[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 4, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49345-49349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-15823]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 173
[Docket No. PHMSA-2025-0091 (HM-268C)]
RIN 2137-AG05
Hazardous Materials: Reducing Burdens on Domestic Companies Using
Battery-Powered Equipment in Trades
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule modernizes the Materials of Trade (MOT)
exception in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) by increasing
the maximum allowable quantities of lithium batteries that can be
transported as MOTs. This increase removes an undue regulatory burden
which constrains the ability of construction, landscaping, mowing, tree
service, food service, and entertainment companies to perform their
trade.
DATES: This final rule is effective September 3, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arthur Pollack, Standards and
Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590-0001, 202-366-8553, [email protected].
I. PHMSA Action
A. What action is PHMSA taking in this final rule?
This final rule removes undue regulatory burdens by increasing the
maximum allowable quantities of lithium batteries that can be
transported as MOTs. This allowance applies to domestic companies in
sectors such as construction, landscaping, mowing, tree service, food
service, and entertainment--enabling them to carry the power sources
required to perform their trade safely and more efficiently.
B. Does this action apply to me?
Effective 30 days after publication of this final rule, lithium
batteries transported under conditions meeting the definition of an MOT
under 49 CFR 171.8 may take advantage of the increased quantity limits
outlined in 49 CFR 173.6.
C. Why is PHMSA taking this action?
PHMSA is taking this action in response to commenter feedback and
to modernize 49 CFR 173.6 to update the quantity limits for lithium
batteries under MOTs. The HMR currently limits the aggregate gross
weight of materials of trade--other than certain diluted mixtures of
Class 9 materials--in a motor vehicle to 200 kg (440 pounds). This
revision increases this allowance for lithium batteries by authorizing
up to 30 kg (66 pounds) per battery, a 500 kg (1102 pounds) gross
vehicle limit, and no limit for batteries installed in equipment, while
including safety provisions to prevent short circuits, shifting damage,
and accidental activation. This action will reduce regulatory burdens
for companies that transport batteries and battery-powered equipment in
support of a trade without any compromise in safety because of the
safety provisions included in the revision. Finally, this action
advances the goals of multiple Executive Orders and provides annualized
cost savings to American businesses--please see a more detailed
discussion in the Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 discussion in ``Section
III. Regulatory Analysis and Notices.''
II. Summary of Comments Received in Response to the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
PHMSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), cited as
HM-268C, to gather feedback on modernizing the HMR to authorize
increased quantities of lithium batteries under the MOTs exception.\1\
Please refer to the NPRM for background and discussion of the proposed
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 90 FR 28578 (Jul. 1, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table alphabetically lists commenters to the NPRM:
[[Page 49346]]
Table 1--List of NPRM Commenters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenter name Docket No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Pyrotechnics Association PHMSA-2025-0091-0004
(APA).
Battery Council International PHMSA-2025-0091-0016
(BCI).
Commercial Vehicle Safety PHMSA-2025-0014
Alliance (CVSA).
Council on the Safe PHMSA-2026-0091-0011
Transportation of Hazardous
Articles, Inc. (COSTHA).
Dangerous Good Advisory Council PHMSA-2025-0091-0013
(DGAC).
Infotrac Inc..................... PHMSA-2025-0091-0003
Medical Device Transport Council PHMSA-2025-0091-0010
(MDTC).
Outdoor Power Equipment Institute PHMSA-2025-0091-0009
(OPEI).
Pyro Shows, Inc.................. PHMSA-2025-0091-0005
Pyro Spectaculars, Inc........... PHMSA-2025-0091-0007
Rechargeable Battery Association PHMSA-2025-0091-0008
(PRBA).
Utility Solid Waste Activities PHMSA-2025-0091-0015
Group (USWAG).
William Forbes................... PHMSA-2025-0091-0012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A majority of respondents supported the proposal to amend the MOT
exception to authorize the transportation of increased quantities of
lithium batteries. Support for the rulemaking came from a diverse
coalition of stakeholders, including battery and equipment
manufacturers, pyrotechnics and entertainment associations, utility
groups, and transportation safety councils. Organizations, including
PRBA, OPEI, and BCI, argued that the current MOT quantity limits are
outdated and overly restrictive, creating logistical and financial
burdens that limit growth in their industries.
