Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 41179 

1May 2020 National Occupational Employment 

and Wage Estimates United States, Occupational 

Employment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

U.S. Department of Labor, https://www.bls.gov/oes/ 

current/oes_nat.htm#15-0000, last accessed July 23, 

2021. 2Employer Costs for Employee Compensation by 

ownership (Dec. 2020), available at https://

www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t01.htm (accessed 

July 23, 2021). 

these estimates, NHTSA calculates an 

average of 265 hours per State, with an 

annual labor cost of $8,700. There are 51 

respondents per year (the 50 States and 

the District of Columbia). Therefore, 

total annual burden hours for 

maintenance and infrastructure is 

estimated to be 13,515 hours (51 

respondents × 265 hours). The total 

annual maintenance and infrastructure 

labor cost per year is estimated to be 

$443,700 ($8,700 × 51). 

To ensure that the information 

contained in the NDR is accurate, States 

sometimes submit a ‘‘clean file’’ which 

is a confirmation of all drivers of that 

State who should be listed in the NDR 

file. NHTSA estimates that an average of 

28 clean files will be submitted 

annually by States. States use SFTP to 

submit this information, and NHTSA 

estimates it takes an IT specialist 8 

hours to prepare and run the data. 

NHTSA estimates the cost for IT 

personnel burden hours using the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics’ mean wage 

estimate for Software and Web 

Developers, Programmers, and Testers 

(Standard Occupational Classification 

#15–1250, May 2020) of $52.86.1 The 

Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 

for State and local government workers, 

wages represent 61.9% of total 

compensation.2 Therefore, the total 

hourly cost associated with the IT 

burden hours is estimated to be $85.40 

($52.86 ÷ 61.9%) per hour. The total 

annual burden hours to prepare and 

submit clean files is 224 hours (8 × 28). 

The total annual clean file labor cost per 

year is estimated to be $19,130 ($85.40 

× 224). 

Submission type Annual 

submissions 

Estimated 

burden per 

submission 

Average 

hourly labor 

cost 

Labor cost per 

submission 

Total burden 

hours 

Total labor 

costs 

Maintenance and Infrastructure ............... 51 265 N/A $8,700 13,515 $443,700 

Clean files ................................................ 28 8 85.40 683.20 224 19,130 

Total .................................................. 51 ........................ ........................ ........................ 13,739 462,830 

Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: 

There are no annual costs. 

Public Comments Invited: You are 

asked to comment on any aspect of this 

information collection, including (a) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility 

and clarity of the information collection; 

and (d) ways minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology, e.g., permitting 

electronic submission of responses. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as 

amended; and 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT 

Order 1351.29A. 

Chou-Lin Chen, 

Associate Administrator for the National 

Center for Statistics and Analysis. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14725 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2022–0043; Notice No. 

2022–06] 

Hazardous Materials: Request for 

Information on Electronic Hazard 

Communication Alternatives 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), Department of Transportation 

(DOT). 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: PHMSA seeks input on the 

potential use of electronic 

communication as an alternative to 

current, physical documentation 

requirements for hazard 

communication. 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before 

September 9, 2022. Comments received 

after that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by the Docket Number 

PHMSA–2021–0043 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management System; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

West Building, Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, Routing Symbol M–30, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Docket Management 

System; Room W12–140 on the ground 

floor of the West Building, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and Docket 

Number (PHMSA–2022–0043) for this 

notice. To avoid duplication, please use 

only one of these four methods. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) and will 

include any personal information you 

provide. 

Docket: For access to the dockets to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http://

www.regulations.gov or DOT’s Docket 

Operations Office (see ADDRESSES). 

Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 

U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments 

from the public. DOT posts these 

comments, without edit, including any 

personal information the commenter 

provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, 

as described in the system of records 

notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can 

be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/ 

privacy. 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI): CBI is commercial or financial 

information that is both customarily and 

actually treated as private by its owner. 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
41180 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 

from public disclosure. If your 

comments responsive to this notice 

contain commercial or financial 

information that is customarily treated 

as private, that you actually treat as 

private, and that is relevant or 

responsive to this notice, it is important 

that you clearly designate the submitted 

comments as CBI. Please mark each 

page of your submission containing CBI 

as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ PHMSA will treat such 

marked submissions as confidential 

under FOIA, and they will not be placed 

in the public docket of this notice. 

