[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31551-31562]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12832]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, 178, and 180

[Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0140 (HM-234)]
RIN 2137-AE80


Hazardous Materials; Miscellaneous Amendments Pertaining to DOT 
Specification Cylinders (RRR)

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), 
DOT.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 
(PHMSA) is considering amendments to the Hazardous Materials 
Regulations (HMR) to revise certain requirements applicable to the 
manufacture, use, and requalification of DOT specification cylinders. 
PHMSA is taking this action in response to petitions for rulemaking 
submitted by the regulated community and a review of the regulations 
applicable to compressed gas cylinders. PHMSA is not proposing specific 
amendments to the HMR; rather, we are seeking comment on the issues 
discussed in the ANPRM. While this ANPRM focuses on specific petitions 
for rulemaking and special permits, we will accept comments on the HMR 
applicable to compressed gas cylinders. These comments will be combined 
with a retrospective review of existing requirements aimed to modify, 
streamline, expand, or repeal existing rules that are outmoded, 
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 27, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number 
PHMSA-2011-0140 (HM-234) by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System; US Department of 
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing 
Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: To the Docket Management System; Room W12-
140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue 
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number for this ANPRM at the beginning of the comment. To avoid 
duplication, please use only one of these four methods. All comments 
received will be posted without change to the Federal Docket Management 
System (FDMS), including any personal information.
    Docket: For access to the dockets to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or DOT's Docket 
Operations Office (see ADDRESSES).
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any 
written communications and comments received into any of our dockets by 
the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the 
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor 
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in 
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or you 
may visit http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Leary or Robert Benedict, 
Standards and Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, at (202) 366-8553.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Summary Review of Amendments Considered
IV. Regulatory Review and Notices
    A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This ANPRM
    B. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563 and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
    C. Executive Order 13132
    D. Executive Order 13175
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272
    F. Paperwork Reduction Act
    G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
    H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    I. Environmental Assessment
    J. Privacy Act
    K. International Trade Analysis

I. Executive Summary

    PHMSA is considering amendments that would revise and clarify the 
HMR (49 CFR parts 171-180) applicable to cylinder manufacture, 
maintenance, and use. This action responds to ten petitions for 
rulemaking submitted by the regulated community and seeks comment on 
incorporating the provisions of three special permits. These amendments 
would update and expand the use of currently authorized industry 
consensus standards, revise the construction, marking and testing 
requirements of DOT-4 series cylinders, clarify the filling 
requirements for cylinders, discuss the handling of cylinders used in 
fire suppression systems, and revise the requalification and 
condemnation requirements for cylinders. PHMSA will review comments on 
the amendments described in this ANPRM for their potential economic and 
safety implications and will use these comments to craft more specific 
proposals in any potential future rulemaking. PHMSA requests that 
commenters note the applicable petition when submitting comments.

II. Background

    PHMSA requests public comment on various petitions for rulemaking 
submitted in accordance with Sec.  106.95 and DOT special permits PHMSA 
has issued applicable to the manufacture, use, and requalification of 
cylinders. PHMSA is publishing this ANPRM to obtain the views of those 
who are likely to be affected by the changes discussed, including those 
who are likely to benefit from and those who are potentially subject to 
additional regulation if PHMSA were to adopt the petitions. This ANPRM 
is intended to provide the

[[Page 31552]]

greatest opportunity for public participation in the development of 
regulatory amendments, and promote greater exchange of information and 
perspectives among the various stakeholders. This additional step will 
lead to more focused and well-developed proposals that reflect the 
views of all regulated entities.
    Access to Compressed Gas Association publications discussed in this 
ANPRM are available for public review at: www.cganet.com. Access to the 
petitions and background documents referenced in this ANPRM can be 
found at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0140 
(HM-234) or at DOT's Docket Operations Office (see ADDRESSES).

III. Summary Review of Amendments Considered

A. Petitions for Rulemaking

    Federal hazardous material transportation law (Federal hazmat law), 
49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to 
regulate the manufacture and continuing qualification of packagings 
used to transport hazardous materials in commerce, or packagings 
certified under Federal hazmat law for the transportation of hazardous 
materials in commerce. The HMR contain requirements for the 
manufacture, use, and requalification of cylinders subject to Federal 
hazmat law, including defining materials and methods of construction, 
the frequency and manner of inspection and testing, standards for 
cylinder rejection and condemnation, cylinder marking and 
recordkeeping, authorizations for packaging hazardous materials in 
cylinders, filling, loading, unloading, and carriage in transportation.
    In accordance with 49 CFR 106.95, a person may petition PHMSA to 
add, amend or delete a regulation by filing a petition for rulemaking 
with all the information required in Sec.  106.100. In this ANPRM, 
PHMSA seeks comment on ten petitions for rulemaking submitted by the 
compressed gas industry, including cylinder manufacturers, cylinder 
requalifiers, hazardous materials trainers, shippers, and carriers of 
compressed gases. These petitions are included in the docket for this 
proceeding. The following table provides a brief summary of the 
petitions addressed in this ANPRM and affected sections:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Party submitting
   Petition            petition                      Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-1499........  The Compressed Gas      Requests PHMSA incorporate by
                 Association (CGA).      reference CGA C-6 Standards for
                                         Visual Inspection of Steel
                                         Compressed Gas Cylinders 2007,
                                         10th edition, in place of the
                                         7th edition (Sec.  Sec.
                                         173.3, 173.198, 180.205,
                                         180.209, 180.211, 180.411, and
                                         180.519).
P-1501........  The Compressed Gas      Requests modifications to the
                 Association.            manufacturing and testing
                                         specifications for series 4
                                         cylinders in Sec.  Sec.
                                         178.50, 178.51, 178.61, and
                                         178.68.
P-1515........  Certified Training Co.  Proposes numerous revisions to
                 (CTC).                  the requirements for the
                                         requalification of DOT
                                         specification cylinders in Sec.
                                          Sec.   180.203-180.215.
P-1521........  The Compressed Gas      Proposes to revise Sec.
                 Association.            172.400a to allow the use of
                                         the labels described in CGA C-7-
                                         2004 Appendix A on cylinders
                                         that are overpacked.
P-1540........  The Compressed Gas      Proposes to require
                 Association.            manufacturers to mark newly-
                                         constructed DOT 4B, DOT 4BA,
                                         DOT 4BW and DOT 4E
                                         specification cylinders with
                                         the mass weight (MW) or tare
                                         weight (TW), and water capacity
                                         (WC) (Sec.   178.35).
P-1546........  GSI Training Services,  Requests a revision to the HMR
                 Inc.                    to allow cylinders used in
                                         fixed fire suppression systems
                                         to utilize the exceptions in
                                         Sec.   173.309(a) for fire
                                         extinguishers.
P-1560........  Air Products and        Requests increased maximum
                 Chemicals, Inc.         permitted filling densities for
                                         specification cylinders
                                         containing carbon dioxide and
                                         nitrous oxide (Sec.
                                         173.304a).
P-1563........  3M Inc................  Proposes to allow materials
                                         packaged in accordance with
                                         Sec.   173.301(a)(9) to be
                                         marked with the OVERPACK
                                         marking.
P-1572........  Barlen and Associates,  Requests clarification of the
                 Inc.                    requirements for the filling
                                         density \a\ for liquefied
                                         compressed gases contained in
                                         multiple element gas containers
                                         (MEGCs) and manifolded
                                         cylinders (Sec.  Sec.
                                         173.301(g) and 173.312).
P-1580........  HMT Associates Inc....  Proposes to resolve a
                                         discrepancy between the HMR and
                                         CGA S-1.1 regarding the
                                         pressure relief device
                                         tolerances for DOT 39 cylinders
                                         transported by aircraft (Sec.
                                         Sec.   173.301(f)(2) and
                                         173.304(f)(2)).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

P-1499
    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in lieu of 
government-unique standards except where inconsistent with law or 
otherwise impractical. Public Law 104-113, 110 Stat. 775 (codified in 
15 U.S.C.); 15 U.S.C. 272. The HMR incorporate a variety of standards 
by reference in Sec.  171.7, including numerous standards relevant to 
cylinder construction, maintenance, and use. With regard to the visual 
inspection of steel cylinders, PHMSA incorporates by reference the 7th 
edition of the Compressed Gas Association's (CGA) publication C-6 
Standards for Visual Inspection of Steel Compressed Gas Cylinders 1993. 
This CGA publication serves as a guide to cylinder requalifiers and 
users for establishing cylinder inspection procedures and standards. 
Inspection procedures include preparation of cylinders for inspection, 
exterior inspection, interior inspection if required, nature and extent 
of damage to be looked for, and tests that indicate the conditions of 
the cylinder. The 7th edition of this standard is currently referenced 
in Sec. Sec.  173.3, 173.198, 180.205, 180.209, 180.211, 180.411, and 
180.519.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \a\ Filling density means ``the percent ratio of the weight of 
gas in a packaging to the weight of water that the container will 
hold at 16 [deg]C (60[emsp14][deg]F). (1 lb of water = 27.737 in\3\ 
at 60 [deg]F.).'' 49 CFR 173.304a, Note 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CGA represents all facets of the compressed gas industry, 
including manufacturers, distributors, suppliers, and transporters of 
gases, cryogenic liquids, and related products. The CGA submitted 
petition P-1499 requesting that PHMSA replace the currently-
incorporated 7th edition of publication C-6 Standards for Visual 
Inspection of Steel Compressed Gas Cylinders with the revised 10th 
edition and update the appropriate references throughout the HMR. The 
10th edition provides enhanced guidance for cylinder requalifiers 
including guidance on the inspection of multiple-element gas

[[Page 31553]]

containers (MEGCs), requirements for thread inspection for cylinders 
used in corrosive gas service and clarifies maximum allowable depths 
and measuring techniques for various types of corrosion. PHMSA 
identified approximately 5,000 companies that would be subject to this 
standard. The majority of these companies are classified as small 
businesses using SBA size standards (<500 employees). This revision 
would impose a one-time cost of between $78 and $142 per document 
depending on the document format (electronic or hard copy) and if the 
purchaser is a member of the CGA.
    This publication is available to view on the CGA Web site at: 
www.cganet.com. PHMSA requests comments from affected entities, 
particularly small entities, on the impacts, both positive and 
negative, that would result from incorporation of this revised 
standard. PHMSA is interested in technical differences between the 7th 
and 10th editions of CGA publication C-6 Standards for Visual 
Inspection of Steel Compressed Gas Cylinders including, but not limited 
to, the specific revisions that increase safety and cost implications 
associated with the adoption of the new standard.
P-1501
    The authorized materials, manufacturing methods and testing 
requirements for DOT 4B, 4BA, 4BW, and 4E cylinders (DOT-4 series 
cylinders) are specified in Sec. Sec.  178.50, 178.51, 178.61, and 
178.68. Specifically, these sections describe material types permitted 
to be used in construction, size specifications, cylinder wall 
thickness and required tests.
    The CGA submitted petition P-1501 requesting that PHMSA revise the 
manufacturing requirements for DOT 4B, 4BA, 4BW, and 4E cylinders. 
According to the petition, the current DOT-4 series welded cylinder 
manufacturing requirements are unclear in some respects and result in 
interpretation by the manufacturers and enforcement personnel. A 
summary of the changes proposed by P-1501 are outlined below:
     Revise Sec. Sec.  178.50(b), 178.51(b), 178.61(b), and 
178.68(b) to ensure material compositions and the heat treatment are 
within the specified tolerances and of uniform quality as follows:
    [cir] Require a record of intentionally-added alloying elements, 
and
    [cir] Require materials manufactured outside of the United States 
to have a ladle analysis confirmed by a check analysis.
     Revise the pressure tests in Sec. Sec.  178.50(i), 
178.51(i), 178.61(i), and 178.68(h) to permit use of the volumetric 
expansion test, a hydrostatic proof pressure test or a pneumatic proof 
pressure test.
     Revise the physical and flattening tests \b\ and retest 
criteria in Sec. Sec.  178.50, 178.51, 178.61, and 178.68 for 
consistency. These revisions would clarify the location on the cylinder 
from which the test specimens are removed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \b\ The physical and flattening tests are destructive tests 
conducted on samples of welded cylinders. The samples are subjected 
to loading until they fail. The failed pieces are then compared to 
known certain pass/fail criteria to determine the quality of the 
weld or tube.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Revise Sec. Sec.  178.50(n), 178.51(n), and 178.61(o) to 
permit marking on the footring for cylinders with water capacities up 
to thirty pounds, rather than twenty-five pounds.
     Add requirements for the location of markings on DOT 4E 
cylinders in Sec.  178.68.
    The CGA states in its petition that the proposed changes do not 
present a significant economic impact to any single manufacturer or 
user, but will also enhance regulatory clarity, promote consistent 
manufacturing practices, and create greater uniformity between the 
specifications for DOT-4 series cylinders and the requirements for 
welded cylinders found in International Organization for 
Standardization (ISO) standard 4706-1, Gas cylinders-Refillable welded 
steel cylinders--Part 1: Test pressure 60 bar and below that are 
referenced in the United Nations Model Regulations.
    PHMSA identified six U.S. based manufacturers of these cylinders. 
PHMSA requests comments on the economic and safety implications of all 
the proposed changes in P-1501. PHMSA seeks comment on the potential 
burden (time and/or cost) for compliance with the information 
collection activities associated with the requirement to keep a record 
of intentionally-added alloying elements and to perform a ladle 
analysis confirmed by a check analysis for materials manufactured 
outside of the United States. In addition to the cost of keeping the 
records, PHMSA seeks comment on the cost to implement and conduct the 
ladle and check analyses, pressure test, and physical/flattening test.
    PHMSA seeks comment on CGA's proposed changes to pressure tests in 
Sec. Sec.  178.50(i), 178.51(i), 178.61(i), and 178.68(h). 
Specifically, we seek comment on safety precautions that should be 
taken to protect personnel when a pneumatic pressure test is authorized 
\c\ and any additional considerations associated with revised testing 
requirements. PHMSA seeks information on whether the expansion of foot 
ring marking permissions will tangibly reduce costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \c\ Pneumatic pressure tests present a greater hazard than 
hydraulic pressure tests. In the event of test failure, a container 
filled with a gas will release a greater amount of stored energy. 
Additional precautions must be taken to ensure the safety of the 
test operator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

P-1515
    The requirements for the requalification of DOT specification 
cylinders found in Part 180 Subpart C outline the specific procedures 
for the requalification and maintenance of cylinders. These 
requirements include definitions for terms used in the subpart, 
references to CGA publications for the visual inspection of cylinders, 
specific requirements for hydrostatically testing cylinders including 
methods to ensure the accuracy of test equipment.
    PHMSA received petition P-1515 from Certified Training Company 
(CTC) proposing numerous revisions to the requirements for the 
requalification of DOT specification cylinders found in Part 180 
Subpart C. The petitioner states that the requalification requirements 
in the HMR create confusion for requalifiers and enforcement officials. 
PHMSA requests comments on the need to revise these requirements and 
two possible methods of resolving the confusion with regard to the 
requalification requirements for specification cylinders. The first, as 
suggested by CTC in P-1515, would modify the specific HMR provisions in 
Sec.  180.203 through Sec.  180.215 for requalification of cylinders. 
The second would incorporate by reference CGA C-1 Methods for Pressure 
Testing Compressed Gas Cylinders, 10th edition (2009) into Sec.  
180.205. CGA C-1 Methods for Pressure Testing Compressed Gas Cylinders, 
10th edition (2009) contains most of the provisions and additions 
specified in P-1515 including revisions to definitions in Sec.  
180.203, appropriate procedures for conducting the hydraulic pressure 
tests, and marking and record keeping requirements.
    CTC, in P-1515, requests that PHMSA revise the HMR as follows:
     Add the following terms and definitions to Sec.  180.203:
    [cir] ``Accuracy'' means the conformance of a particular reading to 
a known standard. Accuracy is expressed as the percentage of error of a 
reading from a true value.
    [cir] ``Accuracy grade'' means the inherent quality of the device. 
It expresses the maximum error allowed