Specific trade sectors also highlighted unique operational needs.
For instance, APA, Pyro Shows, Inc., and Pyro Spectaculars, Inc. stated
that the rulemaking would facilitate the efficient transport of drones
used to supplement professional fireworks displays. Similarly, USWAG
and the MDTC noted that the increased limits are essential for the
transport of equipment used in electrical grid maintenance and life-
saving medical care, respectively. Infotrac Inc. and OPEI emphasized
the practical relief this rulemaking would provide to landscaping and
maintenance professionals who currently face difficulties transporting
heavy equipment, such as robotic mowers and yard tractors, under fully
regulated hazardous materials frameworks. Furthermore, safety
organizations, such as COSTHA and DGAC, supported the proposal on the
grounds that it provides necessary economic relief and operational
efficiency while preserving essential safety frameworks, such as
testing and labeling requirements.
A few commenters had additional questions or concerns regarding
this action. First, several respondents asked to extend the MOTs
lithium battery allowance to sodium ion batteries. PHMSA did not
include that proposal in the NPRM and is not prepared to address this
issue in the final rule. PHMSA will consider adding sodium ion
batteries to the MOT provision in a future rulemaking. In addition,
commenters asked PHMSA to increase the 30 kg (66 pound) limit for
lithium batteries to accommodate portable power stations--e.g.,
rechargeable devices providing household AC power, often marketed as
battery packs or ``generators.'' PHMSA appreciates these comments, but
the agency did not include this proposal in the NPRM and lacks
sufficient data to support increasing the authorized weight limit in
this proceeding. PHMSA may consider this request in a future
rulemaking.
Second, various stakeholders recommended that PHMSA authorize
prototype and low-production-run batteries as MOT. These stakeholders
noted that the NPRM would require all batteries to meet the testing
criteria in Section 38.3 of the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria, and
that this requirement would prevent untested prototypes--which are
typically exempt from standard testing requirements--from being
transported as MOT. PHMSA notes that prototype batteries are generally
transported for testing, development, or certification. These
commercial shipments are outside the scope of the MOT exception, which
only applies to activities that are ``in direct support of a principal
business.'' Furthermore, prototype batteries do not have an established
safety record and generally pose a heightened risk of fire or thermal
runaway during transport. Applying the strict safety requirements of
the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria is necessary to mitigate the
elevated risk to public safety that accompanies these shipments.
Third, PRBA and BCI requested a revision to 49 CFR 173.6 to clarify
that outer packaging is not required for lithium batteries that are
adequately secured against shifting. This allowance currently exists
for other receptacles and articles under the MOT provisions. PHMSA
agrees that this revision promotes regulatory consistency and
efficiency and is amending 49 CFR 173.6 to authorize explicitly the
transport of lithium batteries without outer packaging if they are
properly secured to prevent movement during transport.
Finally, CVSA and Mr. William Forbes submitted comments opposing
the proposed revisions to the MOT provisions. CVSA maintains that the
current 440-pound weight allowance is sufficient and that increasing
the quantity of lithium batteries directly correlates to the severity
of potential incidents. CVSA cites recent crashes and fires involving
lithium batteries that have resulted in significant highway and port
closures. CVSA also points to the petitioner's own admission--that
small businesses often lack the expertise to handle these materials
outside of MOT--to argue that granting regulatory relief to
inexperienced operators is inherently unsafe. Sharing similar concerns,
Mr. Forbes characterizes the proposed weight increase as
``astronomical'' and argues that it poses an ``inherent risk'' without
sufficient safety data. Mr. Forbes contends that the rulemaking would
place an undue burden on first responders charged with managing these
incidents.
PHMSA acknowledges these concerns but disagrees that the current
440-pound allowance is sufficient to meet industry needs or that the
proposed changes pose an unacceptable safety risk. The weight increase
in this final rule is a modest and incremental adjustment--not an
``astronomical'' expansion--that balances the operational needs of
small businesses with robust safety standards. PHMSA is also retaining
all mandatory performance-based packaging and hazard communication
requirements currently applicable to lithium batteries.
