Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/11/07/2018-23965/hazardous-materials-response-to-petitions-from-industry-to-modify-clarify-or-eliminate-regulations
Timestamp: 2019-01-16 07:51:29
Document Index: 202339453

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 171', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009106', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009180', 'art 180', 'art 178', 'art 180', 'art 178', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009176', '§\u2009176', '§\u2009176', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009215', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009215', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009215', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009215', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009177', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', 'art.\n6', '§\u2009172', 'art 171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', 'art 172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009172', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009173', '§\u2009176', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009171', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009178', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180', '§\u2009180']

Federal Register :: Hazardous Materials: Response to Petitions From Industry To Modify, Clarify, or Eliminate Regulations
A Rule by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration on 11/07/2018
55792-55811 (20 pages)
PHMSA-2015-0102
Fertilizer Institute - Letter in Support and DOT Petition -...
19. Basis Weight Tolerances for Liners and Mediums Used in the Manufacture of Specification UN 4G Fiberboard Boxes
B. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13610, Executive Order 13771, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-23965 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-23965
Start Preamble Start Printed Page 55792
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 December 7, 2018.
Delayed compliance date: Unless otherwise specified, compliance with the amendments adopted in this final rule is required beginning November 7, 2019.
Steven Andrews, (202) 366-8553, steven.andrews@dot.gov, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
In response to petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated community, PHMSA is amending the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180) to update, clarify, streamline, or provide relief from miscellaneous regulatory requirements. Specifically, PHMSA is:
Incorporating by Reference (IBR) multiple publications from the Compressed Gas Association (CGA), the Chlorine Institute, and the Department of Defense (DoD).
Revising the table in § 180.407(g)(1)(iv) to make this section consistent with the applicable packaging specification (e.g., § 178.347).
Revising § 173.150(g) include the use of the International System of Units (SI).
Allowing the use of plastic, metal, or composite pallets to transport materials classed and marked as limited quantities.
Allowing electronic signatures for Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) manifest forms.
No longer requiring the service pressure to be marked on Department of Transportation (DOT) 8 and 8L cylinders.
Revising the basis weight tolerance for fiberboard boxes from +/− 5% to +/− 10% from the nominal basis weight reported in the initial design qualification test report.
On June 30, 2016, PHMSA (also “we” or “us”) published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled, “Hazardous Materials: Miscellaneous Petitions for Rulemaking (RRR)” under Docket No. PHMSA-2016-0102 (HM-219A). This deregulatory rulemaking action is part of PHMSA's retrospective review efforts that are designed to identify ways to improve the HMR.Start Printed Page 55793
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's rulemaking procedure regulations in 49 CFR 106.95 establish a process for persons to ask PHMSA to add, amend, or delete a regulation by filing a petition for rulemaking containing adequate support for the requested action. The HM-219A NPRM responded to 19 petitions for rulemaking submitted to PHMSA by various stakeholders. In the NPRM, we proposed to amend the HMR to update, clarify, or provide relief from miscellaneous regulatory requirements at the request of the regulated community.
PHMSA received 26 public comments in response to the above amendments proposed in the June 30, 2016 NPRM. These comments are discussed in further detail in this final rule.
The comment period for the June 30, 2016, NPRM closed on August 29, 2016. PHMSA received a total of 26 comments from 25 separate entities, seven of which submitted petitions discussed in the NPRM. PHMSA developed this final rule in consideration of the comments received to the public docket. The comments submitted to this docket may be accessed via http://www.regulations.gov. The following persons, companies, and associations submitted comments to the HM-219A NPRM:
Aaron Adamczyk https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0011.
Alaska Airlines https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0010.
American Chemistry Council (ACC) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0016.
Association of American Railroads (AAR) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0022.
Association of Hazmat Shippers, Inc. (AHS) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0024.
Clifford Bartley https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0026.
Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0023.
Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0025.
Daniel Shelton https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0004.
Donald Hausmann https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0007.
Dow Chemical Company (Dow) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0015.
Fibre Box Association https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0006.
Healthcare Distribution Alliance (HDA) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0018.
Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0013.
International Vessel Operators Dangerous Goods Association (IVODGA) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0020.
Mark Borth https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0027.
National Propane Gas Association (NPGA) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0021.
Norris Cylinder https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0002.
Norris Cylinder https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0003.
Railway Supply Institute (RSI)—Railway Supply Institute Committee on Tank Cars (RSICTC) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0014.
Reusable Industrial Packaging Association (RIPA) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0028.
The Chlorine Institute https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0019.
The Fertilizer Institute (TFI) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0017.
Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA) https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0012.
VWR International, LLC https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0005.
William Briner https://www.regulations.gov/​document?​D=​PHMSA-2015-0102-0008.
Section III discusses the proposals that are being adopted, as well as those not being adopted, into the HMR as part of this rulemaking.
This final rule, and the NPRM that preceded it, are part of PHMSA's retrospective regulatory review efforts, and is in response to petitions for rulemaking by the regulated community. Its intent is to update, clarify, or provide relief from miscellaneous regulatory requirements. The NPRM provided an opportunity for further public participation in the development of the regulatory amendments and promoted exchange of information and perspectives among the various stakeholders.
PHMSA received comments from 25 entities. The comments were comprehensive and raised important issues to be addressed. PHMSA fully considered all comments in the development of this final rule. This final rule preamble contains a detailed description of the original proposals in the June 30, 2016 NPRM, a summary of the comments received, a response to those comments, and an explanation of PHMSA's decisions for each petition proposed in the NPRM.
This section discusses the comments to the HM-219A NPRM that provided suggestions for additional revisions that were not specifically addressed in the NPRM. Based on an assessment of the proposed changes and the comments received, PHMSA identified two comments as beyond the scope of this rulemaking action.
PHMSA received a comment from the Association of American Railroads (AAR) related to petition P-1646 and the phase out of tank cars constructed of non-normalized steel. While PHMSA has accepted this petition for a future rulemaking, it is not being addressed in this final rule. PHMSA will use AAR's comments if a future NPRM is developed on the referenced petition P-1646.
PHMSA also received a comment from Mr. Adam Adamczyk, who suggested that PHMSA incorporate by reference numerous standards from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the American Welding Society (AWS). PHMSA did not propose the incorporation of these standards in the NPRM and thus is not incorporating the standards in this final rule. However, PHMSA suggests the commenter submit a petition in accordance with § 106.95 of the HMR for any IBR standards the Start Printed Page 55794commenter would suggest including in a future rulemaking.
This section discusses the changes proposed in the NPRM that are not being adopted in this final rule. In the preamble to the NPRM, PHMSA inadvertently included a section on petition P-1655 from the Dangerous Goods Trainers Association (DGTA). PHMSA did not propose any regulatory text and is therefore not addressing this petition at this time. PHMSA anticipates addressing this petition in a future rulemaking.
This section discusses the changes proposed in the NPRM and the comments received in response. Based on an assessment of the proposed changes and the comments received, PHMSA is adopting the following provisions in this final rule. Also, to clearly identify the issues addressed in this rule, PHMSA provides the following list of adopted amendments discussed in this section:
In petition P-1615, The Walker Group requested revisions to the table in § 180.407(g)(1)(iv) to make this section consistent with the applicable packaging specification (e.g., § 178.347). A cargo tank manufactured to the requirements of the applicable DOT specifications has to be tested in accordance with the HMR. Currently, the design specifications for cargo tanks in § 178.320 contain general requirements applicable to all cargo tanks. The design specifications, including the test pressures for older cargo tanks that are no longer authorized for manufacture but still authorized for use, were last found in the 1985 edition of the HMR (e.g., MC 306—§ 178.341-7; MC 307—§ 178.342-7; MC 312—§ 178.343-7).
This petition seeks to eliminate confusion by changing the regulations to allow the use of the marked test pressure on the cargo tank nameplate as the requalification test pressure and to amend every entry in the § 180.407(g)(1)(iv) test pressure table by beginning the entries with the phrase, “[t]he test pressure on the nameplate (specification plate).” PHMSA conducted a technical and policy review of the petition. Instead of modifying every test pressure entry as suggested by the petitioner, PHMSA proposed in the NPRM that revisions should only apply to certain cargo tank specifications (DOT 407, MC 304, and MC 307) to harmonize the periodic hydrostatic testing required by part 180 with the initial testing for the applicable packaging specification prescribed in part 178. The proposed revisions aimed to further clarify that test pressures (in case of periodic pneumatic testing required by part 180) are already consistent with the initial testing for the applicable packaging specification prescribed in part 178.
In response to the proposal, PHMSA received comments from Daniel Shelton, Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association (TTMA), and National Propane Gas Association (NPGA). NPGA noted a discrepancy in the preamble text and proposed regulatory text. Specifically, NPGA referenced the preamble text that identifies revisions to certain cargo tank specifications for hydrostatic testing of DOT 407, MC 304, and MC 307. However, NPGA noted that the proposed regulatory text adds the increased test pressure for all cargo tanks, rather than just those specifications identified in the preamble. NPGA requested that PHMSA resolve the discrepancy to ensure it is consistent with both the administration and the petitioner's intent. PHMSA agrees with the commenter and is adding to each entry the phrase, “The test pressure on the name plate or specification plate, or 1.5 times the MAWP, whichever is greater.”