Submissions containing CBI should be 

sent to Eamonn Patrick, Standards and 

Rulemaking Division, (202) 366–8553, 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. PHMSA will place any 

commentary not specifically designated 

as CBI into the public docket for this 

notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eamonn Patrick, Standards and 

Rulemaking Division, (202) 366–8553, 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Executive Summary 

PHMSA is considering revisions to 

the Hazardous Materials Regulations 

(HMR), which would authorize a 

performance-based electronic 

communication alternative to the 

existing physical, paper-based hazard 

communication requirements. This 

revision is meant to facilitate and 

promote the use of electronic hazard 

communication. For the purpose of this 

request for information (RFI), ‘‘hazard 

communication’’ means shipping 

papers, train consists, dangerous goods 

manifests, notifications to the pilot in 

command, and emergency response 

information, as well as associated 

administrative documentation including 

Department of Transportation (DOT) 

Special Permits (SPs), approvals, and 

registrations. 

The HMR currently require that 

hazard communication be maintained as 

physical, printed documents during 

transportation. However, widely 

adopted technologies could supplement, 

or replace, the existing paper-based 

hazard communication system, and 

offer opportunities for improved 

emergency response and oversight, as 

well as increased efficiency in the 

operations of transportation networks. 

PHMSA anticipates that electronic 

communication would improve 

transportation safety, efficiency, and 

effectiveness by providing electronic 

access to the same required information 

currently contained in hazard 

communication documents. With this 

RFI, PHMSA seeks your input, to help 

determine the most effective 

mechanisms and potential impediments 

for implementing electronic hazard 

communication. 

II. Background 

PHMSA’s mission is to protect people 

and the environment by advancing the 

safe transportation of energy and other 

hazardous materials that are essential to 

our daily lives. To achieve this mission, 

PHMSA establishes national policy, sets 

and enforces HMR standards, educates, 

and conducts research to prevent 

hazardous materials incidents. In doing 

so, PHMSA collaborates closely with 

other Federal agencies and operating 

administrations, including the Federal 

Motor Carriers Safety Administration, 

Federal Railroad Administration, 

Federal Aviation Administration, and 

United States Coast Guard. Federal 

hazardous materials law authorizes the 

Secretary to ‘‘prescribe regulations for 

the safe transportation, including 

security, of hazardous materials in 

intrastate, interstate, and foreign 

commerce’’ 49 U.S.C. 5103(b)(1). The 

Secretary has delegated this authority to 

PHMSA in 49 CFR 1.97(b). 

The HMR are designed to achieve 

three primary goals: 

(1) Ensure that hazardous materials 

are packaged and handled safely and 

securely during transportation. 

(2) Effectively communicate the 

hazards of the materials being 

transported to transportation workers 

and emergency responders. 

(3) Minimize the consequences of an 

accident or incident, should one occur. 

The HMR provide hazard 

communication requirements for the 

transport of hazardous materials in 

subparts C through G of part 172 of the 

HMR, with modal specific requirements 

in parts 174 to 177. This RFI addresses 

the following topics: 

Citation Topic 

Part 172, subpart C ........................ Shipping papers. 

Part 172, subpart G ........................ Emergency response information. 

§ 174.26 ........................................... Train consists. 

§ 175.33 ........................................... Notifications to the pilot in command. 

§ 176.30 ........................................... Dangerous cargo manifests. 

§ 177.817 ......................................... Shipping papers in motor vehicles. 

This RFI also addresses documents 

that accompany shipments that may not 

have a direct emergency response 

purpose, but either commonly 

accompany shipments or are present on 

transportation vehicles, including DOT 

SPs, approvals, and registrations. 

The HMR requires that all copies of 

the shipping papers used for 

transportation purposes must be legible 

and printed (manually or mechanically) 

in English (see § 172.201(a)(2)). Section 

172.201(a)(5) authorizes rail carriers to 

accept shipping papers information 

either telephonically (e.g., voice 

communications and facsimiles) or by 

electronic data interchange (EDI), 

however the train consist containing the 

hazardous materials description carried 

by the train crew must still be 

maintained as a physical document (see 

§ 174.26). Emergency response 

information is required to be maintained 

in the same manner as a shipping paper, 

i.e., printed manually or mechanically 

in English (see § 172.602(c)). 

Prior to this RFI, PHMSA considered 

various alternatives to current 

requirements for paper-based hazardous 

materials documentation, primarily 

focusing on electronic shipping papers. 

Previous activities related to electronic 

shipping papers include: 

(1) The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Hazardous Waste EManifest, 

(2) Current DOT–SPs for electronic 

hazard communications information 

used in highway and rail transportation, 

(3) The Hazardous Materials 

Automated Cargo Communications for 

Efficient and Safety Shipments (HM– 

ACCESS) pilot project, 

(4) Integrated Communications, 

Information and Support Platform for 

Hazardous Materials Stakeholders 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 41181 

ahttps://www.epa.gov/e-manifest. 

Across Multiple Modes (HazSMART) 

research, and 

(5) Transport Canada’s (TC) ongoing 

Regulatory Sandbox on Electronic 

Shipping Documents. 

These activities provide a baseline for 

PHMSA’s development of this RFI. All 

documents discussed here are available 

for review in the RFI docket. 

