15636 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

49 CFR Parts 107, 171, 172, 173, 178, 

and 180 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2020–0102 (HM–219D)] 

RIN 2137–AF49 

Hazardous Materials: Adoption of 

Miscellaneous Petitions and Updating 

Regulatory Requirements 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), Department of Transportation 

(DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: PHMSA amends the 

Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) 

to update, clarify, improve the safety of, 

or streamline various regulatory 

requirements. Specifically, this 

rulemaking responds to 18 petitions for 

rulemaking submitted by the regulated 

community between May 2018 and 

October 2020 that requests PHMSA 

address a variety of provisions, 

including but not limited to those 

addressing packaging, hazard 

communication, and the incorporation 

by reference of certain documents. 

These revisions maintain or enhance the 

existing high level of safety under the 

HMR while providing clarity and 

appropriate regulatory flexibility in the 

transport of hazardous materials. 

DATES: 

Effective date: This final rule is 

effective on April 3, 2024. 

Delayed compliance date: March 4, 

2025. 

Incorporation by reference date: The 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in this final rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of April 3, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Andrews, 202–366–8553, Office 

of Hazardous Materials Standards, 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Incorporation by Reference Discussion 

Under 1 CFR Part 51 

III. NPRM: Publication and Public 

Comments; Executive Order 13924 

IV. Discussion of Amendments and 

Applicable Comments 

V. Section-by-Section Review 

VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This 

Rulemaking 

B. Executive Orders 12866 and 14094, and 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

C. Executive Order 13132 

D. Executive Order 13175 

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive 

Order 13272, and DOT Procedures and 

Policies 

F. Paperwork Reduction Act 

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

H. Environmental Assessment 

I. Privacy Act 

J. Executive Order 13609 and International 

Trade Analysis 

K. Executive Order 13211 

L. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

M. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 

14028 

N. Severability 

I. Background 

The Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) requires Federal agencies to give 

interested persons the right to petition 

an agency to issue, amend, or repeal a 

rule. (See 5 U.S.C. 553(e).) PHMSA 

regulations specify that persons 

petitioning PHMSA to add, revise, or 

remove a regulation in the Hazardous 

Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR 

parts 171 through 180) must file a 

petition for rulemaking containing 

adequate support for the requested 

action. (See 49 CFR 106.100.) PHMSA 

amends the HMR in response to 

petitions for rulemaking submitted by 

shippers, carriers, manufacturers, and 

industry representatives, and welcomes 

petitions from any interested 

stakeholder or member of the public 

with suggested changes to improve the 

HMR. 

PHMSA now finds that these 

revisions will maintain the high safety 

standard currently achieved under the 

HMR while providing clarity and 

appropriate regulatory flexibility in the 

transport of hazardous materials. 

PHMSA also notes that—insofar as 

adoption of the petitions could reduce 

delays and interruptions of hazardous 

materials shipments during 

transportation—the amendments will 

also lower greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions and safety risks to minority, 

low-income, underserved, and other 

disadvantaged populations and 

communities in the vicinity of interim 

storage sites and transportation arteries 

and hubs. A detailed discussion of the 

petitions and revisions can be found in 

section III of this final rule. 

In this final rule, PHMSA revises the 

HMR to: 

• Allow for appropriate flexibility of 

packaging options in the transportation 

of compressed natural gas in cylinders. 

• Streamline the approval application 

process for the repair of certain DOT 

specification cylinders. 

• Provide greater clarity on the filling 

requirements for certain cylinders used 

to transport hydrogen and hydrogen 

mixtures. 

• Facilitate international commerce, 

and streamline packaging and hazard 

communication requirements by 

harmonizing the HMR with 

international regulations to allow the 

shipment of de minimis amounts of 

poisonous materials. 

• Provide greater clarity by requiring 

a specific marking on cylinders to 

indicate compliance with certain HMR 

provisions. 

• Streamline hazard communication 

requirements by allowing appropriate 

marking exceptions under certain 

conditions for the transportation of 

lithium button cell batteries installed in 

equipment. 

• Provide greater flexibility and 

accuracy in hazard communication by 

allowing additional descriptions for 

certain gas mixtures. 

• Increase the safe transportation of 

explosives by updating certain Institute 

of Makers of Explosives (IME) 

documents currently incorporated by 

reference. 

• Modify the definition of ‘‘liquid’’ to 

include the test for determining fluidity 

(penetrometer test) prescribed in the 

European Agreement concerning the 

International Carriage of Dangerous 

Goods by Road (ADR). 

• Incorporate by reference the 

Compressed Gas Association’s (CGA) 

publication C–20–2014, 

‘‘Requalification Standard for Metallic, 

DOT and TC 3-series Gas Cylinders and 

Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination,’’ 

Second Edition, which will eliminate 

the need for some existing DOT special 

permits and allow alternative methods 

for the requalification of cylinders. This 

revision would eliminate the need for 

special permit applications and 

renewals. 

• Incorporate by reference the 

updated Appendix A of CGA 

publication C–7–2020, ‘‘Guide to 

Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases,’’ Eleventh Edition. 

• Incorporate by reference the CGA 

publication C–27–2019, ‘‘Standard 

Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure 

of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes, 

First Edition.’’ 

• Incorporate by reference the CGA 

publication CGA C–29–2019, ‘‘Standard 

for Design Requirements for Tube 

Trailers and Tube Modules, First 

Edition.’’ 

• Incorporate by reference the CGA 

publication CGA V–9–2019, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15637 

‘‘Compressed Gas Association Standard 

for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves, 

Eighth Edition.’’ 

II. Incorporation by Reference 

Discussion Under 1 CFR Part 51 

According to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), 

Circular A–119, ‘‘Federal Participation 

in the Development and Use of 

Voluntary Consensus Standards and in 

Conformity Assessment Activities,’’ 

government agencies must use 

voluntary consensus standards 

wherever practical in the development 

of regulations. 

PHMSA currently incorporates by 

reference into the HMR all or the 

relevant parts of several standards and 

specifications developed and published 

by standard development organizations 

(SDOs). In general, SDOs update and 

revise their published standards every 

two to five years to reflect modern 

technology and best technical practices. 

The National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA; 

Pub. L. 104–113, 15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs Federal agencies to use 

standards developed by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies in lieu of 

government-written standards unless 

doing so would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise 

impracticable. Voluntary consensus 

standards bodies develop, establish, or 

coordinate technical standards using 

agreed-upon procedures. OMB issued 

Circular A–119 to implement section 

12(d) of the NTTAA relative to the 

utilization of consensus technical 

standards by Federal agencies. This 

circular provides guidance for agencies 

participating in voluntary consensus 

standards bodies and describes 

procedures for satisfying the reporting 

requirements in the NTTAA. Consistent 

with the requirements of the NTTAA 

and its statutory authorities, PHMSA is 

responsible for determining which 

currently referenced standards should 

be updated, revised, or removed, and 

which standards should be added to the 

HMR. Revisions to materials 

incorporated by reference in the HMR 

are handled via the rulemaking process, 

which allows the public and regulated 

entities to provide input. During the 

rulemaking process, PHMSA must also 

obtain approval from the Office of the 

Federal Register to incorporate by 

reference any new materials. 

Regulations of the Office of the Federal 

Register require that agencies detail in 

the preamble of a final rule the ways the 

materials it incorporates by reference 

are reasonably available to interested 

parties, or how the agency worked to 

make those materials reasonably 

available to interested parties. (See 1 

CFR 51.5.) 

IME standards are free and accessible 

to the public via the IME website at 

https://www.ime.org/products/category/ 

safety_library_publications_slps. The 

CGA references are available for 

interested parties to purchase in either 

print or electronic editions through the 

CGA organization website at https://

portal.cganet.com/Publication/ 

index.aspx. The UN manual of test and 

criteria is available at https://unece.org/ 

fileadmin/DAM/trans/danger/publi/ 

manual/Rev7/Manual_Rev7_E.pdf. The 

European Agreement concerning the 

International Carriage of Dangerous 

Goods by Road (ADR) can be found at 

https://unece.org/about-adr. The 

specific standards are discussed in 

greater detail in the section-by-section 

review. 

The following standards appear in the 

amendatory text of this document and 

have already been approved for the 

locations in which they appear: ASTM 

D 4359–90, ‘‘Standard Test Method for 

Determining Whether a Material is a 

Liquid or a Solid; CGA Technical 

Bulletin (TB): 2008–25, ‘‘Design 

Considerations for Tube Trailers;’’ ISO 

6406:2005(E), ‘‘Gas cylinders—Seamless 

steel gas cylinders—Periodic inspection 

and testing;’’ and ISO 16148:2016(E), 

‘‘Gas cylinders—Refillable seamless 

steel gas cylinders and tubes—Acoustic 

emission examination (AT) and followup ultrasonic examination (UT) for 

periodic inspection and testing.’’ 

III. NPRM: Publication and Public 

Comments: Executive Order 13924 

On March 3, 2023 [88 FR 13624], 

PHMSA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 

Register, titled ‘‘Hazardous Materials: 

Adoption of Miscellaneous Petitions 

and Updating Regulatory 

Requirements,’’ under Docket No. 

PHMSA–2020–0102 (HM–219D). The 

NPRM proposed revisions to the HMR 

in response to 18 petitions for 

rulemaking submitted to PHMSA by 

various stakeholders in addition to 

miscellaneous issues such as special 

permit procedures and harmonizing the 

HMR with revisions to the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

regulations. PHMSA discusses these 

petitions and revisions in detail in 

section IV (Discussion of Amendments 

and Applicable Comments) of the 

preamble to this final rule. 

The comment period for the NPRM 

originally closed on May 3, 2023. On 

April 6, 2023, PHMSA received a 

request from Worthington Industries to 

extend the comment period for the 

NPRM. In response to the request from 

Worthington Industries, PHMSA 

published a document on April 26, 2023 

[88 FR 25335], extending the comment 

period to June 16, 2023. PHMSA 

received a total of 14 sets of comments 

from eight separate entities, three of 

which had submitted petitions that were 

the basis for HMR amendments 

proposed in the NPRM. PHMSA 

received comments from Chemours after 

the June 16, 2023, deadline. Consistent 

with 49 CFR 107.70(b), PHMSA 

considered those late-filed comments 

given the commenter’s interests in the 

rulemaking and the absence of 

additional expense or delay resulting 

from their consideration. An 

alphabetical list of the persons, 

companies, and associations that 

submitted comments to the HM–219D 

NPRM are listed in the below table: 

Commenter name Docket No. 

Arkema ............................................................................................................ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0016. 

Chemours ........................................................................................................ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0015. 

Chemours ........................................................................................................ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0021. 

Compressed Gas Association (CGA) ............................................................. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0010. 

Council on the Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA) .......... https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0011. 

Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC) ................................................. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0012. 

Heating, Air-Conditioning, & Refrigeration Distributors International .............. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0018. 

Heating, Air-Conditioning, & Refrigeration Distributors International .............. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0017. 

Institute for the Makers of Explosives ............................................................. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0006. 

The Dow Chemical Company ......................................................................... https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0013. 

The Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors—National Association (PHCC) https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0004. 

Worthington Industries .................................................................................... https://www.regulations.gov/document/PHMSA-2020-0102-0003. 

Worthington Industries .................................................................................... https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0019. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15638 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

1P–1714—CGA (PHMSA–2018–0054), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0054. 

2P–1661—CGA (PHMSA–2015–0169), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2015-0169. 

Commenter name Docket No. 

Worthington Industries .................................................................................... https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0014. 

The comments submitted to this 

docket may be accessed via the docket 

file numbers listed in the above table, as 

well as at https://www.regulations.gov. 

PHMSA developed this final rule in 

consideration of the comments received 

to the public docket. 

IV. Discussion of Amendments and 

Applicable Comments 

Based on an assessment of the 18 

petitions and two miscellaneous 

amendments and the comments 

received in response to the NPRM, 

PHMSA is amending the HMR as 

detailed in this section. 

A. Transportation of Compressed 

Natural Gas/Methane in UN Pressure 

Receptacles 

In its petition (P–1714),1 CGA 

requests that PHMSA consider an 

amendment to § 173.302b to implement 

packaging restrictions for the 

transportation of compressed natural gas 

(CNG) and methane in United Nations 

(UN) seamless steel pressure receptacles 

with a tensile strength greater than 950 

MPa. For the purposes of the HMR, 

‘‘UN1971, Methane, compressed’’ is 

compressed natural gas that is at least 

98 percent methane and free of 

corroding components. CGA expresses 

concern regarding the growth in 

transport of CNG and methane in these 

packagings, and wants to ensure the 

safety of the receptacles in this service. 

CGA provides the historical context of 

PHMSA’s predecessor agency imposing 

similar packaging restrictions for CNG 

transported in certain DOT specification 

cylinders. (See § 173.302a(a)(4).) These 

restrictions were intended to limit the 

effect of impurities in the CNG, such as 

hydrogen sulfide, on the structural 

integrity of the steel used in the 

manufacture of the cylinders. CGA cites 

several studies on the corrosive effects 

of natural gas contaminants on a 

cylinder and notes that the 

contaminants are usually noncorrosive 

in the absence of liquid water. Finally, 

CGA highlights an October 27, 1977, 

incident in which two people were 

killed, four people were injured, and a 

compressor station was damaged when 

a DOT specification 3T seamless steel 

cylinder ruptured while being filled 

with natural gas contaminated with 

hydrogen sulfide and water. 

CGA’s specific concern is in regard to 

UN seamless steel pressure receptacles 

with ultimate tensile strengths greater 

than 950 MPa being used for the storage 

and transportation of CNG. Higher 

strength UN seamless steel pressure 

receptacles are susceptible to 

embrittlement from CNG contaminants 

and embrittlement makes the 

receptacles more susceptible to fracture. 

Currently, use of UN pressure 

receptacles for CNG and methane in 

transportation is subject to the general 

requirements for shipment of 

compressed gases in § 173.301; 

additional general requirements of UN 

pressure receptacles in § 173.301b; and 

the filling requirements of cylinders 

with non-liquefied (permanent) gases in 

§ 173.302. However, under current 

regulations, there are no additional 

requirements specific to the use of UN 

pressure receptacles in CNG or methane 

service. 

In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to 

revise § 173.302b to include conditions 

for the transportation of CNG and 

methane in UN stainless steel pressure 

receptacles. The NPRM referenced 

content within CGA’s petition 

requesting such revision, stating that 

natural gas/methane can be safely 

transported in UN steel pressure 

receptacles under the following 

conditions: 

• The product is non-liquefied gas. 

• The UN seamless steel pressure 

receptacle has a maximum tensile 

strength not greater than 950 MPa 

(137,750 psig), and bears an ‘‘H’’ mark 

indicating the cylinder is manufactured 

from a specific type of steel that is 

intended to prevent hydrogen 

embrittlement. 

• Each UN tube has a drain tube. 

• The moisture content and 

concentration of the corroding 

components in the product conforms to 

the requirements in § 173.301b(a)(2). 

Specifically, the requirements in 

§ 173.301b(a)(2) state that gases or gas 

mixtures must be compatible with the 

UN pressure receptacle and valve 

materials, as prescribed for metallic 

materials in International Organization 

for Standardization (ISO) 11114– 

1:2012(E), ‘‘Gas cylinders— 

Compatibility of cylinder and valve 

materials with gas contents.’’ 

In addition, the NPRM included the 

CGA-requested proposal to include new 

text that clarifies the requirements for 

transporting methane gas with a purity 

of at least 98 percent within a UN 

seamless steel pressure receptacle. 

PHMSA also noted in the NPRM that 

it had previously considered this issue 

under petition P–1661 2 submitted by 

CGA on July 15, 2015. That petition was 

denied due to its conflict with the 

requirements in § 173.302a(a)(4) for 

DOT specification 3AAX and 3T 

cylinders when used in methane 

service. Currently, § 173.302a(a)(4) only 

allows methane that is non-liquefied; 

has a minimum purity of 98 percent; 

and is commercially free from corroding 

components to be filled in specification 

(3AX, 3AAX, and 3T) cylinders. 

PHMSA agreed that DOT specification 

3T cylinders with a tensile strength in 

the range of 135–155 kilopounds per 

square inch (ksi) [931–1,069 

megapascals per square inch (MPa)] and 

steel embrittlement can become a safety 

issue. However, DOT specification 3AX 

and 3AAX cylinders typically have 

strength below 135 ksi (931 MPa), and 

steel embrittlement is usually not a 

safety concern. 

In its denial letter, PHMSA 

encouraged CGA to consider a revised 

petition and limit cylinders to steel 

strengths below 950 MPa for ISO 

cylinders made in accordance with ISO 

9809–1:2010, ‘‘Gas cylinders—Refillable 

seamless steel gas cylinders—Design, 

construction and testing,’’ and IS0 

11120, ‘‘Gas cylinders—Refillable 

seamless steel tubes of water capacity 

between 150 l and 3000 l—Design, 

construction and testing’’ standards. 

This is because, had PHMSA proposed 

P–1661, it would have caused 

conflicting requirements for methane 

shipments in specification (3AAX, 3T, 

etc.) cylinders versus shipments in UN 

steel cylinders (ISO 9809–1 and ISO 

11120 standards). 

In response to PHMSA’s denial of P– 

1661, CGA submitted a new petition (P– 

1714) that addresses PHMSA’s concerns 

by not including DOT 3T specification 

cylinders where steel embrittlement 

poses an unreasonable risk. As a result 

of PHMSA’s technical review of CGA 

petition (P–1714), and because it 

requested regulatory amendments for 

shipment of methane (including CNG 

with a methane content of 98 percent or 

greater) only in UN cylinders, PHMSA 

determined that the proposals in P–1714 

would be limited to pressure receptacles 

where steel embrittlement is not a safety 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15639 

3P–1716—FIBA (PHMSA–2018–0074), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0074. 

4A multiple-element gas container is an assembly 

of UN cylinders, tubes, or bundles of cylinders 

interconnected by a manifold and assembled within 

a framework. The term includes all service 

equipment and structural equipment necessary for 

the transport of gases. 

5P–1717—FIBA (PHMSA–2018–0075), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0075. 

issue. Additionally, PHMSA notes this 

revision will align HMR references to 

UN cylinders with equivalent DOT 

specification cylinders. PHMSA further 

agrees that CNG, other than methane, 

can cause steel embrittlement in 

seamless steel pressure receptacles with 

tensile strengths greater than 950 MPa. 

Therefore, PHMSA believes the changes 

outlined in the CGA petition P–1714 

will improve the safe transportation of 

CNG. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted an economic review of this 

petition and expects these amendments 

will not result in any material changes 

in costs or operations for market 

participants because they are accepted 

industry practices and address an 

important safety concern. To the degree 

that market participants are currently 

transporting low-purity methane in 

high-tensile strength receptacles, 

affected participants would be required 

to use substitute packaging. Similarly, 

theses revisions will provide safety 

benefits to the extent there is any 

noncompliance with the practice 

presented by CGA. A more detailed 

discussion of this economic analysis can 

be found in the Regulatory Impact 

Analysis (RIA) posted in the docket to 

this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from 

CGA and DGAC in support of the 

revisions to § 173.302b(f) as proposed. 

PHMSA did not receive any comments 

opposing the proposed revisions. 

Therefore, PHMSA revises the 

requirements for transporting CNG with 

methane in certain UN specification 

seamless stainless steel cylinders. 

Amending these requirements will 

enhance safety by authorizing CNG of 

less than 98 percent methane only in 

pressure receptacles where steel 

embrittlement is unlikely to occur. 

B. Threading and Repair of Seamless 

DOT 3-Series Specification Cylinders 

and Seamless UN Pressure Receptacles 

In its petition (P–1716),3 FIBA 

Technologies, Inc. (FIBA) requests 

PHMSA consider a revision to the 

requirements for repairing seamless 

DOT 3-series specification cylinders and 

seamless UN pressure receptacles 

manufactured without external threads, 

and also to authorize the performance of 

this work without requiring prior 

approval from PHMSA. Specifically, 

this petition requests that PHMSA 

authorize machining new threads on a 

previously manufactured seamless 

cylinder or seamless UN pressure 

receptacle without requiring an 

approval. Further, FIBA requests that 

PHMSA expand the population of UN 

pressure receptacles eligible for repair 

work. Regarding external threads, in 

accordance with the current 

§ 180.212(b)(2), repair work not 

requiring prior approval is limited to the 

‘‘rethreading’’ of DOT specification 

3AX, 3AAX, or 3T cylinders, or a UN 

pressure receptacle mounted in 

multiple-element gas containers 

(MEGC).4

FIBA notes there are older DOT 

specification 3AAX cylinders that were 

not equipped with external neck threads 

at the time of manufacture. These 

cylinders were manufactured in the 

1960s, and were mounted on a semitrailer by inserting the tube neck into a 

flange on the semi-trailer bulkhead and 

then secured in place using set screws. 

FIBA argues that these methods have 

been mostly abandoned in favor of a 

threaded tube neck because a threaded 

flange and anti-rotation pins provide a 

more secure connection. Moreover, risk 

will be reduced by a threaded neck 

surface and flange connection, rather 

than a neck with no threads and set 

screws, because the threaded neck and 

flange more securely mount the 

cylinders and tubes within the MEGC or 

motor vehicle (tube trailer or frame). Set 

screws do greater damage to the tube 

than a threaded neck and flange because 

of the penetration depth required to 

achieve a secure connection. Section 

180.212(b)(2) already allows the repair 

of damaged threads, which can be so 

worn as to be the same as a tube 

manufactured with no outer diameter 

neck threads. FIBA argues that there is 

no difference between threads no longer 

capable of joining the tube neck to the 

flange and a tube neck having no 

threads from the start. The same 

threading process will be performed on 

the tube with worn threads as the tube 

with no threads. Additionally, the same 

CGA C–23 evaluation process used to 

determine suitability of the tube neck 

for rethreading will be used to confirm 

the suitability of the neck for threading. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA has 

conducted a technical review of this 

petition and now determines that 

authorizing the threading of DOT 3AX; 

3AAX manufactured without external 

threads; or 3T specification cylinders; or 

UN pressure receptacles will enhance 

safety by authorizing a more secure 

method of connecting MEGC pressure 

receptacles. PHMSA concludes this is 

an improvement over the previous 

method of using set screws to secure the 

tubes, a process that results in 

indentations being carved into the tube 

necks as the tube jostles during 

transport. Moreover, DOT did not 

originally authorize the threading of 

previously manufactured cylinders due 

to a lack of standardized safe threading 

practices at the time PHMSA adopted 

provisions for these cylinders. Lastly, 

PHMSA concludes that the machining 

of neck threads or rethreading of 

seamless UN pressure receptacles 

should be authorized regardless of 

whether the receptacle is mounted in a 

MEGC. As such, standardization in the 

area of cylinder connections is vital to 

reducing damage to the cylinder necks 

and thus to reducing hazardous 

materials releases. In summary, the 

technical review of this petition 

determines the revision will improve 

safety by ensuring a more secure 

connection to the motor vehicle. 

PHMSA has determined that this 

revision will not impose any costs to 

industry. Further, it has determined that 

the changes would provide appropriate 

regulatory flexibility and potential cost 

savings (i.e., avoided costs associated 

with an unnecessary approval 

application process or use of an 

outdated securement method) without 

any impact on safety. A more detailed 

discussion of this economic analysis of 

this revision can be found in the RIA 

posted to the docket for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from both 

CGA and DGAC in support of the 

revision as proposed. PHMSA did not 

receive any comments opposing these 

revisions. Therefore, in this final rule, 

PHMSA revises § 180.212(b)(2) to allow 

the machining of external threads on all 

seamless DOT specification 3AX, 3AAX, 

or 3T cylinders, or a seamless UN 

pressure receptacle originally 

manufactured without external threads. 

Additionally, PHMSA authorizes the 

machining of neck threads or 

rethreading of UN pressure receptacles 

regardless of whether the receptacle is 

mounted in a MEGC. 

C. Clarification of the Requirements for 

Certain Non-Liquefied Compressed 

Gases 

In its petition (P–1717),5 FIBA 

requests that PHMSA consider an 

amendment to § 173.302a(c) of the HMR 

for the special filling limits for DOT 

specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX 

cylinders containing Division. 2.1 

(flammable) gases. The HM–233F final 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15640 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

6 81 FR 3635 (Jan. 21, 2016). 

7 DOT SP–6530, https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/ 

approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/ 

SP6530.pdf/2018019065/SP6530. 

8P–1725—FIBA (PHMSA–2018–0112), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0112. 

9 85 FR 85380 (Dec. 28, 2020). 

10P–1718—COSTHA (PHMSA–2018–0077), 

https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018- 

0077. 

rule 6 adopted DOT Special Permit 

(DOT–SP) 6530 7 into the HMR. This 

revision authorized the transportation in 

commerce of hydrogen and mixtures of 

hydrogen with helium, argon, or 

nitrogen in certain cylinders filled to 10 

percent in excess of their marked 

service pressure. As part of the HM– 

233F final rule, PHMSA adopted safety 

control measures in paragraph (c)(3) of 

§ 173.302a instead of paragraph (c). In 

the NPRM, in response to FIBA’s 

request, PHMSA proposed to amend 

§ 173.302a(c)(3) to clarify that the 

requirements in § 173.302a(c)(3)(i) and 

(ii) are independent provisions. FIBA 

asserts this revision will accurately 

reflect the technical conditions 

associated with the design and 

manufactured properties of DOT 

specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX 

cylinders. 