Daniel Shelton requested PHMSA adopt the increased test pressure requirements for MC 306 cargo tanks in addition to the proposed language. Specifically, the suggestion stemmed from industry confusion on the appropriate test pressure that should be used for cargo tanks. PHMSA agrees and, as stated above, is adding the revised language to all entries in § 180.407(g)(1)(iv).
TTMA supported the petition and the proposed amendment but noted a minor error in the table for the DOT 412 entry. TTMA believed this note should read: “[t]he test pressure on the name plate or specification plate, or 1.5 times the MAWP, whichever is greater.” PHMSA agrees with TTMA and is adding “or” as appropriate to the table in § 180.407(g)(1)(iv).
In petition P-1619, the Chlorine Institute requested that updates to publications currently listed in § 171.7(l)—specifically § 171.7(l)(1), (2), (5), and (12)—and referenced in various sections of the HMR be incorporated by reference. PHMSA conducted a review of these publications and found them suitable to propose incorporation into the HMR. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to include the following updated documents in the referenced material:
Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “A” for 100-lb. & 150-lb. Chlorine Cylinders, Edition 12, Revision 2, July 2014. Emergency Kit “A” is designed for use with the standard DOT 3A480 and 3AA480 100 and 150-pound capacity cylinders in chlorine service only. Emergency Kit “A” contains devices and tools to contain leaks in and around the cylinder valve and in the side wall of chlorine cylinders. The Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “A” is the only chlorine emergency kit for chlorine cylinders that is manufactured to the design specifications of the Chlorine Institute. Under certain circumstances U.S. DOT regulations permit transportation of a chlorine cylinder with an Emergency Kit “A”. See 49 CFR 173.3(e).
Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “B” for Chlorine Ton Containers, Edition 11, Revision 1, July 2014. Emergency Kit “B” is designed for use with the standard DOT 106A500X chlorine ton container and can also be used with 110A500W in chlorine service. Emergency Kit “B” contains devices and tools to contain leaks in and around the ton container valves and in the side wall of ton containers. The Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “B” is the only chlorine emergency kit for ton containers that is manufactured to the design specifications of The Chlorine Institute. Under certain circumstances U.S. DOT regulations permit transportation of a chlorine ton container with an Emergency Kit “B”. See 49 CFR 173.3(e).
Pamphlet 57, Emergency Shut-Off Systems for Bulk Transfer of Chlorine, Edition 6, June 2015. This pamphlet covers the recommended practices for emergency shut-off protection during chlorine transfers involving bulk containers.
Pamphlet 168, Guidelines for Dual Valve Systems for Bulk Chlorine Transport, Edition 2, July 2015. The purpose of this pamphlet is to set forth performance/selection criteria that should be utilized in identifying dual valve systems for bulk chlorine transportation applications (i.e., tank cars, cargo tanks and barges). These configurations are intended to meet U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and Transport Canada (TC) performance requirements. This pamphlet contains information pertaining to standardizations, performance/design criteria, operational considerations and installation considerations, as well as an Start Printed Page 55795appendix that includes valve manufacturer information.
PHMSA received comments from the Chlorine Institute in relation to this petition. The Chlorine Institute supported PHMSA's incorporation of the IBR documents. The Chlorine Institute further believed that this would eliminate the need for certain special permits (specifically SP-16102, which allows transportation of equipment designed in accordance with Edition 11, Revision 1, of the Emergency Kit “B” (B-Kit) instruction booklet). PHMSA agrees and is therefore adopting the changes in § 171.7(l) to incorporate the most recent Chlorine Institute publications as proposed.
In petition P-1620, Labelmaster Services requested revisions to the HMR to address inconsistencies between international and domestic labels and placards. Specifically, the petition requested revisions to §§ 172.519(f) and 172.407(f) of the HMR to allow for the use of labels and placards conforming to the specifications in the United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (UN Recommendations), the International Civil Aviation Organization Technical Instructions on the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO Technical Instructions), the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, or the Transport Canada Transportation of Dangerous Goods (TDG) Regulations.
Upon reviewing the petition, PHMSA found that the requested changes are likely to clarify some regulatory requirements and provisions that exist for the transportation of hazardous materials internationally, and are not likely to be onerous or costly for the regulated community. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed revisions to §§ 172.519(f) and 172.407(f) of the HMR to allow for the use of labels and placards conforming to the specifications in the UN Recommendations, ICAO Technical Instructions, IMDG Code, or TDG Regulations.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from Clifford Bartley, Council on the Safe Transport of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA), and International Vessel Operators Dangerous Goods Association (IVODGA). All commenters expressed support for PHMSA adopting these provisions as written. Additionally, COSTHA added that the proposed changes would not increase the burden on shippers. PHMSA agrees with the commenters and is therefore incorporating the changes in §§ 172.519(f) and 172.407(f) of the HMR as proposed.
In petition P-1624, Horizon Lines, LLC requested that § 176.415(b) be revised to except limited quantities of “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate” from requiring permission from the Captain of the Port (COTP) before being loaded or unloaded from a vessel at a waterfront facility. This petition for rulemaking is in response to previous changes to the HMR that will eliminate the Other Regulated Materials Domestic (ORM-D) classification.
Specifically, Horizon Lines expressed concern that while the change from ORM-D to limited quantities is good for harmonization and the industry overall, the change has had some unintended negative consequences for shippers and vessel operators. Specifically, Horizon Lines identified having to reclassify “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate” products that would have previously shipped as ORM-D as being shipped under the limited quantities exception. Horizon Lines believes the HMR requires that “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate, 5.1” be moved under a United States Coast Guard (USCG) permit regardless of the quantity shipped.
Upon review of the petition, PHMSA found that shipping “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate, 5.1” as a limited quantity instead of ORM-D will put a higher burden of cost on both the shipper and the vessel operator, without increasing safety, because they must continue to abide by the requirements in § 176.415(c)(4) to obtain a permit. Section 176.415(b) already provides exceptions for “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate” when shipped in a rigid packaging with a noncombustible inside packaging and “UN2067, Ammonium nitrate fertilizer” when the nearest COTP is notified at least 24 hours in advance of any loading or unloading in excess of 454 kg (1,000 pounds). In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed an exception for “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate” when shipped as a limited quantity to require written notification to the USCG at least 24 hours prior to loading this type of cargo.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from Clifford Bartley, Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME), COSTHA, and IVODGA. All commenters expressed support for PHMSA adopting these provisions. However, IME disagreed that the proposed exception should only apply to “limited quantities” of “UN1942, Ammonium nitrate fertilizer.” IME recommended that PHMSA extend the proposed exception to any amount of UN1942, not just limited quantities.
IME's comment is outside the scope of the petition. One of the main justifications for supporting P-1624 was limiting the scope of the exception to “limited quantities,” as these materials were previously classed ORM-D at the same quantity limits and therefore were exempt from § 176.11(e). It is also unclear from the comment what IME is proposing or why any exemptions should apply regardless of whether or not they are limited quantities.
In petition P-1625, HAZMATPAC requested the allowance of the shipment of solid materials in a package when that package has been tested with a liquid material. Currently, § 173.24a(b)(3) allows a single or composite non-bulk packaging that is tested and marked for a liquid hazardous material to be filled with a solid hazardous material up to a gross mass in kilograms not exceeding the rated capacity of the packaging in liters, multiplied by the specific gravity of the packaging, or 1.2 if not marked. In addition, paragraphs (i), (ii), and (iii) allow a packaging rated for a liquid Packing Group (PG) I to be filled with a solid PG II hazardous material, a packaging rated for a liquid PG I to be filled with a solid PG III hazardous material, and a packaging rated for a liquid PG II to be filled with a solid PG III hazardous material.
In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise § 173.24a(b)(3) to allow combination packages tested with liquids to transport solid materials. In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from COSTHA, Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC), Reusable Industrial Packaging Association (RIPA), and Donald Hausmann. Mr. Hausmann supported the proposed requirement, stating that these revisions would improve shipping options for solid material shippers without hindering safety concerns. In its comments, COSTHA stated it cannot support or oppose the proposed revision, as further clarification is needed on PHMSA's intentions for revising § 173.24a(b)(1) and (3). Specifically, COSTHA indicated that the proposed regulatory language erroneously compares specific gravity to the gross mass of the package and vice versa. COSTHA provided the following language, which they believe PHMSA Start Printed Page 55796intended to incorporate in this section: “A Packing Group I packaging may be used for a Packing Group II material with a specific gravity not exceeding the greater of 1.8, or 1.5 times the specific gravity marked on the packaging, or with the gross mass of the package not exceeding 1.5 times the gross mass marked on the packaging, provided all the performance criteria can still be met with the higher specific gravity material.” RIPA also noted that the proposed language to § 173.24a as “or gross mass of the package” is inexact and confusing. RIPA commented that in most cases “gross mass” is not marked on package tested for a liquid. RIPA believed PHMSA should ensure that the upper limit of 400 kg net mass for the definition of non-bulk packages would not be exceeded when using this section. RIPA also noted that PHMSA specified in the preamble that the adoption of P-1625 was for combination packages; however, combination packages are not referenced in the proposed regulatory text of § 173.24a. RIPA indicated their belief that combination packages were not eligible for filling provisions of solids in liquid rated packages because of safety concerns and that the exclusion of combination packages is correct if safety can be shown as a risk.