EPA Hazardous Waste E-Manifest 

The EPA developed the Hazardous 

Waste Electronic Manifest (e-Manifest) 

System to aid in the cradle-to-grave 

tracking of hazardous waste.a EPA 

identified the following benefits of the 

e-Manifest system: 

• Cost savings, 

• Accurate and more timely 

information on waste shipments, 

• Rapid notification of discrepancies 

or other problems related to a particular 

shipment, 

• Creation of a single hub for one-stop 

reporting of manifest data for use by 

EPA and states, 

• Increased effectiveness of 

compliance monitoring of waste 

shipments by regulators, and 

• Potential for integrating manifest 

reporting with the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

biennial reporting process and other 

federal and state information systems. 

The development and maintenance 

costs of the e-Manifest system is offset 

by user fees charged to hazardous waste 

manifest users. 

While the goal of the EPA e-Manifest 

system is related to this DOT-led 

electronic hazard communication 

project, there are substantial differences. 

First, the e-Manifest system is not 

designed to provide information to 

emergency response organizations 

during a hazardous material 

transportation incident, which is a 

primary purpose of DOT hazard 

communication documents. Also, DOT 

has no legal authority to charge user fees 

for an electronic hazard communication 

system. Finally, hazardous wastes are 

only a small subset of the approximately 

1.2 million hazardous materials 

shipments that transit the United States 

every day. Despite these differences, the 

successful implementation of the eManifest system is an instructive 

example for transitioning from a paperintensive process to a national 

electronic manifest system. 

DOT Special Permits 

PHMSA safely allows technological 

innovation through its special permit 

program. Special permits set forth 

requirements for performance of 

functions not otherwise allowed by—or 

a variance to—the requirements of the 

HMR. These functions must either (1) 

achieve an equivalent level of safety to 

that required under the regulations, or 

(2) if a required safety level does not 

exist, do so in a manner consistent with 

the public interest. PHMSA’s Approvals 

and Permits Division is responsible for 

the issuance of DOT special permits in 

accordance with the requirements of 49 

CFR part 107, subpart B. 

The HMR often include performancebased standards that provide the 

regulated community with some 

flexibility in meeting safety 

requirements. Even so, not every 

transportation situation can be 

anticipated and covered under the 

regulations. The hazardous materials 

community is at the cutting edge of 

development of new materials, 

technologies, and innovative ways of 

moving hazardous materials. Special 

permits provide a mechanism for testing 

new technologies, promoting increased 

transportation efficiency and 

productivity, and ensuring economic 

competitiveness without compromising 

safety. In this way, they allow the 

hazardous materials industry to 

integrate new products and technologies 

into production and the transportation 

stream safely, quickly, and effectively. 

PHMSA has issued several DOT–SPs 

in recent years related to the 

maintenance of hazard communication 

information in an electronic format. For 

rail transportation, PHMSA issued 

DOT–SPs which permit train crews to 

maintain the train consist (required by 

§ 174.26) on an electronic device (e.g., a 

smartphone or tablet) carried by the 

train crew in the locomotive cab, and to 

transmit the train consist information 

electronically to emergency responders 

or other authorized Federal, state, or 

local officials in the event of an 

incident, accident, or inspection. These 

SPs include: 

• DOT–SP 20954 to BNSF Railway 

Company, 

• DOT–SP 21053 to Canadian 

National Railway Company, 

• DOT–SP 21046 to CSX 

Transportation, 

• DOT–SP 21059 to Union Pacific, 

and 

• DOT–SP 21110 to Norfolk 

Southern. 

For highway transportation, PHMSA 

issued DOT–SP 15747 to United Parcel 

Service (UPS). Under this SP, the 

physical shipping papers and 

emergency response information can be 

replaced with a document instructing 

responders to call a specific phone 

number and provide the trailer’s unique 

identification number. The call center is 

then required to provide shipping 

papers and emergency response 

information in a single electronic 

transmission within five (5) minutes. 

The types and quantities of hazardous 

materials authorized for transportation 

in accordance with DOT–SP 15747 are 

limited, and do not encompass all, or 

even most, types and quantities of 

hazardous materials transported by 

highway in the United States. 

HM–ACCESS 

The John A. Volpe National 

Transportation Systems Center (Volpe 

Center) conducted the Hazardous 

Materials Automated Cargo 

Communications for Efficient and Safe 

Shipments (HM–ACCESS) project from 

2011–2015 and issued a report to 

Congress on behalf of PHMSA in 2016. 

The HM–ACCESS project consisted of 

consultation with stakeholders; pilot 

tests with hazardous materials offerors, 

carriers, inspectors, and emergency 

responders; and a survey of 

stakeholders. HM–ACCESS determined 

that many shippers and carriers in the 

rail, vessel, and air modes already have 

electronic systems in place that could be 

used to accept and transmit hazard 

communication information. Highway 

shippers and carriers are a more 

complex, heterogeneous group, so not 

all entities would be able to accept and 

transmit hazard communication 

information. 

