[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 43 (Monday, March 4, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15636-15668]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-03290]
[[Page 15635]]
Vol. 89
Monday,
No. 43
March 4, 2024
Part II
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
49 Parts 107, 171 et al.
Hazardous Materials: Adoption of Miscellaneous Petitions and Updating
Regulatory Requirements; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 89 , No. 43 / Monday, March 4, 2024 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 15636]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 107, 171, 172, 173, 178, and 180
[Docket No. PHMSA-2020-0102 (HM-219D)]
RIN 2137-AF49
Hazardous Materials: Adoption of Miscellaneous Petitions and
Updating Regulatory Requirements
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA amends the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) to
update, clarify, improve the safety of, or streamline various
regulatory requirements. Specifically, this rulemaking responds to 18
petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated community between
May 2018 and October 2020 that requests PHMSA address a variety of
provisions, including but not limited to those addressing packaging,
hazard communication, and the incorporation by reference of certain
documents. These revisions maintain or enhance the existing high level
of safety under the HMR while providing clarity and appropriate
regulatory flexibility in the transport of hazardous materials.
DATES:
Effective date: This final rule is effective on April 3, 2024.
Delayed compliance date: March 4, 2025.
Incorporation by reference date: The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in this final rule is approved by the
Director of the Federal Register as of April 3, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Andrews, 202-366-8553, Office
of Hazardous Materials Standards, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, East Building, 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Incorporation by Reference Discussion Under 1 CFR Part 51
III. NPRM: Publication and Public Comments; Executive Order 13924
IV. Discussion of Amendments and Applicable Comments
V. Section-by-Section Review
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 14094, and DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures
C. Executive Order 13132
D. Executive Order 13175
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT
Procedures and Policies
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
H. Environmental Assessment
I. Privacy Act
J. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
K. Executive Order 13211
L. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
M. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 14028
N. Severability
I. Background
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires Federal agencies to
give interested persons the right to petition an agency to issue,
amend, or repeal a rule. (See 5 U.S.C. 553(e).) PHMSA regulations
specify that persons petitioning PHMSA to add, revise, or remove a
regulation in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts
171 through 180) must file a petition for rulemaking containing
adequate support for the requested action. (See 49 CFR 106.100.) PHMSA
amends the HMR in response to petitions for rulemaking submitted by
shippers, carriers, manufacturers, and industry representatives, and
welcomes petitions from any interested stakeholder or member of the
public with suggested changes to improve the HMR.
PHMSA now finds that these revisions will maintain the high safety
standard currently achieved under the HMR while providing clarity and
appropriate regulatory flexibility in the transport of hazardous
materials. PHMSA also notes that--insofar as adoption of the petitions
could reduce delays and interruptions of hazardous materials shipments
during transportation--the amendments will also lower greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and safety risks to minority, low-income, underserved,
and other disadvantaged populations and communities in the vicinity of
interim storage sites and transportation arteries and hubs. A detailed
discussion of the petitions and revisions can be found in section III
of this final rule.
In this final rule, PHMSA revises the HMR to:
Allow for appropriate flexibility of packaging options in
the transportation of compressed natural gas in cylinders.
Streamline the approval application process for the repair
of certain DOT specification cylinders.
Provide greater clarity on the filling requirements for
certain cylinders used to transport hydrogen and hydrogen mixtures.
Facilitate international commerce, and streamline
packaging and hazard communication requirements by harmonizing the HMR
with international regulations to allow the shipment of de minimis
amounts of poisonous materials.
Provide greater clarity by requiring a specific marking on
cylinders to indicate compliance with certain HMR provisions.
Streamline hazard communication requirements by allowing
appropriate marking exceptions under certain conditions for the
transportation of lithium button cell batteries installed in equipment.
Provide greater flexibility and accuracy in hazard
communication by allowing additional descriptions for certain gas
mixtures.
Increase the safe transportation of explosives by updating
certain Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME) documents currently
incorporated by reference.
Modify the definition of ``liquid'' to include the test
for determining fluidity (penetrometer test) prescribed in the European
Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by
Road (ADR).
Incorporate by reference the Compressed Gas Association's
(CGA) publication C-20-2014, ``Requalification Standard for Metallic,
DOT and TC 3-series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic
Examination,'' Second Edition, which will eliminate the need for some
existing DOT special permits and allow alternative methods for the
requalification of cylinders. This revision would eliminate the need
for special permit applications and renewals.
Incorporate by reference the updated Appendix A of CGA
publication C-7-2020, ``Guide to Classification and Labeling of
Compressed Gases,'' Eleventh Edition.
Incorporate by reference the CGA publication C-27-2019,
``Standard Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure of DOT 3-Series
Seamless Steel Tubes, First Edition.''
Incorporate by reference the CGA publication CGA C-29-
2019, ``Standard for Design Requirements for Tube Trailers and Tube
Modules, First Edition.''
Incorporate by reference the CGA publication CGA V-9-2019,
[[Page 15637]]
``Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Gas Cylinder
Valves, Eighth Edition.''
II. Incorporation by Reference Discussion Under 1 CFR Part 51
According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Circular A-
119, ``Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary
Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities,''
government agencies must use voluntary consensus standards wherever
practical in the development of regulations.
PHMSA currently incorporates by reference into the HMR all or the
relevant parts of several standards and specifications developed and
published by standard development organizations (SDOs). In general,
SDOs update and revise their published standards every two to five
years to reflect modern technology and best technical practices. The
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA; Pub.
L. 104-113, 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs Federal agencies to use
standards developed by voluntary consensus standards bodies in lieu of
government-written standards unless doing so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impracticable. Voluntary consensus
standards bodies develop, establish, or coordinate technical standards
using agreed-upon procedures. OMB issued Circular A-119 to implement
section 12(d) of the NTTAA relative to the utilization of consensus
technical standards by Federal agencies. This circular provides
guidance for agencies participating in voluntary consensus standards
bodies and describes procedures for satisfying the reporting
requirements in the NTTAA. Consistent with the requirements of the
NTTAA and its statutory authorities, PHMSA is responsible for
determining which currently referenced standards should be updated,
revised, or removed, and which standards should be added to the HMR.
Revisions to materials incorporated by reference in the HMR are handled
via the rulemaking process, which allows the public and regulated
entities to provide input. During the rulemaking process, PHMSA must
also obtain approval from the Office of the Federal Register to
incorporate by reference any new materials. Regulations of the Office
of the Federal Register require that agencies detail in the preamble of
a final rule the ways the materials it incorporates by reference are
reasonably available to interested parties, or how the agency worked to
make those materials reasonably available to interested parties. (See 1
CFR 51.5.)
IME standards are free and accessible to the public via the IME
website at https://www.ime.org/products/category/safety_library_publications_slps. The CGA references are available for
interested parties to purchase in either print or electronic editions
through the CGA organization website at https://portal.cganet.com/Publication/index.aspx. The UN manual of test and criteria is available
at https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/danger/publi/manual/Rev7/Manual_Rev7_E.pdf. The European Agreement concerning the International
Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR) can be found at https://unece.org/about-adr. The specific standards are discussed in greater
detail in the section-by-section review.
The following standards appear in the amendatory text of this
document and have already been approved for the locations in which they
appear: ASTM D 4359-90, ``Standard Test Method for Determining Whether
a Material is a Liquid or a Solid; CGA Technical Bulletin (TB): 2008-
25, ``Design Considerations for Tube Trailers;'' ISO 6406:2005(E),
``Gas cylinders--Seamless steel gas cylinders--Periodic inspection and
testing;'' and ISO 16148:2016(E), ``Gas cylinders--Refillable seamless
steel gas cylinders and tubes--Acoustic emission examination (AT) and
follow-up ultrasonic examination (UT) for periodic inspection and
testing.''
III. NPRM: Publication and Public Comments: Executive Order 13924
On March 3, 2023 [88 FR 13624], PHMSA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register, titled ``Hazardous
Materials: Adoption of Miscellaneous Petitions and Updating Regulatory
Requirements,'' under Docket No. PHMSA-2020-0102 (HM-219D). The NPRM
proposed revisions to the HMR in response to 18 petitions for
rulemaking submitted to PHMSA by various stakeholders in addition to
miscellaneous issues such as special permit procedures and harmonizing
the HMR with revisions to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
regulations. PHMSA discusses these petitions and revisions in detail in
section IV (Discussion of Amendments and Applicable Comments) of the
preamble to this final rule.
The comment period for the NPRM originally closed on May 3, 2023.
On April 6, 2023, PHMSA received a request from Worthington Industries
to extend the comment period for the NPRM. In response to the request
from Worthington Industries, PHMSA published a document on April 26,
2023 [88 FR 25335], extending the comment period to June 16, 2023.
PHMSA received a total of 14 sets of comments from eight separate
entities, three of which had submitted petitions that were the basis
for HMR amendments proposed in the NPRM. PHMSA received comments from
Chemours after the June 16, 2023, deadline. Consistent with 49 CFR
107.70(b), PHMSA considered those late-filed comments given the
commenter's interests in the rulemaking and the absence of additional
expense or delay resulting from their consideration. An alphabetical
list of the persons, companies, and associations that submitted
comments to the HM-219D NPRM are listed in the below table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenter name Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkema.................................. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0016.
Chemours................................ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0015.
Chemours................................ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0021.
Compressed Gas Association (CGA)........ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0010.
Council on the Safe Transportation of https://www.regulations.gov/
Hazardous Articles (COSTHA). comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0011.
Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC). https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0012.
Heating, Air-Conditioning, & https://www.regulations.gov/
Refrigeration Distributors comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0018.
International.
Heating, Air-Conditioning, & https://www.regulations.gov/
Refrigeration Distributors comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0017.
International.
Institute for the Makers of Explosives.. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0006.
The Dow Chemical Company................ https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0013.
The Plumbing-Heating-Cooling https://www.regulations.gov/
Contractors--National Association comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0004.
(PHCC).
Worthington Industries.................. https://www.regulations.gov/document/PHMSA-2020-0102-0003 0003.
Worthington Industries.................. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0019.
[[Page 15638]]
Worthington Industries.................. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/PHMSA-2020-0102-0014.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments submitted to this docket may be accessed via the
docket file numbers listed in the above table, as well as at https://www.regulations.gov. PHMSA developed this final rule in consideration
of the comments received to the public docket.
IV. Discussion of Amendments and Applicable Comments
Based on an assessment of the 18 petitions and two miscellaneous
amendments and the comments received in response to the NPRM, PHMSA is
amending the HMR as detailed in this section.
A. Transportation of Compressed Natural Gas/Methane in UN Pressure
Receptacles
In its petition (P-1714),\1\ CGA requests that PHMSA consider an
amendment to Sec. 173.302b to implement packaging restrictions for the
transportation of compressed natural gas (CNG) and methane in United
Nations (UN) seamless steel pressure receptacles with a tensile
strength greater than 950 MPa. For the purposes of the HMR, ``UN1971,
Methane, compressed'' is compressed natural gas that is at least 98
percent methane and free of corroding components. CGA expresses concern
regarding the growth in transport of CNG and methane in these
packagings, and wants to ensure the safety of the receptacles in this
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ P-1714--CGA (PHMSA-2018-0054), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0054.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CGA provides the historical context of PHMSA's predecessor agency
imposing similar packaging restrictions for CNG transported in certain
DOT specification cylinders. (See Sec. 173.302a(a)(4).) These
restrictions were intended to limit the effect of impurities in the
CNG, such as hydrogen sulfide, on the structural integrity of the steel
used in the manufacture of the cylinders. CGA cites several studies on
the corrosive effects of natural gas contaminants on a cylinder and
notes that the contaminants are usually noncorrosive in the absence of
liquid water. Finally, CGA highlights an October 27, 1977, incident in
which two people were killed, four people were injured, and a
compressor station was damaged when a DOT specification 3T seamless
steel cylinder ruptured while being filled with natural gas
contaminated with hydrogen sulfide and water.
CGA's specific concern is in regard to UN seamless steel pressure
receptacles with ultimate tensile strengths greater than 950 MPa being
used for the storage and transportation of CNG. Higher strength UN
seamless steel pressure receptacles are susceptible to embrittlement
from CNG contaminants and embrittlement makes the receptacles more
susceptible to fracture.
Currently, use of UN pressure receptacles for CNG and methane in
transportation is subject to the general requirements for shipment of
compressed gases in Sec. 173.301; additional general requirements of
UN pressure receptacles in Sec. 173.301b; and the filling requirements
of cylinders with non-liquefied (permanent) gases in Sec. 173.302.
However, under current regulations, there are no additional
requirements specific to the use of UN pressure receptacles in CNG or
methane service.
In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise Sec. 173.302b to include
conditions for the transportation of CNG and methane in UN stainless
steel pressure receptacles. The NPRM referenced content within CGA's
petition requesting such revision, stating that natural gas/methane can
be safely transported in UN steel pressure receptacles under the
following conditions:
The product is non-liquefied gas.
The UN seamless steel pressure receptacle has a maximum
tensile strength not greater than 950 MPa (137,750 psig), and bears an
``H'' mark indicating the cylinder is manufactured from a specific type
of steel that is intended to prevent hydrogen embrittlement.
Each UN tube has a drain tube.
The moisture content and concentration of the corroding
components in the product conforms to the requirements in Sec.
173.301b(a)(2). Specifically, the requirements in Sec. 173.301b(a)(2)
state that gases or gas mixtures must be compatible with the UN
pressure receptacle and valve materials, as prescribed for metallic
materials in International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
11114-1:2012(E), ``Gas cylinders--Compatibility of cylinder and valve
materials with gas contents.''
In addition, the NPRM included the CGA-requested proposal to
include new text that clarifies the requirements for transporting
methane gas with a purity of at least 98 percent within a UN seamless
steel pressure receptacle.
PHMSA also noted in the NPRM that it had previously considered this
issue under petition P-1661 \2\ submitted by CGA on July 15, 2015. That
petition was denied due to its conflict with the requirements in Sec.
173.302a(a)(4) for DOT specification 3AAX and 3T cylinders when used in
methane service. Currently, Sec. 173.302a(a)(4) only allows methane
that is non-liquefied; has a minimum purity of 98 percent; and is
commercially free from corroding components to be filled in
specification (3AX, 3AAX, and 3T) cylinders. PHMSA agreed that DOT
specification 3T cylinders with a tensile strength in the range of 135-
155 kilopounds per square inch (ksi) [931-1,069 megapascals per square
inch (MPa)] and steel embrittlement can become a safety issue. However,
DOT specification 3AX and 3AAX cylinders typically have strength below
135 ksi (931 MPa), and steel embrittlement is usually not a safety
concern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ P-1661--CGA (PHMSA-2015-0169), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2015-0169.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its denial letter, PHMSA encouraged CGA to consider a revised
petition and limit cylinders to steel strengths below 950 MPa for ISO
cylinders made in accordance with ISO 9809-1:2010, ``Gas cylinders--
Refillable seamless steel gas cylinders--Design, construction and
testing,'' and IS0 11120, ``Gas cylinders--Refillable seamless steel
tubes of water capacity between 150 l and 3000 l--Design, construction
and testing'' standards. This is because, had PHMSA proposed P-1661, it
would have caused conflicting requirements for methane shipments in
specification (3AAX, 3T, etc.) cylinders versus shipments in UN steel
cylinders (ISO 9809-1 and ISO 11120 standards).
In response to PHMSA's denial of P-1661, CGA submitted a new
petition (P-1714) that addresses PHMSA's concerns by not including DOT
3T specification cylinders where steel embrittlement poses an
unreasonable risk. As a result of PHMSA's technical review of CGA
petition (P-1714), and because it requested regulatory amendments for
shipment of methane (including CNG with a methane content of 98 percent
or greater) only in UN cylinders, PHMSA determined that the proposals
in P-1714 would be limited to pressure receptacles where steel
embrittlement is not a safety
[[Page 15639]]
issue. Additionally, PHMSA notes this revision will align HMR
references to UN cylinders with equivalent DOT specification cylinders.
PHMSA further agrees that CNG, other than methane, can cause steel
embrittlement in seamless steel pressure receptacles with tensile
strengths greater than 950 MPa. Therefore, PHMSA believes the changes
outlined in the CGA petition P-1714 will improve the safe
transportation of CNG.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted an economic review of this
petition and expects these amendments will not result in any material
changes in costs or operations for market participants because they are
accepted industry practices and address an important safety concern. To
the degree that market participants are currently transporting low-
purity methane in high-tensile strength receptacles, affected
participants would be required to use substitute packaging. Similarly,
theses revisions will provide safety benefits to the extent there is
any noncompliance with the practice presented by CGA. A more detailed
discussion of this economic analysis can be found in the Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA) posted in the docket to this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from CGA and DGAC in support of the
revisions to Sec. 173.302b(f) as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any
comments opposing the proposed revisions. Therefore, PHMSA revises the
requirements for transporting CNG with methane in certain UN
specification seamless stainless steel cylinders. Amending these
requirements will enhance safety by authorizing CNG of less than 98
percent methane only in pressure receptacles where steel embrittlement
is unlikely to occur.
B. Threading and Repair of Seamless DOT 3-Series Specification
Cylinders and Seamless UN Pressure Receptacles
In its petition (P-1716),\3\ FIBA Technologies, Inc. (FIBA)
requests PHMSA consider a revision to the requirements for repairing
seamless DOT 3-series specification cylinders and seamless UN pressure
receptacles manufactured without external threads, and also to
authorize the performance of this work without requiring prior approval
from PHMSA. Specifically, this petition requests that PHMSA authorize
machining new threads on a previously manufactured seamless cylinder or
seamless UN pressure receptacle without requiring an approval. Further,
FIBA requests that PHMSA expand the population of UN pressure
receptacles eligible for repair work. Regarding external threads, in
accordance with the current Sec. 180.212(b)(2), repair work not
requiring prior approval is limited to the ``rethreading'' of DOT
specification 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T cylinders, or a UN pressure receptacle
mounted in multiple-element gas containers (MEGC).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ P-1716--FIBA (PHMSA-2018-0074), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0074.
\4\ A multiple-element gas container is an assembly of UN
cylinders, tubes, or bundles of cylinders interconnected by a
manifold and assembled within a framework. The term includes all
service equipment and structural equipment necessary for the
transport of gases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIBA notes there are older DOT specification 3AAX cylinders that
were not equipped with external neck threads at the time of
manufacture. These cylinders were manufactured in the 1960s, and were
mounted on a semi-trailer by inserting the tube neck into a flange on
the semi-trailer bulkhead and then secured in place using set screws.
FIBA argues that these methods have been mostly abandoned in favor of a
threaded tube neck because a threaded flange and anti-rotation pins
provide a more secure connection. Moreover, risk will be reduced by a
threaded neck surface and flange connection, rather than a neck with no
threads and set screws, because the threaded neck and flange more
securely mount the cylinders and tubes within the MEGC or motor vehicle
(tube trailer or frame). Set screws do greater damage to the tube than
a threaded neck and flange because of the penetration depth required to
achieve a secure connection. Section 180.212(b)(2) already allows the
repair of damaged threads, which can be so worn as to be the same as a
tube manufactured with no outer diameter neck threads. FIBA argues that
there is no difference between threads no longer capable of joining the
tube neck to the flange and a tube neck having no threads from the
start. The same threading process will be performed on the tube with
worn threads as the tube with no threads. Additionally, the same CGA C-
23 evaluation process used to determine suitability of the tube neck
for rethreading will be used to confirm the suitability of the neck for
threading.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA has conducted a technical review of
this petition and now determines that authorizing the threading of DOT
3AX; 3AAX manufactured without external threads; or 3T specification
cylinders; or UN pressure receptacles will enhance safety by
authorizing a more secure method of connecting MEGC pressure
receptacles. PHMSA concludes this is an improvement over the previous
method of using set screws to secure the tubes, a process that results
in indentations being carved into the tube necks as the tube jostles
during transport. Moreover, DOT did not originally authorize the
threading of previously manufactured cylinders due to a lack of
standardized safe threading practices at the time PHMSA adopted
provisions for these cylinders. Lastly, PHMSA concludes that the
machining of neck threads or rethreading of seamless UN pressure
receptacles should be authorized regardless of whether the receptacle
is mounted in a MEGC. As such, standardization in the area of cylinder
connections is vital to reducing damage to the cylinder necks and thus
to reducing hazardous materials releases. In summary, the technical
review of this petition determines the revision will improve safety by
ensuring a more secure connection to the motor vehicle.
PHMSA has determined that this revision will not impose any costs
to industry. Further, it has determined that the changes would provide
appropriate regulatory flexibility and potential cost savings (i.e.,
avoided costs associated with an unnecessary approval application
process or use of an outdated securement method) without any impact on
safety. A more detailed discussion of this economic analysis of this
revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from both CGA and DGAC in support of the
revision as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments opposing these
revisions. Therefore, in this final rule, PHMSA revises Sec.
180.212(b)(2) to allow the machining of external threads on all
seamless DOT specification 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T cylinders, or a seamless UN
pressure receptacle originally manufactured without external threads.
Additionally, PHMSA authorizes the machining of neck threads or
rethreading of UN pressure receptacles regardless of whether the
receptacle is mounted in a MEGC.
C. Clarification of the Requirements for Certain Non-Liquefied
Compressed Gases
In its petition (P-1717),\5\ FIBA requests that PHMSA consider an
amendment to Sec. 173.302a(c) of the HMR for the special filling
limits for DOT specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX cylinders
containing Division. 2.1 (flammable) gases. The HM-233F final
[[Page 15640]]
rule \6\ adopted DOT Special Permit (DOT-SP) 6530 \7\ into the HMR.
This revision authorized the transportation in commerce of hydrogen and
mixtures of hydrogen with helium, argon, or nitrogen in certain
cylinders filled to 10 percent in excess of their marked service
pressure. As part of the HM-233F final rule, PHMSA adopted safety
control measures in paragraph (c)(3) of Sec. 173.302a instead of
paragraph (c). In the NPRM, in response to FIBA's request, PHMSA
proposed to amend Sec. 173.302a(c)(3) to clarify that the requirements
in Sec. 173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) are independent provisions. FIBA
asserts this revision will accurately reflect the technical conditions
associated with the design and manufactured properties of DOT
specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX cylinders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ P-1717--FIBA (PHMSA-2018-0075), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0075.