PHMSA agrees with COSTHA's proposed language with respect to the gross mass of the package and is updating the language in this final rule to accurately reflect the intention of the NPRM. PHMSA is also adding a statement stating that “packages shall not exceed 400 kg” to ensure only non-bulk packages could be used in this section. PHMSA is also removing the text for single and composite (thus encompassing all non-bulk packages) to clarify that it was PHMSA's intent in the NPRM to allow for single, combination, and composite packages to be able to use this section. While RIPA did note some safety concerns with including combination packages in this section, PHMSA believes the concerns are unfounded. PHMSA believes the factors used to convert between the different packing groups correspond with the multiples between the drop test heights, accounting for the change in testing needed to certify a package for a greater weight at a lower packing group.
In petition P-1634, 3M Company requested an amendment to the table in § 173.5a(c)(l) to include an additional hazardous material description for transport in roadway striping vehicles. Specifically, 3M requested the addition of UN2735 “Amines, Liquid, Corrosive, n.o.s., 8, III” or “Polyamines, Liquid, Corrosive, n.o.s., 8, III” when used as a catalyst.
The table in § 173.5a(c)(1) currently lists “UN3267, Corrosive liquid basic, organic, n.o.s.” as a catchall for corrosive liquids, while at the same time § 172.101(c)(10)(iii) reads, “[a] mixture or solution meeting the definition of one or more hazard class that is not identified in the Table specifically by name, comprised of two or more hazardous materials in the same hazard class, must be described using an appropriate shipping description (e.g., `Flammable liquid, n.o.s.').” Further, commodities that can be described explicitly (not comprised of two or more hazardous materials) should be listed by “the name that most appropriately describes the material,” with the example being an alcohol not listed by its technical name in the table being described as “Alcohol, n.o.s” rather than “Flammable liquid, n.o.s.” Because an amine compound is the single hazardous corrosive component in 3M's pavement marking liquid, PHMSA believes this change will not result in measurable economic or safety impacts. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to add proper shipping names to the list of authorized materials in § 173.5a(c)(1).
PHMSA received no comments either supporting or opposing this proposal. Therefore, PHMSA is incorporating the changes to § 173.5a(c)(l) as proposed to allow the shipping descriptions “UN2735, Amines, Liquid, Corrosive, n.o.s., 8, III” or “Polyamines, Liquid, Corrosive, n.o.s., 8, III” when used as a catalyst.
In petition P-1636, the Chlorine Institute requested that PHMSA extend the service life of interim compliant toxic inhalation hazard (TIH) tank cars to the full service life of all other tank cars as allowed in § 215.203 of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) regulations. Specifically, the Chlorine Institute requested a revision to paragraph § 173.31(e)(2)(iii), which specifies a 20-year allowable service life for tank cars transporting TIH materials that were built to specifications contemplated in the HM-246 rulemaking because of an expected delay of at least 8 to 10 years before a permanent TIH design standard and specification would be available from the Advanced Tank Car Collaborative Research Program (ATCCRP).
Although the plain language of § 173.31(e)(2)(iii) limits the authorized service life of tank cars meeting the relevant specifications to 20 years from the date of the cars' construction, the final rule in which PHMSA adopted this 20-year service life made clear that tank cars built to these specifications were intended as an interim solution to then-existing market conditions. (74 FR 1770; Jan. 13, 2009). These interim tank car specifications were intended to make immediate safety improvements in tank car construction and to ensure the ongoing availability of tank cars for the transportation of TIH materials while the Department moved forward with the development and validation of an enhanced performance standard for TIH tank cars and the incorporation of such an enhanced standard into the HMR. With the understanding of the interim nature of these cars, PHMSA intended the 20-year authorized service life to guarantee tank car owners a reasonable service life for the cars, even if the Department were to issue a new tank car standard in the years immediately following the 2009 final rule [74 FR 1770]. The Department is still working towards developing and implementing an enhanced performance standard for TIH materials tank cars. PHMSA's review of the petition found that there is likely economic merit in undertaking a rulemaking as requested. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise § 173.31(e)(2)(iii) to remove the 20-year service life, which will allow continued use of the interim compliant TIH tank cars to the full service life of all other tank cars, as allowed in § 215.203.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from American Chemistry Council (ACC), Railway Supply Institute (RSI), Dow Chemical, Railway Supply Institute Committee on Tank Cars (RSICTC), and DGAC. All commenters expressed support to extend the service life of TIH tank cars as proposed. RSICTC added that extending the service life of the TIH tank cars would provide an economic incentive for further investment in tank cars with at least a 50 percent improvement in crashworthiness. PHMSA agrees with the commenters and is therefore incorporating the changes in § 173.31(e)(2)(iii) to remove the 20-year service life, which will extend the use of the interim compliant TIH tank cars to the full service life of all other tank cars as allowed in § 215.203.
PHMSA received a petition for rulemaking (P-1691) from the American Association of Railroads (AAR)/The Chlorine Institute/American Chemistry Council (ACC)/The Fertilizer Institute/Railway Supply Institute (RSI) on December 16, 2016, requesting that PHMSA revise the HMR to make the Start Printed Page 55797“interim” tank car specifications issued as part of the HM-246 final rule be considered the “final” specifications. On September 18, 2017, PHMSA accepted the petition, and if a future NPRM is developed PHMSA will address the issue in that rulemaking. Please see the docket for P-1691 [1] for additional information.
In petition P-1638, Labelmaster Services requested a revision to the HMR that would allow the use of plastic or metal pallets to transport materials classed and marked as limited quantities. The petition specifically requested that PHMSA revise § 173.156(b)(2)(iii), which specifies these materials be secured to a wooden pallet, to also specify that they could be secured to a plastic or metal pallet.
PHMSA's review of the petition found that there is likely economic merit in undertaking a rulemaking as requested. In addition, a technical review of the petition found there should be no decrease in safety due to the proposed change. The changes suggested by this petition would allow transporters greater flexibility in their choice of pallets, with possible accompanying cost savings. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise § 173.156(b)(2)(iii) to allow for the use of metal, plastic, or composite pallets used to ship limited quantities of hazardous materials.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from Healthcare Distribution Alliance (HDA), COSTHA, and DGAC. All commenters expressed support for the proposal. In addition, COSTHA specified that it should be reiterated that the hazardous materials should be compatible with the pallet material. PHMSA agrees and is revising § 173.156(b)(2)(iii) to allow for the use of metal, plastic, or composite pallets to ship limited quantities of hazardous materials, provided the hazardous materials will not react with the pallet material.
In petition P-1639, Horizon Lines, LLC requested an exception to the requirement in § 172.604(d)(1) to provide an emergency response telephone number, suggesting that an emergency response telephone number no longer be required on a shipping paper for excepted quantities of hazardous materials. This change would be consistent with how PHMSA treats limited quantities of hazardous materials. Specifically, the petitioner asked PHMSA to revise § 172.604(d)(1) so that it may be applicable to limited quantities and excepted quantities.
This modification is justified because excepted quantity weights are less than the already exempted limited quantity weights. In addition, this revision will harmonize the emergency response number requirements with the IMDG Code, which does not require an emergency response telephone number on the dangerous goods documentation (or anywhere else) for any excepted material; however, all hazardous materials, including those in excepted quantities, must comply with Section 5.4.3.2 of the IMDG Code, which requires emergency response information to be communicated in ways other than a phone number, such as a Safety Data Sheet (SDS). PHMSA's review of the petition found that there is likely economic merit in undertaking a rulemaking as requested without any decrease to safety. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise § 172.604(d)(1) to no longer require an emergency response telephone number on a shipping paper be provided for excepted quantities of hazardous materials.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from AAR, COSTHA, IVODGA, DGAC, Clifford Bartley, the Fertilizer Institute (TFI), HAD, and the Chlorine Institute. All commenters expressed support for the proposal. Therefore, PHMSA is incorporating the changes to § 172.604(d)(1) as proposed to no longer require an emergency response telephone number be provided on a shipping paper for excepted quantities of hazardous materials.
In petition P-1640, the Association of HAZMAT Shippers (AHS) requested that the units of measure included in § 173.150(g), which addresses limited quantities of retail products containing ethyl alcohol, be converted to the International System of Units (SI units) because SI units are used elsewhere in the HMR. SI units are typically used in the manufacturing of inner receptacles. PHMSA's review of the petition found that there is likely economic merit in undertaking a rulemaking as requested without any decrease to safety. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise § 173.150(g) to convert measurements to SI units.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from AHS, VWR International, LLC, and COSTHA. AHS expressed appreciation for incorporation of its petition, which addressed the lack of metric units in § 173.150(g). However, AHS noted that the NPRM did not fully address the original petition, which further requested incorporation of the original scope of Special Permit 9275 into § 173.150(g) that included language allowing “items suitable for retail sale” to be included in the exception. PHMSA notes that in our response to AHS's petition, we denied the portion requesting the incorporation of the term “suitable for retail” sale in § 173.150(g). Therefore, PHMSA did not propose in the NPRM to include the terms “suitable for retail sale” and as such we are not incorporating the term “suitable for retail sale” in this final rule.