Since rail and air modes already 

utilize electronic systems, most 

inspectors who perform compliance 

inspections at rail and air transportation 

facilities have electronic devices that 

can receive and display hazard 

communication information. Inspectors 

who conduct container inspections in 

port areas before and after vessel 

transportation were found to have more 

limited access to electronic devices. 

Many highway inspectors who conduct 

motor vehicle inspections have 

electronic devices in their vehicles that 

could be used to receive and display 

electronic hazard communication 

information. However, the readiness of 

highway inspectors to utilize electronic 

hazard communication is less certain 

due to the lower usage rate of electronic 

systems by highway carriers and 

potential connectivity issues. 

The report found that professional 

emergency responders in urban areas 

generally have access to electronic 

devices capable of receiving and 

displaying hazard communication 

information, as well as high confidence 

that their response areas are covered by 

data networks without connectivity 

issues. But volunteer organizations, 

especially those in rural areas, may lack 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
41182 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 

both the required systems and necessary 

data connectivity. These rural and 

volunteer organizations would 

potentially need to rely upon hazard 

communication relayed via voice-only 

communication from their dispatcher, if 

a physical hazard communication 

document was not available at the scene 

of an incident. 

The HM–ACCESS report found that 

the implementation of a performancebased electronic hazard communication 

standard could provide safety and 

economic benefits, but these benefits 

would depend on numerous variables. 

Potential safety benefits identified in the 

report include more timely provision of 

information during an emergency, 

increased accuracy of hazard 

communication, increased redundancy 

if the electronic system provides 

multiple methods of information access, 

and improved access to hazard 

communication information away from 

the vehicle involved. The report found 

that the economic costs and benefits of 

implementation are likely to vary across 

different modes, and would depend on 

the size of the company involved, 

previous investments made to electronic 

systems, the range of hazardous 

materials involved, and the complexity 

of the system, among other factors. 

HazSMART Research Project 

PHMSA funded the HazSMART 

research project and received a final 

report from Factor, Inc. and Spill 

Center, Inc. in 2020. The objective of 

HazSMART was to develop and deploy 

technologies that could connect 

hazardous materials transportation 

industry stakeholders during scenarios 

in which sharing hazard and shipment 

information is needed to protect public 

health and safety, such as in hazardous 

materials incidents. The project 

developed a central platform for 

management of shipping, transport, 

geographic information systems, and 

incident data. The HazSMART platform 

included a response dashboard, which 

provided protective action distances to 

emergency responders and other 

authorized stakeholders. While the 

HazSMART project was not intended to 

develop an electronic hazard 

communication standard, participants 

in an exercise with emergency 

responders noted that the technologies 

developed in the HazSMART project 

have the capability to receive, send, and 

display required shipping paper 

elements and could be further 

developed into an electronic hazard 

communication system. 

Transport Canada (TC) Regulatory 

Sandbox on Electronic Shipping 

Documents 

Since early 2020, TC has authorized a 

pilot project to evaluate electronic 

hazard communication for highway, 

rail, and air hazardous materials 

transportation. This pilot project, 

known as the ‘‘Regulatory Sandbox on 

Electronic Shipping Documents,’’ was 

conducted by three rail carriers, three 

highway carriers, and one Unmanned 

Aerial Systems carrier in accordance 

with Equivalency Certificates (ECs) 

issued by Transport Canada. The ECs 

authorize each carrier to maintain and 

transmit shipping paper information in 

an electronic format, subject to the 

limitations and conditions of each EC. 

Important features of the Transport 

Canada ECs include standardized 

vehicle markings and redundant 

electronic hazard communication 

systems, able to provide necessary 

information to emergency responders in 

multiple formats. 

III. Questions 

PHMSA requests information on the 

implications of authorizing electronic 

hazard communication. For the purpose 

of this RFI, paper ‘‘hazard 

communication’’ means shipping 

papers, train consists, dangerous goods 

manifests, notifications to the pilot in 

command, and emergency response 

information, as well as associated 

administrative documentation including 

DOT–SPs, approvals, and registrations. 

The questions below are divided into 

two sections: Section A for emergency 

response and inspection organizations, 

and Section B for organizations who 

offer, transport, or facilitate the 

movement of hazardous materials. 

PHMSA requests that you provide as 

much information as possible and 

answer as many of the questions as 

applicable. 

We encourage trade associations, 

labor unions, and other organizations 

that represent companies and workers 

in the emergency response, hazardous 

materials inspection, hazardous material 

transportation, and technology fields to 

respond as well. If you represent such 

an organization, please choose the 

appropriate section; for the 

‘‘Identification’’ questions, briefly 

describe the types of companies and 

workers that your organization 

represents. 