FIBA also submitted petition (P– 

1725) 8 requesting further amendments 

to § 173.302a(c), concurrent with those 

requested in P–1717. In the NPRM, in 

response to FIBA’s request, PHMSA 

proposed a requirement that the plus 

sign (+) be added following the test date 

marking on a DOT specification 3A, 

3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX cylinder filled 

with hydrogen or mixtures of hydrogen 

with helium, argon, or nitrogen to 

signify that the cylinder may be filled to 

10 percent in excess of its marked 

service pressure. Furthermore, FIBA 

requested that cylinders qualifying for 

the special filling limit in § 173.302a(c) 

also be equipped with a pressure relief 

device (PRD), in accordance with CGA 

S–1.1 (2011), rather than the 

requirements in § 173.302a(c)(4), which 

could potentially conflict with each 

other. CGA S–1.1 prescribes standards 

for selecting the correct PRD to meet the 

requirements of § 173.301(f) for more 

than 150 gases. It also provides 

guidance on when a PRD can be 

optionally omitted and when its use is 

prohibited, as well as direction on PRD 

manufacturing, testing, operational 

parameters, and maintenance. At the 

time FIBA submitted P–1725, CGA S– 

1.1 (2011) had not been incorporated by 

reference into the HMR. Since then, the 

HM–234 final rule 9 was published, 

which incorporated by reference CGA 

S–1.1 (2011) into the HMR and outlines 

the PRD requirements for cylinders 

filled with a gas and offered for 

transportation. 

The plus sign marking (+) is 

associated with a commonly applied 

provision in the HMR that authorizes a 

DOT specification cylinder to be filled 

to 10 percent in excess of its marked 

pressure. FIBA states that the plus sign 

marking (+) is an important means of 

communicating to cylinder refillers that 

a cylinder can be filled to 10 percent 

more than its marked service pressure 

and, thus, should be added to the 

special filling requirements in 

§ 173.302a(c). 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of the 

proposals in both petitions along with 

DOT–SP 6530 and the HM–233F final 

rule. After this review, PHMSA noted in 

the NPRM that it agrees with FIBA that 

the safety control measures within 

DOT–SP 6530 were independent 

provisions. In the HM–233F final rule, 

PHMSA intended to adopt those 

provisions into the HMR as independent 

provisions and inadvertently adopted 

two of the safety controls in 

§ 173.302(c)(3)(i) and (ii) as paragraphs 

of § 173.302a(c)(3). In addition, the 

NPRM noted that PHMSA concurs that 

the revision to require the plus sign (+) 

on DOT specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, 

and 3AAX cylinders filled with 

hydrogen or mixtures of hydrogen with 

helium, argon, or nitrogen would 

improve the safety of filling these 

cylinders by providing clarity on the 

conditions for special filling limits and 

helping prevent the overfilling of 

unauthorized cylinders. Finally, 

PHMSA noted it agrees that cylinders in 

hydrogen service that are filled to 10 

percent in excess of its marked pressure 

should be equipped with a PRD that is 

selected as to type, location, and 

quantity, and tested in accordance with 

CGA S–1.1, in the same manner as is 

generally required for cylinders filled 

with a gas, in accordance with 

§ 173.301(f), instead of § 173.302a(c)(4). 

PHMSA determined that CGA S–1.1 

provides much greater specificity than 

§ 173.302a(c)(4) about the type of 

pressure relief device required for a 

particular gas service. PHMSA now 

concludes that the amendments 

associated with P–1717 will provide 

greater clarity on requirements for 

cylinder design and manufacture, and 

will not represent any incremental, 

quantifiable safety effects because 

PHMSA already authorizes the 

transportation in commerce of hydrogen 

and mixtures of hydrogen with helium, 

argon, or nitrogen in certain cylinders 

filled to more than 10 percent of their 

marked service pressures. These 

amendments will also not impose any 

new or incremental cost because they 

merely reorganize the regulations for 

clarity. Additionally, while 

amendments associated with P–1725 

would create a new requirement, 

PHMSA determines this amendment 

will result in only minimal incremental 

costs to the industry, and impose only 

minimal regulatory burden on small 

businesses or other entities. The 

additional request that the cylinders 

qualified for the special filling limit be 

equipped with pressure relief devices in 

accordance with CGA S–1.1 will not 

add any additional cost on affected 

industries or entities. Currently, 

§ 173.302a(c)(4) contains the same 

requirements as CGA S–1.1 and 

therefore the addition of the CGA S–1.1 

requirement will not cause any new 

additional costs beyond those already 

accounted for previously. A more 

detailed discussion of the economic 

analysis of the proposal can be found in 

the RIA posted to the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

PHMSA received a comment from 

CGA in support of the revision as 

proposed. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revision. Therefore, in this final rule, 

PHMSA revises § 173.302a(c) to reflect 

the safety provisions currently in 

§ 173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) are 

independent material construction 

requirements under paragraph (c) and as 

such have separated them into new 

paragraphs (c)(4) and (5). Moreover, 

PHMSA adds a requirement in 

§ 173.302a(c)(7) to require the plus sign 

(+) following the test date marking to 

indicate compliance with paragraph (c), 

indicating that the cylinder is allowed 

to be filled to more than 10 percent of 

its marked service pressure. Lastly, 

PHMSA replaces the PRD 

requirements—found in current 

§ 173.302a(c)(4)—with a new 

§ 173.302a(c)(6). The new provision 

requires that cylinders must be 

equipped with PRDs sized and selected 

as to type, location, and quantity and 

tested in accordance with CGA S–1.1 

(2011) and § 173.301(f). 

D. De Minimis Quantities of Poisonous 

Materials 

In its petition (P–1718),10 the Council 

on Safe Transportation of Hazardous 

Articles, Inc. (COSTHA) requests that 

PHMSA amend § 173.4b to harmonize 

the de minimis exceptions for Division 

6.1, Packing Group (PG) I (no inhalation 

hazard) materials with international 

regulations, including the International 

Civil Aviation Organization Technical 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15641 

11 74 FR 2200 (Jan. 14, 2009). 

12PHMSA LOI 17–0138, https://www.phmsa.dot.

gov/regulations/title49/interp/17-0138. 

13Working paper ST/SG/AC.10/C.3/2009/45, 

https://unece.org/DAM/trans/doc/2009/ac10c3/STSG-AC10-C3-2009-45e.pdf. 

14P–1726—COSTHA (PHMSA–2019–0002), 

https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019- 

0002. 

15PHMSA LOI 12–0261; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.

gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/ 

interpretations/Interpretations/2012/120261.pdf. 

16PHMSA LOI 14–0013; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.

gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/ 

interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2014/ 

140013.pdf. 

Instructions for the Safe Transport of 

Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO TI) and 

the International Maritime Dangerous 

Goods Code (IMDG Code). The de 

minimis exceptions in the HMR provide 

relief from the general requirements of 

the HMR for certain hazardous materials 

shipped in extremely small quantities. 

The maximum quantity allowed in 

order to utilize the de minimis 

exception per inner receptacle is 1 mL 

for authorized liquids and 1 g for 

authorized solids. Additionally, the 

aggregate quantity per package may not 

exceed 100 mL for liquids and 100 g for 

solids. The exception also requires 

cushioning and package testing 

requirements, along with specific 

provisions for certain materials. 

International harmonization includes 

adopting changes in the HMR to 

improve regulatory consistency with 

international regulations and standards, 

such as the IMDG Code, the ICAO TI, 

and the UN Recommendations on the 

Transport of Dangerous Goods—Model 

Regulations (UN Model Regulations). 

Harmonization facilitates international 

trade by minimizing the costs and other 

burdens of complying with multiple or 

inconsistent safety requirements for 

transportation of hazardous materials. 

Safety is enhanced by creating a 

uniform framework for compliance. As 

the volume of hazardous materials 

transported in international commerce 

continues to grow, harmonization is 

increasingly important. Moreover, the 

Federal Hazardous Materials 

Transportation Law (HMTA; 49 U.S.C. 

5101 et seq.) directs PHMSA to 

participate in relevant international 

standard-setting bodies and promotes 

consistency of the HMR with 

international transport standards to the 

extent practicable. 

The exceptions in the HMR for de 

minimis quantities were initially 

adopted in the HM–224D/HM–215J final 

rule 11 in § 173.4b of the HMR, and were 

intended to align with the provisions for 

de minimis exceptions found in the 

ICAO Technical Instructions and IMDG 

Code. However, HM–224D/HM–215J 

addressed exceptions for de minimis 

quantities of only Division 6.1, PG II 

and PG III hazardous materials. As 

noted in the PHMSA Letter of 

Interpretation (LOI) reference number 

(Ref. No.) 17–0138,12 PHMSA 

considered exceptions for de minimis 

quantities of only Division 6.1, PG II 

and PG III hazardous materials in 

response to a petition for rulemaking. 

In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to 

harmonize the scope of the applicability 

of the de minimis exceptions with what 

is allowed under the international 

standards by including Division 6.1, PG 

I materials (no inhalation hazard). As 

discussed in the NPRM, a technical 

review of this petition found the 

inclusion of de minimis quantities for 

Division 6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard) 

materials into the international 

regulations can be traced back to 

working paper ST/SG/AC.10/C.3/2009/ 

45,13 which was submitted by the 

United States. Based on the review of 

this working paper, PHMSA noted that 

it had preliminarily concluded that 

Division 6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard) 

materials should be included as part of 

the de minimis exception. 

PHMSA noted in the NPRM that the 

primary concern regarding the 

transportation of a Division 6.1, PG I (no 

inhalation hazard) material is leakage 

from a package and potential human 

exposure. A leak of such a material 

poses a risk to human health by 

poisoning. To counter these concerns, 

this hazard is mitigated by the 

conditions for transportation in the de 

minimis exceptions, namely, imposing 

limitations on the quantities allowed to 

1 mL or 1 g per inner receptacle. In 

addition, § 173.4b requires that inner 

receptacles have removable closures 

sealed by wire, tape, or other positive 

means (see § 173.4b(a)(2)), which limits 

the possibility for leakage. Furthermore, 

a Division 6.1 PG I material that does 

not pose an inhalation hazard equally 

poses no vaporization risk should the 

package rupture. Lastly, de minimis 

packages are required to have 

cushioning and absorbent material that 

are not reactive with the hazardous 

material and can absorb the entirety of 

the package’s contents if the receptacle 

ruptures. These requirements severely 

limit the risk of exposure presented by 

transportation of these materials. 

While maintaining safety as described 

in the prior paragraph, PHMSA 

concludes in this final rule that this 

harmonization will not impose any 

direct costs on industry, and will 

provide cost savings to shippers by 

providing the option to ship Division 

6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard) 

materials under the de minimis 

provisions that provide alternative 

communication and packaging 

requirements associated with the 

preparation of these packages. In total, 

PHMSA estimates that the revision will 

result in cost savings of approximately 

$178,570 annually. A more detailed 

discussion of the economic analysis of 

the proposal can be found in the RIA 

posted to the docket for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from both 

COSTHA and DGAC in support of the 

revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not 

receive any comments in opposition to 

the proposed revision. Therefore, upon 

review of the COSTHA petition to revise 

the de minimis quantities exception to 

include Division 6.1, PG I materials (no 

inhalation hazard), PHMSA revises 

§ 173.4b to include Division 6.1, PG I 

materials (no inhalation hazard) to the 

list of authorized materials in 

§ 173.4b(a). PHMSA finds expanding the 

de minimis exceptions to Division 6.1, 

PG I materials (no inhalation hazard) 

will maintain the safety of 

transportation of hazardous materials 

and provide cost savings through 

alternative packaging options. 

E. Clarification of the Marking 

Requirements for Button Cell Lithium 

Batteries Contained in Equipment 

In its petition (P–1726),14 COSTHA 

requests that PHMSA amend 

§ 173.185(c)(3) to clarify that lithium 

button cell batteries installed in 

equipment are excepted from the 

marking requirement and not subject to 

the quantity per package or per 

consignment limitation. Currently, 

§ 173.185(c)(3) states: ‘‘Each package 

must display the lithium battery mark 

except when a package contains button 

cell batteries installed in equipment 

(including circuit boards), or no more 

than four lithium cells or two lithium 

batteries contained in equipment, where 

there are not more than two packages in 

the consignment.’’ In its petition, 

COSTHA asserts that the language and 

grammar used to convey the exception 

from display of the lithium battery mark 

has led some in industry to interpret the 

exception for button cell batteries to be 

dependent on the number of cells in a 

package or the number of packages in 

the consignment. Industry has made 

several requests for letters of 

interpretation—12–0261,15 14–0013,16


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15642 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

17PHMSA LOI 15–0171; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.

gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/ 

interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2016/ 

150171.pdf. 

18PHMSA LOI 16–0172; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.

gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/ 

interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2017/ 

160172.pdf. 

19 79 FR 46011 (Aug. 6, 2014). 

20P–1727—CGA (PHMSA–2019–0007), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0017. 

15–0171,17 and 16–0172 18—that 

illustrates the confusion within the 

regulated community. 

PHMSA published final rule HM– 

224F 19 to revise the HMR applicable to 

the transport of lithium cells and 

batteries, consistent with the UN Model 

Regulations, the ICAO Technical 

Instructions, and the IMDG Code. As 

part of final rule HM–224F, PHMSA 

consolidated the requirements for 

shipping and transporting lithium cells 

and batteries into § 173.185 by: 

• Requiring cells and batteries to be 

tested in accordance with the latest 

revisions to the UN Manual of Tests and 

Criteria, and requiring manufacturers to 

retain evidence of successful 

completion of UN testing. 

• Eliminating the exceptions for small 

cells and batteries in air transportation, 

except with respect to extremely small 

cells packed with or contained in 

equipment. 

• Providing relief for (1) the shipment 

of low production run and prototype 

batteries, and (2) batteries being shipped 

for recycling or disposal. 

In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to 

revise § 173.185(c)(3) to clarify the 

applicability of the lithium battery mark 

exception for button cell batteries 

installed in equipment. Consistent with 

the COSTHA petition, PHMSA noted 

that its proposed revisions would clarify 

that the exception in § 173.185(c)(3) 

applies when a package contains only 

button cell batteries installed in 

equipment; or when there is a 

consignment consisting of two packages 

or less, and each package contains no 

more than four lithium cells or two 

batteries installed in equipment. 

PHMSA now concludes that this 

revision to the HMR is neither expected 

to result in a cost to industry nor a 

change to the safety requirements for 

packages containing lithium button cell 

batteries contained in equipment. The 

revision simply clarifies how the 

exception is applied for better 

understanding by the reader. Since 

PHMSA already authorizes this lithium 

battery mark exception, the change will 

not represent a quantifiable safety effect. 

Qualitatively, improved regulatory 

clarity will assist the regulated 

community in complying with the 

requirement and properly exercising the 

exception. Some entities were 

reasonably confused by the current text 

and applied the required mark 

unnecessarily. To the extent this 

occurred, the revision could provide 

economic benefit while maintaining 

safety. PHMSA determines there is 

limited risk in excepting packages of 

button cell lithium batteries installed in 

equipment from the lithium battery 

mark. A more detailed discussion of the 

economic analysis of the proposal can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from both 

COSTHA and DGAC in support of this 

revision as proposed. PHMSA did not 

receive any comments in opposition to 

the proposed revision. Therefore, 

PHMSA now revises the introductory 

language in § 173.185(c)(3) to clarify 

that lithium button cell batteries 

installed in equipment are not subject to 

any quantity per package or 

consignment limitations when applying 

the exception. 

F. Incorporate by Reference CGA C–20 

(2014) 

In its petition (P–1727),20 CGA 

requests that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference CGA C–20 (2014), 

‘‘Requalification Standard for Metallic, 

DOT, and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and 

Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination, 

Second Edition.’’ CGA also proposes to 

revise § 180.205 to reflect the ultrasonic 

examination (UE) methods authorized 

by CGA C–20. CGA C–20 are an 

industry standard for the periodic 

requalification of certain metallic DOT 

and Transport Canada (TC) 3-series 

cylinders and tubes. CGA asserts that 

the incorporation by reference of CGA 

C–20 would eliminate the need for 

many special permits that authorize the 

use of UE methods and would 

harmonize the various UE methods to 

requalify these pressure receptacles. 

CGA further asserts that this standard 

would establish a uniform set of 

techniques, uniform acceptance and 

rejection criteria, and a standard 

calibration method used during the 

requalification process of these 3-series 

gas cylinders and tubes, in contrast to 

the current special permits, which vary 

on the requirements associated with use 

of the UE nondestructive testing 

methodology for requalification. Finally, 

the petition asserts that the 

incorporation by reference of CGA C–20 

would enhance public safety by 

clarifying and mandating consistent 

requalification practices using UE 

throughout the gas industry. In the 

NPRM, PHMSA proposed the 

incorporation by reference of CGA C–20 

(2014), ‘‘Requalification Standard for 

Metallic, DOT and TC 3-Series Gas 

Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic 

Examination, Second Edition’’ and to 

revise § 180.205 to reflect the UE 

methods authorized by CGA C–20 

(2014). 

CGA C–20 identifies and describes the 

various acceptable UE methods that may 

be used in place of the baseline HMR 

requirements (e.g., internal visual 

inspection and hydrostatic 

requalification methods) used to 

examine certain metallic DOT/TC 3- 

series gas cylinders and tubes. This 

standard also specifies the allowable 

flaw acceptance/rejection criteria. 

Under the HMR, requalification 

periods for DOT/TC 3-series 

specification cylinders range from three 

to 12 years, depending on the 

specification under which each cylinder 

was made (e.g., 3, 3AA, etc.). Periodic 

requalification ensures the safety of 

cylinders by checking for leaks and 

damage that might threaten the integrity 

of a cylinder. Cylinders are requalified 

using volumetric expansion testing, 

proof pressure testing, and external and 

internal visual inspections. Currently, a 

person must apply for a special permit 

in order to receive authorization to use 

UE in lieu of the requalification 

requirements in § 180.205. 

CGA notes that the increased use of 

UE necessitates clear and consistent 

instruction in the application of this 

technical method, as well as the 

adherence to proper calibration and 

acceptance/rejection criteria. CGA 

asserts that the modifications ensure 

that this requalification method is 

applied consistently to safeguard 

cylinder serviceability. 

PHMSA noted in the NPRM that it 

had participated in the task force 

meetings, provided technical assistance 

during the development of CGA C–20, 

and completed a technical review of the 

final standard. As discussed in the 

NPRM, PHMSA has conducted a 

technical review and determined that 

the CGA C–20 standard will positively 

impact safety by prescribing appropriate 

procedures for applying UE as the 

requalification method for DOT/TC 3- 

series cylinders and tubes. 

The total cost savings for industry 

regarding requalification using CGA C– 

20 is based on the number of active 

special permits and the costs associated 

with periodic renewal of the special 

permit. We estimate average annual 

industry cost savings of $30,313 due to 

companies no longer being required to 

apply for a special permit. A more 

detailed discussion of the economic 

analysis of this revision can be found in 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15643 

21P–1728—CGA (PHMSA–2019–0018), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0018. 

22P–1729—CGA (PHMSA-2019-0059), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0059. 

the RIA posted to the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from 

CGA and DGAC in support of the 

revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not 

receive any comments in opposition to 

the proposed revisions. Therefore, 

PHMSA adds a reference to CGA C–20, 

‘‘Methods For Ultrasonic Examination 

Of Metallic, DOT, And TC 3-Series Gas 

Cylinders And Tubes, Second Edition,’’ 

in § 171.7, and revises § 180.205 to 

reflect the UE methods authorized by 

CGA C–20. In addition, as proposed in 

the NPRM, PHMSA revises § 180.205(i) 

to state that when a cylinder containing 

hazardous materials is condemned, the 

requalifier must stamp the cylinder 

‘‘CONDEMNED’’ and affix a readily 

visible label on the cylinder stating: 

‘‘UN REJECTED, RETURNING TO 

ORIGIN FOR PROPER DISPOSITION.’’ 

PHMSA also is clarifying that the 

requalifier may only transport the 

condemned cylinder by private motor 

vehicle carriage to a facility capable of 

safely removing the contents of the 

cylinder. Lastly, the NPRM 

inadvertently left out necessary 

revisions to table 1 to paragraph (a) in 

§ 180.209 that reference the inclusion of 

UE for DOT 3T cylinders and certain 

special permit cylinders. Therefore, in 

this final rule, PHMSA is revising table 

1 to paragraph (a) in § 180.209 to 

reference UE for the cylinders intended 

to be allowed to undergo UE as 

proposed and revised in § 180.205. 

G. Gas Mixtures Containing 

Components Defined as Liquefied Gases 

In its petition (P–1728),21 CGA 

proposes that PHMSA authorize an 

alternative description of gas mixtures 

containing components defined as 

liquefied gases. The CGA petition would 

revise the HMR to allow for a gas 

mixture with components that meet the 

definition of liquefied compressed gas 

in § 173.115(e) to be described as a 

‘‘compressed gas’’ when the partial 

pressures of the liquefied gas 

components of the mixture are 

intentionally reduced so that 

liquefaction does not occur at 20 °C 

(68 °F). CGA requests in its petition that 

special provisions be added to Column 

(7) in the Hazardous Material Table 

(HMT) in § 172.101 applicable to 

liquefied gas mixtures. In the NPRM, 

PHMSA proposed to revise § 173.115(e) 

to allow for a gas mixture with 

components that meet the definition of 

liquefied compressed gas to be 

described as a ‘‘compressed gas’’ when 

the partial pressures of the liquefied gas 

components of the mixture are 

intentionally reduced so that 

liquefaction does not occur at 20 °C 

(68 °F). 

Some compressed gas mixtures 

contain components that when shipped 

in their pure form would be considered 

a liquefied gas. However, when the gas 

is in a mixture, it can be manipulated 

to be entirely gaseous at its intended use 

temperature of 20 °C (68 °F) by reducing 

the components’ partial pressures. 

Partial pressure is the pressure that 

would be exerted by one of the gases in 

a mixture if it occupied the same 

volume on its own. The sum of all 

components’ partial pressures equals 

the total pressure of the mixture. 

Therefore, partial pressure can be 

lowered by lowering pressure generally 

(e.g., by lowering temperatures or 

increasing volume) or altering the ratio 

of gases in the mixture. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA has 

conducted a technical review of this 

petition and concludes in this final rule 

that it agrees with CGA that when the 

gas is in a mixture, it can be 

manipulated to be entirely gaseous at its 

intended use temperature of 20 °C 

(68 °F) by reducing the components’ 

partial pressures. PHMSA notes that 

during transportation, the gas mixture or 

its components may partially liquefy, 

forming condensation on the container 

wall, if ambient temperatures are lower 

than 20 °C (68 °F), but still above ¥50 °C 

(¥58 °F). When the mixture returns to 

its use temperature, the condensation 

will transform back to the gaseous state. 

There are scenarios where a gas mixture 

might contain a component that meets 

the definition of a liquefied compressed 

gas, and under small temperature 

changes, a cloud or condensation could 

build up inside the cylinder. This could 

lead to the ‘‘liquefied compressed gas’’ 

description potentially misrepresenting 

the cylinder’s contents to first 

responders and end users. Moreover, 

while CGA does not cite a safety 

concern with the current requirements 

under the HMR, they do note that there 

can be confusion among stakeholders 

when the content of a cylinder is 

described as a liquefied compressed gas, 

but resembles a non-liquefied 

compressed gas during transportation 

and use. Thus, PHMSA has determined 

that this revision is safety neutral or 

slightly improves safety. However, 

PHMSA disagrees with the CGA petition 

to use a special provision to allow for 

the description of a gas mixture with 

components that meet the definition of 

liquefied compressed gas to be 

described as a ‘‘compressed gas.’’ 

Instead, PHMSA believes that the most 

appropriate change is to amend the 

definition of a non-liquefied 

compressed gas in § 173.115(e), as 

revising the regulatory text provides a 

clearer connection for all stakeholders 

who ship these gases. 

This revision to the HMR will not 

result in any cost to industry or impose 

any regulatory burden on small 

businesses. Given that industries 

already must describe shipments of 

these materials on a shipping paper, and 

communicate information about the 

material and the hazard on the package, 

there will be little to no cost on entities 

to change the hazard communication. A 

more detailed discussion of this 

economic analysis of this revision can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from 

CGA in support of the revisions as 

proposed. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises the 

HMR to allow certain mixtures of gas 

with component(s) considered liquefied 

gas, in accordance with § 173.115(e), to 

be described as a ‘‘compressed gas’’ and 

considered a non-liquefied gas, in 

accordance with § 173.115(d). PHMSA 

revises § 173.115(e) to clarify that gas 

mixtures with component(s) considered 

liquefied gases may be described using 

the appropriate hazardous materials 

description of a non-liquefied 

compressed gas in the HMT in § 172.101 

when the partial pressure(s) of the 

liquefied gas component(s) in the 

mixture are reduced so that the mixture 

is entirely in the gas phase at 20 °C 

(68 °F). 