\6\ 81 FR 3635 (Jan. 21, 2016).
\7\ DOT SP-6530, https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/SP6530.pdf/2018019065/SP6530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIBA also submitted petition (P-1725) \8\ requesting further
amendments to Sec. 173.302a(c), concurrent with those requested in P-
1717. In the NPRM, in response to FIBA's request, PHMSA proposed a
requirement that the plus sign (+) be added following the test date
marking on a DOT specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX cylinder filled
with hydrogen or mixtures of hydrogen with helium, argon, or nitrogen
to signify that the cylinder may be filled to 10 percent in excess of
its marked service pressure. Furthermore, FIBA requested that cylinders
qualifying for the special filling limit in Sec. 173.302a(c) also be
equipped with a pressure relief device (PRD), in accordance with CGA S-
1.1 (2011), rather than the requirements in Sec. 173.302a(c)(4), which
could potentially conflict with each other. CGA S-1.1 prescribes
standards for selecting the correct PRD to meet the requirements of
Sec. 173.301(f) for more than 150 gases. It also provides guidance on
when a PRD can be optionally omitted and when its use is prohibited, as
well as direction on PRD manufacturing, testing, operational
parameters, and maintenance. At the time FIBA submitted P-1725, CGA S-
1.1 (2011) had not been incorporated by reference into the HMR. Since
then, the HM-234 final rule \9\ was published, which incorporated by
reference CGA S-1.1 (2011) into the HMR and outlines the PRD
requirements for cylinders filled with a gas and offered for
transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ P-1725--FIBA (PHMSA-2018-0112), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0112.
\9\ 85 FR 85380 (Dec. 28, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The plus sign marking (+) is associated with a commonly applied
provision in the HMR that authorizes a DOT specification cylinder to be
filled to 10 percent in excess of its marked pressure. FIBA states that
the plus sign marking (+) is an important means of communicating to
cylinder refillers that a cylinder can be filled to 10 percent more
than its marked service pressure and, thus, should be added to the
special filling requirements in Sec. 173.302a(c).
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of the
proposals in both petitions along with DOT-SP 6530 and the HM-233F
final rule. After this review, PHMSA noted in the NPRM that it agrees
with FIBA that the safety control measures within DOT-SP 6530 were
independent provisions. In the HM-233F final rule, PHMSA intended to
adopt those provisions into the HMR as independent provisions and
inadvertently adopted two of the safety controls in Sec.
173.302(c)(3)(i) and (ii) as paragraphs of Sec. 173.302a(c)(3). In
addition, the NPRM noted that PHMSA concurs that the revision to
require the plus sign (+) on DOT specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX
cylinders filled with hydrogen or mixtures of hydrogen with helium,
argon, or nitrogen would improve the safety of filling these cylinders
by providing clarity on the conditions for special filling limits and
helping prevent the overfilling of unauthorized cylinders. Finally,
PHMSA noted it agrees that cylinders in hydrogen service that are
filled to 10 percent in excess of its marked pressure should be
equipped with a PRD that is selected as to type, location, and
quantity, and tested in accordance with CGA S-1.1, in the same manner
as is generally required for cylinders filled with a gas, in accordance
with Sec. 173.301(f), instead of Sec. 173.302a(c)(4). PHMSA
determined that CGA S-1.1 provides much greater specificity than Sec.
173.302a(c)(4) about the type of pressure relief device required for a
particular gas service. PHMSA now concludes that the amendments
associated with P-1717 will provide greater clarity on requirements for
cylinder design and manufacture, and will not represent any
incremental, quantifiable safety effects because PHMSA already
authorizes the transportation in commerce of hydrogen and mixtures of
hydrogen with helium, argon, or nitrogen in certain cylinders filled to
more than 10 percent of their marked service pressures. These
amendments will also not impose any new or incremental cost because
they merely reorganize the regulations for clarity. Additionally, while
amendments associated with P-1725 would create a new requirement, PHMSA
determines this amendment will result in only minimal incremental costs
to the industry, and impose only minimal regulatory burden on small
businesses or other entities. The additional request that the cylinders
qualified for the special filling limit be equipped with pressure
relief devices in accordance with CGA S-1.1 will not add any additional
cost on affected industries or entities. Currently, Sec.
173.302a(c)(4) contains the same requirements as CGA S-1.1 and
therefore the addition of the CGA S-1.1 requirement will not cause any
new additional costs beyond those already accounted for previously. A
more detailed discussion of the economic analysis of the proposal can
be found in the RIA posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received a comment from CGA in support of the revision as
proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the
proposed revision. Therefore, in this final rule, PHMSA revises Sec.
173.302a(c) to reflect the safety provisions currently in Sec.
173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) are independent material construction
requirements under paragraph (c) and as such have separated them into
new paragraphs (c)(4) and (5). Moreover, PHMSA adds a requirement in
Sec. 173.302a(c)(7) to require the plus sign (+) following the test
date marking to indicate compliance with paragraph (c), indicating that
the cylinder is allowed to be filled to more than 10 percent of its
marked service pressure. Lastly, PHMSA replaces the PRD requirements--
found in current Sec. 173.302a(c)(4)--with a new Sec. 173.302a(c)(6).
The new provision requires that cylinders must be equipped with PRDs
sized and selected as to type, location, and quantity and tested in
accordance with CGA S-1.1 (2011) and Sec. 173.301(f).
D. De Minimis Quantities of Poisonous Materials
In its petition (P-1718),\10\ the Council on Safe Transportation of
Hazardous Articles, Inc. (COSTHA) requests that PHMSA amend Sec.
173.4b to harmonize the de minimis exceptions for Division 6.1, Packing
Group (PG) I (no inhalation hazard) materials with international
regulations, including the International Civil Aviation Organization
Technical
[[Page 15641]]
Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO TI)
and the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code). The de
minimis exceptions in the HMR provide relief from the general
requirements of the HMR for certain hazardous materials shipped in
extremely small quantities. The maximum quantity allowed in order to
utilize the de minimis exception per inner receptacle is 1 mL for
authorized liquids and 1 g for authorized solids. Additionally, the
aggregate quantity per package may not exceed 100 mL for liquids and
100 g for solids. The exception also requires cushioning and package
testing requirements, along with specific provisions for certain
materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ P-1718--COSTHA (PHMSA-2018-0077), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0077.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
International harmonization includes adopting changes in the HMR to
improve regulatory consistency with international regulations and
standards, such as the IMDG Code, the ICAO TI, and the UN
Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods--Model Regulations
(UN Model Regulations). Harmonization facilitates international trade
by minimizing the costs and other burdens of complying with multiple or
inconsistent safety requirements for transportation of hazardous
materials. Safety is enhanced by creating a uniform framework for
compliance. As the volume of hazardous materials transported in
international commerce continues to grow, harmonization is increasingly
important. Moreover, the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law
(HMTA; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) directs PHMSA to participate in relevant
international standard-setting bodies and promotes consistency of the
HMR with international transport standards to the extent practicable.
The exceptions in the HMR for de minimis quantities were initially
adopted in the HM-224D/HM-215J final rule \11\ in Sec. 173.4b of the
HMR, and were intended to align with the provisions for de minimis
exceptions found in the ICAO Technical Instructions and IMDG Code.
However, HM-224D/HM-215J addressed exceptions for de minimis quantities
of only Division 6.1, PG II and PG III hazardous materials. As noted in
the PHMSA Letter of Interpretation (LOI) reference number (Ref. No.)
17-0138,\12\ PHMSA considered exceptions for de minimis quantities of
only Division 6.1, PG II and PG III hazardous materials in response to
a petition for rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 74 FR 2200 (Jan. 14, 2009).
\12\ PHMSA LOI 17-0138, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/interp/17-0138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to harmonize the scope of the
applicability of the de minimis exceptions with what is allowed under
the international standards by including Division 6.1, PG I materials
(no inhalation hazard). As discussed in the NPRM, a technical review of
this petition found the inclusion of de minimis quantities for Division
6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard) materials into the international
regulations can be traced back to working paper ST/SG/AC.10/C.3/2009/
45,\13\ which was submitted by the United States. Based on the review
of this working paper, PHMSA noted that it had preliminarily concluded
that Division 6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard) materials should be
included as part of the de minimis exception.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Working paper ST/SG/AC.10/C.3/2009/45, https://unece.org/DAM/trans/doc/2009/ac10c3/ST-SG-AC10-C3-2009-45e.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA noted in the NPRM that the primary concern regarding the
transportation of a Division 6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard) material
is leakage from a package and potential human exposure. A leak of such
a material poses a risk to human health by poisoning. To counter these
concerns, this hazard is mitigated by the conditions for transportation
in the de minimis exceptions, namely, imposing limitations on the
quantities allowed to 1 mL or 1 g per inner receptacle. In addition,
Sec. 173.4b requires that inner receptacles have removable closures
sealed by wire, tape, or other positive means (see Sec. 173.4b(a)(2)),
which limits the possibility for leakage. Furthermore, a Division 6.1
PG I material that does not pose an inhalation hazard equally poses no
vaporization risk should the package rupture. Lastly, de minimis
packages are required to have cushioning and absorbent material that
are not reactive with the hazardous material and can absorb the
entirety of the package's contents if the receptacle ruptures. These
requirements severely limit the risk of exposure presented by
transportation of these materials.
While maintaining safety as described in the prior paragraph, PHMSA
concludes in this final rule that this harmonization will not impose
any direct costs on industry, and will provide cost savings to shippers
by providing the option to ship Division 6.1, PG I (no inhalation
hazard) materials under the de minimis provisions that provide
alternative communication and packaging requirements associated with
the preparation of these packages. In total, PHMSA estimates that the
revision will result in cost savings of approximately $178,570
annually. A more detailed discussion of the economic analysis of the
proposal can be found in the RIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from both COSTHA and DGAC in support of the
revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition
to the proposed revision. Therefore, upon review of the COSTHA petition
to revise the de minimis quantities exception to include Division 6.1,
PG I materials (no inhalation hazard), PHMSA revises Sec. 173.4b to
include Division 6.1, PG I materials (no inhalation hazard) to the list
of authorized materials in Sec. 173.4b(a). PHMSA finds expanding the
de minimis exceptions to Division 6.1, PG I materials (no inhalation
hazard) will maintain the safety of transportation of hazardous
materials and provide cost savings through alternative packaging
options.
E. Clarification of the Marking Requirements for Button Cell Lithium
Batteries Contained in Equipment
In its petition (P-1726),\14\ COSTHA requests that PHMSA amend
Sec. 173.185(c)(3) to clarify that lithium button cell batteries
installed in equipment are excepted from the marking requirement and
not subject to the quantity per package or per consignment limitation.
Currently, Sec. 173.185(c)(3) states: ``Each package must display the
lithium battery mark except when a package contains button cell
batteries installed in equipment (including circuit boards), or no more
than four lithium cells or two lithium batteries contained in
equipment, where there are not more than two packages in the
consignment.'' In its petition, COSTHA asserts that the language and
grammar used to convey the exception from display of the lithium
battery mark has led some in industry to interpret the exception for
button cell batteries to be dependent on the number of cells in a
package or the number of packages in the consignment. Industry has made
several requests for letters of interpretation--12-0261,\15\ 14-
0013,\16\
[[Page 15642]]
15-0171,\17\ and 16-0172 \18\--that illustrates the confusion within
the regulated community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ P-1726--COSTHA (PHMSA-2019-0002), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0002.
\15\ PHMSA LOI 12-0261; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2012/120261.pdf.
\16\ PHMSA LOI 14-0013; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2014/140013.pdf.
\17\ PHMSA LOI 15-0171; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2016/150171.pdf.
\18\ PHMSA LOI 16-0172; https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2017/160172.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA published final rule HM-224F \19\ to revise the HMR
applicable to the transport of lithium cells and batteries, consistent
with the UN Model Regulations, the ICAO Technical Instructions, and the
IMDG Code. As part of final rule HM-224F, PHMSA consolidated the
requirements for shipping and transporting lithium cells and batteries
into Sec. 173.185 by:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 79 FR 46011 (Aug. 6, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requiring cells and batteries to be tested in accordance
with the latest revisions to the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria, and
requiring manufacturers to retain evidence of successful completion of
UN testing.
Eliminating the exceptions for small cells and batteries
in air transportation, except with respect to extremely small cells
packed with or contained in equipment.
Providing relief for (1) the shipment of low production
run and prototype batteries, and (2) batteries being shipped for
recycling or disposal.
In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise Sec. 173.185(c)(3) to
clarify the applicability of the lithium battery mark exception for
button cell batteries installed in equipment. Consistent with the
COSTHA petition, PHMSA noted that its proposed revisions would clarify
that the exception in Sec. 173.185(c)(3) applies when a package
contains only button cell batteries installed in equipment; or when
there is a consignment consisting of two packages or less, and each
package contains no more than four lithium cells or two batteries
installed in equipment.
PHMSA now concludes that this revision to the HMR is neither
expected to result in a cost to industry nor a change to the safety
requirements for packages containing lithium button cell batteries
contained in equipment. The revision simply clarifies how the exception
is applied for better understanding by the reader. Since PHMSA already
authorizes this lithium battery mark exception, the change will not
represent a quantifiable safety effect. Qualitatively, improved
regulatory clarity will assist the regulated community in complying
with the requirement and properly exercising the exception. Some
entities were reasonably confused by the current text and applied the
required mark unnecessarily. To the extent this occurred, the revision
could provide economic benefit while maintaining safety. PHMSA
determines there is limited risk in excepting packages of button cell
lithium batteries installed in equipment from the lithium battery mark.
A more detailed discussion of the economic analysis of the proposal can
be found in the RIA posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from both COSTHA and DGAC in support of
this revision as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in
opposition to the proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA now revises the
introductory language in Sec. 173.185(c)(3) to clarify that lithium
button cell batteries installed in equipment are not subject to any
quantity per package or consignment limitations when applying the
exception.
F. Incorporate by Reference CGA C-20 (2014)
In its petition (P-1727),\20\ CGA requests that PHMSA incorporate
by reference CGA C-20 (2014), ``Requalification Standard for Metallic,
DOT, and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic
Examination, Second Edition.'' CGA also proposes to revise Sec.
180.205 to reflect the ultrasonic examination (UE) methods authorized
by CGA C-20. CGA C-20 are an industry standard for the periodic
requalification of certain metallic DOT and Transport Canada (TC) 3-
series cylinders and tubes. CGA asserts that the incorporation by
reference of CGA C-20 would eliminate the need for many special permits
that authorize the use of UE methods and would harmonize the various UE
methods to requalify these pressure receptacles. CGA further asserts
that this standard would establish a uniform set of techniques, uniform
acceptance and rejection criteria, and a standard calibration method
used during the requalification process of these 3-series gas cylinders
and tubes, in contrast to the current special permits, which vary on
the requirements associated with use of the UE nondestructive testing
methodology for requalification. Finally, the petition asserts that the
incorporation by reference of CGA C-20 would enhance public safety by
clarifying and mandating consistent requalification practices using UE
throughout the gas industry. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed the
incorporation by reference of CGA C-20 (2014), ``Requalification
Standard for Metallic, DOT and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and Tubes
Using Ultrasonic Examination, Second Edition'' and to revise Sec.
180.205 to reflect the UE methods authorized by CGA C-20 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ P-1727--CGA (PHMSA-2019-0007), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CGA C-20 identifies and describes the various acceptable UE methods
that may be used in place of the baseline HMR requirements (e.g.,
internal visual inspection and hydrostatic requalification methods)
used to examine certain metallic DOT/TC 3-series gas cylinders and
tubes. This standard also specifies the allowable flaw acceptance/
rejection criteria.
Under the HMR, requalification periods for DOT/TC 3-series
specification cylinders range from three to 12 years, depending on the
specification under which each cylinder was made (e.g., 3, 3AA, etc.).
Periodic requalification ensures the safety of cylinders by checking
for leaks and damage that might threaten the integrity of a cylinder.
Cylinders are requalified using volumetric expansion testing, proof
pressure testing, and external and internal visual inspections.
Currently, a person must apply for a special permit in order to receive
authorization to use UE in lieu of the requalification requirements in
Sec. 180.205.
CGA notes that the increased use of UE necessitates clear and
consistent instruction in the application of this technical method, as
well as the adherence to proper calibration and acceptance/rejection
criteria. CGA asserts that the modifications ensure that this
requalification method is applied consistently to safeguard cylinder
serviceability.
PHMSA noted in the NPRM that it had participated in the task force
meetings, provided technical assistance during the development of CGA
C-20, and completed a technical review of the final standard. As
discussed in the NPRM, PHMSA has conducted a technical review and
determined that the CGA C-20 standard will positively impact safety by
prescribing appropriate procedures for applying UE as the
requalification method for DOT/TC 3-series cylinders and tubes.
The total cost savings for industry regarding requalification using
CGA C-20 is based on the number of active special permits and the costs
associated with periodic renewal of the special permit. We estimate
average annual industry cost savings of $30,313 due to companies no
longer being required to apply for a special permit. A more detailed
discussion of the economic analysis of this revision can be found in
[[Page 15643]]
the RIA posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from CGA and DGAC in support of the
revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition
to the proposed revisions. Therefore, PHMSA adds a reference to CGA C-
20, ``Methods For Ultrasonic Examination Of Metallic, DOT, And TC 3-
Series Gas Cylinders And Tubes, Second Edition,'' in Sec. 171.7, and
revises Sec. 180.205 to reflect the UE methods authorized by CGA C-20.
In addition, as proposed in the NPRM, PHMSA revises Sec. 180.205(i) to
state that when a cylinder containing hazardous materials is condemned,
the requalifier must stamp the cylinder ``CONDEMNED'' and affix a
readily visible label on the cylinder stating: ``UN REJECTED, RETURNING
TO ORIGIN FOR PROPER DISPOSITION.'' PHMSA also is clarifying that the
requalifier may only transport the condemned cylinder by private motor
vehicle carriage to a facility capable of safely removing the contents
of the cylinder. Lastly, the NPRM inadvertently left out necessary
revisions to table 1 to paragraph (a) in Sec. 180.209 that reference
the inclusion of UE for DOT 3T cylinders and certain special permit
cylinders. Therefore, in this final rule, PHMSA is revising table 1 to
paragraph (a) in Sec. 180.209 to reference UE for the cylinders
intended to be allowed to undergo UE as proposed and revised in Sec.
180.205.
G. Gas Mixtures Containing Components Defined as Liquefied Gases
In its petition (P-1728),\21\ CGA proposes that PHMSA authorize an
alternative description of gas mixtures containing components defined
as liquefied gases. The CGA petition would revise the HMR to allow for
a gas mixture with components that meet the definition of liquefied
compressed gas in Sec. 173.115(e) to be described as a ``compressed
gas'' when the partial pressures of the liquefied gas components of the
mixture are intentionally reduced so that liquefaction does not occur
at 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F). CGA requests in its petition that special
provisions be added to Column (7) in the Hazardous Material Table (HMT)
in Sec. 172.101 applicable to liquefied gas mixtures. In the NPRM,
PHMSA proposed to revise Sec. 173.115(e) to allow for a gas mixture
with components that meet the definition of liquefied compressed gas to
be described as a ``compressed gas'' when the partial pressures of the
liquefied gas components of the mixture are intentionally reduced so
that liquefaction does not occur at 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ P-1728--CGA (PHMSA-2019-0018), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some compressed gas mixtures contain components that when shipped
in their pure form would be considered a liquefied gas. However, when
the gas is in a mixture, it can be manipulated to be entirely gaseous
at its intended use temperature of 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F) by reducing
the components' partial pressures. Partial pressure is the pressure
that would be exerted by one of the gases in a mixture if it occupied
the same volume on its own. The sum of all components' partial
pressures equals the total pressure of the mixture. Therefore, partial
pressure can be lowered by lowering pressure generally (e.g., by
lowering temperatures or increasing volume) or altering the ratio of
gases in the mixture.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA has conducted a technical review of
this petition and concludes in this final rule that it agrees with CGA
that when the gas is in a mixture, it can be manipulated to be entirely
gaseous at its intended use temperature of 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F) by
reducing the components' partial pressures. PHMSA notes that during
transportation, the gas mixture or its components may partially
liquefy, forming condensation on the container wall, if ambient
temperatures are lower than 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F), but still above -50
[deg]C (-58 [deg]F). When the mixture returns to its use temperature,
the condensation will transform back to the gaseous state. There are
scenarios where a gas mixture might contain a component that meets the
definition of a liquefied compressed gas, and under small temperature
changes, a cloud or condensation could build up inside the cylinder.
This could lead to the ``liquefied compressed gas'' description
potentially misrepresenting the cylinder's contents to first responders
and end users. Moreover, while CGA does not cite a safety concern with
the current requirements under the HMR, they do note that there can be
confusion among stakeholders when the content of a cylinder is
described as a liquefied compressed gas, but resembles a non-liquefied
compressed gas during transportation and use. Thus, PHMSA has
determined that this revision is safety neutral or slightly improves
safety. However, PHMSA disagrees with the CGA petition to use a special
provision to allow for the description of a gas mixture with components
that meet the definition of liquefied compressed gas to be described as
a ``compressed gas.'' Instead, PHMSA believes that the most appropriate
change is to amend the definition of a non-liquefied compressed gas in
Sec. 173.115(e), as revising the regulatory text provides a clearer
connection for all stakeholders who ship these gases.
This revision to the HMR will not result in any cost to industry or
impose any regulatory burden on small businesses. Given that industries
already must describe shipments of these materials on a shipping paper,
and communicate information about the material and the hazard on the
package, there will be little to no cost on entities to change the
hazard communication. A more detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket
for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from CGA in support of the revisions as
proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the
proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises the HMR to allow certain
mixtures of gas with component(s) considered liquefied gas, in
accordance with Sec. 173.115(e), to be described as a ``compressed
gas'' and considered a non-liquefied gas, in accordance with Sec.
173.115(d). PHMSA revises Sec. 173.115(e) to clarify that gas mixtures
with component(s) considered liquefied gases may be described using the
appropriate hazardous materials description of a non-liquefied
compressed gas in the HMT in Sec. 172.101 when the partial pressure(s)
of the liquefied gas component(s) in the mixture are reduced so that
the mixture is entirely in the gas phase at 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F).