AHS also commented that there are inconsistencies with the incorporation of SI units in § 173.150(g). Specifically, AHS noted that as specified in § 171.10, when SI units are displayed, they are the controlling standard, and when U.S. units appear in parentheses, they are for additional information. AHS noted that their petition originally requested that PHMSA incorporate SI units as the controlling standard and U.S. units in parentheses, which is opposite to the proposed language in the NPRM. Therefore, AHS requested that the intent of the original petition be incorporated. Furthermore, AHS, VWR International, LLC, and COSTHA provided conversions between SI and U.S. units, which they ask to be changed. PHMSA agrees with the commenters and is correcting the regulatory text in § 173.150(g) to show the SI unit as the controlling units in this final rule.
In petition P-1641, CGA proposed to add new paragraphs § 173.301(a)(11) and (12). The proposed changes concern valve requirements for cylinders as outlined in “CGA V-9-2012, Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves, Seventh Edition.” Specifically, CGA requested that cylinder valves and cylinder valve protection caps manufactured on or after May 4, 2019, be required to conform to the requirements in “CGA V-9-2012, Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Cylinder Valves, Seventh Edition.” Justifications for this request include ensuring standardization of cylinder valve designs and providing guidance to users on proper selection of valves. PHMSA's review of the petition found that there is likely economic merit in undertaking a rulemaking as requested without any decrease to safety. In the NPRM, Start Printed Page 55798PHMSA proposed to add new paragraphs to § 173.301(a)(11) and (12) to the HMR to conform to the new standards for cylinder valves and caps as outlined in “CGA V-9-2012, Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves, Seventh Edition.”
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from Dow Chemical, COSTHA, NPGA, and DGAC. While commenters expressed support for the proposed changes, DGAC and Dow were concerned that the proposed requirements may not be appropriate or feasible for materials identified under the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT) entries for “chemical under pressure,” such as UN3500 and UN3503. Specifically, DGAC noted that the valves may not be appropriate for dispensing liquids, since they are more suitable for dispensing a “true gas” and may not be suitable for valves meeting CGA V-9-2012 requirements. As an alternative to the proposed regulatory language, Dow suggested revising the requirement for CGA V-9-2012 valves to exclude “chemical under pressure” from the requirements. Alternatively, Dow suggested revising § 173.335(a) to except these materials from the proposed requirements in § 173.301(a)(11) and (12). In addition, Dow, DGAC, COSTHA, and NPGA requested a sufficient and significant delay to allow time to comply with the retrofit in replacing existing valves. DGAC noted that a May 4, 2015, retrofit date would cause significant cost to industry in order to replace stainless steel valves for these cylinders, with a cost estimate of approximately $2.3 million. COSTHA also commented that it is unclear if the second sentence in proposed § 173.301(a)(11) and (12) provides mandatory exceptions for UN Pressure Receptacles or additional requirements.
PHMSA's Office of Hazardous Materials Safety is revising the HMR to ensure that cylinder valves follow uniform construction and performance standards for improved transportation safety of cylinders containing hazardous materials. PHMSA agrees with commenters that an exception from the valve requirements should be made for those chemicals under pressure regulated under § 173.335. Therefore, PHMSA is implementing Dow's proposal to revise the requirements for chemicals under pressure in § 173.335(a) to provide an exception to conform to the new standards for cylinder valves and caps in the new requirements in § 173.301(a)(11) and (12). PHMSA is also extending the compliance date to give a grace period of one year after the rulemaking becomes effective to comply with the new valve cap requirements in § 173.301(a)(11) and (12). PHMSA is further clarifying that the second sentence in § 173.301(a)(11) and (12) provides additional requirements for UN Pressure Receptacles.
NPGA noted that CGA's petition states that Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) cylinder valves and valve protection systems would not be affected by the adoption of CGA V-9-2012 because LPG cylinders are already listed by National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 58. However, NPGA noted that NPFA 58 does not require cylinder valves to be listed but does require that they comply with ANSI 1769, which is different than being listed. Therefore, NPGA expressed concern that the adoption of CGA V-9-2012 would conflict with the cylinder valve requirement for cylinders used in LPG service under NFPA 58. NPGA also noted that the proposed regulatory text for § 171.7 does not include CGA-V-9-2012.
To address the concerns of NPGA, PHMSA is revising § 173.301(a)(11) to read: “Cylinder valves used on cylinders in liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) service are permitted to comply with the requirements of NFPA 58, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code.” PHMSA also agrees that the CGA V-9-2012 standard should be cited in § 171.7 and is adding applicable regulatory text to this section.
In petition P-1644, HAZMAT Resources proposed to add text to § 180.605(l) to address recordkeeping requirements for portable tanks. This revision would harmonize this recordkeeping requirement with § 180.417(a)(3)(ii), which addresses recordkeeping requirements for certain cargo tank motor vehicles constructed and certified in accordance with the ASME Code. The petitioner recommended renaming § 180.605(l) as § 180.605(l)(1) and adding an additional § 180.605(l)(2). This new section would include recordkeeping requirements in line with § 180.417(a)(3)(ii). PHMSA agrees this revision as proposed would provide an alternative means of compliance for portable tanks that has already been provided for cargo tanks. PHMSA believes there is likely economic merit in revising this section without a reduction in safety. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise § 180.605(l) to allow the owner of a portable tank to contact the National Board for a copy of the manufacturer's data report, if the portable tank was registered with the National Board, or copy the information contained on the portable tanks specification plate and ASME Code data plates.
PHMSA received no comments either supporting or opposing this proposal. Therefore, PHMSA is incorporating the changes to § 180.605(l) as proposed to allow the owner of a portable tank to contact the National Board for a copy of the manufacturer's data report, if the portable tank was registered with the National Board, or copy the information contained on the portable tanks specification plate and ASME Code data plates.
In petition P-1650, Labelmaster Services proposed to revise §§ 172.407(c) and 172.519(c) of the HMR to allow printing tolerances for labels and placards. Labelmaster noted that the printing tolerances specified for the solid-line inner border that is parallel to the edge is extremely difficult to maintain with standard printing processes.
After a policy review of the petition, PHMSA agrees with Labelmaster that the absence of a tolerance will increase printing costs, as well as lead to inconsistent enforcement practices and confusion on the part of businesses attempting to remain compliant, without providing any increase in safety or hazard communication. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise §§ 172.407(c) and 172.519(c) to add the word “approximately” to these sections to allow for printing tolerances with respect to the solid inner border for labels and placards. PHMSA believes that this simple fix and small change in the HMR could reduce costs with no degradation in safety.
In response to the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from COSTHA and DGAC in support of the proposed changes. Therefore, PHMSA is revising §§ 172.407(c) and 172.519(c) as proposed to add the word “approximately” to these sections to allow for printing tolerances with respect to the solid inner border for labels and placards.
In petition P-1651, the Department of Defense (DoD) Explosives Safety Board requested that PHMSA amend the citations in § 171.7(o)(1) and (2) to include the latest detailed publications used by the DoD in its examination and classification of explosives. PHMSA Start Printed Page 55799reviewed and provided feedback to DoD on the proposed changes to the manuals. Updating this manual is essential to allowing the DoD to safely move explosives in the interest of national security.
PHMSA received no comments either supporting or opposing this proposal. Therefore, PHMSA is incorporating the latest publications used by the DoD in its examination and classification of explosives in § 171.7(o)(1) and (2) as proposed.
In petition P-1656, Norris Cylinder proposed that PHMSA revise § 178.35(f)(7) to no longer require the marking of the service pressure on DOT 8 and DOT 8L cylinders. After both a technical and policy review of the petition, PHMSA agrees with Norris Cylinder there is no safety reason to require marking the service pressure on DOT 8 and DOT 8L cylinders. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise this section as requested by the petitioner.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from Norris Cylinder and COSTHA. Both commenters noted a typographical error in the proposed language in § 178.35(f)(7) specifying “DOT 4 or 4AL cylinders,” which should actually read “DOT 8 and 8AL cylinders.” This correction aligns with the original petition, as well as the preamble text in the NPRM. Therefore, PHMSA is revising § 178.35(f)(7) to no longer require DOT 8 and 8AL cylinders to be marked with the service pressure.
In petition P-1657, CGA proposed IBR updates to the CGA publication “CGA C-7-2014, Guide to Classification and Labeling of Compressed Gases, Tenth Edition” currently listed in § 171.7(n)(7). This publication has been updated to meet requirements for the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and was previously incorporated into OSHA's regulations in 2012. CGA requested that PHMSA permit the use of the 2014 edition of CGA C-7 to keep current with industry practices that are incorporated into Appendix A of C-7.
PHMSA's review of the petition found that there are some editorial changes to the text of Appendix A in the 2014 edition that were added for clarity but do not impact the use of the required labels. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed the incorporation by reference of “CGA C-7-2014, Guide to Classification and Labeling of Compressed Gases, Tenth Edition” into the HMR.