H. Incorporate by Reference CGA C–23 

(2018) 

In its petition (P–1729),22 CGA 

requested that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference CGA C–23 (2018), ‘‘Standard 

for Inspection of DOT/TC 3 series and 

ISO 11120 Tube Neck Mounting 

Surfaces, Second Edition,’’ into § 171.7 

of the HMR. CGA also requested that 

PHMSA revise §§ 180.205 and 180.207 

to reference the requirements in CGA 

C–23. CGA C–23 defines a tube as a 

seamless pressure vessel authorized for 

transportation only when horizontally 

mounted on a motor vehicle or in an 

ISO framework. Tube modules are also 

commonly known as skid containers, 

ISO skids, ISO containers, or MEGCs. 

Sections 180.205 and 180.207 outline 

the general requirements for the 

requalification of specification cylinders 

and UN pressure receptacles. The CGA 

petition would require all requalifiers of 

tube trailers, skid containers, or MEGCs 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15644 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

23 DOT SP–14206, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/ 

approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/ 

SP14206.pdf/offerserver/SP14206. 

to periodically disassemble equipment 

and perform an examination of tube 

neck mounting surfaces, in accordance 

with CGA C–23. In the NPRM, PHMSA 

proposed to incorporate by reference 

CGA C–23 (2018), ‘‘Standard for 

Inspection of DOT/TC 3 series and ISO 

11120 Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces, 

Second Edition,’’ into § 171.7 and revise 

§§ 180.205 and 180.207 to reference the 

requirements in CGA C–23. 

PHMSA noted in the NPRM that these 

tubes are typically mounted to a 

semitrailer by engaging the threaded 

surface on either end of the tube with 

flanges built into the bulkheads located 

on opposing ends of the trailer. 

Although secured in place, these 

mounting points support the full weight 

of the tube and, during transportation, 

are subjected to jostling, temperature 

changes, and all the dynamic forces 

associated with the acceleration/ 

deceleration of the transport vehicle. 

Consequently, the constant motion and 

wear between the tube’s threaded 

mounting surfaces and the flanges 

causes, over time, the deterioration of 

the mounting threads. This deterioration 

necessitates the periodic disassembly of 

the tubes from the trailer to inspect 

them. Therefore, CGA C–23 provides 

instructions on how to inspect and 

evaluate DOT/TC 3-Series and ISO 

11120 tubes that are 12 feet (3.7 m) or 

longer; have an outside diameter greater 

than or equal to 18 inches (457 mm); 

and are supported by a neck mounting 

surface. In addition, CGA C–23 provides 

methods to assess the integrity of tube 

necks, including but not limited to, 

damage to mounting threads or to pin or 

set screw marks, as well as other 

damage. The assessment as outlined in 

C–23 provides a method for the 

identification of rejected tubes so that 

they can be removed from service, 

thereby improving the safe 

transportation of these horizontally 

mounted cylinder types. 

The NPRM also noted that CGA C–23 

was developed in response to an 

incident where a DOT specification 

3AAX cylinder was ejected from a 

semitrailer and ruptured upon initial 

impact with the roadway. CGA 

determined that the root cause of the 

ejection, which contributed to the 

severity of the incident, was the 

condition of the connection between the 

tube neck and flange. CGA asserts that 

CGA C–23 will enhance the inspection 

process to include the inspection of the 

tube mounting and replacement of 

flanges. 

The HMR currently do not reference 

CGA C–23, but PHMSA references the 

standard as a safety control in DOT 

special permits, such as DOT SP– 

14206.23 These special permits allow for 

the requalification of DOT specification 

cylinders and UN tubes by UE or 

acoustic emission testing (AET), with a 

follow-up UE, instead of the hydrostatic 

test currently required under the HMR. 

These methods are used to ensure the 

cylinders and tubes remain qualified for 

hazardous materials service. Moreover, 

the UE and AET methods are nondestructive methods of examination and 

are alternatives to the hydrostatic 

method. Additionally, the HMR do not 

require periodic inspection and 

evaluation of the tube neck mounting 

surfaces. The CGA petition would 

enhance transportation safety of these 

larger cylinders and tubes by including 

inspection of the tube mounting threads 

as part of the requalification process. 

The language recommended by CGA 

would require both specification DOT 

3-series and UN tubes that are 12 feet or 

longer, with an outside diameter greater 

than or equal to 18 inches and 

supported by the neck mounting surface 

during transportation in commerce, to 

be inspected at least every 10 years in 

accordance with CGA C–23. CGA also 

proposes new language in §§ 180.205(d) 

and 180.207(d) to require DOT 3-series 

and UN tubes that show evidence of 

corrosion to the neck threads to be 

removed and examined in accordance 

with CGA C–23 before being rejected or 

returned to service. As noted in the 

NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical 

review of the CGA petition and 

determined that the incorporation by 

reference of CGA C–23 will enhance 

safety by implementing a periodic 

inspection of the mounting of these 

tubes. Moreover, the requirements of 

CGA C–23 are consistent with the safety 

controls referenced in DOT–SP 14206. 

There are also improvements offered by 

the CGA C–23 standard versus the 

procedures outlined in DOT–SP 14206, 

such as a table that contains specific 

dimensional values for use in defining 

acceptance criteria for tubes with local 

thin areas (LTA). However, PHMSA 

noted in the NPRM that it had found the 

CGA proposals in §§ 180.205(d)(5) and 

180.207(d)(1)(iii) requiring the 

disassembly of the tube module when 

visible corrosion in the neck region is 

present to be too vague. Therefore, 

PHMSA references the figures and 

descriptions provided in Section 4.2 of 

the CGA C–23 standard for extreme 

neck thread wear conditions in 

§§ 180.205(d)(5) and 180.207(d)(1)(iii) to 

clarify conditions when disassembly of 

the tube module is required. 

PHMSA has determined that 

incorporating by reference CGA C–23 

into the HMR will enhance safety for 

industry and stakeholders by codifying 

the tube neck thread inspection 

procedures. PHMSA estimates there will 

be a one-time cost for industry 

participants to purchase the CGA C–23 

standard. With respect to inspections, 

there may be some minimal 

administrative costs associated with 

special permit holders’ permits to reflect 

the codification of CGA C–23–2018 into 

the code, but these special permit 

holders should have been following the 

requirements of CGA C–23–2018 

already. A more detailed discussion of 

this economic analysis of this revision 

can be found in the RIA posted to the 

docket for this rulemaking. PHMSA 

received comments from CGA in 

support of these revisions as proposed. 

PHMSA did not receive any comments 

in opposition to the proposed revision. 

Therefore, PHMSA revises § 171.7 to 

incorporate by reference CGA C–23, 

‘‘Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 

3-Series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck 

Mounting Surfaces, 2nd Edition.’’ 

PHMSA also adds § 180.205(c)(5) to 

state that DOT 3-series cylinders 

horizontally mounted on a motor 

vehicle or in a framework, and longer 

than 12 feet, shall be inspected in 

accordance with CGA C–23 every 10 

years; and adds § 180.205(d)(5) to 

specify conditions (as outlined in 

Section 4 of CGA C–23) requiring 

removal and inspection in accordance 

with CGA C–23. The current 

§ 180.205(d)(5) requiring testing and 

inspection if the Associate 

Administrator determines that the 

cylinder may be in an unsafe condition 

is renumbered as paragraph (d)(6). 

PHMSA also revises § 180.205(i)(2)(i)(C) 

to state that the requalifier must stamp 

the cylinder ‘‘CONDEMNED’’ and affix 

a readily visible label on the cylinder 

stating ‘‘UN REJECTED, RETURNING 

TO ORIGIN FOR PROPER 

DISPOSITION’’ for a condemned 

cylinder that contains hazardous 

materials. The requalifier may only 

transport the condemned cylinder by 

private motor vehicle carriage to a 

facility capable of safely removing the 

contents of the cylinder. Finally, 

PHMSA adds § 180.207(d)(1)(ii) to state 

that steel UN tubes horizontally 

mounted on a motor vehicle or in a 

framework, and longer than 12 feet, 

shall be inspected in accordance with 

CGA C–23 every 10 years; and to specify 

conditions (as outlined in Section 4 of 

CGA C–23) requiring removal and 

inspection in accordance with Section 6 

of CGA C–23. The text at the current 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15645 

24P–1731—IME (PHMSA–2019–0062), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0062. 

§ 180.207(d)(1) is renumbered as 

paragraph (d)(1)(i). 

Lastly, PHMSA notes that the NPRM 

proposed language in § 180.205(c) 

regarding the grace period allowed for 

neck thread inspections with respect to 

requalification times. However, PHMSA 

asserts that this proposed language is 

redundant with the language already 

incorporated by reference in CGA C–23, 

Section 4, and thus not needed as this 

text would be duplicative. 

I. Incorporate by Reference IME Safety 

Library Publication 23 (SLP–23) 

In its petition (P–1731),24 the IME 

proposes that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference an updated version of IME 

SLP–23 (2021), titled 

‘‘Recommendations for the 

Transportation of Explosives, Division 

1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, 

Division 5.1; and Combustible Liquids 

in Bulk Packaging.’’ IME states that 

these revisions and improvements to the 

standard reflect technological advances 

and best practices in the industry that 

will maintain a high level of safety. In 

the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to 

incorporate by reference IME SLP–23 

(2021) into § 171.7. SLP–23 (2021) 

outlines the requirements for 

transporting certain explosives and 

ammonium nitrate emulsions, classified 

as oxidizers, to ensure their safe and 

efficient transport in bulk packagings by 

highway, vessel, and rail. These bulk 

packagings can either be DOT 

specification or non-DOT specification 

packagings (e.g., cargo tanks or portable 

tanks) adapted to accommodate the 

physical and chemical properties of the 

bulk explosives, oxidizers, or fuel oil 

transported. SLP–23 (2021) makes 

several non-substantive changes and 

editorial clarifications from the previous 

publication. Non-substantive changes 

include changing the structure of SLP– 

23 to read more consistently with the 

HMR and editorial revisions. 

Substantive changes to SLP–23 (2021) 

include: 

• Deletion of the Vented Pipe Test 

(VPT) in Appendix A 

Currently, SLP–23 (2011) requires 

both bulk Division 1.5 explosives and 

Division 5.1 ammonium nitrate 

emulsions to pass the VPT. The updated 

SLP–23 removes the VPT test for these 

materials. IME asserts that the VPT is 

not applicable to Division 5.1 and 

Division 1.5 materials and adds that, as 

outlined in portable tank instruction TP 

32 (applicable to UN0331, UN0332, and 

UN3377 materials), the VPT is required 

only to demonstrate suitability for 

containment in tanks as an oxidizer for 

ammonium nitrate-based emulsions 

(ANEs) classified as Division 5.1, 

UN3375. Additionally, IME notes that a 

significant change to the requirements 

applicable to the testing of ANEs was 

approved by the UN Sub-Committee of 

Experts on the Transport of Dangerous 

Goods at its 54th Session (Nov/Dec 

2018). Under the new testing regime, 

acceptance criteria will require passing 

either test series 8(a), 8(b), and 8(c), or 

if the substance fails the 8(c) test (i.e., 

the ‘‘Koenen Test’’) and the substance 

had a time to reaction in that test longer 

than 60 seconds and a water content 

greater than 14 percent, the material 

would be required to pass test series 

8(a), 8(b), and 8(e). Test 8(e) is the 

Minimum Burning Pressure test (MBP). 

IME noted that industry is currently 

gathering data to determine whether use 

of the MBP test obviates the need for the 

VPT because, in essence, the VPT is a 

scaled-up Koenen Test and, therefore, 

has the same limitations associated with 

extended time of heating. 

• Allowing operators to continually 

monitor driver qualifications and 

training instead of conducting an annual 

audit, as currently required in SLP–23 

(2011). 

IME notes that the current 

requirement for an ‘‘annual audit’’ is 

inadequate to ensure that driver 

qualification and training programs are 

comprehensive, effective, and being 

implemented properly. IME believes 

that limiting oversight of the program to 

an annual audit provides less assurance 

that operators are compliant than would 

a requirement to continually monitor 

the driver qualification program. 

In addition, IME requests revisions to 

the HMR that coincide with the 

incorporation by reference of SLP–23 

(2021). IME requests the adoption of 

DOT–SP 8723, which authorizes 

‘‘UN0332, Explosive, Blasting, type E,’’ 

‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion,’’ and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing 

liquid n.o.s. (PG II)’’ to be transported in 

IM 101 and 102 portable tanks. IME 

explains that continuing to operate 

under DOT–SP 8723 imposes additional 

administrative costs to both industry 

and PHMSA, and that one of the 

advantages of incorporating by reference 

SLP–23 (2011) into the HMR was the 

elimination of SPs governing bulk 

transportation of certain materials 

manufactured and used by the 

commercial explosives industry. IME 

asserts that failure to include the 

provisions from DOT–SP 8723 was an 

oversight when SLP–23 (2011) was 

originally incorporated by reference into 

the HMR. In addition to the 

administrative cost savings noted above, 

IME adds that the conversion of SPs into 

regulations provides certainty to the 

regulated community, and increases 

transparency for government, 

stakeholders, and the public. IME 

proposes that TP codes be assigned to 

‘‘UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E,’’ 

‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion,’’ and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing 

liquid, n.o.s., PG II’’ to authorize the use 

of IM 101 and 102 portable tanks when 

transported under SLP–23 (2021). 

Lastly, IME proposes a revision to 

§ 173.251 to state that this section is not 

applicable when UN3375 is transported 

in IM 101 or 102 portable tanks in 

accordance with SLP–23 (2021). 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of the 

revisions to SLP–23 (2021) and concurs 

with IME that most of the changes in 

IME SLP–23 (2021) are either nonsubstantive or editorial in nature. 

PHMSA does not believe, however, that 

sufficient data was provided by IME to 

no longer require the VPT for Division 

1.5 blasting explosives and Division 5.1 

ANEs when transported in bulk. While 

it is true that the UN Subcommittee has 

discussed whether the VPT is beneficial 

for ANEs when transported in bulk, the 

discussions are still in preliminary 

stages and pending further review by 

the UN Subcommittee. If these 

provisions are adopted by the UN, 

PHMSA may consider changes to VPT 

requirements in a future international 

harmonization rulemaking, but PHMSA 

declines to incorporate that revision at 

this time. PHMSA also concurs with 

IME that an annual audit is inadequate 

to ensure that driver qualification and 

training programs are comprehensive, 

effective, and being implemented 

properly. A continual monitoring 

program better ensures compliance with 

the driver qualification requirements. 

While the timing of the oversight of 

requirements would change—i.e., 

continuous monitoring instead of an 

annual audit—the current elements of 

the qualification and training program 

would remain unchanged. 

Lastly, PHMSA concurs that there is 

sufficient merit to adopt the provisions 

of DOT–SP 8723 to authorize ‘‘UN0332, 

Explosive, blasting, type E,’’ ‘‘UN3375, 

Ammonium nitrate emulsion,’’ and 

‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., PG 

II’’ to be transported in IM 101 and 102 

portable tanks when shipped under 

SLP–23 (2021). This would include a 

conforming revision to indicate that 

§ 173.251 does not apply when UN3375 

material is transported in IM 101 or 102 

portable tanks in accordance with SLP– 

23. PHMSA has determined that these 

revisions maintain the safety of bulk 

transport of these materials because the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15646 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

25https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/ 

documents/offer/SP8723.pdf/offerserver/SP8723. 

26 80 FR 79423 (Dec. 21, 2015). 

27https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/ 

phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/SP11579_

2010010140.pdf. 

SLP–23 (2011) standard currently 

incorporated by reference already 

authorizes larger bulk quantities 

consistent with the hazardous material 

offered in accordance with DOT–SP 

8723 and is supported by a safety record 

of use for 10 years. PHMSA concludes 

that the revisions to IME SLP (2021) will 

streamline regulatory requirements 

without a negative impact on safety. 

PHMSA quantified the effects of 

removing the administrative 

requirements of applying for a special 

permit and estimates the average annual 

cost savings to be $6,746 per year. There 

are several other effects of the proposal 

that may result in costs, cost savings, 

and benefits, but these results are less 

certain and are described qualitatively. 

A more detailed discussion of the 

economic analysis of this revision can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. IME provided 

comments mostly in support of the 

proposed incorporation of IME SLP–23 

(2021). However, IME also provided 

comments on potential revisions to the 

applicability of IME SLP–23 (2021). IME 

notes that since the publication of SLP– 

23 (2021), PHMSA has authorized the 

use of UN T11 portable tanks in DOT– 

SP 8723 25 for ‘‘UN0332, Explosive, 

blasting, type E or Agent blasting, Type 

E’’, ‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion or Ammonium nitrate 

suspension or Ammonium nitrate gel, 

intermediate for blasting explosives’’ 

and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing liquid, N.O.S.’’ 

In its comments, IME request that the 

IME SLP–23 (2021) be revised to 

include the addition of T11 UN portable 

tanks for these materials. 

IME also notes that the use of 

intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) is 

not expressly authorized under IME 

SLP–23 (2021) despite their historical 

use for the transportation of bulk 

explosives. IME adds that the HM–233D 

final rule,26 titled ‘‘Hazardous Materials: 

Requirements for the Safe 

Transportation of Bulk Explosives,’’ 

incorporated by reference the IME SLP– 

23 (2011), which in turn incorporated 

several DOT special permits authorizing 

the transportation of certain explosives 

in bulk containers. One such special 

permit, DOT–SP–11579,27 authorized 

the transportation of blasting materials/ 

ammonium nitrate emulsions in certain 

IBCs. IME SLP–23 (2021) specifically 

authorizes bulk packages for materials 

authorized under §§ 173.240 (UN0331 

and NA0331) and 173.242 (UN0332 and 

UN3375). IME adds that both regulatory 

provisions limit the transportation of 

these materials in IBCs to materials for 

which the IBC type is authorized, 

according to the IBC packaging code, 

specified for the specific hazardous 

material in Column (7) of the HMT in 

§ 172.101. Lastly, IME notes that there 

are no IBC packaging codes for NA0331, 

UN0331, and UN0332 in Column (7) of 

the HMT and, accordingly, their 

transportation in IBCs is currently 

prohibited. IME states that it was not 

their intention to exclude IBCs for these 

materials when the incorporation of 

SLP–23 (2011) was originally requested. 

IME also does not believe it was 

PHMSA’s intent to exclude these 

materials for transportation in IBCs, 

since SP–11579 was expressly 

incorporated into the HMR as part of 

that incorporation action. IME requests 

that PHMSA either revise SLP–23 (2021) 

to state that the IBC code requirements 

in §§ 173.240 and 173.242 are 

inapplicable, or amend the HMT to 

include an IBC Code for the materials. 

With respect to T11 UN portable 

tanks, PHMSA agrees that there is no 

technical reason to not include UN 

portable tanks for the transportation of 

bulk explosives under SLP–23 (2021). 

Additionally, PHMSA does not believe 

there is any technical reason to not 

allow the use of IBCs as requested in 

SLP–23(2021). However, the APA 

requires that the public have an 

opportunity to comment on regulations 

before they take effect, so any 

requirements not proposed in the earlier 

notice cannot be included in this final 

rule. PHMSA encourages IME to submit 

a petition for rulemaking to incorporate 

by reference a revised version of the 

SLP–23 publication with the revisions 

that would authorize these packages in 

a revised version of SLP–23. Until then, 

PHMSA encourages IME’s members to 

continue to renew DOT SP–8723 for the 

use of UN portable tanks. Additionally, 

PHMSA encourages those entities 

wanting to transport NA0331, UN0331, 

and UN0332 in IBCs to apply for a 

special permit similar to what was 

allowed in DOT SP–11579. 

IME also notes that Section I of IME 

SLP–23 (2021), titled ‘‘Standards for 

Transporting a Single Bulk Hazardous 

Material for Blasting by Cargo Tank 

Motor Vehicles,’’ contains a subsection 

G, which addresses the ‘‘Security and 

Safety of the Bulk Hazardous Materials 

Transported under the Provisions of 

IME SLP–23.’’ IME SLP (2021) Section 

II is titled ‘‘Standards for Cargo Tank 

Motor Vehicles Capable of Transporting 

Multiple Hazardous Materials for 

Blasting in Bulk and Non-Bulk 

Packaging.’’ IME notes that the safety 

and security requirements are only 

found in paragraph G of Section I and 

not Section II. IME adds that one could 

interpret the applicability of the safety 

and security provisions in paragraph G 

to Section I as only applying to CTMVs 

carrying a single bulk hazardous 

material. IME states that its intent was 

to apply safety and security precautions 

found in paragraph G of Section I to all 

CTMVs, regardless of whether they are 

carrying a single hazardous materials or 

multiple hazardous materials. 

Accordingly, IME recommends that 

Section II of SLP–23 be amended to 

include the same safety and security 

requirements found in Section I. 

As previously stated, under the APA, 

PHMSA cannot incorporate by reference 

in the final rule a version of the IME 

SLP–23 other than the version proposed 

in the NPRM. The HMR already requires 

that certain hazardous materials 

shippers and carriers develop and 

implement security plans. Specifically, 

§ 172.802 states that security plans must 

be developed and adhered to by 

shippers and carriers of certain 

hazardous materials in specified 

quantities, including Division 1.1, 1.2, 

or 1.3 explosives; spent nuclear fuel; 

highway route controlled quantities of 

radioactive materials; and more than 25 

kg of Division 1.5, 1.3, or 1.1 explosives. 

Security plans must include an 

assessment of possible transportation 

security risks and appropriate measures 

to address those risks. Specific elements 

such as personnel security, 

unauthorized access, and en route 

security must be addressed. 

The safety and security requirements, 

as outlined in paragraph G of Section 1 

of SLP–23 (2021), act as guidance for 

how CTMVs used to transport bulk 

shipments of hazardous materials can 

comply with the regulatory 

requirements currently found in 

§ 172.802. Although paragraph G is not 

currently listed in Section II of SLP–23 

(2021) for CTMVs containing multiple 

hazardous materials, PHMSA believes it 

reasonable to clarify in the preamble to 

the final rule that the safety and security 

requirements found in paragraph G of 

Section 1 should also be applied to 

shipments of multiple hazardous 

materials in bulk, in order to comply 

with the requirements in § 172.802. 

PHMSA encourages IME to note on its 

website for downloading SLP–23 that 

the safety and security requirements 

found in paragraph G of Section I can 

also be used in Section II in order to 

meet the regulatory requirements in 

§ 172.802. Additionally, IME is also 

encouraged to petition PHMSA to 

incorporate a new version of SLP–23 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15647 

28P–1732—SAAMI (PHMSA–2019–0069), 

https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019- 

0069. 

29The periodic retest requirements for 

combination packagings call for conducting design 

qualification retesting at least once every 24 

months. See § 178.601(e). 

which makes the safety and security 

requirements clearer to the users of 

SLP–23. 

Lastly, IME notes that the current title 

of Section I of IME SLP–23 (2021) is 

‘‘Standards For Transporting A Single 

Bulk Hazardous Material for Blasting by 

Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles.’’ IME notes 

that a strict reading of the title implies 

that Section I is limited to bulk 

transport by cargo tank motor vehicle 

(CTMV). However, paragraph B of 

Section I specifically states that 

‘‘highway, vessel, and rail are 

authorized modes for the transportation 

of the bulk hazardous materials listed in 

Section I.A.1 in bulk packagings.’’ In 

order to eliminate any confusion caused 

by this contradictory language, IME 

recommends that the title of Section I be 

modified to read ‘‘Standards for 

Transporting a Single Bulk Hazardous 

Material for Blasting.’’ In addition, IME 

requests that a revision be made to 

Special Provision 148 and § 173.66, 

which specifically reference the title of 

Section I of IME SLP–23 (2021). 

As previously stated, under the APA, 

PHMSA cannot incorporate by reference 

in the final rule a version of the IME 

SLP–23 other than the version proposed 

in the NPRM. However, PHMSA is 

clarifying in the preamble to this final 

rule that since paragraph B of Section 1 

clearly states that ‘‘highway, vessel, and 

rail are authorized modes for the 

transportation of the bulk hazardous 

materials listed in Section I.A.1 in bulk 

packagings,’’ the transportation of bulk 

explosives under IME SLP–23 applies to 

the highway, vessel, and rail modes 

provided the shipment of such materials 

is approved by the relevant mode in the 

HMT. As previously stated, PHMSA 

encourages IME to submit a petition for 

rulemaking to revise the HMR and 

provide an updated version of IME SLP– 

23 that clarifies this issue further. 

Therefore, PHMSA incorporates by 

reference SLP–23 (2021), 

‘‘Recommendations for the 

Transportation of Explosives, Division 

1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, 

Division 5.1; and Combustible Liquids 

in Bulk Packaging,’’ as proposed into 

§ 171.7(r)(2) and replaces the 2011 

edition currently incorporated by 

reference in the HMR. PHMSA also 

revises special provision 148 to clearly 

state that the VPT requirements in SLP– 

23 (2011) would still apply. PHMSA 

also adds new special provision TP48 to 

§ 172.102(c)(8) to authorize the use of 

IM 101 and 102 portable tanks for ANEs 

when transported under SLP–23 (2021). 