H. Incorporate by Reference CGA C-23 (2018)
In its petition (P-1729),\22\ CGA requested that PHMSA incorporate
by reference CGA C-23 (2018), ``Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 3
series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces, Second Edition,''
into Sec. 171.7 of the HMR. CGA also requested that PHMSA revise
Sec. Sec. 180.205 and 180.207 to reference the requirements in CGA C-
23. CGA C-23 defines a tube as a seamless pressure vessel authorized
for transportation only when horizontally mounted on a motor vehicle or
in an ISO framework. Tube modules are also commonly known as skid
containers, ISO skids, ISO containers, or MEGCs. Sections 180.205 and
180.207 outline the general requirements for the requalification of
specification cylinders and UN pressure receptacles. The CGA petition
would require all requalifiers of tube trailers, skid containers, or
MEGCs
[[Page 15644]]
to periodically disassemble equipment and perform an examination of
tube neck mounting surfaces, in accordance with CGA C-23. In the NPRM,
PHMSA proposed to incorporate by reference CGA C-23 (2018), ``Standard
for Inspection of DOT/TC 3 series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck Mounting
Surfaces, Second Edition,'' into Sec. 171.7 and revise Sec. Sec.
180.205 and 180.207 to reference the requirements in CGA C-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ P-1729--CGA (PHMSA-2019-0059), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0059.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA noted in the NPRM that these tubes are typically mounted to a
semitrailer by engaging the threaded surface on either end of the tube
with flanges built into the bulkheads located on opposing ends of the
trailer. Although secured in place, these mounting points support the
full weight of the tube and, during transportation, are subjected to
jostling, temperature changes, and all the dynamic forces associated
with the acceleration/deceleration of the transport vehicle.
Consequently, the constant motion and wear between the tube's threaded
mounting surfaces and the flanges causes, over time, the deterioration
of the mounting threads. This deterioration necessitates the periodic
disassembly of the tubes from the trailer to inspect them. Therefore,
CGA C-23 provides instructions on how to inspect and evaluate DOT/TC 3-
Series and ISO 11120 tubes that are 12 feet (3.7 m) or longer; have an
outside diameter greater than or equal to 18 inches (457 mm); and are
supported by a neck mounting surface. In addition, CGA C-23 provides
methods to assess the integrity of tube necks, including but not
limited to, damage to mounting threads or to pin or set screw marks, as
well as other damage. The assessment as outlined in C-23 provides a
method for the identification of rejected tubes so that they can be
removed from service, thereby improving the safe transportation of
these horizontally mounted cylinder types.
The NPRM also noted that CGA C-23 was developed in response to an
incident where a DOT specification 3AAX cylinder was ejected from a
semitrailer and ruptured upon initial impact with the roadway. CGA
determined that the root cause of the ejection, which contributed to
the severity of the incident, was the condition of the connection
between the tube neck and flange. CGA asserts that CGA C-23 will
enhance the inspection process to include the inspection of the tube
mounting and replacement of flanges.
The HMR currently do not reference CGA C-23, but PHMSA references
the standard as a safety control in DOT special permits, such as DOT
SP-14206.\23\ These special permits allow for the requalification of
DOT specification cylinders and UN tubes by UE or acoustic emission
testing (AET), with a follow-up UE, instead of the hydrostatic test
currently required under the HMR. These methods are used to ensure the
cylinders and tubes remain qualified for hazardous materials service.
Moreover, the UE and AET methods are non-destructive methods of
examination and are alternatives to the hydrostatic method.
Additionally, the HMR do not require periodic inspection and evaluation
of the tube neck mounting surfaces. The CGA petition would enhance
transportation safety of these larger cylinders and tubes by including
inspection of the tube mounting threads as part of the requalification
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ DOT SP-14206, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/SP14206.pdf/offerserver/SP14206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The language recommended by CGA would require both specification
DOT 3-series and UN tubes that are 12 feet or longer, with an outside
diameter greater than or equal to 18 inches and supported by the neck
mounting surface during transportation in commerce, to be inspected at
least every 10 years in accordance with CGA C-23. CGA also proposes new
language in Sec. Sec. 180.205(d) and 180.207(d) to require DOT 3-
series and UN tubes that show evidence of corrosion to the neck threads
to be removed and examined in accordance with CGA C-23 before being
rejected or returned to service. As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted
a technical review of the CGA petition and determined that the
incorporation by reference of CGA C-23 will enhance safety by
implementing a periodic inspection of the mounting of these tubes.
Moreover, the requirements of CGA C-23 are consistent with the safety
controls referenced in DOT-SP 14206. There are also improvements
offered by the CGA C-23 standard versus the procedures outlined in DOT-
SP 14206, such as a table that contains specific dimensional values for
use in defining acceptance criteria for tubes with local thin areas
(LTA). However, PHMSA noted in the NPRM that it had found the CGA
proposals in Sec. Sec. 180.205(d)(5) and 180.207(d)(1)(iii) requiring
the disassembly of the tube module when visible corrosion in the neck
region is present to be too vague. Therefore, PHMSA references the
figures and descriptions provided in Section 4.2 of the CGA C-23
standard for extreme neck thread wear conditions in Sec. Sec.
180.205(d)(5) and 180.207(d)(1)(iii) to clarify conditions when
disassembly of the tube module is required.
PHMSA has determined that incorporating by reference CGA C-23 into
the HMR will enhance safety for industry and stakeholders by codifying
the tube neck thread inspection procedures. PHMSA estimates there will
be a one-time cost for industry participants to purchase the CGA C-23
standard. With respect to inspections, there may be some minimal
administrative costs associated with special permit holders' permits to
reflect the codification of CGA C-23-2018 into the code, but these
special permit holders should have been following the requirements of
CGA C-23-2018 already. A more detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket
for this rulemaking. PHMSA received comments from CGA in support of
these revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in
opposition to the proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises Sec.
171.7 to incorporate by reference CGA C-23, ``Standard for Inspection
of DOT/TC 3-Series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces, 2nd
Edition.'' PHMSA also adds Sec. 180.205(c)(5) to state that DOT 3-
series cylinders horizontally mounted on a motor vehicle or in a
framework, and longer than 12 feet, shall be inspected in accordance
with CGA C-23 every 10 years; and adds Sec. 180.205(d)(5) to specify
conditions (as outlined in Section 4 of CGA C-23) requiring removal and
inspection in accordance with CGA C-23. The current Sec. 180.205(d)(5)
requiring testing and inspection if the Associate Administrator
determines that the cylinder may be in an unsafe condition is
renumbered as paragraph (d)(6). PHMSA also revises Sec.
180.205(i)(2)(i)(C) to state that the requalifier must stamp the
cylinder ``CONDEMNED'' and affix a readily visible label on the
cylinder stating ``UN REJECTED, RETURNING TO ORIGIN FOR PROPER
DISPOSITION'' for a condemned cylinder that contains hazardous
materials. The requalifier may only transport the condemned cylinder by
private motor vehicle carriage to a facility capable of safely removing
the contents of the cylinder. Finally, PHMSA adds Sec.
180.207(d)(1)(ii) to state that steel UN tubes horizontally mounted on
a motor vehicle or in a framework, and longer than 12 feet, shall be
inspected in accordance with CGA C-23 every 10 years; and to specify
conditions (as outlined in Section 4 of CGA C-23) requiring removal and
inspection in accordance with Section 6 of CGA C-23. The text at the
current
[[Page 15645]]
Sec. 180.207(d)(1) is renumbered as paragraph (d)(1)(i).
Lastly, PHMSA notes that the NPRM proposed language in Sec.
180.205(c) regarding the grace period allowed for neck thread
inspections with respect to requalification times. However, PHMSA
asserts that this proposed language is redundant with the language
already incorporated by reference in CGA C-23, Section 4, and thus not
needed as this text would be duplicative.
I. Incorporate by Reference IME Safety Library Publication 23 (SLP-23)
In its petition (P-1731),\24\ the IME proposes that PHMSA
incorporate by reference an updated version of IME SLP-23 (2021),
titled ``Recommendations for the Transportation of Explosives, Division
1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, Division 5.1; and Combustible Liquids
in Bulk Packaging.'' IME states that these revisions and improvements
to the standard reflect technological advances and best practices in
the industry that will maintain a high level of safety. In the NPRM,
PHMSA proposed to incorporate by reference IME SLP-23 (2021) into Sec.
171.7. SLP-23 (2021) outlines the requirements for transporting certain
explosives and ammonium nitrate emulsions, classified as oxidizers, to
ensure their safe and efficient transport in bulk packagings by
highway, vessel, and rail. These bulk packagings can either be DOT
specification or non-DOT specification packagings (e.g., cargo tanks or
portable tanks) adapted to accommodate the physical and chemical
properties of the bulk explosives, oxidizers, or fuel oil transported.
SLP-23 (2021) makes several non-substantive changes and editorial
clarifications from the previous publication. Non-substantive changes
include changing the structure of SLP-23 to read more consistently with
the HMR and editorial revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ P-1731--IME (PHMSA-2019-0062), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0062.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Substantive changes to SLP-23 (2021) include:
Deletion of the Vented Pipe Test (VPT) in Appendix A
Currently, SLP-23 (2011) requires both bulk Division 1.5 explosives
and Division 5.1 ammonium nitrate emulsions to pass the VPT. The
updated SLP-23 removes the VPT test for these materials. IME asserts
that the VPT is not applicable to Division 5.1 and Division 1.5
materials and adds that, as outlined in portable tank instruction TP 32
(applicable to UN0331, UN0332, and UN3377 materials), the VPT is
required only to demonstrate suitability for containment in tanks as an
oxidizer for ammonium nitrate-based emulsions (ANEs) classified as
Division 5.1, UN3375. Additionally, IME notes that a significant change
to the requirements applicable to the testing of ANEs was approved by
the UN Sub-Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods at
its 54th Session (Nov/Dec 2018). Under the new testing regime,
acceptance criteria will require passing either test series 8(a), 8(b),
and 8(c), or if the substance fails the 8(c) test (i.e., the ``Koenen
Test'') and the substance had a time to reaction in that test longer
than 60 seconds and a water content greater than 14 percent, the
material would be required to pass test series 8(a), 8(b), and 8(e).
Test 8(e) is the Minimum Burning Pressure test (MBP). IME noted that
industry is currently gathering data to determine whether use of the
MBP test obviates the need for the VPT because, in essence, the VPT is
a scaled-up Koenen Test and, therefore, has the same limitations
associated with extended time of heating.
Allowing operators to continually monitor driver
qualifications and training instead of conducting an annual audit, as
currently required in SLP-23 (2011).
IME notes that the current requirement for an ``annual audit'' is
inadequate to ensure that driver qualification and training programs
are comprehensive, effective, and being implemented properly. IME
believes that limiting oversight of the program to an annual audit
provides less assurance that operators are compliant than would a
requirement to continually monitor the driver qualification program.
In addition, IME requests revisions to the HMR that coincide with
the incorporation by reference of SLP-23 (2021). IME requests the
adoption of DOT-SP 8723, which authorizes ``UN0332, Explosive,
Blasting, type E,'' ``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion,'' and
``UN3139, Oxidizing liquid n.o.s. (PG II)'' to be transported in IM 101
and 102 portable tanks. IME explains that continuing to operate under
DOT-SP 8723 imposes additional administrative costs to both industry
and PHMSA, and that one of the advantages of incorporating by reference
SLP-23 (2011) into the HMR was the elimination of SPs governing bulk
transportation of certain materials manufactured and used by the
commercial explosives industry. IME asserts that failure to include the
provisions from DOT-SP 8723 was an oversight when SLP-23 (2011) was
originally incorporated by reference into the HMR. In addition to the
administrative cost savings noted above, IME adds that the conversion
of SPs into regulations provides certainty to the regulated community,
and increases transparency for government, stakeholders, and the
public. IME proposes that TP codes be assigned to ``UN0332, Explosive,
blasting, type E,'' ``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion,'' and
``UN3139, Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., PG II'' to authorize the use of IM
101 and 102 portable tanks when transported under SLP-23 (2021).
Lastly, IME proposes a revision to Sec. 173.251 to state that this
section is not applicable when UN3375 is transported in IM 101 or 102
portable tanks in accordance with SLP-23 (2021).
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of the
revisions to SLP-23 (2021) and concurs with IME that most of the
changes in IME SLP-23 (2021) are either non-substantive or editorial in
nature. PHMSA does not believe, however, that sufficient data was
provided by IME to no longer require the VPT for Division 1.5 blasting
explosives and Division 5.1 ANEs when transported in bulk. While it is
true that the UN Subcommittee has discussed whether the VPT is
beneficial for ANEs when transported in bulk, the discussions are still
in preliminary stages and pending further review by the UN
Subcommittee. If these provisions are adopted by the UN, PHMSA may
consider changes to VPT requirements in a future international
harmonization rulemaking, but PHMSA declines to incorporate that
revision at this time. PHMSA also concurs with IME that an annual audit
is inadequate to ensure that driver qualification and training programs
are comprehensive, effective, and being implemented properly. A
continual monitoring program better ensures compliance with the driver
qualification requirements. While the timing of the oversight of
requirements would change--i.e., continuous monitoring instead of an
annual audit--the current elements of the qualification and training
program would remain unchanged.
Lastly, PHMSA concurs that there is sufficient merit to adopt the
provisions of DOT-SP 8723 to authorize ``UN0332, Explosive, blasting,
type E,'' ``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion,'' and ``UN3139,
Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., PG II'' to be transported in IM 101 and 102
portable tanks when shipped under SLP-23 (2021). This would include a
conforming revision to indicate that Sec. 173.251 does not apply when
UN3375 material is transported in IM 101 or 102 portable tanks in
accordance with SLP-23. PHMSA has determined that these revisions
maintain the safety of bulk transport of these materials because the
[[Page 15646]]
SLP-23 (2011) standard currently incorporated by reference already
authorizes larger bulk quantities consistent with the hazardous
material offered in accordance with DOT-SP 8723 and is supported by a
safety record of use for 10 years. PHMSA concludes that the revisions
to IME SLP (2021) will streamline regulatory requirements without a
negative impact on safety. PHMSA quantified the effects of removing the
administrative requirements of applying for a special permit and
estimates the average annual cost savings to be $6,746 per year. There
are several other effects of the proposal that may result in costs,
cost savings, and benefits, but these results are less certain and are
described qualitatively. A more detailed discussion of the economic
analysis of this revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket
for this rulemaking. IME provided comments mostly in support of the
proposed incorporation of IME SLP-23 (2021). However, IME also provided
comments on potential revisions to the applicability of IME SLP-23
(2021). IME notes that since the publication of SLP-23 (2021), PHMSA
has authorized the use of UN T11 portable tanks in DOT-SP 8723 \25\ for
``UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E or Agent blasting, Type E'',
``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion or Ammonium nitrate suspension or
Ammonium nitrate gel, intermediate for blasting explosives'' and
``UN3139, Oxidizing liquid, N.O.S.'' In its comments, IME request that
the IME SLP-23 (2021) be revised to include the addition of T11 UN
portable tanks for these materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/documents/offer/SP8723.pdf/offerserver/SP8723.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IME also notes that the use of intermediate bulk containers (IBCs)
is not expressly authorized under IME SLP-23 (2021) despite their
historical use for the transportation of bulk explosives. IME adds that
the HM-233D final rule,\26\ titled ``Hazardous Materials: Requirements
for the Safe Transportation of Bulk Explosives,'' incorporated by
reference the IME SLP-23 (2011), which in turn incorporated several DOT
special permits authorizing the transportation of certain explosives in
bulk containers. One such special permit, DOT-SP-11579,\27\ authorized
the transportation of blasting materials/ammonium nitrate emulsions in
certain IBCs. IME SLP-23 (2021) specifically authorizes bulk packages
for materials authorized under Sec. Sec. 173.240 (UN0331 and NA0331)
and 173.242 (UN0332 and UN3375). IME adds that both regulatory
provisions limit the transportation of these materials in IBCs to
materials for which the IBC type is authorized, according to the IBC
packaging code, specified for the specific hazardous material in Column
(7) of the HMT in Sec. 172.101. Lastly, IME notes that there are no
IBC packaging codes for NA0331, UN0331, and UN0332 in Column (7) of the
HMT and, accordingly, their transportation in IBCs is currently
prohibited. IME states that it was not their intention to exclude IBCs
for these materials when the incorporation of SLP-23 (2011) was
originally requested. IME also does not believe it was PHMSA's intent
to exclude these materials for transportation in IBCs, since SP-11579
was expressly incorporated into the HMR as part of that incorporation
action. IME requests that PHMSA either revise SLP-23 (2021) to state
that the IBC code requirements in Sec. Sec. 173.240 and 173.242 are
inapplicable, or amend the HMT to include an IBC Code for the
materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 80 FR 79423 (Dec. 21, 2015).
\27\ https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/SP11579_2010010140.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to T11 UN portable tanks, PHMSA agrees that there is
no technical reason to not include UN portable tanks for the
transportation of bulk explosives under SLP-23 (2021). Additionally,
PHMSA does not believe there is any technical reason to not allow the
use of IBCs as requested in SLP-23(2021). However, the APA requires
that the public have an opportunity to comment on regulations before
they take effect, so any requirements not proposed in the earlier
notice cannot be included in this final rule. PHMSA encourages IME to
submit a petition for rulemaking to incorporate by reference a revised
version of the SLP-23 publication with the revisions that would
authorize these packages in a revised version of SLP-23. Until then,
PHMSA encourages IME's members to continue to renew DOT SP-8723 for the
use of UN portable tanks. Additionally, PHMSA encourages those entities
wanting to transport NA0331, UN0331, and UN0332 in IBCs to apply for a
special permit similar to what was allowed in DOT SP-11579.
IME also notes that Section I of IME SLP-23 (2021), titled
``Standards for Transporting a Single Bulk Hazardous Material for
Blasting by Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles,'' contains a subsection G, which
addresses the ``Security and Safety of the Bulk Hazardous Materials
Transported under the Provisions of IME SLP-23.'' IME SLP (2021)
Section II is titled ``Standards for Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles Capable
of Transporting Multiple Hazardous Materials for Blasting in Bulk and
Non-Bulk Packaging.'' IME notes that the safety and security
requirements are only found in paragraph G of Section I and not Section
II. IME adds that one could interpret the applicability of the safety
and security provisions in paragraph G to Section I as only applying to
CTMVs carrying a single bulk hazardous material. IME states that its
intent was to apply safety and security precautions found in paragraph
G of Section I to all CTMVs, regardless of whether they are carrying a
single hazardous materials or multiple hazardous materials.
Accordingly, IME recommends that Section II of SLP-23 be amended to
include the same safety and security requirements found in Section I.
As previously stated, under the APA, PHMSA cannot incorporate by
reference in the final rule a version of the IME SLP-23 other than the
version proposed in the NPRM. The HMR already requires that certain
hazardous materials shippers and carriers develop and implement
security plans. Specifically, Sec. 172.802 states that security plans
must be developed and adhered to by shippers and carriers of certain
hazardous materials in specified quantities, including Division 1.1,
1.2, or 1.3 explosives; spent nuclear fuel; highway route controlled
quantities of radioactive materials; and more than 25 kg of Division
1.5, 1.3, or 1.1 explosives. Security plans must include an assessment
of possible transportation security risks and appropriate measures to
address those risks. Specific elements such as personnel security,
unauthorized access, and en route security must be addressed.
The safety and security requirements, as outlined in paragraph G of
Section 1 of SLP-23 (2021), act as guidance for how CTMVs used to
transport bulk shipments of hazardous materials can comply with the
regulatory requirements currently found in Sec. 172.802. Although
paragraph G is not currently listed in Section II of SLP-23 (2021) for
CTMVs containing multiple hazardous materials, PHMSA believes it
reasonable to clarify in the preamble to the final rule that the safety
and security requirements found in paragraph G of Section 1 should also
be applied to shipments of multiple hazardous materials in bulk, in
order to comply with the requirements in Sec. 172.802. PHMSA
encourages IME to note on its website for downloading SLP-23 that the
safety and security requirements found in paragraph G of Section I can
also be used in Section II in order to meet the regulatory requirements
in Sec. 172.802. Additionally, IME is also encouraged to petition
PHMSA to incorporate a new version of SLP-23
[[Page 15647]]
which makes the safety and security requirements clearer to the users
of SLP-23.
Lastly, IME notes that the current title of Section I of IME SLP-23
(2021) is ``Standards For Transporting A Single Bulk Hazardous Material
for Blasting by Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles.'' IME notes that a strict
reading of the title implies that Section I is limited to bulk
transport by cargo tank motor vehicle (CTMV). However, paragraph B of
Section I specifically states that ``highway, vessel, and rail are
authorized modes for the transportation of the bulk hazardous materials
listed in Section I.A.1 in bulk packagings.'' In order to eliminate any
confusion caused by this contradictory language, IME recommends that
the title of Section I be modified to read ``Standards for Transporting
a Single Bulk Hazardous Material for Blasting.'' In addition, IME
requests that a revision be made to Special Provision 148 and Sec.
173.66, which specifically reference the title of Section I of IME SLP-
23 (2021).
As previously stated, under the APA, PHMSA cannot incorporate by
reference in the final rule a version of the IME SLP-23 other than the
version proposed in the NPRM. However, PHMSA is clarifying in the
preamble to this final rule that since paragraph B of Section 1 clearly
states that ``highway, vessel, and rail are authorized modes for the
transportation of the bulk hazardous materials listed in Section I.A.1
in bulk packagings,'' the transportation of bulk explosives under IME
SLP-23 applies to the highway, vessel, and rail modes provided the
shipment of such materials is approved by the relevant mode in the HMT.
As previously stated, PHMSA encourages IME to submit a petition for
rulemaking to revise the HMR and provide an updated version of IME SLP-
23 that clarifies this issue further.