A. Emergency Response Community and 

Authorized Officials 

Note: In this section, the terms 

‘‘inspectors’’ and ‘‘inspection 

organizations’’ refer to any local or state 

entity that is authorized to receive and 

review shipping paper records, but does 

not typically respond to incidents, 

accidents, or other hazardous material 

transportation emergencies. 

1. Identification 

a. What type of inspection or 

emergency response organization do 

you represent (e.g., law enforcement, 

fire and rescue (including volunteer), 

emergency medical services, specialized 

hazardous materials incident response 

organization, transportation and public 

works, towing and recovery, etc.)? 

i. What level of hazardous materials 

response training do you have? 

ii. For emergency responders, do you 

rely on outside support (e.g., state, 

federal, contract organization) for 

hazardous materials incident response? 

Please explain. 

iii. Approximately how many 

employees work in your response or 

inspection organization? 

b. Which description below best 

describes your typical response or 

inspection area population density and 

layout? 

i. Urban, 

ii. Rural, 

iii. Suburban, 

iv. Not applicable (Varies widely; not 

limited to a specific geographic 

location.) 

2. Background (Responsibilities and 

Capabilities) 

a. Please list or identify any major 

transportation hubs that handle 

hazardous materials (e.g., airports, ports, 

rail yards) or routes (e.g., interstate 

highways, rail corridors) contained in 

your response or inspection area. 

b. For responders, how many 

incidents involving hazardous materials 

transportation do you respond to per 

year, on average? What percentage of 

your total annual responses is this? 

c. For inspectors, how many 

hazardous materials compliance 

inspections or investigations do you 

conduct per year, on average? 

d. Approximately what percentage of 

your response or inspection area is 

covered by a wireless technology 

network that supports portable 

electronic devices capable of 

communications, data processing, and/ 

or computing? 

e. Approximately what percentage of 

your response or inspection area is 

covered by a voice-only radio network? 

f. Does your organization currently 

issue, or do persons in your 

organization have access to, portable 

electronic devices in vehicles capable 

of: 

(1) receiving and displaying hazard 

communication information? 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 41183 

(2) accessing the internet consistently 

during a response or inspection? 

i. If yes to either, describe the types 

of devices. Are they available to all 

persons or units, or only a subset? 

ii. If yes to either, do you currently 

use an electronic system to receive and 

display electronic hazard 

communication that specifically 

identifies the hazardous materials 

present in a transport vehicle or 

container? If so, please identify and 

describe the system, especially how the 

data is received and transmitted. 

iii. If no to either, are there budgetary 

or other constraints that would prevent 

you from upgrading your equipment to 

accommodate an electronic hazard 

communication system? Please describe. 

3. Responding to a Hazardous Materials 

Incident (Needs and Systems) 

Note: Inspectors, please see the next 

section (Section 4). 

a. What additional hazard 

communication information would aid 

in emergency response, beyond what is 

currently required in the HMR? What 

currently required hazard 

communication information is 

unnecessary for emergency response? 

Please provide detailed examples. 

b. How often are paper-based hazard 

communication documents inaccessible 

during a hazardous materials incident 

response? What are the reasons for this 

inaccessibility? What steps are taken to 

obtain needed information if the 

document is not available during an 

incident? 

c. Do you use existing system(s) 

designed to provide electronic 

information to emergency responders 

arriving at a scene? And if so, which 

system(s)? Could these systems be 

adapted for use in transmission of 

hazard communication information? 

d. What role do dispatchers play in 

obtaining hazard communication 

information in an incident response for 

your organization? Do you experience 

difficulties in relaying information from 

a dispatcher to responders at a scene? If 

yes, please explain. 

e. What are the differences in type, 

format, and content of hazard 

communication you need to respond to 

incidents in different modes (e.g., 

highway versus rail, vessel, aircraft at 

airport)? 

f. To respond appropriately to an 

incident involving mixed freight and 

less than truckload (LTL) in the 

highway mode, do you need additional 

information on the non-hazardous 

materials that are being transported 

alongside the hazardous material? 

g. Are you concerned that increased 

reliance on electronic devices for 

emergency response purposes would 

create a distraction during emergency 

responses? Why or why not? 

4. Conducting a Hazardous Materials 

Inspection (Needs and Systems) 

Note: emergency response 

organizations, please see previous 

section (Section 3). 

a. What additional hazard 

communication information would aid 

in inspections, beyond what is currently 

required in the HMR? What currently 

required hazard communication 

information is unnecessary for 

inspection? Please provide detailed 

examples. 

b. How often are paper-based hazard 

communication documents inaccessible 

during a hazardous materials 

inspection? What are the reasons for the 

lack of information availability? What 

steps do you take if documents are not 

available during an inspection? 

c. Do you currently use electronic 

systems for inspections unrelated to 

hazardous materials and/or hazardous 

material inspections? If so, please 

describe. Could systems non-hazardous 

material inspections be adapted to 

enhance hazardous material 

inspections? If so, please describe. 

d. Are you concerned that increased 

reliance on electronic devices for 

inspection purposes would create a 

distraction during the inspection? Why 

or why not? 