PHMSA assigns TP48 to the following 

UN numbers in the HMT in § 172.102: 

‘‘UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E;’’ 

‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion;’’ and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing 

liquid, n.o.s., PG II.’’ Lastly, PHMSA 

revises § 173.251 to state that this 

section is not applicable when 

‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion’’ is transported in IM 101 or 

102 portable tanks in accordance with 

SLP–23 (2021). 

J. Revision of Testing and Marking of 

UN Specification Packagings 

In its petition (P–1732),28 the Sporting 

Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ 

Institute, Inc. (SAAMI) proposes that 

PHMSA amend § 178.503(a)(6) by 

allowing UN performance-oriented 

boxes (e.g., UN 4A, 4B, or 4N for steel, 

aluminum, or other metal boxes, 

respectively) to be marked with the last 

two digits of the year of testing 

certification rather than the last two 

digits for year of manufacture. 

Additionally, the SAAMI petition 

proposes to add an additional selective 

testing variation in § 178.601(g) to allow 

for variation of packagings that include 

articles containing solid hazardous 

materials, packed in inner packagings 

without further testing, subject to 

certain conditions. SAAMI requests that 

this variation also allow for an increase 

in dimensions of the outer packaging of 

the combination packaging based on the 

tested design type. In the NPRM, 

PHMSA proposed to revise 

§ 178.503(a)(6) to allow UN 

performance-oriented boxes (e.g., UN 

4A, 4B, or 4N for steel, aluminum, or 

other metal boxes, respectively) to be 

marked with the last two digits of the 

year of testing certification rather than 

the last two digits for year of 

manufacture, and revise § 178.601(g) to 

allow an additional selective testing 

variation. 

With regard to the marking proposal, 

the marking requirements in 

§ 178.503(a)(6) currently require 

packages to be marked with the last two 

digits of the year of manufacture. 

SAAMI asserts that the year of 

manufacture is meant to tie the 

packaging to a specific certification (i.e., 

tied to design qualification testing and 

periodic retesting to a UN standard). 

SAAMI asserts that while the date of 

manufacture is informative, this degree 

of specificity is not necessary for safety 

or enforcement purposes. SAAMI adds 

that because the retesting of the design 

type occurs every two years,29

industries incur costs to change the year 

of manufacture marking on packagings 

that are still being produced under the 

same design test. (PHMSA notes that 

this conclusion is based on the 

presumption that manufacturers of 

combination packagings are operating at 

the minimum test frequency of retesting 

every 24 months.) SAAMI asserts that 

allowing marking of the last two digits 

of the year of packaging certification on 

packagings is considered an acceptable 

substitute to the current regulatory 

requirement in § 178.503(a)(6) and 

eliminates the need to change printing 

plates biannually. 

PHMSA received mixed comments 

regarding this specific proposal; 

specifically, some commenters 

supported it while others opposed. The 

opposing viewpoint noted that this 

proposal would cause the package 

marking on Series 4 Packages to no 

longer be harmonized with the UN 

Model Regulations. Therefore, PHMSA 

is not adopting the proposal to revise 

§ 178.503(a)(6) to allow the marking of 

Series 4 packages with the year of 

certification instead of the year of 

manufacturing. PHMSA has determined 

that the HMR and the UN Model 

Regulations packaging specification 

marks should remain aligned to 

facilitate efficient cross-border shipping. 

Deviations from the UN Model 

Regulations—particularly with respect 

to standard markings—is not justified 

based on limited potential cost savings 

that could be at issue here. Maintaining 

a global system of consistent 

transportation requirements protects 

businesses and people worldwide by 

allowing for the safe, frustration-free 

transport of hazardous materials. 

With regard to the selective testing 

variation proposal, § 178.601 contains 

the general requirements for the testing 

of non-bulk UN performance-oriented 

packagings and packages. Section 

178.601(g) contains packaging variations 

that allow for the selective testing of 

packagings that differ only in minor 

respects from a tested design type. 

SAAMI proposes in its petition to create 

an additional packaging variation under 

§ 178.601(g) to include small arms 

ammunition—specifically, ‘‘Cartridges 

for weapons, inert projectile(s) or blank 

(UN0012 and UN0014); Primers, cap 

type (UN0044); and Cases, cartridge, 

empty with primer (UN0055)—packed 

in inner packages.’’ Specifically, SAAMI 

proposes allowing inner packagings of 

ammunition to be assembled and 

transported without packaging testing, 

provided that the outer packaging of a 

combination package of articles 

successfully passes the tests, in 

accordance with §§ 178.603 and 

178.606. Additionally, the SAAMI 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15648 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

30P–1734—Evonik (PHMSA–2019–0089), https:// 

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0089. 

31 DOT SP–16295, https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/ 

approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/ 

SP16295.pdf/2018080498/SP16295. 

32P–1736—IME (PHMSA–2019–0167), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0167. 

petition proposes for the packaging 

variation to allow for larger packages to 

use the certification of a smaller tested 

package. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of the 

SAAMI proposal for a new selective 

testing variation to allow for limited 

testing of combination packagings for 

small arms ammunition and 

components. PHMSA concurs with the 

proposal to allow for a variation in 

combination packagings used for 

materials classified as UN0012, 

UN0014, UN0044, and UN0055 without 

further testing. 

PHMSA conducted an economic 

evaluation of the amendment to 

§ 178.601(g) to allow specified inner 

packagings to be assembled and 

transported without testing under 

certain conditions. For this amendment, 

PHMSA estimates annualized cost 

savings of approximately $826,711. A 

more detailed discussion of the 

economic analysis of this amendment 

can be found in the RIA posted to the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from 

COSTHA in support of the revisions as 

proposed. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revision. Therefore, PHMSA is adding a 

new packaging variation in 

§ 178.601(g)(6) to authorize selective 

testing of packagings containing 

‘‘Cartridges for weapons, inert 

projectile(s) or blank (UN0012 and 

UN0014), Primers, cap type (UN0044), 

and Cases, cartridge, empty with primer 

(UN0055).’’ Inner packagings intended 

to contain these materials may be 

assembled and transported without 

testing provided that the outer 

packaging of a combination packaging 

successfully passes the tests, in 

accordance with §§ 178.603 and 

178.606, and the gross mass does not 

exceed that of the tested type. 

K. Authorizing Smaller Combustible 

Placard on IBCs 

In its petition (P–1734),30 Evonik 

proposes that PHMSA revise 

§ 172.514(c) by adding an option for 

smaller placards for intermediate bulk 

containers (IBCs) carrying combustible 

liquids by adopting the provisions in 

DOT–SP 16295 31 into the HMR. This 

would allow shippers to transport IBCs 

containing combustible liquids 

(NA1993) bearing a combustible placard 

sized to be consistent with the label size 

specifications in § 172.407(c). Section 

172.407(c) requires diamond shaped 

labels to be at least 100 mm (3.9 inches) 

on each side. In the NPRM, PHMSA 

proposed to revise § 172.514(c) by 

adding an option for smaller placards 

for IBCs carrying combustible liquids. 

The HMR requires placards to be at 

least 250 mm (9.84 inches) on each side. 

Section 172.514(c) prescribes the 

exceptions for placarding bulk packages. 

Specifically, paragraph (c)(4) authorizes 

IBCs to be labeled in accordance with 

part 172, subpart E. However, IBCs 

transporting combustible liquids do not 

qualify for that exception because there 

is no authorized label for combustible 

liquids. 

Evonik states in its petition that a 

smaller-sized combustible placard 

would allow for more space for proper 

placarding and marking placement due 

to the commonly limited space available 

to display hazard information on the 

IBC side plates and panels. Moreover, 

Evonik states that a smaller placard 

provides a level of safety equivalent to 

the requirements in § 172.514(c)(4), 

where an IBC is authorized to be labeled 

instead of placarded (e.g., flammable 

labels vs. flammable placards), and in 

§ 172.406(e)(6), where duplicate labels 

are not required on two sides or two 

ends of an IBC with a volume of 1.8 m3

(64 cubic feet) or less (approximately 

478 gallons). Because these exceptions 

are allowed for hazardous materials 

considered to pose greater danger than 

combustible liquids, Evonik asserts the 

reduction in size for combustible 

placards will maintain a safe level of 

hazard communication for transport of 

combustible liquids in IBCs. 

While this revision is not technical in 

nature, PHMSA determines that—from a 

policy and safety perspective—this 

amendment does not change the safety 

requirements for the transportation of an 

IBC, but will provide greater flexibility 

by making more space available for 

other necessary information on the IBC. 

Additionally, this amendment will not 

result in any cost to industry or impose 

any new regulatory burden to industry. 

There will be a marginal cost savings 

due to current special permit holders no 

longer needing to apply to renew their 

special permits. A more detailed 

discussion of this economic analysis of 

this revision can be found in the RIA 

posted to the docket for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received feedback from the 

DGAC supporting proposed changes to 

allow label sized placards on IBCs 

containing combustible liquids instead 

of requiring full sized placards. In its 

original proposal, PHMSA asked for 

comments on whether to allow label 

sized placards instead of full sized 

placards on other bulk package types 

containing combustible liquids, such as 

portable tanks. DGAC recommended 

that PHMSA expand the changes to also 

include permitting label sized placards 

instead of full sized placards on 

portable tanks for combustible liquids. 

After further review, PHMSA did not 

find any technical or safety reasons to 

not allow the use of label sized placards 

instead of full sized placards on 

portable tanks. Therefore, PHMSA 

revises § 172.514(c)(1) and (4) to allow 

IBCs and portable tanks containing 

combustible liquids to be placarded 

with a combustible placard that meets 

the label size specifications in 

§ 172.407(c). 

L. Incorporate by Reference IME Safety 

Library Publication 22 (SLP–22) 

In its petition (P–1736),32 IME 

requests that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference IME SLP–22 (2019), 

‘‘Recommendations for the Safe 

Transportation of Detonators in a 

Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive 

Materials.’’ The HMR currently 

incorporates by reference the IME SLP– 

22 (2007) version in the HMR at 

§ 171.7(r)(1). In the NPRM, PHMSA 

proposed the incorporation by reference 

of IME SLP–22 (2019), 

‘‘Recommendations for the Safe 

Transportation of Detonators in a 

Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive 

Materials.’’ 

IME notes that DOT has long accepted 

the SLP–22 publication and its 

recommendations for the safe 

transportation of detonators in a vehicle. 

SLP–22 (2007) is referenced in §§ 173.63 

and 177.835. IME notes that much of the 

SLP–22 standard has remained virtually 

unchanged since 1972 and has proven 

effective for the safe transportation of 

detonators. Of the millions of shipments 

of detonators and explosives made using 

SLP–22, none have resulted in a massdetonation. The primary intent of SLP– 

22 is not to prevent mass detonation, 

but instead to allow sufficient time in 

the event of a transportation incident, 

such as fire, to evacuate bystanders to a 

safe distance. Testing conducted by IME 

has shown that transporting detonators 

in an undamaged box constructed to the 

standard set forth in SLP–22 will 

prevent, for 30 minutes or longer, mass 

detonation. 

SLP–22 (2019) reflects necessary 

changes and improvements to the SLP– 

22 (2007) edition and includes technical 

corrections, practical improvements, 

and deletion of outdated practices. 

Specifically, changes to SLP–22 

include: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15649 

33P–1738—COSTHA (PHMSA–2019–0233), 

https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019- 

0233. 

34P–1744—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0104), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0104. 

• Providing clarity on the text ‘‘other

positions may be acceptable’’ by 

specifying alternative placement of 

SLP–22 packages or containers on a 

motor vehicle based on vehicle cargo 

space configuration. 

• Consistent with the alternative

positions, adding a constraint to limit 

positions of a container on the vehicle 

as far as possible from the points on the 

vehicle that are most susceptible to high 

temperature fires due to accidents or 

severe mechanical failures (e.g., the 

vehicle fuel tank). 

• Adding reference to IME SLP–23 for

containers mounted on a cargo tank 

motor vehicle. 

• Adding a requirement that

structural components (i.e., latches) 

must be bolted or welded to the steel in 

the wall of the container or 

compartment. 

• Allowing alternative materials of

construction subject to certain 

performance standards (i.e., constructed 

of or covered with non-sparking 

material). 

• Adopting several revisions that

provide clarity and correct 

typographical errors. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of each 

revision included in SLP–22 (2019) and 

concluded that these changes will either 

maintain or enhance the safety of 

transporting detonators by highway 

with other explosive materials. PHMSA 

supports the overall intent to allow 

more time for evacuation should there 

be an incident. PHMSA incorporates by 

reference SLP–22 (2019). PHMSA has 

concluded that the specifications in 

Section C.9 of the document are 

adequate to provide the flexibility to 

allow for alternative materials of 

construction without compromising 

safety. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted an economic analysis of the 

IME proposal and found that the 

changes made to Sections C.1 and C.1.a 

provide more flexibility for businesses 

in their placement of SLP–22 boxes 

while still meeting safety standards. The 

changes to Section C.1.c regarding 

padlocks may result in annual cost 

savings of approximately $2,000, 

assuming a small percentage of vehicles 

(0.1 percent) take advantage of the onetime cost savings associated with 

purchasing new padlocks. C.9’s 

allowance of alternative materials in the 

construction of SLP–22 boxes may 

result in cost savings of approximately 

$965,598 per year. These cost savings, 

however, are contingent on the quantity 

and type of material substitutions made 

by SLP–22 box manufacturers, which is 

uncertain. A more detailed discussion of 

this economic analysis of this 

incorporation by reference can be found 

in the RIA posted to the docket for the 

rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from IME 

in support of these revisions as 

proposed. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revision. Therefore, PHMSA amends 

§ 171.7(r)(1) to reference IME SLP–22

(2019). In addition, PHMSA makes an

editorial revision to § 171.7(r)(1) by

inserting a space between ‘‘IME

Standard 22,’’ and ‘‘IME’’ in the first

line and amend the date to read ‘‘June

2019.’’

M. Definition of a Liquid

In its petition (P–1738),33 COSTHA

proposes that PHMSA modify the 

definition of a liquid in § 171.8 to 

include the test for determining fluidity 

found in ISO 2137:1985, ‘‘Petroleum 

products—Lubricating grease and 

petrolatum—Determination of cone 

penetration,’’ (penetrometer test), 

prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A 

of the ADR. Section 171.8 states that a 

liquid means a material, other than an 

elevated temperature material, with a 

melting point or initial melting point of 

20 °C (68 °F) or lower at a standard 

pressure of 101.3 kPa (14.7 pounds per 

square inch). A viscous material for 

which a specific melting point cannot 

be determined must be subjected to the 

procedures specified in ASTM D 4359 

(1990), ‘‘Standard Test Method for 

Determining Whether a Material is 

Liquid or Solid.’’ The UN Model 

Regulations, ICAO Technical 

Instructions, and IMDG Code all include 

the penetrometer test as an alternative to 

performing the ASTM D 4359 test 

method in determination of whether a 

material is a liquid. In the NPRM, 

PHMSA proposed to modify the 

definition of a liquid in § 171.8 to 

include the test for determining 

fluidity—ISO 2137:1985 (penetrometer 

test)—prescribed in section 2.3.4 of 

Annex A of the ADR. 

In its petition, COSTHA states there 

have been no recorded instances of 

determination of liquidity using the 

ADR penetrometer test increasing the 

risk to safety while in transportation. 

COSTHA adds that under the current 

system, a material manufactured outside 

the United States and classified using 

the penetrometer test may not be 

reshipped within the United States 

without first performing the ASTM D 

4359 test method. The HMR does not 

authorize the ADR penetrometer test as 

a method for determining if a material 

is a liquid, and thus, any hazard 

classification based on this result is not 

valid in the United States. This results 

in increased cost for shippers to conduct 

additional testing and creates a barrier 

to importing materials into the United 

States. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of the 

COSTHA proposal to harmonize the 

HMR definition with international use 

of the ADR penetrometer test for 

determination of a liquid. The test, ISO 

2137:1985, as identified in the ADR 

under section 2.3.4, is referenced in the 

UN Model Regulations Volume 1, 20th 

edition, in section 1.2.1, Definitions, 

Liquid, and in the UN Manual of Tests 

and Criteria, 7th edition, as a footnote 

reference to UN Model Regulations 1.2.1 

at the end of 20.4.1.5. PHMSA finds that 

the ISO test is more empirical in nature 

than ASTM D 4359 and provides better 

understanding of the physical properties 

of the tested material. Therefore, 

PHMSA now determines the adoption of 

penetrometer test into the HMR will 

provide a level of safety equal or greater 

to the currently approved ASTM test 

method. Lastly, the addition of the 

penetrometer test into the HMR will 

allow for more flexibility to offerors by 

providing an additional option for the 

testing of liquids. An economic analysis 

of this petition could not validate the 

estimates from the petitioner that 

suggest cost savings from this revision. 

A more detailed discussion of this 

economic analysis of this revision can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments from 

COSTHA and DGAC in support of the 

revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not 

receive any comments in opposition to 

the proposed revision. Therefore, 

PHMSA revises the definition of a 

liquid in § 171.8 to reference the test for 

determining fluidity (penetrometer test) 

prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A 

of the ADR. 

N. Incorporate by Reference Updated

CGA C–7 (2020)

In its petition (P–1744),34 CGA 

proposes that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference the updated Appendix A of 

CGA publication C–7 (2020), ‘‘Guide to 

Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases,’’ Eleventh Edition, 

into the HMR at § 171.7(n)(8). Currently, 

the HMR incorporates by reference CGA 

C–7 (2014), ‘‘Guide to Classification and 

Labeling of Compressed Gases,’’ Tenth 

Edition. The HMR currently authorizes 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15650 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

35P–1746—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0116), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0116. 

36https://www.regulations.gov/document/ 

PHMSA-2020-0116-0003. 

the marking of a Dewar flask or a 

cylinder in accordance with CGA C–7 

(2014), Appendix A instead of labeling 

(see § 172.400a). CGA states that an 

update is needed to CGA C–7, Tenth 

Edition (2014), to address changes made 

to Appendix A in the Eleventh Edition 

(2020), such as: 

• Providing greater flexibility in the 

hazard class display by allowing it to be 

displayed on one or two lines. 

• Clarifying that the marking system 

elements must meet certain minimum 

size requirements. 

• Providing an example of the CGA 

marking system for multiple hazard 

diamonds that are overlapped. 

CGA C–7 (2020) states the general 

principles for labels and markings of 

cylinders, and provides recommended 

minimum requirements for many 

hazardous gases and selected liquids 

used in such cylinders. In the NPRM, 

PHMSA proposed to incorporate by 

reference the updated Appendix A of 

CGA publication C–7 (2020), ‘‘Guide to 

Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases,’’ Eleventh Edition, 

into the HMR at § 171.7(n)(8). 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of this 

petition, including a review of the 

revised Appendix A to C–7 (2020), and 

found that the changes are minor and 

primarily editorial clarifications. 

PHMSA concludes that these editorial 

revisions in Appendix A to CGA C–7 

(2020) will not negatively impact hazard 

communication. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted an economic review of this 

petition and found no quantifiable 

benefits associated with this change. 

However, the changes found in 

Appendix A to CGA C–7 (2020) will 

provide clearer guidance to the 

regulated community and thus increase 

compliance. A more detailed discussion 

of this economic analysis of this 

revision can be found in the RIA posted 

to the docket for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments in 

support of the revisions as proposed 

from CGA and DGAC. PHMSA did not 

receive any comments in opposition to 

the proposed revision. Therefore, 

PHMSA revises § 171.7(n)(8) to 

reference CGA C–7 (2020), ‘‘Guide to 

Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases,’’ Eleventh Edition. 

O. Incorporate by Reference CGA C–27 

(2019) 

In its petition (P–1746),35 CGA 

proposes that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference CGA C–27 (2019), ‘‘Standard 

Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure 

of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes,’’ 

First Edition. PHMSA notes that this 

publication defines ‘‘tube’’ as a seamless 

steel pressure vessel with openings at 

both ends and with a water capacity of 

120 L or greater. CGA requests PHMSA 

revise § 180.212(a)(1) to allow for 

repairs of a seamless steel DOT 3-series 

cylinder at a repair facility that holds a 

valid ‘‘K’’ number approval, issued 

under the provisions in § 107.805. 

Cylinder owners would be permitted to 

apply to reduce the service pressure of 

cylinders in accordance with CGA C–27. 

Approved facilities would then process 

these applications to determine if a DOT 

3-Series cylinder rejected for 

insufficient minimum wall thickness 

could be derated from the original 

marked service pressure. In the NPRM, 

PHMSA proposed to incorporate by 

reference CGA C–27 (2019), ‘‘Standard 

Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure 

of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes,’’ 

First Edition. 

CGA C–27 provides a standard 

procedure to derate the service pressure 

of DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes 

with local thin areas in the walls of the 

tube that do not meet the minimum 

thickness criteria of the specification. 

Derating is the lowering of the 

maximum allowable service pressure of 

a cylinder due to thinning of a 

cylinder’s walls to extend the life of the 

cylinder. In accordance with CGA C–27, 

any tube with a suspect thin area found 

during AET, UE, or visual inspection 

must be evaluated in accordance with 

CGA C–20. If the tube does not meet the 

minimum thickness requirements in 

Section 4b of CGA C–27, a cylinder 

owner may apply to PHMSA to reduce 

the marked service pressure of the 

cylinders, in accordance with Section 4c 

of CGA C–27. The procedure to derate 

a tube must be performed by a DOTapproved repair facility. CGA C–27 does 

not apply to tubes that have been 

condemned from any requalification 

method. Cylinder repair shops must be 

approved by PHMSA to have the 

authority to repair a cylinder. These 

companies receive a K-number from 

PHMSA, and the K-number approval 

indicates whether a company is 

authorized to perform repairs or 

rebuilds of cylinders, and in this case, 

DOT 3-series tubes. 

CGA asserts that the incorporation by 

reference of CGA C–27 will minimize 

inquiries to PHMSA by standardizing 

and codifying the existing process under 

the PHMSA document ‘‘Guidance for 

Applications to Down-Rate the Service 

Pressure of DOT Seamless Steel 

Cylinders (Rev. 3/27/13),’’ 36 and 

provide persons seeking to derate a tube 

with instruction on pertinent 

information to submit to PHMSA in a 

logical and consistent manner. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of the 

proposals in the petition, including a 

review of CGA C–27, and found that the 

method for pressure derating of tubes is 

essentially the same as what is outlined 

in the PHMSA guidance document. 

Both documents provide instructions on 

how persons should conduct an initial 

inspection using CGA C–6 (2013), 

‘‘Standard for Visual Inspection of Steel 

Compressed Gas Cylinders,’’ to establish 

that the tube is in good physical, 

serviceable condition for pressure 

derating with no rejectable corrosion, 

pitting, dents, gouges, or other defects. 

If deemed suitable for pressure derating, 

the tube should undergo 100 percent 

ultrasonic testing (UT) to establish a 

minimum sidewall thickness on which 

to base the new reduced service 

pressure. The methodology used to 

calculate the new service pressure is the 

same as the current methodology used 

to determine the allowable service 

pressure for DOT 3-series seamless steel 

cylinders found in the HMR at §§ 178.36 

(3A and 3AX), 178.37 (3AA and 3AAX), 

and 178.38 (3B). The calculations 

should then be certified by the tube 

manufacturer, or by the Independent 

Inspection Agency (IIA) if the tube 

manufacturer is no longer in service or 

available. IIAs are approved by the 

Associate Administrator to perform a 

review of a company’s inspection or 

requalification operation. In summary, 

the PHMSA technical review found that 

the procedures in CGA C–27 are 

equivalent to the procedure established 

in the PHMSA guidance document for 

pressure derating of tubes and should 

have no impact on safety. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted an economic evaluation of 

this petition and found that no benefits 

or additional costs other than the cost to 

obtain the publication are expected as a 

result of the changes in this petition. A 

more detailed discussion of this 

economic analysis of this revision can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments in 

support of the revisions from CGA. 

PHMSA did not receive any comments 

in opposition to the proposed revision. 

Therefore, PHMSA incorporates by 

reference CGA C–27, ‘‘Procedure to 

Derate the Service Pressure of DOT 

3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes,’’ First 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15651 

37P–1747—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0117), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0117. 

38P–1748—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0124), https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0124. 

Edition, in § 171.7. PHMSA also adds 

§ 180.212(a)(4) for instruction on 

derating of a cylinder reference to CGA 

C–27. 

P. Incorporate by Reference CGA C–29 

(2019) 

In its petition (P–1747),37 CGA 

proposes that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference CGA C–29 (2019), ‘‘Standard 

for Design Requirements for Tube 

Trailers and Tube Modules,’’ First 

Edition, which would supersede CGA 

TB–25 (2018), ‘‘Design Considerations 

for Tube Trailers.’’ CGA also proposes 

conforming revisions to § 173.301 to 

replace references to CGA TB–25 with 

references to CGA C–29. In the NPRM, 

PHMSA proposed to incorporate by 

reference CGA C–29 (2019), ‘‘Standard 

for Design Requirements for Tube 

Trailers and Tube Modules,’’ in § 171.7, 

and revise § 173.301 to replace 

references to CGA TB–25 with 

references to CGA C–29. 