Therefore, PHMSA incorporates by reference SLP-23 (2021),
``Recommendations for the Transportation of Explosives, Division 1.5;
Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, Division 5.1; and Combustible Liquids in
Bulk Packaging,'' as proposed into Sec. 171.7(r)(2) and replaces the
2011 edition currently incorporated by reference in the HMR. PHMSA also
revises special provision 148 to clearly state that the VPT
requirements in SLP-23 (2011) would still apply. PHMSA also adds new
special provision TP48 to Sec. 172.102(c)(8) to authorize the use of
IM 101 and 102 portable tanks for ANEs when transported under SLP-23
(2021). PHMSA assigns TP48 to the following UN numbers in the HMT in
Sec. 172.102: ``UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E;'' ``UN3375,
Ammonium nitrate emulsion;'' and ``UN3139, Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., PG
II.'' Lastly, PHMSA revises Sec. 173.251 to state that this section is
not applicable when ``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion'' is
transported in IM 101 or 102 portable tanks in accordance with SLP-23
(2021).
J. Revision of Testing and Marking of UN Specification Packagings
In its petition (P-1732),\28\ the Sporting Arms and Ammunition
Manufacturers' Institute, Inc. (SAAMI) proposes that PHMSA amend Sec.
178.503(a)(6) by allowing UN performance-oriented boxes (e.g., UN 4A,
4B, or 4N for steel, aluminum, or other metal boxes, respectively) to
be marked with the last two digits of the year of testing certification
rather than the last two digits for year of manufacture. Additionally,
the SAAMI petition proposes to add an additional selective testing
variation in Sec. 178.601(g) to allow for variation of packagings that
include articles containing solid hazardous materials, packed in inner
packagings without further testing, subject to certain conditions.
SAAMI requests that this variation also allow for an increase in
dimensions of the outer packaging of the combination packaging based on
the tested design type. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise Sec.
178.503(a)(6) to allow UN performance-oriented boxes (e.g., UN 4A, 4B,
or 4N for steel, aluminum, or other metal boxes, respectively) to be
marked with the last two digits of the year of testing certification
rather than the last two digits for year of manufacture, and revise
Sec. 178.601(g) to allow an additional selective testing variation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ P-1732--SAAMI (PHMSA-2019-0069), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0069.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to the marking proposal, the marking requirements in
Sec. 178.503(a)(6) currently require packages to be marked with the
last two digits of the year of manufacture. SAAMI asserts that the year
of manufacture is meant to tie the packaging to a specific
certification (i.e., tied to design qualification testing and periodic
retesting to a UN standard). SAAMI asserts that while the date of
manufacture is informative, this degree of specificity is not necessary
for safety or enforcement purposes. SAAMI adds that because the
retesting of the design type occurs every two years,\29\ industries
incur costs to change the year of manufacture marking on packagings
that are still being produced under the same design test. (PHMSA notes
that this conclusion is based on the presumption that manufacturers of
combination packagings are operating at the minimum test frequency of
retesting every 24 months.) SAAMI asserts that allowing marking of the
last two digits of the year of packaging certification on packagings is
considered an acceptable substitute to the current regulatory
requirement in Sec. 178.503(a)(6) and eliminates the need to change
printing plates biannually.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The periodic retest requirements for combination packagings
call for conducting design qualification retesting at least once
every 24 months. See Sec. 178.601(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA received mixed comments regarding this specific proposal;
specifically, some commenters supported it while others opposed. The
opposing viewpoint noted that this proposal would cause the package
marking on Series 4 Packages to no longer be harmonized with the UN
Model Regulations. Therefore, PHMSA is not adopting the proposal to
revise Sec. 178.503(a)(6) to allow the marking of Series 4 packages
with the year of certification instead of the year of manufacturing.
PHMSA has determined that the HMR and the UN Model Regulations
packaging specification marks should remain aligned to facilitate
efficient cross-border shipping. Deviations from the UN Model
Regulations--particularly with respect to standard markings--is not
justified based on limited potential cost savings that could be at
issue here. Maintaining a global system of consistent transportation
requirements protects businesses and people worldwide by allowing for
the safe, frustration-free transport of hazardous materials.
With regard to the selective testing variation proposal, Sec.
178.601 contains the general requirements for the testing of non-bulk
UN performance-oriented packagings and packages. Section 178.601(g)
contains packaging variations that allow for the selective testing of
packagings that differ only in minor respects from a tested design
type. SAAMI proposes in its petition to create an additional packaging
variation under Sec. 178.601(g) to include small arms ammunition--
specifically, ``Cartridges for weapons, inert projectile(s) or blank
(UN0012 and UN0014); Primers, cap type (UN0044); and Cases, cartridge,
empty with primer (UN0055)--packed in inner packages.'' Specifically,
SAAMI proposes allowing inner packagings of ammunition to be assembled
and transported without packaging testing, provided that the outer
packaging of a combination package of articles successfully passes the
tests, in accordance with Sec. Sec. 178.603 and 178.606. Additionally,
the SAAMI
[[Page 15648]]
petition proposes for the packaging variation to allow for larger
packages to use the certification of a smaller tested package.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of the
SAAMI proposal for a new selective testing variation to allow for
limited testing of combination packagings for small arms ammunition and
components. PHMSA concurs with the proposal to allow for a variation in
combination packagings used for materials classified as UN0012, UN0014,
UN0044, and UN0055 without further testing.
PHMSA conducted an economic evaluation of the amendment to Sec.
178.601(g) to allow specified inner packagings to be assembled and
transported without testing under certain conditions. For this
amendment, PHMSA estimates annualized cost savings of approximately
$826,711. A more detailed discussion of the economic analysis of this
amendment can be found in the RIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from COSTHA in support of the revisions as
proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the
proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA is adding a new packaging variation
in Sec. 178.601(g)(6) to authorize selective testing of packagings
containing ``Cartridges for weapons, inert projectile(s) or blank
(UN0012 and UN0014), Primers, cap type (UN0044), and Cases, cartridge,
empty with primer (UN0055).'' Inner packagings intended to contain
these materials may be assembled and transported without testing
provided that the outer packaging of a combination packaging
successfully passes the tests, in accordance with Sec. Sec. 178.603
and 178.606, and the gross mass does not exceed that of the tested
type.
K. Authorizing Smaller Combustible Placard on IBCs
In its petition (P-1734),\30\ Evonik proposes that PHMSA revise
Sec. 172.514(c) by adding an option for smaller placards for
intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) carrying combustible liquids by
adopting the provisions in DOT-SP 16295 \31\ into the HMR. This would
allow shippers to transport IBCs containing combustible liquids
(NA1993) bearing a combustible placard sized to be consistent with the
label size specifications in Sec. 172.407(c). Section 172.407(c)
requires diamond shaped labels to be at least 100 mm (3.9 inches) on
each side. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to revise Sec. 172.514(c) by
adding an option for smaller placards for IBCs carrying combustible
liquids.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ P-1734--Evonik (PHMSA-2019-0089), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0089.
\31\ DOT SP-16295, https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/SP16295.pdf/2018080498/SP16295.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The HMR requires placards to be at least 250 mm (9.84 inches) on
each side. Section 172.514(c) prescribes the exceptions for placarding
bulk packages. Specifically, paragraph (c)(4) authorizes IBCs to be
labeled in accordance with part 172, subpart E. However, IBCs
transporting combustible liquids do not qualify for that exception
because there is no authorized label for combustible liquids.
Evonik states in its petition that a smaller-sized combustible
placard would allow for more space for proper placarding and marking
placement due to the commonly limited space available to display hazard
information on the IBC side plates and panels. Moreover, Evonik states
that a smaller placard provides a level of safety equivalent to the
requirements in Sec. 172.514(c)(4), where an IBC is authorized to be
labeled instead of placarded (e.g., flammable labels vs. flammable
placards), and in Sec. 172.406(e)(6), where duplicate labels are not
required on two sides or two ends of an IBC with a volume of 1.8 m\3\
(64 cubic feet) or less (approximately 478 gallons). Because these
exceptions are allowed for hazardous materials considered to pose
greater danger than combustible liquids, Evonik asserts the reduction
in size for combustible placards will maintain a safe level of hazard
communication for transport of combustible liquids in IBCs.
While this revision is not technical in nature, PHMSA determines
that--from a policy and safety perspective--this amendment does not
change the safety requirements for the transportation of an IBC, but
will provide greater flexibility by making more space available for
other necessary information on the IBC. Additionally, this amendment
will not result in any cost to industry or impose any new regulatory
burden to industry. There will be a marginal cost savings due to
current special permit holders no longer needing to apply to renew
their special permits. A more detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket
for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received feedback from the DGAC supporting proposed changes
to allow label sized placards on IBCs containing combustible liquids
instead of requiring full sized placards. In its original proposal,
PHMSA asked for comments on whether to allow label sized placards
instead of full sized placards on other bulk package types containing
combustible liquids, such as portable tanks. DGAC recommended that
PHMSA expand the changes to also include permitting label sized
placards instead of full sized placards on portable tanks for
combustible liquids. After further review, PHMSA did not find any
technical or safety reasons to not allow the use of label sized
placards instead of full sized placards on portable tanks. Therefore,
PHMSA revises Sec. 172.514(c)(1) and (4) to allow IBCs and portable
tanks containing combustible liquids to be placarded with a combustible
placard that meets the label size specifications in Sec. 172.407(c).
L. Incorporate by Reference IME Safety Library Publication 22 (SLP-22)
In its petition (P-1736),\32\ IME requests that PHMSA incorporate
by reference IME SLP-22 (2019), ``Recommendations for the Safe
Transportation of Detonators in a Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive
Materials.'' The HMR currently incorporates by reference the IME SLP-22
(2007) version in the HMR at Sec. 171.7(r)(1). In the NPRM, PHMSA
proposed the incorporation by reference of IME SLP-22 (2019),
``Recommendations for the Safe Transportation of Detonators in a
Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive Materials.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ P-1736--IME (PHMSA-2019-0167), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0167.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IME notes that DOT has long accepted the SLP-22 publication and its
recommendations for the safe transportation of detonators in a vehicle.
SLP-22 (2007) is referenced in Sec. Sec. 173.63 and 177.835. IME notes
that much of the SLP-22 standard has remained virtually unchanged since
1972 and has proven effective for the safe transportation of
detonators. Of the millions of shipments of detonators and explosives
made using SLP-22, none have resulted in a mass-detonation. The primary
intent of SLP-22 is not to prevent mass detonation, but instead to
allow sufficient time in the event of a transportation incident, such
as fire, to evacuate bystanders to a safe distance. Testing conducted
by IME has shown that transporting detonators in an undamaged box
constructed to the standard set forth in SLP-22 will prevent, for 30
minutes or longer, mass detonation.
SLP-22 (2019) reflects necessary changes and improvements to the
SLP-22 (2007) edition and includes technical corrections, practical
improvements, and deletion of outdated practices.
Specifically, changes to SLP-22 include:
[[Page 15649]]
Providing clarity on the text ``other positions may be
acceptable'' by specifying alternative placement of SLP-22 packages or
containers on a motor vehicle based on vehicle cargo space
configuration.
Consistent with the alternative positions, adding a
constraint to limit positions of a container on the vehicle as far as
possible from the points on the vehicle that are most susceptible to
high temperature fires due to accidents or severe mechanical failures
(e.g., the vehicle fuel tank).
Adding reference to IME SLP-23 for containers mounted on a
cargo tank motor vehicle.
Adding a requirement that structural components (i.e.,
latches) must be bolted or welded to the steel in the wall of the
container or compartment.
Allowing alternative materials of construction subject to
certain performance standards (i.e., constructed of or covered with
non-sparking material).
Adopting several revisions that provide clarity and
correct typographical errors.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of each
revision included in SLP-22 (2019) and concluded that these changes
will either maintain or enhance the safety of transporting detonators
by highway with other explosive materials. PHMSA supports the overall
intent to allow more time for evacuation should there be an incident.
PHMSA incorporates by reference SLP-22 (2019). PHMSA has concluded that
the specifications in Section C.9 of the document are adequate to
provide the flexibility to allow for alternative materials of
construction without compromising safety.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted an economic analysis of the
IME proposal and found that the changes made to Sections C.1 and C.1.a
provide more flexibility for businesses in their placement of SLP-22
boxes while still meeting safety standards. The changes to Section
C.1.c regarding padlocks may result in annual cost savings of
approximately $2,000, assuming a small percentage of vehicles (0.1
percent) take advantage of the one-time cost savings associated with
purchasing new padlocks. C.9's allowance of alternative materials in
the construction of SLP-22 boxes may result in cost savings of
approximately $965,598 per year. These cost savings, however, are
contingent on the quantity and type of material substitutions made by
SLP-22 box manufacturers, which is uncertain. A more detailed
discussion of this economic analysis of this incorporation by reference
can be found in the RIA posted to the docket for the rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from IME in support of these revisions as
proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the
proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA amends Sec. 171.7(r)(1) to
reference IME SLP-22 (2019). In addition, PHMSA makes an editorial
revision to Sec. 171.7(r)(1) by inserting a space between ``IME
Standard 22,'' and ``IME'' in the first line and amend the date to read
``June 2019.''
M. Definition of a Liquid
In its petition (P-1738),\33\ COSTHA proposes that PHMSA modify the
definition of a liquid in Sec. 171.8 to include the test for
determining fluidity found in ISO 2137:1985, ``Petroleum products--
Lubricating grease and petrolatum--Determination of cone penetration,''
(penetrometer test), prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR.
Section 171.8 states that a liquid means a material, other than an
elevated temperature material, with a melting point or initial melting
point of 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F) or lower at a standard pressure of 101.3
kPa (14.7 pounds per square inch). A viscous material for which a
specific melting point cannot be determined must be subjected to the
procedures specified in ASTM D 4359 (1990), ``Standard Test Method for
Determining Whether a Material is Liquid or Solid.'' The UN Model
Regulations, ICAO Technical Instructions, and IMDG Code all include the
penetrometer test as an alternative to performing the ASTM D 4359 test
method in determination of whether a material is a liquid. In the NPRM,
PHMSA proposed to modify the definition of a liquid in Sec. 171.8 to
include the test for determining fluidity--ISO 2137:1985 (penetrometer
test)--prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ P-1738--COSTHA (PHMSA-2019-0233), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0233.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its petition, COSTHA states there have been no recorded
instances of determination of liquidity using the ADR penetrometer test
increasing the risk to safety while in transportation. COSTHA adds that
under the current system, a material manufactured outside the United
States and classified using the penetrometer test may not be reshipped
within the United States without first performing the ASTM D 4359 test
method. The HMR does not authorize the ADR penetrometer test as a
method for determining if a material is a liquid, and thus, any hazard
classification based on this result is not valid in the United States.
This results in increased cost for shippers to conduct additional
testing and creates a barrier to importing materials into the United
States.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of the
COSTHA proposal to harmonize the HMR definition with international use
of the ADR penetrometer test for determination of a liquid. The test,
ISO 2137:1985, as identified in the ADR under section 2.3.4, is
referenced in the UN Model Regulations Volume 1, 20th edition, in
section 1.2.1, Definitions, Liquid, and in the UN Manual of Tests and
Criteria, 7th edition, as a footnote reference to UN Model Regulations
1.2.1 at the end of 20.4.1.5. PHMSA finds that the ISO test is more
empirical in nature than ASTM D 4359 and provides better understanding
of the physical properties of the tested material. Therefore, PHMSA now
determines the adoption of penetrometer test into the HMR will provide
a level of safety equal or greater to the currently approved ASTM test
method. Lastly, the addition of the penetrometer test into the HMR will
allow for more flexibility to offerors by providing an additional
option for the testing of liquids. An economic analysis of this
petition could not validate the estimates from the petitioner that
suggest cost savings from this revision. A more detailed discussion of
this economic analysis of this revision can be found in the RIA posted
to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments from COSTHA and DGAC in support of the
revisions as proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition
to the proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises the definition of a
liquid in Sec. 171.8 to reference the test for determining fluidity
(penetrometer test) prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR.
N. Incorporate by Reference Updated CGA C-7 (2020)
In its petition (P-1744),\34\ CGA proposes that PHMSA incorporate
by reference the updated Appendix A of CGA publication C-7 (2020),
``Guide to Classification and Labeling of Compressed Gases,'' Eleventh
Edition, into the HMR at Sec. 171.7(n)(8). Currently, the HMR
incorporates by reference CGA C-7 (2014), ``Guide to Classification and
Labeling of Compressed Gases,'' Tenth Edition. The HMR currently
authorizes
[[Page 15650]]
the marking of a Dewar flask or a cylinder in accordance with CGA C-7
(2014), Appendix A instead of labeling (see Sec. 172.400a). CGA states
that an update is needed to CGA C-7, Tenth Edition (2014), to address
changes made to Appendix A in the Eleventh Edition (2020), such as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ P-1744--CGA (PHMSA-2020-0104), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0104.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Providing greater flexibility in the hazard class display
by allowing it to be displayed on one or two lines.
Clarifying that the marking system elements must meet
certain minimum size requirements.
Providing an example of the CGA marking system for
multiple hazard diamonds that are overlapped.
CGA C-7 (2020) states the general principles for labels and
markings of cylinders, and provides recommended minimum requirements
for many hazardous gases and selected liquids used in such cylinders.
In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to incorporate by reference the updated
Appendix A of CGA publication C-7 (2020), ``Guide to Classification and
Labeling of Compressed Gases,'' Eleventh Edition, into the HMR at Sec.
171.7(n)(8).
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of this
petition, including a review of the revised Appendix A to C-7 (2020),
and found that the changes are minor and primarily editorial
clarifications. PHMSA concludes that these editorial revisions in
Appendix A to CGA C-7 (2020) will not negatively impact hazard
communication.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted an economic review of this
petition and found no quantifiable benefits associated with this
change. However, the changes found in Appendix A to CGA C-7 (2020) will
provide clearer guidance to the regulated community and thus increase
compliance. A more detailed discussion of this economic analysis of
this revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments in support of the revisions as proposed
from CGA and DGAC. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to
the proposed revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises Sec. 171.7(n)(8) to
reference CGA C-7 (2020), ``Guide to Classification and Labeling of
Compressed Gases,'' Eleventh Edition.
O. Incorporate by Reference CGA C-27 (2019)
In its petition (P-1746),\35\ CGA proposes that PHMSA incorporate
by reference CGA C-27 (2019), ``Standard Procedure to Derate the
Service Pressure of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes,'' First Edition.
PHMSA notes that this publication defines ``tube'' as a seamless steel
pressure vessel with openings at both ends and with a water capacity of
120 L or greater. CGA requests PHMSA revise Sec. 180.212(a)(1) to
allow for repairs of a seamless steel DOT 3-series cylinder at a repair
facility that holds a valid ``K'' number approval, issued under the
provisions in Sec. 107.805. Cylinder owners would be permitted to
apply to reduce the service pressure of cylinders in accordance with
CGA C-27. Approved facilities would then process these applications to
determine if a DOT 3-Series cylinder rejected for insufficient minimum
wall thickness could be derated from the original marked service
pressure. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to incorporate by reference CGA
C-27 (2019), ``Standard Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure of DOT
3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes,'' First Edition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ P-1746--CGA (PHMSA-2020-0116), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0116.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CGA C-27 provides a standard procedure to derate the service
pressure of DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes with local thin areas in
the walls of the tube that do not meet the minimum thickness criteria
of the specification. Derating is the lowering of the maximum allowable
service pressure of a cylinder due to thinning of a cylinder's walls to
extend the life of the cylinder. In accordance with CGA C-27, any tube
with a suspect thin area found during AET, UE, or visual inspection
must be evaluated in accordance with CGA C-20. If the tube does not
meet the minimum thickness requirements in Section 4b of CGA C-27, a
cylinder owner may apply to PHMSA to reduce the marked service pressure
of the cylinders, in accordance with Section 4c of CGA C-27. The
procedure to derate a tube must be performed by a DOT-approved repair
facility. CGA C-27 does not apply to tubes that have been condemned
from any requalification method. Cylinder repair shops must be approved
by PHMSA to have the authority to repair a cylinder. These companies
receive a K-number from PHMSA, and the K-number approval indicates
whether a company is authorized to perform repairs or rebuilds of
cylinders, and in this case, DOT 3-series tubes.
CGA asserts that the incorporation by reference of CGA C-27 will
minimize inquiries to PHMSA by standardizing and codifying the existing
process under the PHMSA document ``Guidance for Applications to Down-
Rate the Service Pressure of DOT Seamless Steel Cylinders (Rev. 3/27/
13),'' \36\ and provide persons seeking to derate a tube with
instruction on pertinent information to submit to PHMSA in a logical
and consistent manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/PHMSA-2020-0116-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of the
proposals in the petition, including a review of CGA C-27, and found
that the method for pressure derating of tubes is essentially the same
as what is outlined in the PHMSA guidance document. Both documents
provide instructions on how persons should conduct an initial
inspection using CGA C-6 (2013), ``Standard for Visual Inspection of
Steel Compressed Gas Cylinders,'' to establish that the tube is in good
physical, serviceable condition for pressure derating with no
rejectable corrosion, pitting, dents, gouges, or other defects. If
deemed suitable for pressure derating, the tube should undergo 100
percent ultrasonic testing (UT) to establish a minimum sidewall
thickness on which to base the new reduced service pressure. The
methodology used to calculate the new service pressure is the same as
the current methodology used to determine the allowable service
pressure for DOT 3-series seamless steel cylinders found in the HMR at
Sec. Sec. 178.36 (3A and 3AX), 178.37 (3AA and 3AAX), and 178.38 (3B).
The calculations should then be certified by the tube manufacturer, or
by the Independent Inspection Agency (IIA) if the tube manufacturer is
no longer in service or available. IIAs are approved by the Associate
Administrator to perform a review of a company's inspection or
requalification operation. In summary, the PHMSA technical review found
that the procedures in CGA C-27 are equivalent to the procedure
established in the PHMSA guidance document for pressure derating of
tubes and should have no impact on safety.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted an economic evaluation of
this petition and found that no benefits or additional costs other than
the cost to obtain the publication are expected as a result of the
changes in this petition. A more detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this revision can be found in the RIA posted to the docket
for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments in support of the revisions from CGA. PHMSA
did not receive any comments in opposition to the proposed revision.
Therefore, PHMSA incorporates by reference CGA C-27, ``Procedure to
Derate the Service Pressure of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes,''
First
[[Page 15651]]
Edition, in Sec. 171.7. PHMSA also adds Sec. 180.212(a)(4) for
instruction on derating of a cylinder reference to CGA C-27.