5. Preferences for an Electronic Hazard 

Communication Alternative 

a. How would you like to receive 

hazard communication documents if 

electronic transmission were permitted? 

What format or means would best suit 

your organization’s current equipment 

and capabilities? 

b. What format or means would you 

prefer for the electronic transmission of 

hazard communication, if there were no 

limitations on cost or capabilities? 

c. Should the information content and 

format for electronic hazard 

communication be standardized across 

all modes, to facilitate recognition in an 

emergency or inspection? 

d. Do you have any recommendations 

for communicating that electronic 

hazard communication is in use, such as 

a standardized visual aid (e.g., a 

marking or placard) on the exterior of 

the transport vehicle or container, or 

other means? 

e. What is your preference for how 

electronic hazard communication 

documents should be maintained, 

transmitted, and overseen? 

f. What additional costs, if any, would 

there be for your organization to 

successfully utilize electronic hazard 

communication (e.g., new electronic 

devices, upgraded data plans, and 

training)? 

g. Are there certain scenarios in 

which electronic hazard communication 

should not be allowed? If so, please 

provide examples. 

h. Approximately how much 

preparation time would your 

organization need to be capable of using 

electronic hazard communication 

during a hazardous materials incident 

response or inspection? 

i. Do you anticipate new training 

needs to enable the use of electronic 

hazard communication? If so, please 

describe. In particular, describe 

challenges any new training would pose 

for your organization. 

6. Potential Benefits 

a. Are there benefits for having hazard 

communication available electronically? 

Do you have any data that can help us 

quantify your input? How could benefits 

be maximized over paper-based hazard 

communication requirements? 

7. Potential Concerns 

a. What concerns do you have 

regarding the use of an electronic hazard 

communication system in place of 

paper-based hazard communication? 

b. What concerns do you have 

regarding the reliability of a wireless 

technology network in your response or 

inspection area? How should access to 

hazard communication be maintained in 

situations where area utilities are 

disabled? Should persons who use an 

electronic system be required to 

maintain a backup or redundant system? 

c. What concerns do you have 

regarding the interoperability of 

equipment maintained by local/county 

organizations versus state/federal 

organizations? 

d. What concerns do you have 

regarding import shipments into the 

United States having access to an 

electronic hazard communication 

system? 

e. What concerns do you have 

regarding the security of electronic 

hazard communication? 

8. Overall Perspective and Input 

a. Do you support the use of 

electronic hazard communication as an 

alternative to the current paper 

requirements? Please provide your 

reasoning. 

b. Are there any specific knowledge 

gaps or areas of concern that the 

Department of Transportation should 

address, via additional informationgathering or research, before authorizing 

electronic hazard communication on a 

broad basis? 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
41184 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 

c. Is there any additional information 

that you would like to provide to the 

Department of Transportation for 

consideration in the development of an 

electronic hazard communication 

standard? 

B. Hazardous Materials Shippers, 

Carriers, and Logistics Facilitators 

1. Identification 

a. Please provide a general description 

of your business activities as related to 

the transportation of hazardous 

materials (e.g., less than truckload (LTL) 

highway carrier, bulk chemical shipper, 

third-party logistics company, trade 

association, labor union, technology 

provider, etc.). If you are responding on 

behalf of a trade association, labor 

union, or other organization, please 

answer for your entire membership, if 

possible. 

b. In which mode(s) (highway, rail, 

vessel, air) do you offer, transport, or 

facilitate the movement of hazardous 

materials? Please identify all modes 

utilized if multi-modal. 

c. Please estimate the number of 

hazardous materials shipments you 

offer, transport, or provide third-party 

facilitation for, per year. 

d. Please identify the classes, 

divisions and quantities (bulk, nonbulk, or both) of hazardous materials 

you offer, transport, or for which you 

provide third-party facilitation. 

e. How many people does your 

company employ? Is your company (or 

the companies you represent) a small 

business, as defined by the Small 

Business Administration (SBA)? 

f. What percentage of your business 

involves the offering, transportation, or 

third-party facilitation of hazardous 

materials shipments? 

g. Do you offer, transport, or provide 

third-party facilitation for hazardous 

materials transportation solely within a 

single state, between states, or 

internationally? Do the shipments you 

offer, transport, or facilitate cross 

through urban, rural, or suburban areas? 

Please identify all that apply. 