PHMSA received no comments either supporting or opposing this proposal. Therefore, PHMSA is incorporating by reference “CGA C-7-2014, Guide to Classification and Labeling of Compressed Gases, Tenth Edition” as proposed.
In petition P-1659, COSTHA proposed to revise § 172.205 to permit the use of electronic signatures when completing an EPA form 8700-22 and 8700-22A. PHMSA reviewed and concurred with this proposed change, believing there is likely merit without a reduction in safety. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to add paragraph (j) to permit the use of electronic signatures when completing an EPA form 8700-22 and 8700-22A.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from HDA, AAR, COSTHA, DGAC, and Clifford Bartley. All commenters expressed support for the proposal. Additionally, AAR noted that “it should be recognized that an electronic copy of the manifest can be used to meet the three-year retention requirement.” Therefore, PHMSA is revising § 172.205 to permit the use of electronic signatures when completing an EPA form 8700-22 and 8700-22A and recognizing that the electronic manifest can be used to meet the 3-year retention requirement.
In petition P-1662, Rigid Intermediate Bulk Container Association of North America (RIBCA) proposed to amend § 178.703(b) to acknowledge that the marked date of manufacture on a composite IBC may differ from the marked date of manufacture on the inner receptacle of that IBC. RIBCA petitioned PHMSA to propose the substance of the UN adopted note, “The date of manufacture of the inner receptacle may be different from the marked date of manufacture (see 6.5.2.1), repair (see 6.5.4.5.3) or remanufacture (see 6.5.2.4) of the composite IBC,” as a final sentence in § 178.703(b)(6)(i) to read as follows: “The date of manufacture of the inner receptacle may be different from the marked date of manufacture required by § 178.703(a)(1)(iv) or by § 180.352(d)(1)(iv).”
Upon review of the petition, PHMSA found that allowing the inner receptacle and the composite IBC to have different date markings will have no effect on the safety of the use and manufacture of IBCs. Integrating the proposed language into the current HMR will also bring rules for the marking of dates of manufacture on IBCs in line with current international standards. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise the HMR to allow the date of manufacture on the inner receptacle to be different than on the composite IBC.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received a comment from RIBCA. RIBCA noted that this change will have no effect on safety when inner receptacles and composite IBCs are stamped with different dates reflecting manufacture or repair of a completed IBC. However, RIBCA disagreed with the language in the NPRM that states “provided that the retest and inspection of the IBCs be based on the earliest marked date.” RIBCA contested that this language should be deleted because it is unnecessary from a safety perspective since inner packagings are sometimes built and stored well before being installed in composite IBCs. Therefore, as proposed, the retest and inspection would apply to an IBC well before an inner package becomes subject to detrimental effects, which begins when it is installed in the IBC. RIBCA noted that this language is inconsistent with other requirements in the regulations and more restrictive than the UN Model Regulations/International Regulations, further noting that it would create an additional complexity for an IBC user because they will need to compare two different dates when determining required periodic tests and inspection dates.
In response to these comment, PHMSA agrees to remove the language stating “provided that the retest and inspection of IBCs be based on the earliest marked date.” While PHMSA believes that including multiple dates may make it confusing to users and may make it difficult to know which to use, the marked date of repair is ultimately the date that must be used to determine the next inspection date. Also, because the repair phase of an IBC includes a leakproofness test, the 2.5-year time period should start from that point. However, comments from members of industry suggest that they are typically replaced in a timeframe less than 2.5 years, so this should not make a difference. Therefore, PHMSA is revising the changes to § 178.703(b) to remove the above language.
In petition P-1663, COSTHA requested PHMSA revise the basis weight tolerance provided in Start Printed Page 55800§ 178.516(b)(7) from +/− 5 percent to +/− 10 percent from the nominal basis weight reported in the initial design qualification test report.
PHMSA conducted a review of the petition and found that the requested change is unlikely to affect safety and is largely following industry practices. The realities of paper manufacturing are such that a wide range of basis weights can be found on any large enough sample of fiberboard run on the same line to the same specification. This revision would only modify the percentage threshold for the allowable nominal basis weight for fiberboard boxes and would not result in any fundamental changes to testing, recordkeeping, or approval processes by either PHMSA or the regulated community. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise the basis weight tolerance provided in § 178.516(b)(7) from +/− 5 percent to +/− 10 percent from the nominal basis weight reported in the initial design qualification test report.
In response to the proposed changes in the NPRM, PHMSA received comments from DGAC, Clifford Bartley, Fibre Box Association, and COSTHA. All commenters expressed support for the proposal. Therefore, PHMSA is incorporating the changes as proposed to revise the basis weight tolerance provided in § 178.516(b)(7) from +/− 5 percent to +/− 10 percent from the nominal basis weight reported in the initial design qualification test report.
Below is a section-by-section description of the changes being adopted in this final rule.
Section 171.7 lists all standards incorporated by reference into the HMR that are not specifically set forth in the regulations. This final rule incorporates by reference publications by the Chlorine Institute, the DoD, and the CGA.
(1) Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “A” for 100-lb. & 150-lb. Chlorine Cylinders, Edition 12, Revision 2, July 2014. This publication is freely available on the Chlorine Institute website at: https://bookstore.chlorineinstitute.org/​iba-instruction-booklet-chlorine-institute-emergency-kit-a-for-100-lb-and-150-lb-chlorine-cylinders-166.html. This publication illustrates the use of Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “A.” It also includes a complete parts list and instructions on how to apply both generations of Emergency Kit “A,” those manufactured before December 31, 2012 and after January 1, 2013. The Emergency Kit “A” contains devices and tools to contain leaks in and around the cylinder valve and in the side wall of chlorine cylinders.
(2) Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “B” for Chlorine Ton Containers, Edition 11, Revision 1, July 2014. This publication is available on the Chlorine Institute website at: https://bookstore.chlorineinstitute.org/​mm5/​merchant.mvc?​Session_​ID=​832f559635b70c753d7a6780f4876094&​Store_​Code=​ci2store&​Screen=​PROD&​Product_​Code=​EPR_​IB_​B-HC&​. This publication illustrates the use of Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “B.” It also includes a complete parts list and instructions on how to apply both the current and previous kit devices of Emergency Kit “B.” The updates in this edition include depictions of commonly used optional devices and numerous editorial revisions. Emergency Kit “B” contains devices and tools to contain leaks in and around the ton container valves and in the side wall of ton containers.
(3) Pamphlet 57, Emergency Shut-Off Systems for Bulk Transfer of Chlorine, Edition 6, June 2015. This publication is available on the Chlorine Institute website at: https://bookstore.chlorineinstitute.org/​mm5/​merchant.mvc?​Session_​ID=​832f559635b70c753d7a6780f4876094&​Store_​Code=​ci2store&​Screen=​PROD&​Product_​Code=​SPHP0057-HC&​. This publication describes recommended practices for emergency shut-off protection during chlorine transfers involving bulk containers. The practices include automatic shut-off upon container movement or utility failure, the ability to activate the system at the bulk container or remotely for any reason, including a chlorine leak, and practical design options for a variety of industry accepted systems.
(4) Pamphlet 168, Guidelines for Dual Valve Systems for Bulk Chlorine Transport, Edition 2, July 2015. Pamphlet 168 is to be added to the HMR at § 178.337-9. This publication is available on the Chlorine Institute website at: https://bookstore.chlorineinstitute.org/​mm5/​merchant.mvc?​Session_​ID=​832f559635b70c753d7a6780f4876094&​Store_​Code=​ci2store&​Screen=​PROD&​Product_​Code=​SPHP0168-HC&​. This publication sets forth performance and selection criteria that should be used in identifying dual valve systems for bulk chlorine transportation applications (i.e., tank cars, cargo tanks, and barges). These configurations are intended to meet DOT and Transport Canada (TC) performance requirements. This pamphlet contains information pertaining to standardizations, performance and design criteria, operational and installation considerations, as well as an appendix that includes valve manufacturer information.
(1) TB 700-2; NAVSEAINST 8020.8C; TO 11A-1-47: DoD Ammunition and Explosives Hazard Classification Procedures, 30 July 2012, into § 173.56. This publication is freely available on the DoD website at: https://www.ddesb.pentagon.mil/​docs/​TB700-2.pdf. This publication sets forth detailed procedures for hazard classifying ammunition and explosives in accordance with DOT regulations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization guidelines, and United Nations Recommendations. Based on reactions obtained, it further provides for assignment of appropriate hazard classifications for transportation and storage. It seeks to assure that under identical conditions, all DoD Components (DODCs) will use identical hazard classifications for ammunition and explosives items.
(2) DLAR 4145.41/AR 700-143/NAVSUPINST 4030.55D/AFMAN 24-210_IP/MCO 4030.40C: Packaging of Hazardous Materials, 21 April 2015 into § 173.7. This publication is freely available on the DoD website at: http://www.dla.mil/​Portals/​104/​Documents/​J5StrategicPlansPolicy/​PublicIssuances/​r4145.41.pdf. This publication establishes a uniform standard for packaging hazardous materials for safe, efficient, and legal storage, handling, and transportation, to include Department of Transportation Special Permit (DOT-SP), Competent Authority Approval (CAA), Certificate of Equivalency (COE), and Packaging Waivers for Military Air in accordance with AR 700-15/NAVSUPINST 4030.28E/AFJMAN 24-206/MCO 4030.33E/DLAR 4145.7 (Reference (c)) and Defense Transportation Regulation (DTR) 4500.9- R-Part II, Cargo Movement (Reference (d)).