P. Incorporate by Reference CGA C-29 (2019)
In its petition (P-1747),\37\ CGA proposes that PHMSA incorporate
by reference CGA C-29 (2019), ``Standard for Design Requirements for
Tube Trailers and Tube Modules,'' First Edition, which would supersede
CGA TB-25 (2018), ``Design Considerations for Tube Trailers.'' CGA also
proposes conforming revisions to Sec. 173.301 to replace references to
CGA TB-25 with references to CGA C-29. In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to
incorporate by reference CGA C-29 (2019), ``Standard for Design
Requirements for Tube Trailers and Tube Modules,'' in Sec. 171.7, and
revise Sec. 173.301 to replace references to CGA TB-25 with references
to CGA C-29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ P-1747--CGA (PHMSA-2020-0117), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0117.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CGA C-29 defines basic design requirements for tube trailers and
tube modules to maintain structural integrity during normal conditions
of handling and transport. A tube trailer or tube module manufactured
in accordance with this standard is less likely to have a separation of
the tubes from the trailer or bundle, or an unintentional release of
product when subjected to the multidirectional forces that can occur
during a highway collision, including a rollover accident. Under this
standard, tube modules must meet the loading and accident protection
standards that are applied to tube trailers.
In its petition, CGA outlines the changes between the CGA TB-25
(currently incorporated by reference in Sec. 171.7) and CGA C-29.
Examples of these revisions include:
Changing the Technical Bulletin to a CGA Standard.
Changing the title of the document to ``Standard for
Design Requirements for Tube Trailers and Tube Modules.''
Adding a scope section that specifies that CGA C-29 is not
applicable to a MEGC because MEGC design requirements are found in
Sec. 178.75.
Providing several examples of testing and methods that
meet the requirement of verifiable performance testing and analytical
methods within the basic design requirements section.
Changing ``should'' to ``shall'' in several places within
the document to provide a standard that includes enforceable language.
Referencing CGA C-23, ``Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC
3 Series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces,'' Second Edition.
CGA developed CGA C-29 to supersede TB-25 and asserts that CGA C-29
provides a more optimal level of safety for the public and a
satisfactory performance standard when cylinders are mounted on motor
vehicles or in frames for transportation. In addition, CGA asserts that
C-29 provides more enforceable language, whereas TB-25 does not (i.e.,
use of ``shall'' vs. ``should'').
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of the
petition and supporting documents and found that CGA C-29 is
technically accurate, consistent with CGA TB-25, and provides safety
improvements for the transport of tube trailers. Additionally, PHMSA
concludes that tube trailers or modules manufactured in accordance with
CGA C-29 are less likely to have separation of tubes from the trailer
or bundle, which could result in the unintentional release of hazardous
materials, when subjected to multidirectional forces that can occur in
highway collisions, including rollover accidents. Therefore, PHMSA
asserts the incorporation by reference of CGA C-29 will enhance the
safe transportation of hazardous materials in tube trailers.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted an economic evaluation and
found that most operators are already following the guidelines in CGA
C-29, and thus there are limited quantifiable economic benefits. The
largest potential source of benefits from mandatory adoption is
enhanced safety through a more standardized qualification and testing
regime. Minor economic benefits might also be derived from the
editorial and definitional clarifications provided in the updated CGA
requirements. Making requirements for operators clearer and easier to
follow would support compliance with the regulation. A more detailed
discussion of the economic analysis of this revision can be found in
the RIA posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments in support of the proposed revision from
CGA. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the proposed
revision. Therefore, PHMSA incorporates by reference CGA C-29,
``Standard for Design Requirements for Tube Trailers and Tube
Modules,'' First Edition, into Sec. 171.7, and removes the references
to CGA TB-25, ``Design Considerations for Tube Trailers.'' PHMSA also
revises Sec. 173.301(i) to replace references to CGA TB-25 with
references to CGA C-29.
Q. Incorporate by Reference CGA V-9 (2019)
In its petition (P-1748),\38\ CGA requests that PHMSA incorporate
by reference CGA V-9 (2019), ``Compressed Gas Association Standard for
Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves,'' Eighth Edition. The HMR currently
references the Seventh Edition of CGA V-9 (2012). The major updates to
CGA V-9 (2019) ensure continuity and consistency with the testing
requirements of ISO 10297, ``Gas cylinder--Cylinder valves--
Specification and Type Testing.'' In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed to
incorporate by reference CGA V-9 (2019), ``Compressed Gas Association
Standard for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves,'' Eighth Edition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ P-1748--CGA (PHMSA-2020-0124), https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0124.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CGA V-9 (2019) standard covers compressed gas cylinder valve
design, selection, manufacture, and use, including performance
requirements such as operating temperature limits, pressure ranges, and
flow capabilities. The standard also includes requirements for
materials, inlet and outlet connections, cleaning, qualification and
production testing, maintenance, and reconditioning. In addition, CGA
V-9 (2019) includes guidelines and requirements for the design,
material selection, testing, and marking of cylinder valve protection
caps. Finally, the standard provides a listing of valve types and
associated drawings and their application and limitations.
As noted in the NPRM, PHMSA conducted a technical review of CGA V-9
(2019) and verified updates and revisions made to CGA V-9 (2012), which
is currently incorporated by reference in the HMR. PHMSA found these
revisions were primarily editorial in nature, except for the revision
to harmonize CGA V-9 (2019) with the testing requirements of ISO 10297.
Because PHMSA has already incorporated by reference ISO 10297 in the
HMR, there is no technical reason to not incorporate by reference the
updated version of CGA V-9 (2019), which references the ISO 10297
standard. In addition, because CGA-V-9 (2019) now references ISO 10297,
it will allow greater flexibility in selecting and qualifying valves,
and thus avoid redundant compliance with both ISO 10297 and CGA V-9
(2019).
PHMSA asserts that this incorporation by reference will result in
benefits to the industry, as CGA V-9 (2019) allows the use of listed
valves in other standards, such as those qualified to ISO 10297,
[[Page 15652]]
thereby avoiding or minimizing additional qualification costs.
Manufacturers and users of compressed gas cylinder valves would no
longer need to conduct two different tests to satisfy ISO 10927 (as
currently required by the HMR) and CGA V-9 (2019). A more detailed
discussion of this economic analysis of this revision can be found in
the RIA posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA received comments in support of the proposed revisions from
CGA. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the proposed
revision. Therefore, PHMSA revises Sec. 171.7(n)(26) to replace CGA V-
9 (2012), ``Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Cylinder
Valves,'' Seventh Edition, with CGA V-9 (2019), ``Compressed Gas
Association Standard for Compressed Cylinder Valves,'' Eighth Edition.
R. Phaseout of Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule
\39\ to issue regulations implementing certain provisions of the
American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act,\40\ as enacted on
December 27, 2020. One provision of the AIM Act mandates the phasedown
of HFCs--a group of chemicals commonly referred to as refrigerants
because of their primary use for cooling and refrigeration applications
like air conditioning--by at least 85 percent by 2036. HFCs are highly
potent greenhouse gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and warm the
planet. The AIM Act directs the EPA to implement the phasedown by
issuing a fixed quantity of transferrable production and consumption
allowances, which producers and importers of hydrofluorocarbons must
hold in quantities equal to the number of hydrofluorocarbons they
produce or import. For the time period of 2022-2050, the EPA estimated
the rulemaking would avoid cumulative emissions of 4,560 million metric
tons of exchange value equivalent \41\ of HFCs in the United States
with a present value of cumulative net benefits of $272.7 billion.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 86 FR 55116 (Oct. 5, 2021).
\40\ https://www.epa.gov/climate-hfcs-reduction/aim-act.
\41\ EPA uses the term ``exchange value equivalent'' to provide
a common unit of measure between HFCs, and the AIM Act defines
``exchange value'' as the value assigned to a regulated substance
(i.e., a regulated HFC).
\42\ 86 FR 55116 (Oct. 5, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA final rule implemented a two-stage approach that would
first prohibit additional disposable cylinders (i.e., non-refillables)
from being introduced to the market by January 1, 2025, and second,
prohibit sales altogether by January 1, 2027. A primary example of a
non-refillable cylinder authorized for transport of HFCs is a DOT 39
cylinder. In the final rule, EPA noted that the AIM Act gives the
agency broad authority to implement these prohibitions relating to the
sale or distribution, or offer for sale or distribution, of regulated
substances that were illegally produced or imported.
In the NPRM, PHMSA proposed adopting the same prohibition on the
filling and transportation of certain HFCs in non-refillable cylinders
to align with EPA's efforts to fulfill the AIM Act mandate and combat
climate impacts, and to avoid potential confusion by industry if PHMSA
were to continue to authorize these materials in non-refillable
cylinders while prohibited by EPA. In response to this proposal PHMSA
received comments from seven different entities opposing the phaseout
of HFCs in non-refillable cylinders. Commenters noted that--in their
opinion--the proposal goes beyond PHMSA's authority, and therefore
PHMSA should not phaseout non-refillable cylinders in the final rule.
Additionally, commenters noted that on June 20, 2023, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a ruling \43\ that
vacated two provisions of the EPA's Phasedown Rule for HFCs. The court
found that the EPA did not have statutory authority to require the use
of refillable cylinders or to implement a QR code tracking system for
HFCs. PHMSA's proposal to phaseout non-refillable cylinders for the
transportation of HFCs was predicated on harmonizing the HMR with the
EPA regulations. Following the decision by the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia, PHMSA is no longer considering
the phaseout of HFCs in this final rule, and will not finalize the
proposal to prohibit the filling and transportation of certain HFCs in
non-refillable cylinders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-caDC-21-01251/USCOURTS-caDC-21-01251-0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. Emergency Processing of Special Permits
Section 107.117 outlines the conditions necessary for applicants
who apply for emergency processing of their special permit request.
PHMSA occasionally issues a special permit that the Associate
Administrator determines is needed to address an imminent safety issue,
a threat to national security, or to prevent significant economic loss.
See Sec. 107.117(a). However, PHMSA has found it necessary to add an
additional criteria due to situations that require processing of an
emergency special permit but are not clearly outlined in the current
Sec. 107.117(a). To meet this need, PHMSA proposed adding a new
paragraph (a)(4) to provide clarification that the Associate
Administrator may also approve emergency processing of a special permit
in support of certain essential governmental functions--both foreign
and domestic. For example, a foreign government request for the
emergency processing of a special permit application regarding the
timely movement of a hazardous material--from or through the United
States--in support of law enforcement, life safety (e.g., providing
health services items or equipment containing hazardous materials
during a pandemic), or judicial activities may qualify under the new
paragraph. Furthermore, to provide additional clarification of Sec.
107.117(a)(2), PHMSA proposed to split the current clauses into two
distinct paragraphs--(a)(2) and (3).
PHMSA received comments from COSTHA in support of both revisions as
proposed. PHMSA did not receive any comments in opposition to the
proposed revisions. Therefore, to provide two instances of
clarification of Sec. 107.117(a), PHMSA will add a new paragraph
(a)(4) and split the current clauses from paragraph (a)(2) into two
distinct paragraphs--(a)(2) and (3).
V. Section-by-Section Review
Below is a section-by-section description of the revisions.
A. Section 107.117
Section 107.117 outlines situations when emergency processing of
special permits may be appropriate. In this final rule, PHMSA adds
Sec. 107.117(a)(4) to clarify that PHMSA may use emergency processing
of special permits in support of essential governmental functions.
Separately, to provide clarification of Sec. 107.117(a)(2), PHMSA is
splitting the current clauses into two distinct paragraphs--(a)(2) and
(3).
B. Section 171.7
Section 171.7 lists all standards incorporated by reference into
the HMR that are not specifically set forth in the regulations. In this
final rule, PHMSA incorporates by reference the following publications
by CGA, IME, and the UN:
CGA C-7 (2020), Guide to Classification and Labeling of
Compressed Gases (Eleventh Edition), into Sec. 172.400a. This
publication has been prepared as a guide for the
[[Page 15653]]
classification and labelling of compressed gases. It is general in
nature and does not cover all circumstances for each individual
cylinder type or lading.
CGA C-20 (2014), Requalification Standard for Metallic,
DOT, and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic
Examination (Second Edition), into Sec. 180.205. This publication is
used for the requalification of seamless cylinders and tubes using UE.
It is general in nature and does not cover all circumstances for each
individual cylinder type or lading.
CGA C-23 (2018), Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 3
Series and ISO 11120, Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces (Second Edition),
into Sec. Sec. 180.205 and 180.207. This publication applies to the
inspection and evaluation of DOT/TC 3-Series and ISO 11120 tubes 12 ft
(3.7 m) or longer with an outside diameter greater than or equal to 18
in (457 mm) that are supported by the neck mounting surface. It is
general in nature and does not cover all circumstances for each
individual cylinder type or lading.
CGA C-27 (2019), Standard Procedure to Derate the Service
Pressure of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel Tubes (First Edition), into
Sec. 180.212. This publication provides a standard procedure to derate
the service pressure of DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes with local
thin areas (LTA) that do not meet the minimum wall thickness of certain
DOT specifications. It is general in nature and does not cover all
circumstances for each individual cylinder type or lading.
CGA C-29 (2019), Standard for Design Requirements for Tube
Trailers and Tube Modules (First Edition), into Sec. 173.301. This
publication defines basic design requirements for tube trailers and
tube modules, manufactured or modified on or after May 11, 2009, to
maintain structural integrity during normal conditions of handling and
transport. It is general in nature and does not cover all circumstances
for each individual cylinder type or lading. Tube trailers manufactured
or modified before May 11, 2009, can continue to follow the
requirements in TB-25, ``Design Considerations for Tube Trailers.'' Any
modifications to the tube trailer, however, should be done in
accordance with CGA C-29.
CGA V-9 (2019), Compressed Gas Association Standard for
Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves (Eighth Edition), into Sec. 173.301.
This publication covers cylinder valve design, manufacture, and use
including performance requirements such as operating temperature
limits, pressure ranges, and flow capabilities. It is general in nature
and does not cover all circumstances for each individual cylinder type
or lading.
SLP-22 (2019), Recommendations for the Safe Transportation
of Detonators in a Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive Materials, into
Sec. Sec. 173.63 and 177.835. This publication outlines the guidelines
for the safe transportation of detonators in commercial transportation.
SLP-23 (2021), Recommendations for the Transportation of
Explosives, Division 1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, Division 5.1; and
Combustible Liquids in Bulk Packaging, into Sec. Sec. 172.102, 173.66
introductory text, 173.251, and 177.835(d). This publication specifies
the requirements for the transportation in bulk packaging of certain
Class 1 and Class 5 hazardous materials essential to commercial
blasting operations.
European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage
of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), which is already incorporated by
reference in Sec. 171.23, into Sec. 171.8. The European Agreement
concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR)
outlines regulations concerning the international carriage of dangerous
goods by road within the EU and other countries that are party to the
agreement. This publication presents the European Agreement, the
Protocol Signatures, the annexes, and the amendments. In addition to a
new title, the 2020 edition of this document includes amendments
necessary to ensure harmonization of ADR with the UN Model Regulations,
additional amendments adopted by the Working Group on Tanks, as well as
amendments proposed by the Working Group on Standards.
United Nations' Recommendations on Test Series 8:
Applicability of Test Series 8(d), June 2019, into Sec. 172.102(c)(1),
special provision 148. This test series is used to determine if an
ammonium nitrate emulsion, suspension, or gel, intermediate for
blasting explosives (ANE), is insensitive enough for inclusion in
Division 5.1, and to evaluate the suitability for transport in tanks.
Additionally, CGA has moved to a new headquarters location.
Therefore, we have revised Sec. 171.7(n) accordingly.
C. Section 171.8
Section 171.8 defines terms used throughout the HMR that have broad
or multi-modal applicability. PHMSA modifies the definition of liquid
in Sec. 171.8 to include the test for determining fluidity
(penetrometer test) prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR
as an alternative method for determining if a material is a liquid.
D. Section 172.101
The HMT is contained in Sec. 172.101. The HMT lists
alphabetically, by proper shipping name, those materials that have been
designated hazardous materials for the purpose of transportation. It
provides information used on shipping papers, package marking, and
labeling, as well as other pertinent shipping information for hazardous
materials. PHMSA amends the HMT by referencing special provision TP48
in Column (7) of the HMT for the following HMT entries: ``UN0332,
Explosive, Blasting, type E;'' ``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion;''
and ``UN3139, Oxidizing liquid n.o.s. (PG II).''
E. Section 172.102
Section 172.102 lists special provisions applicable to the
transportation of specific hazardous materials. Special provisions
contain packaging requirements, prohibitions, and exceptions applicable
to quantities or forms of hazardous materials. PHMSA adds a new special
provision--``TP48''--to allow the use of IM 101 and 102 portable tanks
when transported in accordance with SLP-23. In addition, PHMSA revises
special provision ``148'' to require materials assigned this provision
to be subject to the Vented Pipe Test (VPT). This ensures continued
performance of VPT requirements in the absence of required use of the
test in the update of the incorporation by reference of IME SLP-23.
F. Section 172.514
Section 172.514 prescribes the placarding requirements for bulk
packagings. PHMSA revises Sec. 172.514(c)(1) and (4) to allow an
option to use a placard that meets the label specification size
requirements in Sec. 172.407(c) for combustible liquids transported in
IBCs and portable tanks.
G. Section 173.4b
Section 173.4b prescribes exceptions for transporting certain
hazardous materials in de minimis quantities. PHMSA revises paragraph
(a) to include Division 6.1, PG I materials (no inhalation hazard) in
the list of materials authorized for this exception.
H. Section 173.115
Section 173.115 prescribes definitions for Class 2, Divisions 2.1,
2.2, and 2.3 hazardous materials. PHMSA revises Sec. 173.115(e) to
state that gas mixtures with component(s) that are liquefied gases may
be described using the
[[Page 15654]]
appropriate hazardous materials description of a non-liquefied
compressed gas in the HMT at Sec. 172.101 when the partial pressure(s)
of the liquefied component(s) in the mixture are reduced so that the
mixture is entirely in the gas phase at 20 [deg]C.
I. Section 173.185
Section 173.185 prescribes the requirements for packaging and
transporting lithium cells and batteries. PHMSA revises paragraph
(c)(3) to clarify that lithium button cell batteries contained in
equipment are not subject to any per package or consignment
limitations.
J. Section 173.251
Section 173.251 outlines the bulk packaging requirements for
ammonium nitrate emulsion, suspension, or gel. PHMSA revises Sec.
173.251 to state that this section is not applicable when ``UN3375,
Ammonium nitrate emulsion'' is transported in IM 101 or 102 portable
tanks in accordance with SLP-23 (2021).
K. Section 173.301
Section 173.301 outlines the general requirements for shipment of
compressed gases and other hazardous materials in cylinders, UN
pressure receptacles, and spherical pressure vessels. PHMSA revises
Sec. 173.301 to replace references to CGA TB-25 with references to CGA
C-29.
L. Section 173.302a
Section 173.302a specifies the additional requirements for shipment
of non-liquefied (permanent) compressed gases in specification
cylinders. PHMSA revises paragraph (c) by redesignating Sec.
173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) as Sec. 173.302a(c)(4) and (5) to properly
reflect that the safety provisions currently in Sec. 173.302a(c)(3)(i)
and (ii) are independent material construction requirements under
paragraph (c). PHMSA also adds paragraph (c)(6) to require that
cylinders be equipped with pressure relief devices sized and selected
as to type, location, and quantity, and tested in accordance with CGA
S-1.1 (previously in paragraph (c)(4)). Lastly, PHMSA adds paragraph
(c)(7) to require a plus sign (+) be added following the test date
marking on the cylinder to indicate compliance with paragraph (c) of
this section.
M. Section 173.302b
Section 173.302b describes the additional requirements for shipment
of non-liquefied (permanent) compressed gases in UN pressure
receptacles. PHMSA revises this section by adding a new paragraph (f)
to specify packaging restrictions for transporting compressed natural
gas and methane in UN seamless steel pressure receptacles. For methane
and natural gas with a methane content of 98 percent or greater, the
maximum tensile strength of the UN seamless steel pressure receptacle
may not exceed 1100 MPa (159,542 psi), and the contents must be free of
corroding components. For natural gas with methane content of less than
98 percent, the maximum tensile strength of the UN seamless steel
pressure receptacle may not exceed 950 MPa (137,750 psi). Additionally,
each discharge end of a UN refillable seamless steel tube must be
equipped with an internal drain tube, and the moisture content and
concentration of the corroding components must conform to the
requirements in Sec. 173.301b(a)(2).
N. Section 178.601
Section 178.601 prescribes the general requirements for the testing
of non-bulk performance-oriented packagings and packages. PHMSA
redesignates paragraphs (g)(6) through (8) as paragraphs (g)(7) through
(9) and adds new paragraph (g)(6) to allow packages tested with
articles containing small arms, i.e., ammunition without intermediate
packaging(s), to be assembled with any intermediate packaging(s)
without further testing. Moreover, PHMSA revises the redesignated
paragraph (g)(8) approval provision to include new paragraph (g)(6),
such that paragraphs (g)(1) through (7) are referenced in the revised
paragraph (g)(8).
O. Section 180.205
Section 180.205 prescribes the general requirements for
requalification of specification cylinders. PHMSA revises this section
to incorporate provisions consistent with CGA C-20-2014,
``Requalification Standard for Metallic, DOT and TC 3-Series Gas
Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination'' (Second Edition),
which allow for the use of UE for cylinder requalification. PHMSA
revises paragraph (e)(2) to state that cylinders in corrosive liquid
service are still required to do both an internal and external visual
inspection. PHMSA is revising paragraph (f)(2) to state that if a
cylinder or tube is requalified by ultrasonic examination, only an
external visual inspection is required. Additionally, PHMSA adds a new
paragraph (h) to specify that requalification using UE must be done in
accordance with CGA C-20 and by a facility approved by PHMSA for
performing UE operations. PHMSA revises paragraphs (i) and (j) to
specify the rejection requirements for a cylinder that fails
requalification tests.
PHMSA also adds Sec. 180.205(c)(5). This paragraph specifies that
a DOT 3-series specification cylinder that is 12 feet or longer with an
outside diameter greater than or equal to 18 inches and supported by
the neck mounting surface during transportation in commerce must be
inspected at least every 10 years in accordance with CGA C-23. Lastly,
PHMSA adds paragraph (d)(5) to specify the conditions for removal and
examination of cylinders in accordance with CGA C-23.
P. Section 180.207
Section 180.207 prescribes the requirements for the requalification
of UN pressure receptacles. PHMSA revises Sec. 180.207(d)(1) to
require that each seamless steel UN pressure receptacle that is 12 feet
or longer with an outside diameter greater than or equal to 18 inches
supported by the neck mounting surface during transportation in
commerce be inspected at least every 10 years in accordance with CGA C-
23. In addition, PHMSA specifies conditions for removal and examination
of the cylinder in accordance with CGA C-23.
Q. Section 180.209
Section 180.209 describes the requalification requirements for
specification cylinders. PHMSA is making an editorial revision to table
1 in paragraph (a) to reference the UE for 3T and special permit
cylinders. PHMSA is also making editorial revisions to paragraphs (d)
and (m) to reference Sec. 180.205(j) instead of Sec. 180.205(i) to
conform with a redesignation of that paragraph.
R. Section 180.212
Section 180.212 specifies the requirements for the repair of
seamless DOT 3-series specification cylinders and seamless UN pressure
receptacles. PHMSA adds Sec. 180.212(a)(4) to allow derating the
service pressure of DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes. PHMSA also
revises Sec. 180.212(b)(2) to: (1) allow, as a repair, the external
threading of a DOT 3-series cylinder or a seamless UN pressure
receptacle manufactured without external threads; and (2) not limit
external rethreading to UN pressure receptacles mounted in a MEGC.
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking
This rulemaking is published under the authority of Federal
Hazardous Materials Transportation Law (Federal
[[Page 15655]]
Hazmat Law; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.), which authorizes the Secretary of
Transportation to ``prescribe regulations for the safe transportation,
including security, of hazardous materials in intrastate, interstate,
and foreign commerce.'' The Secretary has delegated the authority
granted in the Federal Hazmat Law to the PHMSA Administrator at 49 CFR
1.97. This rulemaking amends several sections of the HMR in response to
petitions for rulemaking received from the regulated community.
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 14094, and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
Executive Order 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review''),\44\ as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (``Modernizing Regulatory
Review''),\45\ requires that agencies ``should assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives, including the
alternative of not regulating.'' Agencies should consider quantifiable
measures and qualitative measures of costs and benefits that are
difficult to quantify. Further, Executive Order 12866 requires that
agencies should select those regulatory approaches that maximize net
benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity),
unless a statute requires another regulatory approach. Similarly, DOT
Order 2100.6A (``Rulemaking and Guidance Procedures'') requires that
regulations issued by PHMSA and other DOT Operating Administrations
should consider an assessment of the potential benefits, costs, and
other important impacts of the proposed action, and should quantify (to
the extent practicable) the benefits, costs, and any significant
distributional impacts, including any environmental impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
\45\ 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023). PHMSA acknowledges that a
recent update to Circular A-4 contemplates that agencies will use a
different discount rate than those employed in the discussion below
and the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) beginning in January 2025.
However, PHMSA notes that that update to Circular A-4 permits the
use of those historical discount rates based on the Federal Register
publication date of this final rule. See OMB, Circular A-4,
``Regulatory Analysis'' at 93 (Nov. 9, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Order 2100.6A require that PHMSA
submit ``significant regulatory actions'' to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review. This rulemaking is not considered a
significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 (as amended) and, therefore, was not formally reviewed by OMB.
This rulemaking is also not considered a significant rule under DOT
Order 2100.6A.
PHMSA is responding to 18 petitions that have been submitted by the
public in accordance with the APA and PHMSA's rulemaking procedure
regulations (49 CFR 106.95 and 106.100). Overall, this final rule would
maintain the continued safe transportation of hazardous materials while
producing a net cost savings. PHMSA's findings are summarized here and
described in further detail in the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA),
which can be found in the regulatory docket (Docket ID: PHMSA-2020-
0102) at www.regulations.gov.
Summary of Findings
PHMSA estimates a present value of quantified net cost savings of
approximately $19.95 million over a perpetual time horizon and $1.99
million annualized at a two percent discount rate. These estimates do
not include non-monetized and qualitative cost/cost savings discussed
in the RIA.
PHMSA's cost savings analysis relies on the monetization of impacts
for seven petitions included in this rulemaking. All but one of these
petitions have annualized cost savings. The following table presents a
summary of the seven petitions that would have monetized impacts upon
codification and contribute to PHMSA's estimation of quantified net
cost savings.
Total Estimated Cost Savings, 2024-2033, Discounted at 2% Rate, 2023$USD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total net cost Annualized net
Rule provision savings cost savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-1718........................................ 49 CFR 173.4b................... $1,785,696 $178,570
P-1727........................................ 49 CFR 180.205.................. 303,127 30,313
P-1729........................................ 49 CFR 171.7.................... (127,026) (12,703)
P-1731........................................ 49 CFR 171.7(r)(2).............. 67,460 6,746
P-1732........................................ 49 CFR 178.503(a)(6)............ 8,267,109 826,711
P-1734........................................ 49 CFR 172.514(c)(4)............ 4,244 424
P-1736........................................ 49 CFR 171.7(r)(1).............. 9,655,983 965,598
-------------------------------
Total..................................... ................................ 19,956,593 1,995,659
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these seven items, PHMSA described an additional 11
items that may streamline regulatory compliance. While information gaps
prevent quantification of cost savings for these items, PHMSA has
determined they provide relief from unnecessary requirements or provide
additional flexibility without compromising safety.
Conclusion
This final rule is not considered a significant regulatory action
within the meaning of Executive Order 12866, as amended, and DOT
policies and procedures. (See DOT Order 2100.6A.) The economic effects
of this regulatory action would not have an effect on the economy that
exceeds the annual monetary threshold defined by Executive Order 12866
(as amended), and that the regulatory action is not otherwise
significant. PHMSA estimates a present value of quantified net cost
savings of approximately $19.95 million over a perpetual time horizon
and $1.99 million annualized at a two percent discount rate. Please see
the RIA in the regulatory docket for additional detail and a
description of PHMSA's methods and calculations.
C. Executive Order 13132
This rulemaking was analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism'') \46\ and
the Presidential memorandum (``Preemption'').\47\ Executive Order 13132
requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely input by state and
local officials in the development of
[[Page 15656]]
regulatory policies that may have ``substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.'' This rulemaking does not revise any
regulation that has substantial direct effects on the states; the
relationship between the National Government and the states; or the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of
Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999).
\47\ 74 FR 24693 (May 22, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Hazmat Law contains a general preemption provision (49
U.S.C. 5125(a)) in the event compliance with a State, local, or Native
American Tribe requirement is not possible or presents an obstacle to
compliance. Additionally, Federal Hazmat Law contains an express
preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) that preempts State, local,
and Native American Tribal requirements on:
(1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous
materials.
(2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and
placarding of hazardous materials.
(3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents
related to hazardous materials and requirements related to the number,
contents, and placement of those documents.
(4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material.
(5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance,
recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or container
represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in
transporting hazardous material.
This final rule addresses covered subject items above and preempts
State, local, and Indian Tribe requirements not meeting the
``substantively the same'' standard. DOT has determined that this final
rule would provide cost savings and regulatory flexibility to the
regulated community without compromising safety.
D. Executive Order 13175
This rulemaking was analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'') \48\ and DOT Order
5301.1A (``Department of Transportation Tribal Consultation Policy and
Procedures''). Executive Order 13175 requires agencies to assure
meaningful and timely input from Indian Tribal government
representatives in the development of rules that significantly or
uniquely affect Tribal communities by imposing ``substantial direct
compliance costs'' or ``substantial direct effects'' on such
communities, or the relationship and distribution of power between the
Federal Government and Tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA has determined that this rulemaking does not have substantial
Tribal implications, because it will not substantially or uniquely
affect Tribal communities or Indian Tribal governments. The final
rule's regulatory amendments are facially neutral and will have broad,
national scope; the rule will not significantly or uniquely affect
Tribal communities, much less impose substantial compliance costs on
Native American Tribal governments or mandate Tribal action. And
insofar as PHMSA concludes that the final rule will improve safety and
reduce environmental risks associated with transportation of hazardous
materials, PHMSA expects it will not entail disproportionately high
adverse risks for Tribal communities. Therefore, the funding and
consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT
Procedures and Policies
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Flexibility Fairness Act of 1996 (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), requires agencies to consider whether a rulemaking would have a
``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities'' to include small businesses; not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields; and governmental jurisdictions with populations under 50,000.
The RFA directs agencies to establish exceptions and differing
compliance standards for small businesses, where possible to do so and
still meet the objectives of applicable regulatory statutes. Executive
Order 13272 (``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency
Rulemaking'') \49\ requires agencies to establish procedures and
policies to promote compliance with the RFA and to ``thoroughly review
draft rules to assess and take appropriate account of the potential
impact'' of the rules on small businesses, governmental jurisdictions,
and small organizations. The DOT posts its implementing guidance on a
dedicated web page.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rulemaking has been developed in accordance with Executive
Order 13272 and DOT's procedures and policies to promote compliance
with the RFA and ensure that potential impacts of rulemakings on small
entities are properly considered. PHMSA prepared an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis within the Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis
(PRIA) supporting the NPRM. The small entities that could be impacted
by this rule include all small entities engaged in the shipment of
hazardous materials that are already subject to HMR requirements. PHMSA
expects this final rule to facilitate new technologies or other changes
that provide safety equivalence at lower cost; streamline or reduce
recordkeeping and other paperwork and reporting requirements; and
address other changes to reduce the regulatory burden of the HMR. PHMSA
has individually evaluated each of the regulatory amendments contained
in this rulemaking using available information, and PHMSA certifies
that the changes adopted in this final rule will (neither individually
nor in the aggregate) have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small businesses. PHMSA has provided a regulatory
flexibility analysis for this final rule within the RIA in the docket
for this proceeding.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
no person is required to respond to any information collection unless
it has been approved by OMB and displays a valid OMB control number.
Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(B) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d), PHMSA must
provide interested members of the public and affected agencies an
opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping
requests.
PHMSA has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This final rule does not impose new information
collection requirements. PHMSA currently has an approved information
collection under OMB Control No. 2137-0051, entitled ``Rulemaking,
Special Permits, and Preemption Requirements,'' expiring on November
30, 2024. This rulemaking eliminates the need for persons to renew a
special permit, resulting in a decrease in burden. PHMSA estimates the
reduction in information collection burden as follows:
OMB Control No. 2137-0051: Rulemaking, Special Permits, and
Preemption Requirements.
[[Page 15657]]
Decrease in Annual Number of Respondents: 139.
Decrease in Annual Responses: 139.
Decrease in Annual Burden Hours: 208.5.
Decrease in Annual Burden Cost: $0.
PHMSA did not receive any comments related to the Paperwork
Reduction Act in the comments to the NPRM. Please direct your requests
for a copy of this information collection to Steven Andrews, Office of
Hazardous Materials Standards (PHH-12), Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 2nd Floor,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.) requires agencies to assess the effects of Federal regulatory
actions on State, local, and Tribal governments, and the private
sector. For any NPRM or final rule that includes a Federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in 1996 dollars in any
given year, the agency must prepare, amongst other things, a written
statement that qualitatively and quantitatively assesses the costs and
benefits of the Federal mandate.
As explained in the RIA, available for review in the docket, this
final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the UMRA. It does
not result in costs of $100 million or more in 1996 dollars to either
State, local, or Tribal governments, or to the private sector, in any
one year. Therefore, the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply.
A copy of the RIA is available for review in the docket.
H. Environmental Assessment
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) requires that Federal agencies analyze actions to determine
whether the action would have a significant impact on the human
environment. The Council on Environmental Quality implementing
regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508) requires Federal agencies
to consider the environmental impacts of their actions in the decision-
making process. NEPA requires Federal agencies to assess the
environmental effects of proposed Federal actions prior to making
decisions and involve the public in the decision-making process.
Agencies must prepare an environmental assessment (EA) for an action
for which a categorical exclusion is not applicable, and is either
unlikely to have significant effects or when significance of the action
is unknown. In accordance with these requirements, an EA must briefly
discuss: (1) the need for the action; (2) the alternatives considered;
(3) the environmental impacts of the action and alternatives; and (4) a
listing of the agencies and persons consulted. If, after reviewing the
EA and public comments (as applicable), in response to a draft EA
(DEA), an agency determines that a proposed action will not have a
significant impact on the human or natural environment, it can conclude
the NEPA analysis with a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). DOT
Order 5610.1C (``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'')
establishes departmental procedures for evaluation of environmental
impacts under NEPA and its implementing regulations. PHMSA did not
receive any comments related to the DEA in response to the NPRM. This
final EA (FEA) adopts by reference the analysis included above in this
final rule and in the NPRM.
1. Purpose and Need
In response to petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated
community, PHMSA is amending the HMR to update, clarify, or streamline
various regulatory requirements. Specifically, PHMSA amendments
include--but are not limited to--the following: incorporating by
reference (IBR) multiple publications from CGA, IME, and the UN;
allowing for greater flexibility of packaging options in the
transportation of compressed natural gas in cylinders; streamlining the
approval application process for the repair of specific DOT
specification cylinders; providing greater clarity regarding the
filling requirements for certain cylinders used to transport hydrogen
and hydrogen mixtures; streamlining hazard communication by allowing
marking exceptions under certain conditions during the transportation
of lithium button cell batteries; and modifying the definition of
liquid to include the test for determining fluidity (penetrometer test)
prescribed in the ADR.
These amendments are intended to promote safety, provide clarity,
and streamline regulatory requirements. The amendments were identified
in response to petitions from stakeholders affected by the HMR. These
amendments clarify the HMR and enhance safety, while offering some net
economic benefits.
This action: (1) fulfills our statutory directive to promote
transportation safety; (2) fulfills our statutory directive under the
Administrative Procedure Act that requires Federal agencies to give
interested persons the right to petition an agency to issue, amend, or
repeal a rule (5 U.S.C. 553(e)); (3) supports governmental efforts to
eliminate unnecessary burdens on the regulated community; (4) addresses
safety concerns raised by petitioners and removes identified regulatory
ambiguity; and (5) simplifies and clarifies the regulations to promote
understanding and compliance.
These regulatory revisions would offer more efficient and effective
ways of achieving the PHMSA goal of safe and secure transportation of
hazardous materials in commerce, protecting both people and the
environment.
2. Alternatives Considered
In this rulemaking, PHMSA is considering the following
alternatives:
Alternative #1: No Action
If PHMSA were to select the No Action Alternative, current
regulations would remain in place and no provisions would be amended or
added.
Alternative #2: Amend the HMR as Provided in This Final Rule
The Final Rule Alternative would adopt the HMR amendments set forth
in this final rule and was previously referred to as the ``Proposed
Action Alternative'' in the draft environmental assessment (DEA) that
was included within the NPRM. The amendments included in this
alternative are more fully discussed in the preamble and regulatory
text sections of this final rule.
3. Reasonably Foreseable Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives
Alternative #1 No Action
After careful consideration of public comments to the NPRM (none of
which directly addressed the DEA), and revised analyses of economic and
environmental impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative, PHMSA is
adopting the Proposed Action Alternative (i.e., the Final Rule) as the
Selected Action. If PHMSA selected the No Action Alternative, the HMR
would remain unchanged, and no provisions would be amended or added.
However, any economic benefits gained through the proposals, which
include harmonization in updates to transport standards, lists of
regulated substances, definitions, packagings, markings requirements,
shipper requirements, and modal requirements, would not be realized.
Foregone efficiencies in the No Action Alternative also include freeing
up limited resources to concentrate on hazardous materials
transportation issues of potentially much greater environmental impact.
Not adopting the environmental and safety requirements
[[Page 15658]]
in the final rule under the ``No Action Alternative'' would result in a
lost opportunity for reducing negative environmental and safety-related
impacts due to the revisions in this final rule decreasing the
possibility of a hazardous release. Greenhouse gas emissions would
remain the same under the No Action Alternative. However, the No Action
Alternative could have a modest negative impact on GHG emissions. PHMSA
anticipates the provisions for the transportation of compressed natural
gas/methane in UN pressure receptacles to have a minimal positive
effect on greenhouse gas emissions. This would result from stricter
packaging restrictions that should result in fewer failures of these
packages and thus, fewer releases of materials into the environment.
Therefore, by choosing the No Action Alternative, a potential reduction
in GHG emissions would not be achieved.
4. Final Action Alternative
When developing potential regulatory requirements, PHMSA evaluates
those requirements to consider the environmental impact of each
amendment. Specifically, PHMSA evaluates the risk of release and
resulting environmental impact; the risk to human safety, including any
risk to first responders; the longevity of the packaging; and if the
regulation would be carried out in a defined geographic area using
specific resources, especially any sensitive areas and how they could
be impacted by any regulations. The regulatory changes in this
rulemaking have been determined to be clarification, technology/design
updates, harmonization, regulatory flexibility, standard incorporation,
or editorial in nature. As such, these amendments have little or no
impact on the risk of release and resulting environmental impact, human
safety, or longevity of the packaging. None of these amendments would
be carried out in a defined geographic area because this is a
nationwide rulemaking.
The ``Final Action Alternative'' encompasses enhanced and clarified
regulatory requirements, which would result in increased compliance and
fewer negative environmental and safety impacts. This EA incorporates
the safety analyses in the preamble sections of the final rule. The
table and list below summarize the possible environmental benefits,
greenhouse gas emissions, and any potential negative impacts for the
amendments in the final rule.
Summary of Probable Environmental Impacts by Amendments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Probable anticipated
Amendment(s) to HMR (lettered as Type of amendment(s) environmental Greenhouse gas
above herein) impact(s) emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. P-1714--Transportation of Regulatory Flexibility. Minimal positive Minimal positive
Compressed Natural Gas/Methane in UN impacts. impacts.
Pressure Receptacles.
2. P-1716--Threading and repair of Regulatory Flexibility. No impacts............. No impacts.
seamless DOT 3-series specification
cylinders and seamless UN pressure
receptacles.
3. P-1717/P-1725--Clarification of Regulatory Flexibility. No impacts............. No impacts.
the requirements for non-liquefied
compressed gases.
4. P-1718--De minimus quantities of Regulatory Flexibility-- No impacts............. No impacts.
poisonous materials. Harmonization.
5. P-1736--Clarification of the Regulatory Flexibility. No impacts............. No impacts.
marking requirements for button cell
lithium batteries contained in
equipment.
6. P-1727--IBR of CGA C-20 (2014).... Standard Incorporation. No impacts............. No impacts.
7. P-1728--Gas Mixtures Containing Regulatory Flexibility. No impacts............. No impacts.
Components Defined as Liquefied
Gases.
8. P-1729--Incorporation by reference Standard Incorporation. Minimal positive No impacts.
of CGA C-23 (2018). impacts.
9. P-1731--IBR of IME's Safety Standard Incorporation. No impacts............. No impacts.
Library Publication 23 (SLP-23).
10. P-1732--Revision of testing and Regulatory Flexibility. No impacts............. No impacts.
marking of UN specification
packagings.
11. P-1734--Authorizing smaller-sized Regulatory Flexibility. No impacts............. No impacts.
combustible placard on IBCs.
12. P1736--IBR of IME Safety Library Standard Incorporation. Minimal positive No impacts.
Publication 22 (SLP-22). impacts.
13. P-1738--Definition of a Liquid... Regulatory Flexibility-- No impacts............. No impacts.
Harmonization.
14. P-1744--Incorporate by reference Standard Incorporation. No impacts............. No impacts.
updated Appendix A to CGA C-7 (2020).
15. P-1746--IBR of CGA C-27 (2019)... Standard Incorporation. No impacts............. No impacts.
16. P-1747--IBR of CGA C-29 (2019)... Standard Incorporation. Minimal positive No impacts.
impacts.
17. P-1748--IBR of CGA V-9 (2019).... Standard Incorporation. No impacts............. No impacts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. P-1714--PHMSA is implementing packaging restrictions for the
transportation of CNG and methane in UN seamless steel pressure
receptacles with a tensile strength greater than 950 MPa. As discussed
in sections III and IV of this final rule, the packaging restrictions
should result in fewer failures of these packages and thus, fewer
releases of materials into the environment. Additionally, because this
revision involves the transportation of GHGs, its effect on the
reduction of GHGs emissions may be minimal.
2. P-1716--PHMSA is revising the requirements for repairing
seamless DOT 3-series specification cylinders and seamless UN pressure
receptacles manufactured without external threads and authorizing the
performance of this work without requiring prior approval from PHMSA.
This revision provides regulatory flexibility while maintaining safety.
As discussed in sections III and
[[Page 15659]]
IV of this final rule, PHMSA has determined that this is an improvement
over the previous method of using set screws to secure the tubes, which
resulted in indentations being carved into the tube necks as the tube
jostled during transport. This revision is intended to lower the risk
of an incident since this package is expected to increase safety, so
the proposal may result in positive environmental impacts due to less
risk of an accident in transportation. This revision will not result in
any increase to GHG emissions due to the decreased probability of an
incident involving these cylinders.
3. P-1717/P-1725--PHMSA is amending Sec. 173.302a(c) of the HMR to
reflect the independent material construction requirements for
cylinders with special filling limits for DOT specification 3A, 3AX,
3AA, and 3AAX cylinders containing Division. 2.1 (flammable) gases. As
discussed in sections III and IV of this final rule, these amendments
would not represent any incremental, quantifiable safety effects
because PHMSA already authorizes the transportation in commerce of
hydrogen and mixtures of hydrogen with helium, argon, or nitrogen in
certain cylinders filled to 10 percent in excess of their marked
service pressures. Therefore, this revision will not have any impacts
on the environment nor GHG emissions.
4. P-1718--PHMSA is amending Sec. 173.4b to harmonize the de
minimis exceptions for Division 6.1, PG I (no inhalation hazard)
materials with international regulations. The release of Division 6.1,
PG I materials, including toxic substances, poisons, and irritating
material, can have a negative effect on human health and the
environment due to toxicity levels of the material. However, as
discussed in sections III and IV of this final rule, because the
revisions would authorize an existing exception for de minimis
quantities of additional materials with appropriate safeguards, PHMSA
does not anticipate any significant environmental impacts nor any
effects on GHG emissions.