[[Page 31554]]

for the device at any reading. Accuracy grade is expressed as a 
percentage of the full scale of the device.
    [cir] ``Actual test pressure'' means the pressure applied to a 
cylinder during requalification.
    [cir] ``Calibrated cylinder'' means a cylinder that has certified 
calibration points of pressure with corresponding expansion values. It 
is a secondary, derived standard used for the verification and 
demonstration of test system accuracy and integrity.
    [cir] ``Master gauge'' means a pressure indicating device that is 
used as a calibration standard, and has an inherent accuracy grade 
equal to or better than the requirement for the pressure indicating 
device in the test apparatus.
    [cir] ``Over-pressurized'' means a condition in which the internal 
pressure applied to a cylinder has reached or exceeded the yield point 
of the cylinder.
    [cir] ``Percent permanent expansion'' means the ratio of permanent 
expansion to total expansion, expressed as a percentage. The 
calculation for percent permanent expansion is permanent expansion 
divided by total expansion times 100.
    [cir] ``Reference gauge'' means the pressure indicating device that 
is used in the daily verification of a proof test system, and has an 
inherent accuracy equal to or better than the requirement for the 
device to be checked.
    [cir] ``Service pressure'' means the rated service pressure marked 
on the cylinder. The petitioner added this definition to differentiate 
the marked service pressure from the actual full pressure.
     Modify the definitions for the following terms used in 
Sec.  180.203:
    [cir] ``Commercially free of corroding components'' to also specify 
a moisture content less than 55 ppm.
    [cir] ``Defect'' to mean an imperfection requiring a cylinder to be 
rejected.
    [cir] ``Test pressure'' to state the minimum prescribed test 
pressure. This revision was suggested to differentiate test pressure 
from actual test pressure.
     Modify the requirements in Sec.  180.205(f) (visual 
inspection) to permit the shot blasting \d\ of cylinders to remove 
surface corrosion, but prohibit grinding, sanding or any other method 
that may reduce cylinder wall thickness unless conducted by an 
authorized facility in accordance with Sec.  180.212.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \d\ Shot blasting aluminum cylinders may result in adverse 
effect on the cylinder's sidewall properties (e.g. aging and heat 
treatment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Modify the requirements in Sec.  180.205(g) (pressure 
test) to:
    [cir] Clarify the pressure test procedure by:
    [ssquf] Adding a requirement to isolate the cylinder undergoing the 
hydrostatic test from other sources of pressure that may influence the 
test results.
    [ssquf] Separate requirements in Sec.  180.205(g)(2) for pressure 
indicating devices (i.e. gauges) from expansion indicating devices 
(i.e. burettes, digital systems) and require periodic verification of 
these devices to confirm their accuracy.
    [cir] Require a calibrated cylinder's markings to be checked and 
confirmed every five years.
    [cir] Permit up to three repeat tests in the event of equipment 
malfunction and add a requirement to perform a system check at 90% of 
test pressure before repeating the pressure test.
    [cir] Add a provision that would permit a cylinder that was over-
pressurized (filled to a pressure greater than 10% of the test 
pressure) to continue in compressed gas service provided the cylinder's 
permanent expansion does not exceed \1/2\ of the normally-allowed 
limit.
    [cir] Permit cylinders that fail requalification to undergo repair 
and then attempt requalification a second time.
     Combine the condemnation requirements for DOT (found in 
Sec.  180.205(i)) and UN cylinders (found in the applicable ISO 
Standard) under one uniform standard.
     Modify the requirements in Sec.  180.209(b) (DOT 3A or 3AA 
cylinders) to revise the eligibility criteria for the use of the five-
pointed star under Sec.  180.209(b), which permits DOT 3A and DOT 3AA 
cylinders to be requalified every ten years instead of every five 
years. The current eligibility criteria for the use of the five-pointed 
star include that, (1) The cylinder was manufactured after December 31, 
1945; (2) The cylinder is used exclusively for air; argon; 
cyclopropane; ethylene; helium; hydrogen; krypton; neon; nitrogen; 
nitrous oxide; oxygen; sulfur hexafluoride; xenon; chlorinated 
hydrocarbons, fluorinated hydrocarbons, liquefied hydrocarbons, and 
mixtures thereof that are commercially free from corroding components; 
permitted mixtures of these gases; and permitted mixtures of these 
gases with up to 30 percent by volume of carbon dioxide, provided the 
gas has a dew point at or below minus (52[emsp14][deg]F) at 1 
atmosphere; (3) Before each refill, the cylinder is removed from any 
cluster, bank, group, rack or vehicle and passes the hammer test 
specified in CGA Publication C-6; (4) The cylinder is dried immediately 
after hydrostatic testing to remove all traces of water; and (5) Each 
cylinder is stamped with a five-pointed star at least one-fourth of an 
inch high immediately following the test date. The petitioner's 
revisions to the eligibility criteria for the use of the five-pointed 
star include:
    [cir] Remove the restriction that cylinders must be made after 
December 31, 1945 in order to be requalified every ten years;
    [cir] Remove the hammer test, as some question the utility of such 
a test;
    [cir] Add a requirement that the cylinder must have not more than 
5% permanent expansion;
    [cir] Add a requirement that cylinders must not exceed the elastic 
expansion rejection limit (REE); and
    [cir] Add self-contained breathing apparatus to the list of 
prohibited uses, as underwater breathing is already prohibited.
     Require requalification markings to begin immediately to 
the right of the manufacturer's markings and subsequent markings to 
proceed in columns downward to the bottom of the shoulder area. 
Additional markings would proceed in a similar column format.
     Allow domestic requalifiers to stamp cylinders that do not 
conform to a DOT specification, special permit or authorized UN 
standard (i.e. foreign cylinders) with a requalifier identification 
number (RIN).
     Specify in Sec.  180.209(e) \e\ that cylinders used to 
transport reclaimed refrigerant gases must be requalified every five 
years using the volumetric expansion method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \e\ This paragraph permits an increase in the interval between 
retest for cylinders used exclusively for certain non-corrosive 
gases and gas mixtures that are commercially free from corroding 
components. Many of these are refrigerant gases. Refrigerant gases 
recovered from machines and processes may contain water or other 
contaminants that could corrode the cylinder and compromise its 
integrity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Modify Sec.  180.212 to permit grinding of DOT 3-series 
cylinders, provided the remaining wall thickness is measured by 
ultrasonic examination.
    PHMSA is also considering incorporating into the HMR by reference, 
CGA C-1 Methods for Pressure Testing Compressed Gas Cylinders, 10th 
edition (2009), and referring to this standard in the cylinder 
requalification requirements specified in Sec.  180.209. This 
publication provides extensive detail and instruction necessary to 
properly conduct the hydrostatic tests required by the HMR.\f\

[[Page 31555]]