2. General Participation 

a. Would you consider implementing 

electronic hazard communication if the 

HMR authorized it as an option? Why or 

why not? What factors would you 

consider in your determination? Have 

you analyzed the developmental and 

deployment costs with the safety 

benefits? If so, please share any 

available data. 

b. What value could you gain by using 

electronic hazard communication? What 

benefits—financial, organizational, 

safety, etc.—could you obtain by 

implementing electronic hazard 

communication? 

c. Would you be more likely to adopt 

electronic hazard communication if the 

hazard information was maintained and 

transmitted utilizing a: 

i. central DOT or other government 

agency-run repository, 

ii. central third-party run repository, 

iii. performance-based, individual 

shipper/carrier-based standard, 

iv. another option (please describe)? 

d. If a centralized database was used 

to maintain and transmit hazard 

communication information, do you 

have any concerns with DOT/other 

government agencies having permanent, 

historical access to the database, rather 

than having access only during 

transportation? 

e. To what extent would you 

participate in an electronic hazard 

communication alternative that was not 

fully multi-modal (i.e., not all modes are 

authorized for electronic hazard 

communication)? How high of a priority 

should it be for electronic hazard 

communication to encompass all 

modes? Which modes should be the 

highest priority? 

f. To what extent would you use 

electronic hazard communication if the 

applicability for the electronic standard 

was limited to bulk transport of 

hazardous materials (i.e., not permitted 

for LTL and non-bulk shipments)? How 

high of a priority should it be for 

electronic hazard communication to 

encompass all quantities of hazardous 

materials shipments? 

g. Do you anticipate resistance from 

other entities in the hazardous materials 

supply chain, if you decide to adopt 

electronic hazard communication? If 

yes, please describe. 

h. How would implementation of 

electronic hazard communication by 

other entities in the supply chain affect 

your ability to conduct your business 

activities if you choose to continue to 

operate using a paper-based concept of 

operations? 

3. Operational and Economic 

Considerations 

a. Do you have access to the electronic 

equipment and software systems 

required to accept, transmit, and update 

electronic hazard communication? Are 

there scenarios in which you would 

not? How costly would it be to acquire 

the necessary equipment and software 

systems? 

b. What additional costs would there 

be for you to successfully utilize an 

electronic hazard communication 

system, beyond equipment procurement 

(e.g., electronic infrastructure 

maintenance, training, acquisition of 

resources)? 

c. To what extent do you currently 

accept or generate electronic shipping 

documents and utilize electronic 

systems for non-hazardous material 

shipments or operations? 

d. What electronic systems, if any, do 

you utilize for shipment tracking, 

segregation, and consolidation of 

separate hazardous material shipping 

papers into a single dangerous goods 

(DG) manifest or other shipping 

document? 

e. If applicable, describe the 

capabilities of the electronic systems 

you use today. What is their potential 

for adaptation for electronic hazard 

communication? 

f. To what extent would your 

information technology (IT) 

infrastructure be capable of providing 

electronic hazard communication 

capabilities to your employees, as well 

as emergency response organizations 

and inspectors, without delay? 

g. If not currently capable, could you 

develop the necessary IT infrastructure 

to accept and transmit electronic hazard 

information? Please provide a cost 

estimate, if possible. 

h. Should PHMSA require 

standardized information content, 

format, and electronic data interchange 

protocol for electronic hazard 

communication information? 

i. What time and cost savings could be 

gained if electronic hazard 

communication information was 

authorized? 

j. Do you use paper hazard 

communication documents for other 

purposes (e.g., delivery receipts)? Could 

electronic hazard communication 

facilitate more efficient use of this 

documentation? 

k. Are there internal technological, 

administrative, or cultural challenges 

your organization would have to 

overcome to implement electronic 

hazard communication? 

l. Do you think adopting electronic 

hazard communication would positively 

or negatively impact small businesses? 

Please explain. 

m. For international shipments, are 

there additional barriers to 

implementing electronic hazard 

communication? If yes, please describe. 

n. Are there any concerns, issues, or 

potential benefits related to electronic 

hazard communication that have not 

been addressed elsewhere in this RFI? Is 

so, please discuss. 

4. Security and Privacy 

a. Do you have any security concerns 

related to electronic hazard 

communication, particularly the storage 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 41185 

of electronic data outside of your 

company systems? 

b. Despite the potential benefits, are 

your security concerns so extensive that 

you would not be willing to participate 

in electronic hazard communication? 

Please explain. 

c. Is there any information contained 

on your paper-based hazard 

communication documents that you 

consider proprietary, or otherwise have 

privacy/business competition concerns 

with sharing? 

d. In what ways could necessary 

emergency response and hazard 

communication information be stored in 

an electronic system separate from the 

proprietary information described 

above? 

5. Implementation 

a. What is your ideal concept of 

operations for electronic hazard 

communication? 

b. Would it be beneficial to develop 

a single, industry-standard hazard 

communication information input 

system accessible to shippers, carriers, 

emergency responders, and inspectors 

across all modes? Please explain. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on July 6, 2022, 

under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.97. 

William S. Schoonover, 

Associate Administrator for Hazardous 

Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14655 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Information Collection 

Renewal; Submission for OMB Review; 

Guidance Regarding Unauthorized 

Access to Customer Information 

AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency (OCC), Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The OCC, as part of its 

continuing effort to reduce paperwork 

and respondent burden, invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies to take this opportunity to 

comment on a continuing information 

collection as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). In 

accordance with the requirements of the 

PRA, the OCC may not conduct or 

sponsor, and respondents are not 

required to respond to, an information 

collection unless it displays a currently 

valid Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) control number. The OCC is 

soliciting comment concerning the 

renewal of its information collection 

titled, ‘‘Guidance Regarding 

Unauthorized Access to Customer 

Information.’’ The OCC also is giving 

notice that it has sent the collection to 

OMB for review. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before August 10, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Commenters are encouraged 

to submit comments by email, if 

possible. You may submit comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Email: prainfo@occ.treas.gov. 

• Mail: Chief Counsel’s Office, 

Attention: Comment Processing, 1557– 

0227, Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E– 

218, Washington, DC 20219. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th 

Street SW, Suite 3E–218, Washington, 

DC 20219. 

• Fax: (571) 465–4326. 

Instructions: You must include 

‘‘OCC’’ as the agency name and ‘‘1557– 

0227’’ in your comment. In general, the 

OCC will publish comments on 

www.reginfo.gov without change, 

including any business or personal 

information provided, such as name and 

address information, email addresses, or 

phone numbers. Comments received, 

including attachments and other 

supporting materials, are part of the 

public record and subject to public 

disclosure. Do not include any 

information in your comment or 

supporting materials that you consider 

confidential or inappropriate for public 

disclosure. 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should also be 

sent within 30 days of publication of 

this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/ 

do/PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. 

On April 8, 2022, the OCC published 

a 60-day notice for this information 

collection, 87 FR 20932. You may 

review comments and other related 

materials that pertain to this 

information collection following the 

close of the 30-day comment period for 

this notice by the method set forth in 

the next bullet. 

• Viewing Comments Electronically: 

Go to www.reginfo.gov. Hover over the 

‘‘Information Collection Review’’ tab 

and click on ‘‘Information Collection 

Review’’ from the drop-down menu. 

From the ‘‘Currently under Review’’ 

drop-down menu, select ‘‘Department of 

Treasury’’ and then click ‘‘submit.’’ This 

information collection can be located by 

searching by OMB control number 

‘‘1557–0227’’ or ‘‘Guidance Regarding 

Unauthorized Access to Customer 

Information.’’ Upon finding the 

appropriate information collection, click 

on the related ‘‘ICR Reference Number.’’ 

On the next screen, select ‘‘View 

Supporting Statement and Other 

Documents’’ and then click on the link 

to any comment listed at the bottom of 

the screen. 

• For assistance in navigating 

www.reginfo.gov, please contact the 

Regulatory Information Service Center 

at (202) 482–7340. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shaquita Merritt, OCC Clearance 

Officer, (202) 649–5490, Chief Counsel’s 

Office, Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E– 

218, Washington, DC 20219. If you are 

deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech 

disability, please dial 7–1–1 to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal 

agencies must obtain approval from the 

OMB for each collection of information 

they conduct or sponsor. ‘‘Collection of 

information’’ is defined in 44 U.S.C. 

3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) to include 

agency requests or requirements that 

members of the public submit reports, 

keep records, or provide information to 

a third party. The OCC asks that OMB 

extend its approval of the collection in 

this notice. 

Title: Guidance Regarding 

Unauthorized Access to Customer 

Information. 

OMB Control No.: 1557–0227. 

Abstract: Section 501(b) of the 

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. 

6801(b)) requires the OCC to establish 

appropriate standards for national 

banks, Federal savings associations, 

Federal branches and Federal agencies 

of foreign banks, and any subsidiaries of 

such entities (except brokers, dealers, 

persons providing insurance, 

investment companies, and investment 

advisers) relating to administrative, 

technical, and physical safeguards: (1) 

to insure the security and 

confidentiality of customer records and 

information; (2) to protect against any 

anticipated threats or hazards to the 

security or integrity of such records; and 

(3) to protect against unauthorized 

access to, or use of, such records or 

information that could result in 

substantial harm or inconvenience to 

any customer. 

The Interagency Guidelines 

Establishing Information Security 

Standards, 12 CFR part 30, appendix B 

(Security Guidelines), which implement 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES