 

California’s most stringent fire safety 

requirements for institutional use, and may 

be eligible for exemption. Certain grades of 

high density, fire resistant PU foams as 

currently specified by the State of California 

also may be candidates for exemption. The 

full text of these requirements can be found 

in the appendices to this document. 

But while some exemptions may be 

justified, the fact remains that most bulk 

shipments and many finished products 

containing PU foam are formally listed and 

treated as hazardous materials in factories, 

warehouses, retail and residential 

occupancies by their manufacturers, users, 

and regulators. These materials and products 

do not suddenly become less hazardous 

when being transported among these places. 

In fact, given the uncertainties of traffic, road 

conditions, driver behavior and condition of 

the vehicle, the risks are greater during 

transport, especially to emergency 

responders who may need to negotiate 

treacherous conditions such as a steep, 

muddy slope to rescue a driver from a 

burning truck full of PU foam. 

The benefits of changing the classification 

of PU foam far outweigh the costs. 

Given the similarities of PU foam’s fire 

performance to that of gasoline and other 

classified hazardous materials, NASFM 

believes that benefits of the hazardous 

materials classification proposed here may be 

comparable to these existing classified 

materials. Additionally, because PU foam is 

already classified as hazardous across 

numerous other agencies, there will be no 

significant incremental costs associated with 

the proposed action. 

The social and economic costs associated 

with the loss of a roadway tunnel are well 

understood. Serious fires involving PU foam 

on roads, on bridges, in garages or in tunnels 

pose a significant danger to the health and 

safety of persons, often result in the total loss 

of involved vehicles and can cause 

significant structural damage to roads, 

tunnels or surrounding buildings. The March 

1999 fire in the Mont Blanc tunnel between 

France and Italy tragically demonstrated the 

disastrous results of a fire involving materials 

classified as non-hazardous: 39 people died 

during the two-day fire, and the tunnel was 

closed for three years following the tragedy. 

The cost to the Italian economy alone due to 

direct damage and lost revenues associated 

with the tunnel during the three-year closure 

is estimated at $215 billion.11 In addition to 

injuries and fatalities that result from 

catastrophic transportation incidents, the 

social cost to the surrounding region cannot 

be ignored. The furniture truck fire on I–5 

backed up traffic for miles and delayed 

hundreds of thousands of people in traffic for 

hours. As demonstrated by the SP Swedish 

National Testing and Research Institute 

Runehamar tunnel fire tests, a truck 

containing quantities of polyurethane—even 

when in finished products—is capable of 

causing this sort of catastrophic fire, which 

may result in numerous injuries and fatalities 

and require years and billions of dollars to 

repair. 

• The petitioners believe there are no 

direct effects, including preemption effects 

under section 5125 of Federal hazardous 

materials transportation law, of our proposed 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 61 / Friday, March 30, 2007 / Notices 15187 

action on States, on the relationship between 

the Federal government and the States, and 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various levels of 

government. 

The petitioners regard the actions proposed 

here as being fully supportive of the States’

interests in the safety of its citizens and 

emergency responders. 

• The regulatory burden on small 

businesses, small organizations, small 

governmental jurisdictions and Indian tribes 

will be minimal. 

Small businesses, small organizations, 

small governmental jurisdictions, and Indian 

tribes now comply with safety requirements 

for PU foam enforced by state and local 

officials in manufacturing, storage, retail and 

residential occupancies. Classifying PU foam 

as a hazardous material for transportation 

may add some minimal costs related to 

placarding, packaging and the selection of 

routes. 

• Recordkeeping and reporting costs to 

manufacturers and transporters will be 

minimal. 

This action is unlikely to add significantly 

to existing record keeping and reporting 

burdens. The manufacturers and users of PU 

foam already regard these materials as 

‘‘combustible solids’’ and accordingly 

maintain and share data with their customers 

and regulators. 

• Classification of PU foam as a hazardous 

material will not have any adverse 

environmental effects but may have 

significant positive effects on the natural 

environment. Additionally, this action would 

significantly reduce the costs borne by 

society for the unsafe transportation of this 

hazardous cargo. 

Possible environmental effects from the 

reclassification of PU foam are: 

• Increased emissions resulting from 

longer routes needed to transport PU foam; 

• Decreased emissions of the noxious by 

products of PU fires like hydrogen cyanide, 

hydrochloric gas and carbon monoxide 

because of increased precautions taken to 

reduce the number of these fires. 

Societal impacts from the reclassification 

of PU foam are readily apparent. Fewer PU 

foam fires directly benefit society through 

decreased injuries, fatalities and property 

damage. 

Therefore, we respectfully ask the DOT to 

use its clear authority to protect emergency 

responders and the public they are sworn to 

serve, by accepting this petition and moving 

forward expeditiously with enforcement. 

III. Purpose of the Notice 

The purpose of this Notice is to solicit 

comments on the merits of a petition for 

rulemaking filed by the National 

Association of State Fire Marshals 

requesting classification of Polyurethane 

Foam (PU) and certain finished 

products containing PU as hazardous 

materials under the Hazardous Materials 

Regulations. The safety implications of 

the proposals in the petition will be 

given careful considerations as we go 

through the process of determining 

whether regulatory action is needed. 

Because of the many attachments to 

petition P–1491 (e.g., MSDS, 

appendices, bibliography, and other 

information) submitted with this 

petition, we encourage interested parties 

to access the Web site: http:// 

dms.dot.gov to review the petition and 

other documentation submitted with the 

petition. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 27, 

2007. 

Robert A. Richard, 

Deputy Associate Administrator for 

Hazardous Materials Safety. 

[FR Doc. E7–5948 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission’s Inaugural Meeting of the 

‘‘National Financial Education 

Network’’

AGENCY: Departmental Offices, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

inaugural meeting of the ‘‘National 

Financial Education Network’’ of the 

Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission. The Commission was 

established by the Financial Literacy 

and Education Improvement Act (Title 

V of the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003). 

DATES: The Financial Literacy and 

Education Commission’s inaugural 

meeting of the ‘‘National Financial 

Education Network’’ will be held on 

Tuesday, April 17, 2007, from 9:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The inaugural meeting of 

the ‘‘National Financial Education 

Network’’ will be held in the Cash Room 

at the Department of the Treasury, 

located at 1500 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. To be admitted to the 

Treasury building, an attendee must 

RSVP by providing his or her name, 

organization, phone number, date of 

birth, Social Security number and 

country of citizenship to the Department 

of the Treasury by e-mail at: 

FLECrsvp@do.treas.gov, or by telephone 

at: (202) 622–1783 (not a toll-free 

number) not later than 5 p.m. on 

Wednesday, April 11, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information, contact Garret 

Overlock by e-mail at: 

garret.overlock@do.treas.gov or by 

telephone at (202) 622–1006 (not a toll 

free number). Additional information 

regarding the Financial Literacy and 

Education Commission and the 

Department of the Treasury’s Office of 

Financial Education may be obtained 

through the Office of Financial 

Education’s Web site at: http:// 

www.treasury.gov/financialeducation. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Financial Literacy and Education 

Improvement Act, which is Title V of 

the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003 (the ‘‘FACT 

Act’’) (Pub. L. 108–159), established the 

Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) to 

improve financial literacy and 

education of persons in the United 

States. The Commission is composed of 

the Secretary of the Treasury and the 

head of the Office of the Comptroller of 

the Currency; the Office of Thrift 

Supervision; the Federal Reserve; the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; 

the National Credit Union 

Administration; the Securities and 

Exchange Commission; the Departments 

of Education, Agriculture, Defense, 

Health and Human Services, Housing 

and Urban Development, Labor, and 

Veterans Affairs; the Federal Trade 

Commission; the General Services 

Administration; the Small Business 

Administration; the Social Security 

Administration; the Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission; and the Office of 

Personnel Management. 

As part of the implementation of 

Taking Ownership of the Future: The 

National Strategy for Financial Literacy, 

the U.S. Office of Personnel 

Management and the Department of the 

Treasury partnered to establish a 

network of state and local government 

officials to improve collaboration on 

financial education efforts among 

federal, state and local levels. The 

inaugural meeting of the ‘‘National 

Financial Education Network’’ of state 

and local governments will bring 

together representatives from different 

areas and levels of government across 

the nation. The purpose of the meeting 

will be to create an open dialogue 

among associations, government 

officials, and individuals in hopes of 

advancing financial education at the 

state and local level. 

Dated: March 21, 2007. 

Dan Iannicola, Jr., 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Financial 

Education. 

[FR Doc. E7–5953 Filed 3–29–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4811–42–P 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES