Hm-219d Nprm

13624

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

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
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:

PHMSA proposes
amendments to 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 proposed 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: Comments must be submitted by
May 2, 2023. PHMSA will consider latefiled comments to the extent possible.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by identification of the docket number
(PHMSA–2020–0102 [HM–219D]) by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Dockets Management System;
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Dockets Operations, M–30, Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: To U.S. Department
of Transportation, Dockets Operations,
M–30, Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9:00 a.m.–
5:00 p.m., Monday–Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number for this notice at the beginning
of the comment. All comments received

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

will be posted without change to the
Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS), including any personal
information.
Docket: For access to the dockets to
read background documents, including
the Preliminary Regulatory Impact
Analysis (PRIA) or comments received,
go to www.regulations.gov or DOT’s
Docket Operations Office (see
ADDRESSES).
Confidential Business Information:
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
is commercial or financial information
that is both customarily and actually
treated as private by its owner. Under
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA;
5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive
to this NPRM contain commercial or
financial information that is customarily
treated as private, that you actually treat
as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this NPRM, it is important
that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each
page of your submission containing CBI
as ‘‘PROPIN’’ for ‘‘proprietary
information.’’ Submissions containing
CBI should be sent to Steven Andrews,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590–0001. Any commentary that
PHMSA receives that is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the
public docket for this rulemaking.
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. Review of Petitions and Issues
IV. Section-by-Section Review
V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This
Rulemaking
B. Executive Order 12866 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. Environmental Justice
J. Privacy Act
K. Executive Order 13609 and International
Trade Analysis
L. Executive Order 13211

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

M. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act

I. Background
The Administrative Procedure Act
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
proposes to amend 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 expects that the proposed
revisions would 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 as proposed
could reduce delays and interruptions
of hazardous materials shipments
during transportation—the proposed
amendments may 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 proposals can be found in
Section III of this NPRM.
PHMSA proposes 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 specific 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

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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
agreement concerning the International
Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road
(ADR).
• Incorporate by reference a
Compressed Gas Association (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.1
• 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,
‘‘Compressed Gas Association Standard
for Compressed Gas Cylinder Valves,
Eighth Edition.’’

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

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
1 PHMSA notes that it has received a petition to
incorporate by reference the 2021 version of this
publication https://www.regulations.gov/docket/
PHMSA-2022-0030/document. PHMSA is currently
conducting a technical review and cost evaluation
of this publication. PHMSA welcomes comments,
data, and information on whether it should
consider incorporating the 2021 version into any
final rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

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
(SDO). 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) directs Federal
agencies to use standards developed by
voluntary consensus standards bodies in
lieu of government-written standards
unless to do 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 an NPRM the ways the
materials it proposes to incorporate 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 on the internet, with
access provided through 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/

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13625

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 and 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, CGA TB–25, ISO 6406:2005(E),
and ISO 16148:2016(E). No changes are
proposed.
III. Review of Petitions and Issues
A. Transportation of Compressed
Natural Gas/Methane in UN Pressure
Receptacles
In its petition (P–1714),2 CGA
requests that PHMSA consider an
amendment to 49 CFR 173.302b to
implement packaging restrictions for the
transportation of compressed natural gas
(CNG) and methane in United Nations
(UN) seamless steel pressure receptacles
with a tensile strength greater than 950
MPa. For the purposes of the HMR,
‘‘UN1971, Methane, compressed’’ is
compressed natural gas that is at least
98 percent methane and free of
corroding components. CGA expresses
concern regarding the growth in
transport of CNG and methane in these
packagings and wants to ensure the
safety of the receptacles in this service.
CGA provides historical context of
PHMSA’s predecessor agency imposing
similar packaging restrictions for CNG
transported in certain DOT specification
cylinders (see 49 CFR 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
2 P–1714—CGA (PHMSA–2018–0054), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0054.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

13626

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

ultimate tensile strengths greater than
950 MPa being used for the storage and
transportation of CNG because 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 49 CFR 173.301,
additional general requirements of UN
pressure receptacles in 49 CFR
173.301b, and the filling requirements
of cylinders with non-liquefied
(permanent) gases in 49 CFR 173.302.
However, under current regulations
there are no additional requirements
specific to the use of UN pressure
receptacles in CNG or methane service.
CGA requests that 49 CFR 173.302b be
revised to include conditions for the
transportation of CNG and methane in
UN stainless steel pressure receptacles.
The CGA petition states that natural gas/
methane can be safely transported in
UN/International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) steel pressure
receptacles under the following
conditions: (1) the product is nonliquefied gas; (2) 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 that the cylinder is
manufactured from a specific type of
steel that is intended to prevent
hydrogen embrittlement; (3) there is a
drain tube for each UN tube; and (4) the
moisture content and concentration of
the corroding components in the
product conforms to the requirements in
49 CFR 173.301b(a)(2). Specifically, the
requirements in 49 CFR 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 ISO
11114–1:2012(E). In addition, CGA
requests 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’s previously considered this
issue under petition P–1661 3 submitted
by CGA on July 15, 2015. That petition
was denied due to its conflict with the
requirements in 49 CFR 173.302a(a)(4)
for DOT specification 3AAX and 3T
cylinders when used in methane
service. Currently, § 173.302a(a)(4) only
allows methane that is non-liquefied,
has a minimum purity of 98 percent,
3 P–1661—CGA (PHMSA–2015–0169), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2015-0169.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:59 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

and is commercially free from corroding
components to be filled in specification
(3AX, 3AAX, and 3T) cylinders.
PHMSA agreed that DOT specification
3T cylinders with a tensile strength in
the range of 135–155 kilopounds per
square inch (ksi) [931–1,069
megapascals per square inch (MPa)] and
steel embrittlement can become a safety
issue. However, DOT specification 3AX
and 3AAX cylinders typically have
strength below 135 ksi (931 MPa), and
steel embrittlement is usually not a
safety concern. In its denial letter,
PHMSA encouraged CGA to consider a
revised petition and limit cylinders to
steel strengths below 950MPa for UN/
International Standards Organization
(ISO) cylinders made in accordance
with ISO 9899–1 and IS011120
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/
ISO 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
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.
PHMSA conducted an economic
review of this petition and expects these
proposed amendments would 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,
the proposed change may provide safety
benefits to the extent there is any

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

noncompliance with the practice
presented by CGA. A more detailed
discussion of this economic analysis can
be found in the PRIA posted in the
docket to this rulemaking. DOT seeks
comment on the number of shipments
that may currently be made where
substitute packaging would be required
under the proposal.
Therefore, PHMSA has determined
that there is merit in the CGA petition
to amend the requirements for
transporting CNG with methane in
certain UN 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.
PHMSA proposes to add § 173.302b(f) to
specify these requirements for
transporting CNG in UN specification
pressure receptacles.
B. Threading and Repair of Seamless
DOT 3-Series Specification Cylinders
and Seamless UN Pressure Receptacles
In its petition (P–1716),4 FIBA
Technologies, Inc. (FIBA) requests
PHMSA consider a revision to the
requirements for repairing seamless
DOT 3-series specification cylinders and
seamless UN pressure receptacles
manufactured without external threads,
and also to authorize the performance of
this work without requiring prior
approval from PHMSA. Specifically,
this petition requests that PHMSA
authorize machining new threads on a
previously manufactured seamless
cylinder or seamless UN pressure
receptacle without requiring an
approval. Further, FIBA requests that
PHMSA expand the population of UN
pressure receptacles eligible for repair
work. Regarding external threads, in
accordance with the current
§ 180.212(b)(2), repair work not
requiring prior approval is limited to the
‘‘rethreading’’ of DOT specification
3AX, 3AAX, or 3T cylinders or a UN
pressure receptacle mounted in
multiple-element gas containers
(MEGC).5
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 onto a semitrailer by inserting the tube neck into a
4 P–1716—FIBA (PHMSA–2018–0074), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0074.
5 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.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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 pins,
because the threaded neck and flange
more securely mount the cylinders and
tubes within the MEGC or motor vehicle
(tube trailer or frame). Pins 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.
Based on a technical review of this
petition, PHMSA expects that
authorizing the threading of DOT 3AX,
3AAX manufactured without external
threads, or 3T specification cylinders or
UN pressure receptacles would 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 setscrews 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 determined 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 expects
the proposed revision would improve
safety by ensuring a more secure
connection to the motor vehicle.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

This proposed revision is not
expected to impose any costs to
industry. Further, it is expected that the
proposed 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 proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
§ 180.212(b)(2) to allow the machining
of external threads on all seamless DOT
specification 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T
cylinder or a seamless UN pressure
receptacle originally manufactured
without external threads. Additionally,
PHMSA is proposing to authorize 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),6 FIBA
requests that PHMSA consider an
amendment to 49 CFR 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. Final rule HM–233F 7
adopted Department of Transportation
Special Permit (DOT–SP) 6530 8 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 49 CFR 173.302a instead of
paragraph (c). In its petition, FIBA
requests that PHMSA amend 49 CFR
173.302a(c)(3) to clarify that the
requirements in 49 CFR
173.302a(c)(3)(i)–173.302a(c)(3)(ii) are
independent provisions. FIBA asserts
this proposed revision will accurately
reflect the technical conditions
associated with the design and
manufactured properties of DOT
specification 3A, 3AX, 3AA, and 3AAX
cylinders.
6 P–1717—FIBA (PHMSA–2018–0075), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0075.
7 81 FR 3635 (Jan. 21, 2016).
8 DOT SP–6530, https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/
approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/
SP6530.pdf/2018019065/SP6530.

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13627

FIBA also submitted petition (P–
1725) 9 requesting further amendments
to § 173.302a(c), concurrent with those
requested in P–1717. Specifically, FIBA
requests 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, the petition requests that
cylinders qualifying for the special
filling limit in § 173.302a(c) also be
equipped with a pressure relief device
(PRD) in accordance with CGA S–1.1
(2011), rather than the requirements in
§ 173.302a(c)(4), which could
potentially conflict with each other.
CGA S–1.1 prescribes standards for
selecting the correct PRD to meet the
requirements of § 173.301(f) for more
than 150 gases. It also provides
guidance on when a PRD can be
optionally omitted and when its use is
prohibited, as well as direction on PRD
manufacturing, testing, operational
parameters, and maintenance. At the
time FIBA submitted P–1725, CGA S–
1.1 (2011) had not been incorporated by
reference into the HMR. Since then, the
HM–234 final rule 10 was published,
which incorporated by reference CGA
S–1.1 (2011) into the HMR and outlines
the PRD requirements for cylinders
filled with a gas and offered for
transportation.
The plus sign marking (+) is
associated with a commonly applied
provision in the HMR that authorizes a
DOT specification cylinder to be filled
to 10 percent in excess of its marked
pressure. FIBA states that the plus sign
marking (+) is an important means of
communicating to cylinder refillers that
a cylinder can be filled to 10 percent
more than its marked service pressure
and, thus, should be added to the
special filling requirements in
§ 173.302a(c).
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
agrees with FIBA that the safety control
measures within DOT–SP 6530 were
independent provisions. PHMSA
intended to adopt those provisions into
the HMR as independent provisions and
inadvertently adopted two of the safety
controls in §§ 173.302(c)(3)(i) and (ii) as
paragraphs of § 173.302a(c)(3). In
addition, PHMSA concurs that the
proposed revisions to require the plus
9 P–1725—FIBA (PHMSA–2018–0112), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2018-0112.
10 85 FR 85380 (Dec. 28, 2020).

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

13628

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

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 agrees that cylinders in
hydrogen service that are filled to 10
percent in excess of its marked pressure
should be equipped with a PRD that is
selected as to type, location, and
quantity, and tested in accordance with
CGA S–1.1 in the same manner as is
generally required for cylinders filled
with a gas in accordance with
§ 173.301(f) instead of § 173.302a(c)(4).
PHMSA determined that CGA S–1.1
provides much greater specificity than
§ 173.302a(c)(4) about the type of
pressure relief device required for a
particular gas service. Therefore,
PHMSA proposes to remove the PRD
requirements of 49 CFR 173.302a(c)(4)
and instead require compliance with the
PRD requirements of 49 CFR 173.301(f).
This latter provision requires that, with
certain exceptions, a cylinder filled with
a gas and offered for transportation must
be equipped with one or more PRDs
sized and selected as to type, location,
and quantity, and tested in accordance
with CGA S–1.1.
The proposed amendments associated
with P–1717 would provide greater
clarity on requirements for cylinder
design and manufacture, and 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
more than 10 percent of their marked
service pressures. These proposed
amendments would also not impose any
new or incremental cost because they
merely reorganize the regulations for
clarity. Additionally, while the
proposed amendments associated with
P–1725 would create a new
requirement, PHMSA anticipates the
amendment would 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 is not expected to add
any additional cost on affected
industries or entities. Currently,
§ 173.302a(c)(4) contains the same
requirements as CGA S–1.1 and
therefore the addition of the CGA S–1.1

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

requirement will not cause any new
additional costs beyond those already
accounted for previously. A more
detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
§ 173.302a(c) to reflect the safety
provisions currently in
§ 173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) are
independent material construction
requirements under paragraph (c) as
new paragraphs (c)(4) and (5). Moreover,
PHMSA proposes to add a requirement
in § 173.302a(c)(7) to require the plus
sign (+) following the test date marking
to indicate compliance with paragraph
(c) indicating that the cylinder is
allowed to be filled to more than 10
percent of its marked service pressure.
Lastly, PHMSA proposes to replace the
PRD requirements—found in current
§ 173.302a(c)(4)—with a new
§ 173.302a(c)(6). The new provision
would require that cylinders must be
equipped with PRDs sized and selected
as to type, location, and quantity and
tested in accordance with CGA S–1.1
(2011) and § 173.301(f).
D. De Minimus Quantities of Poisonous
Materials
In its petition (P–1718),11 the Council
on Safe Transportation of Hazardous
Articles, Inc. (COSTHA) requests that
PHMSA amend § 173.4b to harmonize
the de minimis exceptions for Division
6.1, Packing Group (PG) I (no inhalation
hazard) materials with international
regulations, including the International
Civil Aviation Organization Technical
Instructions for the Safe Transport of
Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO TI) and
the International Maritime Dangerous
Goods Code (IMDG Code). The de
minimis exceptions in the HMR provide
relief from the general requirements of
the HMR for certain hazardous materials
shipped in extremely small quantities.
The maximum quantity allowed in
order to utilize the de minimis
exception per inner receptacle is 1 mL
for authorized liquids and 1 g for
authorized solids. Additionally, the
aggregate quantity per package may not
exceed 100 mL for liquids and 100 g for
solids. The exception also requires
cushioning and package testing
requirements, along with specific
provisions for certain materials.
International harmonization includes
adopting changes in the HMR to
improve regulatory consistency with
international regulations and standards,
11 P–1718—COSTHA (PHMSA–2018–0077),
https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-20180077.

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

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 (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 12 in § 173.4b of the HMR and were
intended to align with the provisions for
de minimis exceptions found in the
ICAO Technical Instructions and IMDG
Code. However, HM–224D/HM–215J
addressed exceptions for de minimis
quantities of only Division 6.1, PG II
and PG III hazardous materials. As
noted in the PHMSA Letter of
Interpretation (LOI) reference number
(Ref. No.) 17–0138,13 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.
PHMSA now proposes harmonizing the
de minimis provisions for Division 6.1,
PG I (no inhalation hazard) materials
with the ICAO TI or IMDG Code in this
NPRM, in response to COSTHA’s
petition.
The COSTHA petition to harmonize
the scope of the applicability of the de
minimis exceptions with international
standards by including Division 6.1, PG
I materials (no inhalation hazard) would
except de minimis shipments from the
hazardous communication requirements
otherwise associated with these
shipments. 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.3/2009/45,14 which was
submitted by the United States. Based
12 74

FR 2200 (Jan. 14, 2009).
LOI 17–0138, https://
www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/interp/170138.
14 Working paper ST/SG/AC.10/C.3/2009/45,
https://unece.org/DAM/trans/doc/2009/ac10c3/STSG-AC10-C3-2009-45e.pdf.
13 PHMSA

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
on the review of this working paper,
PHMSA asserts that Division 6.1, PG I
(no inhalation hazard) materials should
be included as part of the de minimis
exception.
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, 49 CFR 173.4b requires that
inner receptacles have removable
closures sealed by wire, tape, or other
positive means (see § 173.4b(a)(2)),
which limits the possibility for leakage.
Furthermore, a Division 6.1 PG I
material that does not pose an
inhalation hazard equally poses no
vaporization risk should the package
rupture. Lastly, de minimis packages are
required to have cushioning and
absorbent material that are not reactive
with the hazardous material and can
absorb the entirety of the package’s
contents if the receptacle ruptures.
These requirements severely limit the
risk of exposure presented by
transportation of these materials.
While maintaining safety as described
in the prior paragraph, the proposed
harmonization would not impose any
direct costs on industry and could
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 proposal
would result in cost savings of
approximately $160,000 annually. A
more detailed discussion of the
economic analysis of this proposal can
be found in the PRIA posted to the
docket for this rulemaking.
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 proposes to
revise § 173.4b to include Division 6.1,
PG I materials (no inhalation hazard) to
the list of authorized materials in
§ 173.4b(a) PHMSA expects expanding
the de minimis exceptions to Division
6.1, PG I materials (no inhalation
hazard) to maintain the safety of
transportation of hazardous materials
and provide cost savings through
alternative packaging options.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

E. Clarification of the Marking
Requirements for Button Cell Lithium
Batteries Contained in Equipment
In its petition (P–1726),15 COSTHA
requests that PHMSA amend 49 CFR
173.185(c)(3) to clarify that lithium
button cell batteries installed in
equipment are excepted from the
marking requirement and not subject to
the quantity per package or per
consignment limitation. Currently,
§ 173.185(c)(3) states that, ‘‘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—12–0261,16 14–
0013,17 15–0171,18 and 16–0172 19—
which illustrates the confusion within
the regulated community.
PHMSA published final rule HM–
224F 20 to revise the HMR applicable to
the transport of lithium cells and
batteries, consistent with the UN Model
Regulations, the ICAO Technical
Instructions, and the IMDG Code. As
part of final rule HM–224F, PHMSA
consolidated the requirements for
shipping and transporting lithium cells
and batteries into § 173.185 by:
• Requiring cells and batteries to be
tested in accordance with the latest
revisions to the UN Manual of Tests and
Criteria and requiring manufacturers to
retain evidence of successful
completion of UN testing.
• Eliminating the exceptions for small
cells and batteries in air transportation,
15 P–1726—COSTHA (PHMSA–2019–0002),
https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-20190002.
16 PHMSA LOI 12–0261; https://
cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/
legacy/interpretations/Interpretations/2012/
120261.pdf.
17 PHMSA LOI 14–0013; https://
cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/
legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/
2014/140013.pdf.
18 PHMSA LOI 15–0171; https://
cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/
legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/
2016/150171.pdf.
19 PHMSA LOI 16–0172; https://
cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/
legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/
2017/160172.pdf.
20 79 FR 46011 (August 6, 2014).

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13629

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 its petition, COSTHA presents
grammatical and typographical changes
to § 173.185(c)(3) to clarify the
applicability of the lithium battery mark
exception for button cell batteries
installed in equipment. Consistent with
the petition, PHMSA proposes revisions
that clarify the exception in
§ 173.185(c)(3) applies when a package
contains only button cell batteries
installed in equipment; or when there is
a consignment consisting of two
packages or less, and each package
contains no more than four lithium cells
or two batteries installed in equipment.
This proposed change 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 proposed revision
simply clarifies how the exception is
applied for better understanding by the
reader. Since PHMSA already
authorizes this lithium battery mark
exception, the proposed change would
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 proposed revision could
provide economic benefit while
maintaining safety. PHMSA believes
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
this proposal can be found in the PRIA
posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
the introductory language in 49 CFR
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),21 CGA
requests that PHMSA incorporate by
21 P–1727—CGA (PHMSA–2019–0007), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0017.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

13630

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

reference CGA C–20 (2014),
‘‘Requalification Standard for Metallic,
DOT and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and
Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination,
Second Edition.’’ CGA also proposes to
revise § 180.205 to reflect the ultrasonic
examination (UE) methods authorized
by CGA C–20. CGA C–20 are an
industry standard for the periodic
requalification of certain metallic DOT
and Transport Canada (TC) 3-series
cylinders and tubes. CGA asserts that
the incorporation by reference of CGA
C–20 would eliminate the need for
many special permits that authorize the
use of UE methods and would
harmonize the various UE methods to
requalify these pressure receptacles.
CGA further asserts that this standard
would establish a uniform set of
techniques, uniform acceptance and
rejection criteria, and a standard
calibration method used during the
requalification process of these 3-series
gas cylinders and tubes, in contrast to
the current special permits, which vary
on the requirements associated with use
of the UE nondestructive testing
methodology for requalification. Finally,
the petition asserts that the
incorporation by reference of CGA C–20
would enhance public safety by
clarifying and mandating consistent
requalification practices using UE
throughout the gas industry.
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 3series 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,
special permits are required to use UE
in lieu of the requalification
requirements in § 180.205.
CGA notes that the increased use of
UE necessitates clear and consistent
instruction in the application of this
technical method, as well as the
adherence to proper calibration and
acceptance/rejection criteria. CGA
asserts that the proposed modifications
ensure that this requalification method

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

is applied consistently to safeguard
cylinder serviceability.
PHMSA 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. PHMSA’s technical
review 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 $14,613 due to
companies no longer being required to
apply for a special permit. A more
detailed discussion of the economic
analysis of this proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
PHMSA also proposes to revise 49
CFR 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. PHMSA also
notes the publication of the third
edition of CGA–20 in 2021 and solicits
comment regarding whether this
rulemaking should consider
incorporating by reference the 2021
edition rather than the 2014 edition.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to add a
reference to CGA C–20, ‘‘Methods For
Ultrasonic Examination Of Metallic,
DOT And TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders
And Tubes, Second Edition’’ in 49 CFR
171.7 and revise 49 CFR 180.205 to
reflect the UE methods authorized by
CGA C–20.
G. Gas Mixtures Containing
Components Defined as Liquefied Gases
In its petition (P–1728),22 CGA
proposes that PHMSA authorize an
alternative description of gas mixtures
containing components defined as
liquefied gases. The CGA petition would
revise the HMR to allow for a gas
mixture with components that meet the
definition of liquefied compressed gas
in § 173.115(e) to be described as a
22 P–1728—CGA (PHMSA–2019–0018), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0018.

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

‘‘compressed gas’’ when the partial
pressures of the liquefied gas
components of the mixture are
intentionally reduced so that
liquefaction does not occur at 20 °C
(68 °F). CGA requests in its petition that
special provisions be added to Column
7 in the § 172.101 Hazardous Material
Table (HMT) applicable to liquefied gas
mixtures.
Some compressed gas mixtures
contain components that when shipped
in their pure form would be considered
a liquefied gas. However, when the gas
is in a mixture, it can be manipulated
to be entirely gaseous at its intended use
temperature of 20 °C (68 °F) by reducing
the components’ partial pressures.
Partial pressure is the pressure that
would be exerted by one of the gases in
a mixture if it occupied the same
volume on its own. The sum of all
components’ partial pressures equals
the total pressure of the mixture.
Therefore, partial pressure can be
lowered by lowering pressure generally
(e.g., by lowering temperatures or
increasing volume) or altering the ratio
of gases in the mixture.
PHMSA conducted a technical review
of this petition and agrees with CGA
that when the gas is in a mixture, it can
be manipulated to be entirely gaseous at
its intended use temperature of 20°C
(68 °F) by reducing the components’
partial pressures. PHMSA notes that
during transportation, the gas mixture or
its components may partially liquefy,
forming condensation on the container
wall, if ambient temperatures are lower
than 20°C (68 °F), but still above –50°C
(-58 °F). When the mixture returns to its
use temperature, the condensation will
transform back to the gaseous state.
There are scenarios where a gas mixture
might contain a component that meets
the definition of a liquefied compressed
gas, and under small temperature
changes, a cloud or condensation could
build up inside the cylinder. This could
lead to the ‘‘liquefied compressed gas’’
description potentially misrepresenting
the cylinder’s contents to first
responders and end users. Moreover,
while CGA does not cite a safety
concern with the current requirements
under the HMR, they do note that there
can be confusion among stakeholders
when the content of a cylinder is
described as a liquefied compressed gas
but resembles a non-liquefied
compressed gas during transportation
and use. Thus, PHMSA has determined
that the proposed change 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

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

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-liquified compressed
gas in § 173.115(e), as revising the
regulatory text provides a clearer
connection for all stakeholders who
ship these gases. Nonetheless, PHMSA
appreciates any comments on this
proposal.
This revision to the HMR is not
expected to 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 would be
little to no cost on entities to change the
hazard communication. A more detailed
discussion of this economic analysis of
this proposal can be found in the PRIA
posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to allow
certain mixtures of gas with
component(s) considered liquefied gas
in accordance with 49 CFR 173.115(e) to
be described as a ‘‘compressed gas’’ and
considered a non-liquefied gas in
accordance with § 173.115(d). PHMSA
proposes to revise § 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-liquified compressed gas in 49 CFR
172.101 HMT when the partial
pressure(s) of the liquefied gas
component(s) in the mixture are
reduced so that the mixture is entirely
in the gas phase at 20°C (68 °F).
H. Incorporate by Reference CGA C–23
(2018)
In its petition (P–1729),23 CGA
proposes 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 49 CFR
171.7 of the HMR. CGA also proposes
that PHMSA revise 49 CFR 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 International
Organization for Standardization (ISO)
framework. Tube modules are also
commonly known as skid containers,
ISO skids, ISO containers, or multipleelement gas containers (MEGCs).
Sections 180.205 and 180.207 outline
23 P–1729—CGA

(PHMSA–2019–0059), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0059.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

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
to periodically disassemble equipment
and perform an examination of tube
neck mounting surfaces in accordance
with CGA C–23.
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 ft (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 horizontallymounted cylinder types.
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–

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13631

14206.24 These special permits allow for
the requalification of DOT specification
cylinders and UN tubes by UE or
acoustic emission testing (AET), with a
follow-up UE instead of the hydrostatic
test currently required under the HMR.
These methods are used to ensure the
cylinders and tubes remain qualified for
hazardous materials service. Moreover,
the UE and AET methods are nondestructive methods of examination,
that are alternatives to the hydrostatic
method. Additionally, the HMR do not
require periodic inspection and
evaluation of the tube neck mounting
surfaces. The CGA petition would
enhance transportation safety of these
larger cylinders and tubes by including
inspection of the tube mounting threads
as part of the requalification process.
The proposed new language from
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 49 CFR
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.
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 found the
CGA proposals in §§ 180.205(d)(5) and
180.207(d)(1)(iii) requiring the
disassembly of the tube module when
visible corrosion in the neck region is
present to be too vague. Therefore,
PHMSA is referencing the figures and
descriptions provided in Section 4.2 of
the CGA C–23 standard for extreme
neck thread wear conditions in
§§ 180.205(d)(5) and 180.207(d)(1)(iii) to
clarify conditions when disassembly of
the tube module is required.
24 DOT SP–14206, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/
approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/
SP14206.pdf/offerserver/SP14206.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

13632

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

PHMSA has determined that
incorporating by reference CGA C–23
into the HMR would 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 proposal
can be found in the PRIA posted to the
docket for this rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
49 CFR 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 proposes to
add 49 CFR 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 add 49 CFR
180.205(d)(5) to specify conditions (as
outlined in Section 4.2 of CGA C–23)
requiring removal and inspection in
accordance with CGA C–23. The current
49 CFR 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 is also proposing to revise 49
CFR 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 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 proposes to add 49
CFR 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 4.2 of CGA C–23)
requiring removal and inspection in
accordance with Section 6 of CGA C–23.
(The text at the current 49 CFR
180.207(d)(1) would be renumbered as
paragraph (d)(1)(i)).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

I. Incorporate by Reference IME Safety
Library Publication 23 (SLP–23)
In its petition (P–1731),25 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.
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. Nonsubstantive changes include changing
the structure of SLP–23 to read more
consistently with the HMR and editorial
revisions.
Substantive changes to SLP–23 (2021)
include:
• Deletion of the Vented Pipe Test
(VPT) in Appendix A.
Currently, SLP–23 (2011) requires
both bulk Division 1.5 explosives and
Division 5.1 ammonium nitrate
emulsions to pass the VPT. The
proposed 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
25 P–1731—IME (PHMSA–2019–0062), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0062.

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

had a time to reaction in that test longer
than 60 seconds and a water content
greater than 14 percent, the material
would be required to pass test series
8(a), 8(b), and 8(e). Test 8(e) is the
Minimum Burning Pressure test (MBP).
IME noted that industry is currently
gathering data to determine whether use
of the MBP test obviates the need for the
VPT because, in essence, the VPT is a
scaled-up Koenen Test and, therefore,
has the same limitations associated with
extended time of heating.
• Allowing operators to continually
monitor driver qualifications and
training instead of conducting an annual
audit, as currently required in SLP–23
(2011).
IME notes that the current
requirement for an ‘‘annual audit’’ is
inadequate to ensure that driver
qualification and training programs are
comprehensive, effective, and being
implemented properly. IME believes
that limiting oversight of the program to
an annual audit provides less assurance
that operators are compliant than would
a requirement to continually monitor
the driver qualification program.
In addition, IME requests revisions to
the HMR that coincide with the
incorporation by reference of SLP–23
(2021). IME requests the adoption of
DOT–SP 8723, which authorizes
‘‘UN0332, Explosive, Blasting, type E,’’
‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate
emulsion,’’ and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing
liquid n.o.s. (PG II)’’ to be transported in
IM 101 and 102 portable tanks. IME
explains that continuing to operate
under DOT–SP 8723 imposes additional
administrative costs to both industry
and PHMSA and that one of the
advantages of incorporating by reference
SLP–23 (2011) into the HMR was the
elimination of SPs governing bulk
transportation of certain materials
manufactured and used by the
commercial explosives industry. IME
asserts that failure to include the
provisions from DOT–SP 8723 was an
oversight when SLP–23 (2011) was
originally incorporated by reference into
the HMR. In addition to the
administrative cost savings noted above,
IME adds that the conversion of SPs into
regulations provides certainty to the
regulated community and increases
transparency for government,
stakeholders, and the public. IME
proposes that TP codes be assigned to
‘‘UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E,’’
‘‘UN3375, Ammonium nitrate
emulsion,’’ and ‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing
liquid, n.o.s., PG II’’ to authorize the use
of IM 101 and 102 portable tanks when
transported under SLP–23 (2021).
Lastly, IME proposes a revision to
§ 173.251 to state that this section is not

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
applicable when UN3375 is transported
in IM 101 or 102 portable tanks in
accordance with SLP–23 (2021).
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.
Additionally, if data can be provided in
response to this NPRM that demonstrate
that the VPT is no longer needed for
these materials, PHMSA can consider
such data in the development of the
final rule. In this NPRM, PHMSA
proposes to retain the requirement that
Division 1.5 blasting explosives and
Division 5.1 ANEs are subject to the
VPT, and we have proposed to add a
reference to the UN Test Series 8(d) in
49 CFR 171.7(dd)(5) and 172.102(c)(1),
SP 148.
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 49
CFR 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 would maintain the
safety of bulk transport of these
materials because the SLP–23 (2011)
standard currently incorporated by
reference already authorizes larger bulk

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

quantities consistent with the hazardous
material offered in accordance with
DOT–SP 8723 and has a safety record of
use for 10 years.
PHMSA expects the changes proposed
by IME in this petition to 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 $6,120
per year. There are several other effects
of this 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 proposal can be found in the PRIA
posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
PHMSA asserts that the incorporation
by reference of SLP–23 (2021) will
enhance safety by adopting
technological advances and best
practices used in the bulk explosives
industry. PHMSA proposes to
incorporate by reference of 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 49
CFR171.7(r)(2) and replace the 2011
edition currently in the HMR. PHMSA
also proposes to revise special provision
148 to clearly state that the VPT
requirements in SLP–23 (2011) would
still apply. PHMSA also proposes to add
new special provision TP48 to 49 CFR
172.102(c)(8) to authorize the use of IM
101 and 102 portable tanks for ANEs
when transported under SLP–23 (2021).
PHMSA proposes to assign TP48 to the
following UN numbers in 49 CFR
172.102 of the HMT: ‘‘UN0332,
Explosive, blasting, type E,’’ ‘‘UN3375,
Ammonium nitrate emulsion,’’ and
‘‘UN3139, Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s., PG
II.’’ Lastly, PHMSA proposes to revise
49 CFR 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),26 the Sporting
Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’
Institute, Inc. (SAAMI) proposes that
PHMSA amend 49 CFR 178.503(a)(6) by
allowing UN performance-oriented
boxes (e.g., UN 4A, 4B, or 4N for steel,
aluminum, or other metal boxes,
26 P–1732—SAAMI

(PHMSA–2019–0069),
https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-20190069.

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13633

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 49 CFR 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. Lastly, the SAAMI petition
proposes to revise the frequency of
periodic retesting for combination
packagings in 49 CFR 178.601 from 24
months to 60 months. PHMSA needs
more time to evaluate this final proposal
and therefore it is not proposing the
amendment in this rulemaking.
However, PHMSA may consider this
proposal in a future rulemaking.
With regard to the marking proposal,
the marking requirements in 49 CFR
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,27
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 49 CFR 178.503(a)(6)
and eliminates the need to change
printing plates annually.
PHMSA conducted a technical review
of the proposal to authorize boxes
marked with the last two digits of the
year of testing certification marked
rather than the year of manufacture.
PHMSA believes that this proposal will
27 The periodic retest requirements for
combination packagings call for conducting design
qualification retesting at least once every 24
months. See § 178.601(e).

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

13634

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

maintain the current safety standard for
these packaging types. PHMSA has
determined, consistent with SAAMI’s
petition, that the only likely effect of the
proposed revision is that packaging
manufacturers that periodically retest
packagings less frequently than
annually would not need to update
printing plates annually, and instead
would only need to update plates
biennially, resulting in a small
reduction in regulatory burden.
With regard to the selective testing
variation proposal, 49 CFR 178.601
contains the general requirements for
the testing of non-bulk UN performanceoriented packagings and packages.
Specifically, 49 CFR 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 49 CFR
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 49 CFR 178.603 and
178.606. Additionally, the SAAMI
petition proposes for the packaging
variation to allow for larger packages to
use the certification of a smaller tested
package.
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 has determined
that allowing for a variation in the
packagings used to ship UN0012,
UN0014, UN0044, and UN0055 will not
lead to a reduction in safety because
PHMSA does not expect this minor
package variation to affect the
performance of the package. PHMSA
does not, however, propose to adopt the
SAAMI proposal to allow for an
increase in external dimensions of the
outer package (i.e., allow larger
packages) based on the tested design
type. This proposal is novel to the
extent that no current packaging
variation in 49 CFR 178.601(g) of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

HMR allows for an increase in size of a
packaging from a tested design type and
SAAMI did not provide a safety
justification to support such a change.
Without this additional data, PHMSA
cannot make a determination that
increasing the size of a package from a
tested design type will not lead to a
decrease in safety.
PHMSA conducted an economic
evaluation of the proposal to amend
§ 178.503(a)(6) to allow the year of test
certification to be marked on
specification boxes instead of the month
and year of manufacture. For this
proposal, PHMSA estimated annualized
cost savings of approximately $150,000.
PHMSA also conducted an economic
evaluation of the proposal to amend
§ 178.601(g) to allow specified inner
packagings to be assembled and
transported without testing under
certain conditions. For this proposal,
PHMSA estimates annualized cost
savings of approximately $750,000 if
this proposal were to be adopted.
Together, PHMSA estimates that these
two proposals will yield an annualized
cost savings of $900,000. A more
detailed discussion of the economic
analysis of this proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to amend
§ 178.503(a)(6) to allow adding the last
two digits of the year of certification be
marked on type 4 packagings as an
alternative to the year of manufacture.
In addition, PHMSA proposes a new
packaging variation in § 178.601(g)(6) to
authorize selective testing of packagings
containing ‘‘Cartridges for weapons,
inert projectile(s) or blank (UN0012 and
UN0014), Primers, cap type (UN0044),
and Cases, cartridge, empty with primer
(UN0055).’’ Inner packagings intended
to contain these materials may be
assembled and transported without
testing provided that the outer
packaging of a combination packaging
successfully passes the tests in
accordance with 49 CFR 178.603 and
178.606, and the gross mass does not
exceed that of the tested type. Further,
PHMSA solicits comment on whether
this testing variation should be
expanded to other types of articles
containing solid hazardous materials,
such as fireworks. PHMSA asks that
comments include the associated cost
savings of any such expansion.
K. Authorizing Smaller Combustible
Placard on IBCs
In its petition (P–1734),28 Evonik
proposes that PHMSA revise 49 CFR
28 P–1734—Evonik

(PHMSA–2019–0089), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0089.

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

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 29 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 49 CFR 172.407(c).
Section 172.407(c) requires diamond
shaped labels to be at least 100 mm (3.9
inches) on each side.
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 49 CFR
172.514(c)(4), where an IBC is
authorized to be labeled instead of
placarded (e.g., flammable labels vs.
flammable placards), and in 49 CFR
172.406(e)(6), where duplicate labels are
not required on two sides or two ends
of an IBC with a volume of 1.8 m3 (64
cubic feet) or less (approximately 478
gallons). Because these exceptions are
allowed for hazardous materials
considered to pose greater danger than
combustible liquids, Evonik asserts the
reduction in size for combustible
placards will maintain a safe level of
hazard communication for transport of
combustible liquids in IBCs.
While this proposal is not technical in
nature, PHMSA concludes 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 would
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
29 DOT SP–16295, https://cms7.phmsa.dot.gov/
approvals-and-permits/hazmat/file-serve/offer/
SP16295.pdf/2018080498/SP16295.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
49 CFR 172.514(c)(4) to allow IBCs
containing combustible liquids to be
placarded with a combustible placard
that meets the label size specifications
in § 172.407(c). PHMSA notes that this
petition was focused on allowing a
smaller placard size for IBCs. Yet,
§ 172.514(c) authorizes labels—
essentially a smaller-sized placard—
instead of placards for other types of
bulk packagings (e.g., a portable tank
having a capacity of less than 3,785 L
(1000 gallons). PHMSA solicits
comment on whether this rulemaking
should also authorize smaller placards
for other bulk packagings containing
combustible liquids authorized to use a
label instead of a placard, and the
associated cost savings of such
authorization.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

L. Incorporate by Reference IME Safety
Library Publication 22 (SLP–22)
In its petition (P–1736),30 IME
proposes 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 49 CFR
171.7(r)(1).
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 49 CFR
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. None
of millions of shipments of detonators
and explosives made using SLP–22 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
30 P–1736—IME

(PHMSA–2019–0167), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2019-0167.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

corrections, practical improvements,
and deletion of outdated practices.
Specifically, changes to SLP–22
include:
• 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.
PHMSA conducted a technical review
of each revision included in SLP–22
(2019) and has 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 proposes
to incorporate by reference SLP–22
(2019). PHMSA has concluded that the
specifications proposed in Section C.9
of the document are adequate to provide
the flexibility to allow for alternative
materials of construction without
compromising safety.
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 proposed changes to
section C.1.c regarding padlocks could
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 $875,000 per year. These
cost savings, however, are contingent on
the quantity and type of material

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13635

substitutions made by SLP–22 box
manufacturers, which is uncertain. A
more detailed discussion of this
economic analysis of this proposal can
be found in the PRIA posted to the
docket for the rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to amend
49 CFR 171.7(r)(1) to reference IME
SLP–22 (2019). In addition, PHMSA
proposes to make an editorial revision
to 49 CFR 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),31 COSTHA
proposes that PHMSA modify the
definition of a liquid in 49 CFR 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. Section 171.8
states that a liquid means a material,
other than an elevated temperature
material, with a melting point or initial
melting point of 20 °C (68 °F) or lower
at a standard pressure of 101.3 kPa (14.7
pounds per square inch). A viscous
material for which a specific melting
point cannot be determined must be
subjected to the procedures specified in
ASTM D 4359 (1990), ‘‘Standard Test
Method for Determining Whether a
Material is Liquid or Solid.’’ The UN
Model Regulations, ICAO Technical
Instructions, and IMDG Code all include
the penetrometer test as an alternative to
performing the ASTM D 4359 test
method in determination of whether a
material is a liquid.
In addition, COSTHA states that 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.
PHMSA conducted a technical review
of the COSTHA proposal to harmonize
the HMR definition with international
31 P–1738—COSTHA (PHMSA–2019–0233),
https://www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-20190233.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13636

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

In its petition (P–1744),32 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 49 CFR 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 the marking
of a Dewar flask or a cylinder in
accordance with CGA C–7 (2014),
Appendix A instead of labeling (see 49
CFR 172.400a). CGA states that an
update is needed to CGA C–7, Tenth
Edition (2014) to address changes made
to Appendix A in the Eleventh Edition
(2020), such as:
• Providing greater flexibility in
display of the hazard class by allowing
it to be displayed on one or two lines.
• Clarifying that the marking system
elements must meet certain minimum
size requirements.

O. Incorporate by Reference CGA C–27
(2019)
In its petition (P–1746),33 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 proposes to revise
49 CFR 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 49 CFR 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.
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

32 P–1744—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0104), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0104.

33 P–1746—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0116), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0116.

34 https://www.regulations.gov/document/
PHMSA-2020-0116-0003.

N. Incorporate by Reference Updated
CGA C–7 (2020)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

• 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.
PHMSA conducted a technical review
of this petition, including a review of
the revised Appendix A to C–7 (2020),
and found that the proposed 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.
PHMSA conducted an economic
review of this petition and found no
quantifiable benefits associated with
this change. However, the proposed
changes found in Appendix A to CGA
C–7 (2020) would provide clearer
guidance to the regulated community
and thus increase compliance. A more
detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
49 CFR 171.7(n)(8) to reference CGA C–
7 (2020), ‘‘Guide to Classification and
Labeling of Compressed Gases’’,
Eleventh Edition.

tube that do not meet the minimum
thickness criteria of the specification.
Derating is the lowering of the
maximum allowable service pressure of
a cylinder due to thinning of a
cylinder’s walls to extend the life of the
cylinder. In accordance with CGA C–27,
any tube with a suspect thin area found
during AET, UE, or visual inspection
must be evaluated in accordance with
CGA C–20. If the tube does not meet the
minimum thickness requirements in
Section 4b of CGA C–27, a cylinder
owner may apply to PHMSA to reduce
the marked service pressure of the
cylinders, in accordance with Section 4c
of CGA C–27. The procedure to derate
a tube must be performed by a DOTapproved repair facility. CGA C–27 does
not apply to tubes that have been
condemned from any requalification
method. Cylinder repair shops must be
approved by PHMSA to have the
authority to repair a cylinder. These
companies receive a K-number from
PHMSA, and the K-number approval
indicates whether a company is
authorized to perform repairs or
rebuilds of cylinders, and in this case,
DOT 3-series tubes.
CGA asserts that the incorporation by
reference of CGA C–27 will minimize
inquiries to PHMSA by standardizing
and codifying the existing process under
the PHMSA document, ‘‘Guidance for
Applications to Down-Rate the Service
Pressure of DOT Seamless Steel
Cylinders (Rev. 3/27/13),’’ 34 and
provide persons seeking to derate a tube
with instruction on pertinent
information to submit to PHMSA in a
logical and consistent manner.
PHMSA conducted a technical review
of the proposals in the petition,
including a review of CGA C–27, and
found that the proposed 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 in
calculation of the new service pressure
is the same as the current methodology

use of the ADR penetrometer test for
determination of a liquid. The test
proposed, 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 UNMR 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 believes 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 proposal.
A more detailed discussion of this
economic analysis of this proposal can
be found in the PRIA posted to the
docket for this rulemaking.
For the reasons stated in this section,
PHMSA proposes to revise the
definition of a liquid in 49 CFR 171.8
to reference the test for determining
fluidity (penetrometer test) prescribed
in section 2.3.4 of Annex A of the ADR.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

used to determine the allowable service
pressure for DOT 3-series seamless steel
cylinders found in the HMR at 49 CFR
178.36 (3A and 3AX), 49 CFR 178.37
(3AA and 3AAX), and 49 CFR 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.
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 proposed
changes in this petition. A more
detailed discussion of this economic
analysis of this proposal can be found
in the PRIA posted to the docket for this
rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to
incorporate by reference CGA C–27
‘‘Procedure to Derate the Service
Pressure of DOT 3-Series Seamless Steel
Tubes’’, First Edition, in 49 CFR 171.7.
PHMSA also proposes to add 49 CFR
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),35 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 49 CFR 173.301
to replace references to CGA TB–25
with references to CGA C–29.
CGA C–29 defines basic design
requirements for tube trailers and tube
modules to maintain structural integrity
during normal conditions of handling
and transport. A tube trailer or tube
module manufactured in accordance
with this standard is less likely to have
a separation of the tubes from the trailer
or bundle or an unintentional release of
product when subjected to the
multidirectional forces that can occur
during a highway collision, including a
rollover accident. Under this standard,
tube modules must meet the loading
35 P–1747—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0117), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0117.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

and accident protection standards that
are applied to tube trailers.
In its petition, CGA outlines the
changes between the CGA TB–25
(currently incorporated by reference in
§ 171.7) and CGA C–29. Examples of
these revisions include:
• Changing the Technical Bulletin to
a CGA Standard.
• Changing the title of the document
to ‘‘Standard for Design Requirements
for Tube Trailers and Tube Modules.’’
• Adding a scope section that
specifies that CGA C–29 is not
applicable to a multiple-element gas
container (MEGC) because MEGC design
requirements are found in 49 CFR
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’’).
A technical review of the petition and
supporting documents 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.
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

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13637

standardized qualification and testing
regime. Minor economic benefits might
also be derived from the editorial and
definitional clarifications provided in
the updated CGA requirements. Should
these changes make requirements for
operators clearer and easier to follow,
that would support compliance with the
regulation. A more detailed discussion
of the economic analysis of this
proposal can be found in the PRIA
posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to
incorporate by reference CGA C–29
‘‘Standard for Design Requirements for
Tube Trailers and Tube Modules’’, First
Edition, into 49 CFR 171.7 and remove
the references to CGA TB–25, ‘‘Design
Considerations for Tube Trailers.’’
PHMSA also proposes to revise 49 CFR
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),36 CGA
proposes 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.’’
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.
A technical review of CGA V–9 (2019)
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
36 P–1748—CGA (PHMSA–2020–0124), https://
www.regulations.gov/docket/PHMSA-2020-0124.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13638

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

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 proposal
should 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, 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 proposal can be found in the PRIA
posted to the docket for this rulemaking.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise
§ 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.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

R. Phaseout of Hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs)
The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) published a final rule 37 to issue
regulations implementing certain
provisions of the American Innovation
and Manufacturing (AIM) Act,38 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 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 estimates the rulemaking
will avoid cumulative emissions of
4,560 million metric tons of exchange
37 86

FR 55116 (Oct. 5, 2021).

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

aim-act.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

value equivalent 39 of HFCs in the
United States with a present value of
cumulative net benefits of $272.7
billion.40
The EPA final rule implements a twostage approach that first prohibits
additional disposable cylinders—i.e.,
non-refillables—from being introduced
to the market by January 1, 2025, and
secondly prohibits 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 notes 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 this NPRM, PHMSA proposes to
adopt the same prohibition on the filling
and transportation of certain HFCs in
non-refillable cylinders to align with
EPA’s efforts to fulfill the AIM Act
mandate and combat climate impacts,
and to avoid potential confusion by
industry if PHMSA were to continue to
authorize these materials in nonrefillable cylinders while prohibited by
EPA. Currently in the HMR, the filling
of cylinders with liquefied compressed
gases such as these HFCs is authorized
in § 173.304. To align with the EPA
prohibition on the import, filling, and
use of non-refillable cylinders as part of
the phaseout of HFCs, PHMSA proposes
to revise the § 173.304(d) transportation
requirements for refrigerant gases. First,
PHMSA proposes to move the current
paragraph (d) requirements to a new
paragraph (d)(1) regarding refrigerant
and dispersant gases. Second, PHMSA
proposes to create a new paragraph
(d)(2) to add a list of HFCs that would
no longer be permitted to be filled and
transported in non-refillable cylinders.
These HFCs include:
Chemical name
CHF2CHF2 ...............
CH2FCF3 ..................
CH2FCHF2 ...............
CHF2CH2CF3 ...........
CF3CH2CF2CH3 ......
CF3CHFCF3 .............
CH2FCF2CF3 ...........
CHF2CHFCF3 ...........
CF3CH2CF3 .............
CH2FCF2CHF2 .........
CF3CHFCHFCF2CF3
CH2F2 .......................
CHF2CF3 ..................

Common name
HFC–134.
HFC–134a.
HFC–143.
HFC–245fa.
HFC–365mfc.
HFC–227ea.
HFC–236cb.
HFC–236ea.
HFC–236fa.
HFC–245ca.
HFC–43–10mee.
HFC–32.
HFC–125.

39 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).
40 86 FR 55116 (Oct. 5, 2021).

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Chemical name
CH3CF3 ....................
CH3F .........................
CH2FCH2F ...............
CH3CHF2 ..................
CHF3 .........................

Common name
HFC–143a.
HFC–41.
HFC–152.
HFC–152a.
HFC–23.

Finally, this proposal would phase
out the import or domestic filling of a
listed HFC in a non-refillable cylinder
by January 1, 2025, and would prohibit
the offering of HFCs identified in this
section in a non-refillable cylinder after
January 1, 2027. Lastly, this proposal
provides a phaseout exception for small
cans (i.e., an aerosol can) containing less
than two pounds of a listed HFC that
has a self-sealing valve and meets the
valve specification requirements in 40
CFR 82.154(c)(2)—i.e., the EPA
specifications for self-sealing valves.
S. Emergency Processing of Special
Permits
Section 107.117 of the HMR 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
49 CFR 107.117(a)) However, PHMSA
has found it necessary to add an
additional criterion due to situations
arising that require processing of an
emergency special permit but is not
clearly outlined in the current 49 CFR
107.117(a). To meet this need, PHMSA
is proposing to add 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. Separately, to provide
clarification of 49 CFR 107.117(a)(2), we
are proposing to split the current
paragraph (a)(2) into two distinct
paragraphs—(a)(2) and (3).
IV. Section-by-Section Review
Below is a section-by-section
description of the changes being
proposed.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
A. Section 107.117
49 CFR 107.117 outlines situations
when emergency processing of special
permits may be appropriate. In this
NPRM, PHMSA is proposing to add 49
CFR 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 49 CFR
107.117(a)(2), we are proposing to split
the current clauses into two distinct
paragraphs—(a)(2) and (3).

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

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 NPRM, PHMSA is
proposing to incorporate 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 49 CFR 172.400a. This publication
has been prepared as a guide for the
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 3Series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using
Ultrasonic Examination (Second
Edition), into 49 CFR 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 49 CFR 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 49 CFR 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.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

• CGA C–29 (2019), Standard for
Design Requirements for Tube Trailers
and Tube Modules, (First Edition), into
49 CFR 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, (Eight Edition),
into 49 CFR 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 49 CFR
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 49 CFR 173.66 introductory text
and 177.835(d). This publication
specifies the requirements for the
transportation in bulk packaging of
certain Class 1 and Class 5 hazardous
materials essential to commercial
blasting operations.
• European Agreement Concerning
the International Carriage of Dangerous
Goods by Road (ADR), which is already
incorporated by reference in § 171.23,
into 49 CFR 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

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13639

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 49 CFR
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 proposed a revision to 49 CFR
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
proposes to modify the definition of
liquid in § 171.8 to include the test for
determining fluidity (penetrometer test)
prescribed in section 2.3.4 of Annex A
of the ADR as an alternative method for
determining if a material is a liquid.
D. Section 172.101
The HMT is contained in § 172.101.
The HMT lists alphabetically, by proper
shipping name, those materials that
have been designated hazardous
materials for the purpose of
transportation. It provides information
used on shipping papers, package
marking, and labeling, as well as other
pertinent shipping information for
hazardous materials. PHMSA proposes
to amend 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 proposes to add 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 is proposing to
revise special provision ‘‘148’’ to require
materials assigned this provision to be
subject to the Vented Pipe Test (VPT).
This ensures continued performance of

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13640

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

VPT requirements in the absence of
required use of the test in the proposed
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 proposes to revise
49 CFR 172.514(c)(4) to allow an option
to use a placard that meets the label
specification size requirements in 49
CFR 172.407(c) for combustible liquids
transported in IBCs.
G. Section 173.4b
Section 173.4b prescribes exceptions
for transporting certain hazardous
materials in de minimis quantities.
PHMSA proposes to revise 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 proposes
to revise 49 CFR 173.115(e) to state that
gas mixtures with component(s) that are
liquefied gases may be described using
the appropriate hazardous materials
description of a non-liquified
compressed gas in the HMT at 49 CFR
172.101 when the partial pressure(s) of
the liquefied component(s) in the
mixture are reduced so that the mixture
is entirely in the gas phase at 20 °C.
I. Section 173.185
Section 173.185 prescribes the
requirements for packaging and
transporting lithium cells and batteries.
PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph
(c)(3) to clarify that lithium button cell
batteries installed in equipment are not
subject to any per package or
consignment limitations.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

J. Section 173.251
Section 173.251 outlines the bulk
packaging requirements for ammonium
nitrate emulsion, suspension, or gel.
PHMSA proposes to revise 49 CFR
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 proposes to revise 49
CFR 173.301 to replace references to

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

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
proposes to revise paragraph (c) by
redesignating 49 CFR 173.302a(c)(3)(i)
and (ii) as 49 CFR 173.302a(c)(4) and (5)
to properly reflect that the safety
provisions currently in 49 CFR
173.302a(c)(3)(i) and (ii) are
independent material construction
requirements under paragraph (c).
PHMSA also proposes to add 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
proposes to add 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 proposes to revise this section
by adding a new paragraph (f) to specify
packaging restrictions for transporting
compressed natural gas and methane in
UN seamless steel pressure receptacles.
For methane and natural gas with a
methane content of 98 percent or
greater, the maximum tensile strength of
the UN seamless steel pressure
receptacle may not exceed 1100 MPa
(159,542 psi), and the contents must be
free of corroding components. For
natural gas with methane content of less
than 98 percent, the maximum tensile
strength of the UN seamless steel
pressure receptacle may not exceed 950
MPa (137,750 psi). Additionally, each
discharge end of a UN refillable
seamless steel tube must be equipped
with an internal drain tube, and the
moisture content and concentration of
the corroding components must
conform to the requirements in
§ 173.301b(a)(2).
N. Section 173.304
Section 173.304 contains the
requirements for the filling of cylinders
with liquefied compressed gases.
Paragraph (d) specifies authorized
cylinders for the transportation of
refrigerant and dispersant gases.
PHMSA proposes to revise this
paragraph by adding a list of the HFCs
that are being phased out for use and

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

transportation to align with the EPA
implementation of the AIM Act.
Additionally, PHMSA proposes
language to outline the phaseout dates
and exceptions for the transportation of
HFCs listed in this section.
O. Section 178.503
Section 178.503 prescribes the
requirements for the marking of nonbulk performance-oriented packagings.
PHMSA proposes to revise 49 CFR
178.503(a)(6) to allow 4-series boxes to
be marked with the last two digits of the
year of certification in lieu of the year
of manufacture as currently required in
the HMR.
P. Section 178.601
Section 178.601 prescribes the general
requirements for the testing of non-bulk
performance-oriented packagings and
packages. PHMSA proposes to
redesignate paragraphs (g)(6) through (8)
as paragraphs (g)(7) through (9) and add
new paragraph (g)(6) to allow packages
tested with articles containing solid
hazardous materials without
intermediate packaging(s) to be
assembled with any intermediate
packaging(s) without further testing.
Moreover, PHMSA is revising 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).
Q. Section 180.205
Section 180.205 prescribes the general
requirements for requalification of
specification cylinders. PHMSA
proposes to revise this section to
incorporate provisions consistent with
CGA C–20–2014, ‘‘Requalification
Standard for Metallic, DOT and TC 3Series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using
Ultrasonic Examination’’ (Second
Edition), which allow for the use of UE
for cylinder requalification. PHMSA
proposes to revise paragraphs (e)(2) and
(f) to specify that a cylinder requalified
using UE must be visually inspected in
accordance with paragraph (e)(1).
Additionally, PHMSA proposes to add 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
proposes revisions to paragraphs (i) and
(j) to specify the rejection requirements
for a cylinder that fails requalification
tests.
PHMSA also proposes to add
§ 180.205(c)(5). This paragraph will
specify that a DOT 3-series specification
cylinder that is 12 feet or longer with an
outside diameter greater than or equal to

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
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 proposes to add
paragraph (d)(5) to specify the
conditions for removal and examination
of cylinders in accordance with CGA C–
23.
R. Section 180.207
Section 180.207 prescribes the
requirements for the requalification of
UN pressure receptacles. PHMSA
proposes to revise 49 CFR 180.207(d)(1)
to require that each seamless steel UN
pressure receptacle that is 12 ft or longer
with an outside diameter greater than or
equal to 18 in 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 proposes to specify
conditions for removal and examination
of the cylinder in accordance with CGA
C–23.
S. Section 180.209
Section 180.209 describes the
requalification requirements for
specification cylinders. PHMSA
proposes an editorial revision to
paragraphs (d) and (m) to reference 49
CFR 180.205(j) instead of 49 CFR
180.205(i).

a seamless UN pressure receptacle
manufactured without external threads;
and (2) not limit external rethreading to
UN pressure receptacles mounted in a
MEGC.
V. 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
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 proposes to amend several
sections of the HMR in response to 18
petitions for rulemaking received from
the regulated community.
B. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

T. 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 is proposing to add 49 CFR
180.212(a)(4) to allow derating the
service pressure of DOT 3-series
seamless steel tubes. PHMSA also
proposes to revise 49 CFR 180.212(b)(2)
to: (1) allow, as a repair, the external
threading of a DOT 3-series cylinder or

Background
Executive Order 12866 (‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’) 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
recommends that agencies 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

13641

(‘‘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. Also,
they should quantify (to the extent
practicable) the benefits, costs, and any
significant distributional impacts,
including any environmental impacts.
PHMSA is responding to 18 petitions
that have been submitted by the public
in accordance with the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(e)) and
PHMSA’s rulemaking procedure
regulations (49 CFR 106.95 and
106.100). Overall, this proposed 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
preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis
(PRIA), 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 $15.18 million over a
perpetual time horizon and $1.22
million annualized at a 7 percent
discount rate. These estimates do not
include non-monetized and qualitative
cost/cost savings discussed in the PRIA.
PHMSA’s cost savings analysis relies
on the monetization of impacts for
seven petitions included in this
rulemaking. All 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.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF COST/COST SAVINGS OF PETITIONS FOR REGULATORY REFORM
All figures in $ USD. ‘‘X’’ indicates insignificant cost/savings

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

Petition No.

P–1718
P–1727
P–1729
P–1731
P–1732
P–1734
P–1736

Rule provision

............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................

Total ($USD) ............................................

Significant
costs

One-time cost
savings

Significant
benefits

Annual cost
savings

173.4b ...................
180.205 .................
171.7 .....................
171.7(r)(2) .............
178.503(a)(6) ........
172.514(c)(4) ........
171.7(r)(1) .............

X
500
115,239
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
129,480
X
X
X
X

162,000
28,000
X
6,120
150,000
770
876,000

.............................................

115,739

X

129,480

1,222,890

49
49
49
49
49
49
49

CFR
CFR
CFR
CFR
CFR
CFR
CFR

Net Present Value of Total Net Savings (One-Time Benefits—One-Time Costs + Future Annualized Net Benefit at 7 percent Discount).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

15,188,633

13642

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

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
that they provide relief from
unnecessary requirements or provide
additional flexibility without
compromising safety.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

Conclusion
This NPRM is not considered a
significant regulatory action within the
meaning of Executive Order 12866 (E.O.
12866) and DOT policies and
procedures. (See DOT Order 2100.6A.41)
The economic effects of this regulatory
action would not have an effect on the
economy that exceeds the $100 million
annual threshold defined by E.O. 12866,
and that the regulatory action is not
otherwise significant. PHMSA estimates
a present value of quantified net cost
savings of approximately $15.18 million
over a perpetual time horizon and $1.22
million annualized at a 7 percent
discount rate. Please see the PRIA 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’’) and the
presidential memorandum
(‘‘Preemption’’) published in the
Federal Register on May 22, 2009 (74
FR 24693). Executive Order 13132
requires agencies to assure meaningful
and timely input by state and local
officials in the development of
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 propose any regulation that has
substantial direct effects on the states,
the relationship between the National
Government and the states, or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, the
consultation and funding requirements
of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
Federal Hazmat Law contains a
general preemption provision (49 U.S.C.
5125(a)) in the event compliance with a
state, local, or Indian tribe requirement
41 DOT Order 2100.6A ‘‘Rulemaking and
Guidance Procedures’’ (June 7, 2021) at: https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2021-06/
DOT-2100.6A-Rulemaking-and-Guidance%28003%29.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

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
Indian 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 proposed 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
proposed rule would provide cost
savings and regulatory flexibility to the
regulated community without
compromising safety. This rulemaking
proposes to address 18 petitions for
rulemaking submitted by the regulated
community. PHMSA invites those with
an interest in the issues presented to
comment on the effect that the adoption
of specific proposals may have on state
or local governments.
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’’).
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 Indian tribes.
PHMSA has determined that this
rulemaking does not have substantial
tribal implications. Therefore, the
funding and consultation requirements
of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.
However, we invite Indian tribal
governments to provide comments on
the costs and effects that this NPRM

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

could potentially have on tribal
communities.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive
Order 13272, and DOT Procedures and
Policies
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Flexibility Fairness Act of
1996, requires Federal regulatory
agencies to prepare an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) for any
NPRM subject to notice-and-comment
rulemaking under the Administrative
Procedure Act, unless the agency head
certifies that the rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The small entities that could be
impacted by this proposal include all
small entities engaged in the shipment
of hazardous materials. PHMSA expects
this proposed 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 regulatory change
contained in this rulemaking using
available information and certifies that
none of the proposed changes will have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small businesses.
PHMSA is proposing some new
requirements in this NPRM but does not
expect these requirements to have a
significant impact.
These new requirements include:
1. P–1714—The proposal adds a new
packaging restriction for CNG and
methane in seamless steel pressure
receptacles. While this is a new
requirement under the HMR, CGA
stated in its petition that market
participants already follow the proposed
practices for UN/ISO cylinders.
PHMSA, whose subject matter experts
participate in the CGA membership
meetings and conferences, has spoken
with CGA members and corroborated
this assertation; therefore, it does not
anticipate that the proposed changes
will have an impact on small
businesses.
2. P–1727—This petition incorporates
by reference CGA C–20 (2014),
‘‘Requalification Standard for Metallic,
DOT and TC 3-Series Gas Cylinders and
Tubes Using Ultrasonic Examination,
Second Edition.’’ As part of the IBR of
this new document, cylinder
requalifiers must stamp the cylinder
‘‘CONDEMNED’’ and affix a readily
visible label on the cylinder stating:
‘‘UN REJECTED, RETURNING TO
ORIGIN FOR PROPER DISPOSITION.’’

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

However, PHMSA asserts there will be
an overall positive impact on small
business for three reasons. Firstly, most
large and small affected entities are
members of the CGA, allowing them free
access to updated CGA reference
materials. Secondly, substantially all
affected entities already possess
cylinder stamping equipment required
to implement this regulation and
stamping itself takes very little time.
Thirdly, small businesses are expected
to benefit from this change because
small businesses are currently
disproportionately burdened by the
various special permit requirements that
this stamping substitutes for. The time
to stamp the cylinders is minimal, and
overall, there will be positive impact on
small businesses due to no longer
needing to apply for a special permit.
3. Phaseout of HFCs—This
rulemaking harmonizes with the EPA
phaseout of the use of non-refillable
cylinders for the transportation of
GHGs. While this revision does impose
a cost to industry, this cost has already
been accounted for in the EPA final
rule. Therefore, the proposed revisions
in this NPRM do not impose any
additional new cost on industry.
The remainder of the proposals in this
NPRM are expected to result in cost
savings/streamline regulatory
requirements without impacting safety.
As such, PHMSA’s assessment of nonsignificant impact on small businesses
can be found under the costs and
benefits sections found within the PRIA.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
This NPRM 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.
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 specifically requests
comments on the information collection
and recordkeeping burdens associated
with developing, implementing, and
maintaining these requirements for
approval under this NPRM. Address

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

written comments to the Dockets Unit as
identified in the ADDRESSES section of
this NPRM. PHMSA must receive
comments regarding information
collection burdens prior to the close of
the comment period identified in the
DATES section of this NPRM.
Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, no person is required to respond to
a collection of information unless such
collection displays a valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number.
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 PRIA, available
for review in the docket, this proposed
rulemaking 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 PRIA 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 proposed 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
conduct an environmental review
considering (1) the need for the action,
(2) alternatives to the action, (3)
probable environmental impacts of the
action and alternatives, and (4) the
agencies and persons consulted during
the consideration process. DOT Order

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13643

5610.1C (‘‘Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts’’) establishes
departmental procedures for evaluation
of environmental impacts under NEPA
and its implementing regulations.
1. Purpose and Need
In response to petitions for
rulemaking submitted by the regulated
community, PHMSA proposes to amend
the HMR to update, clarify, or
streamline various regulatory
requirements. Specifically, PHMSA
proposes amendments that 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
proposed changes were identified in
response to petitions from stakeholders
affected by the HMR. These proposed
changes would 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.

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13644

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

2. Alternatives
In proposing this rulemaking, PHMSA
is considering the following
alternatives:
No Action Alternative: If PHMSA
were to select the No Action
Alternative, current regulations would
remain in place and no provisions
would be amended or added.
Proposed Action Alternative: This
alternative is the current proposal as it
appears in this NPRM, applying to
transport of hazardous materials by
various transport modes (highway, rail,
vessel and aircraft). The proposed
amendments included in this alternative
are more fully discussed in the
preamble and regulatory text sections of
this NPRM.
3. Analysis of Environmental Impacts
No Action Alternative
If PHMSA were to select the No
Action Alternative, current regulations
would remain in place and no new
provisions would be added. However,
efficiencies gained through 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
proposed environmental and safety
requirements in the NPRM under the
‘‘No Action Alternative’’ would result in
a lost opportunity for reducing negative
environmental and safety-related
impacts. Greenhouse gas emissions
would remain the same under the No
Action Alternative. However, PHMSA
expects that the No Action Alternative
could have a modest negative impact on
GHG emissions. PHMSA expects 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 resulting in fewer releases of
materials into the environment.
Therefore, by choosing the No Action
Alternative, a potential reduction in
GHG emissions would not be achieved.
Proposed 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 proposed
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
proposed regulations. The regulatory
changes proposed 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 ‘‘Proposed Action Alternative’’
encompasses enhanced and clarified
regulatory requirements, which would
result in increased compliance and
fewer negative environmental and safety
impacts. This environmental assessment
incorporates the safety analyses in the
preamble sections of this NPRM. The
table and list below summarize the
possible environmental benefits,
greenhouse gas emissions, and any
potential negative impacts for the
amendments proposed in the NPRM.

SUMMARY OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY AMENDMENTS
Proposed amendment(s) to HMR
(lettered as above herein)

Type of amendment(s)

Probable environmental
impact(s) anticipated

P–1714—Transportation of Compressed Natural Gas/Methane in UN
Pressure Receptacles.
2. P–1716—Threading and repair of
seamless DOT 3-series specification
cylinders and seamless UN pressure receptacles.
3. P–1717/P–1725—Clarification of the requirements for non-liquefied compressed gases.
4. P–1718—De minimus quantities of poisonous materials.
5. P–1736—Clarification of the marking requirements for button cell lithium batteries contained in equipment.
6. P–1727—IBR of CGA C–20 (2014) ......
7. P–1728—Gas Mixtures Containing
Components Defined as Liquefied
Gases.
8. P–1729—Incorporation by reference of
CGA C–23 (2018).
9. P–1731—IBR of IME’s Safety Library
Publication 23 (SLP–23).
10. P–1732—Revision of testing and
marking of UN specification packagings.
11. P–1734—Authorizing smaller-sized
combustible placard on IBCs.
12. P–1736—IBR of IME Safety Library
Publication 22 (SLP–22).

Regulatory Flexibility ................

Minimal positive impacts ..........

Minimal positive impacts.

Regulatory Flexibility ................

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Regulatory Flexibility ................

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Regulatory Flexibility—Harmonization.
Regulatory Flexibility ................

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Standard Incorporation .............
Regulatory Flexibility ................

No impacts ................................
No impacts ................................

No impacts.
No impacts.

Standard Incorporation .............

Minimal positive impacts ..........

No impacts.

Standard Incorporation .............

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Regulatory Flexibility ................

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Regulatory Flexibility ................

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Standard Incorporation .............

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

1.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Greenhouse gas emissions

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

13645

SUMMARY OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY AMENDMENTS—Continued
Proposed amendment(s) to HMR
(lettered as above herein)

Type of amendment(s)

Probable environmental
impact(s) anticipated

13. P–1738—Definition of a Liquid ............

Regulatory Flexibility—Harmonization.
Standard Incorporation .............

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

No impacts ................................

No impacts.

Standard Incorporation .............
Standard Incorporation .............
Standard Incorporation .............

No impacts ................................
Minimal positive impacts ..........
No impacts ................................

No impacts.
No impacts.
No impacts.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

14. P–1744—Incorporate by reference updated Appendix A to CGA C–7 (2020).
15. P–1746—IBR of CGA C–27 (2019) ....
16. P–1747—IBR of CGA C–29 (2019) ....
17. P–1748—IBR of CGA V–9 (2019) .......

1. P–1714—PHMSA proposes
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 proposed rule,
PHMSA expects that proposed
packaging restrictions should result in
fewer failures of these packages
resulting in fewer releases of materials
into the environment. Additionally,
because this proposed revision involves
the transportation of GHGs, PHMSA
expects that this proposed revision may
have a minimal effect on the reduction
of GHGs emissions.
2. P–1716—PHMSA proposes 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 proposal provides
regulatory flexibility while maintaining
safety. As discussed in Sections III and
IV of this proposed rule, PHMSA has
determined that this is an improvement
over the previous method of using
setscrews to secure the tubes, which
resulted in indentations being carved
into the tube necks as the tube jostled
during transport. Because this proposal
should lower the risk of an incident,
since this package is expected to
increase safety, the proposal may result
in positive environmental impacts due
less risk of an accident in
transportation. Similarly, PHMSA does
not expect this revision to result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
3. P–1717/P–1725—PHMSA proposes
to amend 49 CFR 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. As discussed in
Sections III and IV of this proposed 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

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

nitrogen in certain cylinders filled to
more than 10 percent of their marked
service pressures. Therefore, PHMSA
does not expect this proposal to have
any impacts on the environment.
Similarly, PHMSA does not expect any
effects on GHG emissions.
4. P–1718—PHMSA proposes to
amend 49 CFR 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 proposed rule,
because the proposed revision would
authorize an existing exception for de
minimis quantities of additional
materials with appropriate safeguards,
PHMSA does not expect any significant
environmental impacts. Similarly,
PHMSA does not expect any effects on
GHG emissions.
5. P–1726—PHMSA proposes to
revise 49 CFR 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
proposed rule, because this is not a new
requirement and simply clarifies the
current requirements in the HMR,
PHMSA does not expect any
environmental impacts. Similarly,
PHMSA does not expect this revision to
result in any change in GHG emissions.
6. P–1727—PHMSA proposes to IBR
CGA C–20 (2014), ‘‘Requalification
Standard for Metallic, DOT and TC 3Series 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 proposed
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.

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Greenhouse gas emissions

PHMSA already allows for the
ultrasonic examination of certain
cylinders (see 49 CFR 180.212 for
example). Additionally, 49 CFR
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. PHMSA does not
expect the incorporation by reference of
CGC C–20 to have any environmental
impacts. Similarly, PHMSA does not
expect this revision to result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
7. P–1728—PHMSA proposes to
authorize an alternative description of
gas mixtures containing components
defined as liquefied gases. This proposal
helps clarify confusion among
stakeholders when the content of a
cylinder is described as a liquefied
compressed gas that resembles a nonliquefied compressed gas. As discussed
in Sections III and IV of this proposed
rule, PHMSA has determined that the
proposed change is safety neutral or
slightly improves safety and will
provide regulatory flexibility to the
regulated community without a
reduction in safety. For these reasons,
PHMSA does not expect this proposal to
have any environmental impacts.
Similarly, PHMSA does not expect this
revision to result in any increase to GHG
emissions.
8. P–1729—PHMSA proposes to IBR
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 49
CFR 171.7. As discussed in Sections III
and IV of this proposed rule, CGA C–23
provides an inspection standard that
PHMSA expects will reduce the
likelihood of a release from a DOT/TC
3 series cylinders. Thus, PHMSA
expects this proposal to have a minimal
positive environmental impact. PHMSA
does not expect this revision to result in
any increase to GHG emissions.
9. P–1731—PHMSA proposes to IBR
an updated version of IME SLP–23
(2021) titled, ‘‘Recommendations for the
Transportation of Explosives, Division
1.5; Ammonium Nitrate Emulsions,

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

13646

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

Division 5.1; and Combustible Liquids
in Bulk Packaging.’’ As discussed in
Sections III and IV of this proposed 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 proposals, PHMSA determined
these packages were adequate for the
safe transportation of Ammonium
Nitrate Emulsions. Thus, PHMSA does
not expect this proposal to have any
environmental impacts. Similarly,
PHMSA does not expect this revision to
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
10. P–1732—PHMSA proposes to
amend 49 CFR 178.503(a)(6) by allowing
the last two digits of the year of
certification to be marked on a type 4
packagings, rather than the last two
digits of the year of manufacture. As
discussed in Sections III and IV of this
proposed rule, PHMSA has determined
that the only effect of the proposed
revision is that package manufacturers
would not need to update printing
plates annually. Instead, they would
only need to update plates biennially,
resulting in a small reduction in
regulatory burden. PHMSA expects that
this proposal will provide regulatory
flexibility to the regulated community
without a reduction in safety. For these
reasons, PHMSA does not expect this
proposal to have any environmental
impacts. Similarly, PHMSA does not
expect this revision to result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
11. P–1734—PHMSA proposes to
revise 49 CFR 172.514(c) by
incorporating the provisions in DOT
SP–16295, which would add an option
for smaller placards for IBCs carrying
combustible liquids. As discussed in
Sections III and IV of this proposed rule,
this proposal does not change the safety
requirements for the transportation or
filling of an IBC. PHMSA expects that
this proposal will provide regulatory
flexibility to the regulated community
without a reduction in safety. For these
reasons, PHMSA does not expect this
proposal to have any environmental
impacts. Similarly, PHMSA does not
expect this revision to result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
12. P–1736—IME proposes that
PHMSA IBR 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 proposed rule, PHMSA
conducted a technical review and
examined each of these revisions

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

included in SLP–22 (2019) and asserts
that these changes will either maintain
or enhance safety requirements.
Additionally, PHMSA expects that this
proposal will provide regulatory
flexibility to the regulated community
without a reduction in safety. The
proposal may result in minor positive
environmental impacts due to less
packaging failures due to an increase in
safety. Similarly, PHMSA does not
expect this revision to result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
13. P–1738—PHMSA proposes
modifying the definition of liquids in 49
CFR 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 proposed rule, PHMSA
asserts that the proposed 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
proposal 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
expect this proposal to have any
environmental impacts. Similarly,
PHMSA does not expect this revision to
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
14. P–1744—PHMSA proposes to IBR
the updated Appendix A of CGA
publication C–7 (2020), ‘‘Guide to
Classification and Labeling of
Compressed Gases, Eleventh Edition,’’
into the HMR at 49 CFR 171.7(n)(8). As
discussed in Sections III and IV of this
proposed rule, this proposal updates a
previously approved version of CGA C–
7 and provides necessary technical
updates and regulatory flexibility.
PHMSA expects that this proposal will
provide regulatory flexibility to the
regulated community without any
reduction in safety. As a result, PHMSA
does not expect this proposal to have
any environmental impacts. Similarly,
PHMSA does not expect this revision to
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
15. P–1746—PHMSA proposes to IBR
CGA C–27 (2019), ‘‘Standard Procedure
to Derate the Service Pressure of DOT 3Series Seamless Steel Tubes, First
Edition.’’ As discussed in Sections III
and IV of this proposed rule, PHMSA
has determined that the proposed
method for pressure derating of tubes is
essentially the same as what is outlined
in current PHMSA guidance. PHMSA
expects that this proposal will provide
regulatory flexibility to the regulated
community without a reduction in
safety. Therefore, PHMSA does not
expect this proposal to have any
environmental impacts. Similarly,

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

PHMSA does not expect this revision to
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
16. P–1747—PHMSA proposes to IBR
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 proposed 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. PHMSA expects that this
proposal 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, PHMSA does
expect this proposal may have minimal
positive environmental impacts.
PHMSA does not expect this revision to
result in any increase to GHG emissions.
17. P–1748—PHMSA proposes to
incorporate 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 proposed rule,
this proposal updates a previously
approved version of CGA V–9 and
provides necessary technical updates
and regulatory flexibility. PHMSA
expects that this proposal will provide
regulatory flexibility to the regulated
community without a reduction in
safety. PHMSA does not expect this
proposal to have any environmental
impacts. Similarly, PHMSA does not
expect this revision to result in any
increase to GHG emissions.
4. Agencies Consulted
PHMSA has coordinated with the
Federal Aviation Administration, the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, the Federal Railroad
Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard,
and the Environmental Protection
Agency in the development of this
proposed rule. PHMSA solicits and will
consider comments by members of the
public, state and local governments,
tribal communities, industry, and any
other interested stakeholders regarding
the NPRM’s potential impacts on the
human environment.
5. Proposed Finding of No Significant
Impact
PHMSA expects the adoption of the
‘‘Proposed Action Alternative’’ will
maintain the HMR’s current high level

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

of safety for shipments of hazardous
materials transported by highway, rail,
aircraft, and vessel, and as such finds
the HMR amendments in the NPRM
would have no significant impact on the
human environment. PHMSA expects
that the ‘‘Proposed Action Alternative’’
will avoid any 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 would not result in a significant
impact to the human environment.
PHMSA welcomes any views, data, or
information related to environmental
impacts that may result from NPRM’s
proposed requirements, the No Action
Alternative, and other viable
alternatives and their environmental
impacts.
I. Environmental Justice
DOT Order 5610.2C (‘‘Department of
Transportation Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’) and Executive Orders
12898 (‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’),42 13985 (‘‘Advancing
Racial Equity and Support for
Underserved Communities Through the
Federal Government’’),43 13990
(‘‘Protecting Public Health and the
Environment and Restoring Science to
Tackle the Climate Crisis’’),44 and 14008
(‘‘Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home
and Abroad’’) 45 require DOT agencies to
achieve environmental justice as part of
their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects,
including interrelated social and
economic effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations, low-income populations,
and other underserved and
disadvantaged communities.
PHMSA has evaluated this proposed
rule under the above Executive orders
and DOT Order 5610.2C. PHMSA does
not expect the proposed rule, if
finalized, to cause disproportionately
high and adverse human health and
environmental effects on minority, lowincome, underserved, and other
disadvantaged populations and
communities. The rulemaking is facially
neutral and national in scope; it is
42 59

FR 7629 (Feb. 11, 1994).
FR 7009 (Jan. 20, 2021).
44 86 FR 7037 (Jan. 20, 2021).
45 86 FR 7619 (Feb. 1, 2021).
43 86

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

neither directed toward a particular
population, region, or community, nor
is it expected to adversely impact any
particular population, region, or
community. And because PHMSA
expects the rulemaking would not
adversely affect the safe transportation
of hazardous materials generally,
PHMSA does not expect the proposed
revisions would entail
disproportionately high adverse risks for
minority populations, low-income
populations, or other underserved and
other disadvantaged communities.
PHMSA submits that the proposed
rulemaking could, in fact, reduce risks
to minority populations, low-income
populations, or other underserved and
other disadvantaged communities.
Because the proposed 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 proposed
rule could 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
expects that its proposed 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.
PHMSA solicits comment from
minority, low-income, underserved, and
other disadvantaged populations and
communities on potential impacts of the
proposed rulemaking.

13647

and international regulatory approaches
are unnecessary or may impair the
ability of American business to export
and compete internationally. (See 77 FR
26413 (May 4, 2012)) In meeting shared
challenges involving health, safety,
labor, security, environmental, and
other issues, international regulatory
cooperation can identify approaches
that are at least as protective as those
that are or would be adopted in the
absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can
also reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. This proposed rule does
not negatively impact international
trade.

J. 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.

L. Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’) [66 FR 28355;
May 22, 2001] requires Federal agencies
to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects
for any ‘‘significant energy action.’’
Under the executive order, a
‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as
any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that
promulgates, or is expected to lead to
the promulgation of, a final rule or
regulation (including a notice of
inquiry, advanced notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM), and NPRM) that:
(1)(i) is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 or any
successor order, and (ii) is likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy; or
(2) is designated by the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy
action.
This rulemaking has not been
designated as a significant regulatory
action and has not been designated by
OIRA as a significant energy action. In
addition, PHMSA does not anticipate
that this rulemaking would result in a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore,
PHMSA has not prepared an energy
impact statement. PHMSA welcomes
any data or information related to
energy impacts that may result from this
NPRM, as well as possible alternatives
and their energy impacts. Please
describe the impacts and the basis for
the comment.

K. Executive Order 13609 and
International Trade Analysis
Under Executive Order 13609,
‘‘Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation,’’ agencies must consider
whether the impacts associated with
significant variations between domestic

M. 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

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13648

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

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.
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.

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.