[[Page 49347]]
Compliance with these requirements ensures that the increased weight
allowance will not present an unacceptable risk to public safety.
Consequently, PHMSA concludes that the final rule will not place an
undue burden on first responders and that the economic benefits of
facilitating commerce for small businesses--including the estimated
annualized cost savings of $14.4 million (2024 dollars) outlined in the
final Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) that is available for review in
the rulemaking docket--outweigh any marginal increase in risk.
For these reasons, PHMSA is publishing this final rule to modernize
49 CFR 173.6 to update the quantity limits for lithium batteries under
MOT. PHMSA finds these revisions will not have any adverse impact on
safety.
III. Regulatory Analysis and Notices
A. Legal Authority
This final rule is published under the authority of the Secretary
of Transportation as set forth in the Federal Hazardous Materials
Transportation Laws (49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) and delegated to the PHMSA
Administrator pursuant to 49 CFR 1.97.
B. Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review
E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), as implemented by 49
CFR part 5, subpart B, requires agencies to regulate in the ``most
cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned determination that the
benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs,'' and to develop
regulations that ``impose the least burden on society.'' \2\ In
arriving at those conclusions, E.O. 12866 requires that agencies should
consider ``both quantifiable measures . . . and qualitative measures of
costs and benefits that are difficult to quantify'' and ``maximize net
benefits . . . unless a statute requires another regulatory approach.''
E.O. 12866 also requires that ``agencies should assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives, including the
alternative of not regulating.'' Pursuant to 49 CFR part 5, subpart B,
PHMSA and other Operating Administrations must generally choose the
``least costly regulatory alternative that achieves the relevant
objectives'' unless required by law or compelling safety need. In
addition, 49 CFR part 5, subpart B specifies that regulations should
generally ``not be issued unless their benefits are expected to exceed
their costs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993); 91 FR 22431 (Apr. 27, 2026); DOT
Order 2100.7 (Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound Economic Analysis in
Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and Activities);
see also DOT Order 2100.6B (Policies and Procedures for
Rulemakings).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.O. 12866 and 49 CFR part 5, subpart B also require that PHMSA
submit ``significant regulatory actions'' to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Executive Office of the
President's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. This
final rule is not a significant regulatory action pursuant to E.O.
12866 and has not been designated as a ``major rule'' as defined by the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.).
PHMSA has complied with the requirements in E.O. 12866 as
implemented by 49 CFR part 5, subpart B and determined this final rule
will result in cost savings by reducing regulatory burdens and
regulatory uncertainty for the construction, landscaping, food service,
and entertainment industries by distinguishing the weight limits for
lithium batteries from other Class 9 hazardous materials. PHMSA
estimated that these changes will result in annualized cost savings of
$14.4 million (2024 dollars) at three percent and seven percent
discount rates. The annualized cost savings under the three and seven
percent discount rates are the same given that the annual cost savings
are constant over the 10-year analysis period. A copy of the final RIA
is available for review in the rulemaking docket.
C. Executive Orders 14192 and 14219
PHMSA has determined that this final rule is an E.O. 14192
(Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation) deregulatory action.\3\
PHMSA finds the total costs of the rule on the regulated community will
be less than zero. This final rule does not implicate any of the
factors identified in section 2(a) of E.O. 14219 (Ensuring Lawful
Governance) indicative of a regulation that is ``unlawful . . . [or]
that undermine[s] the national interest.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 90 FR 9065 (Feb. 6, 2025).