(1) CGA C-7-2014, Guide to Classification and Labeling of Compressed Gases, Tenth Edition. This publication states the general principles for labels and markings and gives recommended minimum requirements for labeling of compressed gases for many hazardous gases and selected liquids.
(2) CGA V-9-2012, Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Start Printed Page 55801Gas Cylinder Valves, Seventh Edition. This publication specifies general cylinder valve design, design qualification, required markings, and performance requirements such as operating temperature limits, pressure ranges, operating torque limits, and flow capabilities. It also provides testing and maintenance requirements.
Section 172.205 describes the requirements for the use of hazardous waste manifest. This final rule revises paragraph (j) to permit the use of electronic signatures when completing an EPA form 8700-22 and 8700-22A.
Section 172.407 describes the label specifications for packages shipping hazardous materials under the HMR. This final rule revises paragraph (c) to allow for size tolerances for the labels by inserting the term “approximately” for the inner border to be 5 mm. This final rule also revises paragraph (f) to address inconsistencies between international and domestic labels.
Section 172.519 describes placard specification for shipments of hazardous materials that require placards. This final rule revises paragraph (c) to allow for size tolerances for the placards by inserting the term “approximately” for the inner border to be 5 mm. This final rule also revises paragraph (f) to address inconsistencies between international and domestic placards.
Section 172.604 describes the requirements to have an emergency response number on shipping papers for shipments of hazardous materials. This final rule revises § 172.604(d) to no longer require an emergency response number for excepted quantities of hazardous materials.
Section 173.5a outlines the requirements for cargo tank motor vehicles used for roadway striping. This final rule adds proper shipping names in § 173.5a(c)(1) to the list of authorized materials that can be used under this section.
Section 173.24a outlines the general requirements for non-bulk packages. This final rule revises each paragraph in this section to allow for packages tested with a liquid material to be filled with a solid material of the equivalent packing group.
Section 173.31 outlines the specifications for the use of tank cars. Specifically, § 173.31(e) outlines the specifications for tank cars used to transport materials that are poisonous by inhalation. This final rule removes the reference to the 20-year service life for these tank cars in § 173.31(e)(2)(iii), thus extending the service life to the standard for all tank cars set forth at § 215.203 of the FRA regulations.
Section 173.150 outlines exceptions for Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids. This final rule changes the units in § 173.150(g) from imperial units to the International System of Units and revises all the units in this section to the International System of Units.
Section 173.156 outlines exceptions for limited quantities and ORM-D materials. This final rule revises § 173.156(b)(2)(iii) to allow for pallets to be made of metal, plastic, or composite materials in addition to wood.
Section 173.301 outlines the general requirements for the shipment of compressed gases and other hazardous materials in cylinders, UN pressure receptacles, and spherical pressure vessels. This final rule revises § 173.301(a) by adding subparagraphs (11) and (12). Paragraph (11) will require all cylinder valves manufactured on or after May 4, 2015, to conform to the requirements in CGA V-9-2012, as well as requiring UN pressure receptacles to conform to the requirements of § 173.301b(c)(1). Paragraph (12) will require that cylinder valve protection caps manufactured on or after May 4, 2015, conform to the requirements of CGA V-9-2012. Cylinder valve protection caps used on UN cylinders must conform to the requirements in § 173.301b(c)(2)(ii).
Section 173.335 outlines the requirements for chemicals under pressure, n.o.s. This final rule revises § 173.335(a) to clarify that these materials are not subject to the cylinder valve requirements finalized in § 173.301(a)(11).
Section 176.415 outlines permit requirements for Division 1.5, ammonium nitrates, as well as certain ammonium nitrate fertilizers. This final rule revises the HMR to no longer require written permission from the COTP to load or unload limited quantities of ammonium nitrates.
Section 178.35 outlines the general requirements for specification cylinders. This final rule revises § 178.35 to no longer require the marking of the service pressure for DOT 8 and DOT 8 AL cylinders.
Section 178.337-9 outlines the requirements for pressure relief devices, piping, valves, hoses, and fittings. This final rule revises § 178.337-9(b)(8) to add a reference to allow the use of “Sections 4 through 6, Pamphlet 168, Guidelines for Dual Valve Systems for Bulk Chlorine Transport, Edition 2, July 2015” under this section.
Section 178.516 outlines the standards for fiberboard boxes. This final rule revises § 178.516(b)(7) to allow for the paper wall basis weights that vary by not more than +/− 10 percent from the nominal basis weight reported in the initial design qualification test report.
Section 178.703 outlines the marking requirements for IBCs. This final rule revises § 178.703(b)(6)(i) by clarifying that the date of manufacture of the inner receptacle may be different from the marked date of manufacturer required by § 178.703(a)(1)(iv) or § 180.352(d)(1)(iv).
Section 180.407 outlines the requirements for the testing and inspection of specification cargo tanks. This final rule revises the table in § 180.407(g)(1)(iv) to put the words “The test pressure on the name plate or specification plate, or 1.5 times the MAWP, whichever is greater” in the test pressure column before each test pressure specification.
Section 180.605 outlines the requirements for periodic testing, inspection, and repair of portable tanks. This final rule revises § 180.605(l) by adding § 180.605(l)(2) to allow the owner of a portable tank to contact the National Board for a copy of the manufacture's data report, if the portable tank was registered with the National Board, or copy the information contained on the portable tank's specification plate and ASME Code data plates.Start Printed Page 55802
This final rule is published under authority of the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law (Federal Hazmat Law; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.). Section 5103(b) of Federal Hazmat Law 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 delegated her authority to PHMSA at 49 CFR 1.97.
This final rule is not considered a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735; Oct. 4, 1993), and was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This final rule is also not considered a significant rule under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures order issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation on February 26, 1979. See 44 FR 11034.
PHMSA has involved the public in the regulatory process in a variety of ways for this final rule. Specifically, in this rulemaking PHMSA is responding to 19 petitions that have been submitted by the public in accordance with the APA and PHMSA's rulemaking procedure regulations (49 CFR 106.95).
Overall, this rulemaking maintains 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-2015-0102) at www.regulations.gov.
PHMSA estimates a present value of quantified net cost savings of approximately $237 million over 10 years and $16.5 million annualized at a 7 percent discount rate. These estimates do not include non-monetized and qualitative cost/cost savings discussed in the RIA.
PHMSA's cost/cost savings analysis relies on the monetization of impacts for five petitions included in this final rule. Three of the petitions that were monetized contained cost savings, while two petitions have minor costs. One provision in particular is responsible for the vast majority of the cost savings estimated: The extension of the regulatory life of HM-246-compliant PIH tank cars from 20 years to 50 years, as allowed by FRA regulation, see 49 CFR 215.203, for other tank cars in its class. This regulatory life extension is expected to reduce PIH tank car replacement costs that would occur in the absence of rulemaking. Moreover, these tank cars are more robust and less likely to release material than legacy PIH tank cars, resulting in safety benefits such as reduced incident damages. The following table presents a summary of the five petitions that have monetized impacts upon codification and contribute to PHMSA's estimation of quantified net cost savings.
7% discount (if applicable)
3% discount (if applicable)
P-1636 PIH Tank Cars Service Life Extension Relief ($211,740,704) ($985,661,271)
P-1663 Package Weight Tolerances (25,000,000) (58,333,333)
P-1619 Chlorine Publications (197,644) (452,676)
P-1641 CGA V-9-2012 Cylinder Values and Caps 45,522 47,289
P-1657 CGA C-7-2014 Publications 99,320 103,177
Total (236,793,506) (1,044,296,814)
Annualized (16,575,545) (31,328,904)
In addition to these five items, PHMSA described an additional 14 items that are deregulatory in nature but lack of monetization of their cost savings impacts. While information gaps prevent quantification of cost savings for these items, PHMSA believes that they relax current requirements or provide additional flexibility, and therefore should be considered deregulatory in nature.
In conclusion, PHMSA estimates a present value of quantified net cost savings of approximately $237 million over a perpetual time horizon and $16.5 million annualized at a 7 percent discount rate. Please see the RIA in the regulatory docket for additional detail and a description of PHMSA's methods and calculations.
This final rule was analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132, “Federalism” (64 FR 43255; Aug. 10, 1999). This final rule would preempt State, local, and Indian tribe requirements but does not impose 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, 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(1), contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) preempting State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain covered subjects. Covered subjects are:
(v) The design, manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, reconditioning, repair, or testing of a packaging or container which is represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in the transport of hazardous materials.Start Printed Page 55803
This final rule concerns the classification, packaging, marking, labeling, and handling of hazardous materials, among other covered subjects. This rule would preempt any State, local, or Indian tribe requirements concerning these subjects unless the non-Federal requirements are “substantively the same” as the Federal requirements. See 49 CFR 107.202(d).