5. P-1726--PHMSA is revising Sec. 173.185(c)(3) to clarify that
lithium button cell batteries installed in equipment are excepted from
the marking requirement and not subject to the quantity per package or
per consignment limitation. As discussed in sections III and IV of this
final rule, because this is not a new requirement and simply clarifies
the current requirements in the HMR, there are no environmental impacts
and no changes in GHG emissions.
6. P-1727--PHMSA is incorporating by reference CGA C-20 (2014),
``Requalification Standard for Metallic, DOT, and TC 3-Series Gas
Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination, Second Edition.'' CGA
C-20 provides technical specification for the ultrasonic examination of
cylinders. As discussed in sections III and IV of this final rule,
PHMSA expects that the use of ultrasonic examination will provide a
level of safety at least equivalent to what is currently allowed under
the HMR. PHMSA already allows for the ultrasonic examination of certain
cylinders (see Sec. 180.212 for example). Additionally, Sec.
180.205(f) will no longer require internal visual inspection for these
cylinders once they have undergone ultrasonic examination, as these
actions would be duplicative. The incorporation by reference of CGC C-
20 will not have any environmental impacts and will not result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
7. P-1728--PHMSA is authorizing an alternative description of gas
mixtures containing components defined as liquefied gases. This
revision helps clarify confusion among stakeholders when the content of
a cylinder is described as a liquefied compressed gas that resembles a
non-liquefied compressed gas. As discussed in sections III and IV of
this final rule, PHMSA has determined that the revision is safety
neutral or slightly improves safety, and will provide regulatory
flexibility to the regulated community without a reduction in safety.
For these reasons, this revision will not have any environmental
impacts nor result in any increase to GHG emissions.
8. P-1729--PHMSA is incorporating by reference CGA C-23 (2018),
``Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 3 series and ISO 11120 Tube Neck
Mounting Surfaces, Second Edition,'' into the HMR at Sec. 171.7. As
discussed in sections III and IV of this final rule, CGA C-23 provides
an inspection standard that PHMSA anticipates will reduce the
likelihood of a release from a DOT/TC 3 series cylinders. Thus, PHMSA
anticipates this revision to have a minimal positive environmental
impact. PHMSA does not anticipate an increase to GHG emissions as these
revisions will not have an effect on the usage of DOT/TC 3 series
cylinders.
9. P-1731--PHMSA is incorporating by reference an updated version
of IME SLP-23 (2021), titled ``Recommendations for the Transportation
of Explosives, Division 1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, Division 5.1;
and Combustible Liquids in Bulk Packaging.'' As discussed in Sections
III and IV of this final rule, this updates a previously approved
version of SLP-23 and provides necessary technical updates and
regulatory flexibility. As part of the updated SLP-23, IME included
packages designed for the safe transportation of Ammonium Nitrate
Emulsions. As part of the review of the IME publication, PHMSA
determined these packages were adequate for the safe transportation of
Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions. Thus, this revision will not have any
environmental impacts and will not result in any increase to GHG
emissions.
10. P-1732--PHMSA is amending Sec. 178.601(g) by allowing inner
packagings of articles containing UN0012, UN0014, UN0044, and UN0055 to
be assembled and transported without further testing provided that the
outer packaging of a combination packaging successfully passes the
tests in accordance with 49 CFR 178.603 and 178.606, and the gross mass
does not exceed that of the tested type. This revision will provide
regulatory flexibility to the regulated community without a reduction
in safety. For these reasons, PHMSA does not anticipate this revision
to have any environmental impacts nor result in any increase to GHG
emissions.
11. P-1734--PHMSA is revising Sec. 172.514(c)(4) by incorporating
the provisions in DOT SP-16295, which would add an option for smaller
placards for IBCs carrying combustible liquids. In addition, PHMSA is
revising Sec. 172.514(c)(1) to allow an option for smaller placards on
portable tanks. As discussed in sections III and IV of this final rule,
this revision does not change the safety requirements for the
transportation or filling of an IBC. PHMSA expects that this revision
will provide regulatory flexibility to the regulated community without
a reduction in safety. For these reasons, PHMSA does not anticipate
this revision to have any environmental impacts nor result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
12. P-1736--PHMSA is incorporating by reference IME SLP-22 (2019),
``Recommendations for the Safe Transportation of Detonators in a
Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive Materials.'' As discussed in
sections III and IV of this final rule, PHMSA conducted a technical
review and examined each of these revisions included in SLP-22 (2019)
and asserts that these changes will either maintain or enhance safety
requirements. Additionally, PHMSA expects that this revision will
provide regulatory flexibility to the regulated community without a
reduction in safety. The revisions may result in minor positive
environmental impacts due to less
[[Page 15660]]
packaging failures that will increase safety. PHMSA does not anticipate
this revision to result in any increase to GHG emissions.
13. P-1738--PHMSA is modifying the definition of liquid in Sec.
171.8 to include the test for determining fluidity (penetrometer test),
prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR. As discussed in
sections III and IV of this final rule, PHMSA asserts that the revised
test is more empirical in nature and provides better understanding of
the properties of the tested material and thus, better hazard
classification. PHMSA expects that this revision will provide
regulatory flexibility to the regulated community by offering an
additional test method and will not result in a reduction in safety. As
a result, PHMSA does not anticipate this revision to have any
environmental impacts nor result in any increase to GHG emissions.
14. P-1744--PHMSA is incorporating by reference the updated
Appendix A of CGA publication C-7 (2020), ``Guide to Classification and
Labeling of Compressed Gases, Eleventh Edition,'' into the HMR at Sec.
171.7(n)(8). As discussed in sections III and IV of this final rule,
this revision updates a previously approved version of CGA C-7 and
provides necessary technical updates and regulatory flexibility. PHMSA
expects that this revision will provide regulatory flexibility to the
regulated community without any reduction in safety. As a result, PHMSA
does not anticipate this revision to have any environmental impacts nor
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
15. P-1746--PHMSA is incorporating by reference CGA C-27 (2019),
``Standard Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure of DOT 3-Series
Seamless Steel Tubes, First Edition.'' As discussed in sections III and
IV of this final rule, PHMSA has determined that the method for
pressure derating of tubes is essentially the same as what is outlined
in current PHMSA guidance. PHMSA expects that this revision will
provide regulatory flexibility to the regulated community without a
reduction in safety. Therefore, PHMSA does not anticipate this revision
to have any environmental impacts nor result in any increase to GHG
emissions.
16. P-1747--PHMSA is incorporating by reference CGA C-29 (2019),
``Standard for Design Requirements for Tube Trailers and Tube Modules,
First Edition,'' which would supersede CGA TB-25 (2018), ``Design
Considerations for Tube Trailers.'' As discussed in sections III and IV
of this final rule, PHMSA concludes that tube trailers or modules
manufactured in accordance with CGA C-29 are less likely to have
separation of tubes from the trailer or bundle, resulting in the
unintentional release of hazardous materials, when subjected to
multidirectional forces that can occur in highway collisions, including
rollover accidents. This revision will increase safety for the
transportation of hazardous materials in tube trailers because it may
reduce the incidence of releases of hazardous materials due to failure
of tube mountings. Therefore, this revision may have minimal positive
environmental impacts. PHMSA does not anticipate this revision to
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
17. P-1748--PHMSA is incorporating by reference CGA V-9 (2019),
``Compressed Gas Association Standard for Compressed Gas Cylinder
Valves, Eighth Edition.'' As discussed in sections III and IV of this
final rule, this revision updates a previously approved version of CGA
V-9 and provides necessary technical updates and regulatory
flexibility. PHMSA expects that this revision will provide regulatory
flexibility to the regulated community without a reduction in safety.
PHMSA does not anticipate this revision to have any environmental
impacts nor result in any increase to GHG emissions.
5. Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898 (``Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations'') \50\ and
DOT Order 5610.2C (``Department of Transportation Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'') directs Federal agencies to take appropriate and
necessary steps to identify and address disproportionately high and
adverse effects of Federal actions on the health or environment of
minority and low-income populations ``[t]o the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law.'' DOT Order 5610.2C (``U.S.
Department of Transportation Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations'') establishes
departmental procedures for effectuating Executive Order 12898 by
promoting and considering environmental justice principles throughout
planning and decision-making processes in the development of programs,
policies, and activities--including PHMSA rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ 59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA has evaluated this final rule under the above Executive order
and DOT Order 5610.2C. PHMSA finds the final rule will not cause
disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental
effects on minority, low-income, underserved, and other disadvantaged
populations and communities. The rulemaking is neither directed toward
a particular population, region, or community, nor is it expected to
adversely impact any particular population, region, or community. And
because the rulemaking would not adversely affect the safe
transportation of hazardous materials generally, its revisions will not
entail disproportionately high adverse risks for minority populations,
low-income populations, or other underserved and other disadvantaged
communities.
PHMSA submits that the final rule will in fact reduce risks to
minority populations, low-income populations, or other underserved and
other disadvantaged communities. Because the HMR amendments could avoid
the release of hazardous materials and reduce the frequency of delays
and returned/resubmitted shipments of hazardous materials resulting
from conflict between the current HMR and updated international
standards, the final rule will reduce risks to populations and
communities--including any minority, low-income, underserved, and other
disadvantaged populations and communities--in the vicinity of interim
storage sites and transportation arteries and hubs. Additionally, as
explained in the above discussion of NEPA, PHMSA anticipates that its
HMR amendments will yield minimal GHG emissions reductions, thereby
reducing the risks posed by anthropogenic climate change to minority,
low-income, underserved, and other disadvantaged populations and
communities.
6. Agencies Consulted
PHMSA has coordinated with the Federal Aviation Administration, the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the Federal Railroad
Administration, and the United States Coast Guard in the development of
this final rule. As such, PHMSA did not receive any adverse comments on
the amendments in this final rule from these or any other Federal
agencies.
7. Finding of No Signifcant Impact
PHMSA finds the adoption of the Final Action Alternative's
regulatory amendments will maintain the HMR's current high level of
safety for shipments of hazardous materials transported by highway,
rail, aircraft, and vessel, and as such finds the HMR amendments in the
final rule will have
[[Page 15661]]
no significant impact on the human environment. PHMSA finds that the
Final Action Alternative will avoid adverse safety, environmental
justice, and GHG emissions impacts of the No Action Alternative.
Furthermore, based on PHMSA's analysis of these provisions described
above, PHMSA finds that codification and implementation of this rule
will not result in a significant impact to the human environment. This
finding is consistent with Executive Order 14096 (``Revitalizing Our
Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All'') \51\ by
achieving several goals, including continuing to deepen the Biden-
Harris Administration's whole of Government approach to environmental
justice and to better protect overburden communities from pollution and
environmental harms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ 88 FR 25251 (April 26, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Privacy Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform any amendments to the HMR considered in this
rulemaking. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS). For
information on DOT's compliance with the Privacy Act, please see
www.dot.gov/privacy.
J. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
Under Executive Order 13609 (``Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation''),\52\ agencies must consider whether the impacts
associated with significant variations between domestic and
international regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may impair the
ability of American business to export and compete internationally. To
meet shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation
can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that
are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or
prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ 77 FR 26413 (May 4, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as
amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465),
prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging
in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. Pursuant to the Trade Agreements Act,
the establishment of standards is not considered an unnecessary
obstacle to the foreign commerce of the United States, so long as the
standards have a legitimate domestic objective, such as providing for
safety, and do not operate to exclude imports that meet this objective.
The statute also requires consideration of international standards and,
where appropriate, that these standards form the basis for U.S.
standards. PHMSA participates in the establishment of international
standards in order to protect the safety of the American public. PHMSA
has assessed the effects of this final rule and concludes that it will
not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign trade.
K. Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'') \53\
requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for
any ``significant energy action.'' Under the Executive order, a
``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
(normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates, or is
expected to lead to the promulgation of, a final rule or regulation
(including a notice of inquiry, advanced notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM), and NPRM) that: (1)(i) is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is likely
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or
use of energy; or (2) is designated by the Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rulemaking has not been designated as a significant regulatory
action and has not been designated by OIRA as a significant energy
action. In addition, PHMSA has concluded that this rulemaking will not
result in a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or
use of energy. Therefore, PHMSA has not prepared an energy impact
statement.
L. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA; 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs Federal agencies to use voluntary
consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless doing so
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g.,
specification of materials, test methods, or performance requirements)
that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
Consistent with the goals of the NTTAA, PHMSA has adopted a significant
number of voluntary consensus standards, which are listed in 49 CFR
171.7.
M. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 14028
Executive Order 14028 (``Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity'')
\54\ directs the Federal Government to improve its efforts to identify,
deter, and respond to ``persistent and increasingly sophisticated
malicious cyber campaigns.'' PHMSA has considered the effects of the
final rule and determined that its regulatory amendments will not
materially affect the cybersecurity risk profile for transportation of
hazardous materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 86 FR 26633 (May 17, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
N. Severability
The purpose of this final rule is to operate holistically and, in
concert with existing HMR requirements, provide defense-in-depth to
ensure safe transportation of hazardous materials. However, PHMSA
recognizes that certain provisions focus on unique topics. Therefore,
PHMSA finds that the various provisions of this final rule are
severable and able to operate functionally if severed from each other.
In the event a court were to invalidate one or more of the unique
provisions of this final rule, the remaining provisions should stand,
thus allowing their continued effect.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 107
Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous materials
transportation, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 171
Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste,
Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Definitions and abbreviations.
49 CFR Part 172
Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Incorporation
by reference, Labeling, Markings, Packaging and containers, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 15662]]
49 CFR Part 173
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Training, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 178
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Motor vehicle safety, Packaging and containers, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 180
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Packaging and containers,
Railroad safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, PHMSA amends 49 CFR chapter I as
follows:
PART 107--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 107 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 Section
4; Pub. L. 104-121 Sections 212-213; Pub. L. 104-134 Section 31001;
Pub. L. 114-74 Section 701 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); 49 CFR 1.81 and
1.97; 33 U.S.C. 1321.
0
2. In Sec. 107.117, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 107.117 Emergency processing.
(a) An application is granted emergency processing if the Associate
Administrator, on the basis of the application and any inquiry
undertaken, finds that:
(1) Emergency processing is necessary to prevent significant injury
to persons or property (other than the hazardous material to be
transported) that could not be prevented if the application were
processed on a routine basis;
(2) Emergency processing is necessary for immediate national
security purposes;
(3) Emergency processing is necessary to prevent significant
economic loss that could not be prevented if the application were
processed on a routine basis; or
(4) Emergency processing is necessary in support of an essential
governmental (domestic or foreign) function that could not be satisfied
if the application were processed on a routine basis.
* * * * *
PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
0
3. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 section
4; Pub. L. 104-134, section 31001; Pub. L. 114-74 section 701 (28
U.S.C. 2461 note); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
4. In Sec. 171.7:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (n) and (r);
0
b. In paragraph (dd)(4) introductory text, remove the text ``Sec.
171.23'' and add in its place the text ``Sec. Sec. 171.8; 171.23'';
0
c. Add paragraph (dd)(5); and
0
d. In table 1 to the section, add a main entry for ``Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20230:'' in
alphabetical order followed by the sub-entry ``Federal Standard H-28,
Screw-Thread Standards for Federal Services''.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 171.7 Reference material.
* * * * *
(n) Compressed Gas Association (CGA), 8484 Westpark Drive, Suite
220, McLean, VA 22102; telephone 703-788-2700, www.cganet.com.
(1) CGA C-1--2016 (CGA C-1), Methods for Pressure Testing
Compressed Gas Cylinders, Eleventh Edition, copyright 2016; into
Sec. Sec. 178.36; 178.37; 178.38; 178.39; 178.42; 178.44; 178.45;
178.46; 178.47; 178.50; 178.51; 178.53; 178.55; 178.56; 178.57; 178.58;
178.59; 178.60; 178.61; 178.65; 178.68; 180.205; 180.209.
(2) CGA C-3--2005 (Reaffirmed 2011) (CGA C-3), Standards for
Welding on Thin-Walled Steel Cylinders, Seventh Edition, copyright
2005; into Sec. Sec. 178.47; 178.50; 178.51; 178.53; 178.55; 178.56;
178.57; 178.58; 178.59; 178.60; 178.61; 178.65; 178.68; 180.211.
(3) CGA C-5 (CGA C-5), Cylinder Service Life--Seamless Steel High
Pressure Cylinders, 1991 (Reaffirmed 1995); into Sec. 173.302a.
(4) CGA C-6--2013 (CGA C-6), Standards for Visual Inspection of
Steel Compressed Gas Cylinders, Eleventh Edition, copyright 2013; into
Sec. Sec. 172.102; 173.3; 173.198; 180.205; 180.209; 180.211; 180.411;
180.519.
(5) CGA C-6.1--2013 (CGA C-6.1), Standards for Visual Inspection of
High Pressure Aluminum Compressed Gas Cylinders, Sixth Edition,
copyright 2013 (corrected 4/14/2015); into Sec. Sec. 180.205; 180.209.
(6) CGA C-6.2 (CGA C-6.2), Guidelines for Visual Inspection and
Requalification of Fiber Reinforced High Pressure Cylinders, Third
Edition, 1996; into Sec. 180.205.
(7) CGA C-6.3--2013 (CGA C-6.3), Standard for Visual Inspection of
Low Pressure Aluminum Alloy Compressed Gas Cylinders, Third Edition,
copyright 2013; into Sec. Sec. 180.205; 180.209.
(8) CGA C-7--2020 (CGA C-7), Guide to Classification and Labeling
of Compressed Gases; Eleventh Edition, 2020 (corrected May 6, 2020);
into Sec. 172.400a.
(9) CGA C-8 (CGA C-8), Standard for Requalification of DOT-3HT
Cylinder Design, 1985; into Sec. Sec. 180.205; 180.209.
(10) CGA C-11--2013 (CGA C-11), Practices for Inspection of
Compressed Gas Cylinders at Time of Manufacture, Fifth Edition,
copyright 2013; into Sec. 178.35.
(11) CGA C-12 (CGA C-12), Qualification Procedure for Acetylene
Cylinder Design, 1994; into Sec. Sec. 173.301; 173.303; 178.59;
178.60.
(12) CGA C-13 (CGA C-13), Guidelines for Periodic Visual Inspection
and Requalification of Acetylene Cylinders, Fourth Edition, 2000; into
Sec. Sec. 173.303; 180.205; 180.209.
(13) CGA C-14--2005 (Reaffirmed 2010) (CGA C-14), Procedures for
Fire Testing of DOT Cylinder Pressure Relief Device Systems, Fourth
Edition, copyright 2005; into Sec. Sec. 173.301; 173.323.
(14) CGA C-20--2014 (CGA C-20), Requalification Standard for
Metallic, DOT and TC 3-series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using Ultrasonic
Examination, Second Edition, 2014; into Sec. 180.205.
(15) CGA C-23--2018 (CGA C-23), Standard for Inspection of DOT/TC 3
Series and ISO 11120, Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces, Second Edition,
2018; into Sec. Sec. 180.205; 180.207.
(16) CGA C-27--2019 (CGA C-27), Standard Procedure to Derate the
Service Pressure of DOT Series Seamless Steel Tubes, First Edition,
2019; into Sec. 180.212.
(17) CGA C-29--2019, (Formerly TB-25) (CGA C-29), Standard for
Design Requirements for Tube Trailers and Tube Modules, First Edition,
2019; into Sec. 173.301.
(18) CGA G-1.6--2011 (CGA G-1.6), Standard for Mobile Acetylene
Trailer Systems, Seventh Edition, copyright 2011; into Sec. 173.301.
(19) CGA G-2.2 (CGA G-2.2), Guideline Method for Determining
Minimum of 0.2% Water in Anhydrous Ammonia, Second Edition, 1985
(Reaffirmed 1997); into Sec. 173.315.
(20) CGA G-4.1 (CGA G-4.1), Cleaning Equipment for Oxygen Service,
1985; into Sec. 178.338-15.
(21) CGA P-20 (CGA P-20), Standard for the Classification of Toxic
Gas Mixtures, Third Edition, 2003; into Sec. 173.115.
(22) CGA S-1.1--2011 (CGA S-1.1), Pressure Relief Device
Standards--Part 1--Cylinders for Compressed Gases; Fourteenth Edition,
copyright 2011; into Sec. Sec. 173.301; 173.304a; 178.75.
(23) CGA S-1.2 (CGA S-1.2), Safety Relief Device Standards Part 2--
Cargo
[[Page 15663]]
and Portable Tanks for Compressed Gases, 1980; into Sec. Sec. 173.315;
173.318; 178.276; 178.277.
(24) CGA S-7--2013 (CGA S-7), Standard for Selecting Pressure
Relief Devices for Compressed Gas Mixtures in Cylinders, Fifth Edition,
copyright 2013; into Sec. 173.301.
(25) CGA Technical Bulletin TB-2, Guidelines for Inspection and
Repair of MC-330 and MC-331 Cargo Tanks, 1980; into Sec. Sec. 180.407;
180.413.
(26) CGA Technical Bulletin TB-25 (CGA TB-25), Design
Considerations for Tube Trailers, 2008 Edition; into Sec. 173.301.
(27) CGA V-9--2019, Compressed Gas Association Standard for
Compressed Cylinder Valves, Eighth Edition, 2019; into Sec. 173.301.
* * * * *
(r) Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME), 1212 New York Avenue
NW, #650, Washington, DC 20005, Phone: 202-429-9280.
(1) IME SLP-22, Recommendations for the Safe Transportation of
Detonators in a Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive Materials, 2019,
(IME Standard 22); into Sec. Sec. 173.63; 177.835.
(2) IME SLP-23, Recommendations for the Transportation of
Explosives, Division 1.5, Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions, Division 5.1,
Combustible Liquids, Class 3, and Corrosives, Class 8 in Bulk
Packaging, March 2021, (IME Standard 23); into Sec. Sec. 172.102
173.66; 173.251; 177.835.
* * * * *
(dd) * * *
(5) UN/SCETDG/55/INF.27, United Nations' Recommendations on Test
Series 8: Applicability of Test Series 8(d), June 14, 2019; into Sec.
172.102(c)(1), special provision 148.
Table 1 to 49 CFR 171.7--Materials Not Incorporated by Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20230:
Federal Standard H-28, Screw-Thread Standards for 180.212
Federal Services...................................
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5. In Sec. 171.8, revise the definition of ``Liquid'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 171.8 Definitions and abbreviations.