PHMSA requests comment from the regulated community whether the 
requirements for the requalification of DOT specification cylinders 
found in Part 180 Subpart C need revision and if so, what specific 
provisions need further clarity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \f\ On April 12, 2007 PHMSA published a NPRM under docket number 
PHMSA-2006-25910 (HM-218E; 72 FR 18446) entitled ``Cargo Tank Motor 
Vehicle and Cylinder Issues; Petitions for Rulemakings.'' As part of 
this rulemaking PHMSA proposed the incorporation of the 2004 edition 
of CGA publication C-1 Methods for Hydrostatic Testing of Compressed 
Gas Cylinders, 8th edition (2004) in response to a petition from CGA 
(P-1485). In HM-218E, the 2004 edition of CGA C-1 was not adopted 
based partially on comments raised by CTC that cited concerns about 
the accuracy of certain provisions in the 8th edition of CGA C-1, 
including test equipment accuracy, calibrated cylinder design 
requirements, and certain omissions. On July 17, 2009, CGA published 
the revised CGA Pamphlet C-1, Methods for Pressure Testing 
Compressed Gas Cylinders, 10th edition. The 10th edition of CGA C-1 
addresses the issues raised by CTC in the HM-218E NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA identified 980 entities that conduct hydrostatic retesting. 
Incorporation of CGA C-1 would impose a one-time cost of between $102 
and $186 per document depending on the document format (electronic or 
hard copy) and if the purchaser is a member of the CGA. PHMSA requests 
data on the impact of incorporating CGA C-1 Methods for Pressure 
Testing Compressed Gas Cylinders, 10th edition (2009), the various 
changes proposed by CTC, and the relative benefits and drawbacks of the 
two options as a means of clarifying and enhancing the current 
requirements for requalification of DOT specification cylinders. With 
regard to CTC's petition, PHMSA requests information about the safety 
implications, benefits, and costs of each bulleted item listed. We are 
particularly interested in comments regarding the safety implications 
of the various practices to remove surface corrosion from cylinders and 
whether PHMSA should regulate such practices. PHMSA is also interested 
in comments regarding the safety implications of requiring DOT 
cylinders used to transport reclaimed refrigerant gases to be 
requalified every five years and modifying the conditions for use of 
the five-pointed star. Beyond the purchase costs of CGA C-1 Methods for 
Pressure Testing Compressed Gas Cylinders, 10th edition (2009), PHMSA 
is interested in data on the impacts that would be encountered with 
incorporating CGA C-1 by reference. This publication is available to 
view on the CGA Web site at: www.cganet.com.
    PHMSA requests comments on how these changes would potentially 
impact small entities. Finally, PHMSA seeks information on potential 
benefits of certain aspects of P-1515 including what benefits, if any, 
would be realized from permitting second requalification after failure, 
changing the five-year and ten-year requalification requirements, 
permitting the continued use of over-pressurized cylinders and allowing 
foreign cylinders to be stamped with a RIN.
P-1521
    For many years the HMR have permitted the use of a neckring 
marking, under certain conditions, in accordance with the CGA 
publication C-7, Guide to Preparation of Precautionary Labeling and 
Marking of Compressed Gas Containers, Appendix A, 8th Edition (2004) 
under Sec.  172.400a. This neckring marking identifies the contents of 
a cylinder by displaying the proper shipping name, the UN 
identification number and the hazard class/division diamond within a 
single marking. Section 172.400a permits the use of this marking in 
lieu of the 100 mm x 100 mm square-on-point labels on a Dewar flask 
meeting the requirements in Sec.  173.320 and cylinders containing 
Division 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 materials that are not overpacked. This 
requirement is intended to provide flexibility in hazard communication 
for cylinders, especially small cylinders.
    The CGA petitioned PHMSA (P-1521) to modify the provision in Sec.  
172.400a(a)(1)(i) to remove the limitation that would only allow the 
use of the neckring markings if the cylinders are not overpacked. The 
petition would still require the overpack to display the 100 mm x 100 
mm square-on-point labels in accordance with 49 CFR Part 172, Subpart 
E.
    The marking prescribed in Appendix A to CGA publication C-7, Guide 
to Preparation of Precautionary Labeling and Marking of Compressed Gas 
Containers, Appendix A, 8th Edition (2004) provides useful information 
in a clear and consistent manner and its widespread use on cylinders 
for many years has enhanced its recognition. CGA's proposed change 
would provide greater flexibility for shipments of overpacked cylinders 
while ensuring adequate hazard communication. If cylinders are 
contained in an overpack, the overpack must display the appropriate 
markings and labels.
    According to figures obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, 
approximately 86 entities are engaged in Industrial Gas Manufacturing 
of which 74 are classed as small entities (<500 employees). Other 
potentially impacted entities include medical equipment wholesalers, 
service establishment equipment and supplies merchant wholesalers and 
other miscellaneous durable goods merchant wholesalers. While firms in 
these industries total over 20,000, PHMSA expects that only a tiny 
fraction of these firms would be affected by CGA's proposed change. 
PHMSA seeks comment on the potential implications of this change. 
Specifically, PHMSA seeks comment as to whether this change is 
necessary and what, if any, safety and economic impacts would result. 
PHMSA seeks data concerning how many shipments the proposal would 
impact. Finally, PHMSA seeks information on how the increased 
flexibility of marking would economically affect shippers.
P-1540
    As specified in Sec.  178.35(f), the HMR require DOT specification 
cylinders to be permanently marked with specific information including 
the DOT specification, the service pressure, a serial number, an 
inspector's mark, and the date manufacturing tests were completed. 
These marks provide vital information to fillers and uniquely identify 
the cylinder.
    Liquefied gases are normally filled by weight. The tare weight and 
water capacity must be known by the filler to properly fill a cylinder 
by weight. However, the HMR do not require tare weight, mass weight, or 
water capacity markings on DOT specification cylinders. This 
information is essential for cylinders filled by weight, as cylinders 
overfilled with a liquefied gas can become liquid full as the ambient 
temperature increases. If temperatures continue to rise, pressure in 
the overfilled cylinder will rise disproportionately, potentially 
leading to leakage or a violent rupture of the cylinder after only a 
small rise in temperature.
    To address this, the CGA submitted a petition (P-1540) requesting 
that PHMSA require tare weight or mass weight, and water capacity to be 
marked on newly constructed DOT 4B, 4BA, 4BW, and 4E specification 
cylinders. The petition also requests that PHMSA provide guidance on 
the accuracy of these markings and define the party responsible for 
applying the markings. In its petition, CGA notes that PHMSA 
incorporates by reference, the National Fire Protection Association's 
58-Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code (NFPA-58), which requires cylinders 
used for liquefied petroleum gases to be marked with the tare weight 
and water capacity. However, as stated in the petition, NFPA-58 gives 
no guidance as to the accuracy of these markings or who is required to 
provide the marking. The petitioner states that this lack of guidance 
can lead to overfilling cylinders that can potentially create unsafe 
conditions.
    The CGA petition states that accurate marking of cylinder tare 
weight, mass

[[Page 31556]]

weight, and water capacity at the time of manufacture is necessary for 
safe filling and transportation of these cylinders. While DOT 4B, 4BA, 
4BW, and 4E cylinders are often used to transport liquefied compressed 
gas, we note that these are not the only cylinder types used to 
transport compressed gas.
    In response to the petition, PHMSA is considering modifying Sec.  
178.35 to require all DOT specification cylinders suitable for the 
transport of liquefied gases, to be marked with the cylinder's tare 
weight and water capacity. This proposal would further align the 
marking requirements for DOT specification cylinders with the marking 
requirements for UN ISO Cylinders in Sec.  178.71. However, we stress 
that while cylinder markings are important to ensure the safe filling 
of liquefied compressed gas they do not take the place of adequate 
personnel training, procedures to ensure proper filling, and continued 
requalification and maintenance of cylinders in preventing incidents.
    PHMSA understands that many in the compressed gas industry, 
especially the liquefied petroleum gas industry, already request 
manufacturers mark cylinders with this additional information as an 
added safety measure. Based on this assumption, PHMSA estimates the 
impact on the compressed gas industry will be minimal as many in the 
industry are already voluntarily applying these markings. We request 
comment on this assertion.
    PHMSA identified six U.S. based manufacturers of the cylinders 
identified in the petition. Five of these companies are classed as 
small businesses (<500 employees). PHMSA requests comments and 
supporting data regarding the increased safety benefits and the 
economic impact of this proposal. With regard to the cost associated 
with this modification, PHMSA has the following specific questions:
     What is the average total cost per cylinder to complete 
these markings (i.e. is an estimated cost of $0.10 per character for 
new markings accurate)?
     What is the estimated quantity of newly manufactured 4B, 
4BA, 4BW and 4E cylinders each year? Furthermore, how many of these 
cylinders already display mass weight, tare weight and water capacity 
markings in compliance with the Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code or other 
codes?
     How many manufacturers of the above-mentioned cylinders 
are considered small businesses by the Small Business Administration 
(SBA)?
    PHMSA seeks to identify how often the mass weight, tare weight and 
water capacity markings are already permissively applied to cylinders 
and the costs associated with applying these marks. Finally, PHMSA is 
interested in identifying any relevant data about increased safety 
benefits associated with the additional markings and alternate methods/
safeguards against overfilling of cylinders currently being 
implemented.
P-1546
    The Hazardous Materials Table in Sec.  172.101 provides a shipping 
description for cylinders used as fire extinguishers (UN1044, fire 
extinguishers, 2.2) and references Sec.  173.309 for exceptions and 
non-bulk packaging requirements. Fire extinguishers charged with a 
limited quantity of compressed gas are excepted from labeling and the 
specification packaging requirements if the cylinder is packaged and 
offered for transportation in accordance with Sec.  173.309(a)(1) 
through Sec.  173.309(a)(3). Additionally, fire extinguishers filled in 
accordance with the requirements of Sec.  173.309 may use non-
specification cylinders (i.e. cylinders not manufactured to 
specifications in Part 178). Part 180 also provides special 
requirements for cylinders used as fire extinguishers. Specifically, 
Sec.  180.209(j) includes different requalification intervals for DOT 
specification cylinders used as fire extinguishers.
    PHMSA has written several letters of clarification regarding the 
applicability of Sec.  173.309 to fire extinguishers. Notably on March 
9, 2005, PHMSA wrote a letter to Safecraft Safety Equipment, Ref. No. 
04-0202, regarding non-specification stainless steel cylinders used as 
a component in a fire suppression system for installation in vehicles. 
In that letter, PHMSA stated that the cylinders used in the fire 
suppression system appeared to meet the requirements of Sec.  
173.309(a). PHMSA issued another letter on May 30, 2008 to Buckeye Fire 
Equipment, Ref. No. 06-0101 stating that the company could not use the 
shipping name ``Fire extinguishers'' for their cylinders that served as 
a component of a kitchen fire suppression system and must use the 
proper shipping name that best describes the material contained in the 
cylinder since these cylinders were not equipped to function as fire 
extinguishers. This latter clarification effectively required cylinders 
that are part of a fixed fire suppression system to meet an appropriate 
DOT specification.
    In response to this letter, GSI Training Services submitted a 
petition for rulemaking (P-1546) requesting PHMSA allow cylinders that 
form a component of fire suppression systems to use the proper shipping 
name ``Fire extinguishers'' when offered for transportation. This 
petitioner states that at least one company manufactured over 39,000 
non-specification cylinders for use in fire suppression systems based 
on the information provided in the March 9, 2005 letter and that the 
May 30, 2008 clarification effectively placed this company out of 
compliance. The petitioner further suggests that cylinders comprising a 
component of a fixed fire suppression system will provide an equal or 
greater level of safety than portable fire extinguishers since 
cylinders in fire suppression systems are typically installed in 
buildings where they are protected from damage and not handled on a 
regular basis.
    In response to P-1546, PHMSA is considering modifying Sec.  173.309 
to state that the requirements applicable to fire extinguishers also 
apply to cylinders used as part of a fire suppression system. The 
controls outlined in Sec.  173.309(a), including limits on the internal 
volume, the cylinder contents, the initial testing and subsequent 
retesting requirements, may provide an acceptable level of safety 
regardless of whether the cylinder is equipped for use as a fire 
extinguisher or is a component of a fixed fire suppression system.
    According to figures obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, 
approximately 568 companies are engaged in heavy tank manufacturing 
that would include pressure vessels for fire suppression systems. 
Additionally, equipment wholesalers and retailers may benefit from this 
proposal. PHMSA is concerned with the specific safety impacts 
associated with providing an exception for the transport of compressed 
gases in non-DOT specification cylinders. In other words, are the 
requirements in Sec.  173.309 appropriate for cylinders used in a fixed 
extinguishing system? PHMSA is interested in whether allowing non-
specification cylinders to utilize the fire extinguisher exception 
would result in a cost saving and if so how much? Finally, PHMSA is 
interested in other safety standards that apply to fire suppression 
systems and how those standards would influence transport safety.
P-1560
    Additional requirements for shipments of liquefied compressed gases 
in DOT specification cylinders are specified in Sec.  173.304a. In 
Sec.  173.304a(a)(2), a table provides the maximum filling densities 
and