CGA C–29 defines basic design 

requirements for tube trailers and tube 

modules to maintain structural integrity 

during normal conditions of handling 

and transport. A tube trailer or tube 

module manufactured in accordance 

with this standard is less likely to have 

a separation of the tubes from the trailer 

or bundle, or an unintentional release of 

product when subjected to the 

multidirectional forces that can occur 

during a highway collision, including a 

rollover accident. Under this standard, 

tube modules must meet the loading 

and accident protection standards that 

are applied to tube trailers. 

In its petition, CGA outlines the 

changes between the CGA TB–25 

(currently incorporated by reference in 

§ 171.7) and CGA C–29. Examples of 

these revisions include: 

• Changing the Technical Bulletin to 

a CGA Standard. 

• Changing the title of the document 

to ‘‘Standard for Design Requirements 

for Tube Trailers and Tube Modules.’’ 

• Adding a scope section that 

specifies that CGA C–29 is not 

applicable to a MEGC because MEGC 

design requirements are found in 

§ 178.75. 

• Providing several examples of 

testing and methods that meet the 

requirement of verifiable performance 

testing and analytical methods within 

the basic design requirements section. 

• Changing ‘‘should’’ to ‘‘shall’’ in 

several places within the document to 

provide a standard that includes 

enforceable language. 

• Referencing CGA C–23, ‘‘Standard 

for Inspection of DOT/TC 3 Series and 

ISO 11120 Tube Neck Mounting 

Surfaces,’’ Second Edition. 

CGA developed CGA C–29 to 

supersede TB–25 and asserts that CGA 

C–29 provides a more optimal level of 

safety for the public and a satisfactory 

performance standard when cylinders 

are mounted on motor vehicles or in 

frames for transportation. In addition, 

CGA asserts that C–29 provides more 

enforceable language, whereas TB–25 

does not (i.e., use of ‘‘shall’’ vs. 

‘‘should’’). 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of the 

petition and supporting documents and 

found that CGA C–29 is technically 

accurate, consistent with CGA TB–25, 

and provides safety improvements for 

the transport of tube trailers. 

Additionally, PHMSA concludes that 

tube trailers or modules manufactured 

in accordance with CGA C–29 are less 

likely to have separation of tubes from 

the trailer or bundle, which could result 

in the unintentional release of 

hazardous materials, when subjected to 

multidirectional forces that can occur in 

highway collisions, including rollover 

accidents. Therefore, PHMSA asserts the 

incorporation by reference of CGA C–29 

will enhance the safe transportation of 

hazardous materials in tube trailers. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted an economic evaluation and 

found that most operators are already 

following the guidelines in CGA C–29, 

and thus there are limited quantifiable 

economic benefits. The largest potential 

source of benefits from mandatory 

adoption is enhanced safety through a 

more standardized qualification and 

testing regime. Minor economic benefits 

might also be derived from the editorial 

and definitional clarifications provided 

in the updated CGA requirements. 

Making requirements for operators 

clearer and easier to follow would 

support compliance with the regulation. 

A more detailed discussion of the 

economic analysis of this revision can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments in 

support of the proposed revision from 

CGA. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revision. Therefore, PHMSA 

incorporates by reference CGA C–29, 

‘‘Standard for Design Requirements for 

Tube Trailers and Tube Modules,’’ First 

Edition, into § 171.7, and removes the 

references to CGA TB–25, ‘‘Design 

Considerations for Tube Trailers.’’ 

PHMSA also revises § 173.301(i) to 

replace references to CGA TB–25 with 

references to CGA C–29. 

Q. Incorporate by Reference CGA V–9 

(2019) 

In its petition (P–1748),38 CGA 

requests that PHMSA incorporate by 

reference CGA V–9 (2019), ‘‘Compressed 

Gas Association Standard for 

Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves,’’ 

Eighth Edition. The HMR currently 

references the Seventh Edition of CGA 

V–9 (2012). The major updates to CGA 

V–9 (2019) ensure continuity and 

consistency with the testing 

requirements of ISO 10297, ‘‘Gas 

cylinder—Cylinder valves— 

Specification and Type Testing.’’ In the 

NPRM, PHMSA proposed to incorporate 

by reference CGA V–9 (2019), 

‘‘Compressed Gas Association Standard 

for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves,’’ 

Eighth Edition. 

The CGA V–9 (2019) standard covers 

compressed gas cylinder valve design, 

selection, manufacture, and use, 

including performance requirements 

such as operating temperature limits, 

pressure ranges, and flow capabilities. 

The standard also includes 

requirements for materials, inlet and 

outlet connections, cleaning, 

qualification and production testing, 

maintenance, and reconditioning. In 

addition, CGA V–9 (2019) includes 

guidelines and requirements for the 

design, material selection, testing, and 

marking of cylinder valve protection 

caps. Finally, the standard provides a 

listing of valve types and associated 

drawings and their application and 

limitations. 

As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review of CGA V– 

9 (2019) and verified updates and 

revisions made to CGA V–9 (2012), 

which is currently incorporated by 

reference in the HMR. PHMSA found 

these revisions were primarily editorial 

in nature, except for the revision to 

harmonize CGA V–9 (2019) with the 

testing requirements of ISO 10297. 

Because PHMSA has already 

incorporated by reference ISO 10297 in 

the HMR, there is no technical reason to 

not incorporate by reference the 

updated version of CGA V–9 (2019), 

which references the ISO 10297 

standard. In addition, because CGA–V– 

9 (2019) now references ISO 10297, it 

will allow greater flexibility in selecting 

and qualifying valves, and thus avoid 

redundant compliance with both ISO 

10297 and CGA V–9 (2019). 

PHMSA asserts that this incorporation 

by reference will result in benefits to the 

industry, as CGA V–9 (2019) allows the 

use of listed valves in other standards, 

such as those qualified to ISO 10297, 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15652 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

39 86 FR 55116 (Oct. 5, 2021). 

40https://www.epa.gov/climate-hfcs-reduction/ 

aim-act. 

41EPA uses the term ‘‘exchange value equivalent’’ 

to provide a common unit of measure between 

HFCs, and the AIM Act defines ‘‘exchange value’’ 

as the value assigned to a regulated substance (i.e., 

a regulated HFC). 

42 86 FR 55116 (Oct. 5, 2021). 

43https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/ 

USCOURTS-caDC-21-01251/USCOURTS-caDC-21- 

01251-0. 

thereby avoiding or minimizing 

additional qualification costs. 

Manufacturers and users of compressed 

gas cylinder valves would no longer 

need to conduct two different tests to 

satisfy ISO 10927 (as currently required 

by the HMR) and CGA V–9 (2019). A 

more detailed discussion of this 

economic analysis of this revision can 

be found in the RIA posted to the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

PHMSA received comments in 

support of the proposed revisions from 

CGA. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises 

§ 171.7(n)(26) to replace CGA V–9 

(2012), ‘‘Compressed Gas Association 

Standard for Compressed Cylinder 

Valves,’’ Seventh Edition, with CGA V– 

9 (2019), ‘‘Compressed Gas Association 

Standard for Compressed Cylinder 

Valves,’’ Eighth Edition. 

R. Phaseout of Hydrofluorocarbons 

(HFCs) 

The Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) published a final rule 39 to issue 

regulations implementing certain 

provisions of the American Innovation 

and Manufacturing (AIM) Act,40 as 

enacted on December 27, 2020. One 

provision of the AIM Act mandates the 

phasedown of HFCs—a group of 

chemicals commonly referred to as 

refrigerants because of their primary use 

for cooling and refrigeration 

applications like air conditioning—by at 

least 85 percent by 2036. HFCs are 

highly potent greenhouse gases that trap 

heat in the atmosphere and warm the 

planet. The AIM Act directs the EPA to 

implement the phasedown by issuing a 

fixed quantity of transferrable 

production and consumption 

allowances, which producers and 

importers of hydrofluorocarbons must 

hold in quantities equal to the number 

of hydrofluorocarbons they produce or 

import. For the time period of 2022– 

2050, the EPA estimated the rulemaking 

would avoid cumulative emissions of 

4,560 million metric tons of exchange 

value equivalent 41 of HFCs in the 

United States with a present value of 

cumulative net benefits of $272.7 

billion.42

The EPA final rule implemented a 

two-stage approach that would first 

prohibit additional disposable cylinders 

(i.e., non-refillables) from being 

introduced to the market by January 1, 

2025, and second, prohibit sales 

altogether by January 1, 2027. A primary 

example of a non-refillable cylinder 

authorized for transport of HFCs is a 

DOT 39 cylinder. In the final rule, EPA 

noted that the AIM Act gives the agency 

broad authority to implement these 

prohibitions relating to the sale or 

distribution, or offer for sale or 

distribution, of regulated substances 

that were illegally produced or 

imported. 

In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed 

adopting the same prohibition on the 

filling and transportation of certain 

HFCs in non-refillable cylinders to align 

with EPA’s efforts to fulfill the AIM Act 

mandate and combat climate impacts, 

and to avoid potential confusion by 

industry if PHMSA were to continue to 

authorize these materials in nonrefillable cylinders while prohibited by 

EPA. In response to this proposal 

PHMSA received comments from seven 

different entities opposing the phaseout 

of HFCs in non-refillable cylinders. 

Commenters noted that—in their 

opinion—the proposal goes beyond 

PHMSA’s authority, and therefore 

PHMSA should not phaseout nonrefillable cylinders in the final rule. 

Additionally, commenters noted that on 

June 20, 2023, the United States Court 

of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

issued a ruling 43 that vacated two 

provisions of the EPA’s Phasedown Rule 

for HFCs. The court found that the EPA 

did not have statutory authority to 

require the use of refillable cylinders or 

to implement a QR code tracking system 

for HFCs. PHMSA’s proposal to 

phaseout non-refillable cylinders for the 

transportation of HFCs was predicated 

on harmonizing the HMR with the EPA 

regulations. Following the decision by 

the United States Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia, PHMSA is no 

longer considering the phaseout of HFCs 

in this final rule, and will not finalize 

the proposal to prohibit the filling and 

transportation of certain HFCs in nonrefillable cylinders. 

S. Emergency Processing of Special 

Permits 

Section 107.117 outlines the 

conditions necessary for applicants who 

apply for emergency processing of their 

special permit request. PHMSA 

occasionally issues a special permit that 

the Associate Administrator determines 

is needed to address an imminent safety 

issue, a threat to national security, or to 

prevent significant economic loss. See 

§ 107.117(a). However, PHMSA has 

found it necessary to add an additional 

criteria due to situations that require 

processing of an emergency special 

permit but are not clearly outlined in 

the current § 107.117(a). To meet this 

need, PHMSA proposed adding a new 

paragraph (a)(4) to provide clarification 

that the Associate Administrator may 

also approve emergency processing of a 

special permit in support of certain 

essential governmental functions—both 

foreign and domestic. For example, a 

foreign government request for the 

emergency processing of a special 

permit application regarding the timely 

movement of a hazardous material— 

from or through the United States—in 

support of law enforcement, life safety 

(e.g., providing health services items or 

equipment containing hazardous 

materials during a pandemic), or 

judicial activities may qualify under the 

new paragraph. Furthermore, to provide 

additional clarification of 

§ 107.117(a)(2), PHMSA proposed to 

split the current clauses into two 

distinct paragraphs—(a)(2) and (3). 

PHMSA received comments from 

COSTHA in support of both revisions as 

proposed. PHMSA did not receive any 

comments in opposition to the proposed 

revisions. Therefore, to provide two 

instances of clarification of § 107.117(a), 

PHMSA will add a new paragraph (a)(4) 

and split the current clauses from 

paragraph (a)(2) into two distinct 

paragraphs—(a)(2) and (3). 

V. Section-by-Section Review 

Below is a section-by-section 

description of the revisions. 

A. Section 107.117 

Section 107.117 outlines situations 

when emergency processing of special 

permits may be appropriate. In this final 

rule, PHMSA adds § 107.117(a)(4) to 

clarify that PHMSA may use emergency 

processing of special permits in support 

of essential governmental functions. 

Separately, to provide clarification of 

§ 107.117(a)(2), PHMSA is splitting the 

current clauses into two distinct 

paragraphs—(a)(2) and (3). 

B. Section 171.7 

Section 171.7 lists all standards 

incorporated by reference into the HMR 

that are not specifically set forth in the 

regulations. In this final rule, PHMSA 

incorporates by reference the following 

publications by CGA, IME, and the UN: 

• CGA C–7 (2020), Guide to 

Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases (Eleventh Edition), 

into § 172.400a. This publication has 

been prepared as a guide for the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15653 

classification and labelling of 

compressed gases. It is general in nature 

and does not cover all circumstances for 

each individual cylinder type or lading. 

• CGA C–20 (2014), Requalification 

Standard for Metallic, DOT, and TC 3- 

Series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using 

Ultrasonic Examination (Second 

Edition), into § 180.205. This 

publication is used for the 

requalification of seamless cylinders 

and tubes using UE. It is general in 

nature and does not cover all 

circumstances for each individual 

cylinder type or lading. 

• CGA C–23 (2018), Standard for 

Inspection of DOT/TC 3 Series and ISO 

11120, Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces 

(Second Edition), into §§ 180.205 and 

180.207. This publication applies to the 

inspection and evaluation of DOT/TC 3- 

Series and ISO 11120 tubes 12 ft (3.7 m) 

or longer with an outside diameter 

greater than or equal to 18 in (457 mm) 

that are supported by the neck mounting 

surface. It is general in nature and does 

not cover all circumstances for each 

individual cylinder type or lading. 

• CGA C–27 (2019), Standard 

Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure 

of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes 

(First Edition), into § 180.212. This 

publication provides a standard 

procedure to derate the service pressure 

of DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes 

with local thin areas (LTA) that do not 

meet the minimum wall thickness of 

certain DOT specifications. It is general 

in nature and does not cover all 

circumstances for each individual 

cylinder type or lading. 

• CGA C–29 (2019), Standard for 

Design Requirements for Tube Trailers 

and Tube Modules (First Edition), into 

§ 173.301. This publication defines 

basic design requirements for tube 

trailers and tube modules, manufactured 

or modified on or after May 11, 2009, to 

maintain structural integrity during 

normal conditions of handling and 

transport. It is general in nature and 

does not cover all circumstances for 

each individual cylinder type or lading. 

Tube trailers manufactured or modified 

before May 11, 2009, can continue to 

follow the requirements in TB–25, 

‘‘Design Considerations for Tube 

Trailers.’’ Any modifications to the tube 

trailer, however, should be done in 

accordance with CGA C–29. 

• CGA V–9 (2019), Compressed Gas 

Association Standard for Compressed 

Gas Cylinder Valves (Eighth Edition), 

into § 173.301. This publication covers 

cylinder valve design, manufacture, and 

use including performance requirements 

such as operating temperature limits, 

pressure ranges, and flow capabilities. It 

is general in nature and does not cover 

all circumstances for each individual 

cylinder type or lading. 

• SLP–22 (2019), Recommendations 

for the Safe Transportation of 

Detonators in a Vehicle with Certain 

Other Explosive Materials, into 

§§ 173.63 and 177.835. This publication 

outlines the guidelines for the safe 

transportation of detonators in 

commercial transportation. 

• SLP–23 (2021), Recommendations 

for the Transportation of Explosives, 

Division 1.5; Ammonium Nitrate 

Emulsions, Division 5.1; and 

Combustible Liquids in Bulk Packaging, 

into §§ 172.102, 173.66 introductory 

text, 173.251, and 177.835(d). This 

publication specifies the requirements 

for the transportation in bulk packaging 

of certain Class 1 and Class 5 hazardous 

materials essential to commercial 

blasting operations. 

• European Agreement Concerning 

the International Carriage of Dangerous 

Goods by Road (ADR), which is already 

incorporated by reference in § 171.23, 

into § 171.8. The European Agreement 

concerning the International Carriage of 

Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR) 

outlines regulations concerning the 

international carriage of dangerous 

goods by road within the EU and other 

countries that are party to the 

agreement. This publication presents 

the European Agreement, the Protocol 

Signatures, the annexes, and the 

amendments. In addition to a new title, 

the 2020 edition of this document 

includes amendments necessary to 

ensure harmonization of ADR with the 

UN Model Regulations, additional 

amendments adopted by the Working 

Group on Tanks, as well as amendments 

proposed by the Working Group on 

Standards. 

• United Nations’ Recommendations 

on Test Series 8: Applicability of Test 

Series 8(d), June 2019, into 

§ 172.102(c)(1), special provision 148. 

This test series is used to determine if 

an ammonium nitrate emulsion, 

suspension, or gel, intermediate for 

blasting explosives (ANE), is insensitive 

enough for inclusion in Division 5.1, 

and to evaluate the suitability for 

transport in tanks. 

Additionally, CGA has moved to a 

new headquarters location. Therefore, 

we have revised § 171.7(n) accordingly. 

C. Section 171.8 

Section 171.8 defines terms used 

throughout the HMR that have broad or 

multi-modal applicability. PHMSA 

modifies the definition of liquid in 

§ 171.8 to include the test for 

determining fluidity (penetrometer test) 

prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A 

of the ADR as an alternative method for 

determining if a material is a liquid. 

D. Section 172.101 

The HMT is contained in § 172.101. 

The HMT lists alphabetically, by proper 

shipping name, those materials that 

have been designated hazardous 

materials for the purpose of 

transportation. It provides information 

used on shipping papers, package 

marking, and labeling, as well as other 

pertinent shipping information for 

hazardous materials. PHMSA amends 

the HMT by referencing special 

provision TP48 in Column (7) of the 

HMT for the following HMT entries: 

‘‘UN0332, Explosive, Blasting, type E;’’ 

‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion;’’ and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing 

liquid n.o.s. (PG II).’’ 

E. Section 172.102 

Section 172.102 lists special 

provisions applicable to the 

transportation of specific hazardous 

materials. Special provisions contain 

packaging requirements, prohibitions, 

and exceptions applicable to quantities 

or forms of hazardous materials. 

PHMSA adds a new special provision— 

‘‘TP48’’—to allow the use of IM 101 and 

102 portable tanks when transported in 

accordance with SLP–23. In addition, 

PHMSA revises special provision ‘‘148’’ 

to require materials assigned this 

provision to be subject to the Vented 

Pipe Test (VPT). This ensures continued 

performance of VPT requirements in the 

absence of required use of the test in the 

update of the incorporation by reference 

of IME SLP–23. 

F. Section 172.514 

Section 172.514 prescribes the 

placarding requirements for bulk 

packagings. PHMSA revises 

§ 172.514(c)(1) and (4) to allow an 

option to use a placard that meets the 

label specification size requirements in 

§ 172.407(c) for combustible liquids 

transported in IBCs and portable tanks. 

G. Section 173.4b 

Section 173.4b prescribes exceptions 

for transporting certain hazardous 

materials in de minimis quantities. 

PHMSA revises paragraph (a) to include 

Division 6.1, PG I materials (no 

inhalation hazard) in the list of 

materials authorized for this exception. 

H. Section 173.115 

Section 173.115 prescribes definitions 

for Class 2, Divisions 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 

hazardous materials. PHMSA revises 

§ 173.115(e) to state that gas mixtures 

with component(s) that are liquefied 

gases may be described using the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15654 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

appropriate hazardous materials 

description of a non-liquefied 

compressed gas in the HMT at § 172.101 

when the partial pressure(s) of the 

liquefied component(s) in the mixture 

are reduced so that the mixture is 

entirely in the gas phase at 20 °C. 

I. Section 173.185 

Section 173.185 prescribes the 

requirements for packaging and 

transporting lithium cells and batteries. 

PHMSA revises paragraph (c)(3) to 

clarify that lithium button cell batteries 

contained in equipment are not subject 

to any per package or consignment 

limitations. 

J. Section 173.251 

Section 173.251 outlines the bulk 

packaging requirements for ammonium 

nitrate emulsion, suspension, or gel. 

PHMSA revises § 173.251 to state that 

this section is not applicable when 

‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate 

emulsion’’ is transported in IM 101 or 

102 portable tanks in accordance with 

SLP–23 (2021). 

K. Section 173.301 

Section 173.301 outlines the general 

requirements for shipment of 

compressed gases and other hazardous 

materials in cylinders, UN pressure 

receptacles, and spherical pressure 

vessels. PHMSA revises § 173.301 to 

replace references to CGA TB–25 with 

references to CGA C–29. 

L. Section 173.302a 

Section 173.302a specifies the 

additional requirements for shipment of 

non-liquefied (permanent) compressed 

gases in specification cylinders. PHMSA 

revises paragraph (c) by redesignating 

§ 173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) as 

§ 173.302a(c)(4) and (5) to properly 

reflect that the safety provisions 

currently in § 173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) 

are independent material construction 

requirements under paragraph (c). 

PHMSA also adds paragraph (c)(6) to 

require that cylinders be equipped with 

pressure relief devices sized and 

selected as to type, location, and 

quantity, and tested in accordance with 

CGA S–1.1 (previously in paragraph 

(c)(4)). Lastly, PHMSA adds paragraph 

(c)(7) to require a plus sign (+) be added 

following the test date marking on the 

cylinder to indicate compliance with 

paragraph (c) of this section. 

M. Section 173.302b 

Section 173.302b describes the 

additional requirements for shipment of 

non-liquefied (permanent) compressed 

gases in UN pressure receptacles. 

PHMSA revises this section by adding a 

new paragraph (f) to specify packaging 

restrictions for transporting compressed 

natural gas and methane in UN seamless 

steel pressure receptacles. For methane 

and natural gas with a methane content 

of 98 percent or greater, the maximum 

tensile strength of the UN seamless steel 

pressure receptacle may not exceed 

1100 MPa (159,542 psi), and the 

contents must be free of corroding 

components. For natural gas with 

methane content of less than 98 percent, 

the maximum tensile strength of the UN 

seamless steel pressure receptacle may 

not exceed 950 MPa (137,750 psi). 

Additionally, each discharge end of a 

UN refillable seamless steel tube must 

be equipped with an internal drain tube, 

and the moisture content and 

concentration of the corroding 

components must conform to the 

requirements in § 173.301b(a)(2). 

N. Section 178.601 

Section 178.601 prescribes the general 

requirements for the testing of non-bulk 

performance-oriented packagings and 

packages. PHMSA redesignates 

paragraphs (g)(6) through (8) as 

paragraphs (g)(7) through (9) and adds 

new paragraph (g)(6) to allow packages 

tested with articles containing small 

arms, i.e., ammunition without 

intermediate packaging(s), to be 

assembled with any intermediate 

packaging(s) without further testing. 

Moreover, PHMSA revises the 

redesignated paragraph (g)(8) approval 

provision to include new paragraph 

(g)(6), such that paragraphs (g)(1) 

through (7) are referenced in the revised 

paragraph (g)(8). 

O. Section 180.205 

Section 180.205 prescribes the general 

requirements for requalification of 

specification cylinders. PHMSA revises 

this section to incorporate provisions 

consistent with CGA C–20–2014, 

‘‘Requalification Standard for Metallic, 

DOT and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and 

Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination’’ 

(Second Edition), which allow for the 

use of UE for cylinder requalification. 

PHMSA revises paragraph (e)(2) to state 

that cylinders in corrosive liquid service 

are still required to do both an internal 

and external visual inspection. PHMSA 

is revising paragraph (f)(2) to state that 

if a cylinder or tube is requalified by 

ultrasonic examination, only an external 

visual inspection is required. 

Additionally, PHMSA adds a new 

paragraph (h) to specify that 

requalification using UE must be done 

in accordance with CGA C–20 and by a 

facility approved by PHMSA for 

performing UE operations. PHMSA 

revises paragraphs (i) and (j) to specify 

the rejection requirements for a cylinder 

that fails requalification tests. 

PHMSA also adds § 180.205(c)(5). 

This paragraph specifies that a DOT 3- 

series specification cylinder that is 12 

feet or longer with an outside diameter 

greater than or equal to 18 inches and 

supported by the neck mounting surface 

during transportation in commerce must 

be inspected at least every 10 years in 

accordance with CGA C–23. Lastly, 

PHMSA adds paragraph (d)(5) to specify 

the conditions for removal and 

examination of cylinders in accordance 

with CGA C–23. 

P. Section 180.207 

Section 180.207 prescribes the 

requirements for the requalification of 

UN pressure receptacles. PHMSA 

revises § 180.207(d)(1) to require that 

each seamless steel UN pressure 

receptacle that is 12 feet or longer with 

an outside diameter greater than or 

equal to 18 inches supported by the 

neck mounting surface during 

transportation in commerce be 

inspected at least every 10 years in 

accordance with CGA C–23. In addition, 

PHMSA specifies conditions for 

removal and examination of the 

cylinder in accordance with CGA C–23. 

Q. Section 180.209 

Section 180.209 describes the 

requalification requirements for 

specification cylinders. PHMSA is 

making an editorial revision to table 1 

in paragraph (a) to reference the UE for 

3T and special permit cylinders. 

PHMSA is also making editorial 

revisions to paragraphs (d) and (m) to 

reference § 180.205(j) instead of 

§ 180.205(i) to conform with a 

redesignation of that paragraph. 

R. Section 180.212 

Section 180.212 specifies the 

requirements for the repair of seamless 

DOT 3-series specification cylinders and 

seamless UN pressure receptacles. 