Federal Hazmat Law provides at 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(2) that if PHMSA issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects, the administration must determine and publish in the Federal Register the effective date of Federal preemption. That effective date may not be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of the final rule and not later than 2 years after the date of issuance. PHMSA proposes the effective date of Federal preemption be 90 days from publication of a final rule in this matter in the Federal Register.
This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249; Nov. 9, 2000). Because this final rule does not have Tribal implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply, and a Tribal summary impact statement is not required.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 requires an agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency determines the rule is not expected to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule amends miscellaneous provisions in the HMR for clarification based on petitions for rulemaking. While maintaining safety, this final rule would relax certain requirements that are overly burdensome and provide clarity where requested by the regulated community. The changes are generally intended to provide relief to shippers, carriers, and packaging manufacturers, including small entities.
The changes are generally intended to provide relief to shippers, carriers, and packaging manufactures and testers, including small entities. Therefore, PHMSA certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule has been developed in accordance with Executive Order 13272, “Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking” (67 FR 53461; Aug. 16, 2002) and DOT's Policies and Procedures to promote compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act to ensure that potential impacts of draft rules on small entities are properly considered.
This final rule does not impose any new information collection requirements and, in one instance, marginally decreases the information collection burden on the regulated community. Specifically, the following information collection requirement is affected by this rulemaking:
Please direct your requests for a copy of this final information collection to Steven Andrews or T. Glenn Foster, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards (PHH-12), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in spring and fall of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda.
This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. Public Law 104-4 (Mar. 22, 1995). It does not result in costs in any one year of $141.3 million or more to either State, local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, and is the least burdensome alternative that achieves the objective of the rule.
In response to petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated community, PHMSA is amending the HMR to update, clarify, or provide relief from miscellaneous regulatory requirements. In this final rule, PHMSA is implementing amendments that include, but are not limited to, the following: Incorporating by Reference multiple publications from the CGA, the Chlorine Institute, and DoD; addressing inconsistencies with domestic and international labels and placards; excepting excepted quantities from the emergency response telephone requirement; allowing electronic signatures for EPA manifest forms; and no longer requiring the service pressure to be marked on DOT 8 and 8AL cylinders.
These amendments are intended to promote safety, regulatory relief, and clarity. The proposed changes were identified in response to petitions from stakeholders affected by the HMR. These minor changes will clarify the HMR and enhance safety, while offering some net economic benefits.
This action is necessary to: (1) Fulfill our statutory directive to promote transportation safety; (2) fulfill our Start Printed Page 55804statutory directive under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 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) support governmental efforts to provide regulatory relief to the regulated community; (4) address safety concerns raised by petitioners and remove identified regulatory ambiguity; and (5) simplify and clarify the regulations in order to promote understanding and compliance.
The intended effect of this action is to enhance the safe transportation of hazardous materials and, in conjunction, clarify, simplify, and relax certain regulatory requirements for carriers, shippers, and other stakeholders. These regulatory revisions will offer more efficient and effective ways of achieving PHMSA's goal of safe and secure transportation, protecting both people and the environment, of hazardous materials in commerce.
In developing the final rule, PHMSA considered the following alternatives:
If PHMSA chose this alternative, we would not proceed with any rulemaking on this subject and the current regulatory standards would remain in effect. This option would not address outstanding petitions for rulemaking. We rejected the No Action Alternative.
This alternative is the current proposal as it appears in this final rule, applying to transport of hazardous materials by highway, rail, vessel, and aircraft. The amendments encompassed in this alternative are more fully addressed in the preamble and regulatory text sections of this rulemaking.
When developing potential regulatory requirements, PHMSA considers the environmental impact of each amendment. Specifically, PHMSA evaluates the: Risk of release and resulting environmental impact; risk to human safety, including any risk to first responders; longevity of the packaging; and if the proposed regulation would be carried out in a defined geographic area, the resources, especially any sensitive areas, and how they could be impacted by any proposed regulations. Of the regulatory changes proposed in this rulemaking, most 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 (i.e., this is a nationwide rulemaking).
If PHMSA were to select the No Action Alternative, current regulations would remain in place and no new provisions would be added. However, efficiencies gained through harmonization in updates to transport standards, lists of regulated substances, definitions, packagings, markings requirements, shipper requirements, modal requirements, etc., 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 proposed environmental and safety requirements under the No Action Alternative would result in a lost opportunity for reducing negative environmental and safety-related impacts. Greenhouse gas emissions would remain the same under the No Action Alternative.
This Preferred Alternative encompasses enhanced and clarified regulatory requirements, which would result in increased compliance and fewer negative environmental and safety impacts. The table below summarizes possible environmental benefits and any potential negative impacts for the amendments in this final rule. A detailed discussion on the potential environmental impacts of each type of amendment is included in the complete Environmental Assessment placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
Proposed amendment(s) to HMR (numbered as above herein)
1. Cargo Tank Specification Regulatory Clarity No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
2. Chlorine Institute Publications Update (Publications) No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
3. International Label and Placard Consistency Harmonization Slightly positive benefits.
4. Limited Quantities of Ammonium Nitrate by Vessel Exception No impacts.
5. Use of Combination Packages Tested with a Liquid Regulatory Flexibility Very slight, negligible, or no impacts.
6. Shipping Names for Roadway Stripping Vehicles Editorial No impacts.
7. Toxic by Inhalation (TIH) Tank Car Lifespan Regulatory Flexibility No impacts.
8. Limited Quantity Pallets Regulatory Flexibility No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
9. Emergency Response Numbers Harmonization No impacts.
10. Units of Measurement for Limited Quantities of Ethyl Alcohol Harmonization/Editorial No impacts.
11. Cylinder Valves and Protection Caps Standard Incorporation No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
12. Recordkeeping Requirements for Portable Tanks Regulatory Clarity, Harmonization No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
13. Printing Tolerances for Labels and Placards Regulatory Flexibility Slightly positive benefits.
14. Incorporation of Department of Defense (DoD) Standards Standard Incorporation Slightly positive—moderate benefits.
15. Service Pressure Marking for DOT 8 and DOT 8L Cylinders Regulatory Flexibility No impacts.
16. Incorporation of CGA Publications Standard Incorporation No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
17. Use of Electronic Manifest Update (Technology/Design), Regulatory Flexibility No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
18. Marked Date of Manufacture on Composite IBCs Harmonization No impacts—slightly positive benefits.
19. Basis Weight Tolerances for Liners and Mediums Used in the Manufacture of Specification UN 4G Boxes Regulatory Flexibility No impacts.
PHMSA has selected the Preferred Alternative. As discussed in the table above, we expect no or very slight positive environmental impacts from the Preferred Alternative.
This final rule would affect some PHMSA stakeholders, including hazardous materials shippers and carriers by highway, rail, vessel, and aircraft, as well as package manufacturers and testers. PHMSA sought comment on the Environmental Assessment contained in the June 30, 2016, NPRM published under Docket No. PHMSA 2015-0102 [81 FR 42609] (HM-219A); however, PHMSA did not receive any comments. In addition, PHMSA sought comment from the following Federal agencies and modal partners:
These Federal agencies did not submit to PHMSA any adverse comments on the amendments proposed in the NPRM.
The revisions in this final rule are intended to update, clarify, or provide relief from certain existing regulatory requirements to promote safer transportation practices; eliminate unnecessary regulatory requirements; facilitate international commerce; and make these requirements easier to understand. These amendments will foster a greater level of compliance with the HMR, and thus the net environmental impact of this proposal will be slightly positive.
The provisions of this final rule build on current regulatory requirements to enhance the transportation safety and security of shipments of hazardous materials transported by highway, rail, aircraft, and vessel, thereby reducing the risks of an accidental or intentional release of hazardous materials and consequent environmental damage. PHMSA believes that there are no non-negligible environmental impacts associated with this final rule.
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). 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), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/​privacy.
Under Executive Order 13609, “Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation” (77 FR 26413; May 4, 2012), 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. In meeting 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.
PHMSA participates in the establishment of international standards in order to protect the safety of the American public, and we have assessed the effects of the final rule to ensure that it does not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign trade. Accordingly, this rulemaking is consistent with Executive Order 13609 and PHMSA's obligations under the Trade Agreement Act, as amended.
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (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 standard bodies. This final rule involves multiple voluntary consensus standards which are discussed at length in the “Section-by-Section Review” for § 171.7.
2. Amend § 171.7 by:
a. Revising paragraphs (l)(1), (2), and (5), redesignating paragraphs (l)(7) through (11) as (l)(8) through (12) and adding new paragraph (l)(7);
d. In paragraphs (t)(1) and (v)(2), adding “172.407” to the list of sections in numerical order;
e. In paragraph (y)(1), adding “173.301(a)(11)” to the end of the list of sections;
f. In the introductory text of paragraph (bb)(1), add “172.407” to the list of sections in numerical order; and
g. In paragraph (dd)(1), add “172.519” to the list of sections in numerical order.
(1) Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “A” for 100-lb. & 150-lb. Chlorine Cylinders, Edition 12, Revision 2, January 2014, into § 173.3.