\4\ 90 FR 10583 (Feb. 25, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Energy-Related Executive Orders 13211, 14154, and 14156
PHMSA has analyzed this final rule in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in E.O. 14156 (Declaring a National
Energy Emergency) and E.O. 14154 (Unleashing American Energy).\5\ The
President has declared a national emergency to address America's
inadequate energy development production, transportation, refining, and
generation capacity and asserted a Federal policy to unleash American
energy by ensuring access to abundant supplies of reliable, affordable
energy from (inter alia) the removal of ``undue burden[s]'' on the
identification, development, or use of domestic energy resources. PHMSA
finds this final rule to be consistent with E.O. 14156 and E.O. 14154
because it will not hinder or unduly burden the transportation or
production of energy or energy-related products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 90 FR 8433 (Jan. 29, 2025); 90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, this final rule is not a ``significant energy action''
under E.O. 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use), which requires Federal
agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant
energy action.'' \6\ Because this final rule is not a significant
action under E.O. 12866, it will not have a significant adverse effect
on supply, distribution, or energy use; accordingly, OIRA has not
designated this final rule as a significant energy action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
PHMSA analyzed this final rule in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in E.O. 13132 (Federalism) and the Presidential
Memorandum (Preemption) published in the Federal Register on May 22,
2009.\7\ 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 ``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.'' The Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation laws
contain an express preemption provision at 49 U.S.C. 5125(b) that
preempts State, local, and Tribal requirements on certain covered
subjects, unless the non-Federal requirements are ``substantively the
same'' as the Federal requirements, including the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 74 FR 24693 (May 22, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous
material;
(2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and
placarding of hazardous material;
(3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents
related to hazardous material and requirements related to the number,
contents, and placement of those documents;
[[Page 49348]]
(4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; and
(5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, inspection, marking,
maintenance, recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or
container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use
in transporting hazardous material in commerce.
This final rule addresses items covered in Paragraph 1 and 2 above
and will preempt State, local, and Tribal requirements not meeting the
``substantively the same'' standard. Though the final rule may operate
to preempt some State requirements, it will not impose any regulation
that has substantial direct effects on the States, the relationship
between the National Government and the States, or the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The
preemptive effect of the regulatory amendments in this final rule is
limited to the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of the
Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation laws. Therefore, the
consultation and funding requirements of E.O. 13132 do not apply.
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
Federal agencies to conduct a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA) for a final rule that has been subject to notice-and-comment
rulemaking under the APA unless the agency head certifies that the
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. E.O. 13272 (Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking) obliges agencies to establish procedures
promoting compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.\8\ DOT posts
information on a dedicated web page to help small businesses understand
and navigate Federal regulatory processes.\9\ This final rule was
developed in accordance with E.O. 13272 and DOT implementing guidance
to ensure compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Because the
final rule will reduce burdens, PHMSA certifies that it does not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002).
\9\ DOT, Rulemaking Requirements Related to Small Entities (last
accessed Sept 3, 2024), available at: https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/rulemaking-requirements-concerning-small-entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (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 proposed or final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate of $100 million or more (in 1996 dollars) in any given
year, the agency must prepare, among other things, a written statement
that qualitatively and quantitatively assesses the costs and benefits
of the Federal mandate.
This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under UMRA
because it does not result in costs of $100 million or more (in 1996
dollars) per year for either State, local, or Tribal governments, or to
the private sector.
H. National Environmental Policy Act
PHMSA has analyzed this rule pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined it is
categorically excluded under 23 CFR 771.117(c)(20), which applies to
the promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives. Under section 9
of DOT Order 5610.1D, PHMSA may apply a categorical exclusion (CE)
established in another Operating Administration's procedures. PHMSA
followed the requirements outlined in DOT Order 5610.1D to apply the
Federal Highway Administration's CE to this deregulatory action. PHMSA
has determined no unusual circumstances are present under 23 CFR
771.117(b). PHMSA's Categorical Exclusion Determination memo for this
action is available on PHMSA's website.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ PHMSA, Implementing Procedures (Aug. 28, 2025), available
at: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/planning-and-analytics/environmental-analysis-and-compliance/implementing-procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Executive Order 13175
PHMSA analyzed this final rule according to the principles and
criteria in E.O. 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments) and DOT Order 5301.1A (Department of Transportation
Tribal Consultation Policies and Procedures).\11\ E.O. 13175 requires
agencies to assure meaningful and timely input from 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 or distribution of power between the
Federal Government and Tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA assessed the impact of the final rule and determined that it
will not significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities or Indian
Tribal governments. The rulemaking's regulatory amendments have a
broad, national scope; therefore, this final rule will not
significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities, much less impose
substantial compliance costs on Tribal governments or mandate Tribal
action. For these reasons, PHMSA has concluded that the funding and
consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 and DOT Order 5301.1A do not
apply.
J. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 5 CFR 1320.8(d) require PHMSA to provide
interested members of the public and affected agencies with an
opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping
requests. This rulemaking will not create, amend, or rescind any
existing information collections.
K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
E.O. 13609 (Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation)
requires agencies to consider whether the impacts associated with
significant variations between domestic and international regulatory
approaches are unnecessary or may impair the ability of American
business to export and compete internationally.\12\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 77 FR 26413 (May 4, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as
amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465),
prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging
in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. For purposes of these requirements,
Federal agencies may participate in the establishment of international
standards, so long as the
[[Page 49349]]
standards have a legitimate domestic objective, such as providing for
safety, and do not operate to exclude imports that meet this objective.
The statute also requires consideration of international standards and,
where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
PHMSA engages with international standards setting bodies to
protect the safety of the American public. PHMSA has assessed the
effects of this deregulatory action and has determined that its
regulatory amendments will not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign
trade.
L. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 14028
E.O. 14028 (Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity) directed the
Federal Government to improve its efforts to identify, to deter, and to
respond to ``persistent and increasingly sophisticated malicious cyber
campaigns.'' \13\ PHMSA has considered the effects of the final rule
and has determined that its regulatory amendments will not materially
affect the cybersecurity risk profile for affected entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 86 FR 26633 (May 17, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
M. Privacy Act Statement
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to inform its rulemaking process better. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/privacy. DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000, and may be viewed on
DOT's website at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 173
Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers,
Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, PHMSA amends 49 CFR Chapter I as
follows:
PART 173--SHIPPERS--GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND
PACKAGINGS
0
1. The authority citation for part 173 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96, and
1.97.
0
2. Amend Sec. 173.6 by:
0
a. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(iii);
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(3);
0
c. Adding paragraph (b)(6);
0
d. Revising paragraph (c)(4);
0
e. Adding paragraph (c)(5); and
0
f. Revising paragraph (d).
The revisions to read as follows:
Sec. 173.6 Materials of trade exceptions.
(a) * * *
(7) * * *
(iii) Except when the cell or battery is contained in equipment,
cells and batteries described in 173.185 of this part may not exceed 30
kg (66 pounds) net weight for each cell or battery and 500 kg (1102
pounds) aggregate net weight on a motor vehicle. Cells and batteries,
including when contained in or packed with equipment, must be of the
type proven to meet the criteria in part III, sub-section 38.3 of the
UN Manual of Tests and Criteria (IBR; see Sec. 171.7 of this
subchapter).
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) Outer packagings are not required for receptacles (e.g., cans
and bottles), articles, or batteries that are secured against shifting
in cages, carts, bins, boxes, or compartments or by other means.
* * * * *
(6) Cells and batteries, including cells and batteries contained in
equipment, must be packaged or secured in a manner to prevent:
(i) Short circuits;
(ii) Damage caused by shifting or placement within the package, if
applicable; and
(iii) Accidental activation of the equipment.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Cells or batteries, including when contained in or packed with
equipment, in packages exceeding 30 kg (66 pounds) net weight of
batteries must be labeled with the Class 9 label as specified in Sec.
172.447 and marked with the four-digit UN identification number, as
applicable.
(5) The operator of a motor vehicle that contains a material of
trade must be informed of the presence of the hazardous material
(including whether the package contains a reportable quantity) and must
be informed of the requirements of this section.
(d) Aggregate gross weight. Except for a material of trade
authorized by paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(7)(iii) of this section,
the aggregate gross weight of all materials of trade on a motor vehicle
may not exceed 200 kg (440 pounds).
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 31, 2026, under the authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Paul J. Roberti,
Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2026-15823 Filed 8-3-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P