PHMSA adds § 180.212(a)(4) to allow 

derating the service pressure of DOT 3- 

series seamless steel tubes. PHMSA also 

revises § 180.212(b)(2) to: (1) allow, as a 

repair, the external threading of a DOT 

3-series cylinder or a seamless UN 

pressure receptacle manufactured 

without external threads; and (2) not 

limit external rethreading to UN 

pressure receptacles mounted in a 

MEGC. 

VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This 

Rulemaking 

This rulemaking is published under 

the authority of Federal Hazardous 

Materials Transportation Law (Federal 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15655 

44 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). 45 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023). PHMSA 

acknowledges that a recent update to Circular A– 

4 contemplates that agencies will use a different 

discount rate than those employed in the discussion 

below and the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) 

beginning in January 2025. However, PHMSA notes 

that that update to Circular A–4 permits the use of 

those historical discount rates based on the Federal 

Register publication date of this final rule. See 

OMB, Circular A–4, ‘‘Regulatory Analysis’’ at 93 

(Nov. 9, 2023). 

46 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999). 

47 74 FR 24693 (May 22, 2009). 

Hazmat Law; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.), 

which authorizes the Secretary of 

Transportation to ‘‘prescribe regulations 

for the safe transportation, including 

security, of hazardous materials in 

intrastate, interstate, and foreign 

commerce.’’ The Secretary has delegated 

the authority granted in the Federal 

Hazmat Law to the PHMSA 

Administrator at 49 CFR 1.97. This 

rulemaking amends several sections of 

the HMR in response to petitions for 

rulemaking received from the regulated 

community. 

B. Executive Orders 12866 and 14094, 

and DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures 

Executive Order 12866 (‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’),44 as amended 

by Executive Order 14094 

(‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review’’),45

requires that agencies ‘‘should assess all 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives, including the alternative of 

not regulating.’’ Agencies should 

consider quantifiable measures and 

qualitative measures of costs and 

benefits that are difficult to quantify. 

Further, Executive Order 12866 requires 

that agencies should select those 

regulatory approaches that maximize 

net benefits (including potential 

economic, environmental, public health 

and safety, and other advantages; 

distributive impacts; and equity), unless 

a statute requires another regulatory 

approach. Similarly, DOT Order 

2100.6A (‘‘Rulemaking and Guidance 

Procedures’’) requires that regulations 

issued by PHMSA and other DOT 

Operating Administrations should 

consider an assessment of the potential 

benefits, costs, and other important 

impacts of the proposed action, and 

should quantify (to the extent 

practicable) the benefits, costs, and any 

significant distributional impacts, 

including any environmental impacts. 

Executive Order 12866 and DOT 

Order 2100.6A require that PHMSA 

submit ‘‘significant regulatory actions’’ 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review. This rulemaking is 

not considered a significant regulatory 

action under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 (as amended) and, 

therefore, was not formally reviewed by 

OMB. This rulemaking is also not 

considered a significant rule under DOT 

Order 2100.6A. 

PHMSA is responding to 18 petitions 

that have been submitted by the public 

in accordance with the APA and 

PHMSA’s rulemaking procedure 

regulations (49 CFR 106.95 and 

106.100). Overall, this final rule would 

maintain the continued safe 

transportation of hazardous materials 

while producing a net cost savings. 

PHMSA’s findings are summarized here 

and described in further detail in the 

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), 

which can be found in the regulatory 

docket (Docket ID: PHMSA–2020–0102) 

at www.regulations.gov. 

Summary of Findings 

PHMSA estimates a present value of 

quantified net cost savings of 

approximately $19.95 million over a 

perpetual time horizon and $1.99 

million annualized at a two percent 

discount rate. These estimates do not 

include non-monetized and qualitative 

cost/cost savings discussed in the RIA. 

PHMSA’s cost savings analysis relies 

on the monetization of impacts for 

seven petitions included in this 

rulemaking. All but one of these 

petitions have annualized cost savings. 

The following table presents a summary 

of the seven petitions that would have 

monetized impacts upon codification 

and contribute to PHMSA’s estimation 

of quantified net cost savings. 

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST SAVINGS, 2024–2033, DISCOUNTED AT 2% RATE, 2023$USD 

Rule provision Total net cost 

savings 

Annualized 

net cost 

savings 

P–1718 ............................................. 49 CFR 173.4b .......................................................................................... $1,785,696 $178,570 

P–1727 ............................................. 49 CFR 180.205 ........................................................................................ 303,127 30,313 

P–1729 ............................................. 49 CFR 171.7 ............................................................................................ (127,026) (12,703) 

P–1731 ............................................. 49 CFR 171.7(r)(2) .................................................................................... 67,460 6,746 

P–1732 ............................................. 49 CFR 178.503(a)(6) ............................................................................... 8,267,109 826,711 

P–1734 ............................................. 49 CFR 172.514(c)(4) ............................................................................... 4,244 424 

P–1736 ............................................. 49 CFR 171.7(r)(1) .................................................................................... 9,655,983 965,598 

Total .......................................... .................................................................................................................... 19,956,593 1,995,659 

In addition to these seven items, 

PHMSA described an additional 11 

items that may streamline regulatory 

compliance. While information gaps 

prevent quantification of cost savings 

for these items, PHMSA has determined 

they provide relief from unnecessary 

requirements or provide additional 

flexibility without compromising safety. 

Conclusion 

This final rule is not considered a 

significant regulatory action within the 

meaning of Executive Order 12866, as 

amended, and DOT policies and 

procedures. (See DOT Order 2100.6A.) 

The economic effects of this regulatory 

action would not have an effect on the 

economy that exceeds the annual 

monetary threshold defined by 

Executive Order 12866 (as amended), 

and that the regulatory action is not 

otherwise significant. PHMSA estimates 

a present value of quantified net cost 

savings of approximately $19.95 million 

over a perpetual time horizon and $1.99 

million annualized at a two percent 

discount rate. Please see the RIA in the 

regulatory docket for additional detail 

and a description of PHMSA’s methods 

and calculations. 

C. Executive Order 13132 

This rulemaking was analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13132 (‘‘Federalism’’) 46 and the 

Presidential memorandum 

(‘‘Preemption’’).47 Executive Order 

13132 requires agencies to assure 

meaningful and timely input by state 

and local officials in the development of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15656 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

48 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000). 49 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002). 

regulatory policies that may have 

‘‘substantial direct effects on the states, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ This rulemaking 

does not revise any regulation that has 

substantial direct effects on the states; 

the relationship between the National 

Government and the states; or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, the 

consultation and funding requirements 

of Executive Order 13132 do not apply. 

Federal Hazmat Law contains a 

general preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 

5125(a)) in the event compliance with a 

State, local, or Native American Tribe 

requirement is not possible or presents 

an obstacle to compliance. Additionally, 

Federal Hazmat Law contains an 

express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 

5125(b)) that preempts State, local, and 

Native American Tribal requirements 

on: 

(1) The designation, description, and 

classification of hazardous materials. 

(2) The packing, repacking, handling, 

labeling, marking, and placarding of 

hazardous materials. 

(3) The preparation, execution, and 

use of shipping documents related to 

hazardous materials and requirements 

related to the number, contents, and 

placement of those documents. 

(4) The written notification, 

recording, and reporting of the 

unintentional release in transportation 

of hazardous material. 

(5) The design, manufacture, 

fabrication, marking, maintenance, 

recondition, repair, or testing of a 

packaging or container represented, 

marked, certified, or sold as qualified 

for use in transporting hazardous 

material. 

This final rule addresses covered 

subject items above and preempts State, 

local, and Indian Tribe requirements not 

meeting the ‘‘substantively the same’’ 

standard. DOT has determined that this 

final rule would provide cost savings 

and regulatory flexibility to the 

regulated community without 

compromising safety. 

D. Executive Order 13175 

This rulemaking was analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13175 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’) 48

and DOT Order 5301.1A (‘‘Department 

of Transportation Tribal Consultation 

Policy and Procedures’’). Executive 

Order 13175 requires agencies to assure 

meaningful and timely input from 

Indian Tribal government 

representatives in the development of 

rules that significantly or uniquely 

affect Tribal communities by imposing 

‘‘substantial direct compliance costs’’ or 

‘‘substantial direct effects’’ on such 

communities, or the relationship and 

distribution of power between the 

Federal Government and Tribes. 

PHMSA has determined that this 

rulemaking does not have substantial 

Tribal implications, because it will not 

substantially or uniquely affect Tribal 

communities or Indian Tribal 

governments. The final rule’s regulatory 

amendments are facially neutral and 

will have broad, national scope; the rule 

will not significantly or uniquely affect 

Tribal communities, much less impose 

substantial compliance costs on Native 

American Tribal governments or 

mandate Tribal action. And insofar as 

PHMSA concludes that the final rule 

will improve safety and reduce 

environmental risks associated with 

transportation of hazardous materials, 

PHMSA expects it will not entail 

disproportionately high adverse risks for 

Tribal communities. Therefore, the 

funding and consultation requirements 

of Executive Order 13175 do not apply. 

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive 

Order 13272, and DOT Procedures and 

Policies 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as 

amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Flexibility Fairness Act of 

1996 (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), 

requires agencies to consider whether a 

rulemaking would have a ‘‘significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities’’ to include 

small businesses; not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields; and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations under 50,000. The RFA 

directs agencies to establish exceptions 

and differing compliance standards for 

small businesses, where possible to do 

so and still meet the objectives of 

applicable regulatory statutes. Executive 

Order 13272 (‘‘Proper Consideration of 

Small Entities in Agency 

Rulemaking’’) 49 requires agencies to 

establish procedures and policies to 

promote compliance with the RFA and 

to ‘‘thoroughly review draft rules to 

assess and take appropriate account of 

the potential impact’’ of the rules on 

small businesses, governmental 

jurisdictions, and small organizations. 

The DOT posts its implementing 

guidance on a dedicated web page. 

This rulemaking has been developed 

in accordance with Executive Order 

13272 and DOT’s procedures and 

policies to promote compliance with the 

RFA and ensure that potential impacts 

of rulemakings on small entities are 

properly considered. PHMSA prepared 

an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

within the Preliminary Regulatory 

Impact Analysis (PRIA) supporting the 

NPRM. The small entities that could be 

impacted by this rule include all small 

entities engaged in the shipment of 

hazardous materials that are already 

subject to HMR requirements. PHMSA 

expects this final rule to facilitate new 

technologies or other changes that 

provide safety equivalence at lower cost; 

streamline or reduce recordkeeping and 

other paperwork and reporting 

requirements; and address other 

changes to reduce the regulatory burden 

of the HMR. PHMSA has individually 

evaluated each of the regulatory 

amendments contained in this 

rulemaking using available information, 

and PHMSA certifies that the changes 

adopted in this final rule will (neither 

individually nor in the aggregate) have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small businesses. 

PHMSA has provided a regulatory 

flexibility analysis for this final rule 

within the RIA in the docket for this 

proceeding. 

F. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), no 

person is required to respond to any 

information collection unless it has 

been approved by OMB and displays a 

valid OMB control number. Pursuant to 

44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(B) and 5 CFR 

1320.8(d), PHMSA must provide 

interested members of the public and 

affected agencies an opportunity to 

comment on information collection and 

recordkeeping requests. 

PHMSA has analyzed this rulemaking 

in accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act. This final rule does not 

impose new information collection 

requirements. PHMSA currently has an 

approved information collection under 

OMB Control No. 2137–0051, entitled 

‘‘Rulemaking, Special Permits, and 

Preemption Requirements,’’ expiring on 

November 30, 2024. This rulemaking 

eliminates the need for persons to renew 

a special permit, resulting in a decrease 

in burden. PHMSA estimates the 

reduction in information collection 

burden as follows: 

OMB Control No. 2137–0051: 

Rulemaking, Special Permits, and 

Preemption Requirements. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15657 

Decrease in Annual Number of 

Respondents: 139. 

Decrease in Annual Responses: 139. 

Decrease in Annual Burden Hours: 

208.5. 

Decrease in Annual Burden Cost: $0. 

PHMSA did not receive any 

comments related to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act in the comments to the 

NPRM. Please direct your requests for a 

copy of this information collection to 

Steven Andrews, Office of Hazardous 

Materials Standards (PHH–12), Pipeline 

and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (UMRA; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

requires agencies to assess the effects of 

Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments, and the 

private sector. For any NPRM or final 

rule that includes a Federal mandate 

that may result in the expenditure by 

State, local, and Tribal governments, or 

by the private sector of $100 million or 

more in 1996 dollars in any given year, 

the agency must prepare, amongst other 

things, a written statement that 

qualitatively and quantitatively assesses 

the costs and benefits of the Federal 

mandate. 

As explained in the RIA, available for 

review in the docket, this final rule does 

not impose unfunded mandates under 

the UMRA. It does not result in costs of 

$100 million or more in 1996 dollars to 

either State, local, or Tribal 

governments, or to the private sector, in 

any one year. Therefore, the analytical 

requirements of UMRA do not apply. A 

copy of the RIA is available for review 

in the docket. 

H. Environmental Assessment 

The National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) requires that Federal agencies 

analyze actions to determine whether 

the action would have a significant 

impact on the human environment. The 

Council on Environmental Quality 

implementing regulations (40 CFR parts 

1500 through 1508) requires Federal 

agencies to consider the environmental 

impacts of their actions in the decisionmaking process. NEPA requires Federal 

agencies to assess the environmental 

effects of proposed Federal actions prior 

to making decisions and involve the 

public in the decision-making process. 

Agencies must prepare an 

environmental assessment (EA) for an 

action for which a categorical exclusion 

is not applicable, and is either unlikely 

to have significant effects or when 

significance of the action is unknown. 

In accordance with these requirements, 

an EA must briefly discuss: (1) the need 

for the action; (2) the alternatives 

considered; (3) the environmental 

impacts of the action and alternatives; 

and (4) a listing of the agencies and 

persons consulted. If, after reviewing 

the EA and public comments (as 

applicable), in response to a draft EA 

(DEA), an agency determines that a 

proposed action will not have a 

significant impact on the human or 

natural environment, it can conclude 

the NEPA analysis with a finding of no 

significant impact (FONSI). DOT Order 

5610.1C (‘‘Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts’’) establishes 

departmental procedures for evaluation 

of environmental impacts under NEPA 

and its implementing regulations. 

PHMSA did not receive any comments 

related to the DEA in response to the 

NPRM. This final EA (FEA) adopts by 

reference the analysis included above in 

this final rule and in the NPRM. 

1. Purpose and Need 

In response to petitions for 

rulemaking submitted by the regulated 

community, PHMSA is amending the 

HMR to update, clarify, or streamline 

various regulatory requirements. 

Specifically, PHMSA amendments 

include—but are not limited to—the 

following: incorporating by reference 

(IBR) multiple publications from CGA, 

IME, and the UN; allowing for greater 

flexibility of packaging options in the 

transportation of compressed natural gas 

in cylinders; streamlining the approval 

application process for the repair of 

specific DOT specification cylinders; 

providing greater clarity regarding the 

filling requirements for certain cylinders 

used to transport hydrogen and 

hydrogen mixtures; streamlining hazard 

communication by allowing marking 

exceptions under certain conditions 

during the transportation of lithium 

button cell batteries; and modifying the 

definition of liquid to include the test 

for determining fluidity (penetrometer 

test) prescribed in the ADR. 

These amendments are intended to 

promote safety, provide clarity, and 

streamline regulatory requirements. The 

amendments were identified in 

response to petitions from stakeholders 

affected by the HMR. These 

amendments clarify the HMR and 

enhance safety, while offering some net 

economic benefits. 

This action: (1) fulfills our statutory 

directive to promote transportation 

safety; (2) fulfills our statutory directive 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

that requires Federal agencies to give 

interested persons the right to petition 

an agency to issue, amend, or repeal a 

rule (5 U.S.C. 553(e)); (3) supports 

governmental efforts to eliminate 

unnecessary burdens on the regulated 

community; (4) addresses safety 

concerns raised by petitioners and 

removes identified regulatory 

ambiguity; and (5) simplifies and 

clarifies the regulations to promote 

understanding and compliance. 

These regulatory revisions would 

offer more efficient and effective ways 

of achieving the PHMSA goal of safe 

and secure transportation of hazardous 

materials in commerce, protecting both 

people and the environment. 

2. Alternatives Considered 

In this rulemaking, PHMSA is 

considering the following alternatives: 

Alternative #1: No Action 

If PHMSA were to select the No 

Action Alternative, current regulations 

would remain in place and no 

provisions would be amended or added. 

Alternative #2: Amend the HMR as 

Provided in This Final Rule 

The Final Rule Alternative would 

adopt the HMR amendments set forth in 

this final rule and was previously 

referred to as the ‘‘Proposed Action 

Alternative’’ in the draft environmental 

assessment (DEA) that was included 

within the NPRM. The amendments 

included in this alternative are more 

fully discussed in the preamble and 

regulatory text sections of this final rule. 

3. Reasonably Foreseable Environmental 

Impacts of the Alternatives 

Alternative #1 No Action 

After careful consideration of public 

comments to the NPRM (none of which 

directly addressed the DEA), and 

revised analyses of economic and 

environmental impacts of the Proposed 

Action Alternative, PHMSA is adopting 

the Proposed Action Alternative (i.e., 

the Final Rule) as the Selected Action. 

If PHMSA selected the No Action 

Alternative, the HMR would remain 

unchanged, and no provisions would be 

amended or added. However, any 

economic benefits gained through the 

proposals, which include harmonization 

in updates to transport standards, lists 

of regulated substances, definitions, 

packagings, markings requirements, 

shipper requirements, and modal 

requirements, would not be realized. 

Foregone efficiencies in the No Action 

Alternative also include freeing up 

limited resources to concentrate on 

hazardous materials transportation 

issues of potentially much greater 

environmental impact. Not adopting the 

environmental and safety requirements 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15658 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

in the final rule under the ‘‘No Action 

Alternative’’ would result in a lost 

opportunity for reducing negative 

environmental and safety-related 

impacts due to the revisions in this final 

rule decreasing the possibility of a 

hazardous release. Greenhouse gas 

emissions would remain the same under 

the No Action Alternative. However, the 

No Action Alternative could have a 

modest negative impact on GHG 

emissions. PHMSA anticipates the 

provisions for the transportation of 

compressed natural gas/methane in UN 

pressure receptacles to have a minimal 

positive effect on greenhouse gas 

emissions. This would result from 

stricter packaging restrictions that 

should result in fewer failures of these 

packages and thus, fewer releases of 

materials into the environment. 

Therefore, by choosing the No Action 

Alternative, a potential reduction in 

GHG emissions would not be achieved. 

4. Final Action Alternative 

When developing potential regulatory 

requirements, PHMSA evaluates those 

requirements to consider the 

environmental impact of each 

amendment. Specifically, PHMSA 

evaluates the risk of release and 

resulting environmental impact; the risk 

to human safety, including any risk to 

first responders; the longevity of the 

packaging; and if the regulation would 

be carried out in a defined geographic 

area using specific resources, especially 

any sensitive areas and how they could 

be impacted by any regulations. The 

regulatory changes in this rulemaking 

have been determined to be 

clarification, technology/design 

updates, harmonization, regulatory 

flexibility, standard incorporation, or 

editorial in nature. As such, these 

amendments have little or no impact on 

the risk of release and resulting 

environmental impact, human safety, or 

longevity of the packaging. None of 

these amendments would be carried out 

in a defined geographic area because 

this is a nationwide rulemaking. 

The ‘‘Final Action Alternative’’ 

encompasses enhanced and clarified 

regulatory requirements, which would 

result in increased compliance and 

fewer negative environmental and safety 

impacts. This EA incorporates the safety 

analyses in the preamble sections of the 

final rule. The table and list below 

summarize the possible environmental 

benefits, greenhouse gas emissions, and 

any potential negative impacts for the 

amendments in the final rule. 

SUMMARY OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY AMENDMENTS

Amendment(s) to HMR 

(lettered as above herein) 

Type of 

amendment(s) 

Probable 

anticipated 

environmental 

impact(s) 

Greenhouse gas emissions 

1. P–1714—Transportation of Compressed Natural 

Gas/Methane in UN Pressure Receptacles.

Regulatory Flexibility ......... Minimal positive impacts ... Minimal positive impacts. 

2. P–1716—Threading and repair of seamless DOT 3- 

series specification cylinders and seamless UN pressure receptacles.

Regulatory Flexibility ......... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

3. P–1717/P–1725—Clarification of the requirements for 

non-liquefied compressed gases.

Regulatory Flexibility ......... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

4. P–1718—De minimus quantities of poisonous materials.Regulatory Flexibility—Harmonization.No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

5. P–1736—Clarification of the marking requirements 

for button cell lithium batteries contained in equipment.

Regulatory Flexibility ......... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

6. P–1727—IBR of CGA C–20 (2014) ............................ Standard Incorporation ...... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

7. P–1728—Gas Mixtures Containing Components Defined as Liquefied Gases.Regulatory Flexibility ......... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

8. P–1729—Incorporation by reference of CGA C–23 

(2018).

Standard Incorporation ...... Minimal positive impacts ... No impacts. 

9. P–1731—IBR of IME’s Safety Library Publication 23 

(SLP–23).

Standard Incorporation ...... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

10. P–1732—Revision of testing and marking of UN 

specification packagings.

Regulatory Flexibility ......... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

11. P–1734—Authorizing smaller-sized combustible 

placard on IBCs.

Regulatory Flexibility ......... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

12. P1736—IBR of IME Safety Library Publication 22 

(SLP–22).

Standard Incorporation ...... Minimal positive impacts ... No impacts. 

13. P–1738—Definition of a Liquid ................................. Regulatory Flexibility—Harmonization.No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

14. P–1744—Incorporate by reference updated Appendix A to CGA C–7 (2020).Standard Incorporation ...... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

15. P–1746—IBR of CGA C–27 (2019) .......................... Standard Incorporation ...... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

16. P–1747—IBR of CGA C–29 (2019) .......................... Standard Incorporation ...... Minimal positive impacts ... No impacts. 

17. P–1748—IBR of CGA V–9 (2019) ............................ Standard Incorporation ...... No impacts ........................ No impacts. 

1. P–1714—PHMSA is implementing 

packaging restrictions for the 

transportation of CNG and methane in 

UN seamless steel pressure receptacles 

with a tensile strength greater than 950 

MPa. As discussed in sections III and IV 

of this final rule, the packaging 

restrictions should result in fewer 

failures of these packages and thus, 

fewer releases of materials into the 

environment. Additionally, because this 

revision involves the transportation of 

GHGs, its effect on the reduction of 

GHGs emissions may be minimal. 

2. P–1716—PHMSA is revising the 

requirements for repairing seamless 

DOT 3-series specification cylinders and 

seamless UN pressure receptacles 

manufactured without external threads 

and authorizing the performance of this 

work without requiring prior approval 

from PHMSA. This revision provides 

regulatory flexibility while maintaining 

safety. As discussed in sections III and 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15659 

IV of this final rule, PHMSA has 

determined that this is an improvement 

over the previous method of using set 

screws to secure the tubes, which 

resulted in indentations being carved 

into the tube necks as the tube jostled 

during transport. This revision is 

intended to lower the risk of an incident 

since this package is expected to 

increase safety, so the proposal may 

result in positive environmental impacts 

due to less risk of an accident in 

transportation. This revision will not 

result in any increase to GHG emissions 

due to the decreased probability of an 

incident involving these cylinders. 

3. P–1717/P–1725—PHMSA is 

amending § 173.302a(c) of the HMR to 

reflect the independent material 

construction requirements for cylinders 

with special filling limits for DOT 

specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX 

cylinders containing Division. 2.1 

(flammable) gases. As discussed in 

sections III and IV of this final rule, 

these amendments would not represent 

any incremental, quantifiable safety 

effects because PHMSA already 

authorizes the transportation in 

commerce of hydrogen and mixtures of 

hydrogen with helium, argon, or 

nitrogen in certain cylinders filled to 10 

percent in excess of their marked 

service pressures. Therefore, this 

revision will not have any impacts on 

the environment nor GHG emissions. 

4. P–1718—PHMSA is amending 

§ 173.4b to harmonize the de minimis 

exceptions for Division 6.1, PG I (no 

inhalation hazard) materials with 

international regulations. The release of 

Division 6.1, PG I materials, including 

toxic substances, poisons, and irritating 

material, can have a negative effect on 

human health and the environment due 

to toxicity levels of the material. 

However, as discussed in sections III 

and IV of this final rule, because the 

revisions would authorize an existing 

exception for de minimis quantities of 

additional materials with appropriate 

safeguards, PHMSA does not anticipate 

any significant environmental impacts 

nor any effects on GHG emissions. 

5. P–1726—PHMSA is revising 

§ 173.185(c)(3) to clarify that lithium 

button cell batteries installed in 

equipment are excepted from the 

marking requirement and not subject to 

the quantity per package or per 

consignment limitation. As discussed in 

sections III and IV of this final rule, 

because this is not a new requirement 

and simply clarifies the current 

requirements in the HMR, there are no 

environmental impacts and no changes 

in GHG emissions. 