[[Page 31557]]

permissible cylinder types for certain named gases. Currently, Sec.  
173.304a(a)(2) permits a maximum filling density of 68% for carbon 
dioxide and nitrous oxide in DOT 3, DOT 3HT2000 and DOT 39 cylinders as 
well as DOT 3A, 3AX, 3AA, 3AAX, 3E, 3T, and 3AL cylinders with a marked 
service pressure of 1800 psi.
    Air Products and Chemicals Inc. (Air Products) submitted a petition 
for rulemaking (P-1560) requesting PHMSA revise Sec.  173.304a(a)(2) to 
modify the maximum permitted filling densities for carbon dioxide and 
nitrous oxide to include 70.3%, 73.2%, and 74.5% in DOT 3A, 3AA, 3AX, 
3AAX, and 3T cylinders with marked service pressures of 2000, 2265, and 
2400 psi respectively. Air Products stated in its petition that the 
proposed increase in the maximum permitted filling densities would 
yield various benefits including increased harmonization of compressed 
gas filling requirements with the UN Model Regulations, benefits to the 
carbonated beverage industry, decreased fuel costs associated with the 
transportation and delivery of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide and 
reduced administrative costs through the elimination of DOT SP-13599.
    PHMSA has a high degree of confidence that the increased filling 
densities for these gases will not adversely impact safety and this 
action supports several PHMSA initiatives, including incorporating 
special permits into the HMR. Therefore, we are considering modifying 
the entries currently in the table in Sec.  173.304a(a)(2) for carbon 
dioxide and nitrous oxide to include the maximum filling densities 
listed in P-1560 and DOT SP-13599.
    We note that the current HMR prescribe only one filling density for 
carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide (68%), while the UN Model Regulations 
prescribe two filling densities (68% and 76%) and incorporating the 
provisions of P-1560 would expand the list of allowable filling 
densities and permissible cylinder types beyond what is currently 
permitted in the UN Model Regulations. PHMSA requests comments on the 
safety and economic implications of permitting expanded maximum filling 
densities for carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide gases. PHMSA seeks 
estimates on the number of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide cylinders 
currently in use that would be affected by this authorization. PHMSA 
also requests feedback on how these proposed changes would positively 
and negatively affect both holders of this special permit and non-
holders. Specifically, PHMSA seeks data on the costs associated with 
the process of applying for and maintaining DOT SP-13599 that would be 
obviated by incorporating this special permit into the regulations.
P-1563
    In accordance with Sec.  173.301(a)(9), specification 2P, 2Q, 3E, 
3HT, spherical 4BA, 4D, 4DA, 4DS, and 39 cylinders must be packed in 
strong non-bulk outer packagings. This configuration meets the 
definition of a combination package as it is defined in Sec.  171.8 of 
the HMR. The HMR require the outside of the combination packaging to be 
marked with an indication that the inner packagings conform to the 
prescribed specifications; however, the inner packagings do not have to 
be marked. Since these are combination packages and not overpacks, the 
HMR do not permit the use of the ``OVERPACK'' marking to comply with 
this requirement. In contrast to a combination package, each package in 
an overpack must bear the appropriate markings and labels. The overpack 
must also display these markings and labels unless they are visible 
through the overpack (Sec.  173.25(a)(2), (a)(4)). The absence of the 
``OVERPACK'' marking on outside packages required by Sec.  
173.301(a)(9) removes the implication that each inner packaging 
(cylinders in this case) must meet the applicable marking and labeling 
requirements of Part 172.
    PHMSA received a petition for rulemaking (P-1563) from the 3M 
Corporation addressing the regulatory confusion between marking 
requirements for overpacks in Sec.  173.25 and outside packages for 
certain thin-walled cylinders specified in Sec.  173.301(a)(9). The 
petitioner notes that the differing marking requirements in Sec. Sec.  
173.25 and 173.301(a)(9) create confusion and make training difficult. 
This petition requests PHMSA modify the HMR to permit materials 
packaged in accordance with Sec.  173.301(a)(9), except aerosols ``2P'' 
and ``2Q,'' to display the OVERPACK marking described in Sec.  173.25, 
in lieu of the current requirement for ``an indication that the inner 
packaging conforms to prescribed specifications.''
    The marking ``Inner packages comply with prescribed 
specifications'' for overpacks in Sec.  173.25 was changed in 2004 to 
``OVERPACK'' in an effort to better align with global overpack 
requirements. The petitioner states that prior to 2004 both the 
overpack requirements in Sec.  173.25 and the requirement in Sec.  
173.301(a)(9) used very similar language intended to inform package 
handlers that although not visible, the inner packages contained 
specification packagings and these packagings conform to appropriate 
DOT or UN standards.
    PHMSA recognizes that different marking requirements in Sec.  
173.301(a)(9) and Sec.  173.25 may have caused confusion without 
enhancing safety. PHMSA is considering modifying Sec.  173.301(a)(9) to 
specifically require the use of the ``OVERPACK'' marking for the 
specified cylinders. However, this change would mean that both the 
inner packaging (cylinder) and the overpack would have to display 
hazardous materials markings and labels in accordance with Sec.  
173.25, thereby creating an additional burden. To avoid this 
consequence, PHMSA is considering revising the exceptions for labeling 
in Sec.  172.400a, to specify that labels are not required on cylinders 
packed in accordance with Sec.  173.301(a)(9) provided the outer 
packaging is labeled as required by the subchapter. This modification 
would eliminate the confusion cited by the petitioner while excepting 
the inner packages from the marking and labeling requirements.
    PHMSA requests comments on the potential consequences of these 
changes. Specifically, PHMSA seeks comment on whether others have 
experienced difficulty with the requirements of Sec.  173.301(a)(9) and 
thus see the necessity for such a change. PHMSA also seeks information 
on the safety and economic impacts of this proposed modification, 
including the quantity of shipments per year this modification would 
impact.
P-1572
    Requirements for shipping MEGCs are specified in Sec.  173.312. 
Specifically, Sec.  173.312(b) details the filling requirements for 
MEGCs and states that a ``MEGC may not be filled to a pressure greater 
than the lowest marked working pressure of any pressure receptacle [and 
a] MEGC may not be filled above its marked maximum permissible gross 
mass.'' This requirement that each pressure receptacle contained in the 
MEGC may not be filled above the working pressure of the lowest marked 
working pressure of any pressure receptacle is clear for permanent 
(non-liquefied compressed) gases which are generally filled by 
pressure. However, Sec.  173.312(b) does not contain a corresponding 
requirement addressing pressure receptacles containing a liquefied 
compressed gas which are most often filled by weight. This lack of 
specificity for MEGCs containing liquefied compressed gas has led to 
some confusion on the proper filling methods for such MEGCs.