* * * * *
Liquid means a material, other than an elevated temperature
material, with a melting point or initial melting point of 20 [deg]C
(68 [deg]F) or lower at a standard pressure of 101.3 kPa (14.7 psia). A
viscous material for which a specific melting point cannot be
determined must be subjected to the procedures specified in ASTM D 4359
(IBR, see Sec. 171.7) or to the test for determining fluidity
(penetrometer test) prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the
European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous
Goods by Road (ADR) (IBR, see Sec. 171.7).
* * * * *
PART 172--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS, AND SECURITY PLANS
0
6. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.
0
7. In Sec. 172.101, the Hazardous Materials Table is amended by
revising the entries under ``[REVISE]'' to read as follows:
Sec. 172.101 Purpose and use of hazardous materials table.
* * * * *
Sec. 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table
[[Page 15664]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous (8) Packaging (Sec. 173.***) (9) Quantity limitations (see (10) Vessel stowage
materials Hazard Special --------------------------------------------------- Sec. Sec. 173.27 and 175.75) -------------------------------
Symbols descriptions and class or Identification PG Label codes provisions ----------------------------------
proper shipping division Nos. (Sec. Exceptions Non-bulk Bulk Passenger Cargo aircraft Location Other
names 172.102) aircraft/rail only
(1) (2)............... (3) (4).............. (5)............ (6)............ (7)............ (8A)........... (8B)........... (8C)........... (9A)........... (9B)........... (10A)......... (10B)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[REVISE]..........
* * * * * * *
Ammonium nitrate 5.1 UN3375........... II............. 5.1............ 147, 148, 163, None........... 231............ 251............ Forbidden...... Forbidden...... D............. 25, 59, 60,
emulsion or IB2, IP16, 66, 124
Ammonium nitrate TP48.
suspension or
Ammonium nitrate
gel, intermediate
for blasting
explosives.
* * * * * * *
Explosive, 1.5D UN0332........... ............... 1.5D........... 105, 106, 148, None........... 62............. None........... Forbidden...... Forbidden...... 03............ 25, 19E
blasting, type E TP48.
or Agent
blasting, type E.
* * * * * * *
G............ Oxidizing liquid, 5.1 UN3139........... I.............. 5.1............ 62, 127, A2.... None........... 201............ 243............ Forbidden...... 2.5 L.......... D............. 56, 58, 138
n.o.s.
.................. .......... ................. II............. 5.1............ 62, 127, 148, 152............ 202............ 242............ 1 L............ 5 L............ B............. 56, 58, 138
A2, IB2, TP48.
.................. .......... ................. III............ 5.1............ 62, 127, 148, 152............ 203............ 241............ 2.5 L.......... 30 L........... B............. 56, 58, 138
A2, IB2.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 15665]]
* * * * *
0
8. In Sec. 172.102:
0
a. In paragraph (c)(1), revise special provision 148; and
0
b. In paragraph (c)(8)(ii), add special provision TP48 in numerical
order.
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 172.102 Special provisions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
148 For domestic transportation, this entry directs to Sec. 173.66
of this subchapter for:
a. The standards for transporting a single bulk hazardous material
for blasting by cargo tank motor vehicles (CTMV); and
b. The standards for CTMVs capable of transporting multiple
hazardous materials for blasting in bulk and non-bulk packagings (i.e.,
a multipurpose bulk truck). Note: ``UN3375, Ammonium nitrate emulsion''
and ``UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E or Agent blasting, type E''
are subject to the United Nations (UN) Test Series 8(d) (UN/SCETDG/55/
INF.27) (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter), otherwise known as
the Vented Pipe Test (VPT).
* * * * *
(8) * * *
(ii) * * *
TP48 The use of IM 101 and 102 portable tanks when transported in
accordance with IME Standard 23 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this
subchapter).
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 172.514, revise paragraphs (c)(1) and (4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 172.514 Bulk packagings.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) A portable tank having a capacity of less than 3,785 L (1,000
gallons). Additionally, portable tanks containing a combustible liquid
may be placarded with a combustible placard that meets the label
specifications for size in Sec. 172.407(c). However, a transport
vehicle containing portable tanks with a reduced-size combustible
placard is still required to conform to the placarding requirements in
this subpart, including the size requirements in Sec. 172.519(c);
* * * * *
(4) For an intermediate bulk container (IBC) labeled in accordance
with subpart E of this part, the IBC may display the proper shipping
name and UN identification number markings in accordance with Sec.
172.301(a)(1) in place of the UN number on an orange panel, placard, or
white square-on-point configuration as prescribed in Sec. 172.336(d).
Additionally, IBCs containing a combustible liquid may be placarded
with a combustible placard that meets the label specifications for size
in Sec. 172.407(c). However, a transport vehicle containing IBCs with
a reduced-size combustible placard is still required to conform to the
placarding requirements in this subpart, including the size
requirements in Sec. 172.519(c); and
* * * * *
PART 173--SHIPPERS--GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND
PACKAGINGS
0
10. The authority citation for part 173 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.
0
11. In Sec. 173.4b, revise the introductory text to paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
Sec. 173.4b De minimis exceptions.
(a) When packaged in accordance with this section, the following
materials do not meet the definition of a hazardous material in Sec.
171.8 of this subchapter and, therefore, are not subject to the
requirements of this subchapter: Packing Group I materials of hazard
Division 6.1 (no inhalation hazard), and Packing Group II and III
materials of hazard Class 3, Division 4.1, Division 4.2, Division 4.3,
Division 5.1, Division 6.1, Class 8, and Class 9.
* * * * *
0
12. In Sec. 173.115, revise the introductory text to paragraph (e) to
read as follows:
Sec. 173.115 Class 2, Divisions 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3--Definitions.
* * * * *
(e) Liquefied compressed gas. A gas, which when packaged under
pressure for transportation is partially liquid at temperatures above -
50 [deg]C (-58 [deg]F), is considered to be a liquefied compressed gas.
Gas mixtures with component(s) that are liquefied gases may be
described using the hazardous materials description of a compressed gas
in the Hazardous Materials Table in Sec. 172.101 of this subchapter
when the partial pressure(s) of the liquefied gas component(s) in the
mixture are reduced so that the mixture is entirely in the gas phase at
20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F). A liquefied compressed gas is further
categorized as follows:
* * * * *
0
13. In Sec. 173.185, revise the introductory text to paragraph (c)(3)
to read as follows:
Sec. 173.185 Lithium cells and batteries.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Lithium battery mark. Each package must display the lithium
battery mark except when a package contains only button cell batteries
contained in equipment (including circuit boards), or when a
consignment contains two packages or fewer where each package contains
not more than four lithium cells or two lithium batteries contained in
equipment.
* * * * *
0
14. In Sec. 173.251, add paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 173.251 Bulk packaging for ammonium nitrate emulsion,
suspension, or gel.
* * * * *
(b) Portable tanks. This section does not apply to ``UN3375,
Ammonium nitrate emulsion'' when transported in IM 101 or 102 portable
tanks in accordance with IME Standard 23 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this
subchapter).
0
15. In Sec. 173.301, revise the section heading and paragraph (i)(2)
to read as follows:
Sec. 173.301 General requirements for shipment of compressed gases
and other hazardous materials in cylinders, UN pressure receptacles,
and spherical pressure vessels.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(2) Seamless DOT specification cylinders longer than 2 m (6.5 ft)
are authorized for transportation only when horizontally mounted on a
motor vehicle or in an ISO framework or other framework of equivalent
structural integrity in accordance with CGA C-29 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7
of this subchapter). Seamless DOT specification cylinders longer than 2
m (6.5 ft) manufactured prior to May 11, 2009, may continue to use CGA
TB-25 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter). The pressure relief
device must be arranged to discharge unobstructed to the open air. In
addition, for Division 2.1 (flammable gas) material, the pressure
relief devices must be arranged to discharge upward to prevent any
escaping gas from contacting personnel or any adjacent cylinders.
* * * * *
0
16. In Sec. 173.302a:
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. Remove the semicolons at the ends of paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) and
add periods in their places;
0
c. Revise paragraphs (c)(3) and (4); and
0
d. Add paragraphs (c)(5) through (7).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
[[Page 15666]]
Sec. 173.302a Additional requirements for shipment of non-liquefied
(permanent) compressed gases in specification cylinders.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) DOT specification 3A and 3AX cylinders are limited to those
having an intermediate manganese composition.
(4) Cylinders manufactured with intermediate manganese steel must
have been normalized, not quenched and tempered. Quench and temper
treatment of intermediate steel is not authorized.
(5) Cylinders manufactured with chrome moly steel must have been
quenched and tempered, not normalized. Use of normalized chrome moly
steel cylinders is not permitted.
(6) Cylinders must be equipped with pressure relief devices sized
and selected as to type, location, and quantity, and tested in
accordance with Sec. 173.301(f).
(7) A plus sign (+) is added following the test date marking on the
cylinder.
* * * * *
0
17. In Sec. 173.302b, add paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 173.302b Additional requirements for shipment of non-liquefied
(permanent) compressed gases in UN pressure receptacles.
* * * * *
(f) Methane, compressed, or natural gas, compressed, UN1971.
Methane, compressed, or natural gas, compressed, is authorized in a UN
seamless steel pressure receptacle under the following conditions:
(1) For methane, and for natural gas with a methane content of 98.0
percent or greater--
(i) The maximum tensile strength of the UN seamless steel pressure
receptacle may not exceed 1100 MPa (159,542 psi); and
(ii) The contents are commercially free of corroding components.
(2) For natural gas with a methane content of less than 98.0
percent--
(i) The maximum tensile strength of the UN seamless steel pressure
receptacle may not exceed 950 MPa (137,750 psi);
(ii) Each discharge end of a UN refillable seamless steel tube must
be equipped with an internal drain tube; and
(iii) The moisture content and concentration of the corroding
components must conform to the requirements in Sec. 173.301b(a)(2).
PART 178--SPECIFICATIONS FOR PACKAGINGS
0
18. The authority citation for part 178 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
19. In Sec. 178.601:
0
a. Redesignate paragraphs (g)(6) through (8) as paragraphs (g)(7)
through (9);
0
b. Add new paragraph (g)(6); and
0
c. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (g)(8).
The addition and revision read as follows:
Sec. 178.601 General requirements.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(6) Selective testing of combination packagings for articles
containing small arms ammunition: Variation 6. Variations in inner and
intermediate packagings are permitted in packages for articles
containing Cartridges, small arms (UN0012); Cartridges for tools, blank
(UN0014); Primers, cap type (UN0044); and Cases, cartridge empty with
primer (UN0055) packed in inner packages without further testing of the
package under the following conditions:
(i) The package has been tested containing only the articles to be
transported without intermediate containment;
(ii) The outer packaging must have passed the stacking test set
forth in Sec. 178.606 when empty, i.e., without cushioning or inner or
intermediate packagings, with the test mass of identical packages being
the mass of the package filled with the articles;
(iii) Only articles tested without intermediate containment may be
transported; however, a variety of articles tested in this fashion may
be assembled in a package with intermediate containment;
(iv) No articles demonstrate a loss of material in testing; and
(v) The completed package does not exceed the marked maximum gross
mass of the package.
* * * * *
(8) Approval of selective testing. In addition to the provisions of
paragraphs (g)(1) through (7) of this section, the Associate
Administrator may approve the selective testing of packagings that
differ only in minor respects from a tested type.
* * * * *
PART 180--CONTINUING QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PACKAGINGS
0
20. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
21. In Sec. 180.205:
0
a. Add paragraph (c)(5);
0
b. Remove the word ``or'' at the end of paragraph (d)(4);
0
c. Redesignate paragraph (d)(5) as paragraph (d)(6) and add new
paragraph (d)(5);
0
d. Revise paragraphs (e)(2) and (f);
0
e. Redesignate paragraphs (h) through (j) as paragraphs (i) through (k)
and add new paragraph (h); and
0
f. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (i)(1), (j)(2)(i)(C), and
(j)(3).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.205 General requirements for requalification of
specification cylinders.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(5) Each 3-series specification cylinder that is horizontally
mounted on a motor vehicle or in a framework and that is: 12 feet or
longer; has an outside diameter greater than or equal to 18 inches; and
is supported by the neck mounting surface during transportation in
commerce must be inspected at the time of requalification in accordance
with CGA C-23 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter).
(d) * * *
(5) For a cylinder subject to paragraph (c)(5) of this section, if
there is visible corrosion around the neck or under the flange/sleeve,
as outlined in Section 4.2 of CGA C-23, it must be removed and examined
in accordance with CGA C-23 before being returned to service; or
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) Requalified in accordance with this section, regardless of the
date of the previous requalification. When requalification is performed
using ultrasonic examination, the cylinder must be visually inspected
in accordance with paragraph (e)(1) of this section;
* * * * *
(f) Visual inspection. Except as otherwise provided in this
subpart, each time a cylinder is pressure tested, it must be given an
internal and external visual inspection.
(1) The visual inspection must be performed in accordance with the
following standards (all IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter): CGA
C-6 for steel and nickel cylinders; CGA C-6.1 for seamless aluminum
cylinders; CGA C-6.2 for fiber reinforced composite special permit
cylinders; CGA C-6.3 for low pressure aluminum cylinders; CGA C-8 for
DOT 3HT cylinders; and CGA C-13 for DOT 8 series cylinders.
(2) If a cylinder or tube is requalified by ultrasonic examination,
only an external visual inspection is required.
[[Page 15667]]
(3) For each cylinder with a coating or attachments that would
inhibit inspection of the cylinder, the coating or attachments must be
removed before performing the visual inspection.
(4) Each cylinder subject to visual inspection must be approved,
rejected, or condemned according to the criteria in the applicable CGA
standard.
(5) In addition to other requirements prescribed in this paragraph
(f), each specification cylinder manufactured of aluminum alloy 6351-T6
and used in self-contained underwater breathing apparatus (SCUBA),
self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA), or oxygen service must be
inspected for sustained load cracking in accordance with appendix C to
this part at the first scheduled five-year requalification period after
January 1, 2007, and every five years thereafter.
(6) Except in association with an authorized repair, removal of
wall thickness via grinding, sanding, or other means is not permitted.
Removal of paint or loose material to prepare the cylinder for
inspection is permitted (i.e., shot blasting).
(7) Chasing of cylinder threads to clean them is permitted, but
removal of metal must not occur. Re-tapping of cylinder threads is not
permitted, except by the original manufacturer, as provided in Sec.
180.212.
* * * * *
(h) Ultrasonic examination (UE). Requalification of cylinders and
tubes using UE must be performed in accordance with CGA C-20 (IBR, see
Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter).
(i) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (i)(3) and (4) of this
section, a cylinder that is rejected may not be marked as meeting the
requirements of this section.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) As an alternative to the stamping or labeling as described in
this paragraph (j)(2), at the direction of the owner, the requalifier
may render the cylinder incapable of holding pressure. If a condemned
cylinder contains hazardous materials, the requalifier must stamp the
cylinder ``CONDEMNED'' and affix a readily visible label on the
cylinder stating: ``UN REJECTED, RETURNING TO ORIGIN FOR PROPER
DISPOSITION.'' The requalifier may only transport the condemned
cylinder by private motor vehicle carriage to a facility capable of
safely removing the contents of the cylinder.
* * * * *
(3) No person may remove, obliterate, or alter the required
condemnation communication of paragraph (j)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
0
22. In Sec. 180.207, revise paragraph (d)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.207 Requirements for requalification of UN pressure
receptacles.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) Seamless steel. (i) Each seamless steel UN pressure receptacle,
including pressure receptacles exceeding 150 L capacity installed in
multiple-element gas containers (MEGCs) or in other service, must be
requalified in accordance with ISO 6406:2005(E) (IBR, see Sec. 171.7
of this subchapter). However, UN cylinders with a tensile strength
greater than or equal to 950 MPa must be requalified by ultrasonic
examination in accordance with ISO 6406:2005(E). For seamless steel
cylinders and tubes, the internal inspection and hydraulic pressure
test may be replaced by a procedure conforming to ISO 16148:2016(E)
(IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter).
(ii) Each seamless steel UN pressure receptacle that is
horizontally mounted on a motor vehicle or in a framework and that: is
12 feet or longer; has an outside diameter greater than or equal to 18
inches; and is supported by a neck mounting surface during
transportation must be inspected at the time of requalification in
accordance with CGA C-23 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter).
Notwithstanding the periodic inspection, if the seamless steel UN
pressure receptacle shows visible corrosion, as outlined in Section 4.2
of CGA C-23, around the neck or under the flange/sleeve, then it must
be removed and examined in accordance with Section 6 of CGA C-23 prior
to returning to service.
* * * * *
0
23. In Sec. 180.209:
0
a. Revise table 1 to paragraph (a) and paragraph (d); and
0
b. In paragraph (m), revise the introductory text and the heading of
the table.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.209 Requirements for requalification of specification
cylinders.
(a) * * *
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)--Requalification of Cylinders \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specification under which Minimum test pressure Requalification
cylinder was made (psig) \2\ period (years)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3............................. 3000 psig............. 5.
3A, 3AA....................... 5/3 times service 5, 10, or 12
pressure, except non- (see Sec.
corrosive service 180.209(b),
(see Sec. (f), (h), and
180.209(g)). (j)).
3AL........................... 5/3 times service 5 or 12 (see
pressure. Sec.
180.209(j) and
(m) \4\).
3AX, 3AAX..................... 5/3 times service 5.
pressure.
3B, 3BN....................... 2 times service 5 or 10 (see
pressure (see Sec. Sec.
180.209(g)). 180.209(f)).
3E............................ Test not required.....
3HT........................... 5/3 times service 3 (see Sec.
pressure. Sec.
180.209(k) and
180.213(c)).
3T............................ 5/3 times service 5.
pressure or UE\3\.
4AA480........................ 2 times service 5 or 10 (see
pressure (see Sec. Sec.
180.209(g)). 180.209(h)).
4B, 4BA, 4BW, 4B-240ET........ 2 times service 5, 7, 10, or 12
pressure, except non- (see Sec.
corrosive service 180.209(e),
(see Sec. (f), and (j)).
180.209(g)).
4D, 4DA, 4DS.................. 2 times service 5.
pressure.
4E............................ 2 times service 5, 10, or 12
pressure, except non- (see Sec.
corrosive service 180.209(e)).
(see Sec.
180.209(g)).
4L............................ Test not required.....
8, 8AL........................ ...................... 10 or 20 (see
Sec.
180.209(i)).
Exemption or special permit See current exemption See current
cylinder. or special permit, or exemption or
UE\3\ as allowed by special permit.
CGA C-20 (2014).
[[Page 15668]]
Foreign cylinder (see Sec. As marked on cylinder, 5 (see Sec.
173.301(j) of this subchapter but not less than 5/3 Sec.
for restrictions on use). of any service or 180.209(l) and
working pressure 180.213(d)(2)).
marking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Any cylinder not exceeding two inches outside diameter and less than
two feet in length is excepted from volumetric expansion test.
\2\ For cylinders not marked with a service pressure, see Sec.
173.301a(b) of this subchapter.
\3\ Minimum test pressure is not applicable to those cylinders and tubes
requalified using ultrasonic examination.
\4\ This provision does not apply to cylinders used for carbon dioxide,
fire extinguisher, or other industrial gas service.
* * * * *
(d) Cylinders 5.44 kg (12 lb) or less with service pressures of 300
psig or less. A cylinder of 5.44 kg (12 lb) or less water capacity
authorized for service pressure of 300 psig or less must be given a
complete external visual inspection at the time periodic
requalification becomes due. External visual inspection must be in
accordance with CGA C-6 or CGA C-6.1 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this
subchapter). The cylinder may be proof pressure tested. The test is
successful if the cylinder, when examined under test pressure, does not
display a defect described in Sec. 180.205(j)(1)(ii) or (iii). Upon
successful completion of the test and inspection, the cylinder must be
marked in accordance with Sec. 180.213.
* * * * *
(m) DOT-3AL cylinders manufactured of 6351-T6 aluminum alloy. In
addition to the periodic requalification and marking described in Sec.
180.205, each cylinder manufactured of aluminum alloy 6351-T6 used in
self-contained underwater breathing apparatus (SCUBA), self-contained
breathing apparatus (SCBA), or oxygen service must be requalified and
inspected for sustained load cracking in accordance with the non-
destructive examination method described in the following table. Each
cylinder with sustained load cracking that has expanded into the neck
threads must be condemned in accordance with Sec. 180.205(j). This
paragraph (m) does not apply to cylinders used for carbon dioxide, fire
extinguisher, or other industrial gas service.
Table 4 to Paragraph (m)--Requalification and Inspection of DOT-3AL
Cylinders Made of Aluminum Alloy 6351-T6
* * * * *
0
24. In Sec. 180.212, add paragraph (a)(4) and revise paragraph (b)(2)
to read as follows:
Sec. 180.212 Repair of seamless DOT 3-series specification cylinders
and seamless UN pressure receptacles.
(a) * * *
(4) DOT 3-series seamless steel tubes with an outside diameter
greater than 9\5/8\ in (244.5 mm) may be processed by a repair facility
for derating the marked service pressure in accordance with CGA C-27
(IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter).
(b) * * *
(2) External rethreading of a DOT 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T specification
cylinder or a UN pressure receptacle, and external threading of a
seamless DOT 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T specification cylinder or seamless UN
pressure receptacle originally manufactured without external threads;
or the internal rethreading of a DOT-3 series cylinder or a seamless UN
pressure receptacle when performed by a cylinder manufacturer of these
types of cylinders. The repair work must be performed under the
supervision of an independent inspection agency. Upon completion of the
rethreading or post-manufacture threading, the threads must be gauged
in accordance with Federal Standard H-28 or an equivalent standard
containing the same specification limits. The rethreaded cylinder or UN
pressure receptacle must be stamped clearly and legibly with the words
``RETHREAD'' and a post-manufacture threaded cylinder or UN pressure
receptacle must be stamped clearly and legibly with the words ``POST-
THREAD'', on the shoulder, top head, or neck. No DOT specification
cylinder or UN pressure receptacle may be rethreaded more than one time
without approval of the Associate Administrator.
Signed in Washington, DC, on February 13, 2024, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97(b).
Tristan H. Brown,
Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024-03290 Filed 3-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P