6. P–1727—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference CGA C–20 (2014), 

‘‘Requalification Standard for Metallic, 

DOT, and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and 

Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination, 

Second Edition.’’ CGA C–20 provides 

technical specification for the ultrasonic 

examination of cylinders. As discussed 

in sections III and IV of this final rule, 

PHMSA expects that the use of 

ultrasonic examination will provide a 

level of safety at least equivalent to what 

is currently allowed under the HMR. 

PHMSA already allows for the 

ultrasonic examination of certain 

cylinders (see § 180.212 for example). 

Additionally, § 180.205(f) will no longer 

require internal visual inspection for 

these cylinders once they have 

undergone ultrasonic examination, as 

these actions would be duplicative. The 

incorporation by reference of CGC C–20 

will not have any environmental 

impacts and will not result in any 

increase to GHG emissions. 

7. P–1728—PHMSA is authorizing an 

alternative description of gas mixtures 

containing components defined as 

liquefied gases. This revision helps 

clarify confusion among stakeholders 

when the content of a cylinder is 

described as a liquefied compressed gas 

that resembles a non-liquefied 

compressed gas. As discussed in 

sections III and IV of this final rule, 

PHMSA has determined that the 

revision is safety neutral or slightly 

improves safety, and will provide 

regulatory flexibility to the regulated 

community without a reduction in 

safety. For these reasons, this revision 

will not have any environmental 

impacts nor result in any increase to 

GHG emissions. 

8. P–1729—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference CGA C–23 (2018), 

‘‘Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 3 

series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck 

Mounting Surfaces, Second Edition,’’ 

into the HMR at § 171.7. As discussed 

in sections III and IV of this final rule, 

CGA C–23 provides an inspection 

standard that PHMSA anticipates will 

reduce the likelihood of a release from 

a DOT/TC 3 series cylinders. Thus, 

PHMSA anticipates this revision to have 

a minimal positive environmental 

impact. PHMSA does not anticipate an 

increase to GHG emissions as these 

revisions will not have an effect on the 

usage of DOT/TC 3 series cylinders. 

9. P–1731—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference an updated version of IME 

SLP–23 (2021), titled 

‘‘Recommendations for the 

Transportation of Explosives, Division 

1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, 

Division 5.1; and Combustible Liquids 

in Bulk Packaging.’’ As discussed in 

Sections III and IV of this final rule, this 

updates a previously approved version 

of SLP–23 and provides necessary 

technical updates and regulatory 

flexibility. As part of the updated SLP– 

23, IME included packages designed for 

the safe transportation of Ammonium 

Nitrate Emulsions. As part of the review 

of the IME publication, PHMSA 

determined these packages were 

adequate for the safe transportation of 

Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions. Thus, 

this revision will not have any 

environmental impacts and will not 

result in any increase to GHG emissions. 

10. P–1732—PHMSA is amending 

§ 178.601(g) by allowing inner 

packagings of articles containing 

UN0012, UN0014, UN0044, and 

UN0055 to be assembled and 

transported without further testing 

provided that the outer packaging of a 

combination packaging successfully 

passes the tests in accordance with 49 

CFR 178.603 and 178.606, and the gross 

mass does not exceed that of the tested 

type. This revision will provide 

regulatory flexibility to the regulated 

community without a reduction in 

safety. For these reasons, PHMSA does 

not anticipate this revision to have any 

environmental impacts nor result in any 

increase to GHG emissions. 

11. P–1734—PHMSA is revising 

§ 172.514(c)(4) by incorporating the 

provisions in DOT SP–16295, which 

would add an option for smaller 

placards for IBCs carrying combustible 

liquids. In addition, PHMSA is revising 

§ 172.514(c)(1) to allow an option for 

smaller placards on portable tanks. As 

discussed in sections III and IV of this 

final rule, this revision does not change 

the safety requirements for the 

transportation or filling of an IBC. 

PHMSA expects that this revision will 

provide regulatory flexibility to the 

regulated community without a 

reduction in safety. For these reasons, 

PHMSA does not anticipate this 

revision to have any environmental 

impacts nor result in any increase to 

GHG emissions. 

12. P–1736—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference IME SLP–22 (2019), 

‘‘Recommendations for the Safe 

Transportation of Detonators in a 

Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive 

Materials.’’ As discussed in sections III 

and IV of this final rule, PHMSA 

conducted a technical review and 

examined each of these revisions 

included in SLP–22 (2019) and asserts 

that these changes will either maintain 

or enhance safety requirements. 

Additionally, PHMSA expects that this 

revision will provide regulatory 

flexibility to the regulated community 

without a reduction in safety. The 

revisions may result in minor positive 

environmental impacts due to less 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15660 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

50 59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994). 

packaging failures that will increase 

safety. PHMSA does not anticipate this 

revision to result in any increase to GHG 

emissions. 

13. P–1738—PHMSA is modifying the 

definition of liquid in § 171.8 to include 

the test for determining fluidity 

(penetrometer test), prescribed in 

section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR. As 

discussed in sections III and IV of this 

final rule, PHMSA asserts that the 

revised test is more empirical in nature 

and provides better understanding of 

the properties of the tested material and 

thus, better hazard classification. 

PHMSA expects that this revision will 

provide regulatory flexibility to the 

regulated community by offering an 

additional test method and will not 

result in a reduction in safety. As a 

result, PHMSA does not anticipate this 

revision to have any environmental 

impacts nor result in any increase to 

GHG emissions. 

14. P–1744—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference the updated Appendix A of 

CGA publication C–7 (2020), ‘‘Guide to 

Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases, Eleventh Edition,’’ 

into the HMR at § 171.7(n)(8). As 

discussed in sections III and IV of this 

final rule, this revision updates a 

previously approved version of CGA C– 

7 and provides necessary technical 

updates and regulatory flexibility. 

PHMSA expects that this revision will 

provide regulatory flexibility to the 

regulated community without any 

reduction in safety. As a result, PHMSA 

does not anticipate this revision to have 

any environmental impacts nor result in 

any increase to GHG emissions. 

15. P–1746—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference CGA C–27 (2019), 

‘‘Standard Procedure to Derate the 

Service Pressure of DOT 3-Series 

Seamless Steel Tubes, First Edition.’’ As 

discussed in sections III and IV of this 

final rule, PHMSA has determined that 

the method for pressure derating of 

tubes is essentially the same as what is 

outlined in current PHMSA guidance. 

PHMSA expects that this revision will 

provide regulatory flexibility to the 

regulated community without a 

reduction in safety. Therefore, PHMSA 

does not anticipate this revision to have 

any environmental impacts nor result in 

any increase to GHG emissions. 

16. P–1747—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference CGA C–29 (2019), 

‘‘Standard for Design Requirements for 

Tube Trailers and Tube Modules, First 

Edition,’’ which would supersede CGA 

TB–25 (2018), ‘‘Design Considerations 

for Tube Trailers.’’ As discussed in 

sections III and IV of this final rule, 

PHMSA concludes that tube trailers or 

modules manufactured in accordance 

with CGA C–29 are less likely to have 

separation of tubes from the trailer or 

bundle, resulting in the unintentional 

release of hazardous materials, when 

subjected to multidirectional forces that 

can occur in highway collisions, 

including rollover accidents. This 

revision will increase safety for the 

transportation of hazardous materials in 

tube trailers because it may reduce the 

incidence of releases of hazardous 

materials due to failure of tube 

mountings. Therefore, this revision may 

have minimal positive environmental 

impacts. PHMSA does not anticipate 

this revision to result in any increase to 

GHG emissions. 

17. P–1748—PHMSA is incorporating 

by reference CGA V–9 (2019), 

‘‘Compressed Gas Association Standard 

for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves, 

Eighth Edition.’’ As discussed in 

sections III and IV of this final rule, this 

revision updates a previously approved 

version of CGA V–9 and provides 

necessary technical updates and 

regulatory flexibility. PHMSA expects 

that this revision will provide regulatory 

flexibility to the regulated community 

without a reduction in safety. PHMSA 

does not anticipate this revision to have 

any environmental impacts nor result in 

any increase to GHG emissions. 

5. Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898 (‘‘Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations’’) 50 and DOT 

Order 5610.2C (‘‘Department of 

Transportation Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’) directs Federal agencies 

to take appropriate and necessary steps 

to identify and address 

disproportionately high and adverse 

effects of Federal actions on the health 

or environment of minority and lowincome populations ‘‘[t]o the greatest 

extent practicable and permitted by 

law.’’ DOT Order 5610.2C (‘‘U.S. 

Department of Transportation Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’) establishes departmental 

procedures for effectuating Executive 

Order 12898 by promoting and 

considering environmental justice 

principles throughout planning and 

decision-making processes in the 

development of programs, policies, and 

activities—including PHMSA 

rulemaking. 

PHMSA has evaluated this final rule 

under the above Executive order and 

DOT Order 5610.2C. PHMSA finds the 

final rule will not cause 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health and environmental effects 

on minority, low-income, underserved, 

and other disadvantaged populations 

and communities. The rulemaking is 

neither directed toward a particular 

population, region, or community, nor 

is it expected to adversely impact any 

particular population, region, or 

community. And because the 

rulemaking would not adversely affect 

the safe transportation of hazardous 

materials generally, its revisions will 

not entail disproportionately high 

adverse risks for minority populations, 

low-income populations, or other 

underserved and other disadvantaged 

communities. 

PHMSA submits that the final rule 

will in fact reduce risks to minority 

populations, low-income populations, 

or other underserved and other 

disadvantaged communities. Because 

the HMR amendments could avoid the 

release of hazardous materials and 

reduce the frequency of delays and 

returned/resubmitted shipments of 

hazardous materials resulting from 

conflict between the current HMR and 

updated international standards, the 

final rule will reduce risks to 

populations and communities— 

including any minority, low-income, 

underserved, and other disadvantaged 

populations and communities—in the 

vicinity of interim storage sites and 

transportation arteries and hubs. 

Additionally, as explained in the above 

discussion of NEPA, PHMSA anticipates 

that its HMR amendments will yield 

minimal GHG emissions reductions, 

thereby reducing the risks posed by 

anthropogenic climate change to 

minority, low-income, underserved, and 

other disadvantaged populations and 

communities. 

6. Agencies Consulted 

PHMSA has coordinated with the 

Federal Aviation Administration, the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, the Federal Railroad 

Administration, and the United States 

Coast Guard in the development of this 

final rule. As such, PHMSA did not 

receive any adverse comments on the 

amendments in this final rule from 

these or any other Federal agencies. 

7. Finding of No Signifcant Impact 

PHMSA finds the adoption of the 

Final Action Alternative’s regulatory 

amendments will maintain the HMR’s 

current high level of safety for 

shipments of hazardous materials 

transported by highway, rail, aircraft, 

and vessel, and as such finds the HMR 

amendments in the final rule will have 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15661 

51 88 FR 25251 (April 26, 2023). 

52 77 FR 26413 (May 4, 2012). 53 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001). 54 86 FR 26633 (May 17, 2021). 

no significant impact on the human 

environment. PHMSA finds that the 

Final Action Alternative will avoid 

adverse safety, environmental justice, 

and GHG emissions impacts of the No 

Action Alternative. Furthermore, based 

on PHMSA’s analysis of these 

provisions described above, PHMSA 

finds that codification and 

implementation of this rule will not 

result in a significant impact to the 

human environment. This finding is 

consistent with Executive Order 14096 

(‘‘Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All’’) 51 by achieving several goals, 

including continuing to deepen the 

Biden-Harris Administration’s whole of 

Government approach to environmental 

justice and to better protect overburden 

communities from pollution and 

environmental harms. 

I. Privacy Act 

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), 

DOT solicits comments from the public 

to better inform any amendments to the 

HMR considered in this rulemaking. 

DOT posts these comments, without 

edit, including any personal information 

the commenter provides, to 

www.regulations.gov, as described in 

the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– 

14 FDMS). For information on DOT’s 

compliance with the Privacy Act, please 

see www.dot.gov/privacy. 

J. Executive Order 13609 and 

International Trade Analysis 

Under Executive Order 13609 

(‘‘Promoting International Regulatory 

Cooperation’’),52 agencies must consider 

whether the impacts associated with 

significant variations between domestic 

and international regulatory approaches 

are unnecessary or may impair the 

ability of American business to export 

and compete internationally. To meet 

shared challenges involving health, 

safety, labor, security, environmental, 

and other issues, international 

regulatory cooperation can identify 

approaches that are at least as protective 

as those that are or would be adopted in 

the absence of such cooperation. 

International regulatory cooperation can 

also reduce, eliminate, or prevent 

unnecessary differences in regulatory 

requirements. 

Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act 

of 1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by 

the Uruguay Round Agreements Act 

(Pub. L. 103–465), prohibits Federal 

agencies from establishing any 

standards or engaging in related 

activities that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. Pursuant to the Trade 

Agreements Act, the establishment of 

standards is not considered an 

unnecessary obstacle to the foreign 

commerce of the United States, so long 

as the standards have a legitimate 

domestic objective, such as providing 

for safety, and do not operate to exclude 

imports that meet this objective. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that these standards form 

the basis for U.S. standards. PHMSA 

participates in the establishment of 

international standards in order to 

protect the safety of the American 

public. PHMSA has assessed the effects 

of this final rule and concludes that it 

will not cause unnecessary obstacles to 

foreign trade. 

K. Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211 (‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’) 53 requires 

Federal agencies to prepare a Statement 

of Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant 

energy action.’’ Under the Executive 

order, a ‘‘significant energy action’’ is 

defined as any action by an agency 

(normally published in the Federal 

Register) that promulgates, or is 

expected to lead to the promulgation of, 

a final rule or regulation (including a 

notice of inquiry, advanced notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), and 

NPRM) that: (1)(i) is a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy; or (2) is designated by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) as a significant energy action. 

This rulemaking has not been 

designated as a significant regulatory 

action and has not been designated by 

OIRA as a significant energy action. In 

addition, PHMSA has concluded that 

this rulemaking will not result in a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, 

PHMSA has not prepared an energy 

impact statement. 

L. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA; 

15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs Federal 

agencies to use voluntary consensus 

standards in their regulatory activities 

unless doing so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

specification of materials, test methods, 

or performance requirements) that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies. Consistent 

with the goals of the NTTAA, PHMSA 

has adopted a significant number of 

voluntary consensus standards, which 

are listed in 49 CFR 171.7. 

M. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 

14028 

Executive Order 14028 (‘‘Improving 

the Nation’s Cybersecurity’’) 54 directs 

the Federal Government to improve its 

efforts to identify, deter, and respond to 

‘‘persistent and increasingly 

sophisticated malicious cyber 

campaigns.’’ PHMSA has considered the 

effects of the final rule and determined 

that its regulatory amendments will not 

materially affect the cybersecurity risk 

profile for transportation of hazardous 

materials. 

N. Severability 

The purpose of this final rule is to 

operate holistically and, in concert with 

existing HMR requirements, provide 

defense-in-depth to ensure safe 

transportation of hazardous materials. 

However, PHMSA recognizes that 

certain provisions focus on unique 

topics. Therefore, PHMSA finds that the 

various provisions of this final rule are 

severable and able to operate 

functionally if severed from each other. 

In the event a court were to invalidate 

one or more of the unique provisions of 

this final rule, the remaining provisions 

should stand, thus allowing their 

continued effect. 

List of Subjects 

49 CFR Part 107 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Hazardous materials 

transportation, Penalties, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

49 CFR Part 171 

Exports, Hazardous materials 

transportation, Hazardous waste, 

Imports, Incorporation by reference, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Definitions and 

abbreviations. 

49 CFR Part 172 

Hazardous materials transportation, 

Hazardous waste, Incorporation by 

reference, Labeling, Markings, 

Packaging and containers, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15662 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

49 CFR Part 173 

Hazardous materials transportation, 

Incorporation by reference, Training, 

Packaging and containers, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

49 CFR Part 178 

Hazardous materials transportation, 

Incorporation by reference, Motor 

vehicle safety, Packaging and 

containers, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

49 CFR Part 180 

Hazardous materials transportation, 

Incorporation by reference, Motor 

carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Packaging 

and containers, Railroad safety, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

In consideration of the foregoing, 

PHMSA amends 49 CFR chapter I as 

follows: 

PART 107—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 

PROGRAM PROCEDURES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 107 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 

Pub. L. 101–410 Section 4; Pub. L. 104–121 

Sections 212–213; Pub. L. 104–134 Section 

31001; Pub. L. 114–74 Section 701 (28 U.S.C. 

2461 note); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97; 33 U.S.C. 

1321. 

■ 2. In § 107.117, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 107.117 Emergency processing. 

(a) An application is granted 

emergency processing if the Associate 

Administrator, on the basis of the 

application and any inquiry undertaken, 

finds that: 

(1) Emergency processing is necessary 

to prevent significant injury to persons 

or property (other than the hazardous 

material to be transported) that could 

not be prevented if the application were 

processed on a routine basis; 

(2) Emergency processing is necessary 

for immediate national security 

purposes; 

(3) Emergency processing is necessary 

to prevent significant economic loss that 

could not be prevented if the 

application were processed on a routine 

basis; or 

(4) Emergency processing is necessary 

in support of an essential governmental 

(domestic or foreign) function that could 

not be satisfied if the application were 

processed on a routine basis. 

* * * * * 

PART 171—GENERAL INFORMATION, 

REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 171 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 

Pub. L. 101–410 section 4; Pub. L. 104–134, 

section 31001; Pub. L. 114–74 section 701 (28 

U.S.C. 2461 note); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97. 

■ 4. In § 171.7: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (n) and (r); 

■ b. In paragraph (dd)(4) introductory 

text, remove the text ‘‘§ 171.23’’ and add 

in its place the text ‘‘§§ 171.8; 171.23’’; 

■ c. Add paragraph (dd)(5); and 

■ d. In table 1 to the section, add a main 

entry for ‘‘Department of Commerce, 

1401 Constitution Ave NW, 

Washington, DC 20230:’’ in alphabetical 

order followed by the sub-entry 

‘‘Federal Standard H–28, Screw-Thread 

Standards for Federal Services’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 171.7 Reference material. 

* * * * * 

(n) Compressed Gas Association 

(CGA), 8484 Westpark Drive, Suite 220, 

McLean, VA 22102; telephone 703–788– 

2700, www.cganet.com. 

(1) CGA C–1—2016 (CGA C–1), 

Methods for Pressure Testing 

Compressed Gas Cylinders, Eleventh 

Edition, copyright 2016; into §§ 178.36; 

178.37; 178.38; 178.39; 178.42; 178.44; 

178.45; 178.46; 178.47; 178.50; 178.51; 

178.53; 178.55; 178.56; 178.57; 178.58; 

178.59; 178.60; 178.61; 178.65; 178.68; 

180.205; 180.209. 

(2) CGA C–3—2005 (Reaffirmed 2011) 

(CGA C–3), Standards for Welding on 

Thin-Walled Steel Cylinders, Seventh 

Edition, copyright 2005; into §§ 178.47; 

178.50; 178.51; 178.53; 178.55; 178.56; 

178.57; 178.58; 178.59; 178.60; 178.61; 

178.65; 178.68; 180.211. 

(3) CGA C–5 (CGA C–5), Cylinder 

Service Life—Seamless Steel High 

Pressure Cylinders, 1991 (Reaffirmed 

1995); into § 173.302a. 

(4) CGA C–6—2013 (CGA C–6), 

Standards for Visual Inspection of Steel 

Compressed Gas Cylinders, Eleventh 

Edition, copyright 2013; into §§ 172.102; 

173.3; 173.198; 180.205; 180.209; 

180.211; 180.411; 180.519. 

(5) CGA C–6.1—2013 (CGA C–6.1), 

Standards for Visual Inspection of High 

Pressure Aluminum Compressed Gas 

Cylinders, Sixth Edition, copyright 2013 

(corrected 4/14/2015); into §§ 180.205; 

180.209. 

(6) CGA C–6.2 (CGA C–6.2), 

Guidelines for Visual Inspection and 

Requalification of Fiber Reinforced High 

Pressure Cylinders, Third Edition, 1996; 

into § 180.205. 

(7) CGA C–6.3—2013 (CGA C–6.3), 

Standard for Visual Inspection of Low 

Pressure Aluminum Alloy Compressed 

Gas Cylinders, Third Edition, copyright 

2013; into §§ 180.205; 180.209. 

(8) CGA C–7—2020 (CGA C–7), Guide 

to Classification and Labeling of 

Compressed Gases; Eleventh Edition, 

2020 (corrected May 6, 2020); into 

§ 172.400a. 

(9) CGA C–8 (CGA C–8), Standard for 

Requalification of DOT–3HT Cylinder 

Design, 1985; into §§ 180.205; 180.209. 

(10) CGA C–11—2013 (CGA C–11), 

Practices for Inspection of Compressed 

Gas Cylinders at Time of Manufacture, 

Fifth Edition, copyright 2013; into 

§ 178.35. 

(11) CGA C–12 (CGA C–12), 

Qualification Procedure for Acetylene 

Cylinder Design, 1994; into §§ 173.301; 

173.303; 178.59; 178.60. 

(12) CGA C–13 (CGA C–13), 

Guidelines for Periodic Visual 

Inspection and Requalification of 

Acetylene Cylinders, Fourth Edition, 

2000; into §§ 173.303; 180.205; 180.209. 

(13) CGA C–14—2005 (Reaffirmed 

2010) (CGA C–14), Procedures for Fire 

Testing of DOT Cylinder Pressure Relief 

Device Systems, Fourth Edition, 

copyright 2005; into §§ 173.301; 

173.323. 

(14) CGA C–20—2014 (CGA C–20), 

Requalification Standard for Metallic, 

DOT and TC 3-series Gas Cylinders and 

Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination, 

Second Edition, 2014; into § 180.205. 

(15) CGA C–23—2018 (CGA C–23), 

Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 3 

Series and ISO 11120, Tube Neck 

Mounting Surfaces, Second Edition, 

2018; into §§ 180.205; 180.207. 

(16) CGA C–27—2019 (CGA C–27), 

Standard Procedure to Derate the 

Service Pressure of DOT Series 

Seamless Steel Tubes, First Edition, 

2019; into § 180.212. 

(17) CGA C–29—2019, (Formerly TB– 

25) (CGA C–29), Standard for Design 

Requirements for Tube Trailers and 

Tube Modules, First Edition, 2019; into 

§ 173.301. 

(18) CGA G–1.6—2011 (CGA G–1.6), 

Standard for Mobile Acetylene Trailer 

Systems, Seventh Edition, copyright 

2011; into § 173.301. 

(19) CGA G–2.2 (CGA G–2.2), 

Guideline Method for Determining 

Minimum of 0.2% Water in Anhydrous 

Ammonia, Second Edition, 1985 

(Reaffirmed 1997); into § 173.315. 

(20) CGA G–4.1 (CGA G–4.1), 

Cleaning Equipment for Oxygen Service, 

1985; into § 178.338–15. 

(21) CGA P–20 (CGA P–20), Standard 

for the Classification of Toxic Gas 

Mixtures, Third Edition, 2003; into 

§ 173.115. 

(22) CGA S–1.1—2011 (CGA S–1.1), 

Pressure Relief Device Standards—Part 

1—Cylinders for Compressed Gases; 

Fourteenth Edition, copyright 2011; into 

§§ 173.301; 173.304a; 178.75. 

(23) CGA S–1.2 (CGA S–1.2), Safety 

Relief Device Standards Part 2—Cargo 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15663 

and Portable Tanks for Compressed 

Gases, 1980; into §§ 173.315; 173.318; 

178.276; 178.277. 

(24) CGA S–7—2013 (CGA S–7), 

Standard for Selecting Pressure Relief 

Devices for Compressed Gas Mixtures in 

Cylinders, Fifth Edition, copyright 2013; 

into § 173.301. 

(25) CGA Technical Bulletin TB–2, 

Guidelines for Inspection and Repair of 

MC–330 and MC–331 Cargo Tanks, 

1980; into §§ 180.407; 180.413. 

(26) CGA Technical Bulletin TB–25 

(CGA TB–25), Design Considerations for 

Tube Trailers, 2008 Edition; into 

§ 173.301. 

(27) CGA V–9—2019, Compressed Gas 

Association Standard for Compressed 

Cylinder Valves, Eighth Edition, 2019; 

into § 173.301. 

* * * * * 

(r) Institute of Makers of Explosives 

(IME), 1212 New York Avenue NW, 

#650, Washington, DC 20005, Phone: 

202–429–9280. 

(1) IME SLP–22, Recommendations 

for the Safe Transportation of 

Detonators in a Vehicle with Certain 

Other Explosive Materials, 2019, (IME 

Standard 22); into §§ 173.63; 177.835. 

(2) IME SLP–23, Recommendations 

for the Transportation of Explosives, 

Division 1.5, Ammonium Nitrate 

Emulsions, Division 5.1, Combustible 

Liquids, Class 3, and Corrosives, Class 

8 in Bulk Packaging, March 2021, (IME 

Standard 23); into §§ 172.102 173.66; 

173.251; 177.835. 

* * * * * 

(dd) * * * 

(5) UN/SCETDG/55/INF.27, United 

Nations’ Recommendations on Test 

Series 8: Applicability of Test Series 

8(d), June 14, 2019; into § 172.102(c)(1), 

special provision 148. 