[[Page 31558]]

    Barlen and Associates, Inc. filed a petition for rulemaking (P-
1572) requesting PHMSA explicitly state in Sec.  173.312 that for 
liquefied compressed gases in MEGCs, the filling ratio of each pressure 
receptacle must not exceed the values contained in Packing Instruction 
P200 of the United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of 
Dangerous Goods--Model Regulations (17th ed. 2011), as specified in 
Sec.  173.304b, and liquefied compressed gases in manifolded DOT 
cylinders cannot exceed the filling densities specified in Sec.  
173.304a(a)(2).
    PHMSA does not anticipate this provision will impose any new 
burden, as this proposal would only restate an important safety 
requirement already stated in Sec.  173.304a for DOT cylinders and 
Sec.  173.304b for UN pressure receptacles. However, PHMSA welcomes 
comments from affected entities on the safety and economic impacts of 
this proposal. PHMSA also seeks comment on whether others find the 
requirements of Sec.  173.312(b) confusing and thus, see a need for 
more specific requirements as proposed in P-1572.
P-1580
    As provided by Sec.  173.301(f), a cylinder filled with a 
compressed gas and offered for transportation ``must be equipped with 
one or more [pressure relief devices (PRDs)] sized and selected as to 
type, location and quantity and tested in accordance with CGA 
[publication] S-1.1 [Pressure Relief Device Standards-Part 1--Cylinders 
for Compressed Gases, 12th edition (2005)] and CGA [publication] S-7 
[Method for Selecting Pressure Relief Devices for Compressed Gas 
Mixtures in Cylinders (2005)].'' As specified in Sec. Sec.  
172.302(f)(2) and 172.304(f)(2), the rated burst pressure of a rupture 
disc for DOT 3A, 3AA, 3AL, 3E, and 39 cylinders, and UN pressure 
receptacles ISO 9809-1, ISO 9809-2, ISO 9809-3, and ISO 7866 cylinders 
containing oxygen, compressed; compressed gas, oxidizing, n.o.s.; or 
nitrogen trifluoride must be 100% of the cylinder minimum test pressure 
with a tolerance of plus zero to minus 10%.
    In response to PHMSA's NPRM entitled ``Hazardous Materials; 
Miscellaneous Amendments'' published in the Federal Register on 
September 29, 2010 [75 FR 60017] under Docket No. PHMSA-2009-0151 (HM-
218F), HMT Associates, Inc. submitted a late-filed comment that 
identified a potential discrepancy between the HMR and CGA publication 
S-1.1 Pressure Relief Device Standards--Part 1--Cylinders for 
Compressed Gases, 12th edition (2005). Specifically, this commenter 
stated the HMR have different PRD settings than CGA S-1.1 for DOT 39 
cylinders that make it virtually impossible to comply with both the HMR 
and CGA S-1.1. Sections 173.302(f)(2) and 173.304(f)(2) require the 
rated burst pressure of a rupture disc for DOT 3A, 3AA, 3AL, 3E, and 39 
cylinders to be 100% of the cylinder minimum test pressure with a 
tolerance of plus zero to minus 10%, whereas 4.2.2 of CGA S-1.1 
requires the rated burst pressure of the rupture disc on DOT 39 
cylinders to be not less than 105% of the cylinder test pressure.
    In P-1580, the petitioner proposes revising Sec. Sec.  
173.302(f)(2) and 173.304(f)(2) to require that the burst pressure of a 
rupture disc coincide with CGA S-1.1 for DOT 39 cylinders offered for 
transportation after October 1, 2008, other DOT specification cylinders 
with the first requalification due after October 1, 2008, and UN 
pressure receptacles prior to initial use. Specifically, as prescribed 
in 4.2.2 of CGA S-1.1, the required burst pressure of the rupture disc 
``shall not exceed 80% of the minimum cylinder burst pressure and shall 
not be less than 105% of the cylinder test pressure.''
    PHMSA notes that the HMR do not specify that the rated burst 
pressure on a rupture disc must be in accordance with CGA S-1.1, thus 
we do not see the need for the changes proposed in P-1580. However, 
PHMSA requests comments from the compressed gas industry regarding the 
potential discrepancy. We ask if others see this as a contradiction in 
the regulations in need of modification. Furthermore, if a change is 
deemed necessary, PHMSA requests comment concerning the safety and 
economic implications of such a revision.

B. Special Permits

    The HMR includes many performance-oriented regulations, which 
provide the regulated community with flexibility in meeting safety 
requirements. Even so, not every transportation situation can be 
anticipated and built into the regulations. Special permits enable the 
hazardous materials industry to quickly, effectively and safely 
integrate new products and technologies into the production and 
transportation stream. Federal hazmat law authorizes the Secretary to 
issue variances--termed special permits--from the HMR only if a special 
permit provides for a safety level ``at least equal to the safety level 
required under [Federal hazmat law/regulations] * * * or consistent 
with the public interest and [Federal hazmat law], if a required safety 
level does not exist.'' 49 U.S.C. 5117(a)(1). Thus, special permits 
provide a mechanism for testing new technologies, promoting increased 
transportation efficiency and productivity, and ensuring global 
competitiveness. Within the DOT, PHMSA is primarily responsible for 
implementing the Federal hazmat law and issuing special permits.
    PHMSA periodically conducts reviews of active special permits to 
identify variances that should be adopted into regulations for broader 
applicability. Converting these special permits into regulations 
reduces paperwork burdens and facilitates commerce while maintaining an 
acceptable level of safety. Additionally, adopting special permits as 
rules of general applicability provides wider access to the benefits 
and regulatory flexibility of the provisions granted in the special 
permits. Factors that influence whether a specific special permit is a 
candidate for regulatory action include: the safety record for 
transporting hazardous materials; transportation operations conducted 
under a special permit; the potential for broad application of a 
special permit; suitability of provisions in the special permit for 
incorporation into the HMR; rulemaking activity in related areas; and 
agency priorities.
    In this ANPRM, PHMSA is considering incorporating three special 
permits relating to the transportation of compressed gases into the 
HMR. These special permits have a strong record of safety and 
incorporating them into the HMR will provide wider access to the 
benefits of their provisions, therefore fostering greater regulatory 
flexibility without compromising transportation safety.
Pressure Relief Devices (PRD)
    Section 173.301(f)(2) of the HMR states that ``a pressure relief 
device, when installed, must be in communication with the vapor space 
of a cylinder containing a Division 2.1 (flammable gas material).'' 
Special Permit 13318 (SP-13318) authorizes the transportation in 
commerce of DOT specification 39 cylinders of 75 cubic inches or less 
volume, without the PRD in direct communication with the vapor space. A 
copy of this special permit can be viewed in the docket for this ANPRM. 
PHMSA is considering amending paragraph (f)(2) to state that this 
provision does not apply to cylinders of 75 cubic inches or less in 
volume filled with a liquefied petroleum gas or to cylinders installed 
with PRDs at both ends. This special permit was originally issued in 
2003 subsequent to the publication of HM-