Hazardous materials transportation,
Incorporation by reference, Motor
vehicle safety, Packaging and
containers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 180

§ 171.7

Hazardous materials transportation,
Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety,
Packaging and containers, Railroad
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing,
PHMSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
chapter I as follows:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

4. In § 171.7:
a. Revise paragraphs (n) and (r)(1) and
(2);
■ b. In paragraph (dd)(4), remove the
text ‘‘§ 171.23’’ and add, in its place, the
text ‘‘§§ 171.8; 171.23’’; and
■ c. Add paragraph (dd)(5).
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
■
■

49 CFR Part 178

Reference material.

*

PART 107—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
PROGRAM PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 107
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701;
Pub. L. 101–410 Section 4; Pub. L. 104–121
Sections 212–213; Pub. L. 104–134 Section
31001; Pub. L. 114–74 Section 701 (28 U.S.C.
2461 note); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97; 33 U.S.C.
1321.

Jkt 259001

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.
*
*
*
*
*

■

Hazardous materials transportation,
Incorporation by reference, Training,
Packaging and containers, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

§ 107.117

PART 171—GENERAL INFORMATION,
REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS

49 CFR Part 173

VerDate Sep<11>2014

2. In § 107.117, revise paragraph (a) to
read as follows:

■

*
*
*
*
(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, Methods for
Pressure Testing Compressed Gas
Cylinders, Eleventh edition, copyright
2016; into §§ 178.36; 178.37; 178.38;
178.39; 178.42; 178.44; 178.45; 178.46;
178.47; 178.50; 178.51; 178.53; 178.55;
178.56; 178.57; 178.58; 178.59; 178.60;
178.61; 178.65; 178.68; 180.205;
180.209.
(2) CGA C–3—2005 (Reaffirmed
2011), Standards for Welding on ThinWalled Steel Cylinders, Seventh edition,
copyright 2005; into §§ 178.47; 178.50;
178.51; 178.53; 178.55; 178.56; 178.57;

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

178.58; 178.59; 178.60; 178.61; 178.65;
178.68; 180.211.
(3) CGA C–5, Cylinder Service Life—
Seamless Steel High Pressure Cylinders,
1991 (Reaffirmed 1995); into § 173.302a.
(4) CGA C–6—2013, Standards for
Visual Inspection of Steel Compressed
Gas Cylinders, Eleventh edition,
copyright 2013; into §§ 172.102; 173.3;
173.198; 180.205; 180.209; 180.211;
180.411; 180.519.
(5) CGA C–6.1—2013, Standards for
Visual Inspection of High Pressure
Aluminum Compressed Gas Cylinders,
Sixth edition, copyright 2013 (corrected
4/14/2015); into §§ 180.205; 180.209.
(6) CGA C–6.2, Guidelines for Visual
Inspection and Requalification of Fiber
Reinforced High Pressure Cylinders,
Third edition, 1996; into § 180.205.
(7) CGA C–6.3—2013, Standard for
Visual Inspection of Low Pressure
Aluminum Alloy Compressed Gas
Cylinders, Third edition, copyright
2013; into §§ 180.205; 180.209.
(8) CGA C–7 (2020), Guide to
Classification and Labeling of
Compressed Gases; Eleventh Edition;
into § 172.400a.
(9) CGA C–8, Standard for
Requalification of DOT–3HT Cylinder
Design, 1985; into §§ 180.205; 180.209.
(10) CGA C–11—2013, Practices for
Inspection of Compressed Gas Cylinders
at Time of Manufacture, Fifth edition,
copyright 2013; into § 178.35.
(11) CGA C–12, Qualification
Procedure for Acetylene Cylinder
Design, 1994; into §§ 173.301; 173.303;
178.59; 178.60.
(12) CGA C–13, Guidelines for
Periodic Visual Inspection and
Requalification of Acetylene Cylinders,
Fourth edition, 2000; into §§ 173.303;
180.205; 180.209.
(13) CGA C–14—2005 (Reaffirmed
2010), Procedures for Fire Testing of
DOT Cylinder Pressure Relief Device
Systems, Fourth edition, copyright
2005; into §§ 173.301; 173.323.
(14) CGA C–20 (2014), Requalification
Standard for Metallic, DOT and TC 3series Gas Cylinders and Tubes Using
Ultrasonic Examination (Second
Edition); into § 180.205.
(15) CGA C–23 (2018), Standard for
Inspection of DOT/TC 3 Series and ISO
11120, Tube Neck Mounting Surfaces
(Second Edition); into §§ 180.205;
180.207.
(16) CGA C–27 (2019), Standard
Procedure to Derate the Service Pressure
of DOT Series Seamless Steel Tubes
(First Edition); into § 180.212.
(17) CGA C–29 (2019), Standard for
Design Requirements for Tube Trailers
and Tube Modules (First Edition); into
§ 173.301.
(18) CGA G–1.6—2011, Standard for
Mobile Acetylene Trailer Systems,

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13649

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

Seventh edition, copyright 2011; into
§ 173.301.
(19) CGA G–2.2, Guideline Method for
Determining Minimum of 0.2% Water in
Anhydrous Ammonia, Second edition,
1985 (Reaffirmed 1997); into § 173.315.
(20) CGA G–4.1, Cleaning Equipment
for Oxygen Service, 1985; into
§ 178.338–15.
(21) CGA P–20, Standard for the
Classification of Toxic Gas Mixtures,
Third edition, 2003; into § 173.115.
(22) CGA S–1.1—2011, Pressure Relief
Device Standards—Part 1—Cylinders for
Compressed Gases; Fourteenth edition,
copyright 2011; into §§ 173.301;
173.304a; 178.75.
(23) CGA S–1.2, Safety Relief Device
Standards Part 2—Cargo and Portable
Tanks for Compressed Gases, 1980; into
§§ 173.315; 173.318; 178.276; 178.277.
(24) CGA S–7—2013, Standard for
Selecting Pressure Relief Devices for
Compressed Gas Mixtures in Cylinders,
Fifth edition, copyright 2013; into
§ 173.301.
(25) CGA Technical Bulletin TB–2,
Guidelines for Inspection and Repair of
MC–330 and MC–331 Cargo Tanks,
1980; into §§ 180.407; 180.413.
(26) CGA Technical Bulletin TB–25
(CGA TB–25), Design Considerations for
Tube Trailers, 2008 Edition; into
§ 173.301.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

(27) CGA V–9 (2019), Compressed Gas
Association Standard for Compressed
Cylinder Valves, Eighth Edition; into
§ 173.301.
*
*
*
*
*
(r) * * *
(1) IME Standard 22, IME Safety
Library Publication No. 22,
Recommendations for the Safe
Transportation of Detonators in a
Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive
Materials, June 2019; into §§ 173.63;
177.835.
(2) IME Standard 23, IME Safety
Library Publication No. 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, into §§ 172.102;
173.66; 173.251; 177.835.
*
*
*
*
*
(dd) * * *
(5) Recommendations on Test Series
8: Applicability of Test Series 8(d), June
2019; into § 172.102.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 171.8, revise the definition of
‘‘Liquid’’ to read as follows:
§ 171.8

Definitions and abbreviations.

*

*
*
*
*
Liquid means a material, other than an
elevated temperature material, with a

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

melting point or initial melting point of
20 °C (68 °F) or lower at a standard
pressure of 101.3 kPa (14.7 psia). A
viscous material for which a specific
melting point cannot be determined
must be subjected to the procedures
specified in ASTM D 4359 (IBR, see
§ 171.7) or to the test for determining
fluidity (penetrometer test) prescribed
in section 2.3.4. of Annex A of the
Agreement Concerning the International
Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road
(ADR) (IBR, see § 171.7).
*
*
*
*
*
PART 172—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS,
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY
RESPONSE INFORMATION, TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS, AND SECURITY
PLANS
6. The authority citation for part 172
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49
CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97.

7. In § 172.101, the Hazardous
Materials Table is amended by revising
the entries under ‘‘[REVISE]’’ to read as
follows:

■

§ 172.101 Purpose and use of hazardous
materials table.

*

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

*

*

03MRP3

*

*

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

G ............

(2)

(1)

Jkt 259001

PO 00000

E

*
or

Frm 00028

*

*
Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s .....................

Explosive, blasting, type
Agent blasting, Type E.

*
Ammonium nitrate emulsion or
Ammonium nitrate suspension
or Ammonium nitrate gel, intermediate for blasting explosives.

[REVISE]

Hazardous materials descriptions
and proper shipping names

Symbols

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

5.1

5.1

1.5D

(3)

Hazard
class or
division

*

*
UN3139

*
UN0332

*
UN3375

(4)

Identification Nos.

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

5.1 ............

III ..............

*

5.1 ............
5.1 ............

1.5D ..........

5.1 ............

(6)

Label
codes

*
I ................
II ...............

*
...................

*
II ...............

(5)

PG

*

*
62, 127, A2
62, 127,
148, A2,
IB2,
TP48.
62, 127,
148, A2,
IB2.

*
105, 106,
148,
TP48.

*
147, 148,
163, IB2,
IP16,
TP48.

(7)

Special
provisions
(§ 172.102)

*

152 ...........

*
None .........
152 ...........

*
None .........

*
None .........

(8A)

Exceptions

203 ...........

201 ...........
202 ...........

62 .............

231 ...........

(8B)

Non-bulk

Bulk

*

241 ...........

*
243 ...........
242 ...........

*
None .........

*
251 ...........

(8C)

*

2.5 L .........

*
Forbidden
1 L ............

*
Forbidden

*
Forbidden

(9A)

Passenger
aircraft/rail

30 L ..........

2.5 L .........
5 L ............

Forbidden

Forbidden

(9B)

Cargo aircraft only

(9)
Quantity limitations
(see §§ 173.27 and
175.75)

(8)
Packaging
(§ 173.***)

§ 172.101—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE
(10)

B ...............

D ...............
B ...............

03 .............

D ...............

(10A)

Location

56, 58, 138

56, 58, 138
56, 58, 138

25, 19E

25, 59, 60,
66, 124

(10B)

Other

Vessel stowage

13650
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
*

*
*
*
*
8. In § 172.102:
■ a. In paragraph (c)(1), revise special
provision 148; and
■ b. In paragraph (c)(8)(ii), add special
provision TP48 in numerical order.
The revision and addition read as
follows:

PART 173—SHIPPERS—GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS
AND PACKAGINGS

■

10. The authority citation for part 173
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49
CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97.

11. In § 173.4b, revise the introductory
text to paragraph (a) to read as follows:

■

§ 172.102

Special provisions.

*

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
148 For domestic transportation, this
entry directs to § 173.66 of this
subchapter for:
a. The standards for transporting a
single bulk hazardous material for
blasting by cargo tank motor vehicles
(CTMV); and
b. The standards for CTMVs capable
of transporting multiple hazardous
materials for blasting in bulk and nonbulk packagings (i.e., a multipurpose
bulk truck). Note: ‘‘UN3375,
Ammonium nitrate emulsion’’ and
‘‘UN0332, Explosive, blasting, type E or
Agent blasting, Type E’’ are subject to
the United Nations (UN) Test Series 8(d)
(IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter),
otherwise known as the Vented Pipe
Test (VPT).
*
*
*
*
*
(8) * * *
(ii) * * *
TP48 The use of IM 101 and 102
portable tanks when transported in
accordance with IME Standard 23 (IBR,
see § 171.7 of this subchapter).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. In § 172.514, revise paragraph (c)(4)
to reads as follows:
§ 172.514

Bulk packagings.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

*

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) For an intermediate bulk container
(IBC) labeled in accordance with
subpart E of this part, the IBC may
display the proper shipping name and
UN identification number markings in
accordance with § 172.301(a)(1) in place
of the UN number on an orange panel,
placard, or white square-on-point
configuration as prescribed in
§ 172.336(d). Additionally, IBCs
containing a combustible liquid may be
placarded with a combustible placard
that meets the label specifications for
size in § 172.407(c). However, a
transport vehicle containing IBCs with a
reduced-size combustible placard is still
required to conform to the placarding
requirements in this subpart, including
the size requirements in § 172.519(c);
and
*
*
*
*
*

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

§ 173.4b

De minimis exceptions.

(a) When packaged in accordance
with this section, the following
materials do not meet the definition of
a hazardous material in § 171.8 of this
subchapter and therefore, are not subject
to the requirements of this subchapter:
Packing Group II and III materials of
hazard Class 3, Division 4.1, Division
4.2, Division 4.3, Division 5.1, Class 8,
and Class 9; and materials of hazard
Division 6.1 (no inhalation hazard).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. In § 173.115, revise the
introductory text to paragraph (e) to
read as follows:
§ 173.115 Class 2, Divisions 2.1, 2.2, and
2.3—Definitions.

*

*
*
*
*
(e) Liquefied compressed gas. A gas,
which when packaged under pressure
for transportation is partially liquid at
temperatures above ¥50 °C (¥58 °F), is
considered to be a liquefied compressed
gas. Gas mixtures with component(s)
that are liquefied gases may be
described using the hazardous materials
description of a compressed gas in the
49 CFR 172.101 Hazardous Materials
Table when the partial pressure(s) of the
liquefied gas component(s) in the
mixture are reduced so that the mixture
is entirely in the gas phase at 20°C
(68°F). A liquefied compressed gas is
further categorized as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. In § 173.185, revise the
introductory text to paragraph (c)(3) to
read as follows:
§ 173.185

Lithium cells and batteries.

*

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(3) Hazard communication. 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 batteries
contained in equipment.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 14. In § 173.251, add paragraph (a)(3)
to read as follows:

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13651

§ 173.251 Bulk packaging for ammonium
nitrate emulsion, suspension, or gel.

*

*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(3) This section does not apply to
‘‘UN3375, Ammonium Nitrate
Emulsion’’ when transported in IM 101
or 102 portable tanks in accordance
with IME Standard 23 (IBR, see § 171.7
of this subchapter).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. In § 173.301, revise paragraph
(i)(2) to read as follows:
§ 173.301 General requirements for
shipment of compressed gases and other
hazardous materials in cylinders, UN
pressure receptacles and spherical
pressure vessels.