TABLE 1 TO 49 CFR 171.7—MATERIALS NOT INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

*******

Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20230: 

Federal Standard H–28, Screw-Thread Standards for Federal Services .................................................................................... 180.212 

* * * * * * * 

■ 5. In § 171.8, revise the definition of 

‘‘Liquid’’ to read as follows: 

§ 171.8 Definitions and abbreviations. 

* * * * * 

Liquid means a material, other than an 

elevated temperature material, with a 

melting point or initial melting point of 

20 °C (68 °F) or lower at a standard 

pressure of 101.3 kPa (14.7 psia). A 

viscous material for which a specific 

melting point cannot be determined 

must be subjected to the procedures 

specified in ASTM D 4359 (IBR, see 

§ 171.7) or to the test for determining 

fluidity (penetrometer test) prescribed 

in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the 

European Agreement Concerning the 

International Carriage of Dangerous 

Goods by Road (ADR) (IBR, see § 171.7). 

* * * * * 

PART 172—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 

TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 

COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY 

RESPONSE INFORMATION, TRAINING 

REQUIREMENTS, AND SECURITY 

PLANS 

■ 6. The authority citation for part 172 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49 

CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97. 

■ 7. In § 172.101, the Hazardous 

Materials Table is amended by revising 

the entries under ‘‘[REVISE]’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 172.101 Purpose and use of hazardous 

materials table. 

* * * * * 

§ 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15664 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations Symbols Hazardous materials descriptions and proper shipping names Hazard class or division Identifica- tion Nos. PG Label codes Special provisions (§ 172.102) (8) Packaging (§ 173.***) (9) Quantity limitations (see §§ 173.27 and 175.75) (10) Vessel stowage Exceptions Non-bulk Bulk Passenger aircraft/rail Cargo air- craft only Location Other (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8A) (8B) (8C) (9A) (9B) (10A) (10B) [REVISE]. * * * * * * * Ammonium nitrate emulsion or Ammonium nitrate suspension or Ammonium nitrate gel, inter- mediate for blasting explosives. 5.1 UN3375 .... II ............... 5.1 ............ 147, 148, 163, IB2, IP16, TP48. None ......... 231 ........... 251 ........... Forbidden Forbidden D ............... 25, 59, 60, 66, 124 * * * * * * * Explosive, blasting, type E or Agent blasting, type E. 1.5D UN0332 .... ................... 1.5D .......... 105, 106, 148, TP48. None ......... 62 ............. None ......... Forbidden Forbidden 03 ............. 25, 19E * * * * * * * G ............ Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s ..................... 5.1 UN3139 .... I ................ 5.1 ............ 62, 127, A2 None ......... 201 ........... 243 ........... Forbidden 2.5 L ......... D ............... 56, 58, 138 ........................................................ .................. ................... II ............... 5.1 ............ 62, 127, 148, A2, IB2, TP48. 152 ........... 202 ........... 242 ........... 1 L ............ 5 L ............ B ............... 56, 58, 138 ........................................................ .................. ................... III .............. 5.1 ............ 62, 127, 148, A2, IB2. 152 ........... 203 ........... 241 ........... 2.5 L ......... 30 L .......... B ............... 56, 58, 138 *******


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15665 

* * * * * 

■ 8. In § 172.102: 

■ a. In paragraph (c)(1), revise special 

provision 148; and 

■ b. In paragraph (c)(8)(ii), add special 

provision TP48 in numerical order. 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 172.102 Special provisions. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

148 For domestic transportation, this 

entry directs to § 173.66 of this 

subchapter for: 

a. The standards for transporting a 

single bulk hazardous material for 

blasting by cargo tank motor vehicles 

(CTMV); and 

b. The standards for CTMVs capable 

of transporting multiple hazardous 

materials for blasting in bulk and nonbulk packagings (i.e., a multipurpose 

bulk truck). Note: ‘‘UN3375, 

Ammonium nitrate emulsion’’ and 

‘‘UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E or 

Agent blasting, type E’’ are subject to the 

United Nations (UN) Test Series 8(d) 

(UN/SCETDG/55/INF.27) (IBR, see 

§ 171.7 of this subchapter), otherwise 

known as the Vented Pipe Test (VPT). 

* * * * * 

(8) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

TP48 The use of IM 101 and 102 

portable tanks when transported in 

accordance with IME Standard 23 (IBR, 

see § 171.7 of this subchapter). 

* * * * * 

■ 9. In § 172.514, revise paragraphs 

(c)(1) and (4) to read as follows: 

§ 172.514 Bulk packagings. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) A portable tank having a capacity 

of less than 3,785 L (1,000 gallons). 

Additionally, portable tanks containing 

a combustible liquid may be placarded 

with a combustible placard that meets 

the label specifications for size in 

§ 172.407(c). However, a transport 

vehicle containing portable tanks with a 

reduced-size combustible placard is still 

required to conform to the placarding 

requirements in this subpart, including 

the size requirements in § 172.519(c); 

* * * * * 

(4) For an intermediate bulk container 

(IBC) labeled in accordance with 

subpart E of this part, the IBC may 

display the proper shipping name and 

UN identification number markings in 

accordance with § 172.301(a)(1) in place 

of the UN number on an orange panel, 

placard, or white square-on-point 

configuration as prescribed in 

§ 172.336(d). Additionally, IBCs 

containing a combustible liquid may be 

placarded with a combustible placard 

that meets the label specifications for 

size in § 172.407(c). However, a 

transport vehicle containing IBCs with a 

reduced-size combustible placard is still 

required to conform to the placarding 

requirements in this subpart, including 

the size requirements in § 172.519(c); 

and 

* * * * * 

PART 173—SHIPPERS—GENERAL 

REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS 

AND PACKAGINGS 

■ 10. The authority citation for part 173 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49 

CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97. 

■ 11. In § 173.4b, revise the introductory 

text to paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 173.4b De minimis exceptions. 

(a) When packaged in accordance 

with this section, the following 

materials do not meet the definition of 

a hazardous material in § 171.8 of this 

subchapter and, therefore, are not 

subject to the requirements of this 

subchapter: Packing Group I materials of 

hazard Division 6.1 (no inhalation 

hazard), and Packing Group II and III 

materials of hazard Class 3, Division 4.1, 

Division 4.2, Division 4.3, Division 5.1, 

Division 6.1, Class 8, and Class 9. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. In § 173.115, revise the 

introductory text to paragraph (e) to 

read as follows: 

§ 173.115 Class 2, Divisions 2.1, 2.2, and 

2.3—Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(e) Liquefied compressed gas. A gas, 

which when packaged under pressure 

for transportation is partially liquid at 

temperatures above ¥50 °C (¥58 °F), is 

considered to be a liquefied compressed 

gas. Gas mixtures with component(s) 

that are liquefied gases may be 

described using the hazardous materials 

description of a compressed gas in the 

Hazardous Materials Table in § 172.101 

of this subchapter when the partial 

pressure(s) of the liquefied gas 

component(s) in the mixture are 

reduced so that the mixture is entirely 

in the gas phase at 20 °C (68 °F). A 

liquefied compressed gas is further 

categorized as follows: 

* * * * * 

■ 13. In § 173.185, revise the 

introductory text to paragraph (c)(3) to 

read as follows: 

§ 173.185 Lithium cells and batteries. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) Lithium battery mark. Each 

package must display the lithium 

battery mark except when a package 

contains only button cell batteries 

contained in equipment (including 

circuit boards), or when a consignment 

contains two packages or fewer where 

each package contains not more than 

four lithium cells or two lithium 

batteries contained in equipment. 

* * * * * 

■ 14. In § 173.251, add paragraph (b) to 

read as follows: 

§ 173.251 Bulk packaging for ammonium 

nitrate emulsion, suspension, or gel. 

* * * * * 

(b) Portable tanks. This section does 

not apply to ‘‘UN3375, Ammonium 

nitrate emulsion’’ when transported in 

IM 101 or 102 portable tanks in 

accordance with IME Standard 23 (IBR, 

see § 171.7 of this subchapter). 

■ 15. In § 173.301, revise the section 

heading and paragraph (i)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 173.301 General requirements for 

shipment of compressed gases and other 

hazardous materials in cylinders, UN 

pressure receptacles, and spherical 

pressure vessels. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) Seamless DOT specification 

cylinders longer than 2 m (6.5 ft) are 

authorized for transportation only when 

horizontally mounted on a motor 

vehicle or in an ISO framework or other 

framework of equivalent structural 

integrity in accordance with CGA C–29 

(IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter). 

Seamless DOT specification cylinders 

longer than 2 m (6.5 ft) manufactured 

prior to May 11, 2009, may continue to 

use CGA TB–25 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this 

subchapter). The pressure relief device 

must be arranged to discharge 

unobstructed to the open air. In 

addition, for Division 2.1 (flammable 

gas) material, the pressure relief devices 

must be arranged to discharge upward 

to prevent any escaping gas from 

contacting personnel or any adjacent 

cylinders. 

* * * * * 

■ 16. In § 173.302a: 

■ a. Revise the section heading; 

■ b. Remove the semicolons at the ends 

of paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) and add 

periods in their places; 

■ c. Revise paragraphs (c)(3) and (4); 

and 

■ d. Add paragraphs (c)(5) through (7). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15666 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 173.302a Additional requirements for 

shipment of non-liquefied (permanent) 

compressed gases in specification 

cylinders. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) DOT specification 3A and 3AX 

cylinders are limited to those having an 

intermediate manganese composition. 

(4) Cylinders manufactured with 

intermediate manganese steel must have 

been normalized, not quenched and 

tempered. Quench and temper treatment 

of intermediate steel is not authorized. 

(5) Cylinders manufactured with 

chrome moly steel must have been 

quenched and tempered, not 

normalized. Use of normalized chrome 

moly steel cylinders is not permitted. 

(6) Cylinders must be equipped with 

pressure relief devices sized and 

selected as to type, location, and 

quantity, and tested in accordance with 

§ 173.301(f). 

(7) A plus sign (+) is added following 

the test date marking on the cylinder. 

* * * * * 

■ 17. In § 173.302b, add paragraph (f) to 

read as follows: 

§ 173.302b Additional requirements for 

shipment of non-liquefied (permanent) 

compressed gases in UN pressure 

receptacles. 

* * * * * 

(f) Methane, compressed, or natural 

gas, compressed, UN1971. Methane, 

compressed, or natural gas, compressed, 

is authorized in a UN seamless steel 

pressure receptacle under the following 

conditions: 

(1) For methane, and for natural gas 

with a methane content of 98.0 percent 

or greater— 

(i) The maximum tensile strength of 

the UN seamless steel pressure 

receptacle may not exceed 1100 MPa 

(159,542 psi); and 

(ii) The contents are commercially 

free of corroding components. 

(2) For natural gas with a methane 

content of less than 98.0 percent— 

(i) The maximum tensile strength of 

the UN seamless steel pressure 

receptacle may not exceed 950 MPa 

(137,750 psi); 

(ii) Each discharge end of a UN 

refillable seamless steel tube must be 

equipped with an internal drain tube; 

and 

(iii) The moisture content and 

concentration of the corroding 

components must conform to the 

requirements in § 173.301b(a)(2). 

PART 178—SPECIFICATIONS FOR 

PACKAGINGS 

■ 18. The authority citation for part 178 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR 

1.81 and 1.97. 

■ 19. In § 178.601: 

■ a. Redesignate paragraphs (g)(6) 

through (8) as paragraphs (g)(7) through 

(9); 

■ b. Add new paragraph (g)(6); and 

■ c. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraph (g)(8). 

The addition and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 178.601 General requirements. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(6) Selective testing of combination 

packagings for articles containing small 

arms ammunition: Variation 6. 

Variations in inner and intermediate 

packagings are permitted in packages for 

articles containing Cartridges, small 

arms (UN0012); Cartridges for tools, 

blank (UN0014); Primers, cap type 

(UN0044); and Cases, cartridge empty 

with primer (UN0055) packed in inner 

packages without further testing of the 

package under the following conditions: 

(i) The package has been tested 

containing only the articles to be 

transported without intermediate 

containment; 

(ii) The outer packaging must have 

passed the stacking test set forth in 

§ 178.606 when empty, i.e., without 

cushioning or inner or intermediate 

packagings, with the test mass of 

identical packages being the mass of the 

package filled with the articles; 

(iii) Only articles tested without 

intermediate containment may be 

transported; however, a variety of 

articles tested in this fashion may be 

assembled in a package with 

intermediate containment; 

(iv) No articles demonstrate a loss of 

material in testing; and 

(v) The completed package does not 

exceed the marked maximum gross 

mass of the package. 

* * * * * 

(8) Approval of selective testing. In 

addition to the provisions of paragraphs 

(g)(1) through (7) of this section, the 

Associate Administrator may approve 

the selective testing of packagings that 

differ only in minor respects from a 

tested type. 

* * * * * 

PART 180—CONTINUING 

QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE 

OF PACKAGINGS 

■ 20. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR 

1.81 and 1.97. 

■ 21. In § 180.205: 

■ a. Add paragraph (c)(5); 

■ b. Remove the word ‘‘or’’ at the end 

of paragraph (d)(4); 

■ c. Redesignate paragraph (d)(5) as 

paragraph (d)(6) and add new paragraph 

(d)(5); 

■ d. Revise paragraphs (e)(2) and (f); 

■ e. Redesignate paragraphs (h) through 

(j) as paragraphs (i) through (k) and add 

new paragraph (h); and 

■ f. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraphs (i)(1), (j)(2)(i)(C), and (j)(3). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 180.205 General requirements for 

requalification of specification cylinders. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(5) Each 3-series specification 

cylinder that is horizontally mounted on 

a motor vehicle or in a framework and 

that is: 12 feet or longer; has an outside 

diameter greater than or equal to 18 

inches; and is supported by the neck 

mounting surface during transportation 

in commerce must be inspected at the 

time of requalification in accordance 

with CGA C–23 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this 

subchapter). 

(d) * * * 

(5) For a cylinder subject to paragraph 

(c)(5) of this section, if there is visible 

corrosion around the neck or under the 

flange/sleeve, as outlined in Section 4.2 

of CGA C–23, it must be removed and 

examined in accordance with CGA C–23 

before being returned to service; or 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(2) Requalified in accordance with 

this section, regardless of the date of the 

previous requalification. When 

requalification is performed using 

ultrasonic examination, the cylinder 

must be visually inspected in 

accordance with paragraph (e)(1) of this 

section; 

* * * * * 

(f) Visual inspection. Except as 

otherwise provided in this subpart, each 

time a cylinder is pressure tested, it 

must be given an internal and external 

visual inspection. 

(1) The visual inspection must be 

performed in accordance with the 

following standards (all IBR, see § 171.7 

of this subchapter): CGA C–6 for steel 

and nickel cylinders; CGA C–6.1 for 

seamless aluminum cylinders; CGA C– 

6.2 for fiber reinforced composite 

special permit cylinders; CGA C–6.3 for 

low pressure aluminum cylinders; CGA 

C–8 for DOT 3HT cylinders; and CGA 

C–13 for DOT 8 series cylinders. 

(2) If a cylinder or tube is requalified 

by ultrasonic examination, only an 

external visual inspection is required. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 15667 

(3) For each cylinder with a coating or 

attachments that would inhibit 

inspection of the cylinder, the coating or 

attachments must be removed before 

performing the visual inspection. 

(4) Each cylinder subject to visual 

inspection must be approved, rejected, 

or condemned according to the criteria 

in the applicable CGA standard. 

(5) In addition to other requirements 

prescribed in this paragraph (f), each 

specification cylinder manufactured of 

aluminum alloy 6351–T6 and used in 

self-contained underwater breathing 

apparatus (SCUBA), self-contained 

breathing apparatus (SCBA), or oxygen 

service must be inspected for sustained 

load cracking in accordance with 

appendix C to this part at the first 

scheduled five-year requalification 

period after January 1, 2007, and every 

five years thereafter. 

(6) Except in association with an 

authorized repair, removal of wall 

thickness via grinding, sanding, or other 

means is not permitted. Removal of 

paint or loose material to prepare the 

cylinder for inspection is permitted (i.e., 

shot blasting). 

(7) Chasing of cylinder threads to 

clean them is permitted, but removal of 

metal must not occur. Re-tapping of 

cylinder threads is not permitted, except 

by the original manufacturer, as 

provided in § 180.212. 

* * * * * 

(h) Ultrasonic examination (UE). 

Requalification of cylinders and tubes 

using UE must be performed in 

accordance with CGA C–20 (IBR, see 

§ 171.7 of this subchapter). 

(i) * * * 

(1) Except as provided in paragraphs 

(i)(3) and (4) of this section, a cylinder 

that is rejected may not be marked as 

meeting the requirements of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(j) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(C) As an alternative to the stamping 

or labeling as described in this 

paragraph (j)(2), at the direction of the 

owner, the requalifier may render the 

cylinder incapable of holding pressure. 

If a condemned cylinder contains 

hazardous materials, the requalifier 

must stamp the cylinder 

‘‘CONDEMNED’’ and affix a readily 

visible label on the cylinder stating: 

‘‘UN REJECTED, RETURNING TO 

ORIGIN FOR PROPER DISPOSITION.’’ 

The requalifier may only transport the 

condemned cylinder by private motor 

vehicle carriage to a facility capable of 

safely removing the contents of the 

cylinder. 

* * * * * 

(3) No person may remove, obliterate, 

or alter the required condemnation 

communication of paragraph (j)(2) of 

this section. 

* * * * * 

■ 22. In § 180.207, revise paragraph 

(d)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 180.207 Requirements for requalification 

of UN pressure receptacles. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) Seamless steel. (i) Each seamless 

steel UN pressure receptacle, including 

pressure receptacles exceeding 150 L 

capacity installed in multiple-element 

gas containers (MEGCs) or in other 

service, must be requalified in 

accordance with ISO 6406:2005(E) (IBR, 

see § 171.7 of this subchapter). 

However, UN cylinders with a tensile 

strength greater than or equal to 950 

MPa must be requalified by ultrasonic 

examination in accordance with ISO 

6406:2005(E). For seamless steel 

cylinders and tubes, the internal 

inspection and hydraulic pressure test 

may be replaced by a procedure 

conforming to ISO 16148:2016(E) (IBR, 

see § 171.7 of this subchapter). 

(ii) Each seamless steel UN pressure 

receptacle that is horizontally mounted 

on a motor vehicle or in a framework 

and that: is 12 feet or longer; has an 

outside diameter greater than or equal to 

18 inches; and is supported by a neck 

mounting surface during transportation 

must be inspected at the time of 

requalification in accordance with CGA 

C–23 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this 

subchapter). Notwithstanding the 

periodic inspection, if the seamless steel 

UN pressure receptacle shows visible 

corrosion, as outlined in Section 4.2 of 

CGA C–23, around the neck or under 

the flange/sleeve, then it must be 

removed and examined in accordance 

with Section 6 of CGA C–23 prior to 

returning to service. 

* * * * * 

■ 23. In § 180.209: 

■ a. Revise table 1 to paragraph (a) and 

paragraph (d); and 

■ b. In paragraph (m), revise the 

introductory text and the heading of the 

table. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 180.209 Requirements for requalification 

of specification cylinders. 

(a) * * * 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)—REQUALIFICATION OF CYLINDERS 1

Specification under which cylinder 

was made 

Minimum test pressure 

(psig) 2

Requalification period 

(years) 

3 ...................................................... 3000 psig ............................................................................................... 5. 

3A, 3AA ........................................... 5/3 times service pressure, except non-corrosive service (see 

§ 180.209(g)).

5, 10, or 12 (see § 180.209(b), (f), 

(h), and (j)). 

3AL .................................................. 5/3 times service pressure .................................................................... 5 or 12 (see § 180.209(j) and 

(m) 4). 

3AX, 3AAX ...................................... 5/3 times service pressure .................................................................... 5. 

3B, 3BN ........................................... 2 times service pressure (see § 180.209(g)) ......................................... 5 or 10 (see § 180.209(f)). 

3E .................................................... Test not required.

3HT .................................................. 5/3 times service pressure .................................................................... 3 (see §§ 180.209(k) and 

180.213(c)). 

3T .................................................... 5/3 times service pressure or UE3 ........................................................ 5. 

4AA480 ............................................ 2 times service pressure (see § 180.209(g)) ......................................... 5 or 10 (see § 180.209(h)). 

4B, 4BA, 4BW, 4B–240ET .............. 2 times service pressure, except non-corrosive service (see 

§ 180.209(g)).

5, 7, 10, or 12 (see § 180.209(e), 

(f), and (j)). 

4D, 4DA, 4DS ................................. 2 times service pressure ....................................................................... 5. 

4E .................................................... 2 times service pressure, except non-corrosive service (see 

§ 180.209(g)).

5, 10, or 12 (see § 180.209(e)). 

4L .................................................... Test not required.

8, 8AL .............................................. ................................................................................................................ 10 or 20 (see § 180.209(i)). 

Exemption or special permit cylinder.See current exemption or special permit, or UE3 as allowed by CGA 

C–20 (2014).

See current exemption or special 

permit. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2
15668 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)—REQUALIFICATION OF CYLINDERS 1—Continued 

Specification under which cylinder 

was made 

Minimum test pressure 

(psig) 2

Requalification period 

(years) 

Foreign cylinder (see § 173.301(j) 

of this subchapter for restrictions 

on use).

As marked on cylinder, but not less than 5/3 of any service or working pressure marking.5 (see §§ 180.209(l) and 

180.213(d)(2)). 

1Any cylinder not exceeding two inches outside diameter and less than two feet in length is excepted from volumetric expansion test. 2For cylinders not marked with a service pressure, see § 173.301a(b) of this subchapter. 

3 Minimum test pressure is not applicable to those cylinders and tubes requalified using ultrasonic examination. 

4This provision does not apply to cylinders used for carbon dioxide, fire extinguisher, or other industrial gas service. 

* * * * * 

(d) Cylinders 5.44 kg (12 lb) or less 

with service pressures of 300 psig or 

less. A cylinder of 5.44 kg (12 lb) or less 

water capacity authorized for service 

pressure of 300 psig or less must be 

given a complete external visual 

inspection at the time periodic 

requalification becomes due. External 

visual inspection must be in accordance 

with CGA C–6 or CGA C–6.1 (IBR, see 

§ 171.7 of this subchapter). The cylinder 

may be proof pressure tested. The test 

is successful if the cylinder, when 

examined under test pressure, does not 

display a defect described in 

§ 180.205(j)(1)(ii) or (iii). Upon 

successful completion of the test and 

inspection, the cylinder must be marked 

in accordance with § 180.213. 

* * * * * 

(m) DOT–3AL cylinders manufactured 

of 6351–T6 aluminum alloy. In addition 

to the periodic requalification and 

marking described in § 180.205, each 

cylinder manufactured of aluminum 

alloy 6351–T6 used in self-contained 

underwater breathing apparatus 

(SCUBA), self-contained breathing 

apparatus (SCBA), or oxygen service 

must be requalified and inspected for 

sustained load cracking in accordance 

with the non-destructive examination 

method described in the following table. 

Each cylinder with sustained load 

cracking that has expanded into the 

neck threads must be condemned in 

accordance with § 180.205(j). This 

paragraph (m) does not apply to 

cylinders used for carbon dioxide, fire 

extinguisher, or other industrial gas 

service. 

Table 4 to Paragraph (m)— 

Requalification and Inspection of DOT– 

3AL Cylinders Made of Aluminum 

Alloy 6351–T6 

* * * * * 

■ 24. In § 180.212, add paragraph (a)(4) 

and revise paragraph (b)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.212 Repair of seamless DOT 3-series 

specification cylinders and seamless UN 

pressure receptacles. 

(a) * * * 

(4) DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes 

with an outside diameter greater than 

95⁄8 in (244.5 mm) may be processed by 

a repair facility for derating the marked 

service pressure in accordance with 

CGA C–27 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this 

subchapter). 

(b) * * * 

(2) External rethreading of a DOT 

3AX, 3AAX, or 3T specification 

cylinder or a UN pressure receptacle, 

and external threading of a seamless 

DOT 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T specification 

cylinder or seamless UN pressure 

receptacle originally manufactured 

without external threads; or the internal 

rethreading of a DOT–3 series cylinder 

or a seamless UN pressure receptacle 

when performed by a cylinder 

manufacturer of these types of 

cylinders. The repair work must be 

performed under the supervision of an 

independent inspection agency. Upon 

completion of the rethreading or postmanufacture threading, the threads must 

be gauged in accordance with Federal 

Standard H–28 or an equivalent 

standard containing the same 

specification limits. The rethreaded 

cylinder or UN pressure receptacle must 

be stamped clearly and legibly with the 

words ‘‘RETHREAD’’ and a postmanufacture threaded cylinder or UN 

pressure receptacle must be stamped 

clearly and legibly with the words 

‘‘POST–THREAD’’, on the shoulder, top 

head, or neck. No DOT specification 

cylinder or UN pressure receptacle may 

be rethreaded more than one time 

without approval of the Associate 

Administrator. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on February 13, 

2024, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 

1.97(b). 

Tristan H. Brown, 

Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03290 Filed 3–1–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2