[[Page 31559]]

220D (67 FR 51625; August 8, 2002) and continues to allow a shipping 
practice that previously had been successfully used for over 40 years 
with an acceptable safety record. This amendment would eliminate the 
need for this special permit.
    PHMSA is considering whether incorporating this special permit into 
the regulations is appropriate and seeks comment on the potential 
impacts of such incorporation.
Filling Limits for Carbon Dioxide and Nitrous Oxide
    Section 173.304a(a)(2) provides the maximum permitted filling 
densities for various gases for shipment of liquefied compressed gases, 
including carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, in specification cylinders. 
Special permit (SP-13599) authorizes a higher permitted filling density 
for carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide. The specifics of this issue, 
including the expected costs and benefits of this revision, are 
discussed above in Section III. A. entitled Petitions for Rulemaking, 
under the heading P-1560.
Pressure Relief Device Requirement for Export Cylinders
    As currently stated in Sec.  171.23(a)(4), a cylinder not 
manufactured, inspected and tested in accordance with Part 178 that is 
filled for export must be equipped with a pressure relief device. PHMSA 
issued SP-12929 to authorize the transportation of non-DOT and non-UN 
specification (i.e. foreign manufactured cylinders) to be filled in the 
United States and transported for export, without the PRD, provided 
specific conditions are met. These conditions include requiring: (1) 
The cylinder to meet the maximum filling density and service pressure 
requirements prescribed in the HMR, (2) the shipping paper include the 
notation ``DOT-SP 12929'' and a certification that the cylinder was 
retested and refilled in accordance with the requirements for export in 
the HMR and (3) the emergency response information indicate that the 
cylinders are not fitted with PRDs. A copy of this special permit can 
be viewed in the docket for this ANPRM.
    In this ANPRM, we are considering incorporating the provisions of 
SP-12929 into the HMR. We solicit comments on the impacts, if any that 
adopting these provisions would have on import and export shipments of 
cylinders.

IV. Regulatory Review and Analysis

A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This ANPRM

    This ANPRM is published under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 5103(b), 
which authorizes the Secretary to ``prescribe regulations for the safe 
transportation, including security, of hazardous material in 
intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce.'' Section 5117(a) 
authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to issue a special permit 
exempting compliance with a regulation prescribed in Sec. Sec.  
5103(b), 5104, 5110, or 5112 ``to a person transporting, or causing to 
be transported, hazardous material in a way that achieves a safety 
level at least equal to the safety level required under [the Federal 
hazmat law], or consistent with the public interest * * * if a required 
safety level does not exist.'' The issues described in this ANPRM 
respond to ten outstanding petitions for rulemaking and would 
incorporate into the HMR three special permits with an established 
history of safety.

B. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563 and DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures

    This ANPRM is not considered a significant regulatory action under 
section 3(f) and was not reviewed by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). The ANPRM is not considered a significant rule under the 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures order issued by the Department of 
Transportation [44 FR 11034].
    Executive Order 13563 is ``supplemental to and reaffirms the 
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review 
that were established in Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993.'' 
In addition, Executive Order 13563 specifically requires agencies to: 
(1) Involve the public in the regulatory process; (2) promote 
simplification and harmonization through interagency coordination; (3) 
``identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and 
maintain flexibility;'' (4) ensure the objectivity of any scientific or 
technological information used to support regulatory action; and (5) 
consider how to best promote retrospective analysis to modify, 
streamline, expand, or repeal existing rules that are outmoded, 
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome.
    PHMSA has involved the public in the regulatory process in a 
variety of ways. First, in this ANPRM, PHMSA is addressing issues 
identified for possible future rulemaking in letters of interpretation 
and other correspondence submitted to PHMSA by the regulated community 
and other stakeholders. Overall, the issues discussed in this ANPRM 
promote the continued safe transportation of hazardous materials while 
producing a net benefit. PHMSA is responding to ten petitions for 
rulemaking submitted by the compressed gas industry in accordance with 
49 CFR 106.95 and is considering incorporating the provisions of three 
special permits.
    These petitions clarify the existing regulatory text in the HMR, 
incorporate widely-used industry publications and address specific 
safety concerns, thus enhancing the safe transportation of compressed 
gases while limiting the impact on the regulated community. 
Incorporating the provisions of special permits into regulations with 
general applicability will provide shippers and carriers with 
additional flexibility to comply with established safety requirements, 
thereby reducing burdens and costs and increasing productivity.
    PHMSA requests public comments and feedback on these issues to help 
inform its determination in how to address the issues presented in this 
ANPRM.

C. Executive Order 13132

    E.O. 13132 requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely input 
by state and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that may have a substantial, direct effect 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. We invite state and local governments with an interest in 
the issues presented in this ANPRM to comment on the effect that 
adoption of specific proposals may have on state or local governments.

D. Executive Order 13175

    This ANPRM was analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 entitled ``Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''. Because this ANPRM does 
not have tribal implications and does not impose substantial direct 
compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, the funding and 
consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply, and a 
tribal summary impact statement is not required. We invite Indian 
tribal governments to provide comments on the effect that adoption of 
specific proposals may have on Indian communities.

[[Page 31560]]

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT 
Procedures and Policies

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an 
agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities. 
An agency must conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis unless it 
determines and certifies that a rule is not expected to have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term 
``small entities'' comprises small businesses and not-for-profit 
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not 
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with 
populations of less than 50,000. 5 U.S.C. 601. Accordingly, DOT policy 
requires an analysis of the impact of all regulations on small 
entities, and mandates that agencies strive to lessen any adverse 
effects on these businesses. Section 603(b) of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act requires an analysis of the possible impact of the 
proposed rule on small entities, including reasons for the proposed 
action, the objectives of the proposed rule, an estimate of the number 
of small entities affected and alternative proposals considered. Such 
analysis for this ANPRM is as follows:
    Need for the ANPRM. Current requirements for the manufacture, use, 
and requalification of cylinders can be traced to standards first 
applied in the early 1900s. Over the years, the regulations have been 
revised to reflect advancements in transportation efficiency and 
changes in the national and international economic environment. This 
ANPRM is part of a retrospective analysis to modify and streamline 
existing requirements that are outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or 
excessively burdensome.
    Description of action. This ANPRM considers incorporating the 
provisions of three special permits, responds to ten petitions for 
rulemaking, considers clarifying other requirements in the HMR, and 
addresses areas of concern that are currently not addressed in the HMR. 
The amendments discussed in this ANPRM are designed to facilitate 
international transportation, increase flexibility for the regulated 
community and promote technological advancement while maintaining a 
comparable level of safety.
    Identification of potentially affected small entities. The 
amendments considered here are likely to affect cylinder manufacturers 
(NAICS code 332420; approximately 568 companies), cylinder 
requalifiers, independent inspection agencies, and commercial 
establishments that own and use DOT specification cylinders and UN 
pressure receptacles, as well as individuals who export non-UN/ISO 
compressed gas cylinders (NAICS codes 32512, 336992, 423450, 423850, 
423990, 454312, 541380). Nearly all of these companies, particularly 
cylinder requalification facilities (approximately 5000 companies), are 
small entities based on the criteria developed by the Small Business 
Administration.
    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. This ANPRM does not 
include any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements.
    Related Federal rules and regulations. The Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration (OSHA) prescribes requirements for the use, 
maintenance, and testing of portable fire extinguishers in 29 CFR 
1910.157 and requirements for fixed fire suppression systems in 29 CFR 
1910.160. The issues discussed in this ANPRM pertaining to the 
transportation of fire extinguishers and compressed gas cylinders that 
are a component of a fixed fire suppression system do not conflict with 
the requirements in 29 CFR. With respect to the transportation of 
compressed gases in cylinders, there are no related rules or 
regulations issued by other departments or agencies of the Federal 
government.
    Alternate proposals for small business. Certain regulatory actions 
may affect the competitive situation of an individual company or group 
of companies by imposing relatively greater burdens on small, rather 
than large, enterprises. PHMSA requests comments from small entities on 
the impacts of these additional requirements.
    Conclusion. This ANPRM requests information on a series of 
questions which will be used to develop a proposal to amend provisions 
of the HMR addressing the manufacture, maintenance and use of 
cylinders. PHMSA anticipates that this ANPRM will generally reduce 
burdens for most persons and any costs resulting from adoption of new 
requirements will be offset by the benefits derived from elimination of 
the need to apply for special permits, increased regulatory 
flexibility, and the improved safety derived from enhanced compliance 
with the clarified portions of the HMR. Since there are no specific 
proposals in this ANPRM, there are no costs to be evaluated. If your 
business or organization is a small entity and if adoption of proposals 
contained in this ANPRM could have a significant economic impact on 
your operations, please submit a comment to explain how and to what 
extent your business or organization could be affected.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This ANPRM does not impose new information collection requirements. 
Depending on the results of our request for comments to this ANPRM, a 
decrease may result in the annual burden and costs under OMB proposed 
changes to incorporate provisions contained in certain widely used or 
longstanding special permits that have an established safety record.
    PHMSA specifically requests comments on the information collection 
and recordkeeping burdens associated with developing, implementing, and 
maintaining these requirements for approval under this ANPRM.
    Address written comments to the Dockets Unit as identified in the 
ADDRESSES section of this ANPRM. We must receive comments regarding 
information collection burdens prior to the close of the comment period 
identified in the DATES section of this ANPRM.