(2) Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “B” for Chlorine Ton Containers, Edition 11, July 2014, into § 173.3.
(5) Pamphlet 57, Emergency Shut-Off Systems for Bulk Transfer of Chlorine, Edition 6, June 2015, into § 177.840.
(7) Pamphlet 168, Guidelines for Dual Valve Systems for Bulk Chlorine Transport, Edition 2, July 2015, into § 178.337-9.
(7) CGA C-7-2014, Guide to Classification and Labeling of Compressed Gases, Tenth Edition, copyright 2014, into § 172.400a.
(23) CGA V-9-2012, Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Cylinder Valves, Seventh Edition, 2012, into § 173.301.
(o) Department of Defense (DoD), DoD Explosives Safety Board, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 16E12, Alexandria, VA 22350, https://www.ddesb.pentagon.mil/​;​ or Defense Logistics Agency, Technical and Quality Assurance Division, 8725 John J. Kingman Rd., Fort Belvoir, VA 22060, http://www.dla.mil/​Pages/​default.aspx.
(1) TB 700-2; NAVSEAINST 8020.8C/TO 11A-1-47: DOD Ammunition and Explosives Hazard Classification Procedures, July 30, 2012, into § 173.56.
(2) DLAR 4145.41/AR 700-143/NAVSUPINST 4030.55D/AFMAN 24-210_IP/MCO 4030.40C: Packaging of Hazardous Material, April 21, 2015, into § 173.7.
4. Amend § 172.205 by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:
5. Amend § 172.407 by revising paragraphs (c) and (f) to read as follows:
(ii) Where dimensions are not specified, all features shall be in approximate proportion to those shown in §§ 172.411 through 172.448 of this subpart, as appropriate.
(2) The CARGO AIRCRAFT ONLY label must be a rectangle measuring at Start Printed Page 55807least 110 mm (4.3 inches) in height by 120 mm (4.7 inches) in width. The words “CARGO AIRCRAFT ONLY” must be shown in letters measuring at least 6.3 mm (0.25 inches) in height.
(f) Exceptions. Except for materials poisonous by inhalation (see § 171.8 of this subchapter), a label conforming to specifications in the UN Recommendations, the ICAO Technical Instructions, the IMDG Code, or the Transport Canada TDG Regulations (IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter) may be used in place of a corresponding label that conforms to the requirements of this subpart.
6. Amend § 172.519 by revising paragraphs (c) and (f) to read as follows:
(f) Exceptions. When hazardous materials are offered for transportation or transported under the provisions of subpart C of part 171 of this subchapter, a placard conforming to the specifications in the UN Recommendations, the ICAO Technical Instructions, the IMDG Code, or the Transport Canada TDG Regulations (IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter) may be used in place of a corresponding placard conforming to the requirements of this subpart. However, a bulk packaging, transport vehicle, or freight container containing a material poisonous by inhalation (see § 171.8 of this subchapter) must be placarded in accordance with this subpart (see § 171.23(b)(10) of this subchapter).
7. Amend § 172.604 by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
(3) Transportation vehicles or freight containers containing lading that has been fumigated and displaying the FUMIGANT marking (see § 172.302(g)) as required by § 173.9 of this subchapter, unless other hazardous materials are present in the cargo transport unit.
9. Amend § 173.3 by:
a. In paragraph (e)(1), adding “(with the exception of repair method using Device 8 for side leaks)” immediately after the phrase “Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “A”; and
b. In paragraph (e)(2), adding “(with the exception of repair method using Device 9 for side leaks)” immediately after the phrase “Chlorine Institute Emergency Kit “B”.
10. Amend § 173.5a by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
(1) Authorized materials. Only the hazardous materials listed in the table 1 to this paragraph (c)(1) may be transported in roadway striping vehicles. Cargo tanks may not be filled to a capacity that would be greater than liquid full at 130 °F.
Table 1 to Paragraph (c)(1)—Hazardous Materials Description
Acetone a 3 UN1090 II.
Amines, liquid, corrosive, n.o.s.b or Polyamines, liquid, corrosive, n.o.s b 8 UN2735 III.
Corrosive liquid, basic, organic, n.o.s b 8 UN3267 III.
Corrosive liquids, n.o.s b 8 UN1760 III.
Dichloromethane a 6.1 UN1593 III.
Elevated temperature liquid, n.o.s., at or above 100 °C and below its flash point (including molten metals, molten salts, etc.) c 9 UN3257 III.
Environmentally hazardous substance, liquid, n.o.s b 9 UN3082 III.
Ethyl acetate a 3 UN1173 II.
Ethyl methyl ketone or Methyl ethyl ketone a 3 UN1193 II.
Flammable liquids, n.o.s d 3 UN1993 II.
Methanol a 3 UN1230 II.
Organic peroxide type E, liquid (Dibenzoyl peroxide) b 5.2 UN3107 NA.
Petroleum distillates, n.o.s. or Petroleum products, n.o.s a 3 UN1268 III.
Toluene a 3 UN1294 II.
1,1,1-Trichloroethane a 6.1 UN2831 III.
Xylenes a 3 UN1307 II, III.
11. Amend § 173.7, by removing in the introductory text of paragraph (a) “DLAD 4145.41/AR 700-143/AFJI 24-210/NAVSUPINST 4030.55B/MCO 4030.40B” and adding in its place “DLAR 4145.41/AR 700-143/NAVSUPINST 4030.55D/AFMAN 24-210_IP/MCO 4030.40C”.
12. Amend § 173.24a by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(3) to read as follows:
(b) * * * (1) A non-bulk packaging not exceeding 400 kg may be filled with a liquid hazardous material only when the specific gravity of the material or gross mass of the package does not exceed that marked on the packaging, or a specific gravity of 1.2 if not marked, except as follows:
13. Amend § 173.31 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
(iii) [Reserved]Start Printed Page 55809
14. In § 173.56 amend paragraph (b)(2)(i) by removing “DoD Explosives Hazard Classification Procedures” and adding in its place “DoD Ammunition and Explosives Hazard Classification Procedures”.
15. Amend § 173.150 by revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:
16. Amend § 173.156 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
(b) Packagings for limited quantity and ORM-D are specified according to hazard class in §§ 173.150 through 173.155, 173.306, and 173.309(b). In addition to exceptions provided for limited quantity and ORM-D materials elsewhere in this part, the following are provided:
(1) Strong outer packagings as specified in this part, marking requirements specified in subpart D of part 172 of this subchapter, and the 30 kg (66 pounds) gross weight limitation when—
17. In § 173.301, paragraphs (a)(11) and (12) are added to read as follows:
(11) Cylinder valves manufactured on or after November 7, 2019, used on cylinders to transport compressed gases must conform to the requirements in CGA V-9 (IBR; see § 171.7 of this subchapter). A valve for a UN pressure receptacle must conform to the Start Printed Page 55810requirements of § 173.301b(c)(1). Cylinder valves used on cylinders in liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) service are permitted to comply with the requirements of NFPA 58 (IBR; see § 171.7 of this subchapter).
18. In § 173.335, paragraphs (a) is revised as follows:
(a) General requirements. A cylinder filled with a chemical under pressure must be offered for transportation in accordance with the requirements of this section and § 172.301 of this subchapter. In addition, a DOT specification cylinder must meet the requirements in §§ 173.301a, 173.302, 173.302a, and 173.305, as applicable. UN pressure receptacles must meet the requirements in §§ 173.301b, 173.302b, and 173.304b as applicable. Where more than one section applies to a cylinder, the most restrictive requirements must be followed. These materials are not subject to the cylinder valve cap requirements in § 173.301(a)(11) and (12).
20. In § 176.415, paragraph (b)(5) is added to read as follows:
22. In § 178.35, paragraph (f)(7) is added to read as follows:
23. Amend § 178.337-9 by revising paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows:
Pressure relief devices, piping, valves, hoses and fittings.
(8) Chlorine cargo tanks. Angle valves on cargo tanks intended for chlorine service must conform to the standards of the Chlorine Institute, Inc., Drawing; Dwg. 104-8; or “Section 3, Pamphlet 166, Angle Valve Guidelines for Chlorine Bulk Transportation;” or “Sections 4 through 6, Pamphlet 168, Guidelines for Dual Valve Systems for Bulk Chlorine Transport” (IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter). Before installation, each angle valve must be tested for leakage at not less than 225 psig using dry air or inert gas.
24. Amend § 178.516 by revising paragraph (b)(7) to read as follows:
25. Amend § 178.703 by revising paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows:
(i) The code number designating the IBC design type, the name and address or symbol of the manufacturer, the date of manufacture and the country authorizing the allocation of the mark as specified in paragraph (a) of this section. The date of manufacture of the inner receptacle may be different from the marked date of manufacture required by § 178.703(a)(1)(iv) or by § 180.352(d)(1)(iv) of this subchapter; and
27. Amend § 180.407 by revising paragraph (g)(1)(iv) to read as follows:
28. Amend § 180.605 by revising paragraph (l) to read as follows:
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2018, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
1. https://www.regulations.gov/​docket?​D=​PHMSA-2016-0164.