*

*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(2) Seamless DOT specification
cylinders longer than 2 m (6.5 ft) are
authorized for transportation only when
horizontally mounted on a motor
vehicle or in an ISO framework or other
framework of equivalent structural
integrity in accordance with CGA C–29
(IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter).
Seamless DOT specification cylinders
longer than 2 m (6.5 ft) manufactured
prior to May 11, 2009, may continue to
use CGA TB–25. The pressure relief
device must be arranged to discharge
unobstructed to the open air. In
addition, for Division 2.1 (flammable
gas) material, the pressure relief devices
must be arranged to discharge upward
to prevent any escaping gas from
contacting personnel or any adjacent
cylinders.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 16. In § 173.302a:
■ a. Remove the semicolons at the ends
of paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) and add
periods in their places;
■ b. Revise paragraphs (c)(3) and (4);
and
■ c. Add paragraphs (c)(5) through (7).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 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

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13652

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

normalized. Use of normalized chrome
moly steel cylinders is not permitted.
(6) Cylinders must be equipped with
pressure relief devices sized and
selected as to type, location, and
quantity, and tested in accordance with
§ 173.301(f).
(7) A plus sign (+) is added following
the test date marking on the cylinder.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 17. In § 173.302b, add paragraph (f) to
read as follows:
§ 173.302b Additional requirements for
shipment of non-liquefied (permanent)
compressed gases in UN pressure
receptacles.

*
*
*
*
(f) Methane, compressed, or natural
gas, compressed, UN1971. Methane,
compressed, or natural gas, compressed
is authorized in a UN seamless steel
pressure receptacle under the following
conditions:
(1) For methane, and for natural gas
with a methane content of 98.0 percent
or greater—
(i) The maximum tensile strength of
the UN seamless steel pressure
receptacle may not exceed 1100 MPa
(159,542 psi); and
(ii) The contents are commercially
free of corroding components.
(2) For natural gas with a methane
content of less than 98.0 percent—
(i) The maximum tensile strength of
the UN seamless steel pressure
receptacle may not exceed 950 MPa
(137,750 psi);
(ii) Each discharge end of a UN
refillable seamless steel tube must be
equipped with an internal drain tube;
and
(iii) The moisture content and
concentration of the corroding
components must conform to the
requirements in § 173.301b(a)(2).
■ 18. In § 173.304, revise paragraph (d)
to read as follows:

pressure inside the container may not
exceed 210 psig at 55 °C (131 °F). Each
completed metal container filled for
shipment must be heated until its
contents reach a minimum temperature
of 55 °C (131 °F) without evidence of
leakage, distortion, or other defect. Each
outer package must be plainly marked
‘‘INSIDE CONTAINERS COMPLY WITH
PRESCRIBED SPECIFICATIONS’’.
(2) The following hydrofluorocarbons
are prohibited from being filled or
transported in non-refillable cylinders
pursuant to the phaseout conditions
identified in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)
through (iii) of this section:

*

§ 173.304 Filling of cylinders with liquefied
compressed gases.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

*

*
*
*
*
(d) Refrigerant and dispersant gases.
(1) Nontoxic and nonflammable
refrigerant or dispersant gases must be
offered for transportation in cylinders
prescribed in § 173.304a, or in DOT 2P,
2Q, or 2Q1 containers (§§ 178.33,
178.33a, and 178.33d-2 of this
subchapter). DOT 2P, 2Q, and 2Q1
containers must be packed in strong
outer packagings designed to protect
valves from damage or accidental
functioning under conditions incident
to transportation. For DOT 2P and 2Q
containers, the pressure inside the
containers may not exceed 87 psia at
21.1 °C (70 °F). For 2Q1 containers, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (d)(2)
INTRODUCTORY TEXT
Chemical name
CHF2CHF2 ...............
CH2FCF3 ..................
CH2FCHF2 ...............
CHF2CH2CF3 ...........
CF3CH2CF2CH3 ......
CF3CHFCF3 .............
CH2FCF2CF3 ...........
CHF2CHFCF3 ...........
CF3CH2CF3 .............
CH2FCF2CHF2 .........
CF3CHFCHFCF2CF3
CH2F2 .......................
CHF2CF3 ..................
CH3CF3 ....................
CH3F .........................
CH2FCH2F ...............
CH3CHF2 ..................
CHF3 .........................

Common name
HFC–134.
HFC–134a
HFC–143.
HFC–245fa
HFC–365mfc.
HFC–227ea.
HFC–236cb.
HFC–236ea.
HFC–236fa.
HFC–245ca.
HFC–43–10mee.
HFC–32.
HFC–125.
HFC–143a.
HFC–41.
HFC–152.
HFC–152a.
HFC–23.

(i) As of January 1, 2025, no person
may:
(A) Import a non-refillable cylinder
filled with a material identified in table
1 to paragraph (d)(2) introductory text of
this section; or
(B) Fill a non-refillable cylinder with
a material identified in table 1 to
paragraph (d)(2) introductory text of this
section.
(ii) As of January 1, 2027, no person
may offer for transportation or transport
a material identified in table 1 to
paragraph (d)(2) introductory text of this
section in a non-refillable cylinder.
(iii) A container with two pounds or
less of net material listed in table 1 to
paragraph (d)(2) introductory text of this
section that has a self-sealing valve that
meets the requirements in 40 CFR
82.154(c)(2) is not subject to this
prohibition.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 178—SPECIFICATIONS FOR
PACKAGINGS
19. The authority citation for part 178
continues to read as follows:

■

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.97.

20. In § 178.503, revise paragraph
(a)(6) to read as follows:

■

§ 178.503

Marking of packagings.

(a) * * *
(6) The last two digits of the year of
manufacture. Packagings of types 1H
and 3H shall also be marked with the
month of manufacture in any
appropriate manner; this may be marked
on the packaging in a different place
from the remainder of the markings. For
boxes, the last two digits may
alternatively be the year of certification;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 21. In § 178.601:
■ a. Redesignate paragraphs (g)(6)
through (8) as paragraphs (g)(7) through
(9);
■ b. Add new paragraph (g)(6); and
■ c. Revise newly-redesignated
paragraph (g)(8).
The addition and revision read
follows:
§ 178.601

General requirements.

*

*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(6) Selective testing of combination
packagings for small arms ammunition.
Variation 6. Variations in inner and
intermediate packagings are permitted
in packages for articles containing solid
hazardous materials without further
testing of the package under the
following conditions:
(i) The package has been tested
containing only the articles to be
transported without intermediate
containment;
(ii) The outer packaging must have
passed the stacking test set forth in
§ 178.606 when empty, i.e., without
cushioning or inner or intermediate
packagings with the test mass of
identical packages being the mass of the
package filled with the articles;
(iii) Only articles tested without
intermediate containment may be
transported; however, a variety of
articles tested in this fashion may be
assembled in a package with
intermediate containment;
(iv) No articles demonstrate a loss of
material in testing; and
(v) The completed package does not
exceed the marked maximum gross
mass of the package.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Approval of selective testing. In
addition to the provisions of paragraphs
(g)(1) through (7) of this section, the
Associate Administrator may approve
the selective testing of packagings that
differ only in minor respects from a
tested type.
*
*
*
*
*

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules
PART 180—CONTINUING
QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE
OF PACKAGINGS
22. 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.

23. In § 180.205:
a. Add paragraph (c)(5);
b. Remove the word ‘‘or’’ at the end
of paragraph (d)(4);
■ c. Redesignate paragraph (d)(5) as
paragraph (d)(6) and add new paragraph
(d)(5);
■ d. Revise paragraphs (e)(2) and (f);
■ e. Redesignate paragraphs (h) through
(j) as paragraphs (i) through (k) and add
new paragraph (h); and
■ f. Revise newly-redesignated
paragraphs (i)(1) and (j)(2)(i)(C).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
■
■

§ 180.205 General requirements for
requalification of specification cylinders.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

*

*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) Each 3-series specification
cylinder that is horizontally mounted on
a motor vehicle or in a framework and
that is: 12 feet or longer; has an outside
diameter greater than or equal to 18
inches; and is supported by the neck
mounting surface during transportation
in commerce must be inspected at the
time of requalification in accordance
with CGA C–23 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this
subchapter). If the due date of the tube
neck mounting surface inspection
required by CGA C–23 does not align
with the periodic requalification due
date of the specification cylinder, an
additional two years shall be allowed
after the 10-year requalification due date
to complete the neck inspection. After
the expiration of the time period,
including the two-year grace period,
specification cylinders subject to the
CGA C–23 inspection shall not be
charged or filled but may be transported
for the purposes of draining, purging,
and performing required inspections.
(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

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

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 CGA Pamphlets (all IBR, see
§ 171.7 of this subchapter): C–6 for steel
and nickel cylinders; C–6.1 for seamless
aluminum cylinders; C–6.2 for fiber
reinforced composite special permit
cylinders; C–6.3 for low pressure
aluminum cylinders; C–8 for DOT 3HT
cylinders; and 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.
(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 pamphlet.
(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. Retapping of
cylinder threads is not permitted, except
by the original manufacturer, as
provided in § 180.212.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Ultrasonic examination (UE).
Requalification of cylinders and tubes
using UE must be performed in
accordance with CGA C–20 (IBR, see
§ 171.7 of this subchapter).
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs
(i)(3) and (4) of this section, a cylinder
that is rejected may not be marked as

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

13653

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.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 24. In § 180.207, revise paragraph
(d)(1) to read as follows:
§ 180.207 Requirements for requalification
of UN pressure receptacles.

*

*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) Seamless steel. (i) Each seamless
steel UN pressure receptacle, including
pressure receptacles exceeding 150 L
capacity installed in multiple-element
gas containers (MEGCs) or in other
service, must be requalified in
accordance with ISO 6406:2005(E) (IBR,
see § 171.7 of this subchapter).
However, UN cylinders with a tensile
strength greater than or equal to 950
MPa must be requalified by ultrasonic
examination in accordance with ISO
6406:2005(E). For seamless steel
cylinders and tubes, the internal
inspection and hydraulic pressure test
may be replaced by a procedure
conforming to ISO 16148:2016(E) (IBR,
see § 171.7 of this subchapter).
(ii) Each seamless steel UN pressure
receptacle that is horizontally mounted
on a motor vehicle or in a framework
and that: is 12 feet or longer; has an
outside diameter greater than or equal to
18 inches; and is supported by a neck
mounting surface during transportation
must be inspected at the time of
requalification in accordance with CGA
C–23 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this
subchapter). Notwithstanding the
periodic inspection, if the seamless steel
UN pressure receptacle shows visible
corrosion, as outlined in Section 4.2 of
CGA C–23, around the neck or under
the flange/sleeve, then it must be
removed and examined in accordance
with Section 6 of CGA C–23 prior to
returning to service.
*
*
*
*
*

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3

13654

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 42 / Friday, March 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules

25. In § 180.209:
a. Revise paragraph (d) and the
introductory text to paragraph (m); and
■ b. Designate the table immediately
following the introductory text to
paragraph (m) as table 4 to paragraph
(m).
The revisions read as follows:
■
■

§ 180.209 Requirements for requalification
of specification cylinders.

*
*
*
*
(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 C–6.1 (IBR, see § 171.7
of this subchapter). The cylinder may be
proof pressure tested. The test is
successful if the cylinder, when
examined under test pressure, does not
display a defect described in
§ 180.205(j)(1)(ii) or (iii). Upon
successful completion of the test and
inspection, the cylinder must be marked
in accordance with § 180.213.
*
*
*
*
*
(m) DOT–3AL cylinders manufactured
of 6351–T6 aluminum alloy. In addition
to the periodic requalification and
marking described in § 180.205, each
cylinder manufactured of aluminum
alloy 6351–T6 used in self-contained

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS3

*

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:28 Mar 02, 2023

Jkt 259001

underwater breathing apparatus
(SCUBA), self-contained breathing
apparatus (SCBA), or oxygen service
must be requalified and inspected for
sustained load cracking in accordance
with the non-destructive examination
method described in the following table.
Each cylinder with sustained load
cracking that has expanded into the
neck threads must be condemned in
accordance with § 180.205(j). This
paragraph (m) does not apply to
cylinders used for carbon dioxide, fire
extinguisher, or other industrial gas
service.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 26. In § 180.212, add paragraph (a)(4)
and revise paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 180.212 Repair of seamless DOT 3-series
specification cylinders and seamless UN
pressure receptacles.

(a) * * *
(4) Derating service pressure of DOT
3-series seamless steel tubes. DOT 3series seamless steel tubes with an
outside diameter greater than 95⁄8 in
(244.5 mm) may be processed by a
repair facility for derating the marked
service pressure in accordance with
CGA C–27 (IBR, see § 171.7 of this
subchapter).
(b) * * *
(2) External rethreading of a DOT
3AX, 3AAX, or 3T specification
cylinder or a UN pressure receptacle,
and external threading of a seamless
DOT 3AX, 3AAX, or 3T specification

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 9990

cylinder or seamless UN pressure
receptacle originally manufactured
without external threads; or the internal
rethreading of a DOT–3 series cylinder
or a seamless UN pressure receptacle
when performed by a cylinder
manufacturer of these types of
cylinders. The repair work must be
performed under the supervision of an
independent inspection agency. Upon
completion of the rethreading or postmanufacture threading, the threads must
be gauged in accordance with Federal
Standard H–28 or an equivalent
standard containing the same
specification limits. The rethreaded
cylinder or UN pressure receptacle must
be stamped clearly and legibly with the
words ‘‘RETHREAD’’ and a postmanufacture threaded cylinder or UN
pressure receptacle must be stamped
clearly and legibly with the words
‘‘POST–THREAD’’, on the shoulder, top
head, or neck. No DOT specification
cylinder or UN pressure receptacle may
be rethreaded more than one time
without approval of the Associate
Administrator.
Signed in Washington, DC, on February 14,
2023, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.97(b).
William S. Schoonover,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023–03366 Filed 3–2–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

E:\FR\FM\03MRP3.SGM

03MRP3