G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory 
action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The 
Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in 
April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of 
this document may be used to cross-reference this action with the 
Unified Agenda.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This ANPRM does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of $141.3 
million or more to either state, local or tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector, and is the least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objective of the rule. Further, in 
compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, PHMSA will 
evaluate any regulatory action that might be proposed in subsequent 
stages of the proceeding to assess the effects on State, local, and 
tribal governments and the private sector.

I. Environmental Assessment

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended 
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), requires Federal agencies to consider the 
consequences of major Federal actions and prepare a detailed statement 
on actions that significantly affect the quality of the

[[Page 31561]]

human environment. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) 
regulations require federal agencies to conduct an environmental review 
considering: (1) The need for the proposed action; (2) alternatives to 
the proposed action; (3) probable environmental impacts of the proposed 
action and alternatives; and (4) the agencies and persons consulted 
during the consideration process.
Description of Action
    This ANPRM responds to ten petitions for rulemaking submitted by 
the regulated community and seeks comment on incorporating the 
provisions of three special permits. These issues discussed in this 
ANPRM would, if eventually adopted, update and expand the use of 
currently authorized industry consensus standards, revise the 
construction, marking and testing requirements of DOT-4 series 
cylinders, clarify the filling requirements for cylinders, discuss the 
handling of cylinders used in fire suppression systems, and revise the 
requalification and condemnation requirements for cylinders.
    Amendments to the HMR discussed in this ANPRM:
     Replace the currently incorporated 7th edition of the 
Compressed Gas Association's (CGA) publication C-6 Standards for Visual 
Inspection of Steel Compressed Gas Cylinders with the revised 10th 
edition and update the appropriate references throughout the HMR.
     Revise the manufacturing requirements for certain DOT-4 
series cylinders.
     Revise the requirements for the requalification of DOT 
specification cylinders by the volumetric expansion method found in 
Part 180 Subpart C.
     Allow the use of the labels described in the 8th edition 
of CGA's publication C-7 Guide to the Preparation of Precautionary 
Labeling and Marking of Compressed Gas Containers (currently 
incorporated by reference in the HMR) Appendix A on cylinders contained 
in overpacks.
     Require manufacturers to mark newly-manufactured cylinders 
suitable for the transport of liquefied compressed gas to be marked 
with the mass weight, tare weight and water capacity.
     Allow non-specification cylinders used in a fixed fire 
suppression system to be transported under the same exceptions as those 
provided for fire extinguishers.
     Increase maximum allowable filling density for carbon 
dioxide and nitrous oxide consistent with the UN Model Regulations.
     Permit use of the OVERPACK marking for cylinders packed in 
accordance with Sec.  173.301(a)(9).
     Clarify filling limits for a liquefied compressed gas in a 
manifold or a multiple element gas container (MEGC).
     Harmonize the pressure relief device tolerances for DOT 39 
cylinders transporting oxidizing gases by aircraft with the 12th 
edition of CGA's publication S-1.1 Pressure Relief Device Standards--
Part 1--Cylinders for Compressed Gases.
     Incorporate into the HMR the requirements of DOT Special 
Permit (SP) 13318 that authorizes DOT specification 39 cylinders of 75 
cubic inches or less volume to be transported without the pressure 
relief device being in direct communication with the vapor space of the 
cylinders.
     Clarify the requirements for filling non-specification 
cylinders for export or for use on board a vessel.
Alternatives Considered
    Alternative (1): Do nothing
    Our goal is to update, clarify and provide relief from certain 
existing regulatory requirements to promote safer transportation 
practices, eliminate unnecessary regulatory requirements, and 
facilitate international commerce. We rejected the do-nothing 
alternative.
    Alternative (2): Publish an ANPRM seeking public comment on the 
issues raised in 10 petitions for rulemaking and the incorporation of 3 
special permits. Subsequently, review the comments received on the 
amendments described in this ANPRM and their potential economic and 
safety implications. If deemed necessary, PHMSA will use these comments 
to craft more specific proposals which will be published in a notice of 
proposed rulemaking. This is the selected alternative.
Environmental Consequences
    Hazardous materials are substances that may pose a threat to public 
safety or the environment during transportation because of their 
physical, chemical, or nuclear properties. The hazardous materials 
regulatory system is a risk management system that is prevention 
oriented and focused on identifying a safety hazard and reducing the 
probability and quantity of a hazardous material release. Hazardous 
materials are categorized by hazard analysis and experience into hazard 
classes and packing groups. The regulations require each shipper to 
classify a material in accordance with these hazard classes and packing 
groups. The process of classifying a hazardous material is itself a 
form of hazard analysis. Further, the regulations require the shipper 
to communicate a material's hazards through use of the hazard class, 
packing group, and proper shipping name on the shipping paper and the 
use of labels on packages and placards on transport vehicles. Thus, the 
shipping paper, labels, and placards communicate the most significant 
findings of the shipper's hazard analysis. A hazardous material is 
assigned to one of three packing groups based upon its degree of 
hazard, from a high hazard, Packing Group I to a low hazard, Packing 
Group III material. The quality, damage resistance, and performance 
standards of the packaging in each packing group are appropriate for 
the hazards of the material transported.
    Under the HMR, hazardous materials are transported by aircraft, 
vessel, rail, and highway. The potential for environmental damage or 
contamination exists when packages of hazardous materials are involved 
in accidents or en route incidents resulting from cargo shifts, valve 
failures, package failures, loading, unloading, collisions, handling 
problems, or deliberate sabotage. The release of hazardous materials 
can cause the loss of ecological resources (e.g. wildlife habitats) and 
the contamination of air, aquatic environments, and soil. Contamination 
of soil can lead to the contamination of ground water. Compliance with 
the HMR substantially reduces the possibility of accidental release of 
hazardous materials. It is anticipated that the petitions and special 
permits discussed in this ANPRM, if adopted in a future rulemaking, 
would have minimal, if any, environmental consequences. PHMSA will more 
thoroughly examine the extent of the environmental impacts of the 
petitions and special permits discussed in this ANPRM should these 
issues be proposed in a future rulemaking.
Agencies Consulted
    Occupational Safety and Health Administration;
    National Institute of Standards and Technology;
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Conclusion
    PHMSA has conducted a technical review of the amendments discussed 
in this ANPRM and determined that the amendments considered would 
provide protection against overfilling and where a proposal would 
remove restrictions these revisions are based on sound

[[Page 31562]]

scientific methods and would not result in unusual stresses on the 
cylinder or adversely impact human health or the environment. PHMSA 
welcomes any data or information related to environmental impacts, both 
positive and negative, that may result from a future rulemaking 
addressing the issues discussed in this ANPRM.

J. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or at http://www.regulations.gov.

K. International Trade Analysis

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal 
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related 
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of 
the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of 
standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign 
commerce of the United States, so long as the standards have a 
legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety, and do 
not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. 
The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, 
where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. PHMSA 
notes the purpose is to ensure the safety of the American public, and 
has assessed the effects of this ANPRM to ensure that it does not 
exclude imports that meet this objective. As a result, this ANPRM is 
not considered as creating an unnecessary obstacle to foreign commerce.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 
part 1.
Magdy El-Sibaie,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and 
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-12832 Filed 5-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P